memoscan

0x43fa…1cea

All memos sent from and to 0x43fa…1cea.
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#22,526,866·0x0844ee3b…debbd2
Bitcoin Pizza Day is a fun and iconic moment in crypto. We've been to the events and genuinely enjoyed them. But not every cultural moment needs to be something Nouns funds, especially when it comes together at the last minute. If this proposal had come in earlier, there could have been a real chance for other builders in the community to plan around it. That kind of timing creates opportunities for collaboration and shared momentum. We saw that with Nouns Fest, where projects like Nouns Town, Esports, and Dreamland had the space to grow alongside the main event. With this proposal, the timing just didn’t leave enough room for that. It feels a bit disconnected, not because the idea or team isn’t great, but because there wasn’t enough lead time to make it something bigger. This vote isn’t a knock on the event. It’s simply a call for better coordination. If we want Bitcoin Pizza Day to be a meaningful moment for Nouns, we should give it the planning it deserves.
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#22,321,627·0x417f07ff…a185a3
+1 > $ +1 > would love for the culture of nouns to move away from this sort of prop. sorry +1 > I like what snax has built so far. I don't support rinse-and-repeat concepts/projects/props. In terms of merchandising, I don't support the flooding of communities with (the same) free products year over year again.
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#22,248,147·0x85c3365c…c45b3e
Bonfire Guild is down to support a revised version of this proposal with a smaller budget and more focus on building features that help Nouners curate to provide better oversight. We’re fully behind Rocketman and WOJ and don’t mind covering their salaries to keep pushing Flows forward. That said, we’d like to see the amount streamed to communities scaled back until we’re more confident that the system is consistently rewarding quality builders.
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,777,864·0x430349b9…cceeeb
submitted by peter on behalf of bonfire +1 > Excited to see so many nounsfolk having a connection with MTG but even more so that the idea of modest but highly targeted funding strategy resonates. +1 > I would prefer if all events and contributors were paid in USDC. Why not? > > I hope this initiative is successful and would love to add MTG/TCGs as a community that Nouns.GG supports if you're up for it.
0xa8688227…9e63sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,446,506·0xd31ca356…e2bb8c
submitted by krel on behalf of bonfire +1 > conscious of the fact that i might be a nouns boomer, but i just don't find this to be an interesting vision or direction for the project to support +1 > my reasons for voting against remain the same. NNS as a protocol has very little adoption and usage. the previous prop delivered little against that goal. doesn’t warrant another $400k investment imo.
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,350,083·0x68cf37ed…af7101
not sold, don't love the product, not sure if positive brand association, great proficiency at building tech proven but not so excited about the long term vision described here. gut leans against peter on behalf of Bonfire
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,330,666·0x0f264107…ece8d0
submitted by Peter on behalf of Bonfire +1 > one way of looking at this prop is that it's trying its best to adopt to nouns' treasury and the learnings of the nouns esports org over the years. we spent $2M on nouns esports in 2024. we ran two fairly expensive professional esports teams in dota and counter strike and while they were both valiant efforts they didn't get to a level of success where tournament winnings, in-game sales, or sponsorships generated enough income to sustain them (i consider the $250k sponsorship from matcha an impressive bit of revenue but it falls way short of the $2M spend). if they came back with a $2M budget (or $1.8M budget assuming sponsorship can continue) would we have been willing to run it back for 2025? it would have been about 14% of our total treasury (instead of 6% with this prop) and 56% of our 1Y inflow projection (instead of 24%). i haven't had the chance to catch up with the team since nounsfest in LA when they hadn't finalized some of the decisions here so i don't know exactly the thinking that went into this shift in the prop but i imagine their guess was that the $2M prop would fail. i suspect that guess isn't wrong since it just is objectively hard for us to keep funding the same dollar amount prop when the auction revenue is much lower and the prop itself can't achieve more revenue on its own over time. another aspect of thinking that likely went into the prop (which i did have the chance to hear from sam / peter / sasquatch at nounsfest) is just the feeling that the nouns esports model might work better for a more grassroots community like smash than for a professionalized esports league like dota or CS where