ProposalsProposal 533
ProposalsProposal 533
from nounsfe: For: 0 | Against: 3 | Abstain: 2
lunari: "The one-click candidate submission from the Noundry Gallery is a pretty cool feature, but at the same time, I'd love to see more engaging/story filled proposals if context that would sway votes is missing (especially as new voters coming into the DAO, but do appreciate the conversations here!). With that said, this is an awesome nounish trait & wouldn't mind seeing it pop up in the auctions if passed"
tokkis (against): "there are some other way better designs that the creator has, that could be added" , +1 eusoujp.eth
jesscas (against): "I feel like the context may be good reason for the prop to pass, but I'd rather see that context part of the prop as well then, so that in the future it's also clear why the prop passed"
overall, excited to see more trait proposals & use of the treasury nouns! thanks for the prop (amiyoko eyeshadow palette trait pls...)
Hey, Amiyoko! Thanks for the proposal. I won't go into the compensation precedent or start any discussions here. I think trait proposals are great, and I'll always try to vote based on whether I personally like the trait. In this case, I don’t think it fits the collection, just like how the Noggles Head and the Hip Rose Noggles look a bit off to me. That being said, I really appreciate the work you do in the Noundry community!
For: 5 | Against: 1 | Abstain: 0
+for 1. tuba head is nounish 2. art is great! 3. imo high comp for art (1 Noun) is important because a) Nouns art is important b) its the most value aligned method I’ve heard that is likely to push accepted traits quality high fwiw I find the proposal framework to be icky for art additions. Unsure how to solve — @goldy
+for +1 goldy — @krel
+for This proposal is similar to proposal 147, let's take a look at the details. In prop 147, the winner of head traits got 15 ETH ~ 22,500 USDC at the time. Then if Amiyoko wants to request a Noun as her reward now the average auction is around 7.5 ETH ~ 23,500 USDC. So it's pretty much worth the effort to make it! — @0xishal
+against I think if we are going to set the bar for rewarding nounish traits at "you get a noun" then the trait has to be exceptional. There is nothing wrong with the tuba, but... its just a tuba. It has no cultural significance (like base head in yellow) and its not entirely creative (like bike using nogs as wheels) — @frog
Used to attempt to play one of these at my grandparents house when I was about 6yo. I'm a +for, ty amiyoko — @pip
+for set the ⌐◨-◨’s free. — @sqx
via @zeroweight
The tuba is delightful and a great addition to the current collection.
On the topic of compensation ill try to speak my mind as openly as possible about the issues we're facing and how we as a dao arrived here.
Adding to or modifying the contracts is not a task to be taken lightly. I believe thats as true for art as it is for code changes. This belief greatly colors my downstream thinking and puts me in a position where my goal is to a) protect the dao from watering down the collection, and b) yet add traits that pass the bar for quality and coherency with a wide-ish margin of error (aside: i constantly agonize over whether the fax machine was/is good enough).
Its probably safe to say that i overcorrect on the side of safety, but i think thats good/preferred when the alternative is to do irrevocable harm to nouns as a project (imo, if we were to add a really bad trait, even if we later voted it out, it would do permanent harm).
Now to the touchy subject; most voters have poor taste and poor understanding of what makes nouns traits good. Whats more, most voters seem to lack a "security mindset" around adding traits and treats the entire thing pretty laissez-faire.
Furthermore, i believe nouns works best as a meritocracy. Our VWR culture is strong bc we listen to our peers and subject experts existing in the community. The majority of voters are not experts when it comes to nouns traits.
The list of people i believe the dao should look to for advice and guidance on this topic is rather short: goldy, 4156, gremps. And to a lesser degree 9999, index, facu, amiyoko.
This is the conundrum: With many voters, frankly speaking, falling into the dunning-kruger bucket, how do we make sure the dao steers clear of adding bad traits while also celebrating how fantastic it is that we can actually add traits to this infinite work of art, especially in an ad-hoc manner?
I dont know if this puzzle can be solved, at times i feel skeptical, but this leads us back to the topic of compensation. Rewarding a Noun as comp is an attempt to gatekeep on quality -- basically saying 'look the art is sacred, we should only include traits if we are willing to pay well for it'.
By no means do i think this is a perfect solution, but as of now it is the best tool available and the one i personally will use. If the dao at large gave me more reason to believe it can navigate the topic of trait inclusion, i would not be so adamant about setting a precedent of compensation.
Lastly, and perhaps a different argument altogether, today there are 3 (active) artists who can create nouns traits with a high degree of success -- facu, goldy, and amiyoko. Lets make sure we compensate them for their expertise and massive amount of hours and energy they pour into this craft up front (comp is retroactive after all).
