0x3380a055…694csent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#19,124,837·view on Etherscan
nounswap-auction-houseThanks for reading, and we really appreciate this feedback!
We have considered “locking” the bid Noun. You are right that this will prevent settlement failure, but there are a few drawbacks:
- Bids would be more expensive, since it is less gas efficient. Each bid would need to move the bid Noun into NounSwap, and return the previous bid Noun.
- The NounSwap contract would needs to “escrow” the bid Noun, which might make potential bidders hesitant.
- Bidders would not be able to participate in governance.
If it is something the community feels strongly about, we are open to changing it (which goes for mostly everything in the proposal).
In terms of dev royalty configurability, you make a great point. We want the royalty to be fair for the DAO, while also allowing Paperclip Labs to maintain NounSwap indefinitely without needing additional fundings. The reason we are proposing configurability is because it would allow flexibility for adjustment based on what the community feels is fair, which might not be known until NounSwap is in the wild. But, we are open to working with the community and agreeing upon a fixed value beforehand if that is preferred.
Please don’t hesitate to provide additional feedback or thought. Also, we would love to hear more folks input on these topics!