[DAO:fd705d6] Review of Delegate's VP issued by Esteban Ordano

by 0x8218a2445679e38f358e42f88fe2125c98440d59 (1010)

First and foremost, I want to highlight that the purpose of this review is not to pass any unfavorable judgment on the individuals who have been delegated VP from EO (Esteban Ordano). It is crucial to recognize that the vast majority, if not all, of the delegates have actively engaged in the DAO, demonstrating their commitment to community building with constructive feedback and comments on various proposals, irrespective of the final outcomes. Their valuable contributions have greatly enhanced the discourse within the community.

The purpose of this review is to reflect the sentiment within the community regarding the VP delegation from EO, aiming to bring forth any concerns or differences that may exist.

It has been approximately 6 months since the delegation took place, during which each delegate was granted 500k VP. However, it is worth considering that due to the significant amount of VP held by each individual, they wield considerable influence over the outcome of proposed initiatives. Consequently, the decision-making process tends to be dominated by the top five to ten voters, often overshadowing the voices of smaller stakeholders who have invested their own funds into MANA, LAND, NAME and Wearables and actively participate in the DAO. This can lead to a sense of disenfranchisement among community members.

With that in mind, I would like to propose that EO considers redistributing his VP to a larger pool of delegates, expanding the number from 8 to 16 or more. Over the past 6 months, numerous applications have been submitted by deserving individuals who should be given the opportunity to exert greater influence in the voting process for proposals.

Furthermore, I suggest that delegates who benefit from EO’s delegation ABSTAIN from voting but are allowed to provide comments.

I kindly request both the community and EO to also take into account the number of votes in favor or against a proposal, rather than solely focusing on the total VP attached to each option. This approach would ensure that every participant has an equal voice in this matter, taking into consideration that automated voting bots may also be present.

In conclusion, the objective of this review is to foster open discussion and promote a fair and inclusive decision-making process within the community.

  • Yes, please review the number of delegates/amount of VP
  • No, leave it as is
  • Invalid question/options

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

A TL;DR version
Request for EO to allow more delegates to be included and reduce the amount of VP allocated to each of his existing delegates.

This poll is non binding and the decision will ultimately lie with EO himself.


Edit: Just to also clarify, this poll is by no means a way to force Esteban to change his delegates. He owns the VP and he has the right to decide, even against public sentiment, because it’s his VP. It is just meant to be data collection, should there be an existing sense that maybe the delegates are wielding too much influence.

This poll will not move to draft.

This isnt something the dao has any say over.

I understand that, which is why I say it is ultimately his decision.

Do you have an application in the vp delegation thread filled out?

Yes, I do (20 words xxx)

Seems Esteban is voting Yes on things he should be voting NO on and NO on what he should be voting yes. Much better he distributed his 4M whale VP IMO.

That would be his prerogative. This poll isn’t so much about his voting decisions but rather about whether VP should/could be better distributed. Ultimately it’s his decision but having a gauge of sentiment on the ground about both the delegators and current setup would be helpful in knowing if the community has issues with status quo.

This is tough because at the end of the day it’s his VP, and ultimately he can distribute it how he likes. However, I do agree with you and believe it should be distributed more. I took a quick glance at the number of delegates and seen about at least 10-15 who have voted on 100+ proposals with a VP under 5K. I think diversity is key to this space, and having VP distributed to more delegates would enhance decision making on proposals by having multiple insights from individuals.

1 Like

Given I have VP delegation, I’m going to try and be as objective as possible, but know it will be hard as I’m clearly part of the subject matter here.

First, I want to thank you for sharing your sentiments. It’s always important people regardless if we agree or not are heard for what they feel or are going through. So I hope amongst this you know I am hearing you, but also sharing my views based on my history of over a year in this space.

Speaking of history, I’d like to ask those involved how much of the histories they know of how some of the community delegation has happened? Not just the last 6 months, but prior to the 500k delegation? When 100k delegations we’re given out to maybe 5 or so of us? Or, even before that when no one in the community had any delegation from anyone involved in Foundation about a year ago? AKA when the community started the call to get as many people applying for delegation. All in hopes we could get maybe even a fraction of a percentage of us delegated, so we could rally and align for community who had no chance against whales and unethical behavior that dominated the actual outcomes. This last year has only been the beginning of what we hope for community delegation.

I’m happy to try and piece together a factual timeline for you, so you can learn those histories, as I’m not sure they are really documented anywhere.

