memoscan

0x13ee…da33

All memos sent from and to 0x13ee…da33.
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,810,778·0xdcd26054…766694
⌐◨-◨-|-fund-the-agentic-dao:-nouns-collaboration-for-the-open-standard-for-how-daos-govern one does not simply just slap on AI and call it a day. this requires more understanding of how governance works to be valuable
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,810,748·0x2d0ebc03…ca6b7e
fake-world-assets low risk, high potential prop. easy yes to support a community member w/ high agency who consistently provides value and distribution to Nouns very few people are capable of producing the quality of work that gami and co consistently deliver
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,495,055·0x2981a8e1…77756f
nudge-×-nouns To piggy back off of this, let's say you came up with an idea on how to use Nudge in Nouns or its periphery. I'd open a prop that has a tx interactive with the Nudge protocol. Onchain activity signals sanctioning more than anything else +1 > Agree w/ ben not sure what an ecosystem partner means. Generally Nouns has always been really supportive of high quality projects/initiatives members are a part of and although the builder community in Nouns is smaller now, there are still talented people that may be open to use / help with distribution / or just generally be supportive. We just don't hang out in the common public chats > > Internoun, I'm assuming Nudge is your co. Maybe there's a piece of governance / the protocol where it could be cool to play around w/ Nudge to incentivize behavior in Nouns > > Regardless throughout Nouns we've always taken the stance that you don't need permission to contribute to Nouns in any way and if Nudge provides value it'll naturally earn its spot as "ecosystem partner"
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,495,025·0x09ee4876…df8615
nudge-×-nouns Agree w/ ben not sure what an ecosystem partner means. Generally Nouns has always been really supportive of high quality projects/initiatives members are a part of and although the builder community in Nouns is smaller now, there are still talented people that may be open to use / help with distribution / or just generally be supportive. We just don't hang out in the common public chats Internoun, I'm assuming Nudge is your co. Maybe there's a piece of governance / the protocol where it could be cool to play around w/ Nudge to incentivize behavior in Nouns Regardless throughout Nouns we've always taken the stance that you don't need permission to contribute to Nouns in any way and if Nudge provides value it'll naturally earn its spot as "ecosystem partner"
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,459,757·0x949ba6de…a5228f
![](https://i.postimg.cc/QtDVsb1H/image0.jpg) +1 > @0xc6a3...96E4 > > This proposal is a straightforward governance optimization regarding the backup DUNA admin role. It is not personal, nor is it a vendetta. > > All of the information presented in this proposal is factual and not based on opinion. Please feel free to read it objectively and then let me know if you find any faults with the logic. > > Let the merits of the architecture dictate the vote. > > > > > it's inappropriate at best for a proposal of this nature to be put onchain given the proposer showed up in the past few months and is not a token-holder with skin in the game > > > > I've also personally been witness to and heard several accounts of the proposer/ sponsor and the groups they participate in slandering Satori's character, calling him a bitch and other names > > > > the proposal seems to be a personal vendetta of the sponsor, enacted through a third party by a particular biased context presented on hours-long Discord calls > > > > there are number of factors hurting Nouns as outlined in the Nouns is Dead candidate. some of it is the protocol design itself, some is the inability or unwillingness of large holders to coordinate with each other and with smaller token holders. > > > > the culture Lil Nouns & Nouncil have developed of viciously attacking anyone who doesn't spend 40 hours per week with them on Discord calls mocking other people, hating on large token holders and accusing anyone who is willing to work with them of being a grifter or extractor, accusing anyone who requests treasury funds for a new initiative of being an extractor despite these same people having been funded themselves several times over by Nouns and its subDAOs, is by far the most deleterious to the DAO and its members > > > > rather than taking action to innovate, create win-wins, and create new value, the rest of us are instead presented with impotent protest and facsimiles of action that either have no chance of passing before ever going onchain or are actively seeking to leverage the DAO to hurt other DAO members > > > > they say misery loves company, and unfortunately this group continues to try dragging the rest of us into their misery with them. > > > > --- > > > > "Sentiment is low, morale is lower, and the forums and calls that once felt like a shared project increasingly feel like a battlefield. > > > > Many long-time smaller holders now decline to engage at all with the newest cohort of large holders — and, in the experience of a great many contributors, those who do try to engage across that line, or who simply take an unpopular position, are met with pile-ons and personal attacks rather than argument. > > > > Some of the sharpest of that hostility has come from within organized blocs — Lil Nouners and Nouncil among them — and its effect has been an exodus of exactly the thoughtful, good-faith participants a healthy DAO most needs. This is the human mechanism behind the "small, fatigued core" above: it is not only that governance is tiring, it is that being here has become unpleasant, and enough capable people have concluded it is not worth the abuse. > > > > A DAO can, in principle, redesign a quorum or a reserve price; it cannot legislate its way back to trust once the culture has curdled this far."
