0x1aa55a5f…bdacsent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#22,931,085·view on Etherscan
Yes, that was exactly the point of this prop. Since the original one said that the DAO should remove its allocation of nogs from the treasury, this was just another way to reach that goal avoiding the dump and let the proposer start the execution of his idea. That’s why the title of the prop is the same. The idea was: if the dao doesn’t want anything to do with the nogs, we could at least avoid damaging the new developments and the current holders.
I was obviously Against both versions, it was just me trying to save what was still savable. But it doesn’t matter anymore, I’m going to cancel it in the coming hours.
+1
> My reasoning for voting against this proposal is the same reasoning as voting against the other proposal.... those $NOGS technically belong to the treasury nouns and it makes zero sense to burn them