Definition - Lil Nouns DAO

Lil Nouns is basically a smaller version of the Nouns NFTs from which it was derived. "Nouns as children", as it says on the Lil Nouns website. That is, they have the same pixel art style and aesthetic as Nouns.

One of the most unique things about these NFTs is how they are available. To explain, instead of releasing an entire collection at once like most generative avatar collections, Lil Nouns smart contracts generate and auction off a new one every 15 minutes. Not to mention that this process will, in theory, continue indefinitely. Clearly, this is a riff on the Nouns, whose contracts produce and auction an NFT every 24 hours.

Lil Noun Proposals

Lil Nouns use their voting abilities to direct the treasury. Lil Nouns can create and vote on governance proposals, which execute transactions on the ethereum blockchain when they are approved. Up to now, there are 20 proposals on the website (2 of them active). Proposals are shown as follows from oldest to newest:

1. Create a mysterious server for lil nouns
2. Lower on-chain proposal threshold
3. Acquire Noun at market
4. Purchase Steak Noun #287 for 86 ETH
5. Fund Lil Nouns Prop House
6. Set Voting Delay and Voting Period to Match NounsDAO parameters
7. Partial ‘Fat Finger’ Refund
8. Refund Emergency Hosting Costs
9. Buy Noun #253 from Nouns DAO
10. Buy Noun #253 from Nouns DAO
11. Change Quorum requirement from 10% to 5%
12. Delegate Nouns voting power to nouncil.eth
13. Retroactive Funding and Lil Grants Pool
14. Lil Dot for Nouns DAO representative
15. Residency for lilal409
16. 3,000 Water Purification Educational Kits & Workshops for Students for 20 ETH
17. Buy Noun 102
18. Acquire ENS Domain -- LilNouns.eth
19. Buy Noun 264
20. atareh.eth as Chief content creator

Procedure

In order to understand the voting activity and the related actions to this one, this report has used flipside data to develop the analysis and results. Essential information has been extracted by filtering some information. First, the contract address that has been used to filter Lil Nouns Voting activity is 0x5d2C31ce16924C2a71D317e5BbFd5ce387854039. Then, to filter that activity on Votes it has been filtered thorugh event_name = 'VoteCast'. Moreover, another column with the quorum vote has been added to the table results for a better analysis.

Voting Activity - Analysis on Proposals

Prior to analyse the results obtained from each proposal voting activity, below is briefed the voting procedure.

First of all, it is important ot understand that 1 Lil Noun equals to one vote to direct the treasury. As explained in the introduction section, Lil Nouns are capable to create and vote on governance proposals. Moreover, a Lil Noun owner can vote on proposals that were created after it was minted only.

Then, a proposal must meet two different requirements in order to pass. The first one is the voting quorum which must be met or exceeded. The second one is that a simple majority is needed in order to be passed.

It is important to understand that as Lil Nouns increases, the quorum increases as the comunity is growing (every 15 minutes a Lil Noun is created). This means that every time that a new proposal is done, its voting quorum is higher than an older proposal.

Below chart shows the resuls of all previous proposals voted:

As it can be observed, proposals 1, 9 and 12 do not appear on above chart because they have 0 votes. On another side, proposals 3, 7, 11 and 14 do not reach the minimum quorum votes needed for the proposal to be accepted. Moreover, from those previous propsals, proposals number 7 and 14 have more negative votes so a majority is not reached anyways. Note that proposals 19 and 20 are still active, which means that the voting is still opened.

Observing below chart with the normalized results the majority can be more appreciated and above primary conclusions understood better.

Thus, below conclusions can be extracted:

• Proposals 1, 9 and 12 were directly cancelled as they did not have any votes.
• Proposals 7, 11 and 14 have not reached the simple majority required.
• Proposal 3 did not reach the minimum quorum votes necessary for the proposal to be accepted.
• Proposals not mentioned on above points passed (non-active ones).
• Quorum slope alongside the proposals confirms that it is required more votes for new updated proposals.
• Proposal with more voting activity has been number 17.

Voting Process - Holders

This section intends to analyse smaller holders during voting process. For this, a classification by groups has been done depending on the number of Lil Nouns (LN_NFT) that every user is holding:

• Placton: LN_NFT = 1
• Crabs: 1 < LN_NFT <=3
• Sharks: 3 < LN_NFT <= 5
• Whales: LN_NFT > 5

• As it can be observed in the above table which is the normalized voting activity by the different groups defined previosuly, smaller holders have a significant importance on the votes of each proposal as the voting rate of the placton group is between 35-55%.

• On another side, it is important to point out that the whales are taking more importance thorughout the latest proposals, as it started with a rate of 10-15% and the latest three proposals (without considering proposal 20 which is still active) the rate is approximately a 30%. This gain of percentage is obtained from the sharks.

• Thus, as the chart's objective was to analyse if the smaller holders were voting, it can be concluded that they are not getting excluded from the voting process with a significant importance on it.

Gas Fee in Voting Activity

Below chart represents the evolution of the gas fee (cumulative) for doing a vote against the cumulative number of votes per day. This way both slopes can be compared and primary conclusions extracted:

• The slope of the cumulative gas fee mantains constant growth which means that there is no significant changes or peaks on the gas fee for voting activity.
• On another side, the slope of the cumulative votes is not constant and have different slopes during its evolution which means that presents some peaks on a daily basis.
• The average slope of the cumulative gas fee is lower than the cumulative votes.

Conclusions

Below final conclusions can be extracted from the report:

• All different proposals have been analysed by counting all the votes (for vs against). Thus, this made possible to group those proposals in passed, failed or cancelled props.
• It was able to define the voting activity by different groups depending on the number of NFTs holding on each individual. This confirmed that smaller holders (placton) have an important role on the voting activity for the Lil Nouns Proposals.
• A correlation between gas fees and number of transactions has been shown.