And if y’all didn’t know, ANYONE can STILL apply for VP delegation RIGHT NOW to help us with this fight we have been on for awhile now! I can only speak for myself, but I welcome ALL to apply. :point_down:

Here’s where I’ll get more personal in my thoughts… when I say fight… if you know, this last year has been a FIGHT for community. If you look at just my personal history with the DAO and what I have been through just because I was a voice and speaking up against bad actors, ethical issues, and grants seeking to only take — I think it would make more sense why I have delegation and vote the way they do.

Regardless of all that, I’m all for reviewing more candidates, and getting more VP in to more hands. This part I agree with 10000000%+.

As I was reviewed multiple times in order to get the different numbers of VP delegation I’ve had over the last year by different people who were delegating at different times. And all I did was be active in the DAO, community, DCL, and apply on that link above. I didn’t lobby my delegators, I didn’t even speak to any of them prior about VP delegation either. I haven’t even had much interaction with either of them, outside of DAO grants and comments, where I actually called both of them out on things >.< oops.

So sure review us, but there are also many others in the space that are delegated by non Foundation members with larger amounts of VP as well. I’d say more a vast majority more VP than us 10 combined.

So I question now, why would this proposal silo to one specific group of people delegated? Is this just because it was Esteban? Is it just because it’s the 10 people and how they are voting and how you view that voting? Does this have any relation to any proposal you were a part of? Cherry picking can be divisive. Especially when fairness is discussed in this proposal.

What I really don’t want, is the community to become divided about something that was originally and still is a community fight to have more say in voting and trying to get more VP into more hands.

IMO, there are much larger issues like general VP inequity, and large whales still controlling outcomes(who are also delegated VP BTW), projects and their own DAOs being whales and controlling outcomes in the DAO, etc.

Hope this finds you well @3Point1Four, I’ve always appreciated our convos and what you’ve done in this space, and hope you understand my sentiments as well.


Let Esteban decide where to put his VP hahaha.
We also have no says to how Delegates used their VP, being a new bad and corrupt actor or being a good minority.

Let’s also hope that new whale investors will Delegate some of their VP to those who deserves best hahaha.


1 Like

Hi CK! I really appreciate your comment here. We’ve had this convo in Discord and came to an amicable conclusion that VP inequity is at the heart of most voting issues here in the DAO. This would be my official reply to your message here for everyone to see.

I personally have no grievances with any of EO’s delegates. Heck, I even have constant conversations with some on Discord DMs on a regular basis and truly admire the commitment they show.

The issue at hand is more of seeing if EO is willing to consider expanding his team of delegates to include more people. It is also to balance out the outsized VP allocation that the current team has so that members who are constantly participating actively in the DAO have a better VP weightage to go with their voices.

As an example, pick any of the proposals launched before this poll and see the current results, you’ll notice that at the top 7-10, a majority, if not all, are EO’s delegates, followed by the remaining 10, who’s VPs altogether rarely adds up to 500k. What I’d like to see is that the top 15-20 votes account for 80% of the votes, not the top 7-10.

This is by no means a form of penalizing/shaming EO or his delegates. On the contrary, we should laud his efforts for setting the stage to demonstrate that giving VP to its community will ultimately benefit everyone.

The VP given by Eordano has become a tool for people to take advantage of. Some individuals, like Canessa and Sinful, the CBD, which behaves like a grant mafia. They manipulate the grant system to benefit their own community members. They always vote “yes” on proposals that align with their agenda and “no” on proposals that don’t benefit them. On the other hand, Tobik has been found doing unethical things. They make deals with certain projects and infiltrate different DAOs to hinder specific initiatives. While @esteban had a good intention of sharing the VP, almost everyone in the DAO has become corrupted by power and is driven by greed for money. I suggest either removing the VP and letting @esteban vote “no” on proposals that harm the platform, with the support of the DAO. Alternatively, the VP position could be rotated every few months to prevent corruption.


This reads more like a delusional fever dream than an argument built on fact.

Review of Delegate’s VP issued by Esteban Ordano

This proposal is now in status: REJECTED.

Voting Results:

  • Yes, please review the number of delegates/amount of vp 20% 1,263,736 VP (37 votes)
  • No, leave it as is 1% 8,514 VP (4 votes)
  • Invalid question/options 79% 4,811,514 VP (48 votes)