Definitely one of the more existential proposals so far.

I love the development of open source, scalable infrastructure.

I've had a couple of issues with the website but think they'll get sorted out easily.

It begs the question for Nouners: what should the revenue model of these third parties be? Can people expect to build open source stuff and be compensated by Nouns, or will these third-party platforms expect to monetize thru subscriptions/ads/etc? We've had some of the same questions at Collective/House of Nouns.

devcarrot: I recommend we vote No on this proposal because Nouns Builder is early in its lifecycle and I haven't seen much firm information on the charter or direction for Nouns Builder DAO in regards to what its treasury should be used for aside from generalize-able Nounish tooling. At the same time, the new Nouns Builder DAO would have a risk of fund extraction. Even though a veto power exists, this power comes with a coordination cost if secured correctly. Having a large "imbalance" between the auction proceeds and the DAO's treasury early on in the process feels dangerous to me.

I'd be amenable if this were a smaller initial seed, the NounsDAO were to follow on by amplifying proposals/prop-house rounds/grant pools/etc. after the Nouns Builder DAO is formed, or the NounsDAO were to purchase Nouns Builder DAO votes during the auction.

9999: Thanks to Zora for effort and dedication to building with Nouns. I’m voting against because I feel this proposal and Builder DAO itself need refinements before an ask of this size. My concerns are these:

If this tool truly needs to be a DAO the market will signal as such using the auction price of its governing NFTs. Just like all other Nounish DAOs, Builder should grow its community and treasury from natural demand and develop its ecosystem with people who understand its vision.

If the tool is not meant to be a DAO, then with no proven track-record, the ask for 1000ETH to jump-start demand is overkill. All other large scale, long-term projects/pods have started small and demonstrated demand before asking for outsized funding (See Prop House Protocol: Public Infrastructure by Nouns DAO as cited in this proposal). Builder currently has no metrics to match the size of this ask.

The Zora team should decide which approach to take. If the former, it doesn’t make sense to come to Nouns DAO for a treasury injection. If the latter, the project should first gather momentum before an ask of this size can be considered a hell yes. Thanks again.

24 yes, 25 No, 3 Abstain

SuperTightWoody "ONE THOUSAND ETH....BRO We could buy a country"

Mach "i'd prefer to start with a smaller seed if anything to see viability and how it evolves" "it is pretty exciting to think about the potential of this"

profwerder "BIG ASK --- but tremendous what has been created and it's a set tool that will exist forever. Is it a crazy amount of $? yeah but I think this is an insane value." "I changed my vote to NO but it's truly just because of the ask. If we can get this prop revised to a better place, I'll be a yes again." "Best scenario would be funding distributed over time and/or tied to milestones."

Sidenoun I think the ask is of a significant amount. I’m clearly not alone in thinking so. As a developer, I’m very appreciative of the work that goes into any project, let alone one that has this type of deliverable. The ZORA team are of course a team that I’d vote for. However, that said and with some of the comments on the Nouncil call regarding the hefty request. I think, it’d make some sense to potentially gradually retrospectively reward as we see the success of the protocol roll out to more DAO’s. I can’t cite who made the comment regarding marketing, but I feel that’s probably something that this prop is missing in terms of information. Not just for Nouns, but for those opting to use it.

systemdm.⌐◨-◨ "I think this is an amazing Change the world kind of thing!!! ✊🏻✊🏻✊🏻"

andrewladdusaw "I'm shocked at how confident I feel in this 1000 ETH ask. Jacob is a thought leader in the entire space. Zora is one of the premier orgs in the space. They are already heavily invested with 20 Nouns of their own. They have already delivered the product on their own dime. PLUS, this is not a retro reward, it's funding a DAO with the goal of furthering the incredible work that's already been done.

I'm trying not to speak in hyperbole here, but I think this has the potential to be a really special thing, not just for Nouns, but the future of crypto."

"I'm still not 100% on where I land on this. All my previous comments still stand on my belief in the tool and the team. I still think it's going to be game changer. I originally told them I thought a huge retro should be offered for a free tool, but that amount in my mind was like 250. When you factor the audit costs they referenced as well, I'd be closer to 350-400. Admittedly, I have no idea what things cost in the tech world, but I'd like to see this ask be 40-50% of what it is now with Nouns supporting it further later on if it's found to be providing outsized value."

kerimbonia "nothing more to add to what's already been said but this proposal is dope on so many levels (beyond just nouns) and bullish af!"

