[DAO:e7f9105] Should we restructure the Linked Wearables Category?

by 0xd11a019a70986bd607cbc1c1f9ae221c78581f49 (Yemel)

The Linked Wearables Registry is a list of approved partners that can submit wearables as representations of external non-fungible tokens (NFTs) in Decentraland.

For example, suppose a company called Nowkie sells shoes in real life (IRL). Last year, Nowkie created a collection of NFTs of unique shoe designs (2D images) and distributed them to their customers and online communities. Now, Nowkie wants to allow the holders of their NFTs to be able to wear the shoes in Decentraland. Therefore, they apply to the Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) to be listed in the Linked Wearables Registry.

This initiative was designed as an experiment in metaverse interoperability, where the same NFT has multiple values. It can represent a 2D image on some platforms and can be worn in Decentraland. It’s a way to onboard new communities and increase Decentraland awareness.

To become a Linked Wearables publisher, the following steps are required:

  1. Apply to the DAO (two weeks of voting, 4 million voting power required)
  2. Create the wearables you want to offer to your NFT holders
  3. Submit the wearables for review
  4. Create an API that maps the ownership of wearables and NFTs for your collection

The submission of wearables for review is free for Linked Wearables partners. This was designed to allow a brand to submit a programmatic collection of 10,000 wearables. However, the DAO should pay wearable curators to review such submissions (up to 50 items). For more details about the economics, please check the governance proposal.

There are several concerns with the Linked Wearables Category:

  • It does not generate economic revenue for the DAO and implies curation costs.
  • The process seems too long and cumbersome for a brand to apply.

Do you think this initiative needs to be restructured? If so, please vote yes and share your thoughts and ideas in the comments below.

I will follow up with some draft proposals that might address the current situation.

  • Yes
  • No
  • Invalid question/options

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

Possible solutions are:

DRAFT 1: Add fees to wearables submissions:

  • Publishers will pay $150 per item submitted in regular collections (same as any other wearable)
  • Publishers will pay $50 per item, up to $2,500, per programmatic collection (to cover curation costs)

This proposal should ensure there is no cost for the DAO and actually might capture some value from it.

DRAFT 2: Allow “Umbrella” Publishers in the Linked Wearables Registry:

  • Publishers can use their API to support wearables attached to many NFT collections from third parties
  • Publishers will pay a yearly membership fee of $2,000 USD, which will ensure quality

This proposal calls for the strategic role of onboarding brands and online communities, making the process simpler and faster for them. Umbrella publishers are approved once and can handle everything for third-party brands and charge them a premium for their services.


Thank you for proposing this rework of the current Linked Wearables system and shedding light on the process. Improvements should be made so that DCL has a mutually beneficial ROI ~ rather that be monetary, exposure, user conversion or all of the above!

I think that access/usability of the Linked Wearable is also very important consideration, because it could be a discouraging point for users if unable to wear the linked wearable. For example, I bought a D&G NFT for the sole fact that it would be available as a wearable in DCL at some point (not realizing it would be a linked wearable). Unfortunately, since my avi is a “female” I cannot enjoy it because it was submitted/approved as a “male”.

Yes I think we need to make some changes to the Linked Wearables procedure. The community has been reluctant to support most projects, and the high vp threshold makes it hard to get these passed. I’m concerned with how these brands now perceive our Decentraland platform. If a brand comes in, excited about this prospect, only to get overwhelming “no” votes, they will likely start forming a less-than-pleasant opinion about Decentraland.

We can prevent this by making the process more streamlined before these brands even get to the proposal stage, but also by educating the voters and making it more sustainable for the DAO. We want more people in DCL, and onboarding people through the Linked Wearables process is a vital tool I think we are underutilizing.

1 Like

First time I am every voting NO on anything I think. Speaking from i think one of one of the only 1 of two or three linked collections that passed so far the amount of time (weeks of campaigning) and effort it takes to get the community to vote Yes to get it passed alone is a lot of work. This was also my 3rd trying since the past couple efforts failed. And now creating an additional payment threshold on top of that??? lol. I forecast no one will ever apply again unless I, or the other collection that already got approved, prove massive value through our success being the proof of concepts.

I also took @yemel at his request to me, and spent over 6 months have hit up and even communicating with dozens of the top NFT collections in the world and almost none of them would hit me back after trying all methods (email, twitter DM, instagram DM (I even have blue check), EVERYTHING) and did multiple follow ups and the for the small few that did hit me back concluded:

  1. they would like to be paid for this service not the other way around lol or
  2. kind of intersted but will wait to see if this is worth their time and money it costs to create the 3D molds through a succesful proof of concept example from NFT collection that already does it before them.

What I instead recommend is we create options as @Tudamoon recommended.

  1. Still FREE to the Publishers. (this one still needs VP to pass)

(and the other 4. options Yemel recommends AS AN ADDITIONAL METHOD NOT REPLACING CURRENT) that will require NO VP to pass)
2. Publishers will pay $150 per item submitted in regular collections (same as any other wearable)
3. Publishers will pay $50 per item, up to $2,500, per programmatic collection (to cover curation costs)
4. Publishers can use their API to support wearables attached to many NFT collections from third parties
5. Publishers will pay a yearly membership fee of $2,000 USD, which will ensure quality

As you al know I am truly passionate about this why I even spent a ton of my own time and money making 3D proof of concept models for the top NFT collections in the world can be seen here in hopes it would help convince them to come to Decentraland. But sadly even that did not work.


Which is why I going hard on Waifumon Gen-2 that did finally get passed to be linked in Decentraland, and want to do everything I can to prove to them (the dozens of top NFT collections in the world) it is worth there time and money and efforts to link there collections into Decentraland and I hope to prove them with our actions and success as they requesting in (2.) And am and will continue to spend all my personal time, money and efforts to do so since everyone knows I love this space and community so much and hope it does result in the solution for us.

Open to all feedback from you all, I just wanted to share my data points I have collected from my effort’s in this the past couple years since you guys all know I am very passionate about this why I did it for Waifumon Gen-2 and also thinks is the future of NFTs and the proof of concept of the the entire space as a whole. Thank you.

I believe a restructure is due for the Linked Wearables Category mainly because most of the proposals we have seen for these do not follow what i believe to be the intention of it in the first place.

Most “projects” requesting the feature seem to not necesarilly have a “traditional” NFT (be it a PFP or whatever) collection of X amount items minted, rather it tends to be a collection of the wearable thats trying to be Linked. My argument for this is - if the “project” intends to bring a wearable through the Linked Category rather than the regular way of publishing one there’s an issue by DAO covering fees on this and also having community have to purchase an NFT outside of DCL to be able to obtain that wearable as well.

I like these options so far - however i think that if we were to change cost fees so that the publishers/creators of Linked Wearables are covering them then we should also lower VP requirement to pass or even remove having the need of a DAO prop for them.

@AaronLeupp you brought up some really excellent points. I actually like these options in addition to what @yemel proposed. We need to offer a multi-faceted entry into Linked Wearables that will both allow projects to enter, but also support the DAO.

Here’s a thought… Let’s say Bored Apes came into DCL and paid nothing to the DAO with Linked Wearable submission fees… Wouldn’t there be a large chance that they would start buying other wearables, emotes, parcels to host their land themed around their pfp, etc. etc.? I think we should not just assume that the Linked Wearable fee is where we’re going to make most of our money from these projects coming in. If we can just get them here, I believe it will help the entire creator economy.

CryptoNovo is a good example (sorry to use him as a use case right now :frowning_face:) He made wearables themed around his pfp, bought land, created NovoVerse, his club, and is using Decentraland as a tool to onboard his following from Web2 to Decentraland. In my opinion we just need a few of these influential pfp enthusiasts to do what he did, and that’s why Linked Wearables is really an underutilized onboarding mechanism.

But we need these options to be dynamic to meet the needs of the different projects trying to apply for them.

1 Like

Should we restructure the Linked Wearables Category?

This proposal is now in status: FINISHED.

Voting Results:

  • Yes 99% 2,910,190 VP (171 votes)
  • No 1% 392 VP (8 votes)
  • Invalid question/options 0% 0 VP (0 votes)

Should we restructure the Linked Wearables Category?

This proposal has been PASSED by a DAO Committee Member (0xfe91c0c482e09600f2d1dbca10fd705bc6de60bc)