can we please get some independent verification that the payload on the onchain proposal actually does what it says it does?
@offchainlabs @Frisson @krst @GFXlabs and so on?
ideally, before more people vote on it without verifying it.
As in @web3citizenxyz representation, voting FOR. Below the rationale:
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst, @Sinkas, and @Manugotsuka, and it’s based on their combined research, fact-checking, and ideation.
We voted FOR. We’ve posted full rationale here.
1 Like
gm, voted FOR as expressed above.
Thank you for the proposal.
Even though it was difficult to deeply understand it, it was relatively easy to decide on it. My vote on Tally will be aligned with my vote on Snapshot and will be FOR, like, almost, 100% of the other votes.
My rationale is that after the EIP-4844, Nova became much less cost-effective. @krst said, and I do agree that :
With the proposal passing, it seems as if we are ‘abandoning’ Nova. I also saw a relative comment from @maxlomu. But are we abandoning it, or is it already abandoned? By visiting https://nova.arbiscan.io/charts anyone can see that in the last 24 hours, there are no block rewards, contracts verified, or total gas used. Also, I have the chart regarding the tx/day following:
Unfortunately, what the charts show is that the Nova blockchain is mostly even-driven anymore. It would be nice to find ways to reuse this tool for the common good. It is up to us to explore if and how, but for now, it seems like this proposal is the only way forward.