I feel like what's under discussed (both in the prop writing and in the vwrs) so far is the mountain of work that this trait submission sits upon. looking at the work here as just this trait in isolation is the wrong pov imo.
amiyoko (https://warpcast.com/amiyoko) is one of our most dedicated and prolific noundry community artists. "noundry" for those not familiar is both a product (noundry.wtf that funded by the dao last year to make it easier for artists to publicly iterate on traits and make onchain props https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/375) and a community that shares the farcaster channel (https://warpcast.com/~/channel/noundry). the origins of "noundry" was a channel in the old official nouns discord that community artists hanged out and iterated on traits.
the tuba head was originally a euphonium head that was iterated over 2 years to be the tuba head here now (https://warpcast.com/amiyoko/0x6cabc596; https://warpcast.com/amiyoko/0x6dec0104). amiyoko also has 58 other heads that they are iterating on presented in noundry (https://warpcast.com/amiyoko/0x6dda8c1b). the one tuba trait is the one trait that made it into this onchain prop but it's standing on a mountain of work over the years.
the "we'll get spammed if we pay out a noun for a trait" view i don't quite buy. maybe some ppl will try their luck but you can't easily replicate the amount of noundry work receipts that amiyoko has and the respect that their work has from other noundry artists (e.g. coralorca who is the one building noundry.wtf). someone that just draws a trait and yolos it onchain we can shoot down very easily.
we funded noundry.wtf last september b/c after our last 8/8 nouniversary we as a community had the reflection that we don't want to gate art updates to just that one point in time but rather have it something more continual. this prop is amongst the first to make it through from all the community product building and art iteration and i'm happy to recognize the mountain of work here and the new continuous art updating process we're signaling as a result of this first non-nouniversay art update. can't imagine someone more deserving than amiyoko to take that first step with.
also on the topic of is 1 noun too much compensation. i think it is absolutely a fair amount of compensation. it's ~$30k for an incredible amount of dedication and skill. i also think it scales well with nouns' success. if the project becomes more culturally impactful and nouns' prices go up then we should require even more work and debate and recognize it as a higher honor (the economic hurdle should rightfully be higher). i also like it as a meme and easy thing to understand. i yearn for a future where an artist like jack butcher (who has repeatedly said he'd like to submit a nouns trait one day) submits a trait to earn a noun. tom sachs effectively did a version of this by painting a noun and trading his physical art for a noun but imagine if tom designed a nouns trait. just this art exchange for nouns feels right to me and if more of the nouns fan artists hears "you can earn a noun by designing a trait that the dao accepts" then that's a really good outcome imo. we should make that meme enticing while keeping the bar high and i think paying out a noun accomplishes both.
some thoughts:
it’s an important step forward to utilize the infrastructure that’s been built up around the decentralized addition of new art, so we should make adding something from noundry a priority
we shouldn’t underestimate the value of kicking off a virtuous cycle here. trading many treasury nouns in exchange for many epic traits would be a great outcome
it feels like a great time to start growing and evolving the collection. we’ve explored many of the existing trait combinations and it would be exciting to throw some new ones into the mix
it would be nice to put the artist CC0 declarations on-chain. please consider including in the prop next time (iirc lawyers said it’s okay to sign with a pseudo)
"I do love some other amiyoko heads more though."
ultimately decided to abstain for this reason. while this does feel worthy of the collection, i find some of the other candidate heads more bold and exciting. current personal favorites are tempura and pop tart
The tuba is delightful and a great addition to the current collection.
On the topic of compensation ill try to speak my mind as openly as possible about the issues we're facing and how we as a dao arrived here.
Adding to or modifying the contracts is not a task to be taken lightly. I believe thats as true for art as it is for code changes. This belief greatly colors my downstream thinking and puts me in a position where my goal is to a) protect the dao from watering down the collection, and b) yet add traits that pass the bar for quality and coherency with a wide-ish margin of error (aside: i constantly agonize over whether the fax machine was/is good enough).
Its probably safe to say that i overcorrect on the side of safety, but i think thats good/preferred when the alternative is to do irrevocable harm to nouns as a project (imo, if we were to add a really bad trait, even if we later voted it out, it would do permanent harm).
Now to the touchy subject; most voters have poor taste and poor understanding of what makes nouns traits good. Whats more, most voters seem to lack a "security mindset" around adding traits and treats the entire thing pretty laissez-faire.
Furthermore, i believe nouns works best as a meritocracy. Our VWR culture is strong bc we listen to our peers and subject experts existing in the community. The majority of voters are not experts when it comes to nouns traits.
