I have been in Decentraland since 2021, trying to make something great in this community, I have been a content creator ever since I joined Decentraland almost immedeatly puting thousands of hours in creating content, all I wanted to in my previous grant was doing this exact same thing yet you accuse me of Draining money from the DAO and that our project isn’t worth to look into trying to get people to vote no for it… thats very sad to see tbh since my proposal already this initial proposal already passed. I think you are contributing to the reason why people are scared to vote on my proposals because they find it very controversial because of this exact reason.
I always tried to remain humble and polite about this topic but at one point I think enough is enough.
Thank you for trying to make my life a living hell but hope you understand that I wont stop building…
I would like to clarify that my comments are not intended to attack anyone’s character or mental health. And I find it deeply disturbing that you both have jumped to such accusations, which can also be defined as defamation. As a member of the Decentraland community, I believe it is essential to share my honest thoughts and opinions. I am concerned about the baseless accusations made by @didiimakiii and @InJesterr in response to my comments.
My research has shown that InJesterr’s previous grant proposal was revoked due to unfulfilled promises and mismanagement of DAO funds, which is a fact that cannot be denied. When requesting large sums of money from a DAO, it is crucial to hold individuals accountable for their actions and behavior.
Furthermore, I believe that attention to detail is vital in the grant proposal process. The fact that some links in the proposal are not working may seem like a minor issue, but it can reflect poorly on the professionalism and competence of the proposal team.
To summarize, I want to emphasize that my comments are based on factual evidence and are not intended to spread hate or cause harm. Transparency, accountability, and attention to detail are crucial in the grant proposal process, and I hope that all members of the Decentraland community share these values.
To add to my previous points about Dual Arena’s potential impact on Decentraland, I would like to reiterate that my opinion is that it would not bring an improved user experience or attract new players to the platform. As a member of the Decentraland community, I believe that it is crucial to share my opinions and concerns in a DAO comment section.
Decentraland already has several Play-to-Earn games, but aside from ICE Poker, most of these games have not been successful in bringing new users or enhancing the user experience on the platform.
In my view, it is essential to prioritize the development of projects that have the potential to make a significant impact on Decentraland’s growth and success. As a decentralized autonomous organization, it is our responsibility to make informed decisions based on the evidence and feedback available to us.
People may be scared to vote on your proposal due to your previous track record, not due to my personal opinion @InJesterr
Maybe Try to ask @Zino about this instead of researching because you clearly lack information.
I don’t know you at all, for that reason I dont know how you can respect other people in the team that you don’t know, but then exclude me…
Why is this troubling? At first it looks just like an opinion but this line makes it very disturbing? You dont think, with other words you say that in whichever team I’m a part of that you find that troubling. Makes me feel unworthy, unwanted, incapable, bullied and not appreciated and its overall very rude to say this.
You have a big issue clearly with me, calling me an bad actor while I don’t even know who you are???
It was 1 link and its working but it has a referral to a dutch linkedin profile which it doesn’t work for you personally.
I tought you said that
you had opinions and now you say that its facts
Overall I find you very passive aggressive towards me and would like you to apologize or I am not going to reply on you further more to not hurt each others feelings any longer.
I firmly believe that it is possible to respect an individual without having a personal relationship with them. While the other members of the Dual Arena team may not have a negative track record when it comes to receiving DAO funds, the fact remains that @InJesterr has a history of not meeting the milestones that were previously set.
Given the evidence at hand, I find it extremely concerning that @InJesterr has been named in vital roles within the Dual Arena team. As a member of the Decentraland community, it is my responsibility to consider all aspects of the proposal before casting my vote. In this case, I cannot ignore the fact that the individual in question has not fulfilled their previous promises.
It is essential to base our opinions on facts and evidence rather than personal biases or opinions. In my view, my opinions are supported by factual information, and I will be voting NO on this proposal. While some may interpret my comments as passive-aggressive, I believe that it is crucial for all members of the community to express their views when voting on grant proposals.
