Proposal 242 (Q119)
From Nouns Dev
A Nouns proposal.
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | Proposal 242 |
A Nouns proposal. |
Statements
94
0 references
House of Nouns v2 (revised)
0 references
242
0 references
46
0 references
187
0 references
House of nouns
0 references
28 February 2023
0 references
36
Make it great and work with Prop Lots so youre not reinventing wheels!
0 references
Governance infrastructure is a high order public good for onchain societies. We need multiple options to compete on ideas and fit different Governors patterns and workflow. This teams dedication to Nounish societies is on full display including BuilderDAOs and Gnars.
0 references
House of Nouns is building a great public for the ecosystem, to be used by Nouns and other DAOs down the future. The ask is at a reasonable cost, and Im confident in their ability to deliver on what theyve proposed.
0 references
* 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
Full reasoning on my newsletter: https://cbites.substack.com/p/active-governance-noun-582-3
0 references
We are voting YES on this because House of Nouns has been a consistently great Nouns contributor, is building much-needed tools, and has taken the communitys feedback to adjust their props ask. It would be great to see HoN collaborate with Prop Lot as well.
0 references
23
the house of nouns team is a very nounish squad imo. not only have they continued to iterate on the HoN v1 product (after winning the governance mandated prop house round) into something that many voters use as their default voting client including myself, but theyve also continued to hack on other ideas in the nouniverse without comp for the fun of it (e.g. https://thatsgnar.ly/ is their work). very supportive of the HoN product to continue to be iterated on and very supportive of this team.
0 references
We want to build for Nouns, and this pricing should hopefully make it work. Elite frontends + unified backends FTW!
0 references
Props to HON team for coming back a third time. While l do look forward to the proposed deliverables, I mostly want HON to continue to improve its core UX. Either way, thanks for the persistence and best of luck!
0 references
Voted yes on prop 223 and am very glad the team came back with a revised version. I love using House of Nouns and hope we can figure out a good way to continue to support this team and teams like them! I see governance tools as a core funding area of Nouns.
0 references
28 February 2023
0 references
Imagine a world where voting does not exist. In this world, we would have no need for rules or principles. But in our world, voting is a reality. So we have a simple rule: we only vote against. We use a “Squad Vote” for each proposal. If more people vote against than vote for or abstain, we vote against on-chain. Otherwise, we abstain. This is our rule. According to the “squad vote” result for proposal 241, which is 33 for, 8 against and 15 abstain, we choose to vote abstain. The House Of Nouns proposal is one that is difficult to find flaws in. We have two concerns: 1. NounsDAO has no ownership of the product that the proposal promises. Will the ownership of the product, as promised in the proposal, be allocated to NounsDAO? If there is no correlation, then the funds requested in the proposal are essentially for the team to develop a product that belongs solely to themselves using NounsDAOs funds. This is a proposal that harms Nouns and benefits the team. 2. Complexity of features. The product promises to implement a complete governance lifecycle, including collecting ideas, early-stage discussions, on-chain decisions, etc. This means that the functional requirements are complex, and once the complexity is identified, even the best product manager will find it difficult to handle. First concern is not an issue with the 242 proposal, but rather with the immaturity of the NounsDAO system itself. Overall, we like the House Of Nouns product and team for the following reasons: 1. We are frequent users of House Of Nouns. It is simple and has redesigned the user interaction logic to focus on proposals, rather than channels, communities, or governance participants. This is a new type of product, and it has been well received by users (we can attest to that). 2. House Of Nouns is the first governance tool to define a complete governance process, implying a standard for proposal governance. It is beneficial not only for NounsDAO but also for the Nounish and Crypto industry, as it promotes scientific and standardized governance. 3. House Of Nouns has an excellent product team behind it. They understand the Nouns spirit and have developed a new Nouns model product called thatsgnarly.ly. Behind House Of Nouns and ThatsGnarlys products, one can see a professional and continuous product development system, which is invaluable.
0 references
Vote threshold not met, Nouncil votes abstain. **FOR - 27 VOTES** **Josep** | *Seems to high 5ETH a month per dev, a 3.5ETH a month seems more reasonable* **RobotFishGirl** | *Open source and a WAY reduced ask for one of my most used tools. Wish the media budget was still there, but still an easy yes. Hope the podcast/youtube videos can be funded through another avenue if this gets passed.* **Benbodhi** | *Open Source ⌐◨-◨ This heavily revised prop is of value to the whole ecosystem.* **Sasquatch** | *this prop has been neutered enough. clearly the team wants to make this happen!* **NO - 20 VOTES** **ABSTAIN - 3 VOTES**
0 references
95
0 references
11
0 references
5
0 references
95
0 references
4
0 references
The team behind House of Nouns is seeking 95 ETH in funding to continue its development for the next five months. They aim to expand the platform from a minimum viable product (MVP) for voting into a comprehensive suite of tools that includes an ideas board, drafts, feedback, Nounish integrations, and more discussion spaces.
0 references
<@821168068898062397> congrats on launching!-does it show somewhere the proposal actions?-I saw the budget, but where can I see the actions in more detail?
The proposal actions are not currently shown in detail, but rocketman#1802 mentioned that they are working on adding this feature.
0 references
just added focus mode and are working on the Feelers (half-backed prop ideas feedback) feature + Discourse ingestion, any other features people want to see in the short term?