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,459,751·0xe1b59b9e…d2e2a4
![Democracy](https://i.postimg.cc/QtDVsb1H/image0.jpg) +1 > @0xc6a3...96E4 > > This proposal is a straightforward governance optimization regarding the backup DUNA admin role. It is not personal, nor is it a vendetta. > > All of the information presented in this proposal is factual and not based on opinion. Please feel free to read it objectively and then let me know if you find any faults with the logic. > > Let the merits of the architecture dictate the vote. > > > > > it's inappropriate at best for a proposal of this nature to be put onchain given the proposer showed up in the past few months and is not a token-holder with skin in the game > > > > I've also personally been witness to and heard several accounts of the proposer/ sponsor and the groups they participate in slandering Satori's character, calling him a bitch and other names > > > > the proposal seems to be a personal vendetta of the sponsor, enacted through a third party by a particular biased context presented on hours-long Discord calls > > > > there are number of factors hurting Nouns as outlined in the Nouns is Dead candidate. some of it is the protocol design itself, some is the inability or unwillingness of large holders to coordinate with each other and with smaller token holders. > > > > the culture Lil Nouns & Nouncil have developed of viciously attacking anyone who doesn't spend 40 hours per week with them on Discord calls mocking other people, hating on large token holders and accusing anyone who is willing to work with them of being a grifter or extractor, accusing anyone who requests treasury funds for a new initiative of being an extractor despite these same people having been funded themselves several times over by Nouns and its subDAOs, is by far the most deleterious to the DAO and its members > > > > rather than taking action to innovate, create win-wins, and create new value, the rest of us are instead presented with impotent protest and facsimiles of action that either have no chance of passing before ever going onchain or are actively seeking to leverage the DAO to hurt other DAO members > > > > they say misery loves company, and unfortunately this group continues to try dragging the rest of us into their misery with them. > > > > --- > > > > "Sentiment is low, morale is lower, and the forums and calls that once felt like a shared project increasingly feel like a battlefield. > > > > Many long-time smaller holders now decline to engage at all with the newest cohort of large holders — and, in the experience of a great many contributors, those who do try to engage across that line, or who simply take an unpopular position, are met with pile-ons and personal attacks rather than argument. > > > > Some of the sharpest of that hostility has come from within organized blocs — Lil Nouners and Nouncil among them — and its effect has been an exodus of exactly the thoughtful, good-faith participants a healthy DAO most needs. This is the human mechanism behind the "small, fatigued core" above: it is not only that governance is tiring, it is that being here has become unpleasant, and enough capable people have concluded it is not worth the abuse. > > > > A DAO can, in principle, redesign a quorum or a reserve price; it cannot legislate its way back to trust once the culture has curdled this far."
