For: 6 | Against: 0 | Abstain: 0

+for — @bixbite

+for — @brettdrawsstuff

+for — @mattclark

+for — @carlosjmelgar

+for — @moctezuma3ro

+for — @travsap

This might help future proposals, voting for so it simplify processes in the future.

⌐◨-◨

Voting against this proposal makes sense when considering the bigger picture. While liquidating stETH is necessary to cover immediate ETH needs, this shouldn't have been necessary. The proposed stETH to USDC conversion mechanism, which is crucial for ensuring smoother liquidity management, should have been implemented months ago. Given that the DAO spends over $75k per month on smart contract and protocol development, it's unacceptable that we’ve seen near-zero progress or updates from the development team over the past 4 months. This oversight is costing the DAO both in lost yield and inefficiencies in fund management.

We need better treasury management strategy. Let's get it done, would love to work with folks interested in helping assess decentralized treasury management tools etc. so we have a clearer plan.

Guess so but a payer contract swap stETH to USDC for next time would be great to avoid unstake, happy to work with anybody interested in doing it

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 a link to previous call recordings in our Discord "links" channel.

Nouncil has voted For this proposal, with 33 votes for, 8 against, and 4 abstentions. Thanks for playing Nouns, see comments below:

FOR - 33 VOTES

benbodhi | "Looks like we’re gonna need it. Thanks for putting the prop up."

AGAINST - 8 VOTES

borg00000 | "🦺"

ABSTAINS - 4 VOTES

https://www.lilnouns.wtf/vote/nounsdao/639/votes

FOR 155 VOTES

AGAINST 110 VOTES

nekofar.eth | "Better ask stETH over ETH, but most asks are in USDC, so need a swap. Why can't payer contract swap stETH to USDC? Where are devs on $75k/m?"

ABSTAIN 0 VOTES

⌐◨-◨

Paying out stETH instead of ETH seems like a simple solution, but I also like what others brought up.

key question from Nouncil call: can i DUNA thyself? 😅

Yeah, I'm also not in favor of liquidating (great!) yield-bearing assets, though I think we don't have a choice right now.

The DAO needs to find a good balance between having enough liquidity and yielding the rest, +ideally making the transition smoother between those 2 states. The stETH -> USDC TokenBuyer you mentioned would prolly be a great start there!

The direct transfers of stETH I'm not so sure tho. The 2-step process for unstaking stETH (request withdrawal + claim) is kind of a hassle. If people are unaware or they're not tech-savvy, they'll just be confused when their prop passes. Maybe an educational issue 🤷‍♀️

Agree we should integrate a stETH -> USDC token buyer. But unstaking some in the meantime makes sense.

We should add a new TokenBuyer for stETH -> USDC before the next time we run out of ETH.

Would work for any ERC-20, so it would be easy to deploy for other assets in the future.

For lumped payments, governance clients should start to suggest stETH instead of ETH.

Ideally, the DAO holds yield-bearing assets for as long as possible.