w-g pfp

w-g

@w-g

19 Following
264 Followers
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Deepish cut but need more such props!
5 replies
0 recast
28 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Cross-posting my 2c here; would love if we had a data-rich secondary marketplace (several?) for NOUN. Conviction growing around this point: there will increasing dimensionality to token non-fungibility that will not be easily seen on existing exchanges. This dimensionality is the competitive advantage of NFT-based governance and should be nurtured, but market transparency is crucial. Quit value under % exit, trait statistics/trivia/ deep cuts, gov record, fractionalization state (after $⌐◨-◨ deploy), $nogs rewards, and so on. How can the protocol incentivize these marketplaces to exist?
1 reply
0 recast
8 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
would be great to have an inline way to delegate rounds-eligible post rewards to another user, or, ideally, something like: -if post has replies, rewards flow to most-liked replies (other than self) -otherwise distributed to remaining participants in round may be in a unique situation but: for me the priority is motivating engagement around difficult topics and would like the economics of rounds to better align with that goal.
4 replies
0 recast
6 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Slashing mechanism for Nouns: - deposit-to-propose (proportional to CI or size of ask, whichever larger) - proposal succeeds: deposit is reclaimed on queue - proposal fails: deposit enters a queue phase where anyone can vote to withhold. This vote is imo best if weighted by noun age (decentralized judiciary) and carries its own dynamic quorum curve (ie consensus required to slash can be as stringent as desired) motivation: -the carrot of pushing a malicious high cost prop is an ongoing existential risk to Nouns -proposal spam can quickly become a concern as supply expands, permissionless swapping grows in adoption, etc. -The current lever of increasing proposal threshold is undesirable since it generically slows gov speed at the expense of more centralization. It’s also useless in discouraging coordinated attacks -More good faith props from more unique voices is good! -low cost props are generally low risk (Likely protocol-change props require their own treatment)
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
this am reflecting on a pivot to Dutch auction which imo has good durability properties and apparently may even improve revenue prospects; https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022053122001351 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022053120300685
2 replies
0 recast
6 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
why are every one of your pfps iconic?
2 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
ty mamas https://youtu.be/_PrRiG_ybVU?si=qjr_fORY7JeIeqIr 🧼 🙂🤲
0 reply
1 recast
2 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
synchronicities are a little spooky on this one 😳 bidding for a loved one today ♥️ https://nouns.wtf/noun/1111
2 replies
0 recast
6 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
the artist
2 replies
0 recast
7 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
@krel any specific pointers on what makes prop feel drafty? Guess needs a 5th rewrite lol or if others are confused about anything? (might be first case of a third party attempting to fund another team w/o coordination ?) https://www.nouns.camp/candidates/stake-1k-in-rounds-32d1a53f6709a03f4b6cf4cb0501204ba188d4f5
2 replies
1 recast
1 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
@zeroweight !sponsor stake 1k in rounds
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
if interested in giga-funding rounds &/or improving odds of a liquid $nouns token launch, consider reading this candidate ty https://www.nouns.camp/candidates/stake-1k-in-rounds-32d1a53f6709a03f4b6cf4cb0501204ba188d4f5
2 replies
0 recast
9 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
DISTRIBUTE THE VETO ¯■¯◨ cred: @coralorca
1 reply
0 recast
6 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
1/2 there’s a pure economics argument for delaying $nouns to eoy. The dominant perspective in the market is that we are in for a sleepy summer wrt inflows, and that a second wave of Bitcoin buying & possible eth etf approval a few months down the road may align to drive better engagement with new products:
1 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
all the saltiness around prop 531 reminds me of prop 15- the proposal I’m most proud of since it reminds me of an idealistic time where I believed the merits (or lack) of the transactions might speak for themselves. Now I campaign all the time but miss the person that wrote this https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/15
2 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Nouniverse poll: Are you planning on LPing $nouns? At what starting price? Don’t all raise your hand at once. if a fork 3 occurs I am afaict the only possible meaningful seed liquidity for this thing continue to scratch my head over why my perspective on how to do it properly is not being more actively sought
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Electric
0 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Helpful framing. 100eth says this is wrong, and that it won’t be close. Also throwing in that bids will be more liquid on nft mkt vs LP for free. If we have a bet I may even vote FOR 🫠
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
3 concerns the ‘fungibilization’ of treasury nouns (the swap/auction proposal is far less bad in this dimension and that had strong opposition) as a vehicle for speculation is non-accretive (solvable by allowing only dao to mint & issue as rewards) w/o governance rights or POW to own, how is this not a security?
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/528 Gm A question to consider over ☕️ what protection would you prefer if bringing all you are custodian/guardian/shepherd of into Nouns? which would you extend to friends/guests in your home?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction