Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
six
@six
The whole point of Nouns (imo) is to run an experiment in continuous, permissionless capital formation and distribution. I know the Foundation is thinking about this deeply but I hope that there is an alternative path that doesn’t require KYC for recipients. It breaks the hyperstructure and makes the experiment much less interesting.
6 replies
2 recasts
30 reactions
six
@six
If this is the only option to keep Nouns “alive” in the face of the regulatory environment then I get it. Most if not all recipients incl. myself would happily KYC. Just ideologically it’s not as cool
2 replies
0 recast
17 reactions
Elad
@el4d
We agree in spirit; to the best of my understanding we have to do this..
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Bixbite 👽
@bixbite
Do we though? Says who? Wasn’t the idea of the Duna just recently brought to the Foundation and discussed? …. Is the option transfer to a Duna orrrrr Nouns gets shut down? It’s supposed to be a permissionless protocol: remove the Nounder reward, fork & veto and let the experiment continue to run. …. Or why wouldn’t we look to other organizations such as the Ethereum foundation which is a Swiss Non-profit. Why not model after them? …. Solana is also a Swiss Non-profit.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
4156
@4156
ethereum and solana are optimizing for a different set of problems. ie. not the risk that they’re classified as a general partnership absent another legal structure. and while technically nobody is forcing us into a DUNA, if we don’t do something to mitigate liability for project participants, nouns (dao at least) will almost certainly die, as it will become -ev to own a noun (imagine negative prices in the auction), and too risky to accept grants from the project. our initial position is that for reasons above the majority will want to adopt the DUNA (it will be voted on via dao), but a minority fork is an option if the majority reject the proposal
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
Bixbite 👽
@bixbite
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my comment. I do have a question though & it’s the same I posed to 40, which I can ask you as well since your both part of the Foundation: Are the bylaws of the Foundation available for DAO members to view? Could even be through token gated access? A Cayman Foundation is defined as a legal person, which means the DAO can be a contracting entity and it can: - interact and form contracts with third parties; - file and pay taxes; - open bank accounts and make cash transactions; - hold and protect off-chain assets; - limit the liabilities of its members (if it has members); - protect intellectual property; - serve as a vehicle for airdrops and grants; and - act as a parent or holding entity with subsidiaries to carry out functions for a project. So does the Foundations bylaws limit the liability of its members aka Nouns DAO token holders?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