I will not apologize for sharing my honest opinions, and I stand by everything I have said. It is only through constructive dialogue and healthy debate that we can make informed decisions and move towards the growth and success of the Decentraland platform.
Thank you for your time good luck byebye 
I’m curious about the potential consequences for the Decentraland DAO if every member of its community responds to criticism and differing opinions by accusing others of hate.
You keep using my name in trying to put me in a bad spotlight, you are clearly here to start some controversial discussion about me and not about the project every sentence you make is personally targeted toward me and not the project.
I believe the only bad thing about this whole proposal that is factual was that a link didnt work. the rest are your beliefs\opinion that it wont work. You are free to vote whatever you like ofcourse but I have also many opinions about you even tho I dont know you I dont tell them because it might hurt your feelings sometimes keeping your toughts to yourself to remain respectful I care about human feelings.
In my opinion, it is crucial for community members to speak up when the Dual Arena team is requesting a substantial amount of grant funding. My decision to vote against the proposal is not rooted in animosity towards the team but is partially based on my honest evaluation of @InJesterr past performance when receiving DAO funds. This cannot be over looked when @InJesterr is listed as such a crucial team member in this proposal.
I firmly believe that as a member of the Decentraland community, it is my responsibility to voice my opinions and concerns in a DAO comment section. I have previously shared my thoughts on Dual Arena’s potential impact on the platform, reiterating my view that it would not enhance the user experience or attract new players.
While Decentraland already has several Play-to-Earn games, with the exception of ICE Poker, they have not been successful in driving user growth or enhancing the platform’s user experience. As a result, I think it is critical to prioritize the development of projects that have the potential to make a significant impact on Decentraland’s success and growth.
As a decentralized autonomous organization, we must make informed decisions based on the evidence and feedback available to us. I am concerned that my comments may not have been fully taken into account by @InJesterr and instead have been labelled as an attack or hate. There are multiple issues with this Dual Arena proposal, as I have previously mentioned.
Maybe you will change your mind after we proved ourselves, sometimes with some people you just got to show them and I think this is the case with you, Anyway Great to hear for from you! goodluck, I hope to see you on our parcel when we are finished dont count yourself out you are invited to Duel Arena anytime it is done.
A re-vote shouldn’t be required for moving categories. So I’m voting yes on this one as I can relate to the frustrations of the team for dedicating resources to the project on the basis that funding was promised for it.
The fact that the original proposal was passed by a single vote from RobL is a different issue for VP allocation as a whole which should be addressed separately, and not a fault of the grantee.
Thank you I appreciate that you tried to understand what our issue is and I am thankful for your vote <3
Duel Arena Development Changing Category ( Re- Proposal )
This proposal is now in status: PASSED.
Voting Results:
- Yes 74% 6,980,660 VP (50 votes)
- No 20% 1,992,508 VP (28 votes)
- Abstain 6% 610,738 VP (30 votes)
Dear Community (@InJesterr ),
This grant proposal has successfully met the threshold.
We recommend to the DAO Committee (@HPrivakos @Tobik) that the vesting contract for this project should match the oldest created in the previous proposal.
Here are the details for the vesting contract:
Starting date: May 1, 2023
Duration: 6 months
We ensure fairness and consistency in the grant allocation process by aligning the vesting contract with the oldest.
If you have any questions or concerns, please don’t hesitate to reach out.
Best regards,
Grant Support Squad.
Duel Arena Development Changing Category ( Re- Proposal )
This proposal has been ENACTED by a DAO Committee Member (0xbef99f5f55cf7cdb3a70998c57061b7e1386a9b0)
Vesting Contract Address: 0x2bc0aB6fEA841BF28DACBe5754C62a7E572733A0
Dear Community,
The Grant Support Squad was created to support the grantees in achieving their goals and take care of the DAO treasury.
After thoroughly reviewing this project, the Squad wants to communicate that we request to the DAO Committee (@HPrivakos @Tobik @rizk ) to pause the vesting contract of this project as a precautionary measure.