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,438,833·0x5c9b650c…3579d6
nouns-is-dead Please dm me on Discord or Twitter for access to a private chat where discussions can be had. You must: a) have a Noun or represent one b) not be an asshole or I will ban you
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,438,800·0x388b0f69…5b93cd
nouns-is-dead You make some valid points but it's easy to piggy back off of the current abysmal crypto sentiment. There is a lot of toxicity (i have always gotten my fair share of criticism) however it almost always boils down to bad communication or lack of. If DAO members can't get in the same room and talk... agree it's over. But I wouldn't discount the possibility of that happening There are many that see the possibility of a positive sum future. All I ask is that all the reasonable people get together and chat for once I'm down to host
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#25,079,433·0xc9f320f5…e27c46
I understand how props like this can be good for Nouns and attract more talent to the community. Given that this isn't something that is profit seeking I believe that it must make up for that by being attention seeking. I'd like to see more props with strong distribution plans We can fund all the things in the world but this experiment only continues if we can generate enough attention to continuously attract auction flows This prop is not necessarily bad, it's just not thought through well enough on the execution side. Happy to provide feedback for you or anyone else if you need help on a future iteration
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,065,434·0x395e1bfe…ca421a
community-weighted-voting-and-proof-of-personhood@0x0ED5...4277 Every season of nouns has had a main player/group that was able to capture enough votes to move the DAO in their direction. In one season even Nouncil was the main decider of if a prop would pass or not. (and it was not fun). Unfortunately the fundamental problem with democratic governance is collusion and misinformation to influence outcomes. (psyops everywhere) It doesn't matter if votes are public or not. The beauty of token weighted voting is that it is fair. There is nothing stopping people from generating value and putting that into buying Nouns to earn more voting power if they want it. The reason why I have votes is because of this. And voting power based on token weight can be _good_ because those people tend to have more skin in the game and are likely to think deeply about how they vote. Of course that can be gamed too, but the DUNA, nounder voting block, lack of a fork really makes it a dumb idea to try to attack the DAO > Humans are humans… We all see where prediction markets are heading, so yeah, I agree Futarchy is entering utopian territory at this point. > > On anonymous voting, I agree too. There’s a reason most modern democratic constitutions protect secret ballots as a core principle. > > On Proof of Personhood: what’s the right balance between UX simplicity, privacy, and actual human-vs-agent guarantees? I like Human Passport, already used by Giveth, TheDAO. Feels lightweight while still useful. Curious if anyone has better alternatives though. > > On the first two questions: > > 1. I don’t think “tyranny of the majority” becomes an issue in a community-weighted voting system. Wallets can still hold multiple Nouns = multiple votes. But right now, if I’m supported by 20 nouners holding 2 Nouns each, but opposed by 2 nouners holding 25 Nouns each, it feels weird to say “the DAO rejected the prop”. > > Now imagine a system where 5 voters gives a x1.5 multiplier, 10 voters x2, and so on. That could counterbalance the plutocratic degeneration of the DAO without going full 1 person = 1 vote, which is really the only setup where an actual “tyranny of the majority” scenario emerges. > > 2. It’s important to prevent a single person from managing multiple wallets, distributing their Nouns across them, and effectively gaming the community-weighted voting mechanism. So you need 1 human = 1 wallet.
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,030,179·0xbce343e5…10525d
community-weighted-voting-and-proof-of-personhoodwe have experimented quite a bit w/ alternative models in the past. it's possible hosting an experimental round w/ a small amount of funds using these models makes sense. 1. what about tyranny of the majority? 2. why does this matter?
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#24,986,075·0x6aa502ad…ef84b3
secret-ballot-voting-&-sealed-bid-auctions-for-nouns-dao interesting and something the dao should experiment with. i think for something like this to be valuable it needs to be some kind of product that can generate more governance activity. i think the days of pure research are long gone so i'd like to see your unique take on building a product around this mockups, videos, (anything you can provide to derisk your prop / pow helps) looking forward to updates --- "1 Noun aligns our long-term incentives with the DAO. We are not building a service for Nouns — we are becoming part of it." just buy it
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#24,942,342·0x073b8f4f…bd2705
shocks are necessary for change. nouns has been in a slow bleed for years because of bad politics and infighting. there is an opportunity here to realign and move forward. open markets w/ zero demand or attention just leads to silent accumulation. i am FOR supporting chaos until concessions are made on all sides
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#22,227,142·0xbbbe6863…d2cabf
i think mr. rocketman is a very talented engineer. i'm happy to support Nouns subsidizing grants (around $10-15k/month) rather than fully funding, if you work on finding ways to supplement the rest via the protocol. the rest of the proposal is very reasonable. not going to comment on the roadmap because i believe you / your experience knows best!
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#22,224,505·0x2487d47c…0b2bef
i have no idea what you're talking about. maybe take some time off from conspiracy youtube. you're lost in a psyop of your own creation +1 > @0x13eE...DA33 > > why then vote For a similar proposal for similar access, unless your voting logic has little to do with the merits of the proposal and most everything to do with favor trading based on relationships? > > > > > > > i support, u can just do things. this prop doesn't execute anything not sure one is needed > >
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#21,151,157·0xabe91fdf…31406c
appreciate the effort put into this. i would like to see a version of this prop where the product is taken to completion. it seems to be a bit early in the development stage and it's unclear if nouncil even plans to use it (given some of the push back). otherwise i'm not against competition but i'd rather give more ETH to building the right thing vs a small grant for retro. please come back with more detail on this one
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#21,021,971·0xa1e3faca…e7a031
i'd like to see a better plan for the solutions you're proposing. decent seems to be a safe frontend client and its unclear to me how it fits in here. additionally having a political body like the DMC that onboards and audits contributors seems like a position ripe for abuse. you can prepare people for nouns, but the gov process doesn't select for the "best" proposals. it is highly social and results are mostly determined by community sentiment.
