by 0x247e0896706bb09245549e476257a0a1129db418 (LordLike)
The members of the Wearables Curation Committee currently do not have a defined term limit, and their removal can only occur through a governance vote by the DAO members. By implementing term limits and regularly scheduled elections, a larger pool of skilled individuals will have the opportunity to take part in this well-compensated position.
Initially, elections for the committee were conducted through polls. However, as the DAO continues to grow and mature with increasing voting power, it may be necessary to raise the threshold for these elections.
In conclusion, setting a term limit for Wearables Curation Committee members and regularly scheduling elections for the committee would be a positive move for the Decentraland community, promoting democratic engagement and introducing fresh perspectives.
A model to follow is the Accountability Committee, which is in office for twelve months and can only be re-elected for one consecutive term.
This proposal aims to address this issue and provide a starting point for the community to come together and further clarify and reach consensus on the ideal term length.
Yes: Set a duration period for Wearables Curation Committee members
As I have commented on other proposals regarding office duration, I think it is important to have a rolling overlap so institutional knowledge is retained. This would ensure consistency and quality of service. I think a person ought to be able to reapply for additional terms without limits.
With a rotating roster of members, I think one year is too short. Ensuring meshes are modeled, weighted and textured correctly is a specialized skillset. Although the legal department deals with matters of IP violation, a curator needs to have a working knowledge of the existing market. By the time a new member obtained these skills, their time could be up and theyâd have to leave.
Maybe eighteen months or two years. I dunno. Be interested to hear from actual curators present and past.
I think this is definitely a conversation but I dont think a rotation is the best solution, currently we have a team developed of some top contributors in Decentraland from Polygon Mind, Dapp Craft, Wondermine, FreekaCafe and nominated due to the level of support weâve given to creators in the space.
Outside of approvals we usually do a lot of other work either volunteer, create for official events (eg stages for MVMF) or personal work so it might be a massive loss of resources to rotate out the committee members facilitating the creative and supporting the creator network. So sometimes we might not see some curators but theyâre usually working in the background~
Instead I think we can have a clear application process or nomination process that cant be abused (last time a few streamers spammed the forum) or possibly curator AMA for more clarity and community feedback?
From what i see, well⌠Currently i donât see very big amount of really skilled 3D artists, here, in Decentraland, that will fit curation committee and have enough knowledge about technical 3D issues and artistic vision. Most of wearables thats being published have very ~~~flaw quality, and only 10% of all published things is the really good 3d models from techincal and from art side.
Iâm not sure that we need rotation, firstly, because people will need to learn a lot of things. Secondly, there is lack of real proffessional 3D artists (with big experience on background) and if in curation committee will be more members with low expirience, this will not improve anything in curation anyways.
As for me best of the best should be members of curation committee, and members rotation is just unnecessary, because this will provide more cons than pros :\
And this proposal feels kinda unfair for current committee members, because everyone who already in committee has passed through voting proposal in dao and for most of them, earning 500k votes to pass proposal was a real challenge.
But, as i know, there is no memebers limitation in curation committee, so there is always a way to join commitee, anyways. As for me this proposal is just useless?
i donât see very big amount of really skilled 3D artists, here, in Decentraland
there is lack of real proffessional 3D artists (with big experience on background) and if in curation committee will be more members with low expirience, this will not improve anything in curation anyways.
I see many skilled and talented people in DCL who with great pleasure could take this role, look for example that discord channel.
And this proposal feels kinda unfair for current committee members, because everyone who already in committee has passed through voting proposal in dao and for most of them, earning 500k votes to pass proposal was a real challenge.
They are working for DAO and get paid almost a year. Anyway, if they are so good users will vote for them.
