w-g pfp

w-g

@w-g

15 Following
172 Followers
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
maybe they need a client id 🤔
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
etherscan hummin’
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
post-⌐◨-◨
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
ty mamas https://youtu.be/_PrRiG_ybVU?si=qjr_fORY7JeIeqIr 🧼 🙂🤲
0 reply
1 recast
5 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
maybe we could split it into 1 or or more fractionals if $⌐◨-◨ passes. Everyone gets a slice! 1111 feels like a great one to be shared by a lot of people.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
! Omg 🪐
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
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
you got noun-pilled after nounpunks ? 🤯
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Perfect channel name/ also like experimenting with allowing main-channel posts to include ⌐◨-◨ to opt in
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
💯
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Haha Godspeed! A journey I know all too well
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
gentlenouns keep m(o)um
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
I gave very little thought to spending >200 eth on 68 even though my entire ether position at the time was I think <400. Not sure I’m really noun-pilled in the canonic sense but nouns definitely ether-pilled me.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
the artist
2 replies
0 recast
11 reactions
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
can ofc continue to rally the cultural layer (grateful for these efforts) but implementing centralizing incentives that deepen bias in favor of the economic majority and burden us w high-toxicity rent-seekers makes this programmatically unlikely to happen. V3, protocol incentives, $nouns, all hostile to the vision .
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
thouns
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
we can work on improving engagement but @pip / @wylin are obviously right that if not here the votes are even more concentrated. all good if not enjoying the experiment tho maybe we could experiment w incorporating w rounds / rwds for most-liked vwrs?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Y, I noticed that too haha. guess I figure(d) rounds value prop speaks for itself, or there’s more base competency in the group about it than the liquidity issue..which I’m increasingly seeing as more hopeless by the day.. think we need 1-2x more on top of this but is a start
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
Was the explanation of the problem w $nouns liquidity clear? Prop is really integrating both and trying to be transparent about the value of a poison pill and why rounds is best candidate to custody . Maybe will add that by giving to rounds it means funds will ultimately accessible by all builders
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
w-g pfp
w-g
@w-g
True! I guess if the parameters arent intuitive maybe would just be a case to vote no. The fork issue & closing the liquidity gap is I guess the primary thesis around the urgency, with rounds being I guess on my view the optimal beneficiary. Unsure how to make it clearer..
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction