0xbc3ed6b537f2980e66f396fe14210a56ba3f72c4 (Q224)
From Nouns Dev
Individual
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | 0xbc3ed6b537f2980e66f396fe14210a56ba3f72c4 |
Individual |
Statements
reVoteWithReason @seneca.eth > A nouns font that we can use across the ecosystem makes a lot of sense. Echoing what other voters have mentioned - I dont think the work is quite there yet but Marco has already stated the following: these are not final letterforms, that is what the proposal is for, there is a lot of work to be done for this to become a production typeface. My vote FOR is a vote of confidence in Marco to continue to get delve into Nouns culture to find just the right vibe for the font.
0 references
I like the energy here and it seems like a good experiment for the DAO to lean into and see where it goes. Itd be fun to try to think of a Nounish hook, something fun thats unique about these clubs. A pre or post run ritual? A monthly event the club puts on? Some loose vibes inspiration might be something in [this direction](https://youtu.be/45XF4aC5_FQ)
0 references
Thanks to Krel for putting this up! Vote refund helps ensure maximum voter participation!
0 references
Grateful for all the thoughtful reasons and both sides of this vote so far. Before buying a Noun, the content from Nounish was probably what impressed me most about the project. I really feel they are exceptionally good at what they do, and we are lucky to have them. As I think weve seen with the recent video contest, even with huge prizes, it is hard to get great content and it requires a good amount of admin overhead. I think the DAO funding competent, self-directed teams is an efficiency win and makes sense. Sometimes the most efficient decentralization is empowering several centralized teams! I absolutely open to funding other teams or organizing our spending through different means: prop house or whatever. But telling our story is very important--both externally as well as internally--and I dont think we should stop funding this while we wait to figure something else out. If we have an abundance of good storytelling happening, then we can decide how to optimize. The DAO is still in its infancy and it would feel like a huge loss to lose this team right now. I am comfortable spending 4% of the treasury/12% of annualized auction revenues on this. Finally, Im not sure how much pressure we should put on this team re distribution. I am excited to see what they come up with, but I am also open to the idea that they are great storytellers (and the stories have organic reach, as weve seen!) and we can possibly solve for distribution separately. Thanks to the Nounish team for all the great work so far!
0 references
Love the video and song! Would love an annual recap like this of funding highlights :)
0 references
Love these lil guys. Thanks for iterating on this project. Excited to have options for all Nouns!
0 references
This is awesome! Seriously grateful to the team for taking the feedback and coming back with a much more detailed and exciting plan. I also love incorporating vote reasons as design votes :) I prefer design A. I am skeptical of setting recommend retail below 1 USD, but defer to you all. Also unsure on the claim > Nouns Wet Wipes will become a permanent item in the market after this initial investment of USD 31,450 + 2 ETH. but I hope its true! Good luck!
0 references
Ive had a chance to hang out with snax and attend a pizza DAO event. There were plenty of people in noggles running around and the energy of the whole project strikes me as Nounish: fun, generous, and a bit absurd. I think in supporting this we get to back a community with decent reach that is already Nouns fans and be a part of a charismatic event. Excited to see how it goes!
0 references
I love the vision of ethOS, and I am glad theyve kept at it. I do not think this is a lost cause: all things start small. Ive personally been an Apple fan boy for many years, but am ready to give this a shot as my main phone just because I am so tired of how Apple has treated crypto. I had actually looked into getting setup but didnt feel like buying an old phone. Having a preinstalled option on the latest phone will be huge. My biggest complaint is that I wish there were a better story to this prop: the ask feels small and like were partially just paying for a Nouns gtm option to sell back to us. I wish the ask was larger, with a clear narrative of how our funding can be a key differentiator for the team, and a better story around how Nouns can be featured: e.g. a Noggle easter egg on all phones? Nonetheless, I am voting FOR! Because 1. After talking with the proposers, it seems they went with the lower amount after informally getting pushback on a bigger ask. This will be the largest funding amount theyve received to date and really will meaningfully help them get to market quicker. 2. Notwithstanding what I said about, the Nounish device option is cool and should be fairly high visibility. 3. I think there is a good story here that will reach an important audience. The people excited about ethOS are Ethereum maxis who are Nouns adjacent, if not already plugged in. Of all the people we reach across various props, these people are highly likely to (a) be excited about public goods and the ethos of Nouns and (b) have the means to acquire a Noun or minimally become active in the community. I am excited about funding things that are highly charismatic to those we want to--and can realistically--draw in! Lets make it happen!
