I vote "for" this proposal to donate 100 ETH to Creative Commons. I believe that supporting open access tools like CC0 is a core part of the Nouns ethos, and I am grateful for the work that Creative Commons has done to promote remix culture and the public domain.
CC0 is a powerful tool that allows creators to release their work into the public domain, where it can be freely used, remixed, and shared by others. This has the potential to greatly increase the amount of creative content that is available to everyone, and it is something that I strongly support.
Creative Commons is a small but important organization that does a lot of great work to promote open access. They provide legal tools that help creators share their work more freely, and they also run educational programs and advocacy campaigns. I believe that supporting Creative Commons is a way to help ensure that the future of the internet is one that is open and accessible to everyone.
I understand that Creative Commons already has some funding, but I believe that this donation would be a valuable investment in the future of open access.
I am not a fan of the bubble beanie or cotton candy, maybe it is the "stray pixels" trying to emulate a texture.
I love all the other heads submitted and would like to see this come back either sans those 2 or a re-adjustment to the budget or with 2 other options.
I get liking traits is subjective--but that's my opinion.
I hope that the props that these ⌐◨-◨ will go to will put requests in their proposals to cover the costs of these, that way this can become a more self-sustainable project.
"Due to the cc0 nature of NounsDAO IP, Pudgy Penguins could move forward without the DAO's approval but we want this to be an official collaboration, bringing the Huddle into the Nouns ecosystem."
If you want to engage--just engage.
I'm currently uncertain about the business strategy behind this proposal... It's challenging to see how it can evolve into a self-sustaining venture without a more comprehensive plan.
Right now, it almost feels like a concealed levy intertwined with other proposals, with their success uncertain.
I'd prefer to see a proposal that directly supports you in establishing this as an independently viable business or considers funding the LO-FI Noggles as a public good/utility, thereby enabling everyone to access the designs and production capabilities as needed. Otherwise, when is the next request, or the next one, or the next one...
It's absolutely fine to request that event organizers contribute towards the cost of these novel additions to their events.
A little friction can sometimes be necessary and there are instances when it's best to eliminate the intermediary, similar to Ethereum.
Recently I've observed piles of unused stickers from events which left me hesitant for this one, yes even noggle stickers that were not just handed out by randos to randos.
I truly appreciate the LO-FI Noggles and am delighted to see them at a lower production cost, but with what I have seen unused and thrown away from similar items I feel so much apprehension to be a straight "hell yeah" on this.
I want to reiterate, I would be very much interested in a prop that funded you and nounworks as a viable business that becomes self-sufficient in its operations.
Reason (Optional) However Re: Noun12
"Before spending $100k+ on a platform, need to see evidence that the strategy the platform is being built for has demand. Prove out more, ask for funding after having proof of potential or PMF."
I am supportive of these types of projects but voiced my concerns in "a nouns community" discord that when doing edutainment (educational entertainment) accuracy of the content is essential.
Is there an immediate need for the 50 ETH?
If there is not an immediate need for 50ETH why not see what you can do with the 32ETH and token sales first?
I like this idea as a prop house round but I do think it is a bit early to have these few people (DAO members) decide how to spend these funds right away.
I am of the belief we shouldn't just jump right in and spend the treasury with so few holders.
I would ask that other DAO members here exercise a bit more patience in wanting to spend it so we can have a larger diversity of holders.
But we should keep it in the treasury to help incentivize builders.
BTW the actions and comments from many of the DAO members are one of the reasons I am not a fan of pre-seeding DAOs.
Based on the feedback we have heard thus far it is currently not a "hell yes" from us at this time.
If this does not pass we want to encourage Aubtoshi to rework and resubmit based on the feedback.
If this does pass we wish Aubtoshi the best in her endeavors.
These assets are great for command-based animation, not just for creating indy games (which can be easily made with tools like RPG maker and Chat GPT).
Command-based animation can be used to make all sorts of UGC outside of gaming as well, such as digital shorts.
I think this could be a useful tool in proliferating Nouns.
The Prop House DAO incubator rounds were set at 20, this is a 15e higher ask.
I believe there is another round for Prop House DAO incubator coming this week.
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 that's how he proliferates just like a vert skater,
"Go ALL in or FALL in, don't 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.