In that sense, during a monthly check-in on August 16, the grantee and we coordinated a test the game in the initiative Testing Tuesday to provide an opportunity for the team to showcase the grant progress and receive feedback from the DAO community.
After that, we talked again in our monthly check-in, and the grantee mentioned that everything was okay (September 13) then we moved forward and sent an email to create the testing plan.
However, during the presentation on the Testing Tuesday session, the grantee did not demonstrate progress for the community to test the project, despite having time to prepare the environment (more than 1 month).
According to the video:
- Finding the parcel where the game was allocated was difficult.
- The battle mode wasn´t prepared.
- The game didn´t work properly so could not be tested.
Also, during the session other concerns appeared, and Community questions need to be addressed:
- The project is being done under SDK 6, What are your thoughts about updating to SDK 7 in the next month, the time that the project should be complete?
- How much of the backend is done?
- Can you send what the backend structure looks like, or can you describe it?
- How are you storing the data?
- Could you describe the blocker regarding “We try to upload it to Decentraland in world, but it says deployed but then doesn’t appear on our parcel.”
Have you considered another way to show that the work has been done?
Therefore, we´ve offered another opportunity for Duel Arena to explain its progress and showcase its achievements. To facilitate this, a new testing session has been organized for September 28th.
In the meantime, we request a temporary pause as a precautionary measure before the next step on the vesting contract (September 29)
After the testing session and if the concerns have been addressed, we will discuss the next steps.
Thank you for your understanding.
Hey Zino I am going to provide everything you ask for and I hope a revoke/pause isnt needed after I provided the materials, but if you still think after the video and proof of work its necessary to pause it for just failing a playtest, as you know we already agreed on thursday in the beginning of the playtest because I said before hand what there would be a problem with testing the battle. Then when the playtest went on we only got battle related questions by dogman. Everything else was working and his subjective thought that it isnt enough because its just ‘‘front end’’ is basically a false statement.
Its true he was unable to verify it but that doesnt mean it doesnt exist.
- The project is being done under SDK 6, What are your thoughts about updating to SDK 7 in the next month, the time that the project should be complete?
Hey zino about this question we will have it ready for SDK7 but that wasn’t released when we started so we will have to make adjustments for that its not something we promised or included so what I am going to suggest to the dev and burak is to: finish this project as a SDK6 game and then after we are finished we will convert accordingly but next month will be unreasonable for me to promise but will definetely do our best!
-
How much of the backend is done?
Everything is done accordingly to what we promised with the backend I will provide a full informative video about this with in this reply -
How are you storing the data?
Simply by using a Database & API, ingame when you click on pick- up a dandelion it will send a API call to the database to add + 1 dandelion to the user which is defined per wallet id. -
Could you describe the blocker regarding “We try to upload it to Decentraland in world, but it says deployed but then doesn’t appear on our parcel.”
About this 1 hour later after the playtest we published it on the estate, It appaered that I was a little bit too ambitious with the animation so it had too much materials and textures which was the reason why it wasnt uploaded right on the estate. I will have to simplify the animations so for now we removed all of them and I am reworking them, which will be done this month aswell 
Have you considered another way to show that the work has been done?
Yes I have made a proof of work video just for the community to be able to see, basically it was all 1 bad thing which were the materials & texturs ruining it for the entire playtest.
for the people that wants to test it for themself you are able to go on
just pointing out with sdk deployments you can still deploy the scene even if over the poly/ texture/ material limits. It will still show up and deploy in world but performance may be effected if you exceed the limits. I do not think this is the reason for the malfunctions. What do you mean you have it ready for sdk7? its totally different syntax so you will still need to rewrite all of the code.
No the current battle system had animations that had too much textures and materials it was also to large scale wise for the map so my dev fixed removed all the animations and it worked.
I dont have it ready but to promise @Zino that this will be ready in a month wont be possible. We need time to convert it to sdk7 but in the meanwhile sdk6 will work just fine not saying we are never going to do sdk7 but we definetely have to talk about this with the crew before promising anything.