(Q1814)
Statements
Stake 1 eth in Lido
0 references
6
0 references
18
0 references
16 November 2021
0 references
11
0 references
34
0 references
Stake 1 eth in Lido Several people seemed to think adding some % (to be voted on in a later proposal) of treasury to Lido to earn yield was a viable idea. This proposal is to see if the majority of nouns are interested in a trial of this process with 1 eth to ensure it works properly. If approved well presumably have another vote for whether to add more funds, and if so how much.
0 references
16 November 2021
0 references
<@603240181050638346> seems to have a very good handle on the practical side of implementing various proposals.--If we were to go in the direction of staking some eth would it be best to perhaps stake 1% of treasury (or even just 0.01 eth) as trial? Or would stand protocol be to just vote on the end final result rather than in stages?
Based on the conversation, it seems that the idea of staking a small percentage of the treasury as a trial was discussed, but no definitive answer was given. The conversation included suggestions for different percentages and potential risks, but no clear consensus or final decision was reached.
0 references
<@910382387983179797> would you trade your noun for a noun in the first 50? First 20? First 10?
Noun 19/Cookie Nounster#3464: <@910382387983179797> would you trade your noun for a noun in the first 50? First 20? First 10?--Answer: Probably not.
0 references
Also I’m confused how can new members join the dao forever, don’t daos have to be capped at some #?
GuyZalaxy#1925's question about whether DAOs have to be capped at some number was addressed by Noun 12#8966, who explained that there is no cap on DAO members and that there are hundreds of DAOs with more members/public keys than 200. They also mentioned that Nouns DAO benefits from a constant refreshing supply of new members and that the cadence of auctions can be changed in governance.
0 references
Are the economics of sETH not expected based on making ETH2 not tradable until after the merge? Looking at crypto, wouldn't one expect that the first thing that would happen would be the creation of a derivative, and that the nature of liquidity would make that derivative winner take all? It seems like hopium to expect that something else would have played out here (reminds me of soulbound nfts tbh). Does this problem not go away on its own once beacon chain withdrawals are possible?
Yes, as soon as the conversion is liquid the peg will restore. The problem is expected to go away on its own once beacon chain withdrawals are possible.
0 references
are we planning on transferring/buying the nouns.eth domain into the DAO?
Yes, there are plans to transfer the nouns.eth domain into the DAO. 4156#9052 mentioned that the domain is currently in the foundation's multisig and that they will ask the board about transferring it to the DAO directly.
0 references
By investing in other NFT projects, aren't we just giving those owners exit liquidity and possibly transferring our goodwill to their project for a not so great return?
By investing in other NFT projects, aren't we just giving those owners exit liquidity and possibly transferring our goodwill to their project for a not so great return?--MikeMcDonald#3707: We're absolutely giving them exit liquidity. The hope is that this works as effective advertising to have people who believe in that project believe in our project.
0 references
can’t one just do it through a CEX? Sell DAI for fiat, send fiat to bank account. -Are you concerned about the slippage when converting to fiat?
Yes, one can sell DAI for fiat on a centralized exchange (CEX) and send the fiat to a bank account. The concern about slippage when converting to fiat may not be significant, as stablecoin/USD trade fees might be low enough on exchanges. It's worth double-checking on exchanges like Coinbase for less sophisticated users.
0 references
does one get sETH in secondary market or from depositing with lido?
Yes, one can get sETH in the secondary market or from depositing with Lido. Islandprime59#9223 mentioned that the market is pretty efficient it doesn't really matter but yea probably deposit.
0 references
for any given auction do not exceed 20% of average settle price of the last three (3) auctions Should this be 120%? When would we expect a Noun to go for that far below the most recent 3 auctions?
Yes, the intention is 120%. It’s an edge case some were vocal about pricing people out of a stellar Noun since the treasury can effectively net 0 on its winning of the auction. So a somewhat arbitrary percentage was chosen to address it.