competing teams are being funded by different financial incentives (e.g. saudi wanting an esports league in their country and can pour in money to top teams) that we can't quite compete with. they want to double down in the more real and genuine engagement they can find in more niche communities like smash and onboard them to onchain tools and unique community distribution they are building. so in some meaningful ways the above make sense and is a good adoption (cutting budget by 60%. narrowing focus to what they think is better/unique engagement). > > i think the other side is like the prior year's bet (2024 prop) was more like a high risk / high return bet. there was a chance the teams could win big in these professional leagues where prizes are meaningful. in those contexts of winning big more sponsorships could have been possible too. there was a chance auction revenue could have kept being where it was or could have moved much higher too. my point here is that it was a different type of bet (could a nouns dota / cs team against all odds win big and shock the world? it already did the prior year by the dota team making 7th place in the international. it felt right to see if with another year the team could go even further). this prop is a different prop. it's not going for winning in pro leagues or getting big sponsorships. it's more like smash is an incredible esports subculture that nouns can tap into and nouns should fund us to do that. i like the idea but does the spend feel proportional to the smash subculture's weight and importance in the overall nouns network? if nouns was a country would it choose to spend 25% of its yearly tax income in supporting the smash community's gaming tournaments? it's not an obvious yes to me. > > and yet i'm choosing to vote yes here. i think amongst the nouns teams, esports has likely come the furthest. it swung for one of the biggest goals with the largest viewership. got the largest sponsorship. has a team that worked together for a decently long time now with its own sense of purpose and mission. built its own tools and community engagement mechanics tailored for its community. has a strong sense of its own branding. its not big enough to survive on its own but i do think there's seeds of something unique here. ultimately, we need to figure our how to grow auction revenue independent of this one spending. in the mean time 6% of treasury is something i can stomach. i don't think we should lose the esports team chasing down the idea maze here at this point. against the things we have in our opportunity set i feel good about betting on this team again and seeing where they can take us in 2025 (and seeing how far nouns itself can grow in the next year as well).
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,330,638·0x8d8e1595…95038b
submitted by Peter on behalf of Nouncil +1 > one way of looking at this prop is that it's trying its best to adopt to nouns' treasury and the learnings of the nouns esports org over the years. we spent $2M on nouns esports in 2024. we ran two fairly expensive professional esports teams in dota and counter strike and while they were both valiant efforts they didn't get to a level of success where tournament winnings, in-game sales, or sponsorships generated enough income to sustain them (i consider the $250k sponsorship from matcha an impressive bit of revenue but it falls way short of the $2M spend). if they came back with a $2M budget (or $1.8M budget assuming sponsorship can continue) would we have been willing to run it back for 2025? it would have been about 14% of our total treasury (instead of 6% with this prop) and 56% of our 1Y inflow projection (instead of 24%). i haven't had the chance to catch up with the team since nounsfest in LA when they hadn't finalized some of the decisions here so i don't know exactly the thinking that went into this shift in the prop but i imagine their guess was that the $2M prop would fail. i suspect that guess isn't wrong since it just is objectively hard for us to keep funding the same dollar amount prop when the auction revenue is much lower and the prop itself can't achieve more revenue on its own over time. another aspect of thinking that likely went into the prop (which i did have the chance to hear from sam / peter / sasquatch at nounsfest) is just the feeling that the nouns esports model might work better for a more grassroots community like smash than for a professionalized esports league like dota or CS where competing teams are being funded by different financial incentives (e.g. saudi wanting an esports league in their country and can pour in money to top teams) that we can't quite compete with. they want to double down in the more real and genuine engagement they can find in more niche communities like smash and onboard them to onchain tools and unique community distribution they are building. so in some meaningful ways the above make sense and is a good adoption (cutting budget by 60%. narrowing focus to what they think is better/unique engagement). > > i think the other side is like