Content
@
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
I wanted to write a bit about prop 604, my involvement in the wave protocol, and why I think it's a good prop for us to support. Long thread below:
1 reply
3 recasts
10 reactions
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
The wave protocol was born out of prop 244 -- prop lot. The intention behind prop lot was to provide nouns with a single source of truth for ideas to live before they became proposals. It's important to understand that at the time, nouns did not have candidate proposals, and so ideas were fragmented between discord, discourse, and twitter. We spent a few months building prop lot, but unfortunately (fortunately?) candidate proposals launched at the same time and essentially made prop lot irrelevant. We launched a POC of prop lot for nouns and got 0 users. A tough pill to swallow. The code lives on... https://github.com/prop-lot/v2
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
We faced a tough decision. Candidates seemed like they were going to be the new meta for aggregating ideas before they became proposals, so it didn't feel right to keep investing time into a product like prop lot that wouldn't be used. So we decided to do what a regular tech startup would do, and pivoted away from our original idea and to something new. That new thing is the wave protocol. https://www.waveprotocol.wtf/
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
The wave protocol attempts to introduce something totally new to the governance space and is a protocol that can permissionlessly run with or without nouns support. It aims to solve three problems for three different groups: proposers, delegates, and supporters.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