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#21,017,636·0xf66b2625…7d4a24
fair and reasonable comp for someone who's contributed a ton. however i feel like this sets the wrong precedent for others. would be happy to support rewarding a group of contributors through a mandated round or pay a similar ask scoped as work
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#20,864,495·0x0c999303…69bd3e
# Magical Governance (Revised) ![](https://i.postimg.cc/nrQNbLGw/w.png "wand") **TLDR**: **95 ETH** to support the development of [Wand](https://wand.wtf/). A project aiming to scale onchain governance through the use of automated help or "agents". *This is a revised version of proposal *[#643 Magical Governance](https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/643)* based on community feedback.* # Updates I wanted to start off with a quick overview of the changes made in this proposal: - Adjustments to reduce funding from **120 ETH **to **95 ETH**. - Clarified the roadmap with clear deliverables. *This proposal outlines what I believe is the best path towards creating governance-aware AI.* To ensure significant progress towards this goal, I am requesting funding to support the continued development of Wand over the next 7 months. # Wand Initial Prototype Reception [![kidsparty.png](https://i.postimg.cc/xjHmbGsN/kidsparty.png "https://wand.wtf")](https://wand.wtf) Proposal [#643](https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/643) introduced a functional prototype of Wand that showcased its ability to predict proposal outcomes by simulating the votes of active community members. This addresses a significant challenge of proposing an idea to Nouns — the lack of a reliable way to gauge community sentiment and receive feedback on proposals before going onchain. For Nouns to thrive, it requires a continuous influx of proposals and participation from talented individuals. But our decentralized nature has created barriers to entry, discouraging current and potential contributors from engaging with the community. **Some reactions to the Wand prototype:** [![nadie.png](https://i.postimg.cc/sxjN7Yrq/nadie.png "https://warpcast.com/nadiecito.eth/0x41dae708")](https://warpcast.com/nadiecito.eth/0x41dae708) [![davin.png](https://i.postimg.cc/VLNhNW4b/davin.png "https://warpcast.com/davinoyesigye/0xa6d2537b")](https://warpcast.com/davinoyesigye/0xa6d2537b) # V1 The initial roadmap for Wand focuses on building a consumer grade proposal editor that provides users with feedback using AI powered vote predictions. These predictions allow anyone to gauge community sentiment towards new ideas, enabling proposers to iterate and refine their proposals while building the confidence to go onchain. Improving the accuracy of these vote predictions is a major priority for Wand's development. I expect them to become the foundation of new governance behaviors in the future, such as assisted voting. **Roadmap:** - Editor containing deep integration with Nouns candidates. - Automated feedback with AI, and assisted proposal creation. - Allow voters to build profiles and define their individual preferences on Wand, increasing the accuracy of votes with user defined information. - Continuous iteration and improvement on vote predictions. Wand's development will continue to be iterative and responsive to market feedback beyond this initial roadmap. # Goals ![](https://i.postimg.cc/HLrwfKbv/proposalsbymonth.png "Nouns has struggled to grow proposal inbound") **Some north star metrics are:** - Increase proposal throughput without increased governance fatigue (We need to be the best at allocating capital efficiently). - Increased governance participation (Wand should empower a more diverse group of individuals to feel confident and engaged in the governance process). # Funding The **95 ETH** in funding will help support the development of Wand. This covers expenses like: - Infrastructure and servers - Inference and gpu time - AI Research and software development All funds will be stored in a 3/5 multisig at address [0x6B81...D8e7.](https://etherscan.io/address/0x6B810bAB946032997b006adf1af44b97eF8bD8e7) # Who am I My contributions to the Nouns ecosystem include: - Developed [Federation Governance Pools](https://x.com/nounish/status/1676547312124936194) (vote market) - Founded [Plutocats](https://plutocats.wtf/) (Nouns inspired decentralized community on Blast) - Supported the development of a Nouns minting economy on Zora by building [Bound](https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/479) - Created [a model for generating Nounish images](https://huggingface.co/realwiz/noggles) - Active participant in governance [with a long voting history](https://www.nouns.camp/voters/0xwiz.eth), as a [Nouns gardener](https://zora.co/collect/eth:0x72826904b7bd44af5a133520ccf8a1f39b58d21d), and in multiple sub-DAOs in the ecosystem - Creator of WizardsDAO (an early Nounish DAO) wiz [ [warpcast](https://warpcast.com/wiz), [x](https://x.com/0xWiz_) ] ![](https://i.postimg.cc/Z5r2srB2/ophorse.gif)
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#20,821,877·0x30822a3d…b38c97
