Introduction

> Are they nouns when they were kids? or children of nouns? who knows...

Lil nouns are a NFT collection but not like any other NFTs in many aspects:

• The are generated differently: every 15 min For Ever there is an auction where everyone can bid on a soon to be born LilNoun.
• The team is professional and documentation is performed exceptionally.
• Community is active and caring and future is decided in a decentralized manner in which every LilNoun counts as 1 vote power.

As a LilNoun holder you can vote abstain, for or against a proposal directly or delegate your vote(s) to another address to vote on behalf of you. Since these votes are On-Chain activities on Ethereum block chain they need gas fees, and this alone can have serious effect on voting activities.

In this dashboard we are going to take a look at this voting activity and see if there seems to be any pattern present in voters.

Data & Analysis

To begin With, Lets take a look at Voting history of LilNoun Proposals.

Notes:

• There were 18 finished proposals and there are 2 active proposals in LilNounsDAO.
• Proposal 17 had the most votes with 198 and proposal 11 ended with only 21 votes!
• Proposal number 1, 9 and 12 are absent since they were canceled.

Judging from chart above we can confirm that voting activity doesn't match with number of LilNouns. while this is natural that not everybody is interested in participating in governance, but i don't think having lower 10% participation is normal for a well stablished DAO.

My approach to see if there is any pattern between holders and DAO participant, is that to see among all the wallets that holds or ever held a LilNoun, how many participated in DAO and how many didn't; and how they stand in terms of number of holdings.

This is a table of LilNoun Holders and their number of holdings (First two addresses are related to treasury i believe):

Now the real Deal! I split apart the voters from non-voters and showed their level of participation & number of holdings.

Some Notes:

• There are only 2 addresses with more than 100 holdings and since they are of treasury they didn't participated in votings. I don't know if they are allowed to or chose not to, but if they are able to vote they can easily win every proposal.
• Low participants are those who voted 1 to 3 times and among them 67 people have only 1 NFT and 37 people have 2-5 NFT.
• People with 2-5 NFTs have more share in medium participation (4 to 9 votes) than other groups.
• No holder below 6 NFT actively participated in DAO (more than 10 vote)

But we were most importantly looking for those who didn't vote... As chart below suggests:

• 748 Wallet with 1 LilNoun (now or before) didn't participate in DAO and that's about 70%
• Wallets with 2 to 5 NFT also constitute 27% of Non-Voters.

conclusion:

• Not that every wallet with 1 or so NFT is reluctant to Vote, but lower the number lower the participation is an obvious trend among lilNoun holders.
• Is it for gas? that can't be stated with certainty. First, Those who are able to mint or buy LilNouns (considering its average price) shouldn't have problem with paying a few dollars to vote. But this could be interesting to see how gas fee effects on overall DAO participation.