wand

Nouns governance is incredibly complex and I think a project like Wand could help simplify and improve how we engage with our DAO. I think the proposed roadmap is a good start.

The current proposal reads more like a research grant and not a product that will be ready for community use. Wand is building towards something great, but I don’t think this proposal has fully demonstrated it. This project needs to show clear, concise, and measurable objectives for the next 7 months with a demo ready for community feedback. I would also be more supportive of a smaller ask and a longer runway for the project to iterate.

I still feel that this is a great idea to help with governance but I feel like it needs more work and a more clear plan for implementation. I think it should go back to candidate stage and be fleshed out further.

There is a lot of ground to cover and I don’t see enough specific details on the roadmap to gauge whether the outcome is going to be worthwhile. I would like to see a more fleshed out plan of how this project will actually help the DAO. I am hoping to see a more specific roadmap and a smaller scope to start with.

This proposal is overly focused on helping proposers, with a limited description on how it can improve the overall Nouns ecosystem.

I love the concept of this project but the proposal could benefit from further clarification regarding the impact of this technology in the Nouns ecosystem. I'd also be interested in seeing a more granular and detailed breakdown of the budget allocation.

Voting against this proposal due to the complexity of this project. I believe Wand's initial prototype lacked the clarity to show its value and how it would integrate into Nouns. If the team could focus on building an MVP for a specific element of the project, such as the proposal editor or the voter profiles, I'd be more likely to vote in favor.

While this is a good effort and a worthy problem to solve, it's difficult to see how it can truly improve governance for the vast majority of Nouns stakeholders. The proposal lacks specifics on how Wand will be integrated into the Nouns ecosystem beyond the existing proposal structure. It would be helpful to define how this project will integrate into the daily governance experience.

It is still unclear how Wand will support a more diverse group of individuals in the governance process. I encourage the proposers to clearly articulate how this tool will increase governance participation and address the concerns of new and existing Nouners.

I like the idea of an AI-powered governance tool. I'm less confident in its ability to predict community votes accurately and even less confident in how these predictions would be implemented. Instead, I would prefer to see Wand focus on providing real-time feedback on proposal quality, such as identifying areas that could be better explained, or proposing additional information that would make a proposal stronger.

I don't have a lot of confidence that this technology is going to stick, or that it's a valuable use of treasury funds. There are more direct and immediate ways to increase voter participation, and we have several existing projects that could use this capital to further iterate and expand. To make this a more attractive proposal, I'd recommend showing the team's commitment to Nouns by contributing to governance themselves - through voting, making comments, or even buying a Noun.

The proposal should focus on a smaller, more achievable set of deliverables to ensure a clear path forward. For example, instead of creating a fully featured editor, the initial focus could be on developing an AI-powered proposal prediction tool. The proposal could also clarify the metrics used to measure the effectiveness of Wand's functionality, including the specific user behaviors they aim to influence.

This proposal is very interesting, but I believe that it can improve on the clarity of what specifically this funding will achieve. For example, if the proposal could clarify the technical approach for generating the voting predictions, or elaborate on a tangible goal for the vote predictions, like increasing participation to a specific number, then the proposal would be more convincing.

The proposal is not a great fit for Nouns DAO, while it could be a great addition to other DAOs it is not a good use of treasury funds for Nouns.

I appreciate the work done by wiz and the team so far, but the vote prediction model still requires more development and testing. With a wider range of voter behavior and participation, the model would be able to provide more valuable insights. Maybe the team can focus on improving the accuracy of these predictions to further enhance the value of this project.

Even with the updates, this proposal's scope is still very wide for the given ask. I would be more in favor if the proposal team narrowed the focus. I think the initial roadmap would be more impactful if it focused on the editor and AI feedback with a more concrete deadline. I think it would also be helpful to include how the team plans to improve the accuracy of their predictions.

I believe the goal of Wand is great and could benefit the DAO, however, the current scope and design of the proposal is not quite there yet. Focusing on proposal feedback and iterative improvements seems like a good start, I would encourage the proposer to continue to iterate upon a new version of the proposal to address these concerns.

The development of Wand can benefit Nouns in multiple ways by making the governance process more accessible to new builders and participants.

While this proposal has great aspirations I think more information needs to be provided around the current state of Wand and how the proposed improvements will make an actual impact in practice. I believe this proposal would be more impactful if it were a smaller, more focused request for the development of a single, but essential aspect, of Wand rather than an ongoing development stream.

I think that Wand has the potential to increase proposal throughput and make it easier for more people to contribute to Nouns in a meaningful way. It will be very interesting to see what happens if we empower this team and let them cook.

The proposal focuses on building a tool to make it easier for people to propose, but the proposal doesn't contain information on how the tool will contribute to a diverse community and could potentially lead to less interesting proposals.

I appreciate the time and effort put into this proposal but the scope is far too ambitious. With the current state of AI and lack of real world utility it feels like a gamble. The proposal could be improved by focusing on a specific application of AI to improve governance rather than trying to create the solution to all governance problems.

While I see merit in this project, I would like to see a smaller proposal for a proof of concept first. This will give the DAO more time to see the potential and the impact of the project and ensure a better return on investment.