Thanks for the questions! I'll do my best to answer them below: zherring.eth 1. The term 'delegate' might not be the most accurate. It's hard to say what the final ux is, but Wand could learn your preferences and suggest voting directions with reasonable accuracy (perfect accuracy isn't necessarily required). It can also notify you of proposals or candidates that you'd be exceptionally interested in. That way you can spend time on the props you care about the most and go with Wand suggestions for others. As an example, I would use this already for Noundry or NounSwap props. Now imagine Nouns is 5x the size with 10x the prop inbound. I hope something like this exists in the future. 2. Yes! That would fall under, "Develop automated proposal review and feedback tools" 3. Nothing formal. The path to increasing results from here is very obvious to me, so doing that now feels a bit too early. jkm.eth, humpty.eth I get what you're saying and appreciate the feedback. I would say that I want / need this, and by extension Nouns does too. A lot of that comes from personal experience founding DAOs, participating in Nouns, and even some recent events which led me to start exploring this direction. Many find DAOs intriguing, but regular participation is something they are unlikely to ever commit to. An interesting thought experiment is what if you could allow these people to ease into governance? Delegation may not work because of the principal-agent problem. If they could receive unbiased suggestions tailored to their tastes, this low-effort commitment might be enough to foster genuine interest and participation. Decentralized governance is one of the most valuable use cases for crypto, and we'll have many more hanging out with us in the future. I don't think they will convert if governance looks like it does now. The funding gives me the budget needed to execute well on Wand. The costs don't really mimic those of other recently funded tech proposals. What you see now is only a prototype and I ask that you use it as a way to stir your imagination rather than judge it as the finished product. Personally I've used Wand over the past couple of days as a sentiment indicator. There's been quite a bit of talk in discords about the DUNA and seeing the results on Wand does capture a bit of what I've experienced. The individual votes aren't accurate but the sentiment pull has truth there. You can even see this with how Wand has graded its own prop. Specifically raising concern about the amount of funding which I saw in Nouncil as well. This is a great demonstration, so I'm happy it's happening live. Feel free to keep the questions coming. I'll think more about your feedback and ways to reduce these concerns! +1 > I do believe AI and LLMs are viable in governance. But I also would prefer a smaller test to understand its implications better. Is there a way to reduce the scope and lower the funding request? +1 > This is a pretty big ask for a product that hasn't been proven to be needed/wanted. Like Zherring said, I haven't seen any indication that this would actually solve governance issues. In fact, it could open a lot of attack vectors that still need to be explored (i.e. what if an attacker proposes a prop to drain the treasury and somehow tricks the AI to suggest everyone vote yes?). I think technologies like this show a lot of promise and should be explored, but I would want to see more validation before committing to such a large budget.
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#20,820,773·0x28d10f40…26513f
10% is too low of a threshold for this type of mechanism. I understand the intention behind it tho also lmao @index +1 > This proposal has not adequately addressed the argument against the viability of a fork. The proposal claims that "arbitrage" will be removed by DUNA, which is a questionable argument considering a fork is no longer an option. If this prop was able to elaborate on a specific roadmap, perhaps outlining the process for creating a separate DAO, then it might be more convincing. > > magical governance thanks to 🪄
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#20,814,122·0x7a79ad6e…3ea0dd
not sure how i feel about DUNA yet, i understand the thought process behind this prop but it opens up a bigger can of worms. agree w/ bix on this one +1 > If threshold is lowered to 10% we indeed will see one of 2 things happen: 1) Arbers will rush back in to capture the RFV trade and/or 2) the DAO will rush to pass obscene proposals because ‘we’d rather see builders get it than arbers, so why not pay Little Tommy $1M to ride a unicycle across niagara falls’ 🤦🏼‍♀️ > > Everyone needs to SLOW DOWN …. I don’t think it’s wise for the Foundations proposal to go up anytime soon. I think waiting a bit at least until closer to the end of the year would be best. No point starting a new organization at the tale end of a tax year anyways. Jan 1 - New Year, New Me is always a welcomed motto. > > When people feel like things are being rushed it brings on anxiety, which leads to rash decision making. I may be Anti-Duna at the moment (because I would like more information so I can make an informed decisions), but I’m Pro-Nouns and lowering threshold to 10% is not the way we solve anything.
