[DAO:8971a77] Should we remove the Strategic Unit and prevent $32k in DAO funds from being spent?

by 0x0dd1338a416af72655aacfbccf082762973cceff (Mimsy)

The Strategic Unit was originally created via this proposal: Hire LordLike as DAO Strategic Unit (DAO worker)

I am creating this poll to gauge the community’s sentiment on how the Strategic Unit is working so far, and if it should continue as planned, receiving $32,000 in DAO funding for its work.

This issues I take with the Strategic Unit continuing on are as follows:

  1. The initiatives laid out in the Strategic Unit grant proposal are things that either are currently being done (see Organizational Chart for Decentraland DAO [Draft]) or could be done (see DAO Strategy and Roadmap) by Core Units that are already being funded. It would seem more appropriate to revise the responsibilities of the Core Units that already exist to cover these tasks, as they generally seem to fall under what could be the jurisdiction of the existing units, than to fund one person to do these tasks.
  2. LordLike has taken action that seems contradictory to values that should be held by a person in a DAO position. This includes resubmitting a proposal that did not pass without significant change or transparency (see Should the Community Be the Final Arbiter in Grants Revocation Decisions ? and Should the Community Be the Final Arbiter in Grants Revocation Decisions ?). When asked about this in the DAO discord, LordLike continued to lack transparency, and to point fingers at other proposals that were resubmitted with reasonable cause (like overwhelming community support but failure to reach the VP threshold). In my opinion, these situations are not the same and should not be used as evidence to justify the action being taken here.
  3. While this point is more speculative than the others, it appears that LordLike is no longer acting in the best interest of the DAO as a whole, and there is sentiment among community members as to a change in his motives since originally being approved for the Strategic Unit grant. One example of this is the initiative to revise the Land-to-MANA ratio (see Should the LAND-to-MANA Ratio Be Revised ?), which if passed would place an incomparable amount of voting power (VP) in the hands of a small group of people which have historically acted in their own best interest, not necessarily the best interest of the DAO. Additionally, when asked about certain stances or actions LordLike has taken, he responds in ways that are misleading and lack transparency that should be required of any person in a DAO position. For example, repeatedly citing the amount of money other Core Units have received and citing his income as $0, when in reality the grant is still in the 1-month cliff period and he is slated to receive $32,000.
  4. Though this grant is in its first month of operation, it appears that the main items LordLike has contributed to the DAO have occurred prior to the Strategic Unit passing and efforts have seemingly fallen off since. When asked about his contributions, LordLike routinely cites three proposals (DAO Strategy and Roadmap Establishing a DAO Treasury Management Process Code of Ethics (conduct)) all of which took place before the Strategic Unit was established. This shows that he was willing and able to make contributions to the DAO without receiving a significant payment. Additionally, of the three proposals cited only one has been brought beyond the poll stage, and was done so by a team of people that does not include LordLike (Code of Ethics). There is currently little evidence available to support that the Strategic Unit is following through with the promises made in the proposal.

I personally do not feel this Strategic Unit is an appropriate use of DAO funds, and the intentions and would greatly appreciate your thoughts on the matter.

  • Revoke the Strategic Unit grant
  • Allow the Strategic Unit to continue
  • Invalid question/options

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

Thank you for this proposal.
When asked what he has done since his grant passed, his only answer is: I am the author of initial proposal for DAO Strategy, Treasury Management(co-author), Code of Ethics and continue to move this initiatives.

Initial”, the Code of Ethics is being moved by the Facilitation squad, the Treasury Management proposal hasn’t moved since May 30th, three months ago, and the “DAO Strategy” poll proposal passed 5 months ago and was never promoted to draft.

The only proposals Lordlike started as part of the “Strategic Unit” are proposals which are highly dangerous for the DAO or proposals that don’t need to be passed to be enacted upon (like the Org Chart).


“Code of Ethics” from a guy that votes with delegated VP on his own proposals :slight_smile:

I think some people from decentraland need a real job, so they can stay away from the DAO funds.
So, Lordy is a good start :slight_smile:

My vote:

  • Revoke the Strategic Unit grant
1 Like

Hey HP you seem to have misunderstood me. It’s not about what I’ve accomplished since my grant was approved; rather, it’s about the strategic initiatives that I initially set in motion and continue to advance. Implementing a DAO Strategy and Treasury Management process is a lengthy endeavor. If you had been following the Financial Working Group or had attended our Strategic Planning meetings, you would see that work is in progress.

For example, during our 6th Strategic Planning session, I invited key industry experts in digital assets(Treasury) management, such as Karpatkey—who manages the Ethereum Name System Endowment Fund—and Avantgarde Finance. I continue to engage with them, and there will be updates on this front soon.

