[DAO: Qmbekt9] Wearables Working Group: Attach VP to Limited # of L1 Wearable Collections

by 0x76fb13f00cdbdd5eac8e2664cf14be791af87cb0 (Matimio)

Linked Pre-Proposal

L1 Ethereum Wearables Voting Power Allocation Proposal

Summary

This proposal calls for attaching voting power to the original six official DCL L1 wearable collections, released in 2019. This includes :1) Community Contest; 2) DCL Launch; 3) Exclusive Masks; 4) Halloween 2019; 5) MCH Collection; & 6) Xmas 2019.

Abstract

The question of attaching Voting Power (VP) to wearables is an important issue to members of the Decentraland community. To date, there have been at least four (4) proposals surrounding this topic. All of those that passed were approved before the introduction of the three-stage binding governance proposal process. The hope is that the solution proposed herein meets the demands of wearable stakeholders, and is both accepted by other stakeholders and viewed as technically feasible due to its limited application to only the six (6) first and official Decentraland wearables collections.

Previously passed proposals include:

  • On June 14, 2022, a non-binding poll to “Get voting power for your current L1 wearables and strengthen the wider community DAO participation” passed with 1,442,355 VP (76%/52 votes) in favor; 437,946 VP (24%/10 votes) against. This poll established initial community support for attaching VP to L1 wearables, without detailing specific implementation pathways or a detailed impact assessment. It additionally called for a subsequent proposal to determine a tiered VP allocation system based on the rarity category of items.

  • On June 26, 2022, a subsequent non-binding poll for “L1 Ethereum Wearables Voting Power Allocation Proposal” passed, with 2,920,657 VP (96%/55 votes) in favor; 146,49 VP (4%/9 votes) against. This poll did not contain any specific information on implementation pathways or impact assessment, however, it built on the previous poll, calling for distribution of VP to L1 wearables based on rarity level along the following parameters:

Mythic: 1000 VP

Legendary: 100 VP

Epic: 10 VP

Rare: 5 VP

Uncommon: 1 VP

The argument against attaching VP to L1 wearables has been primarily technical, with both the DAO Committee and other knowledgeable community members pointing to three primary challenges: First, the broad technical scale of attaching VP to wearables that are distributed across X# collections, all of which are held on separate contracts. Second, is the arbitrary distinction between L1 and L2 wearables, particularly given future conflicts that could arise due to emerging technologies that reduce L1 transaction fees (i.e. zK roll-ups and sidechains) or enable easy bridging of assets between L1 and L2. Third, is the fact that L1 wearables outside of the collections officially sold by DCL involved p2p transactions in which no MANA was burned from the ecosystem, and would effectively be creating double VP for these transactions.

This proposal aims to account for all of these critiques. After conducting an in depth analysis of L1 wearables, total/active voting power, and other VP-allocating assets - including LAND, MANA and Names - we have determined that while a blanket application of VP to all L1 wearables is impractical and difficult to justify, limiting the application to the OG6 official collections is justifiable quantitatively - accounting for nearly 70% of all L1 wearables; technically - being limited to only six (6) wearable collections; and qualitatively - linking VP to official DCL collections, with the amount of VP reasonably comparable to the amount of MANA spent/burned to purchase the one OG collection (Halloween 2019) that was officially sold (rather than given away) to the community.

Motivation

This proposal seeks to resolve the issue of wearables VP, which has been a point of contention since passage of the first non-binding poll in June 2022. It aims to provide an implementation pathway that distributes wearable VP in as equitable a way as possible, while mitigating technical blockers. It further fulfills a demand that was made by the community with a relatively strong level of support, equating to nearly 20% of historical VP, however, was not enacted by the DAO committee because there was no clear implementation pathway.

While there was no initial promise of VP with purchase of early L1 wearables, assets from the Halloween 2019 collection remain the only officially-sponsored asset in which MANA was spent by community members, burned by the Foundation, and is not associated with any form of VP. The problem with some past solutions proposed by wearable stakeholders to attach VP to ALL L1 wearables is that, a) it is incredibly arduous to implement, particularly when considering distributing VP by rarity of each collection; b) it is somewhat arbitrary in that there is no precedent for such a VP-generating act; and c) In the majority of cases it would in fact be creating double VP in that wearables were purchased in a p2p transaction in which no MANA was burned, so the seller would have received MANA equating to VP and the buyer a wearable equating to VP. As a result of the above, an all encompassing L1 solution is technically impractical and both quantitatively and qualitatively difficult to justify.

The Halloween 2019 collection, however, was the first wearable collection after the Exclusive Masks beta, and the only collection partially sold by the Decentraland Foundation, raising 1,077,320 MANA in sales. Although subsequent collections in the 2019 wearable offerings were distributed for free or as a reward, this spent MANA, which was removed from the ecosystem, has not received any democratic utility. By attaching VP to these “initial offering” wearable collections (and only to these initial six), which are the foundation of the robust wearables market we see today, this proposal aims to assert wearables as an essential asset class - similar to MANA, LAND, and Names.

