[DAO:c78bb2a] Community consultation regarding the use of LAND (Part C)

by 0x8218a2445679e38f358e42f88fe2125c98440d59 (1010)

This is an outreach to the community to discuss the use cases for the lands that the DAO intends to acquire.
The consultation will be divided into 3 parts, so please do vote on all.

C. Should LANDs be open to the community, free of charge.
Also, other factors to consider will include:

  1. Should we also include a time limit of 1 month per tenant to prevent hoarding and allow a 1 time renewal of the same duration if the tenant/project shows promise or is interesting to the community.
  2. Should the tenant be allowed to extend their tenure beyond the 2 months of trial by paying rent at the same rate as grantees.
  3. Should potential tenants be allowed to choose from ALL sized plots or be restricted to single/2x1 sized plots.

The process to formalize the LAND rental agreement will be:

Voting process will be 1 time only(like POIs) and will require
1m VP threshold to be reached
1m VP needed for acceptance

(This poll will only be pushed to draft should the governance proposal regarding the purchase of LAND be passed and enacted)

  • Yes I agree to all the points mentioned in the poll
  • No, do not open LANDs to community
  • Invalid question/options

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

The rationale to peg the voting thresholds to 1m is to ensure adequate voting participation by the DAO’s members in deciding if a potential tenant is worthy.

To address any potential doubts in regards to how this will affect the rental market, I’d say that first of all, this initiative is time restrictive (max 2months as per recommendation) and the tenant will have their project subjected to community approval. Any potential tenants that do not want to face such restrictions will decide to rent from the marketplace, so the impact is not expected to be large.

I agree that LANDs should be open to the Community but don’t agree with all points in poll that why I voted “Invalid”.

Hi web3nit, would you mind sharing which points you do not agree to. This poll is for everyone to chim in their thoughts. This section of the consultation is more fluid so I intend to recreate another more updated one once the community can agree on the terms.

1 Like

Sure, I think there shouldn’t be special prices(reduced) for someone at now because land rent already pretty affordable. Also, at current VP participation, 1M threshold seems low. IMO LANDs should be opened to the community, free of charge BUT with certain terms and conditions such as KPIs of returning value for DAO and Community.

1 Like

Thank you for your desire and tangible moves for improving Land issues in DAO . :handshake:

1 Like

Hey web3nit, the reason I feel opening up the lands for community members to use FOC without much obligations other than that it has to be legitimate is so that we can give people the chance at trying out. There’s a very short time limit on it as well so it shouldn’t have any detrimental impact. I believe that with such initiatives we can encourage budding builders to put themselves out there at no cost(which has been a big part of the problem)

As for the 1m VP, I believe that the requirement should be high enough to require at least 2 major delegators to vote for it, yet not too high that it becomes a huge barrier for entry. If we consider it from a financial standpoint, each parcel’s MANA cap is slated to be 4k mana, so setting too high a VP may seem overrestrictive for a low cost product. It would be akin to requiring a high vp threshold for a grant that is only going to cost 4k USD or under

I voted invalid because I don’t agree that grantees should be charged money to use the LAND. We always give proposals a hard time that budget DAO money for LAND/renting so why is this any different? I think the point of the DAO buying back LAND should be to benefit the community and not profit from it.

I also don’t think we should be relying any VP threshold on the major delegates. Those who were delegated were informed that it was a temporary delegation that can be revoked at any time for any reason. Just as any delegation is.

Thank you for the feedback @NikkiFuego and @web3nit! I’ll take all you have mentioned and formulate another round of consultation if the community generally shares the same sentiments.

Would love for more feedback to come in. The use of LAND in the DAO in any and all aspects is unprecedented and so even a single line of comment sharing a thought process will help us all move in the same general direction before reaching a consensus.

1 Like

We should evaluate this on a case by case basis. Any community member could submit a proposal requesting the DAO to allow them use of a parcel for a project. If the community agrees we can let them borrow the plot for a specified amount of time… can be 1, 3, 6 or 12 months, whatever they ask for we can evaluate based on the scope of the project. We can also vote on renewals if we feel the content benefits the community as a common good. Perhaps a maximum amount of renewals would be a good idea to keep lands from being held for too long.

1 Like

Hi @CheddarQueso thanks for the input! I understand what you mean. These public consultations are exactly why we need to have this discussions early on so that we can agree on what requires enforcing by rules and what should stay as just guidelines.

1 Like

I agree with @CheddarQueso. There can be many different reasons for wanting to use the land. I think that whether it should be free to use or not and the duration period should be decided at the time of the proposal. In this case, I also think that having a name should come into play. I think those that want to use the land should have a commitment and a presence somehow with in the Decentraland ecosystem. DAO, World, Building,supporter etc.