0 references
Gm everyone! Catching up on discussions while having my morning coffee. Love the thoughtful comments!--I think there’s a strategic decision to be made by NounsDAO with regard to treasury management:--A. ETH-only -B. staked ETH - a low-risk, conservative and passive strategy-C. DeFi yield generation - actively managed yield generation --I would argue in favour of A or B given the early stage NounsDAO is at. This could be a decision that we take for the next 365 days and revisit it annually. --Let me explain the reasoning. As much as I love yield generation, and hate to see the treasury ETH “just sitting there” I think we should be mindful about where we direct our attention and efforts. --What we should consciously avoid at this stage is “incrementalism” in our thinking and this is exactly where strategy C will lead us. Should we get 5% more here or there? Is that farm 20% safer or riskier? Every new person joining will have their own theory about yield generation. None of them will materially move the needle. --By deciding that for the next 365 days we decide *NOT* to have any yield generation discussions (outside of staking ETH) we focus ourselves on core 10x innovations NounsDAO is uniquely positioned to introduce. Yield management is not one of them. --Just a quick pulse check on what other think of it. Which strategy should we focus on for the next 365 days?
Based on the conversation, the question about which treasury management strategy NounsDAO should focus on for the next 365 days was not directly answered. However, there were opinions shared in favor of staking ETH (option B) and some discussions about other potential investments like BTC, NFTs, and ERC-20 tokens. It is suggested that a small and elite committee could be formed to make recommendations on financial strategies for the organization.
0 references
I am probably one of the least experienced on this front, I am DeFi genius compared to my IRL friends but an absolute noob in the private channels of this discord, so I’ll mostly just listen and learn from these conversations but here’s one thing that occurred to my brain that may or may not be helpful to say:--Most noun owners know how to grow wealth, that is how they got to afford a noun. Most noun owners could certainly be (and probably are) putting their personal treasuries to work via yield earning. --What is the appeal of nounsdao? What is the UVP of being a member and investing capital here as opposed to elsewhere?--I don’t believe it’s that you can pool your ETH together to participate in the same yield generation activities that you already can on your own… The opportunity here is the model created where the feedback loop of spending on proliferating nouns, driving value to the NFTs, bootstrapping community and all the good stuff that spending the ETH in novel and experimental ways can bring.--Is attention/focus/time the scarcest commodity in crypto? And are some of nouns greatest assets the brains, experience, and connections of the nouners themselves? --My fear is that every minute nouners spend thinking and debating traditional treasury management measures like yield generation is time not spent engaging in the unique opportunity this project presents us, and therefore kind of… a waste. Could be done elsewhere, way more efficiently, where attention is not so split and votes aren’t required and it doesn’t have to be balanced out with the greater vision which is facing a different direction.
The appeal of NounsDAO is the unique opportunity it presents for its members to pool their resources and invest in novel and experimental ways that drive value to the NFTs, bootstrap community, and create a feedback loop of spending on proliferating nouns. The focus should be on the cultural capital and clout of the organization, rather than traditional treasury management measures like yield generation. The project aims to create one of the most sought-after memberships, status symbols, and cultural artifacts in the world by using the treasury to increase demand.
0 references
is coinbase fee flat or %?
Coinbase fees are a percentage, with a 1.49% fee mentioned for converting USDC to DAI in the conversation.
0 references
Is there some way that the swap and send can be triggered by the searchers such that a naive nouner or builder doesnt need to do anything except watch the funds get converted and transferred?
Yes, there is a way for the swap and send to be triggered by the searchers so that a naive nouner or builder doesn't need to do anything except watch the funds get converted and transferred. The idea discussed involves allowing the searcher to pay through a priority queue, passing the funds through one of the DAO's contracts for accounting purposes, and then having the funds flow to the builder. This would involve paying out outstanding debt before topping up the reserve.
0 references
I thought it was all eth have we sold to stables ?
Yes, if a proposal requires USDC, they sell ETH and forward USDC.
0 references
it sounds like your priority would be to protect the ETH so that Nounders can continue to draw from it to invest in/build their vision, eg spending ETH on creative/viral marketing projects to in turn generate higher auction prices? & that this is the best risk/reward strategy for the DAO full-stop?
The question was whether the priority is to protect the ETH so that Nounders can continue to invest in/build their vision, and if this is the best risk/reward strategy for the DAO. The conversation suggests that the current priority is to collect as much ETH as possible and that the treasury value will be important in the future. The focus is on growing the treasury to fund more projects without eating into the principal as much. There is also an emphasis on attracting new members and increasing the treasury's size to achieve differentiation and attention. However, there is no direct consensus on whether this is the best risk/reward strategy for the DAO.
0 references
Oh so if the prop requires usdc we sell and forward usdc ?
