[DAO:1bf5ebe] Restructure Curation Process in Decentraland

Governance
1

by 0x247e0896706bb09245549e476257a0a1129db418 (LordLike)

PROBLEM

The current curation process in Decentraland lacks balance in the distribution of collections among curators. This imbalance leads to a situation where some curators can earn significantly more while others get little to no work due to not being as fast or not using parsers or bots to get notifications about new collections.

This demotivates some curators as they are left without work opportunities, leading to an unfair distribution of tasks and rewards.

POTENTIAL SOLUTION

To address this issue, we propose the implementation of an automated curation system that ensures a fair distribution of collections among curators. The key features of this system would include:

  • Automated Assignment: A bot that automatically assigns new collections to curators who have curated fewer items that month. This ensures that work is evenly distributed.

  • Time-Based Reassignment: If a curator does not respond to a collection assignment within a specified time period, the collection is reassigned to the next available curator.

  • Review Limitation: Once a curator has approved a collection with n wearables, they will not be able to review additional wearables until all other curators have had the opportunity to review n wearables each. This prevents any single curator from monopolizing the curation process.

  • Sequential Curation Restriction: Curators should not be able to review more than one collection in a row. This further ensures a balanced distribution of work.

CONCLUSION

Implementing an automated curation system with these features will promote fairness, motivate curators, and enhance the overall efficiency of the curation process in Decentraland. By ensuring that collections are evenly distributed, all curators will have equal opportunities to contribute and earn, fostering a more balanced and motivated curation process.

VOTING OPTIONS

YES: Restructure Curation Process.

NO: Leave as it is.

This is a non-binding pre-proposal poll to assess community sentiment. If approved, feedback and insights will be solicited to refine and finalize the points.

  • YES
  • NO
  • Invalid question/options

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

1 Like
2

Hi People. Waiting for inputs for this poll to be polished if it will pass.

3

Thank you for proposal @web3nit, most of solutions written in proposal was my ideas polished by @web3nit. Current issue as @HPrivakos told, that even if proposal will pass, we should ask Foundation to create balance system.

As result, I came here with another solution,which is not covered in proposal and don’t require request of creating balance system from Foundation:

Active curators will keep reviewing collections as always, but instead of getting payment % from each reviewed wearable, they will get fixed % salary from total monthly wearables income + very small % bonus for each reviewed wearable.

Just like tips are divided in a restaurant @ArtReYou

This will motivate all curators to review collections and still get worthy payment, while curators that abuse bots / parsers to assign collections immediately will stop getting huge $ profit.

What about inactive curators, they won’t be kicked from committee, but instead, if they reviewed 0 wearables for 3+ months, they, will stop getting fixed % salary. For now we have around 4-6 active curators (Sango, Yannakis, Fabeeo, Ankou, AndreusAs) + Shibu. All the rest curators reviewed 0 collections past 3 months.

At all, this will be more fair for all curators, and worth for DAO. This solution seems more simple and clear for me, if we can’t move forward with creating balance system.

This solution also solves problem with linked wearables. I saw a huge issue regards that, when we get first payment for linked wearables review. One curator got 10k$+ for approval of linked wearables collections, while others barely got 1k$-3k$. With “just like tips” system all curators will get balanced payment in months of published linked wearbles, instead of looking at huge payment gap in excel sheet with unfair feel.

4

Balance System Pros

  • Active Curators won’t be able to abuse bots and parsers to assign collections immediately, ignoring giving a chance for collection review by other curators
  • Inactive Curators will have more chance to review collection
  • All curators at all will have more balanced payment per month, because they will curate at least something per month
  • Curator that assigned collection won’t be able to do his own things for 2 hours and then come back to review collection

Balance System Cons

  • Simple solution requires creation of bot
  • System at all doesn’t solve issue with huge collections and linked wearables collections (simple bot can’t assign individual wearables for review, builder cant do that too.)
  • Complex solution requires creation of bot that will calculate how wearables each curator reviewed, set a timer for curator to say “im ready for review”, adjustment of builder tools to allow people curate individual wearables. (chance that this will be implemented by Foundation is near 0%)
  • If only one huge or not collection per month was published, only curator assigned by bot will receive payment for this month. Others gets nothing, because there were no collections.
  • Bot may be broken or builder UI may have bugs which requires fast solutions
  • In bull times bot may work slowly (?)

Payment Rework Pros

  • All curators gets fixed % from total DAO wearables income per month + % per wearable which is more fair for curators, especially curators that can’t curate much wearables per month due to other very active curators that abuse parsers.
  • Don’t require creation of bots and rework of builder for individual wearables assignments. Which means that system may be implemented immediately and don’t require waiting for code solutions.
  • Avoids calculation issues for linked wearables
  • Don’t require fixing of bugs and issues that usually happens with bots or builder
  • Don’t require communication with Foundation
  • All curators get even payment, and the most active curators gets bonus, keeping motivation to review wearables
  • In bull times there will be more individual active curators and less greedy curators that takes several collections for review at once

Payment Rework Cons

  • Current most active curators and curators at will be less active and will review only 1 collection per month. (At the same time, this is a pros, because most inactive curators that left curation process due to lack of motivation with current payment system, will come back and be more active)

In the end, I believe payment rework will balance curation system much more than balance system / bot at all and have less cons, requires less things to be created / re-coded.

The only one risk is that for first month curators will be less motivated to review collections, but in-long term everything will be the same as it is right now, except one thing. All active curators will get fixed and fair payment. And they very active curators still will be able to get bonus payment.

With this solution most of monthly DAO income money won’t go in one pocket of one curator.

Payments Rework example from @HPrivakos

# Payments in May:
Shibu -> 295 MANA
Sango -> 1686 MANA
AndreusAs -> 65 MANA
Kristian2 -> 580 MANA
Fabeeo -> 636 MANA
Yannakis -> 135 MANA

# Payment in May if flat % (80% shared) + 20% per curation:
Shibu -> 512 MANA (59 MANA from curations)
Sango -> 790 MANA (337 MANA from curations)
AndreusAs -> 466 MANA (13 MANA from curations)
Kristian2 -> 569 MANA (116 MANA from curations)
Fabeeo -> 580 MANA (127 MANA from curations)
Yannakis -> 480 MANA (27 MANA from curations)

Overall, both solutions may be implemented
Payment Rework as first and simple solution, and later Balance System as complex solution

1 Like
5

Hey!

I absolutely agree that such a restructure is needed, and the key features of it are described just right.

I’m not entirely aware of the technical issues which may prevent from implementing such a system though, so the solution provided by @theankou is a good start, yet I can’t see how such a rework can prevent the most active curators from getting all the collections atm: even though the reward will be much smaller, the situation won’t change drastically in this department imo.

Cheers!

6

Restructure Curation Process in Decentraland

This proposal is now in status: FINISHED.

Voting Results:

  • Yes 19% 332,769 VP (16 votes)
  • No 78% 1,327,273 VP (5 votes)
  • Invalid question/options 3% 61,836 VP (6 votes)
7

Restructure Curation Process in Decentraland

This proposal has been REJECTED by a DAO Committee Member (0xfb1afa4dc069ffb47b19dbee196045d508fcd5a2)