Content pfp
Content
@
https://opensea.io/collection/nouns
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction

Bixbite šŸ‘½ pfp
Bixbite šŸ‘½
@bixbite
I think it’s kind of funny that the 10% threshold prop didn’t pass…. Why is it funny? Because for the last year many have been claiming we’re ’under attack from the big bad arbers’ & that ā€˜arbers have been accumulating’ …. Well guess what, if there were any arbers don’t you think they would have voted FOR the proposal to lower threshold so they could get out early šŸ˜‚ As I said, we’re scared of a boogie monster under our bed which doesn’t exist. šŸ¤¦šŸ¼ā€ā™€ļø I’d say run it back for 15% @coleperkins & let the honest majority leave if there would even be 106 Nouns to enter…. Let’s remember only 28 votes FOR, so it maybe unlikely to even get 106.
5 replies
2 recasts
13 reactions

Bixbite šŸ‘½ pfp
Bixbite šŸ‘½
@bixbite
@spencerperkins.eth
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Peterpandam pfp
Peterpandam
@peterpandam
Damn u really trying to flip that noun already??
1 reply
0 recast
5 reactions

Michael Gingras š“† (lilfrog) pfp
Michael Gingras š“† (lilfrog)
@frog
> I’d say run it back for 15% ya the problem with this is I don't think there would even be enough of an honest minority to get to 15% -- even 10% seems challenging
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

4156 pfp
4156
@4156
if an arber already has 30% of nouns they wouldn’t need to tip their hand on the 10% prop…just keep on arbing as long as possible until a real existential prop (like DUNA) is put forth. in that sense we may still see a fork
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Fibo pfp
Fibo
@cryptonacci
Now that we know that there is no arbitrage, it should allow voters who voted for the 10% proposal and those that voted against due to arbitrage scare to sum up enough votes to win the 10% or even 5% threshold proposal. @spencerperkins.eth send it!
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction