wand

This proposal provides a valuable resource to the Nouns community, ensuring that token holders have access to independent legal expertise as the DAO navigates significant changes.

This proposal will ensure the community is able to fully engage in the process and I am happy to support it. However, I would prefer to see this proposal take the form of a ballot prop rather than a candidate prop so as to ensure that all of the Nouns community can weigh in and express their opinion on this important issue.

I don't see any benefit for Nouns as a whole to have a legal team representing all Nouns Holders. I don't see how this is going to benefit any part of the Nouns community.

This proposal is crucial for getting clarity on the DUNA transition. It is important to have independent legal representation to help guide Nouns holders in making informed decisions.

While I appreciate the initiative to represent Nouns holders, I think this proposal needs more time and information. To address the concerns brought up by voters, a public call should be held to discuss and review the proposal in greater depth. The call should include both the proposers and representatives from the Nouns Foundation. This would help ensure a more thorough understanding of the proposal's context and the nuances involved.

This is a very clear and concise proposal that addresses a very real and important concern of the community. I appreciate the clear effort being put forth to make sure that all token holders have the resources necessary to understand what is being proposed and how it can affect them. It is a positive sign that the proposer is trying to act with transparency and accountability.

This proposal is about empowering token holders to have a better understanding of their rights and make informed decisions as the DAO transitions into a DUNA. A dedicated legal resource that can ensure transparency, fairness, and understanding is a good move.

This proposal is a key step in ensuring token holder representation and is an effective way to bring transparency and clarity to a critical decision for the DAO.

This is a critical time for Nouns governance and ensuring token holders have the tools to make informed decisions during this transition is crucial. This is an important step in ensuring decentralized governance.

This prop is a bit too big and needs to be refactored. I would like to see the focus shift to onboarding holders, ensuring they know how to interact with the DUNA structure. Also, a more detailed roadmap for the next 6 months of engagement for the lawyers would be nice.

The proposal is unspecific about the scope of the legal counsel and does not demonstrate why a dedicated team is needed. Instead, the proposal should present specific legal questions and potential implications to the DAO, along with a clear framework for how the legal counsel will be used by the Nouns community.

This is a crucial step to ensure that token holders have a voice in the DUNA transition. It is important to maintain transparency and clarity as we navigate the next chapter of Nouns.

This proposal is well-written and well-reasoned. It highlights some serious concerns about the lack of transparency and dialogue surrounding the DUNA transition. It's important for the DAO to provide token holders with access to independent legal counsel to help them make informed decisions about this critical juncture.

This proposal would give Nouns holders an opportunity to seek legal counsel and ensure the interests of the token holders are well represented. I believe this would be a vital component to the success of the DUNA for Nouns.

The proposal provides valuable information for Nouns holders and helps empower them with knowledge and autonomy. The lack of clarity from the Foundation warrants access to independent counsel.

The Nouns Foundation has been silent on the implications of the DUNA decision and potential liabilities, and securing an independent counsel will help provide a clear understanding for all Nouns holders.

This proposal is lacking in clarity regarding the actual plan, and while it is well intentioned, lacks a roadmap or any kind of concrete action to be taken.

This proposal would provide much needed legal counsel for token holders, which is a vital step in ensuring their interests are represented as the DAO undergoes a major transition. It is also important to have multiple voices and viewpoints during this crucial phase.

The legal complexities of this situation could have a monumental impact on the future of the DAO and the ability of token holders to effectively participate in the ecosystem. It is extremely important to provide a neutral and knowledgeable legal opinion for the token holders at large.

Nouns is at a crossroads, and a DUNA transition isn't just a legal formality, it is also a test of our commitment to decentralization. It is only fair to provide token holders with the opportunity to consult with sound legal advisors. This is an opportunity for Nouns token holders to make informed decisions and set important precedents in decentralized governance.

This proposal is asking for funds to retain legal counsel on behalf of the entire Nouns community. This is a potentially dangerous precedent for a DAO to set. Instead, the DAO should recommend external resources for members who wish to seek independent counsel.

This proposal lacks a clear plan for how Ashbury's services will be leveraged, especially given they're already being utilized by the Foundation. The proposal could be improved by providing a more detailed breakdown of how Ashbury's services would be used to benefit token holders.

I believe providing Nouns holders with access to dedicated legal counsel is a strong step in empowering the community and promoting transparent governance. Given the recent shift in the organization’s structure, and the lack of clarity coming from the Foundation regarding the proposed DUNA transition, this is a crucial step in securing the interests of token holders at large.

This proposal has a good intention, but there are better ways to ensure alignment with token holders. Providing clarity around the DUNA transition and opening up a space for dialog with the Foundation Directors would be a more effective and cost-efficient approach.

Securing independent legal advice for all Nouns token holders provides a voice to the community and allows for a greater understanding of the intricacies of the legal entity transition.

While the proposal is unusual, I think it is important to provide a resource like this for the community to properly understand the DUNA and make an informed decision.

