0x8ac3ecf6…5987sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#20,985,508·view on Etherscan
To me a part of nouns dies with the duna, a part of what made me fall in love with this project in the first place. The part that made this such a wild experiment, a fully decentralized governing body functioning on the blockchain, where code is the ultimate law.
Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% confident that for Nouns AS A BRAND, converting to a duna is the best possible path. It's that path that massively increases the chances of having widespread and long lasting impact. But that does not necessarily mean it's the right decision.
Maybe running out of funds would have been a more beautiful ending to nouns. Being a true experiment till the bitter end, fully sticking to its core principles. Carving the path for new experiments to be born, as we have started to see already…
Something I still struggle with is the sense of urgency around the DUNA. I'm not sure if things are being kept from the community, but I don't see a solid argument that justifies the urgency and gravity presented. It looks like a decision based on U.S. regulatory threats, which ignores many other thriving nounish communities around the globe which don't need or may not want to be associated with that. I just wish there was more clarity here.
Either way,as I've said once before, the outcome of this proposal has long been decided, long before many of the community even knew about it. I don't see many merits in pushing for another direction at this point. For me it’s about making peace with this new direction.
I truly love Nouns and everything we’ve built as a community. It’s remarkable. And while I know projects will continue to evolve under this new structure (including the ones I’m involved with), it feels like a shift away from some of what made us so unique.
I wish onchain was still our ultimate truth. Code, immutable.