⌐◨-◨: Nouncil votes No
(22 Yes, 35 No, 5 Abstain)
Discussion from Nouncil Discord
https://discord.gg/nouncil
JoshuaFisher
I’m fine with this but also Like the barrier being 2 because it is a self selecting benefit in terms of how much time do they spend in the community. If you can’t get 2 Nouns then maybe not ready to go on-chain imho.
JoelCares
A 1 Noun threshold to submit proposals for the first 1000 Nouns feel reasonable to me.
andreitr
The existing threshold is a feature that reduces noise.
fiveoceans_dev
I also, agree to keep the threshold growing. It will make smaller stake holders to work together and in turn help coordinate against potential malicious activities by individual big stake holders
kerimbonia
Also in agreement that lowering the threshold will introduce more noise and with all the changes going on in the nouns ecosystem i'm not sure this is the best time for it.
mintface.eth
I lean towards a single Noun so that proposals get seen and evaluated.
2 Nouns min creates a three party negotiation to take something on-chain. Two parties are then seen to 'endorse' or at a min be associated with proposer.
The idea of acquire a Noun and propose is cool.
CHEFFO ⌐◧-◧
i think that the current system is healthy and not needing a change
samellis ⌐◨-◨
Drop the threshold, good ideas will rise, especially with the changes of gas reimbursement and the more than likely time extension, why put an additional “pay to play” barrier. Let folks come in with their ideas.
Benbodhi
Only just over a year until it would increase again.
The barrier to entry to buy a noun is significant and the ability to submit a prop after purchasing a noun is something I feel should be possible.
I know delegation and sponsorship is a thing, but I’m thinking of lone actors.
Not sure it makes a huge difference in prop quality.
Toady_Hawk
I agree with reducing to one noun threshold. We don’t have a proposal spam problem yet (which is why this feature was baked in) so I think it makes sense to lower it to encourage more participation. Last time this was proposed (with a long time period attached that muddied the waters) it was all the brand new Nouners voting yes, which I think was telling. Keep in mind if spam ever became a problem, another proposal could easily raise the threshold again.
lil bk
all in favor of reducing the threshold to propose. entry of barrier to hold a noun is high as is.
there’s a total of 292 unique noun owners and thus don’t think spam would be an issue. instead, it’ll increase the overall probability to proliferate/propose in the first place. if my counting is correct, there theoretically is only 58 people who can propose as it stands (holding 2 nouns)
kerimbonia
i'm on the fence with this one but starting to lean towards yes the more we chat about it.
i def agree that anybody buying a noun should be able to put a proposal on-chain and that the cream of proposals will always rise to the top... that might sway my vote (no) concerning added noise to proposals and the additional time investment needed for voters/nouncil to discuss and filter through all of those to give each one the attention they deserve to get. i also think there is something very community about somebody with a noun having to reach out to another to get a proposal on-chain... anyways, still thinking about all this.