more on % exit: isn't there a fundamental problem with 2 nouns having same voting power but potentially very different exposure? eventually nouns with low exposure are incentivized to spend more or even rug?
wdyt @w-g

part of verbs team, working on nouns things

short answer is I think the first property you mentioned is the most powerfully positive-sum aspect of %, and that all of these issues are considerably worse under bv.  

on two, the purpose of low-friction fair exit is to mitigate rug, and I think its optimal here.  
warrants a long-form conversation at some point imo

can be an inverse relationship between ‘threat of exit’ and ‘threat of capture’ under this scenario/model. Not so under bv; cheap nouns= increasing control gov+treasury so voice is outsize from both directions. 

Under % You can buy 100 nouns for 1 eth but if I own 1 noun worth 100 my voice matters ⚖️