We believe this lawsuit is a serious deterrent to legitimate crypto innovation, and several of us have personally donated to this cause.

Generally we think the DAO should only engage in philanthropy when the efforts of the collective are more impactful than efforts of the individual.

That may indeed be the case here, but we believe more discussion is needed to address points brought up by fellow DAO members.

I do not understand the legal nuances involved here and what impact they may have going forward and thus cannot, in good faith, vote in one direction or another.

We don't feel nuanced enough on the legal details to make a decision to contribute so much ETH to this cause.

Do not carry the proper knowledge on this matter to confidently vote yes or no.

Dont know enough about this to confidently take a side

Ultimately, Nouncil was not able to reach a consensus on this Prop so we are voting to Abstain. After the majority vote to Abstain (16), all other votes cast were against (12.) Overall, in discussions, we felt that there are too many unknowns/unclear items WRT the case. Even if the Plaintiffs' motivations could be politically motivated, it seems PT may have indeed broken some lottery and/or banking laws in NY, or at least, it is far from a sure thing that they didn't. Moreover, it was mentioned that this should probably have been a planned-for eventuality for such a protocol (to be sued by the State) and Nouncil worries about the precedent of deploying Nouns treasury to fund this kind of predictable legal battle (hat tip Wag.) On top of the above, this was also not a small ask (which might have found broader support.) We wish PoolTogether the best with this case, but we couldn't vote to support this Proposal at this time.