Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/citynouns
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
SwarthyHatter
@swarthyhatter
## 🟥 P1 Cohort Response to Exit Negotiations Hey everyone, We need to be perfectly clear about our position on the exit proposal given the direction these discussions have taken. @zamees , we have been patient, and are beginning to tire of the heel dragging. 1 post to the community server every 3 days does little to show you are prioritizing our cohorts desire to exit in good faith.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
SwarthyHatter
@swarthyhatter
--- ## P2 ✅ Concessions We Have Already Made Let's be honest about the major concessions we have **already** made in good faith: * We **agreed to send tokens to the Grants Wallet** instead of burning them, even though that choice fundamentally **undermines our original goal** of preventing governance centralization. * We **agreed to return the citynouns.eth ENS** at cost (0.1 ETH), despite it representing months of our work in branding and community-building. * We have **kept these negotiations private**, shielding this conflict from the wider DAO to preserve cohesion and reputations. We made these concessions to show we're reasonable partners. But let's be absolutely clear: these were not minor or costless compromises. They were big sacrifices intended to move us toward resolution. ---
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
SwarthyHatter
@swarthyhatter
## ⚠️ P3 Our Concerns About Those Concessions These concessions have *serious* implications: * **Grants Wallet Transfer:** Risks consolidating power in the hands of those we no longer trust, literally handing over voting weight to the very structure we're exiting in protest of. * **ENS Transfer at Cost:** Returns a foundational asset with no premium or markup, despite its clear symbolic and strategic value for City Nouns' identity. * **Keeping it Private:** Allows leadership to present a false front of unity while ignoring the real, unresolved fractures in governance and trust. We have bent over backwards to demonstrate compromise — but these points are not without real cost or risk. ---
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
SwarthyHatter
@swarthyhatter
## P4 🔎 Bob’s Objections — and Why They’re Flawed **1️⃣ The Playbook Payment is “Overpaying” or Lacks Value** * The Playbook was explicitly commissioned, delivered, and *used* by City Nouns. Bob himself has cited it as valuable in the past. Now that payment is due, it’s suddenly worthless? That is **textbook bad faith**. * The DAO used it to prepare for launches. It was a deliverable under the Builder Prop. This is not a negotiation — it’s settling a debt.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction