The Jungle: Nouns DAO - 206-nouns-on-the-ground-2023-⌐◨-◨ (Q5044): Difference between revisions
From Nouns Dev
TiagoLubiana (talk | contribs) (Changed an Item) |
TiagoLubiana (talk | contribs) (Changed an Item) |
||
| Property / Related Proposal | |||
| Property / Related Proposal: Proposal 183 / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Latest revision as of 00:19, 18 July 2023
A Nouns discord channel.
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | The Jungle: Nouns DAO - 206-nouns-on-the-ground-2023-⌐◨-◨ |
A Nouns discord channel. |
Statements
Aubtoshi livestreamed contest entries for EnterTheNouniverse and shared links to episodes. Hindsight raised concerns about "bad behaviors" in the Discord chat. JoshuaFisher praised Aubtoshi's hard work and dedication. Oni stated that everyone is free to express their opinions but discussions should not be forced. Bixbite encouraged open discussion and suggested treating everyone equally. Lituus questioned the majority of users not being holders and expressed frustration with unanswered questions. Aubtoshi defended their right to use their platform as they wish. Bixbite disagreed with using a Nouns-sponsored platform for discussing volatile cryptocurrencies but respected Aubtoshi's work. Aubtoshi reiterated their support for other communities and artists. Lituus insisted their intention was to resolve misunderstandings.
9 May 2023
0 references
Aubtoshi livestreamed contest entries for EnterTheNouniverse and shared links to episodes. Hindsight raised concerns about bad behaviors in the Discord chat. JoshuaFisher praised Aubtoshi's hard work and dedication. Oni stated that everyone is free to express their opinions but discussions should not be forced. Bixbite encouraged open discussion and suggested treating everyone equally. Lituus questioned the majority of users not being holders and expressed frustration with unanswered questions. Aubtoshi defended their right to use their platform as they wish. Bixbite disagreed with using a Nouns-sponsored platform for discussing volatile cryptocurrencies but respected Aubtoshi's work. Aubtoshi reiterated their support for other communities and artists. Lituus insisted their intention was to resolve misunderstandings.
9 May 2023
0 references
This Month:-1. Chat participants express concerns about the promotion of shitcoins and its potential impact on the community.-2. Importance of open discussion and equal treatment is emphasized.-3. Aubtoshi is excited about future BudLight + Nouns activations and meeting Nouners in real life.
1 June 2023
0 references
This Week:-1. Chat participants express concerns about the promotion of shitcoins.-2. Importance of open discussion and equal treatment is emphasized.-3. Some participants defend their actions and contributions.-4. Others call for a more productive conversation.-5. Main issue revolves around promotion of certain coins and potential impact on the community.
16 May 2023
0 references
.-**1) Is this basically 3 proposals in 1, with OTG + Podcast + Documentary sections tacked on?**--Nouns OTG 2022 was focused just on sending Aubtoshi to events around the world, and OTG 2023 asks to do more of this AND also produce a podcast series and a documentary, for which there is zero evidence that these are things that the proposer can do well. Perhaps if there were others on the team, this would be a different matter. Can you speak to these new areas of focus?
This proposal includes three main components: OTG (On The Ground) events, a podcast series, and a documentary. The proposer, Aubtoshi, has experience with OTG events but has not provided evidence of their ability to produce a podcast series or a documentary. The proposal aims to continue sending Aubtoshi to events around the world and expand into these new areas of focus.
0 references
.-**2) This is a 1 person pod for 520 ETH. How does this scale?**--Are there other members on the team? Who will work on the podcast and the documentary while Aubtoshi is flying around the world attending events and planning for said events. How does this scale if we’re not sharing knowledge with anyone else in the Nouns community?
There are concerns about the scalability of the 1 person pod for 520 ETH and how it would work with Aubtoshi attending events and planning for them. There is no clear answer on how this would scale or if there are other team members involved. However, the conversation does discuss the importance of finding a balance between funding proposals and holding them accountable for the long-term health of the DAO.
0 references
Aubtoshi is constantly working on behalf of the DAO and how she spends her own money shouldn’t concern you and even if it does why not ask questions rather than make accusations and cause drama? It’s not necessary and not helpful.