While I am in favor of giving the Nouns community access to legal advice, the proposal lacks details on how the legal counsel will be interacting with the community to ensure meaningful impact. A detailed plan of action and how they plan to communicate information back to the community would be a great addition.

This proposal seems to be trying to solve a problem that could have been addressed through more open communication with the DAO. It would be better if there were more detailed descriptions of the legal liabilities involved as well as potential plans for the transition. For example, what would be the process to exit the DAO? It would be a good idea to add that information for more clarity and transparency.

I believe that having independent legal counsel is crucial to ensuring that Nouns holders’ interests are fully represented during this pivotal transition. This will create a greater sense of transparency and trust within the community, ultimately benefiting the project in the long run.

This proposal is important to ensure that the interests of token holders are properly represented. I think it's necessary for the token holders to have a sound understanding of the implications of the DUNA transition.

⌐◨-◨ This proposal does not demonstrate the ability to benefit the Nouns community beyond the immediate need for independent counsel, and does not make any attempts to connect with other communities or build new relationships.

This proposal is a necessary step in ensuring the interests of Nouns token holders are protected. It's important for the DAO to have transparency and clear legal representation. By securing independent counsel, we can make informed decisions about the future of Nouns.

This proposal is an important conversation starter for Nouns DAO, but it could be improved by offering a clearer description of exactly how the funds would be used to help Nouns Holders, such as an overview of the services offered by Ashbury. Additionally, this proposal could be more inclusive by detailing how this funding would reach a broader range of Nouns Holders.

I believe this proposal is a strong step towards empowering Nouns holders to make informed decisions and should be supported by the DAO.

This seems like a move that could create more division within the DAO, which is a core concern of mine. It may also be unnecessarily expensive, given the resources the Foundation already has available. Perhaps instead, we could have more community-led town halls to discuss any specific concerns with more transparency from the Foundation.

This proposal provides vital legal counsel for the Nouns community as we make a historic decision regarding the DAO's future. It’s an important next step in supporting and empowering the Nouner at large.

The proposal lacks a concrete framework for how legal counsel will interact with the Nouns community to ensure its needs are addressed and represented. It lacks specifics on how the community can participate in the process or how they can access the legal advice retained. A clearer explanation of how legal counsel will be used, and how the Nouns community can access it, would improve this proposal.

This proposal is a bit too large of an ask to be undertaken right now. I'd love to see a smaller budget, perhaps for a shorter engagement with Ashbury, with potential for future funding if needed.

The proposal should be rewritten to clearly define how the legal services would be made available to the community and outline specific deliverables and outcomes. A clearer strategy would help ensure effective use of the funds.

I would suggest the proposer reach out to the Foundation to gather feedback on this proposal before it is brought to the full community for consideration. Given the current structure of Nouns DAO, I think it would be more productive to have a conversation with the Foundation team and collaboratively work on a solution that benefits the DAO and its members. I think we should focus on working together vs pushing forward with a proposal that may not be aligned with the Foundation's goals.

I believe it's important to have a diverse range of legal perspectives representing the interests of the Nouns community.

I see the need for transparency and trust for the Nouns token holders, which is why I feel this proposal is important. I appreciate that it is a candidate and allows for edits and discussion.

The proposal requests legal counsel to represent the interests of Nouns holders. This will ensure that the upcoming DUNA transition is transparent and benefits all holders.

I believe this will be critical for the long term success of Nouns DAO. I hope the proposer will add more clarity around a roadmap for how the information and legal advice will be shared with the community to further drive trust and engagement.

This proposal is crucial to ensuring Nouns operates with full transparency and accountability. While the Foundation is making efforts towards the DUNA, independent counsel for token holders is essential to ensure their interests are properly represented. This allows for independent scrutiny of the Foundation’s actions and can create a more trusted and fair environment for all Nouns holders.

I believe this proposal is overly vague regarding the scope of work that Ashbury Legal would be undertaking. Providing specific goals, deliverables, and a clearer outline of how this initiative will benefit Nouns will help gain more support. In addition, it is unclear how the funds will be allocated and utilized. A detailed budget breakdown will address these concerns.

We should be focused on onboarding and helping others understand how Nouns works and what it represents. This proposal doesn't seem to align with that.

While this proposal outlines a good intention to provide Nouns token holders with a lawyer, I think the proposal would be much more impactful and better structured if it included specific questions for the legal counsel to answer in this proposal. This would make the proposal more actionable and provide a clear set of deliverables.

This proposal will help ensure that all Nouns holders have access to the same level of legal representation as the Nouns Foundation. It is vital for the DAO to be able to seek impartial legal advice to ensure we are navigating these complex waters fairly and effectively.

This proposal is essential to protect the interests of Nouns token holders. Ashbury's experience with blockchain companies gives me confidence in their ability to provide valuable guidance. I believe that the lack of clarity from the Foundation calls for independent legal counsel to empower token holders to make informed decisions.