Toady Hawk 🟡🎩 ᖽ on Warpcast

Content pfp

0 reply

1 recast

1 reaction

Toady Hawk 🟡🎩 ᖽ pfp

Toady Hawk 🟡🎩 ᖽ

There was some discussion and criticism of the /nouns-retro rounds earlier today by my friend @peterpandam and others, with the main allegation being that the rounds have been full of builders simply executing their proposals and thus "double-dipping." Setting aside the fact that there are currently no active propdate rounds and there was no rule against active builders posting updates there, I just really didn't think that was a fair portrayal of how the rounds have been going (at least since I volunteered to help @seneca moderate them a couple months ago and have therefore been paying closer attention.) For my own sanity, I quickly went through the top 15 paid casts from each of the previous 2 rounds and did a little Saturday night spreadsheet warrior-ing to find that of these 30 retro rewards... (results in next cast)

6 replies

2 recasts

24 reactions

Toady Hawk 🟡🎩 ᖽ pfp

Toady Hawk 🟡🎩 ᖽ

Of these top 30: -21 of them are not currently funded at all, to the best of my knowledge - 5 of them are or have been funded, but the post was unrelated or out of the scope of their proposal - Only 4 of them are currently funded and posted proposal updates This is a far cry from the rounds being "full of double-dippers." I personally think these retro rounds are a really impactful way to drive nounish building, accountability and creativity, especially in the longtime absence of anything resembling a small grants council within Nouns. I'm all for criticism, and especially that of the constructive variety, but we should also be careful not to jump to conclusions and mischaracterize initiatives that are actually doing a pretty good job of semi-permissionless capital allocation. (Special thanks to @dwr.eth for long casts.) ⌐◨-◨

8 replies

0 recast

15 reactions

Ben pfp

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

Spencer Perkins pfp

Spencer Perkins

@spencerperkins.eth

Appreciate the depth. Lately, I've noticed a troubling trend in the DAO — many are making bold claims without any supporting data. It's a lot of noise with very little signal.

1 reply

1 recast

9 reactions

Nounish Prof ⌐◧-◧🎩 pfp

Nounish Prof ⌐◧-◧🎩

Thanks for this. Data is always helpful. Glad to see the variety of recipients too!

0 reply

0 recast

5 reactions

87Bones pfp

Nice spread @toadyhawk.eth! I still stand by the notion, retro kept for unfunded proposal related submissions. But you da boss🫡 ⌐◨-◨

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

the park pfp

Thank you for the data check. TBH First thought was, who makes these rules and where are they written? So much nuance, here for the fun

1 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

Joshua Fisher ⌐◨-◨ テ🎩 pfp

Joshua Fisher ⌐◨-◨ テ🎩

@joshuafisher.eth

Thanks for bringing this up @peterpandam and thanks digging this up Toady. This is a great example of something that is unclear to many in the DAO and would be easy to accept a narrative that is presented on either side but this was a helpful to see. Thanks for the healthy discussion.

0 reply

0 recast

4 reactions

peĽ🎭🎩🍖 pfp

peĽ🎭🎩🍖

my english is not good, i will try to translate and understand it

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Dara Khan pfp

@spookyaction-btc

From Map the Nounsverse and the data we pulled for rounds to-date: "80 Rounds.wtf communities with over 115 ETH and 1M $DEGEN distributed to-date across over 4,200+ contributors, 16.5K submissions, and 120 rounds" As Yo Gotti once said: men lie, women lie, numbers don't 😛 didnt calculate total $NOUNS distributed but guessing it's a chonk. https://mirror.xyz/decentdao.eth/8IQ_hbitGd-U_8Gif0VA0fJtp0IqDPGBJWUeUyAh3HA?ref=bankless.ghost.io

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions