[DAO:b5d5b64] Should VP be delegated in a LAND Rental transaction?

The implementation defers the transfer until a tenant actually rents the land, so listing the land on rent will be free. The gas cost are payed by the tenant when they accept the listing and pay. The approach you define does work but it requires a trusted third party (escrow) to hold the payments and resolve disputes between landlords and tenants, the Rental contract fixes this without adding any trusted party, but yes it’s true that it makes the process more costly. I think one of the issues with transferring the land that makes users nervous is not seeing them in the platform, but this is not going to be the case for rentals. Same as with Estates (where the user transfers their LAND to the EstateRegistry) users keep seeing their parcels in the platform (in their Estate form), here users that rented LAND will be able to see them in the marketplace/builder, just with different information/actions.


Thanks for clarifying.

Sounds very promising!

1 Like

Hey Eibriel,
I get your point. Adding value to the ecosystem is critical, but from my point of view, with the number of people just holding LAND and not doing anything with them, I feel this is a step forward. If we let them keep their VP while they rent, I think we’re giving them a more trusted environment to actually start renting, having more creators with access to LAND and therefore, more experiences being built in DCL.

Right now owners can rent land while keeping the VP, in that sense there will be no change on the incentive to rent out land (if the VP stays with the owner).

But I’m changing my vote to Yes, VP remain attached to the owner’s wallet.. To prevent people for renting VP as @Klockmann points out.

(Voting No will discourage people for using the contract at all, so no taking that option into account)

1 Like

There needs to be a way to earn VP by being an active player and owning and purchasing new items. If only rich people vote the main players will eventually leave…

I agree that it should stay with the land owner. If they are ok with delegating to the renter they can do so or maybe it can stay with a DAO delegate if the landlord or the tenant are not really involved in voting.

I agree! There are also workgroups working on this. It’s just hard because afk bots can easy manipulate this… Take a active work in this, and join the DCL dao discord :slight_smile: Lots of great people looking at issues like this… But 100% agree, just difficult to make a reality without being abused

Should VP be delegated in a LAND Rental transaction?

This proposal is now in status: FINISHED.

Voting Results:

  • Yes, vp remain attached to the owner’s wallet. 93% 3,504,891 VP (65 votes)
  • Yes, vp should be delegated to the renter’s wallet while the rental is active. 1% 2,100 VP (9 votes)
  • No, vp should not be counted if the land/estate is rented. 1% 2,109 VP (5 votes)
  • Invalid question/options 5% 212,094 VP (6 votes)

Should VP be delegated in a LAND Rental transaction?

This proposal has been PASSED by a DAO Committee Member (0xbef99f5f55cf7cdb3a70998c57061b7e1386a9b0)