Proposal 212 (Q1768): Difference between revisions
From Nouns Dev
TiagoLubiana (talk | contribs) (Changed an Item) |
TiagoLubiana (talk | contribs) (Changed an Item) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Property / Team Name | |||
| Property / Team Name: I cannot find the name of the team or builder in the provided text / rank | |||
| Property / Summary | |||
| Property / Summary: This proposal requests NounsDAO to burn Lil Noun held in its treasury by transferring it to the official Ethereum burn address. The goal is to exit the treasurys Lil Noun position and avoid conflicts of interest and favoritism. If the proposal passes, a follow-up proposal will be created to burn the remaining +720 Lil Nouns. / rank | |||
| Property / Question & Answer | |||
This is a serious prop to grab Nouner's attention. Let's not kid ourselves it is most likely going to fail, however maybe it can help us obtain some answers and can act as a protest vote against the lack of transparency.--For example, we are now on DAY 3 of 'Jacob-gate' <@400168997779275778> . You know the Nouner who didn't warn us about a potential 300 ETH tax liability before we voted on 'Nouns Builder' prop 167? Why was Jacob removed as a Lil Nounder this month, but still has a vote and is collecting rewards on their multi-sig? | |||
| Property / Question & Answer: This is a serious prop to grab Nouner's attention. Let's not kid ourselves it is most likely going to fail, however maybe it can help us obtain some answers and can act as a protest vote against the lack of transparency.--For example, we are now on DAY 3 of 'Jacob-gate' <@400168997779275778> . You know the Nouner who didn't warn us about a potential 300 ETH tax liability before we voted on 'Nouns Builder' prop 167? Why was Jacob removed as a Lil Nounder this month, but still has a vote and is collecting rewards on their multi-sig? / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
| Property / Question & Answer: This is a serious prop to grab Nouner's attention. Let's not kid ourselves it is most likely going to fail, however maybe it can help us obtain some answers and can act as a protest vote against the lack of transparency.--For example, we are now on DAY 3 of 'Jacob-gate' <@400168997779275778> . You know the Nouner who didn't warn us about a potential 300 ETH tax liability before we voted on 'Nouns Builder' prop 167? Why was Jacob removed as a Lil Nounder this month, but still has a vote and is collecting rewards on their multi-sig? / qualifier | |||
| Property / Team Name | |||
The text does not provide information on the name of the team or builder that | |||
| Property / Team Name: The text does not provide information on the name of the team or builder that / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
| Property / Summary | |||
The proposal requests NounsDAO to transfer Lil Noun from its treasury to the official Ethereum burn address, as a first step towards exiting the treasurys Lil Noun position. This foll ows prop 210, which redirected all future Lil Nouns emissions back to the Lil Noun treasury. | |||
| Property / Summary: The proposal requests NounsDAO to transfer Lil Noun from its treasury to the official Ethereum burn address, as a first step towards exiting the treasurys Lil Noun position. This foll ows prop 210, which redirected all future Lil Nouns emissions back to the Lil Noun treasury. / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Latest revision as of 15:01, 17 July 2023
A Nouns proposal.
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | Proposal 212 |
A Nouns proposal. |
Statements
Transfer Lil Noun 1 held in the NounsDAO treasury to the official Ethereum burn address
0 references
212
0 references
17 January 2023
0 references
58
0 references
0
0 references
0
0 references
17 January 2023
0 references
WTF is this prop?
The proposal in question is a serious attempt to grab Nouner's attention and act as a protest vote against the lack of transparency. It is most likely going to fail, but it may help obtain some answers. The proposal is related to concerns about a Nouner who didn't warn about a potential 300 ETH tax liability before voting on 'Nouns Builder' prop 167 and their removal as a Lil Nounder while still having a vote and collecting rewards on their multi-sig.
0 references
This is a serious prop to grab Nouner's attention. Let's not kid ourselves it is most likely going to fail, however maybe it can help us obtain some answers and can act as a protest vote against the lack of transparency.--For example, we are now on DAY 3 of 'Jacob-gate' <@400168997779275778> . You know the Nouner who didn't warn us about a potential 300 ETH tax liability before we voted on 'Nouns Builder' prop 167? Why was Jacob removed as a Lil Nounder this month, but still has a vote and is collecting rewards on their multi-sig?
0 references
1
0 references
0
0 references
The text does not provide information on the name of the team or builder that
0 references
The proposal requests NounsDAO to transfer Lil Noun from its treasury to the official Ethereum burn address, as a first step towards exiting the treasurys Lil Noun position. This foll ows prop 210, which redirected all future Lil Nouns emissions back to the Lil Noun treasury.
0 references
