nounish

from nouns.fe: All votes yes :]

lunari: very sound and healthy upgrade to the nouniverse!

katalyyst: "seems like a cool way to support additional content/visual fronts for nouns"

ashe: "promotes building"

jesscas: "Always down for upgrades, looks good to me ⌐◨-◨"

For a protocol that has incentivised creating multiple frontends and will allow for many more in the future, I think it makes sense to bake in this incentive layer. The work here is inspiring and I look forward to seeing how these features are utilised.

Very excited about client incentives. Cryptoeconomics for the win.

+1 lilfrog

i understand wag's concerns but to me this mechanism isn't a defense against economic majorities that turn malicious (if that's the case then they have other ways to "drain" the treasury and the only defense against that is veto or minority fork)

the intention of this mechanism is to enable the economic majority to set up a competitive incentive system for multiple clients to compete over. it can decide we should spend some percentage of auction proceeds for these functions that are critical for nouns to remain healthy and then those who are delivering that utility well can get more of the incentive. i'm excited about a nouns gov future where more of our funding is spent in this way rather than individual yes / no funding props for specific amounts for specific teams.

thanks verbs team!

For: 2 | Against: 1 | Abstain: 0

+for creating new reasons for people to care for nouns is good — @krel

in addition to my Nouncil VWR, +against due to Seneca posting that this is happening before the vote even opened. implies there is back room coordination amongst large/ key players and an expectation of alignment with them. undermines the integrity of governance as a free and fair process imo — @wylin

+for excited for many more client experiences — @frog

via @zeroweight

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

The Nouncil poll closed, failing to meet the vote threshold of 18.

FOR - 7 VOTES

benbodhi | "For a protocol that has incentivised creating multiple frontends and will allow for many more in the future, I think it makes sense to bake in this incentive layer. The work here is inspiring and I look forward to seeing how these features are utilised."

borg00000 | "Personally find this interesting e.g. for https://probe.wtf to explore ways to route these rewards back to community members & help people afford a Noun. Also aware of issues raised wrt large voting blocks favouring clients and believe these are valid concerns, but not worth blocking because of that, imo. Optimistic."

AGAINST - 3 VOTES

imwylin | *"in spirit i’m a FOR. in the context of the DAO having already funded several multi-hundred thousand dollar clients, (some of them backed by VCs,) i’m a hard AGAINST.

the existing bias is too strong to for me ingenuously believe that a market of competing clients will emerge outside of these already funded clients. i can understand the need for finances for maintenance, hosting, etc. but previous supportive VWRs were almost entirely about market competition for client building and I simply don’t see that being the case

would be great to be proven incorrect though"*

ABSTAINS - 12 VOTES

what are the current clients and the ones that are coming?

Thanks elad and david <3

We like the Client Incentives. Excited to see the fruits of all this work!

For: 3 | Against: 0 | Abstain: 0

Thank you for the excellent work!

exciting step towards further decentralization of the protocol. thank you verbs!

https://www.lilnouns.wtf/vote/nounsdao/532/votes

FOR 36 VOTES

AGAINST 0 VOTES

ABSTAINS 88 VOTES

stand by all of my earlier comments

some things to consider

afaik anyone can register an id & mint an nft. wrt to the contracts/changes, this is all a 'client' is.

if true, at the on-chain level these are direct incentives to engage with the protocol. They are , in the plainest sense possible, not incentive-compatible with the stated purpose.

The noun-owner decides which id to route to. they will push rewards to the ids they favor.

i encourage thinking opportunistically (imagine you are someone with a lot of votes that wants to use these incentives to steer behavior or farm) .

The majority can drain because they can claim all the incentives (distribute nouns to indiv wallets, produce n + n^2 interactions per vote cycle) and vote to approve. seems little basis for saying the efficient outcome is unlikely to happen.

its tricky to force specific off-chain behaviors (esp of secondary actors/ middle-men) with on-chain mechanics. while, at a small enough network size people may play along, this doesn't relieve any governance burden since the dao will be deciding case by case on subsidizing clients, which is already the default state.

its on-chain bloat without any real possibility of scaling benefit & downstream it leads to further centralization.

the thing i think no one wants to face but that i think we can do relatively easily- sybil layer/ nounish personhood badge- makes it work.