Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Zero Weight
@zeroweight
Nouns Proposal 546: Fund Retroactive Rounds via Rounds.wtf Reply with +for, +against, or +abstain and a reason to control 3 /nouns votes. Read prop → https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/546
7 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Zero Weight
@zeroweight
FOR! Vote has been cast. Thanks for weighing in.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bixbite 👽
@bixbite
+against - currently with the way the algo is set up the same people with large audiences are the ones that receive the majority of the funding, I also think the funding that was set aside for Prop House should be used towards Rounds as the infra of Rounds is not as extensive as Prop House.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
mono
@0xmonografia
+for solid progress. let's keep funding builders through Rounds
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
wylin💎↑
@wylin
+against beyond my belief that Nouns has not gotten a good price to value ratio on Prop House and Rounds, the mechanism as is mostly serves to reward people who are already being rewarded. imo crypto is about new incentive structures to reward the many not recreating old ones that reward the few
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Fibo
@cryptonacci
+for rounds has been the best mechanism to date for onboarding nounish contributors. Double-down on what works.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Fattybuthappy.eth
@fattybuthappy
+for since it is a fertile land for ⌐◨-◨ builders to get funding and feedback in real time of ideas💡
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Michael Gingras (lilfrog)
@frog
+for necessary to help evaluate impact of rounds
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
