0xae65e700…46c0sent to0xb6d1eb1a…dab3·#19,185,853·view on Etherscan
(noun40 voting via agora)
i don't see a material difference between this prop and the previous prop (same $250k budget ask for roughly the same initiative) and am voting against for the same reason. from my perspective most of the no voters last time felt that the while nouns berries could compete in the charitable spending that nouns does, going from 0 to $250k in one go was a stretch. we like to see a project delivered in smaller milestones over time and continuously evaluate whether there's a good fit between the project and nouns. it's totally fine for the proposer to say that that's just not possible here b/c the project cannot be split into smaller steps or the proposer doesn't want to and would rather go for other funding sources but then i think it's natural to expect the same voting outcome from nouns.
also i don't want to be sound pedantic here but i feel the need to reiterate that "make food a public good" does not make sense to me. this also bothered me on the coffee shop prop as well since there was a line about making coffee a public good by giving out free coffee at noun o clock. giving a private good (something that definitionally one person can consume) out for free does not make it a public good if you're trying to use the term "public good" in its economic definition (non-excluable & non-rivalrous; essentially a good that can meet an unbounded demand without limits or restrictions). you can say that it's good for the public to subsidize food production or that it's good to offer food to the public for free but making food a public good is definitionally not possible.
the reason i'm going hard on this point is that i feel my tweet about nouns having an orientation of trying to increase public goods production in this world is being used as a means to build a narrative around this prop (it's added as a screenshot). i also wrote about this point in my last vwr and it's still up on the body of the prop with wag's justification that i'm quibbling with semantics b/c everything has maintenance cost. this is not true. if an animation is made and released as cc0 (e.g. the wizard's hat) it can be enjoyed by an infinite amount of people forever at no maintenance cost. an open source software repository might require maintenance over time but at least at the moment of launch it is a true public good (an infinite amount of ppl can use it for free without restriction or competition). nouns has the aspiration to create a society where public goods are abundant b/c that's truly attainable at scale in the online/onchain world and there's a reason our funding budget has been leaning towards media > software > other things. arguing that this prop is trying to make food a public good and that nouns should fund it b/c nouns funds public goods represents either a misunderstanding of the concept or a intentional misleading or blurring of the lines that feels non productive to me.