0 references
I think the comp is high here, relative to what I see as the number of required weekly hours, but I am voting FOR, nonetheless. I do not think I support a canonical discord, but 1. I do think The Jungle is valuable and I use the prop specific channels regularly 2. I am for funding a diverse set of ppl/orgs that are engaging with the public and representing Nouns. I see Oni as being in that role here, and I have heard good things about them. Im not sure what exactly the success criteria is here: not sure what would make me want to fund again in six months. But I am for experimenting!
0 references
I think there are substantive issues at play here, and I was strongly opposed to creating the autobidder for Nouns DAO, but I am voting FOR. As far as I am concerned, the substantive thing is that Nouns DAO deployed an instance of this contract. Adding an ENS name feels like a logistical item, and it would have been nice to have the ENS show in the feed when it was used to bid. I think it’s unfair to say that the DAO can’t name/bless things: we’ve been on a Droposal tear! I would prefer a bit more provenance in the name, though, e.g. federationAutobidder. I do think returning the ETH with naming turned out to be an odd combo and I think it would have been courteous to cancel this prop and split into two as soon as it was clear that the ENS aspect was going to be contentious.
0 references
Super excited about this prop! - Nounish: Funding artists and putting work in the public domain. - Unique unlock: theres probably not another organization that would fund this in this way. Nouns provides unique value here. - One and done: no ongoing costs, the project is delivered and we all benefit from it forever! - Reasonable scope: The project has a clear plan, with a good chunk of work already done. The funding amount is fairly modest, relatively, and will be streamed. Author has past successful work. Excited to pilot how Nouns can work with book authors, and I cant wait to read with my 7yo! Good luck!
0 references
Appreciate the detailed breakdown here of how the team has delivered. I think we should double down on our winners and Nouns Esports seems like its winning!
0 references
I think that this is a fairly small spend to get more out of what we have already funded here. Id bet that this drives a non-insignificant amount of traffic to nouns.wtf. I think that we should be making reasonable bets to increase mainstream awareness of Nouns. On implementation, sending them to Nouns is great, but I would prefer we could get some QR code or something that would send them to a story on the Danits line + Nouns, in particular. The story is charismatic. Board could even say Nouns funds ideas.
0 references
SOOO excited about this. HUGE value per $. Thanks to all involved!
0 references
Im excited about this one! Appears contentious so Ill try to add a bit more thought. 1. I think this prop is a great, charismatic mix of punk, audacious, and wholesome. Its Nounish. I think the people who would see this and want to join Nouns because of it--want to help fund more stuff like this--are people I would love to work with. The asymmetric upside of most props is in how far and wide the story might go: how many people it might inspire. I feel this is high potential, in this regard. 2. Its a prop were Nouns uniquely can unlock something: would this happen without Nouns? Probably not. We can make all the difference. 3. I am a fan of props that fund a specific deliverable which can be used forever with no maintenance: in this case Nouns gets a story and video that can be used forever and has no upkeep. Super excited to see it happen!
0 references
Wild, fun experiment for a pretty low ask, relative to the work to be done. Lets do it!!
0 references
Im really happy with how Prop 197 went, and think it makes sense to do this follow on, as well. Seems like theres a lot of positive serendipity that would come from it and it makes sense to double down where were seeing success, not to mention put to use what weve already funded! After this one, if Danit thinks we should do more of these, I think I would prefer to see a proposal for a next coherent block of work that might encompass several events. Not sure if it makes sense to ask the DAO to vote on going to each event, and we may see diminishing marginal returns. Thanks for all your work and good luck in NYC!
0 references
I am excited about this prop! I havent loved the use of heyanoun so far, but I think there is certainly a place for both anonymity and pseudonymity and I am excited about the features described here. Perhaps more than the Nouns specific use cases, I think this is important web3 tech and Im excited that Nouns has a chance to support it. Good luck!
0 references
This charismatic and a clever way to incentivize solo staking. Excited to see it piloted!
0 references
Excited to build on the success of 195 and support another Atrium project!
0 references
I am not sure about all the exact details here, but directionally this seems substantive and worth experimenting with. I often get DMs asking for feedback on proposals touching on ideas Ive tweeted about, and I think the idea of formalizing that process is interesting. I also am excited about possibly having a repository of all the things Nouners want to see built, though I do wonder if for something to really work it has to be the proposers own in some way beyond just writing the proposal for something others want to see done. In any case, excited to see experimentation here!
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
I think that it is important for the DAO to continue to explore new ways to use governance to resolve conflict, and I see Function Props as a promising direction here. They could offer a way to take advantage of the concave decision making advantage of large groups: where any point along the spectrum from 0 to 1 is higher value than either a 0 or 1 outcome. I also think the funding ask is reasonable, considering audit is included. Good luck!
0 references
Loved the film and excited for the mint! Moar droposals!
0 references
Soooo excited for this! And generally find the meta of droposals to be a clear signal amongst a lot of noise right now. Really nice incentive alignment: if the DAO is happy with how a prop went, the work can be made canon and the proposer benefits from that, as well!
0 references
This action makes sense to me. Nouns pending award should not be used to vote. Aside, I think the current model of using the Nouns Acquisition Committee is really broken, and I look forward to the day when the DAO can directly mint Nouns to people.
0 references
Voting yes here despite som reservations. I want to support a team that has dedicated a lot of time to serving the DAO and has built a tool that I use on every prop. I think we should help them as they try to figure out a model to make their work sustainable. I wish there was more clarity on exactly what the model is. 5 months is not a lot of time, and I find the ask/salaries to be pretty high. Would prefer we were being charged some like annual fee as a DAO. But as usual, our task is to vote on the proposal that’s been put up, and not the one we wish was, and I think the main thing is I want to make sure the team can keep building and figure out a long term plan.
0 references
Super fun prop packed with a lot of great ideas. Exactly the kind of charismatic and out there stuff I think we should be spending on. Seems like a fair amount to pay for all that is included + the duration. Beyond the IRL engagements, I think images of things like the terrain park and gondolas will carry far online! Thanks for this and good luck!
0 references
I believe the most important task for Nouns DAO right now is to fund work that is charismatic to those we want to draw in. I think privacy tech is hugely important and charismatic in crypto broadly, and I expect it to be a core part of DAO-tech, in the future. I see DAO-tech as a core Nounish funding area. So I am voting yes on this because I think the work is important and I am hopeful that Nouns investing here will draw in more like-minded thinkers and builders to the ecosystem. I am uncertain about the usage in Nouns DAO, specifically. I can imagine a lot of ways in which private voting could make the DAO less healthy. But I think that (1) it is coming one way or another and we have a chance to invest and put our own spin on it (2) known personalities will win out in the long run and be the most popular delegates. Thanks to David and Elad for their time putting this together!
0 references
A very reasonable funding ask for a product that has already proved useful to people in the ecosystem! Excited to see where it goes!
0 references
I went back and forth a lot on this one--pay is high, we just funded an explorer grants in this same space--but was ultimately won over by reading through the teams answers to all the questions in Discord. I think the team has delivered some promising products to date (I had tried out before even joining the DAO!), and I am excited about the vision for what’s next. At these comps, Id prefer they were all full time on this with no other work obligations. But our task is to vote on the proposals that have been made, and I hope the generous pay attracts more talent to the DAO! Good luck to you all!
0 references
A reasonable funding ask for a clear and ambitious prop focused on proliferation in new geographies. Love to see it!
0 references
I think this is a reasonable funding ask for work that I find to be charismatic and fun. I think it is Nounish and like that the projects runs against the Effective Altruist trend. I am not sure how I feel over the long run about a social impact platform being reliant on the DAO for funding, but there are many other such orgs in the Nouns ecosystem right now so Im trying to keep an open mind! Best of luck!
0 references
Really enjoyed watching the video and hearing about all thats been done here so far, thanks David! Super exciting to have you engaged with Nouns. I wish that we could put a bit more structure on the prop: more specific goals and TODOs. Someone mentioned re-upping on a quarterly basis which I think could be interesting. But, voting FOR still because I am excited about all thats been done so far and think that if we have a chance to work with top talent we shouldnt let planning get in the way too much. Seems like lots of asymmetric payoff opportunities for Nouns here!
0 references
I have learned a lot from all the discussion around this proposal. Thanks all! I am voting for it because - I think that Nouns *should* have something going on for all these event. There are many alternative ways approaches that have been brought up, but I tend to think most will not actually happen or will not happen in time. If other people have other things they want to do, we should fund those too! - The plan laid out really is pretty ambitious (144 podcasts!). I think the ask is reasonable for the work. Everyone I have talked to who has met Aubotshi speaks very highly of her. It seems she gets Nouns, is a great ambassador, and is worth taking the risk on. - When it comes to spreading the meme, I think time is value. Better to spend sooner on a proposal you’re 80% happy with than try to wait for something you’re 100% happy with. Thanks Aubotshi! Excited to see all that comes out of this!
0 references
People seem to be voting against this because there is an alternative proposal with no reward to Jacob. Time and ideas are valuable, and I dont think Nouns DAO wants a reputation for being miserly. Jacob had the idea, spent time figuring out the transaction, and made a clear proposal with a nice graphic. 1 ETH is a reasonable reward.
0 references
I am working to more fully flesh this out, but my basic thesis is that Nouns should fund things that are charismatic and likely to draw in other builders and creative people. For me, this proposal fits that bill. Bonus points if we can support and encourage a creative builder who is invested in the community. And more bonus points if we get AWESOME SPRITES OUT OF IT! I also think the ETH ask is quite reasonable. I know some people are concerned about if/how these will get used, and I so I would love to see us fast follow with a Prop House round to fund uses of these! Thanks for the proposal! Can’t wait!
0 references
This is an interesting one. At first it seemed obvious to me: an easy yes! Of course we should give some of these glasses, entrusted to the DAO, to Nouners. But some valid concerns have been raised: Does this set a bad precedent of the DAO giving free stuff to Nouners? Using DAO holdings to reward Nouners? Should we be more focus on spreading the meme beyond the DAO? Can we avoid a distribution that favors those who hold several Nouns? I am sympathetic these concerns and appreciate those who have raised them, but I am still for this proposal. Proposal 57, which funded the creation of 8,250 of these glasses, included an allotment of 500 glasses to NounsDAO itself. I consider 50—10%—to be a fairly modest portion of this allotment. I think giving them to DAO members is a fun use and a very reasonable way to “spread the meme:” I think we should have some faith that the Nouners who receive these will do interesting things with them! 150 have already been given elsewhere and after this 300 will remain. I hope those who want to see these go outside the DAO will put up proposals to make this happen. Let’s use them! In my opinion, there is no reason to be precious.
0 references
Impressed that the plan laid out in the first prop is still holding. I think makes sense to see this work through given the time and funding already invested. Excited to see the result!
0 references
Voting FOR as I believe this is exciting content and an important experiment in funding and building that Nouns should absolutely lean into. Really, really appreciate this team and the care and effort they are putting in. Love having a schedule and plan, and to now see how were moving along it. The team has also been working in a very open way, trying to involve Nouners as much as possible. As a tiny aside suggestion, I would like to see some more *Nouns* feature in the story, aside just noggles. [Rookswaters novel](https://rookswater.blogspot.com/2023/06/the-nominal-hero-ch-5.html) has been inspiring imagining. Good luck! *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
Love these noggles and think it logistically makes sense to get a bunch of these upfront so that we have on hand. As an aside, I *really* want to get a sort of Nouns Event Kit of various sizes that includes things from many of the wonderful makers in our community and can be ordered and shipped easily. Could even have a mini version just for personal orders :) *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
Am excited to vote FOR this proposal, and want to use my vote to flesh out some of my thinking on the topic of how I think about developing the DAO, code-wise. I would prefer that Nouns onchain code changes are driven in two ways: 1. The DAO decides that it wants to make some changes, and then solicits quotes or runs a prop house for ideas on how to implement the change. 2. Teams make direct proposals to the DAO on code changes *they* think should be made, and the DAO funds them to work on it. In either case, I think the DAO should be driving changes and should generally be voting on a per feature basis. I dislike funding teams in an open ended way for a few reasons 1. I think it becomes unclear to outsiders what is and isnt being worked on, and how they can get involved. Anything important to the DAO will be taken on by a funded team with an open mandate. Which in a way is great: talented people are ready to work on stuff! But I also think can feel like capture of the codebase. 2. I am not sure how much the DAO code should be changing, and on what frequency. If teams are funded to work on stuff, they’ll find stuff to do, but it’s not guaranteed that the DAO would vote to have each of those things worked on, if it was up to them. 3. Finally, it often ends up that features get bundled together in updates, and it makes it hard for DAO members to make voting decisions. That all said, there are practicalities at play. Most good devs want some stability. They do not want to need to get funding feature to feature. And also, due to the nature of how smart contracts are developed, it is efficient to bundle things into a single audit. So, to the case at hand. With Verbs we have great devs, who have been with Nouns nearly since the start, and have done great work. The pay is high, but is on par for staff engineer levels of salary + equity, and I think high pay is to be expected for the uncertain nature of this job (will you get funded again in six months?) and the lack of things like health benefits. I read this proposal and think it mostly falls in category (2) above—“Teams make direct proposals to the DAO on code changes *they* think should be made, and the DAO funds them to work on it.” I think an NFT-first governor is important, I think seeing through the Fork is important, tips to governance clients, undo votes, and price oracle would be nice to ha
0 references
reVoteWithReason from nounburger.eth > Voting yes for Proposal 307 as I believe it offers a fantastic opportunity to globally celebrate, proliferate, and highlight the Nounish culture that has been built over the last 2 years. Opening it up to a prop house round will enable communities to create their own unique activations, showcasing the talent and passion within our Dao. 🥳 *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
reVoteWithReason from krel.eth > Unique opportunity by someone uniquely positioned to execute on it. *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
I am excited to see this prop and hope to see more like it. Things I like - Unique value unlock: probably arent many other orgs that will fund something like this. - Charismatic story/small is big: a fun, good vibes story here that could spread far. Lots of good Nouns images could come out of what gets done here. - One and done: though not as long lasting as, say, digital media. There is a clear one time ask here, which will provide value for a long time. Cant wait to see it! *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
I am the happy owner of an Artmatr piece that came from prop 224. This is a high ask, but I think its an ambitious prop with high proliferation potential. The team executed well on prop 224--both in quality of work, and in online and IRL event proliferation. I think the team is networked into a good art scene that Nouns should stay engaged with and frankly I just find the prop pretty charismatic! Its cool art tech, and I think people will have fun trading tokens and making their own Nouns prints. Would be really excited to see this come to life.