The concern raised in the conversation is whether Nouns directly sponsoring or endorsing a token could paint a negative representation of Nouns, especially if the token's value crashes. The discussion emphasizes the importance of being cautious and knowledgeable about such matters and considering the potential impact on the community. However, no specific solution or prevention method is agreed upon in the conversation.
0 references
Can you explain your relationship with Bloomz and his overall involvement in Nouns OTG?
Bloomz is not mentioned in the provided conversation, so the relationship between Bloomz and Nouns OTG cannot be determined from the given context.
0 references
Hi <@930317640487030854> 👋 thanks for taking the time to write this proposal and all of yours and NounsOTGs work to date.--One thing I wished was more clearly laid out in your proposal is data around how your previous Props 110 and 166 went. How did these Props impact the numbers around NounsOTG?--I believe we have to be more data driven about how we deploy money for groups that are raising money through a third Prop and up. Similar to early stage investing, we can give a check to and make a bet on the people at PreSeed/Seed without too much data, but at Series A+ we need to start making bets on sustainable models of growth and that starts by looking at the numbers.
There isn't a clear answer provided in the conversation regarding the impact of Props 110 and 166 on the numbers around NounsOTG. The conversation mainly focuses on the need for more data-driven decision-making and the importance of showing quantified impact and progress from previous proposals.
0 references
I dont think the concern lies in what she is doing with her own personal money..... I think that the concern is: since the content was streamed from a Nouns sponsored platform, could it be seen as Nouns directly sponsoring or endorsing the token..... and since it crashed down almost 40% at one point today alot of people prob got REKT.... could that paint a negative representation of Nouns?
The concern about whether Nouns directly sponsoring or endorsing the token could paint a negative representation of Nouns is a valid conversation to have. However, it's important to treat each other with respect and seek understanding before jumping to conclusions. The discussion suggests that Nouns-funded entrepreneurs, like Aubtoshi, can talk about various topics on their platforms, including Nouns and other projects, without necessarily endorsing them. It's essential for individuals to do their own research and make their own decisions regarding investments.
0 references
I'm trying to understand if he is actually a valued/legitimate member of the team, why is he asking lil nouns dao for 58 eth (either from our treasury, or to sponsor him in a separate prop to nouns dao) to join you instead of getting his expenses covered in this prop? Who's expenses besides yourself does this cover?
It is not clear who is asking for the 58 ETH, but the proposal covers 2-3 airline tickets (depending on the size of the event) to events, insurance, and checked bag fees for Aubtoshi and production crew members. The travel expenses/airline ticket price was calculated with 10% added to the total cost. Accommodation is also covered at each event for Aubtoshi and production crew members.
0 references
I think if you take a step back and reread all the messages you will see that while <@1071163728579547136> approach should have been different, he offers a valid concern. You saying he is not a Noun, builder, etc …. How do you know this? Could be a major whale holder in an Alt account…. You should treat everyone the same …. If Will Price asked you a question in regards to money in your prop or concerns over a Nouns sponsored platform discussing a financial investment I don’t think your response would be the same. 🤷🏼♀️ Open discussion should be encouraged - your responses are not showing you want to discuss and learn from the situation, it’s showing you instantly trying to ‘shut it down’ by saying this is the way it is, don’t like it, too bad.
No specific question was asked in the provided context. The conversation revolves around concerns and discussions related to a Nouns sponsored platform and its content.
0 references
I wanted to circle back on the point of tracking performance in general here for IRL events. I suggest trying out a POC of tracking performance. There is a bit more of a challenge measuring impact of IRL events vs something tracking dApp traction with DAUs, TVL etc... I was thinking of a way we could beta test this in a measurable way. <@930317640487030854> , is it correct to say that your previous props included POAP distribution? I think it was Prop 110. It would be interesting to see how many POAPs were minted and analyze if those wallets also have any activation in the Nouns ecosystem through things like Gnars/Lil Nouns or a lower entry point subdao or derivative. Any thoughts on this <@959005197244448848> or <@537427016501297152> <@738504263428472833> --<@959005197244448848> to your point on social traction, it is a valid metric for sure. Im just thinking of other measurable ways to track activation. -- I look at what GMoney has done with his brand, 9dcc. He has been able to activate, track and engage people through POAPs has been pretty creative, fun and web3 native. And the distribution method for his 9dcc POAPs in almost exclusively IRL. I think there is an opportunity to use this as a core metric for events going forward. Obviously, not the only metric but something that is easily trackable and incentivizes engagement. Let me know if you want to coordinate on data like that.
It is correct that a previous proposal, Prop 110, included POAP distribution. Tracking performance and impact of IRL events can be challenging, but using metrics like POAP distribution and analyzing wallet activation in the Nouns ecosystem could be a way to measure engagement. GMoney's 9dcc project is an example of successful activation, tracking, and engagement through POAPs distributed primarily in IRL events. This could be a core metric for events going forward, incentivizing engagement and providing trackable data.
0 references
more of who is receiving funds & for what work should be disclosed. who is working on this besides aubtoshi? production & admin? i dont believe it's said anywhere in the prop.
Aubtoshi addressed concerns about the funding and her salary in the proposal, stating that a majority yes vote would be funding NounsOTG for one year, and her salary is laid out in the numbers. This salary is lower than industry standard and is meant to give Nouns holders a chance to participate in, better understand, and further grow the IRL/Events focused track of Nouns. She also expressed her concerns about anonymous platforms and the potential for personal attacks within the ecosystem.
0 references
Nouns is bigger than ever with more exciting creators joining us from multiple areas right now, why should we slow down on the stuff that's working and making people excited? There will be nothing to measure if we're not showing up and making activations happen.
There is no direct answer to the question about slowing down on the stuff that's working and making people excited. However, the conversation revolves around the proposal for NounsOTG and its impact on the community. The proposal aims to continue proliferating Nouns IRL, and the discussion focuses on the importance of transparency, accountability, and the potential benefits of the proposal.
0 references
one concept that's being ideated on over in Nouncil in relation to this prop:--> Instead of funding 1 person to travel the world for a year, why not create a repeatable & scalable playbook that can activate hundreds of Nouns OTG events around the world?
The idea of creating a repeatable and scalable playbook to activate hundreds of Nouns OTG events around the world is being discussed in the Nouncil. Hindsight shared a similar idea on Twitter: https://twitter.com/0Hindsight/status/1613254325790474241?s=20&t=ag2WlMyeGm6YaaewxBYoBA
0 references
This might be true if the anon commenter wasn’t just grasping at straws in an attempt to fling mud at a good builder. So many people have minted NFT collections in this space, many of them cc0 and with no promise of utility. If every one of those is a “rug” then we need to clear out this discord. Is Lost Nouns a rug because they never did anything with them after? No. It’s just art on chain. I know for a fact that sobmfers was just a fun collection Aubtoshi made (and deployed herself) early on when she was learning about NFTs. It was RT by Sartoshi himself and surely never promised any utility. The other two collections weren’t even made by her but I’m sure there’s a similar story about Cheffo’s own journey as an nft creator. People need to get a grip and concentrate on the proposal itself, and the nounish execution record of the builder. --And btw, you can pretend to be unbiased and polite in here but in public your bitter energy is on full display: https://twitter.com/eldefijesus/status/1614295605282746369?s=46&t=UJpRL-LOc1rgEN7Q-WRxyg
From the conversation, it seems that the accusations against the proposer are considered false and not based on any solid evidence. The proposer, Aubtoshi, has clarified their intentions and involvement in the Nouns community, as well as their commitment to the proposed events and projects. They have also mentioned their past successful on-chain proposals and the return of extra funds to the treasury.
0 references
Who do you support that is doing positive work for Nouns? How often do you find yourself adding value vs trying to “uncover” something?
There isn't a direct answer to the question about who is supported for doing positive work for Nouns and how often value is added versus trying to uncover something. The conversation mainly revolves around concerns and discussions about a Nouns-sponsored platform and its association with financial investments.
0 references