XIN "Huge ask but huge project and the team is great and have extensive experience making projects and delivering Software and art is the best things to fund imo with the endless amount of reach they can have and this seems amazing Im heavily leaning on a yes vote but i dont see anything about the code being open source or what license they will publish it with? Hopefully gpl or even better agpl"

Juan ⌐◨-◨ "Would love to see some traction or more details on how they would deploy the capital (criteria, vetting, etc), seems a little too much like a "blank check". Leaning towards a "no" vote with the hopes of becoming a "yes" when there is more traction or more details available." "100E-250E I'm starting to look at this like a Pod now for something large scale like this I think that would be an appropriate range, with follow-on funding earmarked based on actual performance and other metrics that could be determined appropriately by the DAO"

H O N K D I D D L Y "Plenty of forks exist, this tool is only to bring the lowest effort forks into being. This will bring little to no new builders.

Prop house is MUCH higher ROI.

Further, Zora got $50M to build tooling - they should be seeking subscriptions for their tools, not one-offs."

Enjoy reading this discussion? Learn more here: nouncil.wtf

I'm not convinced that we should be making a binary decision on this. Nor am I convinced that they need all 1000 ETH right away to bootstrap the DAO. My biggest concern with this proposal is that it's all or nothing. this is a common issue with Nouns proposals.

I would much prefer a more milestone-based approach when proposals are being written. I know that's not built into the system right now, but perhaps proposals asking for a large amount can be split up into several smaller ones.

Plenty of forks exist, this tool is only to bring the lowest effort forks into being. This will bring little to no new builders.

Prop house is MUCH higher ROI. Generally speaking, we could do much more with $1.5M.

Further, Zora got $50M to build tooling - why do they need a one-off payment of $1.5M from nouns?

This is a disservice to both their investors and their business. They should seeking subscriptions for their tools, not more one-off vc-style funding.

We are big fans of Builder and Zora, but we would love to see some traction or more details on how they would deploy the capital (criteria, vetting, etc). We would encourage the team to provide more details and/or lower their initial ask with the intention to return for a larger ask once there is demonstrable traction in the market.

We are big fans of Builder and Zora, but we would love to see some traction first or more details on how they would deploy the capital (criteria, vetting, etc). We would encourage the team to provide more details and/or lower their initial ask with the intention to return for a larger ask once there is demonstrable traction in the market.

1000 ETH is too high. Love the product, but Prop House could have been utilized to build this tool several times over for that amount. A lot of talented builders would have jumped at the opportunity to build this for far less. Zora has raised at least $50MM and is now requesting that Nouns bootstrap the treasury of a DAO that may or may not see any traction. Assuming Zora will control Builder DAO for awhile. What will the funds be used for? Will there be a vote by builder DAO to reimburse Zora? Unfortunately there are too many questions for me to vote yes on such a big ask.

I like the builder and the potential for more external proliferation, but this is a no for me in it's current form.

Yes, it's a lot of money but the overall structure of the proposal is vague and not exciting on paper. I think a proposal this large (if it has the votes internally or not) should help with making the community understand what they are doing and why it's exciting. There are numerous ways to do this via videos, spaces, interviews or AMA in a Discord etc.

The other thing I would have liked to see is a smaller ask up front with benchmarks and timeline for additional funding periods.

This is going to pass and I am actually excited to see the potential outward proliferation here, would like to see others in the community excited as well via a communicative proposal layout with community engagement ❤️

#Ugly

Seeding Builder DAO with 1000 ETH does not feel maximally nounish to me.

I believe that Builder DAO should use their own tool, launch their own DAO, and raise the funds via their own daily auction.

Have more faith in the tool, the protocol, etc., and lead by example.

Presumably, every other DAO that launches with this tool will attempt to raise the majority of their capital via the auctions just as the OG Nouns DAO has done. So it seems odd to me that the DAO governing the tool is circumventing the mechanic their own tool provides to raise the majority of their capital.

Even something like Auction #1 going to Nouns DAO for 1000 ETH sits better with me than just sending the 1000 ETH over.

⌐◨-◨