Proposal 86 (Q1956): Difference between revisions

Ultimately, Nouncil was not able to reach a consensus on this Prop so we are voting to Abstain. After the majority vote to Abstain (16), all other votes cast were against (12.) Overall, in discussions, we felt that there are too many unknowns/unclear items WRT the case. Even if the Plaintiffs motivations could be politically motivated, it seems PT may have indeed broken some lottery and/or banking laws in NY, or at least, it is far from a sure thing that they didnt. Moreover, it was mentioned that this should probably have been a planned-for eventuality for such a protocol (to be sued by the State) and Nouncil worries about the precedent of deploying Nouns treasury to fund this kind of predictable legal battle (hat tip Wag.) On top of the above, this was also not a small ask (which might have found broader support.) We wish PoolTogether the best with this case, but we couldnt vote to support this Proposal at this time.