Content
@
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
Spencer Perkins
@spencerperkins.eth
If the DAO didn't want "Escrowed Streaming", why was it voted through as part of DUNA? Seems like just threw away $82k + months of Verbs time spent on this?
5 replies
6 recasts
20 reactions
mike good ⌐◨-◨
@mikegood
Can vote to support something but disagree with the design, or nah?
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Spencer Perkins
@spencerperkins.eth
IMO doesn't make sense for the audit, which was for the implementation of the specified design. If you disagree with the design enough to not want it deployed, why pay to get it built and audited?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
mike good ⌐◨-◨
@mikegood
I think people were caught up with the formation of a duna vs dao and not thinking about looking back at prop 653 where verbs decided the best route for the dao themselves, instead of putting the exit/stream mechanics to a vote. Actually says there they'd "...repropose if the DUNA proposal passes." not couple it in. Also, there was 2x the voter turnout for DUNA compared to this... Where are those voters? https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/708?vote-overview=708 dao changes block by block, eh? 🤷♂️ maybe better to propose after the new year when those blocks have time to govern.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Spencer Perkins
@spencerperkins.eth
Yea, unfortunate they were bundled together. But, this isn't Verbs fault... as part of the DUNA prop, the DAO voted to pay for the audit, which essentially means voted FOR this mechanism (otherwise, why audit it). Re 2x voter turnout: note that over half of these are Nounder controlled Nouns. Re re-proposing: Maybe, but this was a pretty strong outcome, and Verbs extension ends in Jan:
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction