Reasonable ask, considering the potential impact.

Huge fan of TNS and the team behind it but feel that at the current point of the DAO lifecycle, we should focus on funding projects that directly contribute to our mission of building Nouns Builder Protocol to empower onchain communities. Would love for the DAO to support this initiative in a different way.

Thank you to everyone who took the time to engage and vote on this proposal. If it passes, we will do our best to make BDAO proud!

Having been part of the TNS team since the beginning, and very specifically, interfacing with artists for commissions of daily art, running/handling payments to artists and contest winners, I have seen the immense talent that this kind of initiative attracts. It’s valuable to any ecosystem where the focus becomes awareness of that ecosystem. The exploration of using builder to fund a collective like this in a different way to normal DAOs is also surely very valuable to learn from. It’s a small ask/risk to builder DAO which itself was seeded by nouns, and a worthy experiment in expanding the ways The Yellow Collective can evolve from the foundations of The Noun Square. 🟡🟨💛

There is clearly a lot of momentum behind TNS already and this prop could being in a new cohort of artists and builders to BD. +++

One of the biggest challenges--and the reason I continue to vote against props that aren't directly tied to BDAO, but only speak indirectly of being built on BDAO--is that we do not have a proven pathway from "mentions" to conversion on the platform. And, given that we have a 50 eth code audit coming up, I'm firmly in the camp that we should be laser focused on platform atm (conversion, tech, UX, support). I've placed the rest of my rubric evaluation comments on X and Farcaster.

TNS will be an incredible top of the funnel. They are incredibly Nounish and will know how to make great use of the ETH. We need to capture the leads they send our way to turn this into an important growth mechanic for Builder Protocol.

the nouns square and toadyhawk have been persistent, positive builders in the ecosystem and we should support them expanding their community (and doing it on L2 in a way that can drive learnings)

Voting on behalf of Purple https://snapshot.org/#/purpdao.eth/proposal/0xd1335cbb05c0f47b81084aa323dc1ba956f5b2ae87e97c4bca2c0ba6d8a28772

Our greatest narrative is that anyone can come use the protocol, with the right idea and the right community, and build something that grows a treasury and proliferates their idea. From what I understand, seeding early stage DAOs has not helped that narrative, and it also may not have had the desired effect on the DAOs that we have sponsored in the past. The right course of action here would be to learn from the past and pivot to a model that could provide a greater, more sustaining benefit for both parties involved. I still want to help the Yellow Collective. I just don't think this is the way.

Agree with Zaak's feedback on this. We have very limited resources right now and need to focus there for the time being.

Voting no on this specific type of request. We've experimented with funding pre launch / early DAOs a few times and we've had limited success. More than happy to change this to a yes after yellow collective launches and proves out demand for their idea a bit more.

Nounish