Yes, if a proposal requires USDC, they sell and forward USDC. In some cases, the proposers had to convert after the DAO sent the funds, but they are working on a new model.
0 references
out of curiosity, is the lack of clarity around the tax implication the main reason you voted against prop22?
The main reason Noun 12#8966 voted against prop22 was due to the lack of context and clarity in the proposal. They mentioned that the proposal didn't explain what was learned from the 1 ETH experiment, didn't discuss the tradeoffs in participating in Lido, and wasn't comprehensive enough for treasury management. They wanted a clearer and more articulated proposal for managing large sums of money.
0 references
possibly? i think it could be interesting to refine a dao perspective on macro and potentially explore ways of opportunistically driving revenue to the treasury. arbitrage/writing premium are the primary ways i know of doing this, but imagine there may be other ways people in this space make fear their friend... for example if sub-2k eth pushes some alts (& nfts?) into 'deep-value' territory; do we care? are there revenue ideas out there not centered around finance/trading?
There is no direct answer to the question about exploring ways of opportunistically driving revenue to the treasury or revenue ideas not centered around finance/trading. However, there is a discussion about treasury management, diversification, and staking ETH across multiple products/protocols.
0 references
Probably yes, depending on the 4 nouns. <@!827708794841727076> which noun(s) do you own?
There isn't a direct answer to the question in the provided context. However, there is a discussion about creating a Nouns Market with a lending system that could potentially allow users to borrow against their Nouns as collateral. This idea is still in the draft stage and would require further development and governance approval.
0 references
Question about treasury transparency. If we decided to have a variety of investments, staking, etc how will that be displayed to someone who wants to quickly review the portfolio? I know that we can build a dashboard. However, I don't anything will ever replace going on a block explorer and looking at the ETH balance.--The last thing we need is for the DAO treasury to be as opaque as Tether's reserve.
The question about treasury transparency and how investments, staking, etc., will be displayed to someone who wants to quickly review the portfolio was answered by vapeape#3087. They mentioned that if everything is done from the treasury, plugging the address into DeBank or a similar platform will show it all. If needed, a page could be built on the main site if it gets more complex than that.
0 references
Serious question, is staking ETH completely riskless? In the context of how the treasury is currently setup.
Staking ETH is mostly riskless from a treasury custody perspective if done through liquid staking like Lido or Rocketpool. Lido is not fully decentralized yet, and Rocketpool is newer but completely decentralized and trustless. There is a theoretical risk of Lido getting hacked, but that would cause much bigger problems for the entire ecosystem.
0 references
so <@378904401290592258> you were referencing using this for dumping some of the ETH? https://github.com/banteg/yfi-buyer
Yes, elad#6192 confirmed that they were referencing the yfi-buyer GitHub repository for potentially dumping some of the ETH. They also mentioned they could show the code they're working on if chris224466#1109 is curious.
0 references
Some variant of this could be good but these parameters will be absolute chaos. --I for one will definitely just take ~90 eth loans against each of my nouns and not pay them back and try to use the 90 eth to buy cheaper nouns and repeat. Pretty sure many others would do the same.--Not sure the right amount but probably something more like 40% maxloantovalue would be more realistic? I don't think we should have either:-A) bigger loans than the price of recent sales-B) loans be a major incentive to artificially prop up recent sales
MikeMcDonald#3707's question was about the potential chaos of having high max loan-to-value ratios and whether a lower ratio like 40% would be more realistic. --In the conversation, willprice#7766 agrees with starting with conservative parameters and suggests that if they start with low LTV and high liquidation penalties, and slowly relax them over time, the NounsDAO will accrue substantially all the value instead of profit maxis. Illiquidjpeg#3448 also agrees with a lower LTV of 40-60% and higher liquidation incentive of ~10% to start.
0 references
This is a bit nit-picky but 365 days from now we'll have 470 nouns, of which only 105 + 36 = 141 are definitely represented by members of this chat. 141/470 = 30%. So it feels a bit weird to try to have the 30% speak for the 70% when I believe its majority rules?
Goldy#0420's reply addresses the concern about the 30% speaking for the 70%. They argue that when someone buys into NounsDAO, they accept the decisions that have been made up to that point. They can campaign to change things, but it's not unfair for the DAO to make long-term decisions.