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#20,810,735·0xfd0dac3d…4a8f29
# Magical Governance ![](https://i.postimg.cc/nrQNbLGw/w.png "wand") **TLDR**: 120 ETH to support the development of [Wand](https://wand.wtf). A project aiming to scale onchain governance through the use of automated help or "agents". # Overview Over the past several years, Nouns has made significant strides in governance and has served as a shining example of how a decentralized community can operate. However, the inherent complexities of decentralization have made it challenging to retain existing participants and attract new ones. ![](https://i.postimg.cc/xjzmGMPH/voterperproposal.png "Governance participation has remained relatively static over time") ![](https://i.postimg.cc/HLrwfKbv/proposalsbymonth.png "We have struggled to handle sustained growth in inbound proposals") As our community continues to evolve, we face challenges like members leaving and an increase in information asymmetry. In addition to these challenges, the demands of governance during times of rapid growth make voting a challenge for many. Fortunately, recent advancements in LLMs offer us a new set of tools to govern more efficiently. Much of governance involves interacting with others and processing information using natural language—tasks that LLMs excel at. Plus, our culture of openness and public feedback has uniquely positioned us to get more out of LLMs, as we generate a wealth of data through onchain governance (vote history, reasons, preferences, etc.). # Approach *Wand is building governance-aware AI*. AI that understands us, our values, and augments our ability to govern well. For Wand to become a valuable tool in governance, the following capabilities are crucial: - **Analyze voter activity:** Employ vote simulation and predictions to reduce the cognitive burden associated with governance participation. - **Index and surface relevant information:** Provide easy access to voter, proposal, and other related information, enabling the community to make more informed decisions. - **Automate proposal review and analysis:** Offer automated feedback on proposals to enhance their quality before submission. By enabling LLMs to understand and participate in governance, we can attract and retain more participants, ultimately increasing the likelihood of success for Nouns. # Prototype / Demo [![kidsparty.png](https://i.postimg.cc/xjHmbGsN/kidsparty.png "https://wand.wtf")](https://wand.wtf) Visit [https://wand.wtf](https://wand.wtf) and you'll see automatically generated vote predictions for pending proposals and recent candidates. These predictions are based on each user's voting history and governance activity. They provide insight into what people care about, a valuable resource for other members and proposers seeking feedback on their ideas. I anticipate the quality and accuracy of these predictions will increase significantly with further development. The current implementation is a work in progress but serves as a compelling demonstration of an agentic workflow that can help with decision making. Ideally, Wand will evolve to a state where it can handle the majority of routine governance tasks. *Wand does not aim to replace human voting but rather to enable Nouns to scale its governance participation significantly (although I envision a future where many choose to leverage Wand to automate most of their activity).* # Goals / Roadmap [![screen.png](https://i.postimg.cc/cJZjKKKG/screen.png "https://warpcast.com/wiz/0xe699d2c3")](https://warpcast.com/wiz/0xe699d2c3) Short term goals for Wand: - **Enhance vote predictions and reasoning pipeline**: This is where most of the magic happens - **Implement customizable user preferences and actions:** Allow voters to define their individual preferences and automate actions on Wand, such as automatically voting "yes" on proposals supporting specific causes. - **Develop automated proposal review and feedback tools:** Provide tools for automatic proposal analysis, including quality checks, security, insights, etc - **Lower the barrier to entry for governance participation:** Develop features that empower more individuals to become active and productive governors. Some north star metrics are: - Increase proposal throughput without increased governance fatigue (We need to be the best at allocating capital efficiently) - Increased governance participation (Wand should empower a larger and more diverse group of individuals to feel confident and engaged in the governance process) Ideally, Wand is useful for both community members and those seeking to open proposals. To continue to attract high quality talent to Nouns, it needs to be easier to open proposals or test community reception towards ideas. # Where the $ will go The 120 ETH in funding will help support the development of Wand over the next 9 months. This covers expenses like: - Infrastructure / servers - AI Model inference / gpu time - Team