Proposal 189 (Q1889)
From Nouns Dev
A Nouns proposal.
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | Proposal 189 |
A Nouns proposal. |
Statements
14 December 2022
0 references
Extremely nounish
0 references
81
0 references
189
0 references
114
0 references
118
0 references
Gnars
0 references
Gnars is awesome, should be funded if needed and within limits, but the 694.20 ETH is past the limit and is not judicious for Nouns DAO based on what was presented. Over time, would have no problem funding more than that, in tranches, as needed, and based on following demonstrated successes with more successes. Would fund 69.420 ETH.
0 references
Dear Gami, my brother in christ. Youve done an incredible job with Gnars so far which is why I really deliberated on this one for so long. Unfortunately, I dont think this proposal (as it stands today) is ready to be passed given the ask. My primary reason is that gnars should go into much more detail into the following two questions: 1. What did Gnars do with the previous proposal? 2. What does Gnars *plan* to do with the funding moving forward? Re: Question 1 — I know youve done some really awesome things like sponsor the skater that won the championship! and other awesome things which probably resulted in lots of impressions for ⌐◨-◨ — but your prop doesnt go into these details 🥹 More generally, i sincerely think its important for nouns to create a culture where proposers provide sufficient context *on-chain*. It is especially important in a community where new members join every single day, so that each new member can make the best possible decision with sufficient context. To summarize, Id prefer to see this back on-chain with more detail and broken up into 2 stages.
0 references
I have done substantial research into gnars and believe they are a net positive for the Nouns ecosystem. However, I believe the sum requested exceeds their current needs and should be broken into a few proposals. I would likely vote For the next.
0 references
I am chatting with 0xigami as I am writing this--he knows how I am voting. We both have the skater mindset. bail. get back up. dust off. climb stairs. -Gami And thats how he proliferates just like a vert skater, Go ALL in or FALL in, dont leave one foot on the coping -Sam Ellis I have been excited to see the highest voter turnout for this prop. I encourage him and the Gnars DAO to revise and resubmit, if this prop does not pass, based on some of the feedback that has been given by the DAO I say some as I consider Gami an expert in his field. If resubmitted by just GNARS sans Gami, please see the above comment. Gami, Gnars--I love you crazy builders Oh, and Bob Burnquist--stick around I promise it will be worth it.
0 references
I really like Gami and the work gnars does. But I dont think putting this amount of eth in one single persons hands are the best for the DAO. A smaller ask with (any) detail on how funds will be distributed (who/how/when itll be decided) would be welcomed.
0 references
agree w/ noun 12 reasoning
0 references
A vote against a proposal is not a vote against the proposer or the project. It is healthy to say No sometimes too. Great to see another DAO that has achieved some level of self sustainability. Team seem passionate. 1. It does not make sense to seed other DAOs to this scale at this stage. I hear people saying we need to put our faith in Gami and the team but IF Gami is going to be deciding how these funds are deployed, that is a problem (as it means they have control of the DAO and distribution is not right). Otherwise we are putting our faith in gnarsdao token holders...10xing their treasury. Without fully understanding who they are (how could we) and the implications of doing so. (Of which I can think of many...but im not going to get into it here). Seeding other DAOs to this extent - that have not solved for some of the governance issues that Nouns has is not the way to scale. Like others I would be more open to a prop with a much smaller ask and more detail for how its planned to be deployed.
0 references
19
i am a huge fan of gami and gnars and all the work they have done and will continue to do. however, at 700 ETH i have to vote against this version of the proposal. i think this is an absolute no-brainer yes at a lower expenditure. i would vote in favor of large proposals with generous compensation for the gnars team to execute on them, but for 700 ETH up front i would prefer things were better defined ahead of time. this is in no way a personal rebuke on anyone involved, i am a big fan of the team, and i would lead the charge on supporting v2 of this proposal at a lower funding cost to nouns dao, and would vote yes on big ambitious well compensated projects that were better defined ahead of time
0 references
Amazing work, but ask is big without sufficient breakdown detail. Would love to see another version of this prop with either an ask that goes 2x instead of 10x, or budget detail justifying why 10x is necessary at this point.
0 references
Unclear outcomes, lack of data around previous fundings successes and conversions, and somewhat shockingly being disrespectful within the community.
