ProposalsProposal 908
ProposalsProposal 908
Requesting 1.5Ξ for the production of ~100 Nounish toy prototypes.
A recently passed 1.5Ξ proposal (897) could not execute due to an error; nocguild.eth covered that 1.5Ξ, and this proposal requests reimbursement / rerouting of those funds to the established toy maker Duckhead to produce initial toy prototypes over the coming months.
Duckhead is already working on Nounish prototypes, and, if supportive, the community could comment or VWR designs they’d like to see explored. Distribution will explore boutique Japanese-style gacha at Nounish events, alongside limited edition packs for online sale. Ideally, this work will be cross-promoted with other limited products that showcase integration of the unique Nounish characters produced here (working on that).
A potential future outcome would be to establish a revenue-sharing model with DUNA ownership should we find success. We plan to showcase the work at Toy Shows, Art Fairs, and Nounish events, and grow this into a gacha-native IP born from Nouns.
https://www.instagram.com/duckhead/?hl=en
Why Gacha?
Gacha is a distribution ritual, not just a sales mechanic. It emphasizes surprise, participation, and collectability over individual object valuation, aligning with Nouns’ cultural logic.
Gacha encourages breadth over scarcity: many people receive something, rather than a few people extracting perceived value. This mirrors Nouns’ emphasis on memetic spread, play, and shared cultural artifacts rather than prestige ownership.
From a production standpoint, gacha supports iteration and variation. Small runs, subtle differences, and experimental forms are expected and celebrated, making it an ideal format for early-stage physical exploration where outcomes are intentionally unknown.
Culturally, boutique Japanese-style gacha has deep precedent in art toys and character IP incubation. Many enduring art-toy ecosystems began as low-stakes gacha experiments before evolving into broader worlds, narratives, and formats.
Gacha participants do not choose outcomes, reducing entitlement, speculation, or promises of value. Success is measured in engagement, delight, and cultural resonance—not floor prices or resale.
Physical production risk: As with any physical toy work, timelines and iteration cycles may shift as prototypes are refined. This proposal funds exploration and learning, not guaranteed final production.
Market response uncertainty: While gacha and art toys have strong cultural precedent, there is no guarantee of demand or resale value. Success is measured in cultural reach and experimentation, not financial return.
Prototype scope ambiguity: “~100 prototypes” may include variations, test runs, or experimental forms rather than 100 finalized, production-ready SKUs. The exact composition will emerge through making.
Revenue & legal structure unresolved: Any future revenue-sharing model, DUNA involvement, or formal ownership structure is explicitly out of scope for this proposal and would require a separate governance process.
Execution precedent: This proposal reroutes funds already fronted due to a previously passed proposal not executing. While documented, this is an edge case and not intended as a standard funding pathway.
Requesting 1.5Ξ for the production of ~100 Nounish toy prototypes.
A recently passed 1.5Ξ proposal (897) could not execute due to an error; nocguild.eth covered that 1.5Ξ, and this proposal requests reimbursement / rerouting of those funds to the established toy maker Duckhead to produce initial toy prototypes over the coming months.
Duckhead is already working on Nounish prototypes, and, if supportive, the community could comment or VWR designs they’d like to see explored. Distribution will explore boutique Japanese-style gacha at Nounish events, alongside limited edition packs for online sale. Ideally, this work will be cross-promoted with other limited products that showcase integration of the unique Nounish characters produced here (working on that).
A potential future outcome would be to establish a revenue-sharing model with DUNA ownership should we find success. We plan to showcase the work at Toy Shows, Art Fairs, and Nounish events, and grow this into a gacha-native IP born from Nouns.
https://www.instagram.com/duckhead/?hl=en
Why Gacha?
Gacha is a distribution ritual, not just a sales mechanic. It emphasizes surprise, participation, and collectability over individual object valuation, aligning with Nouns’ cultural logic.
Gacha encourages breadth over scarcity: many people receive something, rather than a few people extracting perceived value. This mirrors Nouns’ emphasis on memetic spread, play, and shared cultural artifacts rather than prestige ownership.
From a production standpoint, gacha supports iteration and variation. Small runs, subtle differences, and experimental forms are expected and celebrated, making it an ideal format for early-stage physical exploration where outcomes are intentionally unknown.
Culturally, boutique Japanese-style gacha has deep precedent in art toys and character IP incubation. Many enduring art-toy ecosystems began as low-stakes gacha experiments before evolving into broader worlds, narratives, and formats.
Gacha participants do not choose outcomes, reducing entitlement, speculation, or promises of value. Success is measured in engagement, delight, and cultural resonance—not floor prices or resale.
Physical production risk: As with any physical toy work, timelines and iteration cycles may shift as prototypes are refined. This proposal funds exploration and learning, not guaranteed final production.
Market response uncertainty: While gacha and art toys have strong cultural precedent, there is no guarantee of demand or resale value. Success is measured in cultural reach and experimentation, not financial return.
Prototype scope ambiguity: “~100 prototypes” may include variations, test runs, or experimental forms rather than 100 finalized, production-ready SKUs. The exact composition will emerge through making.
Revenue & legal structure unresolved: Any future revenue-sharing model, DUNA involvement, or formal ownership structure is explicitly out of scope for this proposal and would require a separate governance process.
Execution precedent: This proposal reroutes funds already fronted due to a previously passed proposal not executing. While documented, this is an edge case and not intended as a standard funding pathway.
