DAO - restructuring the LAND business

Should the DAO be looking to buy back unwanted lands? To organize more districts/monetize and start preparing for a more dynamic game?

Been thinking about this lately. We all know there is a lot of green space in game and a lot of under developed lands. I think it would be more viable to start buying back lands (let’s say under 4k mana) with DAO funds and contribute to increased district sizes.

An example could be to buy up squares alongside main roads as bus stops for future transportation.

The DAO could also borrow unused land (without permission) to monetize with games

Lemme know your thoughts…

How do you think this would affect land value, say for people who recently bought into land, at a fairly high price - relative to the past? Do you think this would undermine their investment?

1 Like

Ya, this proposal should push up prices of LAND by reducing the supply and increasing the developments.
Which should incentivize people to sell their LANDs or utilize them…

Why in the world would anyone be OK with this? This is, in effect, imminent domain - just digitally. And that’s not a very popular concept in real life.

The only way it’d even be remotely “fair” is if the DAO had to pay a premium on the space and if it provided a high % of proceeds from the parcel to the original owner.

Otherwise, this is a super dangerous proposal…

1 Like

Not really sure how this makes it dangerous…
I never suggested that we force people to sell…
Just think if there is cheap land going then why not buy it up?
LAND has as much utility as MANA…
Also in the case that someone sells a LAND parcel way under market value then the DAO can insta buy it and flip it or whatever

You don’t think it’s dangerous to allow the DAO to claim unused LAND without permission?

I meant buying back ‘unwanted’ lands…
As in people that want to sell them cheap…
Sorry for confusion…

1 Like

Here is the thing about this, in my opinion, and there are several factors at play:

  1. There should be at least some incentive to drive away pure speculators of land (once again this is all in my opinion). I think we want land to be used in this community and world. Land-held, land-unused will undermine the entire longevity of the project.

  2. If we look at past models of MMORPGs with advanced economic and property systems there is something we can learn, for example from the old Ultima Online in the 2000s. Land/Homes that were not used, visited at all over a certain period of time by their owners, started to deteriorate, became in danger of collapsing, and eventually collapsed into ruin, with everything in it, and the plot become possible to build on again.

  3. It wouldn’t be without permission because land owners have a right to vote in the DAO and would come up with a structured and agreed upon way to reintroduce circulation of unused land.

  4. A thought: Maybe there is a way to implement a system of taxes for land that is not being used… So if its empty, and not used at all, you must pay a holding tax, or something that benefits the community…

Obviously none of the above are solutions, just items for discussion. I think this idea is important to consider and even more important in how it is implemented, if it does come to pass.

I agree with this idea. Decentraland revolves around community-created experiences. People who purchase land as an investment with no intention of having content on it are the people who limit this game’s potential. Without people working on experiences and content on land, there would be nothing in Decentraland.

I think i read about the idea of having a “tax” on empty land, incentivising people to actually either utilise it, or offer it to an artist/creative person in a lease form…

I’m actually really against tax on my land…
I actually think that comparing the deflationary nature of MANA to fixed supply of LAND is already a tax…
This proposal is kinda because I don’t believe there are 90,000 active enough developers using the SDK…

A good comparison is domain names…
Even today after 20 years of internet…
There are still 3 letter domains worth $000s with no developments…

I would rather see a game that has been constructed by 1,000,000 independent devs all working together than a bunch of investors still looking to flip some bucks 20 years down the line…

I do have a question about land distribution and the DAO, although I’m new and hesitant to start a new conversation about it, so I will pose it as a response here…

If DCL is aiming to have a lot of corporate buy in from the likes of Atari and others, and power in the DAO is distributed in large part based on land ownership and MANA accumulation, doesn’t this lend itself to a recentralization of power in the DAO around specific set of interests? Are we not just creating a neo-aristocracy and landed-corporate class “nation” in digital form?

Just some thoughts I’ve been having as I’m exploring the world and emerging systems that will shape it as it grows out of its development phase.

As a land owner, I dislike the idea of people defining what land “use” is. If someone used the DCL builder to place basic 3d models on their land would you consider that “use”?, are land owners now held prisoner to DAO and what people want in regards to their land?
I don’t like the idea of that, you may aswell call it China Land…

1 Like

Yes, ‘use’ would mean anything that has not been edited from the default setting…
Also note the use of the word ‘borrow’ in the OP

I rather pay/ charges Taxes for the empty land than expropriate them, because that is what I understand you propose.

as a land owner you would be against tax on your land lmao,

think about it this way, you land may become worthless if there is no dev/artist interest in dcl, by imposing a tax in incentives land holders to be more engaged with the community as well as offering their land to artists/devs to create on etc

which inturn increases the value of your land since the more people developing/being interested in creating for dcl, the more users are more likely to join etc etc

i just think holding land for the sake of holding it as a speculation that one day it might be worth more than you payed for it, is a poor backwards way of thinking,

for dcl to be a big success, more than it already is, we want to actively promote creativity and experimentation, this heavily relays on having excited devs developing & also having the opportunity to demostrate their ideas/projects

This is kinda a different topic, but…
Not all LAND was bought to be utilized as a business…
If the only reason to own LAND is for profit then people would only build for profit, which would mean that you will only see advertisements/casinos/shops…
No games, no events, no giveaways, no free stuff…
Also land prices would drop as we move towards an authoritarian society…
Not to mention the nightmare of actually implementing and redoing all the smart contracts…

i agree not all LAND was bought to be utilized as a business, that’s why were only suggesting a tax on empty land, not land being actually used,

the use case doesn’t actually matter, i just want to see more developers having the option to deploy their ideas onto parcels

ok… but how are you gonna tax land now from a smart contract POV?

Can you look me up on discord? Got a questiom about fashion interconnect estate!
@CoolDudeBroski#5353