Specification

Attach voting power, distributed by rarity to the six (6) official Decentraland wearable collections released in 2019. This includes:

  1. Community Contest
  2. DCL Launch
  3. Exclusive Masks
  4. Halloween 2019
  5. MCH Collection
  6. Xmas 2019
  • There are 48,620 total wearables in these six collections, spread across 7,583 wallets. This equates to nearly 70% of the 71,082 total L1 wearables, which are spread across 10,442 unique wallets.

VP will be distributed according to rarity as follows:

  • Mythic: 1000 VP

  • Legendary: 100 VP

  • Epic: 10 VP

  • Rare: 5 VP

  • Uncommon: 1 VP

  • There are 644 mythic across 189 unique wallets; 4,249 Legendary across 827 unique wallets; 17,382 Epic across 4,820 unique wallets; and 24,713 rares across 4,126 unique wallets.

In total this will create 1,796,691 VP. This equates to less than 10% of the historically active VP in the DAO, and is less than 2x the amount of MANA spent (and burned) by community members to purchase Halloween 2019 wearables from the Decentraland Foundation.

[Impacts & Implementation pathways are available for discussion on the Forum ([DRAFT] Cumulative Layer 1 Wearables VP Proposal), and will be included in the final Binding Governance Proposal]

Conclusion

These six (6) original wearable collections from 2019 are the final group of initial offering assets that have no associated VP. Other assets in this category include MANA, LAND and Names. What unites these assets are the fact that they are tied to either the core Decentraland smart contracts, or were linked to a foundation-led asset sale in which MANA was burned or the assets were distributed freely to early project adopters.

Voting in favor of this proposal is meant to put a close to the question of creating additional voting power assets in the future. This final section of the proposal should be referred to if there are further attempts to use past precedent as an argue for extending VP to additional asset sets or categories.

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

This proposal was prepared by the Decentraland DAO Facilitation team, in collaboration with the Wearables VP Working Group. (meant to include this at the top of the proposal)

The primary objection to this proposal I’ve seen is that it is a greedy power grab by OGs with no perspective on what good optics is.

This is disrespectful to the hundreds of people who have joined DCL and are busting their ass to build a community.

Why do the rich need to get richer while those who have been creating in the space in recent days do not deserve compensation for their time and mana?

Arbitrary is the word for it, indeed.

I would not say this is arbitrary. The initial wearable collections were the only essential asset class in which community members spent MANA that was burned and was not exchanged for VP.

Also, see the distribution of wallets, it is not only OGs that are gaining VP, but those early adherents are gaining the most. That said it is still less than 10% of the total active VP.

There has been some discussion of what it would mean to add it to some collections from 2020 that were official releases so that it was both 1st gen and 2nd gen communities that got VP.

This is a Draft proposal still, so it will require passing this stage and a final stage to be passed, so there is still room for discussion on it.

I do not understand why this requires a retroactive change.

What occurred that makes the ruling class of DCL need to extract even more value now?

I joined Decentraland last summer, so I was too late to get the L1 wearables, but over time I have bought some from Opensea.
I am happy that I will get voting power for some of my wearables, it won’t be much, but at least some extra power!

This should extent to more collections, honestly. There’s only so much, of them, and they are discontinued. It’s not even 1% of the VP of land 850 parcels gives 1.7m vp. I think this would help distribute the vp more evenly. But include all 1k l1 mythics, (1m vp total) as well as the other L1s…

Some of the calculations in the proposal are actually inaccurate (my fault), creating 1.7m VP is not 10% of total active voting power, which is 62m.

VP

I think it is easier to control over the long term if it is attached to certain collections, not rarities, and it will likely be more even dispersed as well if by collection instead of rarity, as L1 Mythics are likely predominantly held by specific type of DCL stakeholders.

There are a few additional official DCL collections from 2020 I believe, which if we apply VP to it could create additional VP, distribute it across more wallets and eras of stakeholders, and even set a precedent for creating new VP in the future, weather on L1 or L2, as we could determine that a certain type of official collection will have VP attached to it in the future (thinking out loud here) – as it would be kind of cool to see wearable collections in the future that have VP and are distinguished from the wider marketplace, e.g. because they have special historic value and are officially released by the DAO/Foundation.

These are just active numbers? The land should total 180m vp for the 90k parcels, and less than 10% of the land owners (7.2k on OS are even active within the dao) I really think any and all l1 wearables should be giving vp as a similar turn out of participation will hardly impact the dao, and give vp to those who have held wearables. A lot of 1/100 legendaries sold for 1k-1500 mana a piece, and would only be getting a fraction of that as vp, unlike everything else.

Why should the rest of us subsidize your investing choices? You purchased those wearables for some reason, and VP wasn’t it.

Did you fail to find a good reason to justify this greed?

The only reason I can imagine 3 edits and a delete.

