⌐◨-◨

in favor of the 115 ETH, but echo the sentiments that the inclusion of a noun deviates from what was originally discussed/proposed.

⌐◨-◨

you guys need to vote for this so it doesn't time out

In general Nouncil was supportive of this proposal. But, for some Nouncillors, the extra Noun felt like too big an ask. This kind of reward would make more sense as a retroactive prize provided after the project is wildly successful.

excited to see these come to life but i do not support committing a noun upon delivery of glasses. DAO should evaluate the proposal as a whole after everything has been executed to determine if a noun is justified

I support the ETH requested, but believe that proposals should be solely comprised of state changes.

If a Noun is being granted, it should be transferred by this proposal.

If a Noun is deemed a worthy retroactive reward, that decision should be made at the appropriate time, not within the context of the initial proposal.

I'm voting FOR prop 57 because in the current world where nouns lacks a mechanism (or any type of process) to compensate for success of proposals (note we fund mostly costs) it makes rational sense for the proposer to include what they want upon success. Naturally it's a contentious and painful topic to discuss. Before seeing what the project delivers, how are we to know what the success reward should be? People are mostly arguing that 1 noun is a lot, but it can also be much too little. Ultimately, the correct success reward is infinitely harder to decide upon before the fact and can lead to much wasted heartburn each time. This is why I’d advocate for us to put into place something like Retroactive Impact Rewards - Nouns to establish trust with proposers that we will reward success fairly and generously such that we can move the reward discussion moment to AFTER the project is delivered rather than before. In lack of such process and trust in the current state, I do not see it as bad faith or form that a proposer asks for what they want upon success as part of their funding proposal ask. I’ll leave the ambiguity of “successful delivery” which is the 1 noun delivery criteria outside of this discussion. I’m imaging there’s some judgement by the DAO to make when the time comes and should be additional incentive alignment for the proposer to actually deliver something clearly successful in order to earn the noun without debate.

For the Proposal for the 115 ETH, but the addition of the Noun compensation is different than what was proposed before this got on chain (doc still reflects this) and is a major change. That type of major change should be documented, discussed and socialized before the vote goes on-chain.