ProposalsProposal 515
Refill voteRefund balance
Executed
For
111
Against
1
Abstain
0
Quorum: 48
Proposed by
0xA868...9E63
ProposalsProposal 515
Easy yes to continuing to reimburse gas fees.
Re moving to an L2 (or L3), there are two realistic approaches in my mind that Nouns can take:
Move auctions + governance to an L2 (or L3). This would be a top-down approach where Nouns picks a lower-fee chain to move to and everyone else follows.
Don't move auctions + governance to an L2 (or L3), but begin to move other Nounish experiments there. We already see this with The Yellow Collective on Base, Nounish drops on Zora network, public goods mints on Optimism, etc. Over time, a locus of energy will eventually emerge, and then Nouns could go all-in on it.
I'm strongly in support of moving experiments to lower fee chains and seeing which direction it shakes out. I'm opposed to Nouns trying to pick a specific chain top-down, given the greater liquidity available on L1, the greater security on L1, and the current fragmentation of the L2 ecosystem.
Note that there is a third option, which is splitting auctions and governance (keeping auctions on L1 for greater liquidity, moving governance to an L2 for cheaper fees). Cross-chain attempts like these are right now both quite messy and much less secure in practice than going all in on either an L1 or an L2. It sounds nice in theory, but would be extremely difficult to execute in practice with the current tools available.
For: 3 | Against: 0 | Abstain: 0
+for refunding votes is better than moving Nouns govn to an L2 for the foreseeable future — @krel.eth
+for refunds until another solution becomes reasonable/apparent. — @indexcard.eth
+for — @pip
via @zeroweight
Necessary for active governance. Lots of delegates (and maybe nouners?) couldn't afford or at least wouldn't bother to vote consistently if it wasn't for vote refunds. Big yes.
Long-term a less gas-intensive voting mechanism would be great to see, but continuing to subsidize voting doesn't mean not looking for better ways to vote.
It shouldn’t cost $20 to vote.
Especially with the fee being refunded, the amount may seem innocuous at first glance — but I believe it’s a barrier to entry, especially when considering zero weight voters who are not compensated for putting their opinion onchain.
Mechanisms like voting should be moved to an L2. I appreciate Noun40’s nuanced reasoning as to why moving to an L2 is more complex than we may think, but I think he’s ALSO right that Nouns should be leading. Complexity should never be an excuse for inaction, and Nouns has the opportunity to lead the charge in making onchain governance more accessible for all.
That being said, the DAO should fund this prop, because participation should be prioritized above all else.
Small impact for the treasury, huge impact for the community and its governance. Definitely, yes!
(noun40 voting via agora)
i'm a bit on the other side of L2 voting migration being a high priority. my thinking:
all of the above leads me to think that we should just pay the ~18 eth cost for another year or two until thing settle down rather than spending a lot of cycles here now.
(ofc the other side of the argument is that we should lead here as a way to stay on the frontier and push the boundaries and run a mandated round as a way to attract more technical talent towards our ecosystem. if that's the argument i would be much more supportive and it's a totally different value proposition. but the "we're wasting eth refunding voter gas" as a cost savings value prop is not compelling to me given the non obvious technical complexity at the present moment)
For now, I think refilling the voteRefund balance is critical for governance & voting retention - but it's obviously only a short term bandaid.
This budget spend signals that we don't have the devs in our cosmos & community who can make this happen and imo we should be spending the same amount on a campaign and prop house round to to attract more dev talent.
I’m not versed enough in the tech lingo to formulate the requirements, but happy to take on the campaign and spearhead the prop house round. If there’s someone who can articulate the tech requirements well and you’re down to collaborate, lmk!
Now, voting FOR.
The Nouncil has spoken.
We discuss all Nouns proposals every week in our Discord https://discord.gg/fdjJpMeV6K. The calls are public and all are welcome!
You can find previous call recordings here: https://nouncil.notion.site/30328df718424f17a623859018497fc2?v=806b5234a2a34b619c3d5028bcd879f0&pvs=4
For - Wins. Vote refunds are brilliant.
FOR - 28 VOTES
benbodhi | "Absolutely FOR this. But wen L2 voting layer?"
AGAINST - 0 VOTES
ABSTAINS - 2 VOTES
https://www.lilnouns.wtf/vote/nounsdao/515/votes FOR 87 VOTES 0x9e0e9D25a5ED9bc773f91691f0b45599255257B1 | "Although using L2s may be a logical choice, refunding for votes appears to be a more practical option with a better user experience." AGAINST 0 VOTES ABSTAINS 0 VOTES
I think we should fund this to ensure the continued participation in governance, AND i agree with 0xsvg.eth that we should explore moving voting to an L2
Voting N to open discussions of nouns migrating governance to an L2
The Amigos made a decision!
--
FOR - 3 VOTES
AGAINST - 0 VOTES
ABSTAINS - 0 VOTES
🙏 Thanks for focusing on core infra being functional and funded!
Shame it doesn’t refund my failed vote transactions 🫠😂 because I somehow managed to get 3 failed in a row - I blame 1inch wallet. Coinbase wallet inbuilt browser worked fine… 4th time’s a charm I guess.
I propose we top up the contract that refunds voters' gas fees. The contract was last refilled with 15 eth on May 11th 2023, and as of today around 1 eth remains.
More context can be found in previous proposals:
I propose we top up the contract that refunds voters' gas fees. The contract was last refilled with 15 eth on May 11th 2023, and as of today around 1 eth remains.
More context can be found in previous proposals: