[DAO:26bce8d] Revoke grant "Decentraland X Powered by Decentraland"

Governance
1

by 0x521b0fef9cdcf250abaf8e7bc798cbe13fa98692 (Kyllian)

Linked Pre-Proposal

Revoke grant “Decentraland X Powered by Decentraland”

Summary

Revoke the “Decentraland X Powered by Decentraland” grant due to lack of information and refusal from the grantee to answer questions in public.

Abstract

This poll is to revoke the grant “Decentraland X Powered by Decentraland”.
The grant is trying to deploy a “Decentraland Native DEX” which is just an outdated version of Uniswap.

Alex is venting the benefits of it and that it would bring a lot of money to the DAO.
But when asked how he plans to achieve that, and when presented with the math about it, he avoids the question and answers with empty promises and no concrete plan.

Sending a part of the fee to the DAO would require either of those two options:

Increasing the total fees for each trades, making it less attractive for traders
Increasing the percentage that goes to the DAO rather than liquidity provider, making it less attractive for liquidity providers to add liquidity compared to Uniswap
Neither traders or liquidity providers would have any incentive to use this DEX and the tools he promises could be done on top of Uniswap instead of a Decentraland DEX.

The DAO should focus into adding liquidity to existing pools rather than creating new ones.

Motivation

Alex still refuses to answer the questions in public, he tries to get 1-on-1 talk with anyone that voted no to the grant and voted yes on this revocation but when asked in public, he gives half-baked answers without any concrete information and full of empty promises.

Specification

The grant should be revoked if the governance proposal passes.

Conclusion

Alex is an influencer, his job is to sell overpriced stuff to people who don’t need it by making false promises.
This is exactly what is happening here, overpriced grant for a tool which is not actually needed by promising amazing returns for the DAO.

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

2

It is unfortunate to see an admin of the DAO in HPrivakos trying to abuse his position of power to cast a highly beneficial and broadly-supported proposal in a bad light. He is continually trying to paint an untrue narrative and spreading false information. We have continuously had transparent conversations with community members as well as in the community discord addressing all major questions and areas of interest as it relates to the DEX proposal. It would be a very bad precedent to set to allow a DAO admin to manipulate the outcome of an already approved grant before any milestones have been missed within that grant. Our team has already started working and has incurred costs and time in designing the core interface for the DEX. We have been incredibly open and transparent regarding answering questions and exploring collaboration within the community. We view HPrivakos’s actions as a clear attack on governance and decentralization within the DAO. We urge all voters to reach out to us directly with any questions, comments, or concerns about the DEX so we may have an open and legitimate conversation about it. The objective of this proposal is to create sustainable, revenue-generative infrastructure for the DAO, and that mission has not changed. We are committed to this mission and ensuring that the community has access to the facts and truth about this proposal rather than senseless manipulative attacks.

3

Screenshot_2023-06-05_09-36-33
Screenshot_2023-06-05_09-36-331493×427 94.8 KB

People won’t put money into a product that has a largely inferior ROI for them just because it’s Decentraland branded.

As said in my proposal, sending a part of the fee to the DAO would require either of those two options:

  • Increasing the total fees for each trades, making it less attractive for traders
  • Increasing the percentage that goes to the DAO rather than liquidity provider, making it less attractive for liquidity providers to add liquidity compared to Uniswap

I don’t see how you will make an attractive product and attract enough liquidity when the platform will be way less profitable for them then Uniswap for example.

I am not an admin of the DAO, I am part of the DAO Committee which role is to enact what passed, not to make decision.

This proposal is following a decentralized process, I fail to see how this is an attack on decentralization and governance.

You prove my point in directly your response, thank you.

4

I really need you to understand that this isn’t a valid way to try and frame the conversation.

First, it is important to understand that I don’t like HP and I think he is a petty person who is as likely to act out of petty spite motivated by a misunderstanding of a person he doesn’t like. So when I say that your not making a compelling point using this line of reasoning, it isn’t because I have a desire to defend HP.

Nothing about how HP is going about pursuing the revocation of your grant, one he seems to genuinely believe isn’t good and being sold honestly, is setting a bad precedent. He is following the rules of the system in a way that anyone could, and if anything, is demonstrating the process for others to replicate in situations they feel warrant such scrutiny without in any way taking actions not available to all of us.

I can understand why you’d be frustrated, but it isn’t going to convince anyone that you are actually trying to make good on your original grant if you are going to make strawmen arguments such as this.

1 Like
5

Revoke grant “Decentraland X Powered by Decentraland”

This proposal is now in status: PASSED.

Voting Results:

  • Yes 88% 4,063,861 VP (55 votes)
  • No 1% 1,379 VP (2 votes)
  • Abstain 11% 541,070 VP (9 votes)