I wanted to add some of my discussion to this proposal, since I understand that it may feel like you’ve become endemic of other issues in the DAO, but I think people are rightfully pointing out core concerns. I don’t want you to feel targeted, like your proposal wasn’t understood, I want you to feel heard while you’ve been given this feedback. I feel responsible to show that while I was negative to your proposal, I was rather correct about how it would be received when it was originally brought to the Discord. I hope I can unpack some of that here.
Mainly, when people are saying ‘this isn’t what DCL needs right now’ I think the thing some of us are trying to say is that injecting extra authentication into existing gameplay would objectively worsen the player experience, and what Decentraland needs right now, is better player experience. Hence the hype for a new client! That being said, you are free to disagree and suggest that your implementation would not deter players, but people are right to voice their opinion, vote no, and say why they’ve done so. I think some of that comes to the fact that parcel ownership is it’s own privilege, so some might see a security measure as a given, not an accrued cost.
I am not against bot players in DCL but it’s a fallacy to act like they don’t exist just because one user declares to not have seen them. They exist and are their own meme worth embracing. To @Ozymandias point, you are in an arms race. The people whom have already designed bots exploiting your parcel could simply apply a patch, furthering the divide between you and real players. You may run into an irony that happens in gaming where the right management becomes so much a detriment, the better experience is provided when you tool the game to the player’s advantage.
My last concern is that you evidently proposed this idea as a way where there would be no consent or awareness to the CAPTCHA mechanism. This is unethical, and dystopian. I shouldn’t be constantly playing games to prove my humanity, and comparing anti-cheat to this is apples to oranges. Anti-cheat is applied with consent, without interference, to existing gameplay. This adds gameplay, maybe even replacing it at points, interfering with gameplay, without consent from the player. This ultimately is why I’ve decided to dissent against this specific proposal, but I am detailed in my feedback since I want to encourage you to take these messages not personally, but with a realization that you’ve at least caught attention with a good use case for gamified captcha’s, at some point in the future.
Yet at the old adage goes;
Being early is indistinguishable from being wrong.
I think this best summarizes the reactions to this proposal, and I hope we can still foster a welcoming environment for like-minded proposals. Cheers! 