the prior year's bet (2024 prop) was more like a high risk / high return bet. there was a chance the teams could win big in these professional leagues where prizes are meaningful. in those contexts of winning big more sponsorships could have been possible too. there was a chance auction revenue could have kept being where it was or could have moved much higher too. my point here is that it was a different type of bet (could a nouns dota / cs team against all odds win big and shock the world? it already did the prior year by the dota team making 7th place in the international. it felt right to see if with another year the team could go even further). this prop is a different prop. it's not going for winning in pro leagues or getting big sponsorships. it's more like smash is an incredible esports subculture that nouns can tap into and nouns should fund us to do that. i like the idea but does the spend feel proportional to the smash subculture's weight and importance in the overall nouns network? if nouns was a country would it choose to spend 25% of its yearly tax income in supporting the smash community's gaming tournaments? it's not an obvious yes to me. > > and yet i'm choosing to vote yes here. i think amongst the nouns teams, esports has likely come the furthest. it swung for one of the biggest goals with the largest viewership. got the largest sponsorship. has a team that worked together for a decently long time now with its own sense of purpose and mission. built its own tools and community engagement mechanics tailored for its community. has a strong sense of its own branding. its not big enough to survive on its own but i do think there's seeds of something unique here. ultimately, we need to figure our how to grow auction revenue independent of this one spending. in the mean time 6% of treasury is something i can stomach. i don't think we should lose the esports team chasing down the idea maze here at this point. against the things we have in our opportunity set i feel good about betting on this team again and seeing where they can take us in 2025 (and seeing how far nouns itself can grow in the next year as well). +1 > > staffing overheads > > Wages at 55% of a budget this large feels off. > > Caught myself instinctively agreeing with this but want to take a moment to argue the other side. > > Camps budget is ~99% wages, which makes perfect sense for a software project. The goal for camp team is to pay our bills and write code, any large expenses outside of that (eg marketing, events, travel) would seem excessive and wasteful. > > Nouns.gg is not (purely) a software project, but the texture of the project still feels like a startup to me. The project founders are the most important variable in Nouns.gg, and without them putting in work every day the project will quickly die. > > What im trying to say here is that the staffing/salary line item _should_ be the biggest budget item, bc the people working on Nouns.gg are the most important factor for the projects' success. > > However, its possible that the team can downsize its group of founders/operators, or maybe some of them are in a position to take a leaner paycheck. Ive no insight there and Im not making a claim either way. Im only arguing that salaries being the primary expense should not be seen as odd or wrong.
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,330,622·0xedeea45e…c4c647
+- submited by Peter on behalf of Bonfire +1 > > staffing overheads > > Wages at 55% of a budget this large feels off. > > Caught myself instinctively agreeing with this but want to take a moment to argue the other side. > > Camps budget is ~99% wages, which makes perfect sense for a software project. The goal for camp team is to pay our bills and write code, any large expenses outside of that (eg marketing, events, travel) would seem excessive and wasteful. > > Nouns.gg is not (purely) a software project, but the texture of the project still feels like a startup to me. The project founders are the most important variable in Nouns.gg, and without them putting in work every day the project will quickly die. > > What im trying to say here is that the staffing/salary line item _should_ be the biggest budget item, bc the people working on Nouns.gg are the most important factor for the projects' success. > > However, its possible that the team can downsize its group of founders/operators, or maybe some of them are in a position to take a leaner paycheck. Ive no insight there and Im not making a claim either way. Im only arguing that salaries being the primary expense should not be seen as odd or wrong. +1 > I understand the concerns around past spending and sustainability. While I wouldn’t call previous proposals mistakes, the lessons we’ve learned along the way have led us here. I truly believe gaming offers us an opportunity to make a significant impact within Nouns. > > +1 > > > I believe in backing world class Nounish teams building things that can grow Nouns while serving existing super fans. > > > > Nouns esports benefits the Nouns brand, community, and is creating nounish subculture funding innovations like Rounds. > > +1 > > > I’m fully in support of continuing the Nouns Esports journey. As a more 'behind the scenes-work' member of the esports community I've seen many orgs come and go, I initially thought Nouns Esports was just another organization entering the space with cryptobacked partnerships and startup promotion intentions. When I jumped in to learn more I couldn’t have been more wrong. My curiosity about what Nouns Esports really had to offer led me to meet Ohan, Peter, and Sasquatch. They showed me that they really do have genuine passion and love for these games and their communities. > > Esports communities can super vary across different games, but Nouns Esports has found meaningful ways to engage with and support those in spaces the spaces they've moved into. I've totally seen them uplift and empower the communities they’ve joined, like straight up first hand for real for real. I also was able to contribute to and become more involved with Nouns too! In 2024 I worked with Nouns Esports on photo, video, and media projects, and even won one of the Nouns Rounds! Nouns Rounds have been some of the most fun things around in the Smash community. > > What makes keeping Nouns Esports alive so important is how much they’ve done for a community in the short time they've been around. Their team of people with passion, technical expertise and genuine care have brought invaluable support and positivity to the players and the communities around them. This dedication is why I think its super duper important to continue the this journey and I'm so excited for whats in store for 2025! > > +1 > > > Nouns is becoming a household name in the Smash community. I think the ongoing effects of that are worth doubling down on. > > +1 > > > @0x6fB5...83b0 > > > > With over $3 million, 555 ETH, and a handful of Nouns invested into Esports in just over 2.5 years, it’s an eye-opening amount. We believe there are valid arguments on both sides regarding the ROI for the DAO. However, our concern is sustainability and this current model is not. With staff wages making up 55% of this budget, there may be room for cuts to help move closer to that goal. We have no doubt you agree with Krel for obvious reasons. > > > > > @0x15BC...2781 > > > > > > Thank you for the feedback. I also agree with Krel that employee salaries and contributor compensation should be prioritized as the highest budget items. Without the full-time dedication of this group, much of what this proposal aims to achieve would simply not be possible. > > > > > > Why is spending money on esports "a hard pill to swallow"? Esports has brought significant awareness to Nouns and attracted new contributors. As far as I know, the DAO isn’t structured like a VC firm funding profit-seeking projects. Instead, this is an investment in marketing and community engagement to extend the reach and impact of the Nouns ecosystem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We commend the team and players for the inroads they've made thus far, but we are not sold. > > > > > > > > The amount of money this DAO has invested into the Esports scene to date is indeed a hard pill to swallow, and it's clear this approach is not a sustainable model for the DAO in its current state. When staff publicly say, "when the money is gone the ⌐◨-◨ will go," we are not filled with confidence for the future. > > > > > > > > Wages at 55% of a budget this large feels off. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > staffing overheads > > > > > Wages at 55% of a budget this large feels off. > > > > > > > > Caught myself instinctively agreeing with this but want to take a moment to argue the other side. > > > > > > > > Camps budget is ~99% wages, which makes perfect sense for a software project. The goal for camp team is to pay our bills and write code, any large expenses outside of that (eg marketing, events, travel) would seem excessive and wasteful. > > > > > > > > Nouns.gg is not (purely) a software project, but the texture of the project still feels like a startup to me. The project founders are the most important variable in Nouns.gg, and without them putting in work every day the project will quickly die. > > > > > > > > What im trying to say here is that the staffing/salary line item _should_ be the biggest budget item, bc the people working on Nouns.gg are the most important factor for the projects' success. > > > > > > > > However, its possible that the team can downsize its group of founders/operators, or maybe some of them are in a position to take a leaner paycheck. Ive no insight there and Im not making a claim either way. Im only arguing that salaries being the primary expense should not be seen as odd or wrong. > > > > We most definitely do believe there is a place for Nouns Esports in the DAO. We are only suggesting a rethink to extend the lifespan. +1 > one way of looking at this prop is that it's trying its best to adopt to nouns' treasury and the learnings of the nouns esports org over the years. we spent $2M on nouns esports in 2024. we ran two fairly expensive professional esports teams in dota and counter strike and while they were both valiant efforts they didn't get to a level of success where tournament winnings, in-game sales, or sponsorships generated enough income to sustain them (i consider the $250k sponsorship from matcha an impressive bit of revenue but it falls way short of the $2M spend). if they came back with a $2M budget (or $1.8M budget assuming sponsorship can continue) would we have been willing to run it back for 2025? it would have been about 14% of our total treasury (instead of 6% with this prop) and 56% of our 1Y inflow projection (instead of 24%). i haven't had the chance to catch up with the team since nounsfest in LA when they hadn't finalized some of the decisions here so i don't know exactly the thinking that went into this shift in the prop but i imagine their guess was that the $2M prop would fail. i suspect that guess isn't wrong since it just is objectively hard for us to keep funding the same dollar amount prop when the auction revenue is much lower and the prop itself can't achieve more revenue on its own over time. another aspect of thinking that likely went into the prop (which i did have the chance to hear from sam / peter / sasquatch at nounsfest) is just the feeling that the nouns esports model might work better for a more grassroots community like smash than for a professionalized esports league like dota or CS where competing teams are being funded by different financial incentives (e.g. saudi wanting an esports league in their country and can pour in money to top teams) that we can't quite compete with. they want to double down in the more real and genuine engagement they can find in more niche communities like smash and onboard them to onchain tools and unique community distribution they are building. so in some meaningful ways the above make sense and is a good adoption (cutting budget by 60%. narrowing focus to what they think is better/unique engagement). > > i think the other side is like the prior year's bet (2024 prop) was more like a high risk / high return bet. there was a chance the teams could win big in these professional leagues where prizes are meaningful. in those contexts of winning big more sponsorships could have been possible too. there was a chance auction revenue could have kept being where it was or could have moved much higher too. my point here is that it was a different type of bet (could a nouns dota / cs team against all odds win big and shock the world? it already did the prior year by the dota team making 7th place in the international. it felt right to see if with another year the team could go even further). this prop is a different prop. it's not going for winning in pro leagues or getting big sponsorships. it's more like smash is an incredible esports subculture that nouns can tap into and nouns should fund us to do that. i like the idea but does the spend feel proportional to the smash subculture's weight and importance in the overall nouns network? if nouns was a country would it choose to spend 25% of its yearly tax income in supporting the smash community's gaming tournaments? it's not an obvious yes to me. > > and yet i'm choosing to vote yes here. i think amongst the nouns teams, esports has likely come the furthest. it swung for one of the biggest goals with the largest viewership. got the largest sponsorship. has a team that worked together for a decently long time now with its own sense of purpose and mission. built its own tools and community engagement mechanics tailored for its community. has a strong sense of its own branding. its not big enough to survive on its own but i do think there's seeds of something unique here. ultimately, we need to figure our how to grow auction revenue independent of this one spending. in the mean time 6% of treasury is something i can stomach. i don't think we should lose the esports team chasing down the idea maze here at this point. against the things we have in our opportunity set i feel good about betting on this team again and seeing where they can take us in 2025 (and seeing how far nouns itself can grow in the next year as well).
0x7f64c6e6…d6d2sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,181,201·0xa2d1fdfe…e5c6f0
— krel (on behalf of bonfire) +1 > Atrium have shown huge committment, understanding, and ability to create awesome value for both Nouns and in their own ecosystem. > > Having a film under our collective belt, of this quality, for this cost, would be an amazing achievement. > > Atrium's commitment to cover part of the cost and turn the project sustainable as they did with Quack is admirable and promising > > Momentum is extremely important for production like this, I cant see a justification for putting the breaks on it so lets get it. > > I think Latsko's comments about finding ways to tell the meta story and reach wider audiences and build something on social media is advice worth heading, and it looks like it will be. > > Well done and good luck Supriyo and team! Good luck.