0 references
What do you mean iceberg it? We could let the nounders execute it via a private mempool or in chunks if everyone is comfortable with that
Iceberg it refers to breaking up a large transaction into smaller orders to avoid causing significant price movements or revealing the full size of the transaction. In this context, the user is suggesting that the Nounders could execute the transaction in smaller chunks or via a private mempool if everyone is comfortable with that.
0 references
What do you think about using the treasury to buy eth call options for instance?
Using the treasury to buy ETH call options is a possibility, but another more passive route that is less speculative and matches the governance latency constraint is selling covered calls. However, there is no consensus on the best approach for treasury management, and some members suggest focusing on ETH staking or other strategies.
0 references
Why would there be any dissent? Id like to hear the argument?
The question was about why there would be any dissent regarding the treasury management. The direct reply from 4156#9052 argues that limiting the number of Nouns or focusing solely on the ETH value of the treasury would hinder the long-term potential of the Nouns DAO. They emphasize the importance of cultural capital, clout, and the diverse abilities and opportunities that new members can bring to the organization. The conversation also touches on the benefits of having a constant supply of new members and the potential drawbacks of capping the creation of Nouns.
0 references
would be great if we all started thinking on key decisions re: the stablecoin payments infrastructure-we'd like to bring them up on calls starting next week-------decisions we expect will require more deliberation:--1. which token do we want to pay in? e.g. USDC vs DAI -2. the amount of the baseline position the DAO will hold, denominated in USD (the baseline amount helps pay builders immediately, vs asking builders to wait until we can buy USD on chain)-2.1 with this decision the DAO can set lower and upper bounds within which an admin multisig can adjust things without going through the proposal process-------decisions we expect should be easier to decide on:--1. the max price slippage rate; this should be easy as the DAO can set a reasonable upper bound and let the admin multisig find an optimal value gradually on mainnet-2. who should be the admin; personally I think the tech pod multisig is a great choice with highly relevant people already part of that team (to clarify: the highest owner role is of course the DAO's; the admin has more limited configuration rights)-------please hit us up with questions and feedback anytime!--for anyone curious about the state of the code right now: https://github.com/nounsDAO/token-buyer/pull/1
Based on the conversation, the key decisions regarding the stablecoin payments infrastructure are as follows:--1. The majority of users seem to prefer DAI over USDC, but they want to ensure there's an easy and low-cost path for builders to convert and withdraw their funds.-2. A baseline position of around 2.5% (~700 ETH) is suggested, but there's also a suggestion to peg it as a percentage of total treasury holdings.-3. The max price slippage rate should be 0.5% to attract interest from the MEV community.--However, there is no clear consensus on the admin multisig and the lower and upper bounds for adjusting the baseline position without going through the proposal process.
0 references
Would the increase in usd value be return to the treasury. Or is it increasing the prop runway ?
The increase in USD value would go to the Nouns Esports Pod, which would also be looked to for funding a shortage in the event of catastrophic mismanagement of the last 20% and no revenue being generated.
0 references
Would you need another vote to decide if a project has met its goals? Also, not every project gets an A or an F
Yes, a vote would be needed to decide if a project has met its goals. H O N K D I D D L Y#2881 mentioned a slashing mechanic where people could call out a project for failing to meet its objectives after a certain period of time, and then it would be put to a vote. The details on the best implementation of the vote are not yet clear.
0 references
ya, seems most likely it would stay in steth until then.. but whether the merge outlook begins to change, or lido fundamentals change/ or curve pool liquidity changes (drop in incentives etc).. just seems we want someone to have eyes on it somewhat regularly. maybe there are people in the dao keeping track of these things anyway that we can count on for ongoing risk management?
Yes, it seems that there is a suggestion to have a small team dedicated to treasury management and ongoing risk management. Goldy#0420 mentioned that it has been discussed somewhere that a small team could be dedicated to this task.
0 references
you mean a FIFO queue of the builders which the DAO owes?
The question was whether there would be a FIFO queue of the builders which the DAO owes. The conversation suggests that the idea is to pay outstanding debt before topping up the reserve, and the searcher would transfer tokens directly to the builder, possibly passing through one of the DAO's contracts for accounting purposes.
