(Q352)
Statements
16
feedback given in DMs
0 references
i appreciate the effort put into this proposal, but i am voting against it because i feel the requested amount is too high for a project that hasnt yet demonstrated a strong product-market fit. although i acknowledge the importance of maintaining and developing archives.wtf, i believe a smaller team and a more modest budget would be a more prudent approach for this work, allowing it to progress incrementally and adapt as needed.
0 references
Looks like a little overkill on the team spend for what the app hopes to accomplish. I dont see hardly any traffic coming to the site, just a few individuals casually using it. Chop down the budget and the team and maybe it would be worth funding.
0 references
Tools like this are important but Id personally need to see more evidence of PMF, or plans for how the tool is going to be marketed, before feeling comfortable funding at the requested amount. The current metrics on site views from the first version dont warrant this scale of follow-on funding (though I appreciate the teams transparency in providing that data for this proposal.
0 references
This is a fun and valuable project, but the amount of (financial) resources being allocated here is absurd. Archival is important, but I feel pretty strongly that a team could accomplish similar goals for a quarter of the price, without it feeling like an underpay.
0 references
Strongly echo Noun40 reasonings. Will provide full thoughts my newsletter tomorrow
0 references
current engagement #s doesnt seem to indicate product market fit (yet), may need a smaller/scaled down prop or additional engagement on current site to justify
0 references
Unfortunately the ask for this is too large for something that has gotten ~4,000 lifetime views - we dont think we should be paying $24k monthly to maintain something that is still unproven. A smaller prop with a small team would be great.
0 references
Something about archival and searchability of nounish media is interesting/useful, but the pieces dont quite come together for me here. There is probably a version of this prop that i would support though. https://twitter.com/krel404/status/1650761375751237633?s=20
0 references
Really love what this is but feels like the cost to build could be lowered and it would still be amazing.
0 references
22
appreciate the team and the energy they put into launching the site but unfortunately my feeling is that this isnt yet something the community actually uses much yet. so rather than scaling the funding and doubling down on the current direction, I would rather support something smaller to explore product market fit. for example, maybe the strongest need is not archiving everything in this schema but rather just to bring all the CC0 media to a imgur/flickr like site that you can easily search and find the image/video youre looking for? (according to the attached screenshots of ppl describing pain points that seems to be the strongest need)
0 references
I agree with what has been said by others re traction and funding amount. Grateful for the teams work here and hope theyre not too discourage by this vote. It seems like between this and prop 240, theres a good bit of builder interest in making the Nouns Dataverse more organized, searchable, and permanent. Im sure theres an exciting product to be built in this space, and I would be in favor of funding more exploration at a lower spend.
0 references
Against - 2 Wallets / 29M Votes For - 5 Wallets / 25M Votes
0 references
While I love the idea of an archive center for the Nouns ecosystem, the specifics of this extension do not seem to align with the demand. It might be more effective to pursue a series of focused proposals that have clear and limited scope, and in the interim collaborate with the community to develop strategies to ensure that the archive captures as much media as possible.
0 references
I appreciate what the team built here and I encourage them to keep building archives.wtf out for those who find value in it. I question the utility of the site myself when I put myself in the shoes of an end-user. To be honest, I wouldnt use the site but its totally possible that Im not the target audience for it. Good luck Voadz and team!
0 references
I endorse this proposal because, although its primary goal is to deliver long-term advantages for Nouns, it also serves as an open-source public good that enables all on-chain organizations, both present and future, to effortlessly maintain their own archives. The projects impact is significantly magnified when adopted by numerous organizations. As demonstrated by Prop House, Nounish public goods not only provide essential infrastructure but also promote and disseminate our shared values and principles.
0 references
20 April 2023
0 references
136
0 references
Archives.wtf - Extension
0 references
6
0 references
270
0 references
130
0 references
Archiveswtf
0 references
20 April 2023
0 references
Poll failed to meet vote threshold. **FOR - 21 VOTES** **fiveoceans_dev** | *i like what the team accomplished. i feel that archives.wtf could be a great way to unboard new builders by goving them access to see everything that was build.* *i hope the team woild put more efforts to keep the site updated.* *also, I would loke the team to consider adding a feature.i think it would be great to add a page where all content is shown without any categories with pagination* **AGAINST - 19 VOTES** **EltonPenguin** | *Thats a lot of money for not a lot of benefit* **Benbodhi** | *Love the concept, love Voadz, but I think the budget for this is a bit high and could be achieved for less without it being so low that its not viable.*
0 references
5
0 references
6
0 references
192,400
0 references
192,400
0 references
7
0 references
The team behind Archives.wtf is seeking funding of 192.4K USDC (~99 ETH) to continue maintaining and developing the platform as the main archive center of Nouns DAO for the nex t six months (May 23-Oct 23). The goal is to increase the media content of the Nouns ecosystem with software improvements and public goods tools to enhance user experiences.
0 references
Also seems like all entries need to be submitted manually right now?
Yes, currently all entries are being done manually by the curation team. However, with the submission form, the community will be able to contribute as well, lessening the burden on the curation team and making the process more sustainable.
0 references