0x8ab0c174…ad1csent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#22,243,474·view on Etherscan
+1
> I appreciate the vision and contributions that Rocketman has made to the ecosystem — Flows is one of the most ambitious attempts to reimagine bottom-up funding in crypto. However, I will be voting NO on this proposal for the following reasons:
>
> 1. DAO Has No Long-Term Stake in $FLOWs Token.
> Flows is moving toward a tokenized revnet system, and yet Nouns DAO — the only funding source to date — is not explicitly included in the token design.
> Without equity, protocol fees, or token allocations for Nouns, there is no structural mechanism for the DAO to benefit from Flows’ upside.
> We’ve seen this before with other projects that launched tokens after being incubated by the DAO, only to exclude Nouns from the long-term value loop. **I do not want Flows to become another Agora.**
>
> 2. Funding Scale Requires VC Validation.
> Flows already received significant early-stage support from the DAO, well beyond what traditional incubators would commit.
> A follow-on ask of $575k should ideally be de-risked through outside validation.
> If the team can secure venture support — and I’m happy to help introduce them — I would feel more comfortable backing the next round of DAO support. VC validation would show that the tokenomics are sound and that Flows is building a market-aligned, sustainable product.
+1
> I believe in the potential of Flows, but right now it feels unfocused and difficult to rally around.
>
> Many grants either fund things people were already doing or they lack clear follow-through (not to mention the rugs). I’ve tried coordinating with grantees, and even getting the bare minimum of engagement has been challenging.
>
> What is the goal of Flows? What are we actually working toward? We need clear, centralized goals that leverage decentralized tools to coordinate decentralized communities. All in service of building the Nouns brand.
>
> I want a smaller budget version of this proposal. Less funding per month to grantees and more focused goals from the Flows team.
+1
> The premise of Flows is powerful, and it's worth continuing to develop. However, I still think the protocol needs to be fixed to make it "the most effective use of the Nouns treasury." I'd support a proposal to explore different ways to fix and test the protocol before committing to the proposed solution.