public domain art that is a reasonable ask (art that gives up IP makes sense to cost more than that which doesn't imo) and with potential for compounding upside. love the effort put in so far, and the chapters written. hope to see this pass

the noggles, they do nothing

Voting against let me ragequit.

On behalf of UglyDAO

Alana here, from Variant. We’ve decided to vote against Prop 271.

Our rationale stems from a mix of concerns regarding alignment with the broader goal of NounsDAO, the effectiveness of propagating the Nouns meme, and the justification of the cost of the proposal.

One of the things that excited us most about joining NounsDAO was its mission of funding public goods and the self-sustaining mechanism it invented to continue to do so. A middle-grade novel strikes us as distinct from more powerful public goods initiatives we’ve seen, like cleaning up trash in Africa or funding the planting of trees. We’d love to see Nouns devoting funding toward bigger, more ambitious projects.

Second, the proposal contains no plans for distribution of the novel. Key to Nouns’ mission is propagating the meme. Creation of content is important, but the true execution is in distribution. Even if we imagine that the novel achieves moderate success, the distribution will be most potent among children (likely 7-10 year-olds, i.e. the ones who read the novel). In our view, that’s not the target audience for Nouns; the funding mechanism only works if people feel compelled to buy into the community, and creating emotional ties with children may struggle to fulfill the Nouns flywheel (auction funds Treasury → Treasury funds projects → projects increase demand for the auction → and so on) in the short-medium term.

Third, 25 ETH for this proposal feels expensive, at least with the justification for funds given in the prop. To date, we have tried to avoid debates on the cost of funding associated with proposals, given a key component of Nouns is the ability to easily unlock funding for unique and attention-grabbing experiments. 25 ETH without any plans for exogenous distribution – and simply a plan to release a timed open edition (where demand for the mint will likely be endogenous from the Nouns community) – seems a potentially ineffective use of funds. That’s not to say there may not be a strong justification for 25 ETH without a go-to-market plan; rather, we simply did not see one in the proposal. A more effective request, for instance, would have included detail about market comps for the cost of publication to better benchmark a reasonable expected cost.

The reason we feel compelled to mention funding here is because we want to prevent the setting of a precedent in which the Nouns Treasury is seen as a free money machine. Funding should be easily accessible, but should match the boldness or proliferation expected with each proposal.

One thing of note is that the creator feels part of the 25 ETH is necessary to compensate them for forgoing future revenue streams; in other words, the upfront payment covers for the lack of a longer-term stake in the success of the novel. To us, this suggests there may be a better way than pure ETH grants to reward creators for contributing to the community: find a way to give them a stake in the success of Nouns. We’ve been exploring ideas related to this challenge in incentive alignment, and hope to have additional ideas to share with the community soon.

And finally, we’re still excited by this proposal and appreciate the author’s hard work. We encourage the author to resubmit a proposal, with a revised plan for funding and/or more detail on distribution for the project.

I like the idea of nouns in books. I read to my kids every single day and not a day goes by that I haven't wished they were nounish books. I sometimes change words to make them nounish lol. This kind of thing make sense to me.

My thesis as a delegate is: “Nouns has a unique role in the ecosystem as a gathering place around public goods.”

I’ve gone back and forth on this proposal quite a bit. My analysis of funding requests is:

1. Is this a public good?
2. Is this public good something that other organizations won’t fund, or that Nouns is uniquely best to fund?

Writing about the Nouniverse is not necessarily a public good, but public domain writing about Nouns is. Public domain writing, just like CC0 art or freely licensed code, is composable. While the ways it could be remixed may be less obvious, it's equally important as other forms of composable creative work.

My other lens is whether this is something that other organizations won't fund. There are many established pathways to funding books, even if they are admittedly hard to access. Nouns is also not uniquely suited to funding novels. But at the same time, these established pathways are less accessible for public domain works, which the proposal points out forgoes revenue opportunities. (That is why many books choose CC BY-NC-SA as their license, to ensure that the work is able to be shared freely by readers but not used commercially).

The concerns that other voters brought up around the size of the ask and the fact that there are other established pathways for funding books are valid. At the same time, public domain composability for books is an important experiment. While I don't yet know what composability will result from this book, I believe that it's a good experiment for Nouns. I am in support of this proposal, but would be more hesitant to vote for similar proposals until we see how the benefits of public domain composability play out for Nouns-related books.

(I would also note that I did read both chapters in full prior to making a decision, and I quite liked them. Though their quality is necessary but not sufficient for my support.)

nom nom the nominal hero!

Embracing top tier creative talent ftw!

Poll failed to meet vote threshold.

FOR - 22 VOTES

fiveoceans_dev | "All novels, books, journals would last centuries which makes them good proliferation mediums"

byhardy | "Nounish storytellers = v good"

.Wide Eye ⌐◨-◨ | "We need more storytelling content (vid, book etc) to showcase what Nouns is about."

CHEFFO ⌐◧-◧ | "primary layers ⌐◨-◨"

AGAINST - 13 VOTES

EltonPenguin | "The author is asking for waaaaay too much. A typical first-time author gets a $7,500 advance and 10% of royalties. These types of novels sell for around $10, which means he'd have to sell over 40,000 copies to make 25 ETH. John Grisham's most recent book sold 500,000 copies. Hard pass."

I love the idea of Nouns creative presence expanding into literature and novels. The closest thing we've done to this is a comic book, but I think there's a lot to explore with purely written literature.

It's a great way to energize young folks about Nouns, and as a previously published author I have confidence in Tasha's ability to execute on an idea like this over the long term.

Though I would love to vote in favor of this proposal, I can't help but feel that the amount of ETH requested doesn't make sense for a project of this size, especially with no go-to-market plan.

To be clear: Creating a CC0 book rules. Paying an author upfront to work on the project rules. Bringing Nouns to middle schoolers rules. But as a delegate, I feel the need to note that one of the main issues I see across a variety of proposals centers on a lack of clarity regarding what some perceive as outsized spend. Perhaps if this proposal had been developed in collaboration with the community, incorporating feedback on what feels like a reasonable budget may have resulted in less opposition.

Though I'm voting against, I hope that the author will consider submitting a revised proposal if this one does not pass.

Excited to fund more creative work, especially when it's being released directly into the public domain.

Taken from my newsletter Active Governance: https://paragraph.xyz/@thebower/UF6pmJQChyRthUTsBfq7

I caught myself thinking that maybe I should just say "f*ck it" and vote yes to this prop. But after pausing for a moment I realized that's not how it should be. Governing the DAO on a "let's hope for the best" kind of mindset is not feasible.

Sure, I could ignore my concerns with this proposal. Like it not having any distribution plans or the unexplained cost or even the fact that an open mint is just selling it to ourselves... But is that what Nouns are about? Trusting that something is nounish enough and hoping it works out? I don't believe so.

I have nothing against the idea of a Nounish children's book per se. As a matter of fact I think it's a great idea. One of my core beliefs as a Nouner is that we should heavily fund creative people and initiatives. What I am against though, is not having a plan. We have to change the mindset that being nounish = throwing caution to the wind and fund anything. Not having something amazing to support is not an excuse to fund anything.

Recent Props like 256(Triple backflip in a Wheelchair) or 263(Nouns Esports) are perfect examples of what we should be funding. They are creative ideas by people that can deliver and have a plan. That's nounish, nounish af.

To Tasha, I would encourage you to bring back a revised version of this prop with more details. Explaining why the cost makes sense for this project, compare it to other known authors and market rates for this kind of work. Most importantly though, I would like to see more on distribution ideas. If we are making this awesome book let's make sure we can actually get it in the hands of readers!

wealthy people asking the slush fund, I mean DAO, for money for passion projects is cool but caring about book value is bad. makes sense. to hell with those pesky defi bros and the fiscal conservatives!

This sounds exciting! Hope there's a juicy nounish mystery at the heart of the story... maybe something about copyleft?

I was afraid to cast this vote. I was thinking to myself, “TM0B1L, you’re new to Nouns the last thing you want to do is publicly vote against 4156 and the Nounders.” That being said, I would not be true to myself if I did not vote against this prop. I’m surprised that so many people who voted FOR consider $50k to be a good value and/or will yield the kind of attention we need on Nouns DAO.

In short, I question the (1) value and (2) effective proliferation that will be yielded by this work.

(1) I don’t think a book like this should cost ~$50k. Perhaps I’m missing something but if distribution was part of this $50k ask then I think it would make more sense. Once we pay and eventually the book is released, what is the plan to get it out there (e.g., schools, book stores, social media, etc.)?

(2) I question how far the reach of this book will be and I expect the primary consumers of it are already in Nouns. For example, Wilson mentioned reading this to his kid — that’s cute and you should, Wilson! <3

Nouns is still somewhat of a secret cult, even mainstream ETH heads don’t really know what Nouns is or what we’re doing. The kind of proliferation we need for Nouns is to break into the larger attention market, not have a few people read a digital children’s book.

I cannot support this prop in good faith without applying the same amount of rigor that all others are subject to. I could be convinced to vote for this effort if a solid distribution plan was put in place (something that is expected of all products incubated by the community). Don’t let my opinion, or the opinion of others, serve as a reason for not participating in the future. Putting your work on display - for all to judge - requires a lot more vulnerability than most are willing to admit. Sometimes a little bit of tweaking can lead to an outcome that all parties can get behind and maybe that is what's required here. Looking forward to reading more of your work and seeing the rest of the scribbles in your economist notebook come to life

Very Nounish:

• Do good with no expectations of return.
• Teach people about web3 and spread cypto values.
• Spread the Nouns "meme" ⌐◨-◨
• Create and proliferate CC- content and open source infrastructure. -Create positive externalities, embrace absurdity & different and have fun.

and I like to know what happens to Caden and his siblings. ⌐◨-◨

Nice example of Nouns as an "ingredient brand." Streamed payment de-risks the ask significantly. I'd love to see this written using one of those platforms (can't remember names) where you effectively peer over the author's shoulder. Would be a fun learning experience for us and would keep the author accountable. Which seems relevant here since this pen name is new and previously published works were not disclosed.

This is a nearly $50,000 ask...

In their words: "is partly to compensate for the lack of those future revenue streams"

We are paying them $50,000 to make up for the money they can't make?

Did all these for voters actually read the first two chapters?

My first thought when reading this prop was "what if the book isn't good?"

Then I read the sample chapters and said, "okay, this is pretty good so far!"

Still, I was skeptical. Why this story? Why this author?

After sitting with it for a bit, I realized none of those questions mattered. We are funding a complete book, in the public domain, telling a Nounish story, for children who might (big might) now grow up loving Nouns. That's Nounish af.

Plus, the ask is reasonable, and I appreciate the work already put into making this project great.

Excited to mint this!

Also a +1 on wilson's vote reasons. Excited for more nouns stories!

+1 on wilson’s unique unlock. v nounish prop, easy FOR

Light hearted Nounish novels for middle schoolers is an excellent idea, and the first two chapters were fun. I would read more.

For pitching purposes I wish the plot was explained in more detail. What I read was fun exposition, but I'm uncertain about the heart of the novel's conflict. You mention "a few careless words summon a threat to the Nouniverse" - elaborating on that and getting us hooked on the grand adventure would go a long way.

I appreciate how the Nouns are presented and look forward to seeing all of the different personalities and the situations they cause.

The compensation is generous, but given that you've committed to releasing this into the public domain and forgoing all traditional royalties, I think its fair.

The key details of the Open Edition mint should have been included here, including revenue split. Have you considered minting each chapter? Ideally you build up an audience as you go.

Once complete, what are the plans for publishing this and getting it out into the world? How are we going to get people to read this? I would love to see publishers that work with traditional public domain material printing and selling this at their own expense. If this is not the case, possibly use funds from the OE mint to fund a vanity publisher.

On the whole - excited to see this happen, excited to read the novel.

“Hide!” Ruth whispered.

“What?” the hairspray creature said indignantly. “I will not! I am an artist! I stand by my work!”

excited to see new artists bringing their talents (and new mediums) into the ecosystem

Easy yes so gonna QA nounsvote.wtf --

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1IbRujko-A&ab_channel=10Hours

⌐◨-◨

原作をかなり自由に脚色し、背景にはスタッフがロケハンしたスウェーデンのストックホルム及びゴットランド島のヴィスビュー、宮崎自身が1988年（昭和63年）5月に個人的に旅行したアイルランド、その他サンフランシスコ、リスボン、パリ、ナポリなどの風景を織り交ぜて使っている[17]。街の名前は、劇場公開時のパンフレットによれば原作のまま「コリコ」の街とされている。この街では白黒テレビが普及している一方でボンネットバスや大きな飛行船が使われているなど、現代ではなく過去の時代を舞台にしているものとみられる（宮崎によれば「二度の大戦を経験しなかったヨーロッパ」という設定）。ストックホルムとヴィスビューは宮崎がAプロダクション（シンエイ動画）時代の1971年（昭和46年）に幻の映画企画『長くつ下のピッピ』のロケハンで訪れた場所でもある。

fun, unique, nounish. excited to see the results.

Stories through a Noggles lens, yes!

Super excited about this prop!

• Nounish: Funding artists and putting work in the public domain.
• Unique unlock: there's probably not another organization that would fund this in this way. Nouns provides unique value here.
• One and done: no ongoing costs, the project is delivered and we all benefit from it forever!
• Reasonable scope: The project has a clear plan, with a good chunk of work already done. The funding amount is fairly modest, relatively, and will be streamed. Author has past successful work.

Excited to pilot how Nouns can work with book authors, and I can't wait to read with my 7yo! Good luck!