The list of people i believe the dao should look to for advice and guidance on this topic is rather short: goldy, 4156, gremps. And to a lesser degree 9999, index, facu, amiyoko.
This is the conundrum: With many voters, frankly speaking, falling into the dunning-kruger bucket, how do we make sure the dao steers clear of adding bad traits while also celebrating how fantastic it is that we can actually add traits to this infinite work of art, especially in an ad-hoc manner?
I dont know if this puzzle can be solved, at times i feel skeptical, but this leads us back to the topic of compensation. Rewarding a Noun as comp is an attempt to gatekeep on quality -- basically saying 'look the art is sacred, we should only include traits if we are willing to pay well for it'.
By no means do i think this is a perfect solution, but as of now it is the best tool available and the one i personally will use. If the dao at large gave me more reason to believe it can navigate the topic of trait inclusion, i would not be so adamant about setting a precedent of compensation.
Lastly, and perhaps a different argument altogether, today there are 3 (active) artists who can create nouns traits with a high degree of success -- facu, goldy, and amiyoko. Lets make sure we compensate them for their expertise and massive amount of hours and energy they pour into this craft up front (comp is retroactive after all).
I feel like what's under discussed (both in the prop writing and in the vwrs) so far is the mountain of work that this trait submission sits upon. looking at the work here as just this trait in isolation is the wrong pov imo.
amiyoko (https://warpcast.com/amiyoko) is one of our most dedicated and prolific noundry community artists. "noundry" for those not familiar is both a product (noundry.wtf that funded by the dao last year to make it easier for artists to publicly iterate on traits and make onchain props https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/375) and a community that shares the farcaster channel (https://warpcast.com/~/channel/noundry). the origins of "noundry" was a channel in the old official nouns discord that community artists hanged out and iterated on traits.
the tuba head was originally a euphonium head that was iterated over 2 years to be the tuba head here now (https://warpcast.com/amiyoko/0x6cabc596; https://warpcast.com/amiyoko/0x6dec0104). amiyoko also has 58 other heads that they are iterating on presented in noundry (https://warpcast.com/amiyoko/0x6dda8c1b). the one tuba trait is the one trait that made it into this onchain prop but it's standing on a mountain of work over the years.
the "we'll get spammed if we pay out a noun for a trait" view i don't quite buy. maybe some ppl will try their luck but you can't easily replicate the amount of noundry work receipts that amiyoko has and the respect that their work has from other noundry artists (e.g. coralorca who is the one building noundry.wtf). someone that just draws a trait and yolos it onchain we can shoot down very easily.
we funded noundry.wtf last september b/c after our last 8/8 nouniversary we as a community had the reflection that we don't want to gate art updates to just that one point in time but rather have it something more continual. this prop is amongst the first to make it through from all the community product building and art iteration and i'm happy to recognize the mountain of work here and the new continuous art updating process we're signaling as a result of this first non-nouniversay art update. can't imagine someone more deserving than amiyoko to take that first step with.
also on the topic of is 1 noun too much compensation. i think it is absolutely a fair amount of compensation. it's ~$30k for an incredible amount of dedication and skill. i also think it scales well with nouns' success. if the project becomes more culturally impactful and nouns' prices go up then we should require even more work and debate and recognize it as a higher honor (the economic hurdle should rightfully be higher). i also like it as a meme and easy thing to understand. i yearn for a future where an artist like jack butcher (who has repeatedly said he'd like to submit a nouns trait one day) submits a trait to earn a noun. tom sachs effectively did a version of this by painting a noun and trading his physical art for a noun but imagine if tom designed a nouns trait. just this art exchange for nouns feels right to me and if more of the nouns fan artists hears "you can earn a noun by designing a trait that the dao accepts" then that's a really good outcome imo. we should make that meme enticing while keeping the bar high and i think paying out a noun accomplishes both.
Voting yes, obviously. But, I gotta admit that i don’t agree with the for’s or the against votes here. I think we still need a better way to standardize trait inclusion. This feels off for the one part of the dao that should be the most fun.
fwiw, this will also be amiyoko’s second noun in a year for adding traits to the collection.. opening up another layer to the larger conversation. Hoping to see these rewarded nouns vote more in the future as well.
• tuba is very nounish, and so is amiyoko
• the art looks good, feels good, and the collection would be better with it than without it
• +1 noun40.eth that the reward is worth the contribution and that a world were artists submit artwork striving to be rewarded a noun in return is a good outcome.
• +1 on krel.eth that I have anxiety about protecting the quality of Nouns art, and that Noun as a reward to gatekeep quality may be the best defense we currently have. I'd love to see us conciously trying to build mechnisms or norms to protect the collection in this way.
• +1 on mikegood.eth that i hope we can find a more good vibes way to standardise inclusion -but i personally am finding it hard to reconcile and balance this with my other concerns.
Love musical instruments as heads and this one is quite good. I do love some other amiyoko heads more though. Noun for head compensation is cool, but I’m unsure how many other people would be as successful with their own props like this. I’d like to see more artists getting traits in. Overall, positive about trait additions in general. I wouldn’t be mad if trait addition props became the majority we saw for a while.
Very high quality trait. I appreciate Noun 40’s context. Let’s reward contributors, not traits, on a case by case basis. This is clearly a contributor we want to reward.
Left curving this vote. I see art of the highest quality that perfectly fits into canon, I vote FOR. ⌐◨-◨
Voting yes, obviously. But, I gotta admit that i don’t agree with the for’s or the against votes here. I think we still need a better way to standardize trait inclusion. This feels off for the one part of the dao that should be the most fun.
fwiw, this will also be amiyoko’s second noun in a year for adding traits to the collection.. opening up another layer to the larger conversation. Hoping to see these rewarded nouns vote more in the future as well.
I feel like what's under discussed (both in the prop writing and in the vwrs) so far is the mountain of work that this trait submission sits upon. looking at the work here as just this trait in isolation is the wrong pov imo.
amiyoko (https://warpcast.com/amiyoko) is one of our most dedicated and prolific noundry community artists. "noundry" for those not familiar is both a product (noundry.wtf that funded by the dao last year to make it easier for artists to publicly iterate on traits and make onchain props https://www.nouns.camp/proposals/375) and a community that shares the farcaster channel (https://warpcast.com/~/channel/noundry). the origins of "noundry" was a channel in the old official nouns discord that community artists hanged out and iterated on traits.
the tuba head was originally a euphonium head that was iterated over 2 years to be the tuba head here now (https://warpcast.com/amiyoko/0x6cabc596; https://warpcast.com/amiyoko/0x6dec0104). amiyoko also has 58 other heads that they are iterating on presented in noundry (https://warpcast.com/amiyoko/0x6dda8c1b). the one tuba trait is the one trait that made it into this onchain prop but it's standing on a mountain of work over the years.
the "we'll get spammed if we pay out a noun for a trait" view i don't quite buy. maybe some ppl will try their luck but you can't easily replicate the amount of noundry work receipts that amiyoko has and the respect that their work has from other noundry artists (e.g. coralorca who is the one building noundry.wtf). someone that just draws a trait and yolos it onchain we can shoot down very easily.
we funded noundry.wtf last september b/c after our last 8/8 nouniversary we as a community had the reflection that we don't want to gate art updates to just that one point in time but rather have it something more continual. this prop is amongst the first to make it through from all the community product building and art iteration and i'm happy to recognize the mountain of work here and the new continuous art updating process we're signaling as a result of this first non-nouniversay art update. can't imagine someone more deserving than amiyoko to take that first step with.
also on the topic of is 1 noun too much compensation. i think it is absolutely a fair amount of compensation. it's ~$30k for an incredible amount of dedication and skill. i also think it scales well with nouns' success. if the project becomes more culturally impactful and nouns' prices go up then we should require even more work and debate and recognize it as a higher honor (the economic hurdle should rightfully be higher). i also like it as a meme and easy thing to understand. i yearn for a future where an artist like jack butcher (who has repeatedly said he'd like to submit a nouns trait one day) submits a trait to earn a noun. tom sachs effectively did a version of this by painting a noun and trading his physical art for a noun but imagine if tom designed a nouns trait. just this art exchange for nouns feels right to me and if more of the nouns fan artists hears "you can earn a noun by designing a trait that the dao accepts" then that's a really good outcome imo. we should make that meme enticing while keeping the bar high and i think paying out a noun accomplishes both.
The tuba is delightful and a great addition to the current collection.
On the topic of compensation ill try to speak my mind as openly as possible about the issues we're facing and how we as a dao arrived here.
Adding to or modifying the contracts is not a task to be taken lightly. I believe thats as true for art as it is for code changes. This belief greatly colors my downstream thinking and puts me in a position where my goal is to a) protect the dao from watering down the collection, and b) yet add traits that pass the bar for quality and coherency with a wide-ish margin of error (aside: i constantly agonize over whether the fax machine was/is good enough).
Its probably safe to say that i overcorrect on the side of safety, but i think thats good/preferred when the alternative is to do irrevocable harm to nouns as a project (imo, if we were to add a really bad trait, even if we later voted it out, it would do permanent harm).
