0x32d1a53f…d4f5sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#19,869,680·view on Etherscan
in the end i have strong misgivings about whether financial exposure to the fungible parts of Nouns can/should be something seen as desirable. In my big-picture thinking the way we make Nouns 'work' (amenable to progressive decentralization at scale) is if the economics bias ever-more strongly towards amplifying the non-fungible bits; individual Nouns differentiated by ID, brand, governance narratives etc enjoy unbounded value accrual potential, while 'dormant' Nouns parroting a the view of a parent wallet or simply not doing anything are effectively taxed for being undifferentiated/ not providing unique value to the network.
viewed through the above lens this token starts to look a bit different, since, stripped of governance/digital identity, it would amount to taxation w/o representation. it's not that i think the # can't go up, but that it's in our collective interest to make it more and more difficult for that to happen, biasing instead for differentiation among circulating Nouns, in whatever meaningful character dimensions we can identify. This approach will tend make the dao more secure (& imo) more interesting/more fun.
Nouns sitting in the treasury or in LP does not fit so well with that goal, & i wonder if buyers, unable to leverage the tools of ID, PFP, Vote to build their Nounish life atop, will ultimately find themselves holding a structurally receding % of network value.
"Nouns are an experimental attempt to improve the formation of on-chain avatar communities. While projects such as CryptoPunks have attempted to bootstrap digital community and identity, Nouns attempt to bootstrap identity, community, governance, and a treasury that can be used by the community."
A significant % of our holder base puts major daily brain energy into Nouns, and have done for over 3 years. Can the same be said for any Erc-20 community?
It's possible i'm wrong and ultimately we want to pivot more towards erc-20 land/lean into fungibility, so i guess i've settled on abstain to signal that i welcome a simultaneous exploration of both paths if there is enough conviction in this as an alignment tool.