0x7f64c6e6…d6d2sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,153,730·0xa56232b4…ffa41a
Generally supportive of the idea BUT stripy is correct. Considering market conditions , Eth preservation is the goal. Please consider re-proposing with USDC. - Supriyo (On Behalf of bonfire) +1 > USDC budget requesting ETH, since this proposal was submitted we are up 25% don’t think we should be sending ETH and praying people return the surplus when usdc can be requested
0x7f64c6e6…d6d2sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,107,985·0xda95c18d…e23d1c
+1 ! - Supriyo (On Behalf of Bonfire) +1 > I think we should actively be recruiting the best available talent (coders, artists, etc.) and make 'working with nouns' the best possible experience for them. > > this kind of small asks with potential big upside should be funded quickly and without hairsplitting. at the end of the day, great talent, when neglected, will just find other projects to work with. > > tbh, I don't care so much for what Yukigesho can do for nouns.sh (tho it looks great!), but all the new ideas he'll have in the process and what new project/client/tool may come out of it!
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,023,914·0xd9315491…d9d193
Satori is a passionate and capable operator, with a strong connection to the Kendama community. However, I don’t believe running rounds for ongoing engagement will be effective. Instead, I’d recommend focusing on building Nouns as the central Kendama community through a Discord or Instagram presence. Expecting people to use Warpcast just to engage with the sponsor seems unrealistic. Like esports, Kendamas may become overly reliant on DAO funding. Without developing independent distribution channels (they plan to do this via Warpcast), they'll struggle to retain and engage their audience long-term. - peterpandam
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,023,820·0x0e5ca374…e1c892
Satori is a passionate and capable operator, with a strong connection to the Kendama community. However, I don’t believe running rounds for ongoing engagement will be effective. Instead, I’d recommend focusing on building Nouns as the central Kendama community through a Discord or Instagram presence. Expecting people to use Warpcast just to engage with the sponsor seems unrealistic. Like esports, Kendamas may become overly reliant on DAO funding. Without developing independent distribution channels (they plan to do this via Warpcast), they'll struggle to retain and engage their audience long-term. - peterpandam
0x6fb5d14b…83b0sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#21,023,816·0x2559da98…c1a6b5
Satori is a passionate and capable operator, with a strong connection to the Kendama community. However, I don’t believe running rounds for ongoing engagement will be effective. Instead, I’d recommend focusing on building Nouns as the central Kendama community through a Discord or Instagram presence. Expecting people to use Warpcast just to engage with the sponsor seems unrealistic. Like esports, Kendamas may become overly reliant on DAO funding. Without developing independent distribution channels (they plan to do this via Warpcast), they'll struggle to retain and engage their audience long-term. - peterpandam
0x7f64c6e6…d6d2sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#20,792,748·0x03b3823f…34f9f5
- 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.
0x7f64c6e6…d6d2sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#20,786,650·0x89f11d6b…9702d0
Impressed by Voadz and Nero's previous prop execution. Public governance installation is neat and thought provoking for those that will interact with it. Nounish Goods have no real pathway today to reach fans IRL (unless prop teams individually can pull off running a high footfall ecomm store). Feels comfortable backing this one as a genuine Nounish hub in South-east Asia. - Supriyo (Voting FOR on behalf of Bonfire)
0x7f64c6e6…d6d2sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#20,772,649·0x063a919f…0307f7
Will has summed this up already. Artists need a choice, not forced into an minting experiment by anons permissionlessly minting pointers to their tracks. This is also dubious ground for record labels to act against and by extension DAO supporting such experiment. Check Song.tech (Similar experiment on base for traction reference). - Supriyo (Voting AGAINST on behalf of Bonfire) +1 > I love the energy here and am very supportive of efforts to find alternative, more sustainable compensation models for artists. I do think that when one of crypto’s biggest narratives is “We make more money for artists”, a narrative of “Nouns funds piracy” is too high a risk of being interpreted in bad faith. I’ve personally seen even the most benign of crypto efforts (like buying books) be turned into attack lines outside the industry. > > (That being said, the narrative is clever marketing for how provocative it is, but funding it is narratively charged too)
0x7f64c6e6…d6d2sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#20,715,984·0x735b747c…e23074
