1 citizen = 1 vote

After separate conversations and today, listening to Sinful and Canessa’s last twitter space, it seems apparent to me that a lot of Decentraland citizens feel that the Voting system, using VP, creates large inequality. Attempts at VP delegation and talks of additional VP being added to other assets outside of land, names, and mana holding have been considered and there has been a lot of debate around the topic. One potential resolve for this, that perked my ears, was the idea of restructuring the voting system and ridding it entirely of VP(where 1 citizen = 1 vote). How do we feel about this?
The point of starting this forum conversation and posing this question here is to continue the conversation and extend it to those who may have missed previous conversations and may have an opinion to weigh in with.
I’d like to hear about some pros/cons to the idea of creating a voting system where one person = 1 vote.

I personally don’t think it is a terrible idea, initially. I believe something similar to this will encourage, individuals with proposals to be passed, to include themselves in the community and strengthen communication to do so.
I’m no expert but there are also probably ways this can be taken advantage of as well(i.e. creating multiple wallets to make multiple votes)

How do you feel about this?
Any further opinions or ideas about fine tuning these thoughts are encouraged and appreciated!


I’m not entirely against the idea. It would be a truly democratic option if it could be implemented in a way that insured that it could not be abused. The idea of a KYC type ‘soul bound’ NFT comes to mind. The main trouble with that is it still has the potential for abuse. I see possibilities for abuse in the following ways:

  1. One user could utilize multiple wallets to abuse by having friends and family secure a soul-bound NFT on their behalf, while allowing them to utilize their vote to gain additional voting power.

  2. Similar to IRL, identity theft could be a concern. Individuals who look similar may be able to trick the system or team responsible for verifying the identity.

  3. Upon death or lack of interest of being involved anymore, wallets containing a soul bound NFT could have ownership transferred or even sold in a discrete way. This could result in a VP black market of sorts.

Other considerations might be that such a implementation would go against the decentralized nature of the platform. Many people would be unwilling to verify their identity, even if that information was kept secret. Additionally this would involve some sort of centralized party to verify identity which would likely be protested.

In order to enact any sort of change, its going to take an overwhelming and almost unfathomable amount of VP. Those who ‘hold the gold’ may not be willing to vote in favor of ANY proposal which removes any of the power they have become accustomed to holding. The idea that the masses could generate enough VP to outvote early adopters, while noble, doesn’t seem feasible at this point either, with the existing population and the price of land and MANA.

I don’t know what the proper implementation path will look like, if we can even find one at all. But I do know without a shadow of a doubt that we shouldn’t expect it to be easy. My personal belief is that it will be impossible unless we are able to find a solution that is mutually beneficial to everyone in the community, but especially to the whales and early adopters. I don’t want to sound like a doomsday preacher, but it may actually take a total collapse of the entire ecosystem to get everyone on the same page.

Whatever happens, its going to be a bumpy ride, and I see a lot of blood (metaphorical), pain and financial loss along the way. For the sake of the future and to build a lasting and fair world for everyone, it is necessary though. Whatever it takes, I will be here, and I hope most everyone else will as well.

Conversations like this are the first step, and as I’ve said many times, I have no idea what the proper path will look like. I’m glad to see many people in the community coming to the table to talk though.


I also want to take this opportunity to share just how incredibly massive the VP inequality is. Please observe this screenshot from a recent snapshot I pulled from the transparency google doc:
Small edit to mention this is considered ‘active VP’/VP that has been used to vote


This shows that 15 wallets hold more VP than over HALF of all VP holding wallets. 80 wallets hold almost the entire power supply. This chart doesn’t account for the thousands upon thousands of users who hold 0 VP.

If I’ve mistaken or confused any of this information I invite and welcome correction. I just wanted to put into perspective exactly how dire of a situation we are in. I don’t believe this takes into account (REMOVES) land or MANA that has been long lost in wallets that are no longer accessible by the owners, but that is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. This also doesn’t take into account VP which will be given to select holders of the 6 wearables collections, which will likely be passed in this DAO proposal:

I have researched this issue EXTENSIVELY and I’d implore anyone who doubts my abilities to research due to the fact that I stumble over technical terminology to have a seat at the table, and ask me questions. Provide feedback. Criticize my methods. But if you can’t offer any solutions or don’t see this VP inequality as a detriment to the future of DCL, I’d request you evaluate if you really value decentralization. What is truly motivating your protests against any change at all?


QV (quadratic vote) is the solution. Using this method you can get results that more accurately reflect the needs and wants of the voting community.

1 Like

This is interesting. I didn’t know anything about quadratic voting(still don’t know much after watching an explanation video). It seems that each individual has a number of voting credits that they can choose to put into different topics being voted on. Is this what you are referring to @Lean ?
If so:
How is the number of voting credits, each individual has, decided? Are new credits rewarded weekly? I’d love to hear more about how you think this can be applied to the Decentraland DAO

I like the concept but in the past we’ve had people do twitter giveaways to anyone who voted "yes’ to their proposal getting many votes but 0 VP and most of them first time accounts with no interest in the DAO.
There I think still needs to be entry point to make sure it’s not just a bunch of bots or people abusing giveaways but I like the idea of a more equal voting system. It’s come up a few times actually but I think there’s not been a clear solution yet!

Good to see the conversation continuing ~

1 Like

Ahhh, this is a good point. I can see how this would be a very simple way to take advantage

1 Like

Hey @srJH in a simple way you just can apply the square root to the total VP, therefore the result would be: 10K = 100 VP; 1K = 31.62 VP; 100 = 10 VP; 10 = 3.16 VP; 1 = 1 VP
This model somehow balances the power of whales and allows the DAO to consider the preferences of the majority.