0 references
Salvino elegantly summarized my thinking around this. Gnars is one of the best projects to come out of Nouns, and Id love to continue supporting it. However, this current proposal is asking for a very large sum of funding without the commensurate level of transparency on how the funds will be spent. Would support new series of props from Gnars that request less funding for a shorter period of time each, with more budget transparency. (without necessarily diminishing the overall ETH/month in sum)
0 references
28
Really like gnars and everything theyre doing but this large of an ask in one swing feels too high for comfort - Budget section of proposal feels too sparse on details. Who is being paid and how much? How fast is the ETH going to be used? How much would each event cost? can we know the events and whatnot upfront? - Personally I dont like the idea of giving people ETH to buy 2 nouns. I had to spend 30+E to get mine, others much more. I could write a proposal saying Ill do x y z marketing give me a free noun, but that would be unfair. Nouns arent a cheap NFT, 30E is like a full years salary for many in the US. - Gnars has daily auctions which give them ETH, they still have over 70E in their treasury to use (which is great given the 60ish we funded them with in the past). I feel gnars could be self sufficient and this proposal is asking for a large amount simply because it can. - With 3360 Gnars in circ, giving gnars dao 700E would 10x the book value of a gnar when a noun trades at half. I know many in our DAO think this metric doesnt matter, its just a point worth keeping in mind for those that do care.
0 references
I echo everything Salvino said under his vote description. I love Gnars and I love Nouns, but this vote marks the start of a new experiment (if you will) of the DAO evolving to be a bit more careful and efficient with its spending, while setting a precedent that we want to see more structured props going forward. I cannot think of a better team to come back from this and resubmit a bulletproof proposal that will pass with flying colours. I remain 100% faithful in 0xigami and the Gnars crew, and their ability to execute. I look forward to a resubmission soon.
0 references
Not a knock against the great work done by Gnars, but the ask is way too high imo. Would consider funding for a much smaller amount. Not to beat a dead horse, but I strongly feel that bear market expenditures should scale back quite a bit. 700 ETH will likely be worth 7 mil USD in a couple years - would prefer to conserve as much dry powder as possible during the lean times.
0 references
Id want to see more details on the type of impact this project is meant to have for the overall nouns community
0 references
I believe in seeding people, places and things (like nounish projects/subDAOs) that have the potential for mass proliferation of the meme. ⌐◧-◧
0 references
I think Gnars is one of the best examples of execution out there. Talented team, clear vision + great partnerships with pro skaters. LFGnars!
0 references
We believe that leveraging proven pods of Nounish proliferators is a de-risking strategy for the Nouns treasury. Keeping all of the ETH in one big honey pot is liable to attracts flies. Conversely, deploying it to teams with track records of success ultimately brings more new people into Nouns and completes the virtuous cycle. Now that’s Ugly (and Gnarly.)
0 references
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬛🟨⬛🟨⬛ ⬛🟨🟧🟧⬛ ⬛🟨🟨🟧⬛ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
0 references
Gnars has consistently delivered proliferation. To do this at a larger scale they need to be well capitalized. Gami has proven the ability to execute.
0 references
I sat with this for some time, given its huge financial ask. Im a fan of proposals that clearly outline how they want to spend their money, and this one quite frankly did none of that. However, I ultimately came to the conclusion that when funding a subcommunity or DAO, we actually dont necessarily need an understanding of the budget. The question, rather, is whether we trust that DAO to be valuable stewards of that money. I see these types of proposals as cultural venture investments, similar to our @nounsbuilder funding. Just as a VC does not review all the expenses of their portfolio companies, Im not sure we need to know how exactly a subDAO is going to spend the money we give them. Rather, we just need to know whether a) we trust that the subDAO will steward those funds in a way that is positive for Nouns DAO, and b) if the cumulative ask is an amount of our treasury we are comfortable locking up until we see the cultural ROI from that spending. The bar is super high for both a) and b), but this proposal meets both of them for me, so I decided to vote yes.
0 references
Great initiative that will help promote the sport and provide opportunities for athletes from all over the world, I am from South America where the opportunities for athletes are limited and centralized, my vote is in favor of the independence of athletes and the construction of value in community.