Now to the touchy subject; most voters have poor taste and poor understanding of what makes nouns traits good. Whats more, most voters seem to lack a "security mindset" around adding traits and treats the entire thing pretty laissez-faire.
Furthermore, i believe nouns works best as a meritocracy. Our VWR culture is strong bc we listen to our peers and subject experts existing in the community. The majority of voters are not experts when it comes to nouns traits.
The list of people i believe the dao should look to for advice and guidance on this topic is rather short: goldy, 4156, gremps. And to a lesser degree 9999, index, facu, amiyoko.
This is the conundrum: With many voters, frankly speaking, falling into the dunning-kruger bucket, how do we make sure the dao steers clear of adding bad traits while also celebrating how fantastic it is that we can actually add traits to this infinite work of art, especially in an ad-hoc manner?
I dont know if this puzzle can be solved, at times i feel skeptical, but this leads us back to the topic of compensation. Rewarding a Noun as comp is an attempt to gatekeep on quality -- basically saying 'look the art is sacred, we should only include traits if we are willing to pay well for it'.
By no means do i think this is a perfect solution, but as of now it is the best tool available and the one i personally will use. If the dao at large gave me more reason to believe it can navigate the topic of trait inclusion, i would not be so adamant about setting a precedent of compensation.
Lastly, and perhaps a different argument altogether, today there are 3 (active) artists who can create nouns traits with a high degree of success -- facu, goldy, and amiyoko. Lets make sure we compensate them for their expertise and massive amount of hours and energy they pour into this craft up front (comp is retroactive after all).
I kinda agree that the precedent of rewarding Nouns as compensation for adding traits is a bit much, but I also think we should be adding traits way more often than we currently are. If this prop can help change that sentiment then a Noun is worth it imo
I will always vote for heads. As I have previously said. If some one is passionate enough to propose on chain. AND they are a nounish enjoyoooor… who am I to hold that head back. (Which most likely has at least 1 buyer!)
Precedent: amiyoko HAS received noun for work I believe. Also +1 wylin and the blowing wind.
P.S. I prefer heads for heads sake. P.P.S. Probs should have built in submission cooldowns … but dao and all that.
Agree with nbaronia, adding traits is usually great but transferring a Noun in return sets a bad precedent for future trait additions.
seeing as the Verbs team was given 16 eth to cover taxes for their Nouns, and then this was decided by large voters to not be the case for future Noun gifts, (including cancelling Bob Burnquist’s proposal in order to remove the eth portion,)
the concerns about setting a precedent with giving Amiyoko a Noun here don’t seem warranted. precedent is a pick and choose circumstance in Nouns, not a hard and fast rule
Voting for previously-signalled reasons. I like the art and I want people to submit art, but tying this reward to this single prop doesn't seem like the right way to do it.
amiyoko is a prolific creator of Nouns art and has many traits waiting to be added imo - https://gallery.noundry.wtf/profile/0x1bd40b1d0bd65b12b2995dd6ad8f0334aa7ed83d
i don't think gifting 512 means every head needs to be rewarded a noun either (also considering that this would be the first addition outside of 8/8)
I agree with Juar's take, in that adding nounish traits shouldn't be compensated with a Noun. I am pro adding Nounish traits, I am pro rewarding Nouns to contributors, and I am pro this Tuba head. However, I think this would set a precedent where we would get a lot of trait spam. I would much rather people contribute to the Nounish meme and culture out of goodwill, with the DAO able to recognize contributions retroactively. While many proposals require meaningful capital to initiate and everyone deserves to be compensated for labor, I think when and where contributions to Nouns do not cost the creator too much (time or money), we should encourage and retroactively reward more of this.
Really appreciate the effort of adding new art to nouns. It's great having people trying to do so. That said, the price requested here seems a bit too much (transfer of a Noun) for the effort put in. Contributing into the nouns art is by itself already a great achievement that gets you long ways in crypto. Not saying your work should be free, but this is definitely on the high side and I hope you come back in the future with another proposal. Thanks ❤️
*submitted via *Noundry Gallery
This proposal adds a new head trait: Tuba
Showcase Noun
Trait artwork
Circle crop
Palette: 3 colors
Here are some auto-generated combinations of the new part with existing Nouns parts:
I agree to the CC0 licence agreement and proceed with the signing process off-chain. amiyoko
*submitted via *Noundry Gallery
This proposal adds a new head trait: Tuba
Showcase Noun
Trait artwork
Circle crop
Palette: 3 colors
Here are some auto-generated combinations of the new part with existing Nouns parts:
I agree to the CC0 licence agreement and proceed with the signing process off-chain. amiyoko