0 references
1 eth, 5%, 10%, in 3 separate proposals? lets us execute an initial test which should have no objections, and then members can voice opinions on chain to determine position size that we’re comfortable with
0 references
22 made the point earlier but if we entered ribbon now we'd probably be selling 3k calls; if eth has a v-shaped recovery what then? in my experience the alpha in options trading is 100% in efficiency of execution and *actively managing risk.* which means someone/something needs to trade the book. products like this may be a sort of compromise: https://twitter.com/wadepros/status/1476973710150152194?s=21 but contract risk, etc.. (though yields are currently > 1%/day 👀 ) // FC trading accounts auditable by dao a non-starter?
0 references
<@!827708794841727076> just curious why you voted against 52 in the absence of rETH being available. did you have other concerns?
0 references
Agree with this, the returns on our ETH now are de minimis relative to the 1 year growth we expect from the next 300 Noun O'Clocks. This has partially informed my desire to keep punting on putting the treasury to work. Happy to have people noodle on what kind of structure we should be comfortable with long term and I have views on that (only Lindy protocols, minimize counterparty/smart contract risk and the stacking of counterparty/smart contract risk, no more than 20% of tsy in a given silo of very similar risk -- this shouldn't be thought about as what we'd do with our individual ETH and a rule of thumb is We can't lose this any of this money...where should we put it?) but there's no pressing need for this in the short and medium term.--The best return to the treasury on our engagement right now is getting people interesting in becoming a Noun.
0 references
All in favor of giving 100% of the treasury to non-members?
0 references
all the investments will still be on chain?
0 references
aren't there entities being set up that will interface with dao funds?
0 references
Are we still deciding to alter https://nouns.wtf/vote/52 or keep this and in addition do something else?
0 references
are we tied strictly to eth + stake indefinitely / across all mkt conditions?
0 references
back when people used to wear usbs housing their sks around their neck?
0 references
But can’t you then say that for every decision the DAO makes? Surely if you buy into nounsdao today you accept all the decisions that have been made to date have been made. You can of course campaign to change things, but it doesn’t read to me as unfair for nounsdao to make long term decisions 🤔 💁♂️
0 references
but seriously lido holds like 5-10% of eth I think now? if that gets hacked it's bad news bears regardless
0 references
but then would it still be. .. nouns?
0 references
Can you clarify the 'just straight eth' – are you saying you think we should only do things like staking eth and lending eth and not diversify to earn more yield other ways, or are you saying we should only hold eth directly in the treasury and not use it to earn anything?
0 references
could we build our own staking infrastructure and hold the keys in a multisig or even in the dao?
0 references
did we previously discuss a luna short for the dao?
0 references
does anyone have a strong view on probability of merge coming in '22?
0 references
Does counsel think foundation can open trading accounts?
0 references
do we actually think the nouns will ever win one? I guess if it's a really bad looking one lol
0 references
do we have a sense of what the parameters are over at nftfi? outsourcing this work to a dedicated lending protocol seems like a much better risk/reward to me. if we figure that the same 'trade' is available whether expressed via a third party, or expressed via our own treasury, the only exclusive premium available to the treasury is the margin for building and running our own infrastructure. if the goal is a 5% yield, let's chase the yield by lending against nouns on NFT-fi without any long-tail structural risk to this project
0 references
Do we know for sure that WBTC can't be blacklisted? As a DAO who would be a large holder of WBTC, this seems like an important consideration. The counterparty risk embedded in WBTC is even higher for a DAO than a normal person.
0 references
do you think merge upside risk is fairly priced by the market atm?
0 references
economic forces? people believe one day ETH2 will launch and current ETH will bridge over and be fungible with the ETH currently being staked
0 references
Emoji poll: what is DAO sentiment on experimenting with hiring an industrial farmer to manage X% of the treasury?
0 references
Feels like there is high confidence in USDC, if it somehow has problems what is the best practices in that scenario?
0 references
Genuinely curious, would you trade your noun for 4 recently auctioned nouns?
0 references
how does that work if adoption has driven that kind of growth which in turn means significant eth burn
0 references
how do the staking rewards get distributed?
0 references
how is there $312m of debt agains $337m collateral?
0 references
ie do we expect a Nouns foundation will be holding 1000+eth in future?
0 references
IIRC @mining_dao specializes in this type of thing (I think they facilitated the guy buying 100 punks in 1 block).--Could build a contract that perhaps 1st of the month at midnight UTC buys the cheapest punk?--Or does it need to be more literal than that?
0 references
I'm a really big fan of this proposal, especially with sane risk parameters. What are next steps here in making it happen?
