Based on conversations with some LAND owners and Foundation’s core developers, we have come up with a two-fold strategy.
[This poll] A short-term plan to implement right away if it gets a general acceptance level.
[Second Poll] A long-term plan should go through the three-stage governance process.
Short-term Plan
To increase the adoption and utility of Decentraland Worlds, and to encourage more creators to publish content utilizing the Decentraland platform, an integration between Worlds with Places , Events and the Explorer is proposed.
Description
Allow discoverability of Worlds deployed to Foundation’s World Content Server only for NAME owners that also hold LAND or an active LAND rental contract.
The World Content Server will expose a list of “discoverable” worlds and it will be used by other products such as Events , Places and the Explorer .
Creators will be able to opt out of this functionality at the moment of deploying their world via settings in the scene.json file.
Rationale
Decentraland Foundation team is leading the development of the World Content Server and enabling the discoverability of Worlds is an important milestone to reach. There is some considerable engineering effort required and this is a great timing for the team to do it.
Limiting discoverability to LAND owners and tenants allows Foundation to implement and test the feature while preserving the economics of the LAND market. It also encourages the world owner to build a portal from Genesis City to the World to bring more traffic.
Conclusion
This poll aims to test the community sentiment about enabling the discoverability of Worlds owned by LAND holders and tenants. It will be implemented if the poll receives general support.
There is also an ongoing conversation, about how the long-term support of Worlds should work. Those issues should be discussed in this other proposal and go through the three-stage governance process.
Voting No due to the restriction to only the Foundation’s server, this is centralization and an arbitrary limit that has not technical backing.
(I know the reason, to please a handful of lands owners, and I do not agree with it.)
I voted “Invalid” because i do agree with the proposal but that part also feels me like a centralized move :
“Allow discoverability of Worlds deployed to Foundation’s World Content Server *only for NAME owners that also hold LAND or an active LAND rental contract.”
If i’m wrong about it can you please explain to me and i’ll change my vote.
Hi @web3nit, thanks for your comments. There are no plans to increase Genesis Land parcel size at the moment. Height limit would be the easiest to increase. Could you start a DAO proposal about it?
Genesis City is the public space of Decentraland, enabling discoverability to worlds for users involved in LAND makes sense. They could have the chance to connect both worlds and increase traffic. An alternative would be paying to be listed, but is out of the scope of this stage.
Thanks for pointing this out. To be honest it’s phrased this way because it’s easier to implement the validation in the World Content Server, only making discoverable worlds associated with an address with LAND or rental contract. This way Places and Events can check against such server, trusting the verification is already done.
We could do it the other way around, verifying on the Places and Events servers that the world owner has a LAND or rental contract in place. This way we don’t need to trust the World Content Server to do such validation. It’s more work but it makes sense to me.
If this allow all Worlds servers to be used on the Foundation’s Places and Events pages, then it’s a step forward.
I have my doubt on the technical feasibility of such verification though.
The ethereum address of the world owner is not publicly available anywhere (talking about the scene.json and entity file), and a third-party worlds server could allow publishing to any DCL name as they could remove the verification, so relying on the DCL name is not a solution either.
@HPrivakos thank you for addressing your concerns and @yemel thank you for being so engaging on this polls comments. I have been absorbing knowledge from 2 legends
The issue is that a worlds content server can be modified to not check the ownership of a name when deployed.
I could deploy to yemel.dcl.eth on my own worlds-content-server, making the verification based solely on the world name worthless.
Yes, you could do that but it will only work if I point my ENS domain to your world-content-server.
I’m the only one that adds records to yemel.dcl.eth. The explorer or any other app, will get the content of the world from the world-content-server configured on the ENS of the NAME.
Similarly, when you buy a domain name you also set the DNS record pointing to your server IP.
