[DAO:7283957] Assign Voting Power to Decentraland Content Creators [GOV]

Governance
1

by 0x247e0896706bb09245549e476257a0a1129db418 (coalition)

Linked Draft Proposal

Assign VP to Content Creators [DRAFT]

Summary

This proposal gives content creators Voting Power (VP) based on verified publication fees they paid. The rule is 1 MANA of an eligible creator-paid publication fee = 1 VP for eligible past and future publications.

Abstract

Creators add value to Decentraland through Wearables, Smart Wearables, Emotes, and Linked Wearables. This proposal recognizes these contributions by creating VP from eligible creator-paid publication fees.

Creator VP may encourage more creators to publish approved content and take part in DAO governance.

This proposal does not change or refund publication fees, and it does not distribute MANA. It only creates VP.

Motivation

Creators help build Decentraland, but publishing content does not currently give them VP.

The earlier Poll and Draft supported creator VP. The Draft excluded past submissions, but during its discussion community members asked for them to be included at the Governance stage. This proposal includes them and sets the final rules.

Specification

Eligible content

A publication is eligible when it:

  • was submitted through an official Decentraland publishing process;
  • was approved and published; and
  • has a creator-paid publication fee verified by official payment or publishing records.

These rules apply to past and future regular Wearables, Smart Wearables, Emotes, and Linked Wearables, with no date cutoff.

Linked Wearables are not automatically eligible. Standard and Programmatic publications qualify only for verified creator-paid amounts. Free slots and free publications create no VP. A fixed Programmatic payment is counted once, regardless of item or slot count.

VP calculation

1 MANA of an eligible creator-paid publication fee = 1 VP (1 MANA = 1 VP).

  • For a MANA payment, use the exact MANA amount recorded for the publication.
  • For an official card or other non-MANA payment, use the official MANA amount recorded for that publication at payment time.
  • If no MANA amount was recorded, use the verified creator-paid USD amount and Decentraland’s official MANA/USD rate at payment time. If that rate is unavailable, use the official rate at submission time. The approval-time rate may be used only as a final fallback.
  • Never recalculate an old payment using today’s MANA price.
  • If the amount or creator wallet cannot be verified, the allocation remains pending until verified.

VP is added only after approval and publication. Rejected or unpublished content receives no VP.

VP goes to the submitting creator wallet in the official records. Selling or transferring the content does not transfer this VP.

Each eligible payment is counted once. If one payment covers several items or a whole collection, total VP equals the eligible MANA amount calculated under these rules and is not multiplied by the number of items. Gas and payment-service charges do not count. Later distribution of the fee does not change VP.

Governance display and delegation

The Governance dApp must add Creator VP to own and consolidated VP totals and show it as a separate source. Creator VP uses the normal delegation system; delegation does not change its original allocation.

Fees, subsidies, and Credits

This proposal does not change publication fees. Only the creator-paid part creates VP. Payments or subsidies from the Foundation, DAO, or others do not count. Discounts, waivers, free slots, and free publications do not count.

For publications covered by the passed 2026 fee proposal, Phase 3 sets a $25 fee. For six months, creators pay $5 and the Foundation pays $20; only the creator-paid $5 creates Creator VP. Afterward, the creator-paid amount counts under the same rule unless later governance changes the fee or subsidy.

Legacy Marketplace Credits earned in-game create no VP. Marketplace transactions do not create Creator VP. Existing VP sources (MANA, LAND, Estates, Names, and selected L1 Wearables) and delegation rules remain unchanged.

If purchasable Credits are accepted for publication fees, they may count only when official records show the submitting creator paid for them and the amount applied. Credits received without payment do not count. Calculate VP under the non-MANA rules above. If records cannot separate paid from free Credits or verify the applied amount, the allocation remains pending. Giving VP for Credits received without payment requires a separate DAO proposal.

Impacts

The passed 2026 fee proposal reported 492 new items published by 128 unique creators during the previous 18 months: 366 Wearables, 119 Emotes, and 7 Smart Wearables. It did not list Linked Wearables separately.

The expected result is more creator representation in DAO decisions. Total governance VP will increase, and creators who paid more eligible MANA will receive more VP.

Some past records may take time to verify. The main risks are missing records, duplicate payments, incorrect wallet matching, and VP concentration among large publishers. Before the initial allocations are activated, the DAO must publish the allocation list, check for duplicate payments, test the calculation, and provide a way to correct errors.

No MANA or other token is distributed.

Implementation Pathways

The DAO Council is responsible for oversight, public reporting, and making sure this proposal is implemented. DCL Regenesis Labs, as the DAO Executive Arm, is responsible for carrying out or arranging the technical implementation.

Both are responsible for the implementation, including reviewing pending past records.

Together, they must:

  • identify eligible past and future publications;
  • connect each publication to its creator wallet and eligible MANA amount;
  • prevent duplicate payments from creating duplicate VP;
  • build and activate the Creator VP strategy, including its Governance dApp display and delegation;
  • publish the calculation method and initial allocations for public review;
  • provide a way to report and correct errors; and
  • add pending past allocations after their records are verified.

The DAO Council and DCL Regenesis Labs may choose the technical method and correct minor technical details. They may not change the core rules of this proposal, including 1 MANA = 1 VP, creator-paid fees only, one payment counted once, and inclusion of eligible past publications.

Implementation may happen in stages. A technical problem affecting one content or payment type does not cancel the rest of this proposal or stop other verified allocations.

If a core rule must change, the DAO Council must publish the issue and submit the required change through the DAO governance process in force at that time.

If either responsible body is replaced, its DAO-approved successor takes over these duties.

Conclusion

This proposal gives creators 1 VP for every 1 MANA of verified creator-paid publication fees, including eligible past and future publications.

The goal is to make creators stronger stakeholders in Decentraland governance and give them a voice that reflects their contributions. This change may also encourage more content creation and support a more diverse and engaging Decentraland for the whole community.

References

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

1 Like
2

Based on the Decentraland DAO Transparency spreadsheet, I found approximately 10,642 approved content items with a positive recorded creation fee:

  • 9,959 regular Wearables

  • 79 Smart Wearables

  • 604 Emotes

Their recorded creation fees total approximately 2,430,322 MANA, which could create around 2.43 million VP under the 1 MANA = 1 VP rule.

This is only my preliminary estimate from a spreadsheet that may not be complete or current. It does not provide a reliable separate count for Linked Wearables. The final amount may change after checking duplicate records, subsidies, Credits, free publications, creator wallets, and historical payments.

Only the DAO Council and DCL Regenesis Labs can confirm the final number using official publishing and payment records.

3

Reference mockup only! Creator VP is not live or officially implemented.

This example shows how Creator VP could appear as a separate source in the Governance dApp and be included in Own and Consolidated VP. The displayed Creator VP is only an illustration based on my published item, not a confirmed allocation.

gov_dapp_creator_vp_reference
gov_dapp_creator_vp_reference1818×865 139 KB

4

What is the “Creator VP strategy”?

Who is delegating the VP and what pool/wallet would it come from?

1 Like
5

With the new publishing fee changes that has been approved, I dont think we should implement anything yet until that is confirmed.

Im also a little puzzled by this concept.

1 MANA = 1 VP

When a creator publishes, he/she surrenders one’s MANA to pay for the publishing = Loss of VP

When the creator gets a sale, he/she gets MANA for sale = Gain of VP

There’s a balance to that equation. No inflation of VP whatsoever. Won’t introducing this tip that balance?

2 Likes
6

The proposal uses the actual creator-paid fee recorded for each publication, so it does not depend on the new fee being active.

The existing MANA VP rule remains unchanged. Creator VP is an additional VP source for verified fees paid to publish approved content. Each payment is counted once, and sales do not create Creator VP.

Yes, this would increase total VP and change relative voting weights. This is intentional: the proposal adds separate VP to recognize approved creator contributions.

