0x7d81478ad18ad375e53de6f74f3122f6be3499ca (Q4108): Difference between revisions
From Nouns Dev
TiagoLubiana (talk | contribs) (Created a new Item) |
TiagoLubiana (talk | contribs) (Changed an Item) |
||||||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 237 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 237 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 236 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 236 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 231 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 231 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 139 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 139 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 135 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 135 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 129 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 129 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 128 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 128 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 126 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 126 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 125 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 125 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 123 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 123 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 119 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 119 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 117 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 117 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 113 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 113 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 93 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 93 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 245 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 245 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 245 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: i know a no brainer when i see one | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 242 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 242 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 242 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: * the community is using its tooling * team has hacked on PoCs without asking for funding which is very Nounish * having a third unified client outside of nouns.wtf and nounsagora is +EV thanks for coming back a third time. Lets put this team back to work | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 233 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 233 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 233 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: i agree with the sentiment that we should avoid putting proposals on-chain that dont modify on-chain state, and as such, Ill be abstaining from any future proposals that fit this description. however, I strongly believe that Nouns acquired using DAO funds as a form of future compensation shouldnt be utilized for governance until theyve been correctly distributed to their intended recipients. | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 229 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 229 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 229 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: the proposed infra offers proper decentralized execution across sub-communities. it is imperative to promote governance and mitigate intermediaries that can be subject to external influence. the ability to engage in trustless governance across subDAOs is the type of innovation id like to see Nouns showcase. i do think there is a chance that trustless participation can increase demand for Nouns, even if by a small margin. ripe and wiz are excellent builders, and i am happy to support this initiative. | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 124 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 124 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 124 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: no 🧠 | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 118 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 118 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 118 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: a vote of confidence in beautyandthepunk.eth | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 116 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 116 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 116 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: 🤖 + ⌐◨-◨ + ✅ | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 114 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 114 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 114 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: we do a little act of pixel perfection | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 112 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 112 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 112 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: no brainer - esports, particularly with the folks spearheading this prop, has been a remarkable experiment in proliferating the meme. | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 94 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 94 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 94 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: I am not entirely sure how this will proliferate the Noun meme, but in the interest of supporting the cc0 photography vertical, particularly one of space exploration, I am curious to see if there can be an audience reached here that would otherwise not reach. Cost is negligible for the bet. | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 92 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 92 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 92 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: Enthusiastic to support an extension for David. | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 91 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 91 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 91 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: Excited to see Nouns continue to proliferate eSports. The price to pay here seems negligible for the potential upside. | |||||||
Property / Supported | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 90 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 90 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Supported: Proposal 90 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: I have a tab browser open at all times with Goldys memes to facilitate the proliferation of Nouns, so this is a no-brainer for me. | |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 136 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 136 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 131 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 131 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 122 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 122 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 244 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 244 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 244 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: We built something similar on nouns.center/ideas, and without network effects, it becomes a ghost yard. I am bearish that novel ideas will come from public forums. Id be glad to be proven wrong here, but I am almost positive YCombinator doesnt do anything internal like this. Quality proposals will come from ultra-skilled, smaller teams (Atrium, Goldy, Danit, Stoopid Buddy, albeit not so small, Prop House, etc.), that have very specific skill sets. Id be much more inclined to further fund work on this proposal if it has moved the needle forward within the Lil Nouns community, where this tool seems to already be in place. | |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 241 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 241 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 241 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: i am a fan of DigitalOil and would vote yes for them to work on ideas that would benefit the DAO. my opinion remains unchanged though in that i do not believe that functional props will lead to better governance for the DAO at this time. | |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 238 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 238 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 238 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: while I appreciate the intention behind this proposal, i am not convinced it would significantly move the DAO forward. having a clear and concise ask is important to the proposal process. rather than relying on game theory to skew outcomes, the DAO should vote on a static ask. off-chain discussion might be a better fit for this topic, as social consensus often leads to meaningful results. that being said, i like DigitalOil and am excited to see what other ideas they have for the DAO. i am always happy to vote in favor of proposals that will have a significant impact on the DAO. | |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 232 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 232 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 232 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: i am not sold on this spreading the Noun meme effectively or that it will