Content
@
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
Bixbite 👽
@bixbite
Spicy Saturdays: Hot Take …. Burn The Treasury Nouns 🔥 I’m considering putting in a proposal for this, idea would be there would be a set date, say Halloween when the burn would take place…. So everyone can get their swaps in ahead of time. Rationale: giving out Nouns dilutes the governance of active participants…. && historically the % of Nouns given out that are left unused or delegated is larger than those given out that do participate. The dilution of governance was also something I mentioned in Nouncil, thankfully we passed a vote to raise voting participation rate to double the previous metric. I know it’s a spicy topic, but would love to hear everyone’s thoughts…. To burn or not to burn, that is the question. 🤔
13 replies
0 recast
25 reactions
Nounish Prof ⌐◧-◧🎩
@nounishprof
I'll be a very loud no. There are some special nouns in there and shouldn't be burned but maybe no one is ready for them yet. And would be very hypocritical of me to say otherwise. There's only "dilution" if you actually believe in "book value" (which is BS frankly). What we should do instead is end the fork -- then no more treasury nouns will be created. Which if you're going to burn the existing treasury nouns, you need to deal with that issue anyway. What happens to forked nouns in the future? And raising the nouncil vote threshold to 40 was rash -- should have gone to 30 then 40 -- now we're just rubber stamping the same people back to nouncil so it's wasting quite a bit of time and energy. Agree it needed to be raised but there was a better step up option if anyone bothered to give it some thought.
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
Bixbite 👽
@bixbite
If there are special Nouns those can be transferred to a contract so they will not be burned, maybe the $NOUNS contract pool or the token Wags is working on. The whole issue about BV is not something thats too concerning anymore because the margin continues to close & I believe the arbers & RFV traders are gone... we've had the 4th fork kicked off for almost 2 months and only 3 Nouns are in there. Governance dilution is much more important than BV.... for instance in Nouncil there are 77 members with an average of 35 votes on each prop.... sometimes not enough votes are cast so we miss threshold and abstain..... but by raising participation rate to 40% we go from 77 members to 53, going from 45% engagement to 66% which lowers quorum & threshold numbers, making it easier to achieve. Also the people who will be removed have to reapply which will reset their participation rates, if they fall below 40% they will be removed again.... I agree there are always better ways, but glad we took some action vs none.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Nounish Prof ⌐◧-◧🎩
@nounishprof
If BV is not an issue then let's get rid of the fork, right? If you're going to burn treasury nouns it makes no sense to do so if we're just gonna keep making more. But also -- let's wait on ALL this until we do see what wag is coming up with. btw when we raised it to 20% we actually had this convo and I wanted it to go up higher but agreed that a step up was the better option. This time there was basically no discussion, just a vote. I think if we had some discussion on it, we would have come to consensus to do this in a way that made more sense and avoided those on the bubble who were participating to not have to re-apply all over again. Also-we have some governance challenges with the nouns in the $nouns pool since they are calculated into threashold BUT can't vote. If that pool grows too large, it will be impossible or at least extremely difficult to pass anything & challenge of even accumulating $nouns due to minimal circulation and availability of $nouns so could be a big problem if not managed.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