7

The “Creator VP strategy” is the technical rule that would calculate Creator VP from verified publication records.

It is not a transfer of existing VP. It is a new VP source calculated for the eligible creator wallet. The creator may later delegate it through the normal delegation system.

8

I can’t support the addition of VP arbitrarily if its not backed by assets, as has always been intended.

Sorry @web3nit

2 Likes
9

No need to apologize, I understand your opinion.

As experience shows things do not always turn out as expected. Nowadays, we can be flexible and adjust our movements according to the circumstances.

IMO allocation is not arbitrary. Free or rejected publications receive no VP. Only the paid part counts, third party paid portions do not count, unverifiable allocations remain pending, and each eligible payment is counted once.

Yeah, Creator VP would not be asset-backed in exactly the same way as MANA, LAND, Names, or L1 Wearables. Instead, it would be fee-based: every allocation would follow a fixed 1:1 rule tied to a verified fee for approved and published content.

At now VP is concentrated among relatively few wallets, and DAO participation is uneven.

Broader distribution to verified creators could encourage more publishing, voting, and interest in Governance. Rough estimates suggested that the potential historical allocation could be below 2.5 million VP which isn’t that much.

Rule-based VP distribution could encourage greater participation, and give active creators a stronger voice balancing the voting system.

Total governance VP would increase and relative voting weights would change. That is a real trade-off.

We also have active DAO governing bodies and an engaged community. If problems appear, I have no doubt they can be reviewed and necessary adjustments can be made swiftly through the gov process.

I have published only one wearable. This proposal is not motivated by my own allocation, but by recognizing creators who contribute to the ecosystem.

P.S. This is my personal opinion and I could be off base :cold_face: .

Anyway, Community will decide what is right and what is wrong.

10

Would be helpful if the DAO leaders could chime in and share their perspectives.

@ginoct @yemel @maraoz @toxicwaifu @Monotributista @Zino @MetaRyuk @Canessa @Fehz @esteban

11

LOL. That’s funny. With few exceptions. LOL.

12

Two things I’d want addressed before this is enacted.

  1. Who performs the work, and under what authority?

This assigns implementation to the @DAO-Council and @DCLRegenesisLabs by name: identifying eligible past publications, matching each to a creator wallet, deduplicating payments, building and activating the strategy, publishing allocations, and running a correction process across roughly 10,000 historical records.

@MetaRyuk raised precisely this on my governance documents proposal, and the point was well made. The Council is constituted as an oversight body, not an execution arm, and Regenesis Labs’ approved scope and 18-month budget don’t automatically extend to whatever a passing proposal assigns them. Existing compensation doesn’t make new work free — at minimum there’s an opportunity cost against commitments already on the books.

His vote only resolved once ownership, execution, and final approval were separated and the decision on who performs the work was left with the Council. This one doesn’t make that distinction at all. It names both bodies as jointly responsible for the whole thing, including reviewing pending past records, with no scope, no timeline, and no funding source.

  1. Publish the distribution first.

The proposal names VP concentration among large publishers as a risk and then doesn’t address it. With roughly 2.4 million VP in play, we should see the shape of it before voting: the top 20 recipient wallets by VP, and how many wallets receive under 1,000.

13

I agree with this proposal, and should have come to fruition a long time ago. Truth to be told, alot of creators publish wearables mainly for the experience, participate in giveaways, and truly bring a unique dynamic to the platform. Without them? The platform would have a diminished user experience. But this brings this to a larger discussion- we should value assets that are less liquid with higher VP ( Published Wearables, Names, L2 Wearables etc), then highly liquid assets (MANA.) I think it would honestly drive more traffic, and have individuals diversify more in the platform (other then MANA and Land.) Hope to see this pass, and give creators a voice they deserve in governance- as many proposals can barely reach a quorum even with a high turnout.

1 Like
14

If you mean ‘creators’ that includes builders who build scenes, i vote yes. but if this only for wearable creators alone and how many wearables they create, then no.

Its Decentra’land’ not Decentr’Avatar’