by 0x247e0896706bb09245549e476257a0a1129db418 (LordLike)
This proposal aims to gauge Community opinion regarding the rebranding of Decentraland Worlds to DreamSpace.
Please share your thoughts related to this proposal in the DAO Discord or comments (forum post).
YES: I support rebranding Worlds to DreamSpace.
NO: Leave as it is.
- Invalid question/options
Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO
View this proposal on Snapshot
I’d like to understand the rationale of changing from Worlds to DreamSpace. I personally think either Worlds or Spaces is adequate, short and simple.
Worlds stuck pretty well but i’m assuming its because VRChat uses Worlds?
Decentraland DreamSpace vs Decentraland Worlds. I really liked the simplicity of “Worlds” for the length. Decentraland Spaces would of been cool maybe w/o the dream part. Also, I think of @serenaelis now when I hear DreamSpace because of her DayDream brand XD
I am also curious as to how much scene operators will have to update their CLIs/scene files to reflect any new changes.
Not the worst, but not the best decision either.
I like the sound of it but think had it been that from the beginning it might have been better. Since it’s implementation people have come to know it as Decentraland Worlds or DCL Worlds and this expresses that it is Decentraland where as Dream Spaces could be anything. I understand that things get rebranded however, this is still young and should go through it’s Worlds phase first.
As I’ve stated on other Worlds-related proposals, I believe that there are bigger issues to address first with Worlds before considering changing its name. Worlds should be fully flushed out with all its features and integrations before a name change should even be evaluated. It’s only been live for 6 months. Most name changes don’t happen until a year or so after for data purposes.
The way the GitHub commit expresses it is that the reason for the change is because the name is “confusing.” Which isn’t enough to strong-arm a rebrand so early. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone saying they’re confused as to what it is from the public or the community. Would like to see more evidence/data behind this proposition.
Also isn’t there a Formal Request process now that we can inquire about this through? @Matimio
While the official name change of Worlds has not yet taken place, we’d like to give some additional insight into why this decision was made.
Why change the name ‘Worlds’?
- ‘Worlds’ doesn’t accurately communicate what the feature offers: your own personal space. ‘Worlds’ implies something much bigger.
- The name ‘Worlds’ is used by other metaverse projects. (ex:Spatial: Build your own 3D world in one click).
- In day-to-day conversations we refer to anything inside Decentraland as ‘in world’—this is now getting confused with ‘in WORLDS’.
- We often refer to other metaverse projects as other ‘worlds’.
In summary, the name ‘Worlds’ was found to be too general and not the best for marketing purposes. As the feature is currently in a beta state, the name was always subject to change.
'DreamSpaces’ is a more imaginative, enticing, and accurate description of what the feature currently known as ‘Worlds’ can enable. The name is more unique and marketable, resolving the issues presented by ‘Worlds’.‘DreamSpaces’ gives readers a better idea of what the feature is at just a glance: a space for you to set your imagination free, experiment, and transform your ideas into reality. A place that can change into anything you dream of, but which is private unless you share it, just like your dreams. DreamSpaces offer all the creative freedom of Decentraland in the setting of your own space.
Dreamspace also appears to be taken
Hi @KimboNFT thanks for providing the explanation. IMO the choice of name should be all encompassing and evergreen, to reflect the multitude of use cases, for an individual all the way to a business entity.
While DreamSpaces does sound like a space where anyone can unleash their dream, it also sounds like a campaign title and direction.
A consideration would be if an organisation like Goldman Sachs, Nike or PWC wants to create an experience in said space. Would you want them to be telling their execs that it’s Decentraland DreamSpaces, or Spaces/Worlds. I’d think that DreamSpaces would sound “dreamy” instead of professional.
I understand the difficulty in choosing a replacement since Worlds can be confusing and too generic (vrchat/spatial) and Spaces(Twitter). Perhaps more consideration can be given before choosing a name that’s more apt than Worlds?
Have u all explored the possibility of choosing a name that isn’t used to describe a space?
Hey Kim! Thanks for responding and giving some perspective.
While I respect the response and information, this implies that the decision to change the name was already made. Without a DAO vote. If we can introduce Worlds without a DAO vote and change the name without a DAO vote, why can’t we integrate it with Places/Events without a DAO vote?
Additionally, I personally think DreamSpace doesn’t fit within the “one word” branding that Decentraland has used thus far with any of its products. DreamSpace honestly makes me think of every other platform except Decentraland when reading it. I agree with other sentiments that more time should be given to brainstorming a new name before just outright changing it.
“If we can introduce Worlds without a DAO vote and change the name without a DAO vote, why can’t we integrate it with Places/Events without a DAO vote?”
Land whales are the ones who are against integrating Places/Events with Worlds. They are short sighted and clueless as they believe this feature will devalue their portfolios.
As for DreamSpaces, initially I hated it, however after some careful consideration it made much more sense then “Worlds” for better marketing strategies.
@jar0d The term “Worlds” is used by many other things also…
I no longer see hidden messages, have you been banned from DAO Discord
@JasonX To assume that land whales/owners are shortsighted and clueless would also be a mistake.
Imagine if shareholders of a company were initially promised that there will be no dilution of their shares, and then down the line it gets diluted to infinity without consultation. No shareholder would be pleased, especially if it’s a unilateral decision. That is what happened.
Perhaps an example that could apply to names or L1 wearables would be that the foundation takes a unilateral decision to allow all users to mint any name/wearable multiple times, at the cost of 1 mana, because that’s the message the foundation sent to land owners.
I am for the idea of integrating both worlds and lands, but not at the cost of centralisation in terms of the decision making process, especially if there’s a functioning DAO.
@3Point1Four This is a valid point and I am aware it’s a fight with the Land owners. However, I do believe that most Land owners that are upset are ones that are not actively using the Land for what it was intended for. If all Land owners had something worth staying in Genesis Land for, then this wouldn’t even be up for discussion. But the reality is that majority (not all, don’t come for Land owners :P) of Land owners have zero interest in building out cool experiences but rather are interested in “power” and financial gain. Which I think is a very weird approach to have in a creator/builder-focused platform.
The point I was trying to make @JasonX was why are the big decisions being made without DAO participation? When that happened with the introduction of Worlds the sentiment was very clear that the Foundation heard our feedback and wouldn’t do something like that again. I can only wonder if this would have been the case again with the name change had @web3nit not made this proposal.
Agreed. There has to be more usage of LANDs
DreamSpaces wagmi. In JasonX we trust . Change name to whatever you want this shit stupid as hell to argue over. Team should decide themselves.
I didn’t say it wasn’t.
but if the purpose of changing the name was to avoid confusion with other products, it would make sense to choose a name that wasn’t already being used by something successful enough to have a wikipedia page.
Do you support Worlds rebranding to DreamSpace ?
This proposal is now in status: FINISHED.
- Yes 1% 24,995 VP (12 votes)
- No 79% 4,449,810 VP (41 votes)
- Invalid question/options 20% 1,159,848 VP (6 votes)
Do you support Worlds rebranding to DreamSpace ?
This proposal has been REJECTED by a DAO Committee Member (0xbef99f5f55cf7cdb3a70998c57061b7e1386a9b0)