Iâll have to agree with @theankou . The link provided takes you to the dcl hiring channel which is very general. Have to keep in mind that dcl is using a very specific workflow for wearables which is very different to usual 3d assets that i saw people post in that channel. Anyone joining should have at least worked on a couple wearables, know the technical limitations to making wearables and also have at least some knowledge of the marketplace to avoid duplicate publishing and also keep up to date with all the recent changes and updates (currently done in a monthly curation team meeting). I belive that constantly changing the curation committee will only cause more confusion. As mentioned tho:
Thanks for your opinion. There is a logical limit of committee members and I am sure that there is a huge number of members who will not have a problem quickly understanding all the technical nuances as you once understood them and I think the current members have best practices and methodologies that they can pass on to new members. I am also sure that part of the committee will remain as they will be voted for. Please look at Accountability Committee concept, it also has term limits for its members. For me an endless duration period is something unhealthy and not democratic. Anyway let community decide.
I like the reasoning for this however curation has evolved from âdemand - supplyâ of curators. At the moment itâs pretty well taken care of, the work load is managable and there are speedy responses to submitters/curation turnaround.
Iâve been on the curation team since wave 2 (the expansion from the original 3) and saw a lot of teething issues that have now come to a nice resolve. The team have a great breadth of technical experience and familiarity, if there is ever an issue we always come to each otherâs aid. I donât do a lot of curation these days (due to other work in DCL asset creation) but help from time to time with specific curation cases or if someone needs a hand with something technical to get through curation. Iâm not a strain on the DAO as we get a fee for the curation approval but folks are able to trust the discord role that we are able to help them with passing curation standards etcâŚ
Iâd personally not like to see this disrupted as the team work well together and we do our best for the community, opening this up to community popularity rotation (who can electioneer VP etcâŚ) Opens up potential variance for exploitation and disrupts a currently working dynamic.
So if it ainât broke, donât fix it vibes from me, after seeing it first hand evolve from being a struggle to being smooth. If it were a âsalary based systemâ and curators got paid for just existing, then yeah⌠turf em out, but it doesnât work like that.
Like the others have said, there isnât a cap and if the creator base swells and the demand for more curators is there, lets go! Bring more folk on!
The Accountability Committee will be constituted by 5 members and 2 substitutes. This committee selected by the Decentraland DAO Community is expected to be in office for twelve (12) months and the members could be re-elected only for one consecutive period.
Each committee member will be compensated with 200 USD in MANA per Grant case analyzed, paid by the DAO treasury and executed by the DAO committee once the verdict has been posted on the Grant Proposal page.
To remove a member:
Following the DAO Committee framework, the DAO should add a REMOVE COMMITTEE MEMBER proposal category with the required parameters mentioned in the complete framework document.
A member could be removed by an Internal decision of the Committee members. A member could be removed by the community creating a proposal, and a simple majority vote would be needed to make it effective.
I donât think anyone should be removed from the committee after a specific limit, but it may be wise to have a re-assessment period at some duration. Every 1 or 2 years, to evaluate all of the current members and make sure they are active and performing their duties properly. Any inactive members should not remain in a committee position if they are not performing committee duties.
I think the idea of rotating new people in could be good to get that âfresh bloodâ experience. But in reality, do business do that in the real world? Successful businesses donât let qualified employees go just because a duration of time is up. They retain them as long as possible. They promote them, they give them new responsibilities, and the company is stronger because of it. I think the value that the wearable committee brings is worth retaining. I also wish there were ways we could provide more opportunities for new skilled individuals, so itâs worth a continued conversation.
Iâve only submitted and been approved for 6 wearables since Iâve been here. Every single interaction has been positive, supportive, and timely.
I appreciate hearing from people serving on the Curation Committee. After reading details of how the committee operates and comments from others, Iâve decided to vote no on this proposal. My concern for retaining intellectual capital and institutional knowledge is very strong.
I do appreciate the suggestion of AMAs from @michi. Iâm a fan of improved communications.
In my opinion, it is crucial for the growth of this community to have all DAO positions be term-limited and rotational. As we are still in the early stages, it is imperative to give more individuals the opportunity to gain experience in holding these positions.