augmentation - Research All funds will be stored in a 3/5 multisig at address [0x6B81...D8e7](https://etherscan.io/address/0x6B810bAB946032997b006adf1af44b97eF8bD8e7). # Who am I My contributions to the Nouns ecosystem over the past several years include: - Developed [Federation Governance Pools](https://x.com/nounish/status/1676547312124936194) (vote market) - Founded [Plutocats](https://plutocats.wtf/) (Nouns inspired decentralized community on Blast) - Supported the development of a Nouns minting economy on Zora by building [Bound](https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/479) - Created [a model for generating Nounish images](https://huggingface.co/realwiz/noggles) - Active participant in governance [with a long voting history](https://www.nouns.camp/voters/0xwiz.eth), as a [Nouns gardener](https://zora.co/collect/eth:0x72826904b7bd44af5a133520ccf8a1f39b58d21d), and in multiple sub-DAOs in the ecosystem - Creator of WizardsDAO (an early Nounish DAO) Thanks for your time and consideration - wiz [[warpcast](https://warpcast.com/wiz), [x](https://x.com/0xWiz_)] ![](https://i.postimg.cc/Z5r2srB2/ophorse.gif "keepnounsweird")
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#20,792,975·0xc92460b6…1df571
+1 > - Supriyo (Voting FOR on behalf of Bonfire) > > +1 > > > David is an extraordinary individual with bold dreams, and those are the type of projects that has a chance of creating nounish waves for years and even decades. Thanks for coming back with a revised prop. > > +1 > > > David was here day 01 and contributed to the genesis of nouns big time. Love the plush! > > > > +1 > > > > > Having followed David's incredible career as fans, we can confidently say that few are as well-suited as David to lead this charge and opportunity for Nouns. David’s experience in building brands, IP and relationships over the years makes him an invaluable asset to Nouns and would benefit future projects across the DAO. > > +1 > > > I think David has the market knowledge, clout, and Nouns receipts to make it happen. Know there have been questions about what David has said about his work in the past but I think he's been very proactive and transparent afaik about those days and how he got plugged in. He's been in the details. I've learned more about the niche business of plush from a pro. Can't beat that :) > > > > Looking forward to seeing this level of detail over the next year+ on propdates and on /nouns, les geddit.
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#20,659,519·0x1e4b8b17…4a313d
+1 > Intrigued by this prop but similar to the recent Rio proposal im not a hell yes as of now (but can possibly be convinced over time). > > Pro: > - Permanent physical locations as cultural watering holes are indeed exciting > > Con: > - I have low conviction that an IRL space like this can become amazing (rather than just ok/fine) unless the owners/proposers are hard-core nouns fans. And despite the nounish events Oshi been hosting in the past, i dont see that being the case here. > > Actionable feedback for Oshi team would be to ingrain themselves more deeply in nouns day-to-day (social layer, governance, pass smaller props, etc) in the next 6 months and then come back with this idea. Thank you so much for proposing!
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#20,659,473·0x5a349aab…68f655
+1 > You’ve done a great job delivering what you promised, you’ve built a lot, and it looks great. However, I still don’t really understand the vision and end goal. > > I watched your latest pitch video. Although it poses the question “what is the point of all this?”, it goes on to say the goal is to make Tom the most popular person (on his own platform?). I’m sure it’s meant as a joke, but it leaves the question unanswered. > > I’ve checked out a bunch of spaces that have been set up so far, and many seem to just be iframes for other websites or a list of casts. I don’t really see anything social about it. It feels like the users don’t know what they are supposed to do with this product, and if you don’t either, I don’t think throwing money at it will help us all figure it out. > > You’ve requested a path to sustainability, but for 2% of the treasury, I think we should expect a VC-level explanation of how you can make that work. Right now the PMF and vision are just big unknowns, and I don't think any VC would take this deal. > > I'm open to funding smaller experiments to see what sticks.
0x13eef4ef…da33sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#20,648,759·0xc1ffd145…2b294e
i think events like this have a lot of potential and will continue to grow in popularity. ask is fair, but how do we turn this into more than just a branding exercise? where does the leverage come from to capture the max amount of attention for this event? are you able to produce a series of high quality content? can we get wide distribution in the esports space? how do we max impact for u and for nouns?
1-50 of 122