0x32d1a53f…d4f5sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#19,725,516·view on Etherscan
was told offchain that 'word on the street' is i wanted this/ pretty wild given it's antithetical to all my values/politics in nouns. it's true that it may serve my personal short-term governance interests and that i view those interests as strongly aligned with nouns
- however -
exit rights imo, even under a flawed and inequitable design, are integrally important to positive sum world-building . they are as critical as crypto tenets such as 'freedom to transact,' 'right to privacy,' etc
any proposal that rolls them back should be viewed with hostility imo. i recognize it may be hard to stomach - no one in nouns has poured a fraction of the amount of sweat as i have into correcting this dynamic (and i believe the solution is on the way)- but in reality 0 threshold is by far the best option here. It keeps the dao maximally free from ongoing anon/arber presence (or absence) in governance and keeps the threat of progressive capture at a minimum. it also game-theoretically minimizes the overall amount of drain, as well as the volatility of drain (drain under higher thresholds is harder to predict) .
My cost basis to build my current Noun position under 0 threshold would have been close to 2x higher.
even with the discount, i think we can count on our hands the # of new engaged nouners we've onboarded at auction.
what else is there to say?