[DAO: QmX5oNE] Balanced Voting Power in Decentraland

Governance
1

by 0x785c8d210ab8888da6d121faa0a9568f75400b13 (VinnyPiazza)

SUMMARY

The goal of this proposal is the balancing of Voting Power across the Decentraland community regardless of contribution method; investor, creator, or consumer. I am proposing a more balanced Voting Power allocation, should the methods of the proposed allocations be feasible and amendable.

Preserving a near relative Voting Power for current leading voters is essential to gain support on getting a more balanced voting system approved and implemented. This proposal conserves the Voting Power of leading voters and adds additional voting power through creative balancing while preventing material dilution.

ABSTRACT

There is an imbalance of Voting Power favoring those with large amounts of MANA or LAND creating a perceived class war. Understanding that MANA and LAND are investments in DCL, they deserve fair Voting Power but no one DCL contribution asset should overshadow the community as a whole. All stakeholders should have an equitable say.

Current:

  • 1 MANA contributes 1 VP
  • 1 NAME contributes 100 VP
  • 1 LAND parcel contributes 2000 VP
  • Each Estate is worth 2000 multiplied by the number of single LAND parcels in that Estate. For example, an Estate with 2 parcels will contribute 4000 VP to your total voting power.

In the Works:

  • Some L1 wearables will get additional VP based on proposal “Wearables Working Group: Attach VP to Limited # of L1 Wearable Collections”.

SPECIFICATION

By adding additional voting rights through new allocations using relative contribution and vested interest factors, it disperses the Voting Power across the community in a more equitable way.

Proposed Additions:
In addition to current Voting Power allocation…

  • 1 MANA spent in DCL contributes 1.5 VP (new)
  • 1 WEARABLES CREATED contributes 100 VP (new)
  • 1 EMOTES CREATED contributes 100 VP (new)
  • ACTIVE DAYS in Decentraland contributes = 1 VP per day (new)
  • DOB of Decentraland Character = 0.5 VP per day (new)

NAME and LAND owners would be getting a small inherent multiplier for both spending MANA and having their respective Decentraland assets. An additional inherent multiplier is the MANA from LAND proceeds, such as renting, that the asset owner continues to hold in their DCL connected wallet.

WEARABLE CREATORS would be getting a inherent multiplier for both spending MANA (in DCL) and being a content creator for DCL. An additional multiplier is the MANA proceeds from wearable sales that continue to be held in their DCL connected wallet.

These are reasonable inherent multipliers that give greater weight to those that have long term horizons on the success of DCL. These investments are not as easy to divest giving them more incentive for long term growth of Decentraland.

MOTIVATION

This proposal for balancing Voting Power in Decentraland gives investors, creators, & consumers more equitable voting power allowing for the voices and opinions of the community to be heard. This creates a vested interest in the betterment of Decentraland and ultimately more engagement. This promotes investments that create stickiness to DCL which increases the value of past contributions (investments) in DCL. Some of the additional Voting Power also promotes spending in Decentraland which gives the DAO more revenue to service DCL.

I would expect future proposals for re-balancing as the community and its contributing members grow, however the members choose to contribute.

  • Add New VP Allocations
  • Leave VP As Is
  • Abstain
  • Invalid question/options

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

1 Like
2

I think the MANA spent is dangerous since it can be gamed, you can sell any wearable to yourself and multiply your voting power multiple times just paying the 2.5% fee. If the VP received from spending would match the fee payed to the DAO or the royalties (ie spending 100 mana gives you 2.5VP), then that would not be gameble.

Regarding giving VP to creators I think that’s a great idea, I would make the VP match the amount of mana spent on publishing fees, but only on items that have been approved.

Active days in DCL is a tricky one implementation wise, and I think bots will farm those VPs.

DOB i dunno what it means.

3 Likes
3

DOB is Date Of Birth.
Like active days, it can also be farmed.

I’m unsure about the wearables and emotes created as compared to LANDs and NAMEs, the MANA wasn’t burned.
The MANA from the curation fees circulate back in the community through grants and payments to curators, creating an infinite supply of VP if the MANA keeps getting used to create wearables.

2 Likes
4

Like @cazala and @HPrivakos mentioned, ACTIVE DAYS, DOB, and MANA spent can be easily manipulated.

About items created (WEARABLES, EMOTES, etc), I would constrain it to approved ones. I mean, once a DCL curator approves it. It is not the same to create 40 items with many errors rather than having 40 items created, approved, and used in DCL.

1 Like
5

It would be cool to see wearable creators get VP from the mana they use to submit items.

The rest of these ideas would just be botted / farmed and people would manipulate the system.

I don’t think that is ideal personally

1 Like
6

Thank you for taking the time to read the proposal and providing feedback, @cazala @HPrivakos @Nacho & @Peanutbutta. I am trying to get this right for the community.

For the various ways to manipulate the vote, we could add an anti manipulation clause. Those caught manipulating get a voting ban.

DOB is Date of Birth. So if you created your account 60 days ago you would get 30 VP (60 * 0.5 = 30).

I struggled with mitigating Bot farming. It would be a challenge to eliminate Bot farming but the structure should make it less than worthwhile. The VP allocation per individual account is relatively low for DOB and Active Days. Each account would have to be created and logged into often, along with having to log in to vote with each account. If the VP gets delegated it should be obvious. (refer to a manipulation clause).

I agree with matching VP to the amount of MANA spent on publishing fees but would make it regardless if approved or not. If someone wants to burn MANA to get VP that is a costly manipulation. (refer to a manipulation clause). I’m still open to opinions and thoughts on this.

Matching VP to the DCL 2.5% fee as a way to prevent gaming voting is an interesting suggestion. They could still game the system but it would be costly and likely not worth it. We could make that change but maybe use a 3x multiplier to make it worth something. (refer to a manipulation clause).

I agree, active days in DCL will be tricky but if reasonably feasible it would be a good Voting Power allocation for actual active users and encourage engagement. Maybe adding a 30 minute minimum should be included. Again, could be a challenge to implement but I know they are using something in the TRU Bandroom that achieves something similar.

The infinite supply of VP is definitely an issue that a solution would need to be implemented. Maybe a scaling feature for required VP to pass a proposal.

1 Like
7

Another issue about giving VPs to anything that is not registered on the blockchain is that it requires a central entity to verify and distribute VPs, which is centralized and goes against the decentralization nature of the project

3 Likes
8

It may be over my head but I’m not sure which aspect would not be on chain. My guess would be the active days, which admittedly was a stretch to begin with. I really appreciate the feedback as it helps the goal of drawing attention and working towards a solution for the growing concerns of inequality in voting power.

2 Likes
9

I agree with @Peanutbutta , @Nacho and @HPrivakos on that sadly DOB and active days can be farmed and can be taken advantage of through a bot system. However maybe participation could be tracked via in game activity something like POAP/NEATs collection over time or hours streamed since you streamers are bringing a ton of value to the community.

I also would like to debate @cazala and @HPrivakos on the 1. MANA invested on wearable creation and 2. MANA spent. Yes I do agree on some things they are saying on that there is some methods that could be utilized to fake transactions from one wallet to the next, but if we figured out a clever way to spot and disregard these types of methods this could be massive for the space. Since we have tho think about what is the overall goal here. To either incentive the spend and utility of MANA to continue to make it the leading used coin in the crypto space or 2. to only incentive holding land and MANA. Since that is all it does now which is holding back massive innovation. Yes someone like me that has spent estimated over $10,000 on wearable submissions alone would love some type of incentive to continue to invest in the advancement of DCL not continued to be punished and my VP taken away every time I do as I am sure most other creatures feel the same way as well. Also I think at least 500 VP should go to the people like myself that spent 500 MANA per wearable submissions while yes we can give 100 VP to those that spent 100 MANA per submission as @VinnyPiazza has laid out. Happy see this Vinny so many people talk about proposing something like this daily on twitter, twitter spaces and DCL chats but no one has done it yet. So good to see some action and I thank you for that.

1 Like
10

Well…taking a look at the votes we can see how fair or decentralized the system is. For 10 against 11 votes, the result is 1% to 99%. I cannot understand how we are still call this “Decentraland”.
And clearly these who have power won’t let it go as we can see…
Same thing happening for the grants makes this a bit difficult to swallow.

Here are the votes:

Add New VP Allocations 1%
12,971 VP(10 votes)

Leave VP As Is 99%
1,243,845 VP (11 votes)

1 Like
11

I would really love to see a proposal with VP allocation towards publishing costs, something I know a few creators have been thinking about. If you do a second draft/submission I hope that stays!

3 Likes
12

I see where the problem is and where you’re trying to make it more activity based as opposed to LAND and MANA holding heavy, but at the end of the day all this would do is shift that massive amount of VP to a new demographic.

Honestly if you want it to be truly balanced it should be 1 person = 1 VP. That’s it, maybe make some kind of threshold of activity to gain that 1 VP, but each person should count as one vote once they reach whatever threshold. And threshold can be set to 1 or multiple things (spend certain amount of MANA, hold at least x amount of MANA, own LAND, create a wearable, etc.), but once one of those are achieved then you only get 1 VP and that’s it. Then it would truly be balanced and proposals will be voted on based on number of actual votes instead of whoever bought LAND 2 years ago and hasn’t stepped foot in DCL or touched the community since purchasing.

But doing this would also require a change in the entire voting system by adjusting the VP threshold for the votes on a poll/proposal.

13

Some really good ideas here! I definitely think we need to progressively move away from a pure coin voting system (See Vitalik’s ideas on potential solutions for token voting issues: Moving beyond coin voting governance) towards a governance framework where the people who are building and adding value to the Decentraland ecosystem is rewarded with more VP. I like the idea of multipliers, so if someone has VP, that VP can be multiplied based on some activity or value-addition indicator or action. That would disincentivize farming because someone would have to invest in having VP first to make the multiplier worthy. But what if a LAND owner gets a multiplier based on the activity on their LAND, scenes deployed, or something like that? Or creators get a multiplier based on the wearables they create and are approved? Another idea would be to reward users who are active in the governance process, voting, discussing, and proposing changes in the DAO.
@HPrivakos made a really good point regarding the notion of having a central entity verifying and distributing VP, that is concerning and it should be addressed as part of the evaluation of any of these ideas.

14

Balanced Voting Power in Decentraland

This proposal is now in status: FINISHED.

Voting Results:

  • Add new vp allocations 1% 13,423 VP (14 votes)
  • Leave vp as is 99% 1,538,229 VP (20 votes)
  • Abstain 0% 0 VP (0 votes)
  • Invalid question/options 0% 0 VP (0 votes)
15

Balanced Voting Power in Decentraland

This proposal has been REJECTED by a DAO Committee Member (0xfe91c0c482e09600f2d1dbca10fd705bc6de60bc)