# Creator Contests - a Nounish Funding Middleware
## Tldr
Fund the Calabara team with 60 ETH to continue developing Creator Contests for a 3-month sprint.
## Introduction
Hi NounsDAO, we’re nick and weez, the tandem behind Calabara and Creator Contests.
### Our Nounish Journey: part 1
Both of us were introduced to Nouns by way of SharkDAO, which we first joined over a year ago. We were fascinated by the Nouns protocol and community and soon began building out sharkish tools to ease some of the unique challenges of a Nounish subDAO. We created a dashboard for SharkDAO, which included widgets for a snapshot client, calendar, and token-gated document center. We wanted to build a simple interface for casual members to be able to quickly catch up on the latest in SharkDAO and Nouns. Soon after, other communities asked if they could have their own dashboards. We open-sourced the code, modularized the components, and invited other web3 groups to join. Today, we’d describe [Calabara](https://calabara.com/explore) as an open-source design house for public infrastructure and applications.
By prop [62](https://nouns.wtf/vote/62), we began to get excited about many of the ideas being communicated by the Prop House team. We'd been thinking deeply about community funding protocols for some time ourselves, and were eager to experiment with the Prop House model. Unfortunately, we weren’t yet able to run our own Prop House rounds at SharkDAO (because we don’t use an erc721 for governance). Prop House wasn’t open-source yet, so we decided to fork the core ideas of Prop House and build something of our own: Creator Contests.
## Creator Contests … WTF?
Creator Contests are a nounish middleware for distributing funds to creatives.
Creating scalable funding infrastructure at all levels is a critical building block in establishing Nouns as the world's largest open-source brand. Creator contests build upon the strong foundations developed by the Prop House team while experimenting with novel features to create unique incentive systems and new ways to fund builders – allowing any Nounish community with an ENS the ability to start running their own contests.
## How does it work?
Similar to Prop House, participants create submissions in response to a contest prompt, and voters choose the best ones. Once the contest is over, funds are distributed to the winners. All contests follow this basic model, but administrators have full control over the contest settings to layer-on additional components. Here’s what we offer today …
* Submitter Rewards
* Define 1 or more winning ranks (1st, 2nd, ... nth place)
* Define 1 or more rewards for listed ranks (ETH, ERC20, ERC721)
* Voter Rewards
* Voters that accurately choose rank N submission will split X reward.
* Can be used to create unique incentive systems.
* NOMO-style games can be created, where voters join forces to try to choose the 2nd best submisison without pushing it to first place.
* Participant Restrictions
* Token thresholds required for participants to submit or vote
* Voting Strategies
* Token -- Voting power based on token holdings
* Arcade -- Uniform voting power for all qualifying voters
* Twitter Integration
* Collect submissions via Twitter interactions
* Inherit all existing infrastructure while proliferating via Twitter
* Additional Parameters
* Vote total visibility
* Anonymous Submissions
* Self Voting
## Our Nounish Journey: part 2
Before Spring 2022, we had bootstrapped the project ourselves. We were lucky enough to receive support from SharkDAO, and they funded us with 7 ETH to develop an MVP of Creator Contests. We launched our first contest in September, and have helped fund 45 nounish creatives with ~4 ETH and 25k ERC-20 tokens since. 2 months ago, we received a small grant of 8 ETH from NSFW to develop the Twitter Integration mentioned above. We have groups like SharkDAO, Composables, TNS, and the Society of Nounish Cartoonists running contests as we speak. We are now ready to take Creator Contests to the next level.
## Goals for the funding period
For this funding period, we’d like to focus on “Top of the funnel” funding infrastructure. This means implementing a scalable protocol for funding creatives in the 0.069 - 3 ETH range. Our goal is to fund 100+ nounish creatives in the 3-month window.
While bringing the codebase out of “MVP mode” so it can sufficiently scale to other Nounish pods (and make it easier to fork), we’ll work on the following upgrades:
* Support native video and other media formats
* Add vote audit reports
* Add voting capability for Noun delegates
* Experiment with new voting strategies
* Simplify contest initialization process.
* Improve our twitter algorithms
* UX redesign - It’s time for CC to get Nounish
We’d also like to answer the following questions:
* Are voter rewards a feature or a bug?
* In the voting period, how impactful are visible vote totals on a communities ability to choose the “best” submissions?
* Does submission history serve as a relevant talent repository for other pods?
* Are deep Twitter integrations viable for other tasks, like governance? (Nouncil, Nerman, etc)
* Are there ways to maintain a certain level of submission quality without directly moderating submissions?
* Prop House already sees a certain percentage of “low quality” submissions, and we’ll see higher levels at this funding tier. Are there ways to ensure a certain quality standard without direct moderation? Learnings from this experimentation could be layered on top of Prop House and other applications.
## Defining success
Success at the funding tier we are targeting is tightly coupled with onboarding. We’ll define onboarding for the scope of this project as the following:
* New creatives
* Introduce new creatives to Nouns and extension communities
* Existing creatives to larger funding tiers
* Support creatives in the earliest stages of ideation that can translate to quality Prop House or NSFW proposals
* Between Nounish extension communities
* Increase the discoverability factor of extension projects and communities through different contest designs and synergies, i.e.
* TNS and Composables co-host a round
* Multi-community voting
* Twitter contests
Of course, success for us also hinders on our ability to proliferate the meme. Twitter integrations drastically increase our proliferation potential -- elevating contests from a siloed web app to a publicly discoverable and interactable experience. We're focused on lifting the stack as close to the "public edge" as possible and see the potential for these integrations in other Nounish areas.
Defining success is one thing, measuring it is different. For this funding term, we’ll do so manually by following up with participants and winners while exploring ways we can automate and better measure this in the future.
## Prop House
*Why not just fork Prop House for real?*
While we haven’t really heard this much, it’s a valid question that we anticipate some Nouners might have.
Halting further experimentation to go back and layer our changes on top of the PH codebase feels like a step backwards at this point in time. We envision a coordinated approach where both PH and CC are able to sandbox and test different ideas and merge the ones that work. Ultimately, the far more relevant component to fork will be the smart contracts for a trustless implementation that the PH team is leading, which we fully plan on doing.
At worst, CC is an alternative client for Prop House. At best, it is an experiment in funding infrastructure, working alongside Prop House in developing sound protocols for high velocity, trustless, and scalable funding infrastructure for web3 communities – all powered by Nouns.
## Team
Weez: frontend, designer, UX, support
Nick: lead dev, fullstack
## Links
* [Calabara](https://calabara.com/explore)
* [Github](https://github.com/calabara-hq/calabara)
* [Twitter](https://twitter.com/calabarahq)
## Budget
60 ETH for continued development
3/5 Multisig tasked with sending 30 ETH of project funds to the team wallet upon execution, and setting up a 3-month stream for the remaining funds.
Signers:
Nick: nickdodson.eth
Benbodhi: signed.benbodhi.eth
Juan: juanx.eth
JoshuaFisher: joshuafisher.eth
ToadyHawk: toadyhawk.eth
## Proposed Transactions
0x55d1f4091Ced357cD4C4F9dd12531b8fDBe2dd26.transfer(
60.0 ETH
)
A great call to action for nouners and builders in our eco-system to authentically onboard others in a nounish way--the real reward will not be the prize we offer but those we bring in to build with us--that is nounish--Let's put the "FUN" in Funding.
I like the idea of the imagery, but not a hell yes in its current form. I am sure this will pass, but I would like to see what kind of activation efforts could be built into this and then resubmitted.
To the Nouners out there that vote and Nouncil–this is the type of signal that cuts through the noise.
Since the disbanding of the main discord I spend a lot of time running through all the discords and all over Twitter to collect information that is of use to me–What Maty does is help filter out the things I am less interested in and helps me find what ultimately matters most to me and what I need to perform as a member of the DAO. If you don’t already subscribe to his newsletter you should, and I think as a DAO we should fund this as a core contribution as it serves the members and supports the ecosystem.
Though I am a big fan of the NNS in general and am proud to be part of the first extensions to resolve the .⌐◨-◨ on yolonouns.wtf, nounstown.wtf, and puppetsamurai.wtf I am not sure there is enough traction at this point to give it the "hell yes" from me. If this prop does not pass I hope DOM makes some revisions and brings this back on-chain with a bit more focus on adoption, both with users and resolvers. I also think we should have some retro reward for all of his efforts over the past 7 months.
