by 0x0e7c2d47d79d4026472f4f942c4947937daa94a8 (unversed)
Hey, community. Tobik here.
Last month the Committee spent 38,349 MANA on 16 plots of LAND. This action is something that has to be executed monthly because of the following proposal:
To be honest, I think the DAO has already bought enough land (68). Also, if you check the Decentraland Foundation activity, a lot of effort has been recently put into Worlds.
In addition to this, no one has executed a proposal to do something with that LAND. It seems more like “let’s buy it and then we will see what we are going to do with those plots”. Wouldn’t be better to buy LAND when we actually need it?
Feel fee to disagree, but please, a bit of respect
The land purchase is to give grantees or community members a chance to use the land rent free. If anyone remembers, a common complaint from many creators during the last bull run was that land was too expensive and was a major barrier to entry. I know, because I felt the same. Fast forward 1ish year later, the floor price of land is down 90%, and so has the participation from said creators since the hype has died off.
If and when interests do return, would we want to face the same complaint all over again, or do we want to at least have the option of opening up the lands for community use instead of having the same issue repeat all over again.
There was a proposal to set up the infrastructure to support the use of land that reached governance, but ultimately failed due to lack of awareness and support, and that was a failure on my end for not putting it out there. Link to the proposal is here
I am currently taking a break from pursuing it again atm. Will attempt it probably end of year or so, but as i’ve mentioned in the land buyback channel, should anyone feel competent to take that responsibility up i’m all for it as well.
After Decentraland sold out the land, it launched a “world” to replace most of the functions of the land, making the land purchased by early investors at a high price lose value. This dishonest operation highlights the development team’s lack of contractual spirit.They let a limited number of The version of NFT has become existential in name only. How far can such a project go? I doubt it.
I think we should cancel the “world” function and force participants to use land to protect the interests of early investors. After all, without early contributors, DCL would not be what it is today.
I’ll have to disagree. Lands serve as a form of shared universe that allows dynamic landscape, where else Worlds are pocketverses that give it’s owners full control of their environment, but with no way to interact with others.
There is no point in cancelling a function that will bring more in more users just to ensure another is used. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. An example would be that there’s a hard cap to the number of lands, but technically infinite number of Worlds
Im gonna say lets finish out the year with the buy program then take a look at where things are and possibly pause it. A pause every so often would not be a bad thing but eventualy it will have to end. i guess it needs to be decided what is a reasonable or maximum amount of land that will be purchased or was that mentioned in the last one?
I don’t understand why there is such a proposal. At the low point of the project, the power of unity can be particularly important, but at this stage it seems that the community is divided. Recently, the foundation has indeed invested more energy in the world, with the purpose of allowing more users to participate, but at the same time, it has also put some restrictions on the world, because it is clear that if another land is designed, it will obviously become a cut-off. The behavior of retail investors is very detrimental to the long-term development of the project. I think DAO and all participants should know one thing. A project not only needs users, but also has financial attributes. If it does not have investment value, the long-term development of the project will be very limited. This is why I recognize land. Now The staged repurchase of LAND shows an attitude that the DAO has not given up on the landowners. If proposals similar to reducing the value of the assets owned by the landowners continue to be made, it will lead to a divided community and the loss of the financial attributes that can promote the development of the project. All participants will will be affected.