0 references
its a large ask, yes, but its also arguably the largest irl presence nouns has
0 references
Gami was designed in a lab for irl proliferation and has a track record Let’s take a chance on this large ask
0 references
I went back and forth on this one, but on balance, I dont think you can vote no given the work this team has done. Would I appreciate a smaller proposal with more checkpoints? Yes. But I dont think thats a good enough reason to reject a proposal where everything else, in my eyes, gets a big thumbs up. SubDAOs are the future of Nouns – they are the only way the DAO will thrive in the long run as more folks enter the ecosystem and the meme becomes more fractured. Gnars sets a great precedent on that front.
0 references
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬛⬛⬛⬜⬛⬛⬛⬜⬛ ⬜⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛⬜ ⬛⬜⬜⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬜⬛⬛ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
0 references
Gami and gnars have been amazing to see. I dont know how funds will be spent exactly, but seems like the right model to lean into trust when we see talented builders with a lot of momentum.
0 references
Gami has done so much to proliferate Nouns ... in particular outside of the traditional crypto circles. Nouns should be taking more big bets on people like Gami.
0 references
love gnars. the budget did give me pause for a moment but ultimately garns is one of the strongest centers of IRL nouns subculture thats being built out and we should support the momentum.
0 references
This proposal is of huge value to the DAO and the nounish culture in general. The Gnars community has proven to be very efficient with the treasury and enabling the community with a larger treasury to push these initiatives across every continent. This subDAO is an insanely good model for the pod concept that has been talked so much about in the past few months. This pod has organic inbound flow and aggressive outreach into a subculture that is super hard to penetrate without being culturally relevant, living and breathing this stuff.
0 references
I HAVE NO NOUNS BUT GNARS ARE FOR THE CULTURE
0 references
Prop name says it all. Non stop inspiration from Gnars makes it extremely easy to want more.
0 references
voting FOR an engaged community and proven builder to proliferate the fuck out of nouns.
0 references
11
**Nouncil Vote:** 44 Yes, 10 No, 1 Abstain 3 Nouncillors abstained from the decision **YES WINS** --- **Vote Reasons & Discussion** --- **Benbodhi** | *nounish af Gnars is a power pod of proliferation and is spreading the culture far and wide in the best way possible imo. ⌐◨-◨* **.ZllW ⌐◨-◨** | *Sub-DAO have proven to proliferate and expand nouns branding. (Lil Nouns, Gnar, FoodNouns,etc) No doubt a large ask, but Gnar led by Gami have been providing impactful proliferation around Nouns; thus trust that Gnar team would put this 694E to good use in crossing the chasm and scaling what they are doing* **Josep** | *I think other ways to finance the project over time should be explored, I dont see a plan to be reasonably self-sustainable over time. I believe that Gnars brings a lot to the image of Nouns DAO and for this reason I would like to see the proposal revisited by reducing the capital required over the time period, setting goals and creating a strategy to make Gnars profitable.* **Akva** | *As part of GnarsDAO core team, I abstain from voting on this proposal even though I really want to see it succeed* **Mach** | *Love how gnars is spreading the culture and using money efficiently to build a brand/the nouns brand* **systemdm.⌐◨-◨** | *Definetly Yes… In my opinion this kind of activations and proliferation and social impact is exactly what its all about….* **Sasquatch** | *easy yes* *the inspiration for a lot of work done at Nouns* *let our best builders have a clear runway for takeoff* **JoshuaFisher** | *you had me a gnello* **andreitr** | *Love Gnars and what they are doing. Lets keep the momentum going.* **Satori** | *Gnars are paving the way for subDAOs in many areas and I think it would be hugely beneficial for Nouns in the long run to facilitate their growth.* **JoelCares** | *keep on shreddin* **pemburux** | *Great initiative, great proliferation, and big yes from me* **Mindtoasted** | *This is a huge amount of request, but from a long term perspective, IMHO it can continue to push something that covers a wide range of things related to sports and athletes, especially for the Nouns itself, which has never been separated from anything highlighted before. I vote yes for this* **Graphic.⌐◨-◨** | *Gami has done a great job previously with the grant he was give and theres no doubt he will so ever bigger and greater things wit
0 references
20
Mint it all. Minting makes memes measurable.
0 references
Its gnars, of course im voting for this. Viva Gami!
