Imagine a world where voting does not exist. In this world, we would have no need for rules or principles. But in our world, voting is a reality. So we have a simple rule: we only vote against. We use a “Squad Vote” for each proposal. If more people vote against than vote for or abstain, we vote against on-chain. Otherwise, we abstain. This is our rule.

According to the “squad vote” result for proposal 241, which is 33 for, 8 against and 15 abstain, we choose to vote abstain.

The House Of Nouns proposal is one that is difficult to find flaws in.

We have two concerns:

1. NounsDAO has no ownership of the product that the proposal promises. Will the ownership of the product, as promised in the proposal, be allocated to NounsDAO? If there is no correlation, then the funds requested in the proposal are essentially for the team to develop a product that belongs solely to themselves using NounsDAO's funds. This is a proposal that harms Nouns and benefits the team.

2. Complexity of features. The product promises to implement a complete governance lifecycle, including collecting ideas, early-stage discussions, on-chain decisions, etc. This means that the functional requirements are complex, and once the complexity is identified, even the best product manager will find it difficult to handle.

First concern is not an issue with the 242 proposal, but rather with the immaturity of the NounsDAO system itself.

Overall, we like the House Of Nouns product and team for the following reasons:

1. We are frequent users of House Of Nouns. It is simple and has redesigned the user interaction logic to focus on proposals, rather than channels, communities, or governance participants. This is a new type of product, and it has been well received by users (we can attest to that).

2. House Of Nouns is the first governance tool to define a complete governance process, implying a standard for proposal governance. It is beneficial not only for NounsDAO but also for the Nounish and Crypto industry, as it promotes scientific and standardized governance.

3. House Of Nouns has an excellent product team behind it. They understand the Nouns spirit and have developed a new Nouns model product called thatsgnarly.ly. Behind House Of Nouns and ThatsGnarly's products, one can see a professional and continuous product development system, which is invaluable.

House of Nouns is building a great public for the ecosystem, to be used by Nouns and other DAOs down the future. The ask is at a reasonable cost, and I'm confident in their ability to deliver on what they've proposed.

Vote threshold not met, Nouncil votes abstain.

FOR - 27 VOTES

Josep | "Seems to high 5ETH a month per dev, a 3.5ETH a month seems more reasonable"

RobotFishGirl | "Open source and a WAY reduced ask for one of my most used tools. Wish the media budget was still there, but still an easy yes. Hope the podcast/youtube videos can be funded through another avenue if this gets passed."

Benbodhi | "Open Source ⌐◨-◨ This heavily revised prop is of value to the whole ecosystem."

Sasquatch | "this prop has been neutered enough. clearly the team wants to make this happen!"

NO - 20 VOTES ABSTAIN - 3 VOTES

We are voting YES on this because House of Nouns has been a consistently great Nouns contributor, is building much-needed tools, and has taken the community's feedback to adjust their prop's ask. It would be great to see HoN collaborate with Prop Lot as well.

Make it great and work with Prop Lots so you're not reinventing wheels!

Voted yes on prop 223 and am very glad the team came back with a revised version. I love using House of Nouns and hope we can figure out a good way to continue to support this team and teams like them! I see governance tools as a core funding area of Nouns.

Governance infrastructure is a high order public good for onchain societies. We need multiple options to compete on ideas and fit different Governors patterns and workflow. This team's dedication to Noun'ish societies is on full display including BuilderDAOs and Gnars.

• the community is using its tooling
• team has hacked on PoC's without asking for funding which is very Nounish
• having a third unified client outside of nouns.wtf and nounsagora is +EV

thanks for coming back a third time. Let's put this team back to work

the house of nouns team is a very nounish squad imo.

not only have they continued to iterate on the HoN v1 product (after winning the governance mandated prop house round) into something that many voters use as their default voting client including myself, but they've also continued to hack on other ideas in the nouniverse without comp for the fun of it (e.g. https://thatsgnar.ly/ is their work).

very supportive of the HoN product to continue to be iterated on and very supportive of this team.

Props to HON team for coming back a third time. While l do look forward to the proposed deliverables, I mostly want HON to continue to improve its core UX. Either way, thanks for the persistence and best of luck!

We want to build for Nouns, and this pricing should hopefully make it work.

Elite frontends + unified backends FTW!

Full reasoning on my newsletter: https://cbites.substack.com/p/active-governance-noun-582-3