Allowing the DAO to manually issue .eth 2LDs, including 1- and 2- character ones

[pol.eth]

pol.eth

gm frens,

This is my first time posting on the forum despite being an active ens community member on ct since 2021. So please be nice

Why did I decide to post on this matter?

I think this is a very important topic that the ens community has been looking forward to for years.

If this passes without the ENS community having talked about it on twitter, this will have very bad consequences on ENS DAO reputation. The ens community is mostly on twitter. The percentage of the community active on the forum is epsilon.

The ENS DAO should not interfere with name ownership. Name ownership shall not be infringed can also be, and should be, interpreted as: “The ENS DAO won’t register names and won’t privilege a person or organization at the detriment of others”.

@clowes.eth

My immediate gut reaction to this was no. The eth.eth situation is suboptimal, but there is a lot of subjectivity to this. The DAO in principle can do this already with an accounting exercise, but the optics are really important here IMO. I don’t think a smart contract method should allow any group to have preferential access to expiring names.

I agree with clowes.eth on this. Just because the DAO can already register names for free doesn’t mean it’s fine and that it should do it. This would be perceived so badly by the community.

zk.eth and l2.eth are top 10 .eth names that can bring a lot of revenue for the dao treasury AND bring a lot of eyes and new users to ens (major dns domains sales make the headlines and it won’t be different for ens)

@clowes.eth

Why should ZK Email get zk.eth over ZK Sync (as an example)?

I can see zk.eth and l2.eth selling for millions of united states dollarinos. The DAO and Labs team should not underestimate the impact of huge sales on adoption. Tech alone doesn’t win, human emotions play a considerable role. And money has been always charged, over human history, with a lot of human emotions.

@nick.eth

eth.eth is currently owned by Virgil Griffith, who has no access to the wallet it is owned by. It will soon expire and the DAO could use this functionality to register it and reserve it for ENS operations.

Why would the DAO need eth.eth? This is a collector item that should belong to the collector who wants it the most and is ready to pay the most for it.

The community waited years for this. Let’s not ruin it by suggesting that it would be normal for the DAO to register the best names.

No one deserves to own zk.eth more than the person willing to pay the most for it. And if you want it but can’t afford it you can use zkm.eth, zk.xyz, zk.us or zk.ens.eth.

As for ens.eth, the DAO should just renew it with treasury fund and keep the accounting headache for the accountants