When asked what he thought 'Nounish' meant 4156 said "do good with no expectation of return, create positive externalities, embrace absurdity & difference, teach people about nouns & crypto, have fun"
We hope all of you think this is a Nounish Proposal
We are big fans of Builder and Zora, but we would love to see some traction or more details on how they would deploy the capital (criteria, vetting, etc). We would encourage the team to provide more details and/or lower their initial ask with the intention to return for a larger ask once there is demonstrable traction in the market.
Although we have reservations on how we're tracking success on this prop (and any IRL prop in general), we're excited to support Stoopid Buddy and Nouns IRL efforts. Going forward, we would like to see more data-driven elements such as QR codes or other traditional IRL tools used to measure results. Nothing measured is nothing gained.
As the discord is dissolved the DAO should help create more tools such as videos that the different communities can use to hype, educate, and inspire others to come and join us.
With the success of their video in Times Square, and proving it out on their own dime, I feel like we should support them if we think that was a success.
I also have faith in this team being able to deliver what they promise.
Based on the feedback we received from the DEVCon event in Bogota sounded great and I can't wait to see the results in AU.
Oxigami has a great reputation and a track record of getting things done to proliferate the meme, I am excited to see what he and his team can do here.
I think these regional OTG activations with local builders are one of the pillars of growing Nouns as an authentic brand.
I believe Nouncil has been an important part of Nouns DAO and we should continue to support their efforts in proliferating the meme. Funding builders that have a proven track record to help us grow is a good thing.
I am a "hell yes" for these types of Proposals.
As someone who did the convention circuit for years, I know these displays can really make a long-term impression on attendees.
I also think they are one of the most impactful OTG initiatives we can do.
As we move from one discord to many discords and this has added time to hunt down and discuss the proposals extending the time for props to go on-chain and get voted on makes more sense.
This also may alleviate future pressure points if we have an influx of on-chain proposals that need review before we vote on them.
I am happy to support this proposal.
I feel like any Nouner should be able to propose to the rest of the protocol their idea on-chain and let the other nouners or delegates vote for or against it.
If Nouners don’t want to give the proposals attention that is their business as they have deployed capital into it.
Just having immediate access to one noun does not signal a bad idea, we can look at past proposals and see that is not the case.
Drop the threshold, invite ideas, and good ideas will rise to the top.
I am a huge fan of the Nouns News, however, for what is being made currently it seems the team is a bit bloated and the price seems to reflect that.
I also am not sure if 1M is that great of a metric on TikTok, with the TikTok creator fund when you hit 1M views as a creator you can make $20-$40, if the platform puts that low a price of value on those views why would we spend so much?
If the TikToks were more interactive and had more calls to action I may be in favor. I encourage you to revisit this if the prop does not pass.
Though I am a fan of this type of action in general, I want more than just a top-funnel activity. What does success look like for this, how do we measure impact, would this be better during an event? Could this be bigger? With the desired outcomes being squishy I will have to vote no at the current time but would encourage you to revisit and resubmit with some rework to your prop to help me say, "hell yes".
Nothing measured is nothing gained.
As a person that uses Ai every day for work, I think the DAO's involvement with machine learning, in general, is important. I also think the tools that this pod will develop will help many proliferate the meme.
Initiatives like NSFW are important to be able to help motivate and incentivize builders in our ecosystem.
I do however agree with the Nounders that it needs to be more decentralized with multiple voices.
This does not mean that anyone has done a bad job.
However, moving NSFW into a more decentralized pod with more participants that are anxiously engaged in voicing their opinions and impacting outcomes has a great deal of merit, this will also support 22 in his efforts so that all of the burdens don't fall solely on his shoulders as it is a lot of work liaising with all of the different requests.
I am not voting against this proposal, because I know of all the good that can come out of this program for both the receivers of the rewards and the DAO, however, I would be a "hell yes" if this was a proposal that also included a full-time group/POD working on NSFW, sharing their knowledge, streamlining the process, coming up with more standardized rewards, and having the rewards/outcomes be more publicized across social media.
While I am a big fan of Agora, the following factors lead me to vote NO on this prop in its current state. 1) Lack of platform traction, 2) Outsized ask, 3) Lack of prop specificity. I would vote YES on an Agora prop that could either demonstrate more traction or have more specifics as to prop deliverables.
Also, clarity on the goals as related on the Nouncil call today, of double participation and delegation. Does that mean votes or wallets?
I really want to support this but I would like a bit more clarity.