Content
@
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
Zach
@zherring
Wanted to post a follow up! The feedback on Prop 613 from folks on Nouns.camp, specifically from @carlosjmelgar, @gami, @frog, @krel and the /nouncil has been really helpful in scrapping and redrafting something we'd be excited to work on. I wrote this up while the prop was being submitted, and feel like it’s still worth posting for feedback. TLDR Crypto's Wordle moment ***will*** happen in the next 18 months. Shouldn't it happen in the Nouns ecosystem? https://paragraph.xyz/@zherring/nouns-and-moonshots-2 https://warpcast.com/w1nt3r/0x1ae4db61
2 replies
0 recast
8 reactions
mono 🐵 🥌
@0xmonografia
> Nouns should consider funding Builders instead of Projects. i agree with this. the builders determine the success of a project. a few not-a-full-hell-yes props have passed because of the builders. in the end, it's a combination of the two. downside is, unpopular builders won't be able to jump in regarding this, are you suggesting a simple funding paradigm shift? i believe part of this change will come soon, thanks to prop 582 (streaming grants), unless you have something different in mind. anyway, it is worth checking it out and perhaps connecting with @rocketman if you haven't regarding enabling aggressive bids, how would you prevent attracting more arbers when BV is still there? still, i like the mecha pilots concept. imagine putting a game out there where people play on their phones, bidding on the daily noun OE to upgrade their mecha noun—just a thought! nice reading~
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
krel
@krel
yet to digest the entire post but quick note that some of our (arguably) most impactful props are more of a team-basis than project basis: verbs, nounish, camp, rounds, etc all act more as a startup vs a contractor if you were to plot that on a spectrum (now back to reading!)
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions