[DAO:9166e5f] Should Tobik be confirmed as the winner of the DAO Committee Elections voting?

by 0x5b5cc427c1d81db4f94de4d51d85ce122d63e244 (Fehz)

Linked Pre-Proposal

Which candidate should be added to the DAO Committee?


This Draft Proposal is the second of three stages that will lead to the appointment of a new DAO Committee Member, by confirming Tobik as the winner of the voting between the 5 selected DAO Committee Applicants.


The DAO needs to appoint 1 new member to the DAO Committee in order to reach the initial setup of 2-of-3 signers.

In accordance with the process established for adding/removing DAO Committee Members, an Open Call for Candidates was published. The Open Call received 10 submissions. Two withdrew from the process. Five were selected by existing DAO Committee members, following an interview process and ranking of the candidates using a system based on Trust, Technical Knowledge, Timezone, and DAO Participation.

A Pre-Proposal Poll served as a mechanism to select between the 5 candidates in a single-choice voting round. The result was that Tobik received the most amount of supporting voting power, with 60% (5,811,308) of the participating VP in favor.

This Draft Proposal will serve to confirm Tobik as the winner, and if it gets approved, it will be followed by a Binding Governance Proposal to ratify the decision and formally appoint the Member-Select to the DAO Committee.

In the event that subsequent proposals fail to pass, DAO operators will focus on formalizing the pathway for adding and/or removing members to committees within our Governance dApp, which will include the process for electing new members to the DAO Committee.


The DAO Committee should be composed of 3 members elected by the Community to improve security. Since Mr Eric resigned early last year, @HPrivakos and @Yemel have been serving alone.


This is a voting to confirm Tobik as the applicant with the most amount of voting power in favour to become a DAO Committee Member. →View Tobik’s Application

Historical Context:

The Formal Process for Adding/Removing DAO Committee Members laid out a three stage process for selecting a new DAO Committee Member. This includes: 1) The open application period; 2) Committee interviews; and 3) Final vote - by ranked choice or individual proposals for each applicant.

Given Ranked-Choice Voting has not yet been approved or implemented as a voting modality in the Governance dApp, the DAO Committee created 5 separate Governance Proposals, one for each candidate: AwedJob, Champ, Martriay, Szjanko, and Tobik. At the end of the voting period, despite reaching the participation threshold, none of the proposals passed, and a new candidate was not selected - with community members calling for mechanisms to better understand each candidate’s background and skills, and reframing the selection process into a single proposal, including all five candidates. This would ensure that the community was equipped to make an informed decision, and that DAO Members could only vote for one of the five candidates.

In response to these sentiments, a specific channel was opened in the Decentraland DAO Discord for asynchronous communications with candidates, a synchronous session with the five candidates was held during the most recent Town Hall on January 26, 2023, and the above poll was put together by the DAO Facilitation upon DAO Committee request.

On February 6, 2023, a Pre-Proposal Poll was submitted as a mechanism to select between the 5 candidates in a single-choice voting round. With the voting closed on February 11, 2023, the result was that Tobik received the most amount of supporting voting power, with 60% (5,811,308) of the participating VP in favor.


Over the past year, the DAO Committee has been proven essential for the regular operations of the DAO. Adding a new member should improve the security and decentralization of the DAO.

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot


An excerpt of @Tobik 's public application is included below:

What is your full name?

Tobías Kaplan

Why are you applying?

There are many reasons, but I think this job is a perfect opportunity to complement it with what I already do, which is documenting Decentraland at Unversed (https://unversed.org). In that sense, I always need to be updated on what’s going on, including the DAO. I already spend time here reading, voting and following proposals.

What is your history with both Decentraland and Decentraland’s DAO?

I joined Decentraland in 2021 and I was able to create one of the most popular YouTube channels focused on this platform. Not only I have onboarded multiple players, but also I’ve created multiple videos for companies and projects inside DCL (including The Decentraland Foundation, where I still collaborate). Today I’m focused on making the information accessible on Unversed, a wiki that I have created where multiple collaborators contribute by adding articles: https://unversed.org

In regards to the DAO, I have been participating for more than a year. I always found it an amazing phenomenon that represents a new way of doing politics on the internet. I really advocate for decentralization and I’m always learning how to contribute to it.

My first proposal was about developing a low-latency stream and while at that time it didn’t pass, now there is a project inspired by that.

I normally try to vote for projects that show creativity but also make sense for the platform. I’m not a big fan of Play2Earns (mostly when they are Ponzi / Pay2Win) and I prioritize tools that help creators create better content. I try to give feedback each time and I’m always 100% open to changing my mind.

What skills, qualifications, and experience will you bring to the committee?

I can create professional videos, see: (https://youtube.com/TobikCC) // (https://decentralfun.com) I can do an analysis of what’s going on in Decentraland due to my knowledge of the community (We must solve this, so Decentraland will succeed | Unversed)

I’m able to create tutorials and didactic information.

Links to Tobik’s relevant social media profiles or other information:

Can he provide any of the reasons besides it would be an ideal position to help him monetize his website?

1 Like

How are these skills relevant to the position?

@Tobik does not seem willing to engage with the community. Instead of answer direct questions he decided to build a strawman argument and ask the questionaire to solve it.

1 Like

Hey @Tobik it doesn’t bother you that a scammer Robl votes for you, making your victory in first round happen, moreover, he promised not to use the districtX 4 mill voting power ? ? :thinking:

  1. How much time you know Robl?

  2. Does you support his actions on DistrictX contributors ?

  3. He asked something in return for his vote ?

You can look at some scammed by @RobL contributors in this channel.






Given the nature of the first round of voting, I am voting no and do not feel it’s appropriate to confirm Tobik as the winner. I don’t think we can, in good conscience, say the results of the vote represent the opinion of the community when the majority of supporting VP comes from one vote of one person representing a district in which the contributors were seemingly misled and are actively blocked from voicing their opinions. Had the same result occurred in a more fair manner, I would not actively oppose but simply abstain from voting, as I also feel that Tobik is the least appropriate candidate for the position based on his past actions and response to the results of and questions around the first vote.


I am voting NO because although Tobik seems to have the technical knowledge, IMO he has handled himself very poorly when community members have questioned him around how he got the first vote. A little maturity and a professional demeanor would be helpful for future consideration.


I believe that Tobik would do good in this position; however, I am choosing to abstain at this time. There are current issues with the account that cast the 4m VP vote and whether or not they are abusing their position.

It is unfortunate that 1 bad actor can slow down everything the DAO is working towards, but this is the current reality.

If this does not pass, my recommendation would be to revote on the prior top 3 candidates.


Excellent assessment

Tobik wasnt my first choice but i think hed be great for the position as long as HP and Yemel say they can work with him. Plus, i think we should fill this open position asap.

I disagree that a revote in necessary. If you have concerns about whales swinging votes or how robL aquired his VP those are valid concerns. I have concerns about both of those issues as well. However they are issues of our larger governance system and effect every single vote in this dao. They likely wont change soon even if we revote and we need this position filled.

Voting no on this particular election because of those reasons is misdirected and you may as well boycott this entire dao until they are fixed.

Now if you just really dont like tobik or dont think hes right for the position, thats a totally valid reason to vote no.


I said I’m abstaining - not that Im voting no. And as you see right now, the same person has cast another 4m VP vote.

This has nothing to do with whale votes overall. This only has to do with 1 single person and 1 single account that is in question for abusing District land and VP to further their own interests. And that account happens to be the main voter in this specific situation. I don’t feel like it is right to vote on something like this when the integrity of the main voting account is in question. Since I dont have all the information, and this is an important decision, I am abstaining.


Gonna need to have other whales cosign RobL’s actions for Tobik to clear the vote threshold to actually be submited after this vote.

1 Like

Hey people.

I voted ‘No’ in an attempt to counterbalance the whaled ‘Yes’ vote.

Hope that brings some well-needed breathing room to the community when making your decisions.


Voting no to counter balance a large whale vote who has serious allegations being raised against the ethical nature of their VP. Until we can have more clarity around the nature of this VP, I think it is in the best interest of the community to carefully examine each vote this specific account passes. I don’t know how else to protect our community from 1 person with a large sum of VP (That they haven’t personally acquired through mana, land, or names that they themselves own)

This in no way reflects my opinions towards Tobik or his qualifications for the position. If he had passed without the large whale vote, I would be voting yes to confirm his win at this time.


Dao committee candidate defending scammer Robl, nice tobik :nauseated_face:

1 Like

First of all verbal agreements exists, but what i clearly see is deluding and deceive of contributors.

If there will be legal claims let court or sec decide.

The fact is that districtx contributors received nothing, no royalties, no lands.

And a scammer robl is voting on behalf of district not asking contributors.

Tell me one thing, you agree that Robl deceived and acted badly with contributors or not? @Tobik

Robl is one of those who are guilty, you just afraid to even say that, putting your personal interests first :nauseated_face: :zipper_mouth_face:

Why would we vote no because someone votes yes?
So we are always going to counter Vote RobL?
He could just manipulate you by voting No so you would vote Yes with this logic…

All we have to do is see if @Tobik is worthy as an individual and not look at what others do…
Voted Yes!