Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
1๐ด35๐ธ1
@1a35e1
Rough ideas after reading: https://mirror.xyz/verbsteam.eth/gnTdSqqiZC7OmqL8Dix-hEek5Sim1abC1BsZNm9_h-s I think the key design challenge here is not requiring people to place their NOUN in a new contract. Off the cuff ideas - Could update governor to have an exclude list - People who delegate to a pool, get a soulbound NFT which prevents double vote problem - Burn soulbound NFT to get normal voting privileges again - Governor lists known pool contracts similar to well-known Clients
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
Could you explain more on the sb NFT? My first reaction is that I donโt see why the delegator gets the nft, Iโd think the pool would need it so itโs delegation of the voting power is recognized
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
1๐ด35๐ธ1
@1a35e1
The pool contract would have a count of delegated tokens. Which should be sufficient?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
Oh okay so the pool is a new contract? Is it just a smart account or a specific contract? Iโm still misunderstanding
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
