0xfc538ffd…6183sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,496,728·view on Etherscan
Some Nouncilers are holders, others delegates.
Why? -- I was trying to suggest a group 'everyone' joins, and has equal weight, and using the delegation as a carrot to grow the group to literally everyone -- a true democracy within Nouns. But as we can see from the outcome here, voters obviously don't want to see that for a number of reasons. Which is okay... Was a bad idea to suggest it, I guess.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Appreciate the VWR.
+1
> @0xFC53...6183
>
> you complained extensively about a group of whales taking over the DAO. why would we make Nouncil, a group of non-holders with no stake, the greatest of the whales, controlling voting and taking over the treasury?
>
> >
> >
> > LOL -- thanks for showing up, gang ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> >
> > +1
> >
> > > lol
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > > Nouncil's primary delegate is the same person as Shwoundation's, a whale buyer who outbid fork arbitragers & anons
> > > >
> > > > Nouncil voted against itself becoming a fully onchain and permissionless protocol (Prop 692) and instead operates as a 2/6 multi-sig with a Discord-based voting system that the multi-sig signers can ignore or change the rules of on the fly, which happened with Prop 962 when their system posted a For vote, but the multi-sig signers decided to change it to an Abstain
> > > >
> > > > after the $nouns debacle, the decision to vote against becoming fully onchain and permissionless was the primary contributor for our shared delegate choosing to stop participating at Nouns or with Nouncil
> > > >
> > > > this version of Nouncil - less than 10 people on a weekly discord call with another 10-15 people in the voting body who don't join the calls - is a long ways away from the meritocratic mini-democracy our delegator once sought to empower, and has morphed into a version that drives away thoughtful, good-faith participants
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > > 🤌