FeedProjects
Developers
Settings
🎉 A new chapter begins: Boardroom has joined Agora
Learn more
protocol logo
Explore / Projects
Nouns DAO

Proposals

Members

Information

Create Proposal

Nouns DAO

ProposalsMembersInformation
ProposalExecutable Code
Back to Proposals
executedEnded 2 years ago Â·  Onchain

Lower fork threshold to 10%

By 0xA868...079E63

I propose to lower fork threshold to 10% (from 20%) and fork period to 3.5 days (from 7 days).

By lowering the fork threshold, we increase alignment among those who stay while leaning into the fact that forks can be inherently good for Nouns.

We don’t yet understand the full implications of having many separate funding bodies co-existing under one Nouns umbrella brand. But, Nouns being cc0, we’re uniquely capable of leaning into the potential of having multiple funding bodies, each with different approaches but individually highly aligned.

Isn’t a lower threshold just making it easier for arbitrageurs? It is widely understood that we need to accelerate spending to close the arbitrage opportunity. Yet, figuring out exactly how to thoughtfully accelerate spending is a process that takes time. In the meantime, it seems like we’ll be co-existing with arbers and should make the most out of the situation. Lowering the threshold increases arber competition, accelerating the process, decreasing their profits, and allowing them to drain less of the treasury.

Doesn’t inviting arbitrageurs disrupt governance? A lower threshold doesn’t change that arbers will vote No on proposals and attempt to block spending. Conversely, it makes it less likely that arbers grow into a big cohort with significant voting power, which is a side effect of accumulating to reach the fork threshold.

Why not raise the threshold instead? While raising the threshold might seem like a good stopgap to defend the dao against further arbitrage, it comes with an air of intellectual dishonesty and risks being regressive, while not accomplishing that much in terms of protection.

Why decrease the fork period? One downside of a lower fork threshold and potentially consecutive forks is that proposal execution is blocked during the fork period. The fork period is decreased to mitigate governance disruption while still providing honest minorities ample time to coordinate.

Thanks to 40 and Elad for co-penning this proposal, and to Necfas for providing a Noun.

Continue Reading
Connect Wallet to Add Note
0
Votes 30
VoterCast PowerVote & Rationale
0xFC21...976214
20

FOR

0xDCb4...555E5e
16

FOR

0x008c...86A7e4
9

AGAINST

0x8e71...3C71BC
8

FOR

0x8D8B...5eB9AF
5

FOR

SHOW MORE
VOTE POWER
0
Connect Wallet
Proposal Status
  • Fri September 22 2023, 10:35 pmPublished Onchain 0xA868...079E63
  • Wed September 27 2023, 11:31 pmVoting Period Starts
  • Tue October 03 2023, 12:19 amEnd Voting Period
  • Tue October 03 2023, 12:28 amQueue Proposal
  • Thu October 05 2023, 12:31 amExecute Proposal
Current Results

1-FOR

73

79.35%

2-AGAINST

15

16.3%

3-ABSTAIN

4

4.35%
Quorum 92/38
DocumentationBrandingContact Us
Home
This Project is Currently Disabled

If you would like to enable it, please checkout below.

Boardroom Subscription

Sign up for an individual subscription (access all projects on the platform)

Subscribe
Enable Project

Enable the entire project for every user

Enable Project
Contact Us