0 references
I only have a basic understanding but curve was what I had seen before. Maybe I didn't keep up with the conversation though and the idea was to keep it locked in until merge anyway? Would be nice to know if there were things we could do if we wanted to though
0 references
i see, so you see a future where eth market share is divvied up among many metaverse chains and btc commands a larger mcap than any/all of them?
0 references
is there any guarantee that the 8 eth savings would still be available in 7 days when the proposal executes?
0 references
is there anything like a how to guide for greating a proposal?
0 references
It seems like so far we at least have consensus on wanting to keep full exposure to eth but earn money staking. Some q’s: I’m writing a proposal that we would put 20% into Lido for stEth, too high/low? I think we should also then provide to the eth/stEth curve pool, it’s essentially just additional free yield, but maybe we should save that for a separate proposal? Rocketpool could also be a great alternative, I’m personally a believer but they are very new still. If anyone wants to help with the proposal or constructing the transactions DM me.
0 references
just iceberg it, no?Steth discount has persisted throughout the history of the contract & 8 eth is 8 eth 🤷 can’t we move it into a multisig?
0 references
Looks like from recent auction sales that premium for ‘coherence’ may be around 15-20%/ though vry hard to tell (eg 169) anyone have a different take?
0 references
Maybe it’s worth considering locking up some ETH on Maker and borrowing USDC for funding proposals.--Maybe start off with about 100 ETH to test the idea?
0 references
Opinions on 1k ETH to Rocketpool?
0 references
Philosophical question: should NounsDAO hedge ETH deltas, or should that responsibility fall on DAO members to hedge their individual exposure?
0 references
re: committee, imo its not quite that simple. while a committee is useful for things like retroactive funding, what we are talking about here is a 50-100m dollar ‘hedge fund’ that is by default growing aum by 300k++ per day. there are very few people in the world that i trust to run such an org, and they would essentially have the fate of the entire project in their hands. i’m all-for staking eth as a very clearcut activity that we can engage in as a preliminary experiment. if we want to pursue more complex strategies, maybe it would be worthwhile to become LPs in actual crypto funds like Paradigm? i do think the endowment point is quite interesting, but given the amount of capital and what’s at stake, imo we would be better off in the hands of professional money managers than internal volunteers
0 references
should we add taxes then also? 😉
0 references
So I understand reasoning… do you ask/suggest because--1. You think we should possibly be staking even more ETH?--2. It would be safer to stake across multiple products/protocols? (Simply diversifying writhing the limited scope we’ve defined)--Also-3. My extremely limited understanding is that Rocketpool somehow more decentralised than Lido. Are there any other pros and cons important to understand?
0 references
So just to be clear are we sweeping under the rug that Lido/Rocket pool are built atop experimental technology under active development, and there is no guarantee that it has been developed error-free?
0 references
so possibly direct through Lido is ok, but not through curve?
0 references
so the dao burns the liquidated noun?
0 references
So the idea is that the current eth values of the top 100 projects prevent more projects from reaching that level of success?
0 references
there are all kinds of yield avenues & risk/reward profiles in this space as well all know. an actively managed delta-neutral portfolio (ie pure yield) should be earning 60-100% un-compounded in current DeFi landscape & personally don't get that excited about assuming technical/smart-contract risk for much less. however the question then becomes, who wants to take on investment management responsibilities?
0 references
to the extent that everyone's online life becomes increasingly commoditized, & if you have all sorts of new asset classes represented by nfts enabling all of this new social-economic exchange, and all these transactions have to take place on decentralized networks (or L2), how can those networks, which seemingly will need to process potentially billions of transactions every day to handle all of this new commerce, underperform btc if its primary use case remains as reserve asset?
0 references
we were touching on conviction voting in there and this is sort of a cousin of that / maybe you can clarify how you are pricing the credits in eth terms if they are denominated in Noun ?
0 references
Ya that could be interesting to see how that would work. --That said I suppose we've been a little sidetracked from the initial point of treasury diversification. Not many people voted in <@603240181050638346>'s poll but the majority were in favor of diversification so I may try suggesting some proposal in the coming days.--Do other people have feedback (positive or negative) regarding this?
0 references
you believe in NFTs but not eth? if so do you think Nouns willl be eventually moving to another L1 and should we be hedging by buying SOL etc?
0 references
1
0 references
11
0 references
1
0 references
The text does not provide information on the name of the team or builder that
0 references