0 references
Appreciate all the votes on both sides here. I am voting for because I think this could turn into something exciting and I think the flow of funds, starting with funding to build out a proof of concept, makes sense and is a reasonable guard. It looks like this is not going to pass, so Ill just note some ideas - Could we first fund an exploration to build a proof of concept machine? I think people will be excited by some proof they can see. - Are we sure that going for a validator is the best simplification of the original prop (281)? I really liked the original props focus on hobbyists and learning. This feels Nounish. Is there a way we can push in this direction at a lower cost? Again, just a proof of concept people can get excited about? - Nounish design is cool, but where can we gain the most from your expertise? Are there any huge pain points we can solve since well be going 0 to 1? It feels like a lot of the work for a validator may be redundant? - In general, Id say dont hesitate to discuss with any and all Nouners to find the most exciting version of this, and then make sure to pitch that here. E.g. for this prop I think this may have amounted to one of the cheaaper validator options on the market, but this aspect wasnt really pitched. I appreciate fiveoceans sticking with this and trying to refine to arrive at something the DAO will support.
0 references
Has been fun to track this so far: seems the team has done well starting something fun and interesting on their own, and Im excited for Nouns to get involved. So Im a yes, but a few thoughts 1. I think it would be best to stay focused: this product is barely started. Seems not worth getting sidetracked with new product categories. 2. The biggest ask here is marketing spend, and Im not sure that feels the most high leverage? Again, seems team is doing well so I defer to them, but it seems like a sort of internet native, CC0 brand should leverage its organic and grassroots reach and try to stay cheap on the marketing spend. Would funding be better spent on hard fixed costs like production, shipping, storage, etc.? 3. Related to 2., think about how you can best leverage your online fans! Theres probably a LOT of people who could help get this into local spots around the world, can you find a way to empower your community? Excited to see what comes! *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
reVoteWithReason from 0xfc218f > (noun40 voting via agora proxy) weve turned down a few nft conference sponsorship tied props from local nouns communities and asked for something more independent and specific to nouns. this feels like that kind of prop to me. feels organic and grassroots from the korean community and Im supportive of this energy. *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
Martin is a talented builder who has already done a lot for Nouns. I personally have wanted a product like Mogu for sometime, and I think it is off to a promising start. This is a very reasonable ask for three months of full time work on it. Its dev szn at Nouns DAO! Good luck Martin! *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
Want to first reference my vote from the previous Prop 209 > I think this is a reasonable funding ask for work that I find to be charismatic and fun. I think it is Nounish and like that the projects runs against the Effective Altruist trend. I am not sure how I feel over the long run about a social impact platform being reliant on the DAO for funding, but there are many other such orgs in the Nouns ecosystem right now so Im trying to keep an open mind! Best of luck! From the Discord conversation I gather that most, if not all, of the work promised in the last prop was done. Am glad to hear! Though I wish that could have been highlighted more clearly in the prop, and we could see artifacts of those stories, as a good amount of the budget went to film and photo crews. I think the learnings here are good, though I am a little leary of the impulse to scale and go bigger. Something that I have liked so far about the work is the small is big feeling. I love the barbershop story: allowing people to do something fun and interesting and self directed is more exciting than charity. I am excited about the member led activations outlined. Overall, my current understanding of Nouns DAO is that the DAO functions to help facilitate running the idea maze of What is the most compelling identity and direction for these CC0 assets? What is the most exciting story for Nouns? We do this by stampings things as Nounish by funding them and/or partnering in content releases. Today there are several varying and coherent answers to the question, What should Nouns fund?: art, social impact, public goods, CC0, governance tools, the list goes on. So, though I am not 100% certain the direction proposed in this prop is the best, I trust the team. I think they are good people who care a lot about Nouns, and who have done charismatic work to date. I think Much Love is pulling an important thread in the What is Nouns? conversation that few other funded projects are, and Im excited to see where it goes. Best of luck 🫡 *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
I really appreciate the proposers. They seem like earnest and enthusiastic Nouners, and Im glad they have been responsive to feedback. But I am still voting against. The core of my reasoning hasnt changed since 285, as I dont think the core of the proposal has changed, either > I feel we have funded a lot of things focused on IRL activations recently (262, 257, 251, 218, 206, 197) and I am still sort of waiting for the dust to settle/a clear assessment of our ROI there. In particular, I dont feel a need to fund more NFT event sponsorship/attendance/activation type stuff. I know there was some pushback on this ROI point: a Noun was sold due to last years activation! I really like framing returns in terms of bringing in Noun buyers, so I appreciate this. But I am not totally sure how to measure: is the return just the value of that auction? Is it the surplus value vs. the trailing average auction? Or something else? Even if we say the return should be counted as the total auction value, I feel compelled to stick with my feeling that spending on event sponsorships is not a good use of funds right now. It seems like there is an amazing Nouns community in Brazil and I would love to fund some crazy and fun stuff, perhaps like doubling down on the momentum around the Nounstacle? Thanks again to the proposers! I hope my vote doesnt discourage their enthusiasm for Nouns.
