Content
@
https://opensea.io/collection/nouns
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
krel
@krel
Its possible we should reframe The Burn as The Great Public Goods Distribution — the mechanics are the same, but gut reaction from onlookers probably isnt
10 replies
0 recast
5 reactions
seneca
@seneca
agree w a few others here that we shouldn’t brand it as ‘obviously good’ as we are disincentivize it. that said, something that balances optics and incentives is worth exploring. eg “public good of last resort” is great but not catchy
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Gabriel Ayuso
@gabrielayuso.eth
I'd frame it as fund delegation. If we don't use the funds effectively we delegate it to public good funds to use them for us.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
jihad ↑
@jihad
While I’m not necessarily married to the current name, I think The Burn implies a serious tone and feels like something we’d want to avoid. That’s a a good thing.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Toady Hawk
@toadyhawk.eth
I’m not sure. I think the power of the meme comes from its framing as a drastic measure. Every concession to make it more palatable to onlookers will make it less powerful as a forcing function imo. A difficult problem.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Joshua Fisher ⌐◨-◨
@joshuafisher.eth
Dr. Weirdnoun or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Burn
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
martin ↑
@martin
i think the weird part is that the Burn in the context of Ethereum was good and a key mechanism, whereas here we are actually trying to _avoid_ the Burn by spending. So it's strange to celebrate the Burn. Almost like if incentives to doing your job were called "The Firing" lol
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Noun 40
@noun40
The Great Public Goods Burn? burning itself is a public good to all eth holders but we also expect if we really haven’t reached consensus by the burn date that a lot of public goods donation props will be pouring in. doesn’t seem like too much of a stretch?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Goldy ⌐◨-◨
@goldy
Spend o clock
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