1 Like

I really have no vote or say here

But i can tell you right now that charging rent for a new possible devoloper to do somthing in decentraland is a horable idea

The honest truth here is you need to attact new indy developers like myself who have 0 expectations of making anything for the land they devolop

They just enjoy making things others can have fun with and thats the only goal

I can open a website and deploy everything i have made and done without ever touching a meta free and generate income from that much easier

But im looking for a meta to develop a headquarters in aka The Webacade

The cost to develop is to high for an average persn like myself who is broke and cares not about money

But enjoys making things people use and have fun with

This is what decentraland is missing entirely hooks to keep the average user who has 0 interest in buying or owning comming back

And you have completely missed my sons age group which for anything vr is your target

older people such as myself are not going to jump in vr

My son spends countless hours in fornight making small games for others and never makes a dime

I used to mod morrowind oblivian skyrim just for fun relesed an entire dlc island took 6 months to make made 0 off it

My point is this is what your missing entirely and why your user count sucks

Even knowing all this i still think i coukd bring a new crowd into this meta

For referance my son loves the sandbox thinks this is a borning pile of garbage

Im not trying to be negative as i really do want to help turn this into somthing great

But the make money over anything else model is going to make this crash and burn

I realize this is not just a game

But the facts are it is to most users a game without any core gameplay to keep players returning

And your entirly missing the kids who spend money on avatars and skins without them there is 0 future

Lastly i will close saying i think this project has great potential

I have played sandbox,i was a beta tester for horizon i have been a tester for alot

I think i could help make this somthing that all others try and mimic

What you need is core gameplay or somthing to bring people back over and over along with over time growing a crowd of returning players to see whats new and get some mindless mini game time in

Have a good night

Community consultation regarding the use of LAND (Part C)

This proposal is now in status: REJECTED.

Voting Results:

  • Yes i agree to all the points mentioned in the poll 1% 21 VP (9 votes)
  • No, do not open lands to community 1% 1 VP (4 votes)
  • Invalid question/options 98% 2,716,453 VP (57 votes)

Thanks everyone for your feedback.

In conclusion to this poll and speaking to members privately via DMs, the feedback is that LAND should be open for use to all community members, with prerequisites.

There is no consensus in terms of whether cost should be included, which means that applicants will be judged on a case by case basis as to whether they need to pay for LAND usage, when their proposal is submitted.

The VP threshold needed for applying for LAND should not be too low to prevent abuses, and yet not too high that it acts as a barrier to entry.

There should be a limited number of renewals allowed.

All applicants will be reviewed by the community on a case by case basis.

Looks like this topic got rejected, however I wanted to chime in!

I’ve already worked on a deployment system for this exact type of use case: community deployment.

I believe @awedjob has used this and can attest to it.

I mention the system I built as an alternative option for allowing someone to deploy to land based on a certain criteria. The criteria I worked with was a calendar reservation system with a limited number of days and concurrent days allowed to reserve.

This was also predicated on an entire plaza being used for the community land, so I’m not sure what lands the DAO is targeting to use, but the same subdivision logic can apply elsewhere.

The land is then subdivided into separate sizes of “plots” that then become available for reservation. Please see the screenshot for an example of varying plot sizes and amounts with non-deployable roads connecting between.

Essentially, the system is a website that allows a wallet to reserve a certain plot size and then days to deploy. The website allows the person to then upload a scene folder, and the website and system will handle all the verifications for deployment, then deploy the uploaded scene folder for that specific reserved plot.

The user doesn’t need to be assigned rights, the user doesn’t need anything special but a wallet to sign the message to reserve the plot for the intended time.

I would love to help build this out with whoever!!

1 Like

The community just passed a proposal to buy some lands, so it’s likely to use those lands.

About your system, you can base it on the linker-server, it works great (except when you are deploying to 400 lands ahah, it was actually the catalyst timing out while checking permission for each individual lands) and your system would justneed to update a json file

1 Like

Might be too late, but why not just ask the foundation for a duplicated plaza instead of using dao funds to actually buy land back?

Hey @lastraum, is the system that you mentioned going to be deployed on the existing plot of estate that Angzaar is on?

The goal of the DAO buying back land instead of asking the foundation for land is to ensure our sovereignty in terms of decision making. While I’m sure the DAO and Foundation has good relations generally and should continue to maintain that, I believe the community would prefer that we can make decisions on our own.

An example would be that if the Foundation loans us a plaza, but down the line requires it back to organize a major event. That would disrupt all the work that various builders have put in, and will definitely lead to conflicts arising. This may also apply for Angzaar.

Hey hey! That system was just a thought about utilizing underdeveloped land. It won’t be what we do for angzaar. There are other duplicate plazas that have potential to be redeveloped.

And I see your point now about the vp. The land lease between the dao and foundation could prevent against that. There are 9 plazas with 5 unique scenes, so there shouldn’t be an issue for the foundation to utilize other plazas without taking back the “community one.”

What if IN ADDITION to this proposal, we also redevelop another plaza using a system like the one I mentioned? I’m happy to help!