0 references
Why use collective over ens
House of Nouns is built by Collective, and if someone changed their profile picture explicitly on Collective, it is prioritized. However, ENS integration is planned for the future.
0 references
At a glance, this looks like a useful tool, props on the mockup/UI/UX work. --So if the intent is to supplant discourse, how will user auth be handled? Use discourse as an OAuth2-like API? Instead of utilizing email or OAuth2, will it be wallet gated? Perhaps with WalletConnect or the like? This would be inline with Web3 ethos and allow participation across the board of Nounders, Nouners and the general non-token-holding public to comment and hold discussions at the public wallet level.--How many channels or categories would there be? For the proposal category/channel a useful check would be to ensure only prop submitters initiate discussions by allowing only the proposal submitters' wallet addresses to submit a number of posts less than or equal to the number of active on-chain submissions associated with that address. This ensures the channel holds discussions only on active proposals and that only proposal submitters can choose whether to start a discussion, or not (or even throw away the opportunity by starting a random discussion). --I fail to see the utility of adding the heyanoun anonymous commenting module, by utilizing the above mentioned wallet-gating method anyone would be able to create a burner wallet, if they choose, to handle pseudonymous commenting.---In principle the mechanics of this utility appears sound, but a bit more clarity on the mechanics of how user participation is handled on a technical level would give us information for making good discernment. --On another note, curious how many hours and/or what it cost your team to develop the mockup, demo and write the text.
User authentication for the House of Nouns platform will be wallet-gated, currently implemented using Dynamic.xyz for easy onboarding. The platform will have three sections: Proposals, Drafts, and Ideas. Anonymous commenting will be deprioritized until a solution that the entire community supports is found. If implemented, it will still show user wallet annotations (e.g., Nouner) and have community moderation built in to discourage harmful behavior.
0 references
gm @here -- I wanted to proactively share some answers to frequent questions we’ve been getting:--**Aren’t you VC-backed?**-Yes, we are. That’s why we’ve geared this prop to deliver an entirely open-source, openly owned codebase — so there is no centralized value capture, and anyone can host, build on top of, and monetize the end deliverables. We think this completely aligns incentives and will help a strong, open ecosystem.--**What does open sourcing mean here?**-This means everything from the repo to the APIs will be open access, so people with varying levels of technical acumen can clone and re-host and build on top of House of Nouns. We’ll also be doing continual data dumps to Arweave for any offchain data.--**Budget?**-While ETH is going up in price, we’ve decreased our prop’s total cost by ~$100k. We heavily increased deliverables and the speed at which we deliver them. We’re looking for 9ETH/month/developer, which is less than any other active developers for Nouns. We think that deliverables and actual matter the most, and think they are very justifiable for the cost of 190ETH in terms of the long-term impact they can have on the DAO’s success.--**Integrations?**-We’re looking to be as open and composable as possible, and help accelerate the adoption of the infrastructure built by others in the ecosystem. Our goal is to integrate the amazing work of others everywhere it makes sense, versus create clones and replicate any functionality. We’re working on this on a case-by-case basis, but wherever infrastructure is open, we want to help accelerate its adoption instead of competing with it.
The proposal aims to deliver an entirely open-source, openly owned codebase for House of Nouns. The budget has been decreased by ~$100k, and the team is looking for 9 ETH/month/developer. The goal is to be as open and composable as possible, integrating the work of others in the ecosystem. The platform has grown to 2k MAUs and continues to be a favorite place to view proposals for a large portion of the community. However, some community members believe the proposal is still expensive and suggest a lower budget of 50 ETH.
0 references
`I fail to see the utility of adding the heyanoun anonymous commenting module, by utilizing the above mentioned wallet-gating method anyone would be able to create a burner wallet, if they choose, to handle pseudonymous commenting.`--Wouldn't you prefer to know that a commenter was a verified noun holder rather than a burner wallet?
Yes, it would be preferable to know that a commenter was a verified noun holder rather than a burner wallet. The consistency of the wallet address and identity is important for community building and forming stronger bonds. The solution to anonymity concerns is to reach out and form stronger connections, not to rely on anonymity.
0 references
is the current iteration for 6 months or 5 months? (haven’t had the time to read the prop in detail)
The current iteration is for 5 months.
0 references
What do you mean by drafts client?
A drafts client is a more active and collaborative way of proposal-forming than going from idea to on-chain. It allows posting, commenting, and feedback tied to your ETH identity and voter profile in one place. The middle step in the proposal lifecycle is drafts, as shown in this image: https://collectivexyz-public.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/Proposal+Lifecycle+Small.gif. The stand-alone mockup from the last proposal can be seen here: https://collectivexyz-public.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/Drafts+Demo+Sped+Up+2.gif.
0 references
Yeah I did read that and the prop again…my point and opinion is that that the main focus of the prop seems to be the pre proposal client and the idea client…and on that area it is competing surely?
It's possible for House of Nouns and Prop Lot to build completely different experiences and use cases on top of shared data, making their idea boards compatible with each other. There is nothing in Prop Lot's proposal about a drafts client, which is a more active and collaborative way of proposal-forming. An idea could be posted to Prop Lot, compatible/surfaced on House of Nouns as well, then shifted into a draft on House of Nouns once it has support. Posting, commenting, and feedback would be tied to the user's ETH identity and voter profile in one place. This is a different product than what exists or has been proposed anywhere else.
0 references