0 references
I appreciate the proposers and their care for Nouns, but I feel we have funded a lot of things focused on IRL activations recently (262, 257, 251, 218, 206, 197) and I am still sort of waiting for the dust to settle/a clear assessment of our ROI there. In particular, I dont feel a need to fund more NFT event sponsorship/attendance/activation type stuff. Thanks again for your time and energy here!
0 references
Feeling conflicted, but voting against. I really appreciate Nounlius putting this up and their reference to my past vote on this topic. A few thoughts 1. Putting the quorum back to 15% feels kind of low conviction. If we are ideologically opposed to the DQ and favoring AGAINST voters, we should set it to 0/the quorum. 2. The DAO just voted on this. I open to seeing how this goes. So far, I do not think it has led to an unhealthy about of props failing to pass. 3. Lower conviction on this point, but I do want to respect the time and energy of the DAO in voting on stuff, and so reverting back to exactly what it was before after such a short time feels possibly unhealthy. Again, thanks to Nounlius! Excited for more props from you!
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
In my vote for prop 260, I said > Droposals are a new pattern that were still figuring out, but my feeling is they should mainly be used for ratifying/approving of works that were funded by the DAO. They also generally involve revenue back to the DAO, which does not seem to be the case here. So for these reasons, I am voting against. This again is a case of work that was not commissioned/paid for by Nouns DAO, but rather Gnars DAO and 40% of the revenue here is going back to Gnars DAO. This makes sense to me, and I see no reason for Nouns DAO to be involved. If we were to get involved in this way, I think the DAOs droposal commission should be MUCH higher than 10%. I like the music and wish the project well!
0 references
Thanks to Wiz for the prop and the work here. I have several concerns about the mechanism design. Everyone can see the min and max bids, and so there is effectively a floor price on the auction. The incentive for the DAO and Noun holders would be to see the max bid realized and so someone could repeatedly bid (and get tips) from the auto bidder, and then outbid it, and bid again until the max bid is reached. I think in most cases it is better for someone to use a human bidder that cannot be gamed like this. If someone wants to bid at a specific price for a Noun they can just us a collection offer? That said, it sounds like Lil Nouns is already using this and is happy with it, and I am glad to hear it is useful to them. Beyond my concerns on the mechanism design, I dont see a reason for Nouns DAO to use this right now. From Twitter I gather that there is some idea here that this should be used to replace Nouns Acquisition Committee (NAC). I do not think this is a good replacement, and I would rather hold out for the paradigm where the DAO can directly vote to mint someone a Noun. Moreover, if this indeed a motivation it would have been better if it were stated directly in the prop, in my opinion. Thanks again for your work on this and for the Nouns community at large!
0 references
Thanks to the proposers for the time and energy put in here! I am voting against namely because I think consumer goods are SUPER hard and I would only want to back if we had an obviously great gtm. I think this is a place where you really need to sweat the details up front and not figure it out later: design, marketing, partners, etc. Theres not enough here that makes me feel confident this could do well. I also think wipes are not super charismatic product.
0 references
At first I thought I would vote for this--dynamic quorum is already in place, and why not bump it up a bit to ensure higher conviction on proposals? But after catching up on all the background and thinking a bit more, I am against. I actually think I am against any dynamic quorum. I do not think it is offering meaningful risk protection: proposals are watched pretty closely and I think there is near 0 risk someone drains the treasury due to low voter turn out. Functionally, dynamic quorum serves to privilege against votes. Up to the dynamic quorum max, every vote against basically counts as two votes for. To me this seems unfair and is uncommon to all IRL dominant functioning forms of democracy that I am aware of. So, in addition to being against this prop, I think I would be in favor of setting the quorum max = quorum min to address that these odd incentives affect the DAO much more than the hypothetical risk we are trying to guard against.
0 references
I think this is a really fun idea and it seems like it is being executed really well. (Though I wish it was less of an after-mint raffle and more of a one of these in the real one up front.) But I am not sure this should be a droposal from the DAO. Droposals are a new pattern that were still figuring out, but my feeling is they should mainly be used for ratifying/approving of works that were funded by the DAO. They also generally involve revenue back to the DAO, which does not seem to be the case here. So for these reasons, I am voting against. Wish the team all the best, nonetheless!
0 references
Thanks to the team for putting together this prop! I think this is a cool idea, and is a fun theme to experiment with, but I think the ask is too high for the amount of work and the need being met here. I am also concerned about the longevity of this design: who maintains the systems that send these notifications, how are they funded and organized, etc. Would be up for a smaller grant to fund some experimentation here. Thanks again for your time on this!
0 references
I am interested in seeing proposals that address the danger of the tyranny of the majority and offer a path beyond the Nounder veto, but I do not support this proposal. It reads like an attempt to offer disillusioned Noun holders a refund that would in some cases be partial and other cases be excessive. (I see many Nouns that have been trading on the floor on Blur voting for this.) I do not support the concept of Noun refunds, in general. Its also a brittle approach: freezing a certain book value, offering redemptions on a first come first served basis. It read to be primarily about money and not the health of the DAO. Eager to work together to find a way to address the issues at hand. Thanks for the time on this!
0 references
I think this is a really cool idea. Thanks to the proposers for the time spent on it! But I am voting against as I do not think it is a good fit for Nouns DAO. I think the DAO should be focused on spending ETH on Nounish things and not trying to earn yield through defi.
0 references
I do not think we need a longer voting delay. For voting period, I understand the desire to be able to vote on a single day, but I also find it hard to think well about so many proposals that are concurrently in voting stage. So would prefer to not increase likelihood of overlap.
0 references
I think that using the treasury to earn yield is a slippery slope and is a path we should avoid. The treasury should be used to fund Nounish ideas. We should not be seeking 5% yield opportunities but rather opportunities to 10x or 100x the number of people who know of Nouns, 10x or 100x peoples passion for Nouns, 10x or 100x Nounish organizations or creators resources, etc. I see seeking treasury yield through DeFi as a distraction from these other things and think it is outside the DAOs mandate. I also worry that putting the treasury to work earning yield will make people less inclined to spend the treasury when I would prefer something of the upset approach: burn stale treasury ETH past a certain date as an incentive to us it or lose it.
0 references
Really appreciate all the time and energy that went into this super interesting proposal. Thank you! But I am voting against. I am not sure that this project really needs Nouns to succeed. There is probably demand for whisky-barrel backed NFTs, generally. (Though I do think there is probably some legal concern here.) I am not sure that Nouns makes this product more exciting or likely to succeed, apart from us giving the upfront capital. But I think you could likely sell NFTs to get that capital, anyway, if theres interest. It feels a bit like a white-label product with Nouns put on. I am also not sure whether alcohol is something Nounish. Thanks again for your time and wish you success with this!
0 references
Voting against as I voted for 202: I think we should reward people for their time and ideas and it is a bad look not to do so.
0 references
Voting against as I do not see a big need for this product and cant imagine using it myself. Appreciate the time writing the proposal and wish the team well!
0 references
Grateful to the team for taking the time to put this proposal together, but I am voting against for a few reasons. 1. This is not a product I personally feel a need for or can imagine myself using. I generally connect with other Nouners only online, and to the extent we want to meet up in person, Discord or Twitter could be used to organize. 2. It seems like the tech is pretty much entirely built but just a new instance is needed for Nouns, and the funding ask seems kind of high given that. 3. Given the product is already built and working for other communities, I think the team should try to find a way to monetize the product/find sustainable funding. That will give better info about if there is real demand and for what exactly, whereas DAO grant funding is not sustainable.
0 references
Again excited to see Nouns drawing in creative proposals from such talented people, but I am voting against this one. I am not sure that NFT-specific email addresses are the right model: seems more likely that something tied to your address, which cant be transferred, will work better in most cases. I am also not really compelled by the email-gated use cases: I think Nouns biases open, and I also think that the web3 integrations we see in Discord will be in a lot of other apps soon. Grateful for the time and energy put into this and wish this team the best!