0 references
14 December 2022
0 references
again, nobody said it wouldn't work but that's not the approach we've taken. It's not combative, it's just not ideal in the long run. Here's a message I sent in another server --> I see where you're coming from, but does Nouns really want to micromanage the operations of all subDAOs?-> If willing and capable collectives such as Gnars are willing to do the work, shouldn't Nouns put their faith in these sub-communities and delegate the management and operations to that sub-DAO? Nouners aren't getting paid to be nouners, and asking them to review and analyze those kind of details about every specific thing a sub-DAO does is a full time job in and of itself. In the long run, more decentralization is better imo
Using tranches for funding is not the same as micromanaging the operations of a subDAO. Sending 175 ETH in 4 tranches is not the same as reviewing and analyzing every specific detail about what a sub-DAO does. If the proposers do a good job of packaging the next tranches proposal with metrics and growth, Nouns will likely be happy to review.
0 references
ah 700eth proposal has less than a weeks worth of time to discuss?
The voting period for the 700 ETH proposal is set up to be less than a week, as that is how the voting period is currently structured.
0 references
Are we at Nouns better funding newcomers with no track record, or backing those who've delivered and proven culture fit and dedication to the cause?
There is no clear consensus in the conversation about whether Nouns should better fund newcomers with no track record or back those who've delivered and proven culture fit and dedication to the cause. Some users prefer a more decentralized approach, while others express concerns about spending too aggressively and needing tighter capital controls.
0 references
But why not outline it in the prop?
The ETH goes to the treasury and then sets up a bunch of the initiatives outlined in the proposal, and the community votes on them. The majority of the funds will be spent through Gnarshouse, a Prop House like from GnarsDAO, to be able to do more events like I Love XV, which has had a high ROI for the DAO.
0 references
can we just split up the current proposal into seven 100 ETH proposal and call it a day?
Splitting the current proposal into seven 100 ETH proposals is not directly addressed in the conversation. However, there are discussions about the size of the proposal, the percentage of the treasury it represents, and the idea of funding in tranches. Some participants express concerns about the proposal's size and suggest that funding over time, as needed, would be more appropriate.
0 references
can we please avoid you've haven't even a spent month as a way of discrediting the newest members within the community and instead focus on responding to the questions/critiques they bring up? 🙏--Yes, It's true that <@968972070899810344> just joined. It is the responsibility of the *proposer* to provide sufficient context every time they they ask for funds on-chain, so that the even the newest members can make the best possible decision.--I don't mean to single you out here <@324687468433637376> -- and mean this respectfully. I've noticed that other people have a tendency to do this to other newcomers as well. Just feel as though if we continue to do this, nounsdao will *feel* increasingly captured by the OG in-group to newcomers.
Satori#1337 apologized for any perceived discrediting of the newest members' opinions and clarified that their intent was to express frustration with the idea that previous work done without attribution data was considered throwing away money. They acknowledged the validity of asking for more context and information but disagreed with the notion that all previous work was a waste due to the lack of attribution data.
0 references
does hype not matter tho? isnt treasury spend just trying to get the most energy + momentum for nouns?
Hype does matter, and treasury spend aims to get the most energy and momentum for Nouns. The conversation discusses the importance of tracking metrics and data to inform decisions and measure the impact of events and proposals.
0 references
Doesnt the ETH just seed the treasury and then pending props dictate the spend?
Yes, the ETH seeds the treasury, and then pending proposals dictate the spend. The community votes on the initiatives outlined in the proposal.
0 references
Do you feel this way about all SubDAOs?
There is no consensus on whether all SubDAOs should be treated the same way. Some Nouners are against funding subDAOs, while others support funding projects initiated by a subDAO. The discussion revolves around the sustainability of subDAOs, their ability to deliver quality work, and preserving the treasury for more potential projects. It is important to note that not all Nouners have the same opinion on this topic, and reaching a consensus might not be possible.
0 references
how do you think nouns grows? -https://twitter.com/0xigami/status/1603167609238671361
Nouns can grow by utilizing the treasury rather than always growing by minting. The focus can be on shipping things that holders love, curating a fun and engaging community, and keeping spend low.
0 references
How long have you been in the DAO? How many votes have you already casted in the DAO and subDAOs?--You definitely didn't see what Deeze said about the DAO being a part time job
Defi jesus#2761 has been around since testnet and was part of the initial multisig of SharkDAO that bidded and won Noun #2.
