As much as I like this project and the proposers, I don’t think it advances the DAO’s goals and the ask is too large (10% of our treasury). Not a fan of retroactive funding for a project the DAO didn’t signal interest in

I like the project and I’m a big fan of Gami’s ideas, but voting "no" for the following reasons: 1. Besides Omega DAO and nOmega DAO using Nouns Builder, I don’t see how the project is related to the protocol. 2. I missed seeing more visual examples of games on Omega. I know there are some examples at the end of the proposal but not enough. It would be great to visually see other use cases besides Forgeries. 3. I think it’s a big ask for a retro fund without it being previously discussed with the DAO.

very cool ideas here. and i'm a big fan of this team. but this doesn't directly proliferate the nouns protocol ecosystem so i'm voting against.

Iain Nash

This is a cool project, and i love the team but this isn't directly related to Nouns Builder as a protocol or ecosystem. This isn't something that Nouns Builder is uniquely positioned to fund.

I love innovative projects that expand what human organization and governance can mean while giving our BuilderDAO's new tools and hyperstructures to work with.

Love the team and the idea but voting against it for the lack of direct benefit to the Builder ecosystem.