0x1db19b99…bda0sent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#21,030,884·view on Etherscan
+1
> After ready the prop a couple times and clicking into the propdate from last season, it doesn't make me very excited. There's no tie back to Nouns and from what I've seen, the last prop has been executed like any other sponsorship - just scrolling through the propdate I wouldn't be able to tell if this was funded by Nouns or Bayer.
>
> Here's an example - imo all of the "Funds" section read alike:
> "Funds from the Nouns grant were used to cover the cost of travel, accommodation, and materials for creation of the artwork."
>
> More specific cornerstone feedback:
> - The lack of overlap between GLITCH <> ⌐◨-◨ make it a very transactional sponsorship.
> - The "Why Nouns?" section feels forced and doesn't seem to identify any existing synergies that could be leveraged to do greater, weirder things beyond Nouns ability to fund 60ETH of sponsorship.
> - "Future involvement with Nouns:" after the 60ETH or during this phase? Why hasn't this happened already? the whole point of funding things is to add more people to the ⌐◨-◨ movement or at least make them aware of Nouns.
> - Why ETH when all expenses are in USDC/fiat?
> - This proposal reads a bit like Nouns is the first stop and if it's defeated, you'll move on to the next. Which makes sense, but also does not help make it compelling to support.