0 references
How to avoid treasury drain without the Veto?
The veto issue and treasury drain are not directly related. The veto issue is about decentralization, while the treasury drain concern is about the amount of ETH being given to a sub DAO. It is suggested that instead of giving a large lump sum, grants could be given in tranches over time, as needed, and based on demonstrated successes.
0 references
I’m new here. Been buying Gnars for a few months. I’m going to be pretty careful with my wording here because I don’t want anything to be read as it wasn’t intended. --So…I’m not sure I understand some of the comments. What is the point of trying to get funding from Nouns if you have to be self-sustainable first? --It can take years for a start-up to make a profit…but they are funded in VC rounds in the early years. Is that not the point of Nouns? To fund projects they collectively agree should be funded because there is a “there” even if it’s not fully realized?
The point of trying to get funding from Nouns is to support projects that the community collectively agrees should be funded, even if they are not fully realized or self-sustainable yet. However, before a company raises a series A, they have to show not only sustainability but also sustainable growth. Growth should come before capital is injected, as injecting money without proven growth can lead to artificial growth and a lack of profit. In the case of Gnars, they have already received an initial 69 ETH as seed funding, which has helped them become self-sustaining. The current discussion revolves around whether additional funding is necessary and if the project has shown enough growth to warrant it.
0 references
In that - the question of if a dao *optimises* community decision making depends on a lot of things. It possibly *can*, but it’s not a foregone conclusion that most will or do. Soooo many variables. --But transferring Eth to another DAO to make these decisions for them is certainly not aligning of incentives or the best way to make governance decisions in a specific area. Pods are better.--Think of it this way:-You have 2 companies A and B - both having voting shares. -Company A has $30m and 600 shareholders - they make bikes-Company B has $80k - they make miniature bikes for elfs. --Company A wants to increase bike sales - so they transfer $1m to company B and their shareholders to make more mini elf bikes. With no equity or voting rights in company B (this is what we are doing with subDaos and I’ll let you draw your own conclusions as to why this doesn’t make much sense)
Domain-specific pods are considered a better way of allocating funds than transferring to a subDAO. The main difference between seeding/transferring ETH to subDAOs and to pods is that subDAOs optimize decisions between experts in specific fields, while pods are more focused on specific tasks or projects within the main DAO.
0 references
In the same essence as deleting discord to increase decentralization, wouldn't allocating a sizeable sum of ETH to a successful sub-DAO also further increase decentralization while staying true to the Nouns ethos and mission? shouldn't Nouns put faith in sub-communities that demonstrate clear success which matches their ambition? or do you really want all sub-DAOs to ask mom for lunch money every time they're hungry?
It is suggested that allocating a sizeable sum of ETH to a successful sub-DAO could increase decentralization while staying true to the Nouns ethos and mission. However, there are concerns about the efficacy of giving more ETH than needed. It is recommended that grants be doled out as needed over time and always be conditional and success-based. For example, an ask of 150 ETH with an expectation to come back every 3 months would be more appropriate.
0 references
In your opinion, what is the difference between seeding/transferring Eth to subDAOs and to pods?
In the conversation, it is suggested that the difference between seeding/transferring Eth to subDAOs and to pods lies in the alignment of incentives and accountability. Pods are considered better than subDAOs because the incentives are more closely aligned, and those pods are answerable to the Noun holders who funded them. Transferring Eth to a subDAO may not align incentives or be the best way to make governance decisions in a specific area, while domain-specific pods can be a better way of allocating funds.
0 references
Isnt Lil Noun already sending tokens to NounsDAO? -Every 11th token I think
Yes, Lil Noun is already sending tokens to NounsDAO, with every 11th token being sent. However, the current emissions have been under discussion for a while, as some feel that a founders tax and a NounsDAO tax is too dilutive. The base case for Nouns acquisition is association with NounsDAO, and leveraging the governance tokens for builders interested is still a work in progress. As the Noun holding grows, demand for use cases grows to justify acquisitions beyond association. Currently, work is being done to build permissionless tools (PropLot, Federation) to enable governance tokens to dictate how Nouns are used on-chain and in Prop House.
0 references
Not shooting the messenger at all. It's just that you don't have a clue about what you're talking about because you have just arrived. Reading all the props, making a due diligence and voting takes a *lot* or time, but you seem to be unaware of that.--Deeze is an NFT collector and ex-nouner (just sold the 2nd he had) and he used to complain about Nouns being a part time job and guess what? He was right
No clear answer was provided on why a lump sum is needed for the proposal's success. The conversation mainly focused on the differences between tranches and lump sum funding, as well as the role of Nouns DAO in managing subDAOs.
0 references
One question: are you suggesting the size of the proposal based on gnars potencial, or based on gami work?
The size of the proposal is not directly addressed in the conversation provided. However, it is mentioned that the Gnars community plans to come back with a smaller ask, more detail, and a trustless dao-to-dao proposal.
0 references
Prop 189 keeps giving insights and debates, innit? 😅
There is no direct answer to the question about insights and debates related to Prop 189. However, the conversation discusses various aspects of subDAOs, funding, and the relationship between NounsDAO and Lil Nouns. Some key points include being against ongoing blank check funding of subDAO treasuries, supporting funding projects initiated by a subDAO, and the need for a subDAO to have a reason why their project is better than a pod doing the same.
0 references
Should Lil Nouns stop buying Nouns and sending Lil Noun tokens to NounsDAO?
There is no clear consensus on whether Lil Nouns should stop buying Nouns and sending Lil Noun tokens to NounsDAO. Opinions vary, and some users are against ongoing blank check funding of subDAO treasuries while others support funding projects initiated by a subDAO. It is important to consider the specific goals and sustainability of each subDAO and project when making decisions about funding and support.
0 references
so you think nouns holder should have governance and receive funds from grants?
Nouns holders should not have governance and receive funds from grants. Instead, domain-specific pods are a better way of allocating funds than transferring to a subDAO. Transferring ETH to another treasury, which sells a token and has holders in the open market, is not the best way to make governance decisions in a specific area. Pods are better because they align incentives and provide accountability.
0 references
There is nothing stopping lil nouns builders going on chain in nouns if its relevant to nouns?
There is nothing stopping lil nouns builders from going on-chain in nouns if it's relevant to nouns.
0 references
Wait part of this prop is to give them money to buy nouns?
The proposal intends for Gnars to purchase 2 nouns. Both would go to the treasury, but Bob Burnquist would be involved directly.
0 references
where does this argument that there is proliferation without attribution come from??
There isn't any quantitative data to support the argument that there is proliferation without attribution. However, some users have requested more data to inform their decisions, such as end-to-end metrics, including the number of people attending events and the number of people from those events who bought a noun or were active in Gnars for more than 3+ months. The team is working on providing more data and numbers to address these concerns.
0 references
which DAO? gnars or the main one?
The main DAO is being referred to in the conversation.
0 references
Would you say the same about pods? How many are sustainable? How many purchase 13 Nouns?
There is no direct answer to the question about the sustainability of pods and how many purchase 13 Nouns. However, the conversation discusses the sustainability of subDAOs and their funding, as well as the idea of Nouns DAO acting as an incubator for builders.
0 references
you seem to keep pulling back the idea that since a 1000 ETH proposal passed, it somehow increases the validity of your proposal. I can't seem to understand why.--> We are on a strong growth trajectory-1) How much of that growth is organic and/or replicable; (2) how does that growth reflect on the gnars finances? if it's not reflected now, why will it reflect after the proposal work is done?
All growth in Gnars DAO has been organic, with athletes onboarded through word of mouth. They have generated revenue 2x the original 69 ETH received. However, some users in the conversation express concerns about the size of the proposal and suggest funding in tranches over time instead of a lump sum.
0 references
let me rephrase then. Why is lump sum needed for the proposal's success?
0 references
totally man! agree wholly here. in fact i challenged people saying the prop should only take 60 secs to consume. i want all the scrutiny and to do my best answering. should we jump on voice?
0 references
694.2
0 references
694.2
0 references
66
0 references
7
0 references
Gnars, an extension of Nouns dedicated to supporting extreme athletes, is requesting 694.20 ETH to expand its operations. Since its inception seven months ago, Gnars has sponsored over a d ozen athletes and attracted millions of views on its content. The group has recently made a significant impact in Brazil through its involvement in the I LOVE XV skateboarding event.
0 references
12
0 references
