david

@davidbr

63 Following

272 Followers

david pfp

I think the dao executor can send a message from mainnet to base in order to call some function on a base contract. the msg.sender gets transformed when that happens

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Elad pfp

gm, sharing another verbs propdate: https://www.updates.wtf/prop/458

1 reply

2 recasts

26 reactions

david pfp

You can create another proposal as soon as the previous one finished voting period

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

david pfp

Note that if a fork would happen any time soon, it's important that the 1000 stETH are not still waiting in the queue. Should probably put up a proposal to claim asap @jarmen @bixbite

3 replies

0 recast

9 reactions

david pfp

Can definitely be done. Need to do thoughtful on how to do this so that quorum doesn’t go too low. Maybe the lower end can be a fixed param

0 reply

0 recast

3 reactions

Elad pfp

Important notice for all noun owners and delegates We were recently approached by 0xkasper from @hexens, a white hat security team, who found a new attack vector based on a vulnerability we were aware of in the Nouns token contract. Nouns tech grants pod has initiated a bounty payment of 30K USDC to the team. TLDR * Who’s at risk? Noun owners delegating to EOA accounts (not smart contract accounts). * What’s the damage? Noun NFTs can become non-transferrable with no voting power. * How likely is it to happen? The probability is low if you trust your delegates and their wallet security setup; otherwise please consider changing your delegation immediately. More info in this post: https://mirror.xyz/verbsteam.eth/TP917T6vm6gXuVAxbQ34ZCn7dNiHabu3UW-ninwalVc

5 replies

6 recasts

61 reactions

david pfp

Why do you consider it an attack? Someone can also buy a Noun on the secondary market if they want to vote

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

david pfp

it's different. they can vote. if someone sees a proposal they care about, they can get 1M $nouns, swap it for a Noun and vote with it

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

david pfp

It's equivalent to the depositors not using their nouns to vote. I don't understand what you mean by "having this impact on threshold"

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

david pfp

there have been a lot of discussions about private voting. besides the technical challenges, it seems like Nouns prefer to be public, at least at the time. what do you mean by keeping voting anonymous? no information is shared? no tally, no addresses, no VwR?

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

david pfp

I don't think it makes sense to adjust specifically for the $nouns contract. Whoever deposited there decided not to use their voting power. If we want to lower quorum params we can do that regardless of the $nouns contract.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

david pfp

added an abi file for easier calling of admin functions: https://github.com/nounsDAO/nouns-monorepo/pull/853/files

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

david pfp

Feedback on contract: moving treasury nouns will increase adjustedTotalSupply, which is wrong. Another way to implement this is to keep the nouns in the treasury and give the side contract approval to transfer nouns from the treasury.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

david pfp

I also agree it’s probably more gas efficient to support standing bids

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

david pfp

I think about those as the fee you pay for the service. Your ETH still flows to the treasury. But agree it’s more fun to interact directly with the auction.

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

david pfp

Can you put that bid on a secondary market place? If the auction is lower than your bid, likely someone will scoop it up and sell to you

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

david pfp

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

david pfp

The owner is the base standard bridge. I would assume all bridged tokens on base have these warnings

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

david pfp

What is this screenshot from?

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

david pfp

nounswap (and etherscan donation) are the first to earn client incentives from the auction 👏 https://etherscan.io/tx/0x198662f536403e14c3540e42d0e6b9b44566a47806c72885b1ee53766ff29fff

3 replies

4 recasts

42 reactions