wylin💎↑ on Warpcast

Content pfp

0 reply

1 recast

1 reaction

Spencer Perkins pfp

Spencer Perkins

@spencerperkins.eth

Path to making $nouns useful and scalable: 1. Get it audited 2. Exclude $nouns’ Noun balance from totalAdjustedSupply (NounsDAOFork lib upgrade + NounsDAOLogicV4 upgrade to consume new lib) 3. Deposit some treasury Nouns (top N ID’s) 4. LP some of the $nouns, and distribute others as builder rewards Benefits: * $nouns won’t break governance quorum * More LP means less slippage, making it more feasible to use $nouns as a medium of exchange within the Noun ecosystem * Fractional treasury Noun distribution for builders rather then giving full Noun’s, which are mostly not being used (and themselves, hurting quorum) Prop 536 failed largely due to regulatory uncertainty and liability, but DUNA might solve this? Thoughts? cc @noun40 @el4d @davidbr

5 replies

4 recasts

27 reactions

Michael Gingras (lilfrog) pfp

Michael Gingras (lilfrog)

What ever happened to the ascii nouns prop? Also supportive of the above but worried about fracture from a new token And the proportional voting power of ascii nouns is attractive, feels like a better coin overall Just not sure what the deal is, haven’t heard anything in a minute cc @wylin

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

wylin💎↑ pfp

the audit didn’t pass when we put it up; can resend the audit prop at anytime, code’s ready to go the governance process is important, kind of the fundamental thing that Nouns is, so no desire to leverage DAO-wide resources for a personal project or just send it anyways when the proposal doesn’t pass i get the space is permissionless but sometimes it’s important to show restraint. the core thesis of Nouns is bootstrapping governance & identity onchain; putting the token out after the prop not passing totally flies in the face of that and would be a bad look. imo the design of $nouns is fundamentally broken and blacklisting the Nouns in its contract doesn’t solve that i understand the sunk costs for a site like NounSwap but all it does is make people bag holders

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Spencer Perkins pfp

Spencer Perkins

@spencerperkins.eth

To be clear, NounSwap was not involved in building $nouns. We choose to build on top of it because it enables permissionless swapping. If $ascii gets deployed and has liquidity, we will likely build permissionless swapping on top of that too. Would be cool to see a fragmented Nouns ERC-20 become a medium of exchange in the Nouns ecosystem for example for things like merch, ticket, other projects NFT’s, etc. But, it’s a bit of a chicken and egg problem, need liquidity in order for this to occur otherwise there is huge slippage (like $nouns), meaning folks are less willing to accept the ERC-20 as they might need to cover their costs in fiat (for IRL businesses at least). Any ERC-20 needs to solve this liquidity issue, and probably the best way is to do this is bootstrapping from the Nouns treasury. I personally think $nouns is a better design than $ascii due to the name, simplicity, and ease of education/understanding (KISS). But, would be cool to see both of them in existence.

1 reply

0 recast

3 reactions

wylin💎↑ pfp

personally wouldn’t be against a name change. i had minimal involvement with $ascii, knew a prop was coming a provided a bit of feedback but no real involvement. picked up the mantle after learning the code had been finished for weeks but the audit was stalled because $nouns was released imo the wrapping into NFTs and ability to meaningfully participate in governance, as opposed to zero voting, gets to the crux of solving the liquidity issue by giving people a real reason to care and actually buy more, at which point medium of exchange use cases can begin to flourish, plus it is significantly more aligned with the core thesis of Nouns as an experiment in bootstrapping onchain governance & identity

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

Spencer Perkins pfp

Spencer Perkins

@spencerperkins.eth

Without a name change it would be difficult find $ascii, which will make it hard to LP, and even harder to buy. I'm not convinced $ascii will generate deep liquidity without a bootstrap as you say. There are already ways for people without a Noun to vote (Nouncil, zero weight), and ways to use alt Nouns as your identity (fomo, lil Nouns, builder DAOs, ...). I get your perspective, but governance and identity associated with $ascii make it more complicated to understand and use, which I think will be a potential roadblock especially for new folks. Happy to be proven wrong tho.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

wylin💎↑ pfp

not saying no bootstrapping is required, just think the longer term issue of liquidity is better with better incentives around the token. $nouns WAS bootstrapped then promptly arbed, that chart is ugly would pushback on comparing Nouncil and zero votes to $ascii voting and the identity via other Nounish projects points Nouncil is a permissioned body; it’s not intended to be broadly inclusive and not everyone will be able to vote through it Zeroweight has been sunset. people can vote without a Noun but unless you’re deep into this thing, most people find it fairly useless. there’s real incentive giving people actual skin in the game of Nouns through fractional voting that just doesn’t exist now re: identity; Nouns has an allure that these projects simply don’t. being associated with Nouns is not the same as being associated with Lils, etc. $ascii can have a crystal ball so people can choose their fractional Noun when they wrap it it adds complexity but gives membership & identity incentives

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction