[DAO: QmS8ieS] Auto approve all Wearables- Let the market buy what they want even if it is Wallmart/Kirkland quality Act

by 0x37f00ec67d68c2d3c662339c183d37403c36f28e (AaronLeupp#f28e)

Sorry in advance for confusion I just a guy that wants to buy more of everyones Decentraland wearables. Feel free to pitch revisions too since I open up for debate and just wanna get this red-tape bureaucracy out of the way so we can let the market (aka me) buy what it wants to buy which is MORE of everyones epic Wearables!

If it were up to me all wearables would get auto approved no matter what and no fees to make it happen. However I guess there are some moving parts I do not understand so,
what about my hybrid idea? Allow anyone to mint warbles at anytime. Which will cost like $10+ mana gas fee per (approved wearables proposal) to @toonpunk23 team or whoever is doing the “approving” of Decentraland wearables. Plus the $100 to $200+ escrow mana like @DCLCurations was saying. That way it incentives faster approvals and feedback for non approvals to get approved.

We will call it the "@DCLCurations - @AaronLeupp - @lastraum - @kevinonearth999 -@toonpunk23 - @Waifumons - @RealMattBond
(Let the market buy what they want even if it is Wallmart/Kirkland quality Act) "

  • Auto Approve and Allow all Wearables to be made ASAP!
  • No! I hate giving people the freedom to make and sell Wearables!

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

Do this into a separate Rarity category (Not Mythic, Legendary or Epic) and cover the technical overhead costs for the hosting of these and I am in on this proposal.

Different wearable category for ‘community made’ and ‘personal’. Personal has a much higher fee, as those are one offs and technically Mythical. Community made, requires a certain percentage be given away. I suggest if those of you whom feel so strongly that wearables made by the community at large will be, “low-effort”, or “poorly made”… work on educating the community to prevent this, thereby taking a lot off the plate of three members of the wearable approval committee (Martin, KJ, and Juan). And if the market is indeed about to see a “flood” they will be compensated for their work. I’m for a FREE market and letting the cream rise to the top, as in IRL fashion. The builder is not a true builder, it’s a publishing tool, that doesn’t allow for ill made wearables to be published, so where is the issue here? Someone has to know Blender fairly well, AND make it work in the Wearable builder before pushing that publish button. It’s arrogant to assume that these will all be crap IMO.

I’m against this proposal for the reasons mentioned in this reply to another subject: [DAO: QmT9WrE] Revised proposal for wearable publication fees - #5 by esteban

I think all the wearables need to pass a minimum technical review, otherwise there’s no way to stop scammers or copycats or attackers. I could simple right-click-save the thumbnail from the top seller wearable, create a wearable that is just a box (or even worse a broken wearable that breaks the app) and then put it on sale on the marketplace for half the price using that custom thumbnail… people will see the thumbnail and buy it thinking it is the original. Or just create a wearable that breaks the client or makes it slow and then mint many of those and bring them to events to slow the perf for everybody else… not having a technical review makes it easy to scam and attack other users.

There is no way to do that with the builder, if it’s non functioning you won’t be able to publish and mint. Just like a scene with an item out of bounds or too many tri’s. The builder IS the technical review, along with the three person wearable committee whose job it is to prevent what you’re saying will happen.

Sadly the Builder is not that smart (and I said that as one of the guys who built it). The wearable editor is a preview tool, it allows you to debug (ie. see how the wearable you modeled on Blender would look like in an avatar in Decentraland) and to configure its properties to then mint them. But it cannot know if the wearable actually works as intended, or if the custom thumbnail attached to it actually represents it (ie. my example of using the thumbnail of a top seller and then using a GLB that is just a box).

You need a human for that.

It can block certain things like an file with the wrong extension, or a model with too many triangles/textures, but it cannot know if the model you are uploading is an existing one that you stole (you can just open the Network tab on your browser and see all the models being downloaded as you walk through the world, and save the GLB files, and use them to create your own). The Builder could check if the hash of the file matches an existing one, but again you can just change 1 bit in the file and the hash won’t match anymore.

Finally, remember that the Builder is just an interface to interact with the underlying protocol (the polygon blockchain, and the DCL catalysts), so you can publish collections even without using the Builder at all, or using an alternative tool (everything is open source so nothing is stopping anyone from doing so). The committee approval process is on-chain, so it can’t be skipped, even if interacting straight with the blockchain and the catalysts. And it’s necessary because a catalyst can’t know if a wearable being uploaded is actually what it claims to be. Yes, it can reject files that are too big (ie. the 2MB limit) but it doesn’t have a rendering engine embedded within, so it can’t know if a model has the right amount of triangles/textures or if it goes above. That could be abused to mint wearables that destroy the performance. The committee stops that from happening.

1 Like

Thank you! This is all really interesting. I in no way, think the committee should be removed. Nor do I believe it should be entirely free. When I say, ‘free market’ I’m more referring to allowing the market to determine the success or failure of properly created wearables. My fear is, if the price is prohibitive of some, that will lead to a flood of wearable brand’s requesting grants.

1 Like