0 references
Super grateful to the proposers for all the time they put into writing this and answering questions. Really excited Nouns can draw in people new to crypto and this quality of proposal. That said, Im voting against. It’s a decent amount of ETH, both in absolute terms and as a % of the treasury. I don’t doubt that it is warranted for a quality event, but I think there are better ways the DAO could use the money. In particular, I am more interested in going deeper with our true fans than trying to reach out to a community that has historically disdained NFTs/crypto (the Dota subreddit responses to this proposal were not encouraging). I also felt a bit like the proposal was made to work for the proposers in a way that maybe doesn’t make the most sense for Nouns: the emphasis on using the proposer’s venue and the VIP Nouns experience. Finally, there were a lot of ideas here about how to use NFTs in the contest itself, but the proposers by their own admission seem to have little experience in the space. I think there’s a lot of subtlety here and it would take some real experience to get it right. Hope to see these proposers back with other ideas in the future!
0 references
Grateful to the Cozy team for this proposal, but I am against. I have previously voted against staking ETH, at all. I do not think the DAO is optimized to make these kinds of risk and yield decisions. If we are concerned about depegs at all, I think we should just hold ETH. I am sympathetic to the point that voting on things like this is not a great use of the DAOs time. I *do* want to see the DAO support important DeFi work where it can make sense, though. To be honest, I think I would be more open to just doing benevolence grants for co-marketing or something like that, rather than actually using our treasury in DeFi. My vote on [Proposal 217: Stake additional 5000 ETH in Lido](https://nouns.wtf/vote/217) > I think that using the treasury to earn yield is a slippery slope and is a path we should avoid. The treasury should be used to fund Nounish ideas. We should not be seeking 5% yield opportunities but rather opportunities to 10x or 100x the number of people who know of Nouns, 10x or 100x peoples passion for Nouns, 10x or 100x Nounish organizations or creators resources, etc. I see seeking treasury yield through DeFi as a distraction from these other things and think it is outside the DAOs mandate. I also worry that putting the treasury to work earning yield will make people less inclined to spend the treasury when I would prefer something of the upset approach: burn stale treasury ETH past a certain date as an incentive to us it or lose it. *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
I am excited about funding some kind of Nouns zine, perhaps an annual recap, but not super into funding something covering the whole NFT space. Feels like the kinda thing that could easily be funded via NFT-pre orders, if people are interested. Good luck and thanks for your time! *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
I like Arash and many of the videos he helps make, but I am a no on this one. The channel is getting some good views and seems to be earning ad revenue on its own. The goal is to get 15 monetized videos to get to sustainability, and the channel already has 8 and has recently been releasing more than 1 per week! Given these factors, I dont think the ask for $60k makes sense. And even without these factors, I do not think I would support such a large ask for this sort of sing along type content. I might support a lower ask, or funding more more unique, high touch content. Like videos with story lines. Perhaps some funding with an ad revenue split could be interesting, but gets a bit sticky to try to figure that out/prove revenues, etc. Wish you good luck and am glad the channel is seeing success! *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
Thanks to the team for putting this proposal together! As I have said in other recent votes, I am not excited about NFT/Web3 event activations right now. Almost half the budget is going to WebX. I think some aspects of this are really cool, I like the Pop Pop Tokyo visual a lot and the team room is interesting. But theres a lot packed in here and it feels a little unfocused. Im not super excited about metaverse/VR stuff. I would rather fund some standalone Nouns event or activation. Hope we can find more ways to support Nouns Japan. Thanks again!
0 references
This proposal is very confusing and should be cancelled and resubmitted as multiple proposals. 1. Mandate NAC send Noun 252 to Dustin Yellin Studio 2. Request DAO send 50 ETH to Dustin Yellin Studio (NAC does not exist as some fallback protection for proposers to get promised funds from DAO) 3. Dissolve NAC (? That seems to be the subtext here, but its not clear.) *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
I have gone back and forth on this one. We have to vote on the proposals we have, not the ones we wish we had. I am biased to vote for imperfect proposals if I feel its net net +EV. But I dont think I can get there on this one. I think we do a lot better. - This reads to me like a redo of the launch Pudgy already did, but now with noggles. And the cost is super high: $299. Honestly I dont think there will be a lot of demand. - I find the gold plating kinda cringe and not Nounish, and the fact that that is specifically where our funds are going bums me out. Also not clear what the golden ticket does/means? - No revenue shared back--which I am possibly OK with, as I think we gain more from their reach in IRL goods than they do from our cobranding--but I think DAO stamp is valuable and we should be looking for some return. There is a vague promise to put a % of proceeds back to buying a Noun. Things I would be a lot more excited about - A co-sponsored Nouns x Pudgy Open Edition Drop. Have seen some really fun Nouns Pudgy art that we could use. Maybe ever N could be redeemable for a toy? - Lets just give toys away! Ask the DAO for a $100k and well do Pudgys with Noggles and give them away. Super grateful to the Pudgy team for their time and interest in working with us. I am a Pudgy holder myself! Hope we can do something great. *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
will recuse myself from this one, but he seems like a good guy :) *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