contribute to higher demand in daily auctions. with current outflows > inflows, prefer to stay conservative here and vote no. | |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 228 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 228 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 228 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: Not a bad proposal, but I have concerns about these ephemeral events and their potential impact on daily auction appreciation. Instead, I would like to concentrate on voting for high-value infrastructure and projects with the potential for significant auction growth. The ask is reasonable, but we shouldnt be voting yes just because 10e is a drop in a bucket. The drops will ultimately overflow the bucket. | |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 130 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 130 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 130 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: seems a bit much for a book | |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 127 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 127 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 127 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: feels like minimum nounish proliferation happening here | |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 120 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 120 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 120 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: appreciate the sentiment here, but 200e for a wellness app seems like an overreach | |||||||
Property / Opposed | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 89 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 89 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 1
| |||||||
Property / Opposed: Proposal 89 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: Appreciate the intention behind this prop. I am not sold on the value proposition of spending the requested ETH here on an ephemeral piece slated to EOL by July 10. Landing pages should be substantially more affordable, too. The team looks solid, but I am struggling with the short-lived value add here (relative to cost). | |||||||
Property / Abstained | |||||||
Property / Abstained: Proposal 133 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Abstained: Proposal 133 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Abstained | |||||||
Property / Abstained: Proposal 240 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Abstained: Proposal 240 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Abstained: Proposal 240 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: i like the builders on this team and would happily vote for them to build helpful tech for the DAO. i dont think the proposal in this current form moves the DAO forward. there is an expensive tax to build an architecture of this magnitude into production, and the tax is on all of the individual data stores to expose their off-chain data to the consumers of this index. anything on-chain is already composable. centralized data stores such as discourse already have APIs that can be consumed (https://docs.discourse.org). i think distracting builders with this tax right now is -EV, and some might not have the bandwidth to pull it off at all, leaving us with just adding an API on top of data sources that already have APIs whether in the form of HTTP or RPC-JSON on-chain calls. i think we have much bigger problems to tackle and this isnt a blocker for client developers as of today. id love to fund this team to work on something else. | |||||||
Property / Abstained | |||||||
Property / Abstained: Proposal 134 / rank | |||||||
Normal rank | |||||||
Property / Abstained: Proposal 134 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Weight: 2
| |||||||
Property / Abstained: Proposal 134 / qualifier | |||||||
Vote Reason: dont have an opinion here |
Latest revision as of 22:46, 14 July 2023
Individual
Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
---|---|---|---|
English | 0x7d81478ad18ad375e53de6f74f3122f6be3499ca |
Individual |
Statements
* the community is using its tooling * team has hacked on PoCs without asking for funding which is very Nounish * having a third unified client outside of nouns.wtf and nounsagora is +EV thanks for coming back a third time. Lets put this team back to work
0 references
i agree with the sentiment that we should avoid putting proposals on-chain that dont modify on-chain state, and as such, Ill be abstaining from any future proposals that fit this description. however, I strongly believe that Nouns acquired using DAO funds as a form of future compensation shouldnt be utilized for governance until theyve been correctly distributed to their intended recipients.
0 references
the proposed infra offers proper decentralized execution across sub-communities. it is imperative to promote governance and mitigate intermediaries that can be subject to external influence. the ability to engage in trustless governance across subDAOs is the type of innovation id like to see Nouns showcase. i do think there is a chance that trustless participation can increase demand for Nouns, even if by a small margin. ripe and wiz are excellent builders, and i am happy to support this initiative.
0 references
no brainer - esports, particularly with the folks spearheading this prop, has been a remarkable experiment in proliferating the meme.
0 references
I am not entirely sure how this will proliferate the Noun meme, but in the interest of supporting the cc0 photography vertical, particularly one of space exploration, I am curious to see if there can be an audience reached here that would otherwise not reach. Cost is negligible for the bet.
0 references
Excited to see Nouns continue to proliferate eSports. The price to pay here seems negligible for the potential upside.
0 references
I have a tab browser open at all times with Goldys memes to facilitate the proliferation of Nouns, so this is a no-brainer for me.
0 references
We built something similar on nouns.center/ideas, and without network effects, it becomes a ghost yard. I am bearish that novel ideas will come from public forums. Id be glad to be proven wrong here, but I am almost positive YCombinator doesnt do anything internal like this. Quality proposals will come from ultra-skilled, smaller teams (Atrium, Goldy, Danit, Stoopid Buddy, albeit not so small, Prop House, etc.), that have very specific skill sets. Id be much more inclined to further fund work on this proposal if it has moved the needle forward within the Lil Nouns community, where this tool seems to already be in place.
0 references
i am a fan of DigitalOil and would vote yes for them to work on ideas that would benefit the DAO. my opinion remains unchanged though in that i do not believe that functional props will lead to better governance for the DAO at this time.
0 references
while I appreciate the intention behind this proposal, i am not convinced it would significantly move the DAO forward. having a clear and concise ask is important to the proposal process. rather than relying on game theory to skew outcomes, the DAO should vote on a static ask. off-chain discussion might be a better fit for this topic, as social consensus often leads to meaningful results. that being said, i like DigitalOil and am excited to see what other ideas they have for the DAO. i am always happy to vote in favor of proposals that will have a significant impact on the DAO.
0 references
i am not sold on this spreading the Noun meme effectively or that it will contribute to higher demand in daily auctions. with current outflows > inflows, prefer to stay conservative here and vote no.
0 references
Not a bad proposal, but I have concerns about these ephemeral events and their potential impact on daily auction appreciation. Instead, I would like to concentrate on voting for high-value infrastructure and projects with the potential for significant auction growth. The ask is reasonable, but we shouldnt be voting yes just because 10e is a drop in a bucket. The drops will ultimately overflow the bucket.
0 references
feels like minimum nounish proliferation happening here
0 references
appreciate the sentiment here, but 200e for a wellness app seems like an overreach
0 references
Appreciate the intention behind this prop. I am not sold on the value proposition of spending the requested ETH here on an ephemeral piece slated to EOL by July 10. Landing pages should be substantially more affordable, too. The team looks solid, but I am struggling with the short-lived value add here (relative to cost).
0 references
i like the builders on this team and would happily vote for them to build helpful tech for the DAO. i dont think the proposal in this current form moves the DAO forward. there is an expensive tax to build an architecture of this magnitude into production, and the tax is on all of the individual data stores to expose their off-chain data to the consumers of this index. anything on-chain is already composable. centralized data stores such as discourse already have APIs that can be consumed (https://docs.discourse.org). i think distracting builders with this tax right now is -EV, and some might not have the bandwidth to pull it off at all, leaving us with just adding an API on top of data sources that already have APIs whether in the form of HTTP or RPC-JSON on-chain calls. i think we have much bigger problems to tackle and this isnt a blocker for client developers as of today. id love to fund this team to work on something else.
0 references