- Supriyo (Voting FOR on behalf of Bonfire) +1 > i feel that this prop offers a valuable opportunity to test an irl format that we haven’t fully explored before. > > 1. new territory for irl: our experience with media and code has proven successful, but irl remains largely unexplored for us. this prop gives us a chance to test a new format and gather data on how irl initiatives perform. if this experiment doesn’t work out, we’ll have important information to rethink our approach to irl projects. > 2. proven team: the proposal is from a long-term, proven team that has contributed successfully in the past. this gives me confidence that the experiment will be rigorously tested and managed effectively. > 3. data-driven insights: if the experiment in rio doesn’t yield the expected results, it will provide crucial data on irl strategies, helping us make more informed decisions for future projects. > 4. alignment with nouns values: the prop aligns with our values by focusing on community impact and engagement. > > while i lean towards conservatively managing spending, the potential benefits and the valuable data we could gain from this experiment make it a worthwhile investment. it’s a strategic move to explore untested areas and gain insights for future initiatives. +1 > The reduction of the stream from 15 months to 3 months certainly makes this more palatable. The reno budget still feels high for what’s being undertaken. > > That said, we're happy to give the team the benefit of the doubt. We love the concept and are big believers in IRL, obviously… > > Good luck to the team :)
0xa8688227…9e63sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#20,670,433·0xea0853cd…7694c4
Thanks nounspace team for proposing a follow-up funding round. My main gripe with this project is that the initial idea of "what if myspace x farc x nouns" was never really validated with potential users, and indeed its not clear who the target user is or how you aim to reach them. In this situation, doubling down on building more features (eg fidgets in your case), polishing the app, extending to mobile, etc almost never works bc there are deeper running flaws with the basic idea and GTM. (I regret to admit im familiar this from first-hand experience -- happy to chat about it if i can be of help.) Unfortunately, this fact, coupled with some of your strategy/comms choices in the past, leads me to have low belief in this idea and i find it hard to justify a 250k ask. Unsolicited feedback, hope its well received: If youre determined to build something in the farcaster and/or nouns landscape, i would take a big step back and find crystal focus on who your user is (by name) and how you aim to get them to use your app. If you did that and show promising result i would consider funding a much lower ask for you to experiment, bc your passion does shine through. /krel (on behalf of bonfire)
0x7f64c6e6…d6d2sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#20,651,790·0x4566201b…16d0cb
New unexplored form factor (longform writing), low cost and working with a cryptonative platform makes it a worthwhile engagement. Please reconsider making Kiwi pass optional for participating or subsidize it for all participants. - Supriyo (Voting FOR on behalf of bonfire)
0x7f64c6e6…d6d2sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#20,651,703·0x8ada0101…4f1cb1
Without TNS community, a lot of new members would have never found Nouns. They did well orienting towards using onchain media + farcaster and yellow’s success in finding some revenue is evident. If the goal to run sustainably for a year is achieved by subsidized outside grants, it’s a step in right direction. - Supriyo (on behalf of bonfire)
0xa8688227…9e63sent to0x43fa3b63…1cea·#20,569,491·0x4daddbe1…a16ecc
Vote decision led by krel and supriyo. +1 > consistent value creation, divergent opinions, quality execution. even if swap isn't _the_ thing, the reward is well earned and the positive reinforcement ensures that this team is incentivized to continue to add outsized value in the future with swap or alt ventures > > +1 > > > Personal opinions on swaps should be put aside to recognize that NounSwap is well liked by many looking to get their forever noun. Spencer and Cole are some of the best builders we have who have shown time and time again that they care deeply about nouns and enjoy building here. > > > > 40 ETH feels fair to me considering we [regularly](https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/583) [spend](https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/534) [many](https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/527) [multiples](https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/522) [of] (https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/520) [that] (https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/559) [amount] (https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/573) on events, which we hope will end up netting us new builders or bidders. > > > > If part of the goal is to bring in new builders then I find it silly we choose not to recognize their work when they are earnestly trying to bring value to our community. > > > > Cheers to Spencer and Cole for building great tools, and I hope you all stick around even if this prop does not pass.