While this is a noble goal, the proposed features seem too basic, and it's not clear how Wand would provide value beyond simply being a more sophisticated user interface. For example, the current proposal does not specify how Wand would utilize its AI model to improve the quality of Nouns proposals. The value proposition could be stronger if Wand included features that go beyond the UX like assisting in proposal creation, curation, or analysis.

Wand is innovative and has the potential to impact the Nouns DAO, increasing proposal throughput and participation, which are both priorities for the treasury.

Wand has the potential to increase governance participation. I am hopeful that this proposal will result in a tool that could help empower a wider range of individuals to confidently participate in governance.

The proposal is ambitious but lacks concrete plans for how Wand will be used, and its success is not clearly tied to how it will benefit the community. The proposal would benefit from a section outlining how Wand will be used by artists and builders, and how it will add value to the current ecosystem, and how it will be adopted by other communities.

I think the idea is good and I like the goal of making it easier to submit proposals. However, I believe a 95 ETH budget is too large for a project that is still in the early stages of development. Instead of asking for such a large upfront funding, the DAO could support a smaller ask and allow the proposers to prove their ability to deliver before making a larger investment.

This is a very interesting concept and I love how this proposal is iteratively improving. However, more time is needed to thoroughly evaluate how this will function and what potential issues it might introduce. A shorter-term, more focused proof of concept would be much more compelling.

The proposal is lacking in detail and specifics. A clear path, plan, and timeline for deploying the tool to the public would be more impactful.

Wand is an ambitious project that has the potential to make Nouns more accessible to new builders. I am confident that it will make governance more engaging and efficient for all parties involved.

The current proposal offers a compelling path to making governance more approachable and streamlined. With a clear roadmap and focus on AI-powered vote predictions, Wand has the potential to significantly enhance participation.

I'm excited to see the Wand project continue to develop. It has the potential to increase participation and streamline governance while keeping it user-friendly.

It's a very creative idea with a clear roadmap and potential for large impact. I'm excited about the possibilities.

This proposal has the potential to make the Nouns governance process more efficient and engaging by empowering builders and voters with access to real-time feedback and insights, which could lead to better outcomes.

Wand could help scale governance and encourage new participants in Nouns. The proposal is well laid out and explains the project's key features and benefits. I would like to see more discussion on the potential risks of using AI in governance.

I’m not sold on the necessity for Wand at this point. The concept of AI-powered governance is fascinating but a full-fledged AI requires more than just a proposal editor and prediction tools. To make this proposal more compelling, consider adding a roadmap for a more mature, data-driven approach and how it can enhance Nouns' ecosystem.

This proposal is very ambitious, and the team should spend more time fleshing out specific use cases and examples of how Wand would be utilised by the Nouns community. In particular, I think it would be helpful to see examples of how a proposal editor could be integrated into existing interfaces.

I'm not sure I can call this a 'hell yes' when it comes to allocating almost 10% of the dao's funds. I also don't think an "AI powered vote prediction" is a good enough justification for this level of funding. I think this is a great idea that is worth exploring, but it needs more data, concrete milestones and a lower ask. I’d like to see this come back in a much smaller format with a revised roadmap.

This proposal has a great concept and I think it's a great way to help onboard more people into Nouns Governance. I think the addition of user profiles could also provide a great opportunity for building a more personalized and engaging experience.

I believe that scaling governance for Nouns is a key element to its long-term success. Wand's approach to AI-assisted governance seems like an exciting path towards creating a more accessible and sustainable DAO.

This proposal provides a valuable tool that can help drive more participation in Nouns Governance. The prototype proved its ability to predict proposal outcomes, but the focus on improving accuracy of those predictions is needed for success.

I am impressed by the prototype but believe more community input is required to ensure that Wand is a good fit for the Nouns ecosystem. Specifically, the proposal needs more detail on how the product will work for both non-Nouns holders and the core team. This proposal could benefit from more information on how Wand can improve the onboarding experience for new Nouners and also help the core team streamline proposal review processes.

This proposal is a great idea, but it needs more transparency. I think it would be a good idea to include a more clear description of how Wand will be used to support Nouns governance.

The proposal outlines a clear roadmap and showcases the potential for Wand to address a key challenge in Nouns governance. The goal of increasing proposal throughput without exacerbating governance fatigue is a clear and important goal for the Nouns DAO, and Wand offers a novel solution to that.

This proposal is trying to achieve too much at once, and I am unsure if the DAO can deliver on this vision in its current form. I'd recommend focusing on one to two key deliverables and establishing clear proof of concept before seeking further funding.

The proposal has a lot of potential, but lacks a concrete vision on how Wand can benefit the community and it's unclear if the project has the ability to become a successful application with the limited scope. The proposal also reads more like a fundraising request than a community project.

This is still a bit too big of a request, and the proposal doesn't mention any specific changes to address issues that came up with the previous version. I think the team can improve this by providing more detailed updates and specific features for each version.

This is a very ambitious project to create governance-aware AI. I believe the current roadmap is still too vague. More details around user profile definition and automated feedback would be beneficial to help understand the project's potential and increase confidence in it's success.

This proposal promises to be an incredibly impactful project for the future of Nouns governance and participation, and I am excited about the prospect of scaling onchain governance through AI.