Who is the rest of us? 4 people that voted no? Or are you talking about yourself in plural? You have already made fool of yourself in Twitter, please try to keep it together at least in DAO forum.

1 Like

Lol u mad? Names/land got vp - I don’t see why l1 wearables shouldn’t get some too, not like adding some more diversity to the heavily stacked dao is a bad thing lollllll

I will not engage with your antagonism ser.

I deleted because I was trying to respond to Xeta not you. I am a facilitator of a process that produced this proposal, as stated, it was produced by the Wearables VP working group, it is not mine.

Your responses, however, only serve to undermine any legitimate argument you could be making, and your reputation in the Decentraland Community. We are adults here, and should treat each other with respect.

1 Like

Yes, these are just active numbers, not the total.

These are from the six collections even included in the proposal? Since this proposal was based on the versions that passed previously, it went with the distribution made in the second Wearables VP proposal, which allocated 100 to legendaries. I think, however, there was some discussion of this fact that they cost more, so it is something to consider.

While I am not personally opposed to this, and I do believe that the creation of additional VP is inherently a positive thing, I feel that such a decision is not justifiable with past precedent or other metrics, and would in many cases be creating double VP, as wearables were sold by private creators, so they would gain the VP from the sale and the buyer would gain the VP from the purchase.

That said, I can map out the case for all L1 wearables again, as I think these six collections actually account for 70% of all L1 VP, so extending it to all L1 wearables is not that significantly different, other than the justifications for it…

If you aren’t able to see why this is a bad look for the community that’s already artificially inflating the price of land and taxing the people actually building the community like @Billyteacoin, @NikkiFuego or anyone not lucky enough to meet a generous whale benefactor, then I don’t have much hope for the future of DCL.

Dismissing valid concerns because you don’t like how they are articulated is not what leadership is.

Treat the reasonable people on the ground with respect and I won’t be here calling out the corrupt greed that is clear to anyone who is able to step back and take a clear look at the reality of the situation.

1 Like

By implementing this proposal, it would give more voting power to the same community that has voted on Nikkis grant proposal, which has passed and will provide 60 000$ for game development.

Look on this chain, and look across my entire chat history, in discord and on the forums to see how I engage when people raise valid concerns in a constructive and meaningful way.

This is a draft proposal. Elevating two proposals that passed 6+ months ago, because they were not implemented, because it required broader community consensus and technical understanding to enact.

This “DRAFT” proposal is part of that process, came out of an open working group in the Discord where opinions could be raised, was discussed at town halls for several months in detail, and there is one more opportunity to modify this proposal before it goes to a binding governance solution. There are other options that have been discussed and remain on the table, including attaching VP to all L1 wearables (which may be a much more equitable solution in some peoples minds, more technically difficult in others, and not justifiable at all to others).

Hit me with any and all arguments ser. I have heard near all of them and will continue to listen to them and work to synthesize them in a way that resonates with as many different people as possible, from as many different stakeholder groupings as possible, in a manner that is for the overall betterment of this community and this DAO. But do not throw sh*t and expect anything else in return.

I also suggest you look back at who outwardly supports this. I don’t think they are from the community you think they are. Many of them were from the same 2020 cohort as my self, and to be honest, I know some of them do not fully agree with the solution that is being presented here, because it is too limiting, and that the restriction of VP to the original six official wearable collections is too limiting as to who VP will go to.

To this I say we need to answer a few questions:

  • First, are you/we against adding VP to any/all Layer 1 Wearables? Meaning you do not believe wearables should have VP associated with them at all. If so, then why?
  • Second, if you agree that L1 wearables should or at least could get VP attached to them, is it the limitation to the 6 Original Wearable collections? Which by the way, equate for 70% of all L1 wearables. Should we extend it to include official collections from 2020? All of L1 wearables?

My sense of how the community overall has reacted to this DRAFT PROPOSAL - both publicly and in private conversations that I have had - is that the only way we can reach a reasonably sound level of consensus on this issue is to structure the BINDING GOVERNANCE PROPOSAL stage of this item as a Ranked Choice vote, that includes the primary solutions that are being proposed. That is:

a) Do not attach VP to any L1 Wearables
b) Attach VP to the Original 6 official DCL wearable collections on L1, as cited in the Draft Proposal
c) Attach VP to ALL L1 Wearables, as cited in the original Polls of June 2021
d) Wearables should have VP, but we need to continue working to find the best implementation pathway

This will allow us to vote all these suggestions (and any others we decide need to go in the final version of the proposal) against each other, till we find the one with the most support). Instead of trying to find a consensus from the working group, I should have presented all leading options in this way for the Draft Proposal Stage.

1 Like

Not a fan of this proposal’s specifics, but voted YES to try to distribute VP more broadly.

Thanks @maraoz. We have one more opportunity to modify this proposal before it goes forward into a binding governance vote.

I am leaning toward structuring the final vote as a ranked choice between the previously agreed upon possible solutions.