Why does an apology need to be made when someone has simply expressed their opinion? Cheddar did not offend anyone she simply said how she feels. If you don’t agree with that opinion then that’s fine, no one is asking for your apology because you expressed your opinion. I am so confused right now.
This is not a simple expression of opinion. We have an instigator and a victim.
If there are some aspects that are unintentional. Then an apology is generally given along side the comment but itstead it was assumed with a “however”… Which assumes that the stance was intentional…
Why would anyone need to consult another person prior to expressing their own opinion? Cheddar does need to apologize, nor do I believe there is an instigator or a victim. She simply put a request to remove a POI because it is not active. BTW, I voted to not remove because it may be a legacy POI. The intentional stance is obvious, Cheddar submitted a request via DAO votes to remove a POI. Again, no apology is required as she did not personally offend anyone.
1 Like
So you dont think SC was offended?
Even with this?
Maybe Sugar Club was offended however I am not going to cuddle someone who might be offended every time they might be offended. I would imagine that Sugar Club who has been around since the beginning has much thicker skin than someone’s opinion around whether their club should remain a specific POI. Even they seem to agree that they may qualify for a different POI.
SugarClub doesn’t get to make up rules and act like a victim. as someone who has personally been victim to sugars victim mentality, I have no sympathy for there desire to abandon dcl and pretend they deserve special treatment.
your desire to stir up shit and try and make cheddar a bad guy is frankly absurd and beyond foolish.
1 Like
Obviously i dont know the full SC situation well enough that I can justify abusing people online aswell 
I just remember SC as one of the first builds… When people didnt need to build for any reason… Before any toxicity and expectations of money… I just came here to try and kill the toxicity with love and simplicity… Im not the one calling names to anyone…
The name calling is the reason that the OGs have left this place… So whats the point in doing it? SC shouldnt need to have “thicker skin” just for being here… Or be called “foolish”…
Guyz this is a Governance thread ! Can you not bring your bickering out to the schoolyard ?
Why aren’t we concentrating on @Canessa’s suggestion, and working on Escalating this here Draft, which would make Legacy POIs an actual thing ?
Hey @CheddarQueso Cheddar just reading your reply just now. i just wanted to make sure i made my point clear after a bit of time to reflect since it seems it is completely glanced over regardless of what you think or feel about our project.
In the best scenario possible removing a POI wether its a legacy build or otherwise “should” have in its protocol an obligation to at least attempt to reach the creators with social channels. The fact that you imply i am asking for special treatment is completely missing the point. This should apply to all POI removal attempts. If reaching out is unsuccessful then a POI removal can proceed, but attempts need to be made to contact creators in order for them to have a chance to defend their POI in a fair and honest way , since not everyone is present in the DAO and for good reasons ( toxicity , personal attacks and so forth ).
This can assure that :
- Creators are being proactively onboarded and bridges are being built instead of burned
- Assures that removals are not politically motivated due to proper communication being promoted
- Insures that Legacy POIs and other builds get proper voting chance by participating in governance instead of being sidelined .
- Overall promotes and incentives creators through multiple strategies to stay onboard in DCL.
At the end of the day for me it is not a big issue anymore because i have moved on, i have created ample experiences here , built community from scratch, onboarded users, promoted DCL generously over the years and am fully indebted at the amount of knowledge and skills i have acquired in this space and i am now totally fulfilled in the the projects i am building currently.
But let me remind you that DCL has very little leverage left in terms of community capital , analytics trends, sentiment and total treasury and every policy going forward by the foundation and the DAO should be to onboard creators and at least try to keep the ones that are leaving by extending olive branches.
If this community was a little more forthcoming at appreciating content and building bridges instead of cutting them then maybe , just maybe a lot of creators would not have left. just saying…
This is why i loved it when i had my last discussion with @bay and the grants squad team @palewin about my plans of leaving DCL and they asked me what she and the rest of her team could do to keep me onboard. This is proper communication and shows care , and a willingness to go the extra mile to keep creators actively hooked on this platform.
Any way ( i hope ) you get the message here hence the bigger picture of what this platform’s vision is all about.
Have a good day.
PS: @jar0d @DedHeadJ @BET @Ozymandias i do not need an apology, so no need to talk about this issue anymore. But i am curious if the resolutions for POI legacy system proposed by @Canessa will be voted for or if this is just lip service and not something the community feels demand proper care.
2 Likes
Hey @jar0d seeing your message now.
Just wanted to say:
You imagining SugarClub behind their computer seething and pouting at how unfair the world is because their POI is being removed and trying to get special treatment by any means possible make me genuinely laugh 
I now how vindictive you can be online but not everything is conspiring against you 
Go touch some grass , Sincerely SC
Please leave me alone. I’ve never done anything to you, and you insist on creating a false narrative around some imagined slight.
You: no need to keep talking about this
You seconds later: actually….
Maybe you confuse me with Tudamoon, the person who harassed you for months on end 
1 Like
@jar0d Fair enough 
I have no desire to argue with you.
So it goes both ways . We can agree to let it go and move on 
And agreed our short interaction In the Dao discord has nothing to do Tudamoon’s relentless campaign to discredit me at every turn back then .
The days of my active presence during the DAO were truly difficult for me and I hope that things went smoother back then In terms of communication but it is what it is .
I’m just hoping the internal infighting can stop and DCL community learns to respect each other because it’s survival depends on it .
@CheddarQueso And also for the record I have not left DCL discord . If you type Sugarclub you will find my profile
This was one of the reasons along the fact that I still from time to time check news and forum that I was able to see this POI removal prop.
Hey @Sceth
First, I want to thank you for this post, and I want to recognize the amazing work you have done in Decentraland. No one can deny that Sugar Club was not only a great hangout, but also continues to be a beautiful work of art. I don’t want it to go away, and I think it is a loss to not have you around. I prefer that you are a part of our world, and that SC remains an option for us to go play, listen to music, chat and make memories. I disagree that we should notify before submitting a proposal, but I think it’s a reasonable request, and it would not be a burden when making a POI change. From now on, if I submit a POI removal, I will make sure to contact, and give the land owner the courtesy of being notified, so they may have an opportunity to respond. I think it would be a good idea to enshrine this step in our POI guidelines. You are right, proper communication shows care, and we should go the extra mile to keep creators and build bridges. I made a mistake in mentioning that SC left after the grant ended when making this request. It is not a false statement, but I can see how it implies your reasons for leaving and that was not my intention. I should have made that clear afterwards instead of continuing to mix the two. I do not believe that we should have POIs highlighting inactive builds that don’t host events, have games, or something that you can actually do in the build. But that doesn’t mean I don’t see value in SC, or that I don’t care to highlight and recognize legacy builders. On the contrary, I think it’s a great idea to have a legacy POI system that takes users on a quest to see the first builds in DCL (king of like a historic preservation society) and I would be happy to help by writing bios, making videos, or collecting and building content. I am for whatever makes Decentraland great, and I think SC is part of that. Thank you again for extending the olive branch. See you around.
2 Likes
@CheddarQueso Thanks for your reply. I will probably not be the one pushing for those guidelines as my capital and patience in DCL has come to a close for now. But I do hope that you or any other community member will take this prop into consideration and make adjustments regarding what constitutes POIs guidelines and legacy builds .
I also haven’t had the chance to check the new client so I do not know if SC is still working properly. That is something I am willing to look into . I do hope that the music radio streams still work as well as the simple drinking game . Because if that is the case the club can still be visited and players can still hang out as part of a Music tour in DCL.
Cheers