In three days, I have a scheduled update on my grant where I will provide comprehensive details on the work I’ve been doing.


As to Organizational Chart - it is the heart of DAOs onboarding and structure for new comers and Community members who want to understand how DAO works and who is for what responsible and my DAO proposal specifies what the chart should include and mandates responsibility, specifying the Core Units (Governance Squad and Strategic Unit) accountable for its upkeep because without timely updates and responsible ones for that, the chart might not reflect the current DAO structure, leading to misunderstanding.

Btw, you voted ‘yes’ in the first stage of this proposal :joy:.

Its wild that with different core units which DAO has paid significant amounts of money we still don’t have it as well as there is inaccurate and outdated documentation on Decentraland website on how DAO works.

How much $ already received grant based Core Units:

  1. Governance Squad: 471,360$ (this amount does not include a new grant of 187,504 $)
  2. Grant Support Squad: 187,200$ (this amount does not include a new grant of 114,600 $)
  3. Facilitation Squad: 153, 000$ (this amount does not include a new grant of $98,500 $)
  4. Strategic Unit: 0$

I predicted the forum spam to fill the first five messages as quickly as possible so people have to click “show more” on the governance page =)

Yes, because it was a poll gauging interests, the draft and governance proposals were useless, especially if it’s just to say “I’ll do it” while it was already done by someone else.

Misleading. Strategic Unit: $5,333 (in a couple days) (this amount does not include 26,667$ still to be vested)


The Decentraland DAO is the decision-making tool for MANA, NAMES and LAND holders in Decentraland’s virtual world. Through votes in the DAO, the Community can have a say in important aspects of the virtual world, including grants, POIs, Names, policies, catalyst nodes, LAND and Estate smart contracts, and any other issues the Community deems relevant.

For example, the Pre-Proposal Poll was created to gauge Community sentiment, and no one can take away my right to post DAO proposals or to seek the Community’s opinion. If you disagree with my poll, feel free to vote ‘no’. These proposals are my personal initiative. I care about LAND owners, as LAND is the heart of Decentraland IMO. I also believe that the revocation process for Grants should involve the Community in making the final decision. By the way, I’ve always been for decentralization (look at the screens).

Regarding the LAND proposal, similar topics were discussed in 2019 and 2020. There’s no reason I can’t seek the Community’s opinion on it in 2023! Also, it’s worth noting that you don’t represent the entire DAO. There are Community members who find value in my polls and consider them interesting topics for discussion, as evidenced by the comments on the Land Poll, for example.






I wrote as of today. This is your personal opinion with which I do not agree, If you don’t like it - vote “NO”.

It’s not personal opinion, it’s facts.
It’s not something the DAO Committee can enact, therefore this governance proposal is useless, like jar0d ban or features requests proposals.
Crazy that a Core Unit, Strategic Unit team member doesn’t know that.
I already voted Abstain on it because it’s invalid.

1 Like

DAO Committee shouldn’t. Please look carefully at Implementation Pathways, I think you again missed the point.

And please read what is Governance Proposal.

Some proposals are not as simple as adding or removing an item from a list, they require community signaling, discussions and implementation paths. Those proposals should be submitted thorugh a three-stage governance process that starts with a poll and ends with a binding proposal.

The voting process includes three steps: a Pre-Proposal Poll, a Draft Proposal, and a Governance Proposal. Each tier will have progressively increasing submission and passage thresholds to ensure important governance decisions are made by a representative majority (based on Voting Power). Each step must reach the defined VP threshold to be promoted to the next one.


Along with being generally unfit for the position, LL has consistently demonstrated themselves to be a person of a duplicitous nature. There are very few people who have ever collaborated or worked closely with LL who have something nice to say about them over a time frame of any reasonable length.

LL has spent more time trying to strategically keep this grant then he has how to help the dao do anything.

1 Like

Cmon man you are mad because I voted “No” on your grant. Rethink your behavior, stop attacking Community members and me personally and I will reconsider my decision.

You vote on grants solely based on the person submitting it rather than on the content of the grant itself?


as someone who is exactly the kind of person you’re talking about, warning others to not “get lordliked” is a civic duty

ZESTYBEAM is aware of the ongoing war and dangerous conditions in Ukraine. Despite this, he still wishes for me to return there. I find this to be not just culturally insensitive but a blatant disregard for my safety, bordering on a wish for my harm or even death.

Offtopic. Is this some way connected with your grant?

Oh here is another member that constantly harasses someone including me and not only.

jail != death, but keep pushing that false narrative since you’ve got nothing else. maybe you can kiss chris between the cheeks and get me muted again. until then, cry harder.

Hey, Lordy, I usually go after scamers, bruh. <3

1 Like