by 0xa77610fcb5288bc95849c64136df159dd3efe6ac (MetaArchs)
Should the scene located at -30,-31 be added to the Point of Interest list?
Welcome to the future of banking with Quontic’s Decentraland outpost – the first of its kind in the Metaverse. Visit our virtual location to learn more about our products, snag exclusive NFTs and, maybe, experience a surprise or two.
Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO
View this proposal on Snapshot
I visited your build, and I’m impressed by the interactive nature that it has provided. I enjoyed finding the secret backyard, and a ring you can pay for transactions with is intriguing! Has your company held any events in Decentraland already? Do you have plans to do any in the near future? I believe your POI has already been passed, so I look forward to seeing events that will let the Decentraland Community get to know your brand and your products better.
Just to be clear why I voted no, the way that this proposal was passed does not build trust within the community you are joining.
I’m going to speak honestly here, I have never been to this location, nor have heard of this brand and any of its events they’ve done with or for the community. This could be my ignorance though.
I’m also off put by the fact the proposal was voted in by the person submitting, before the community really had a chance to vote. I don’t see this happen often, but I do no agree with this practice, as I feel it hurts the community, and takes away our voices and options of voting. Esp if we’re fighting whales that are voting on their own proposals.
Regardless, it looks like you’ll get the POI passed, so I do hope you have good intentions of bringing positive growth and experiences to DCL. But I will be voting NO on this, there must be a checks and balances in a decentralized space.
Voting NO in protest of the method you took to getting this passed. The community should decide which builds get a POI. Not a bank who wants to use our platform to advertise.
Consider hosting some events as Canessa suggested. Allow us to get to know you. After this POI is enacted, I will be creating a proposal to have your star removed. We can go back and forth on this POI no POI as long as you want, but I will do it again if you simply make a new proposal to give yourself a star again.
VERY tacky move.
This shouldnt be allowed. Passing your own poi,this was not decided by the community.But by a sole entity there was no chance this wouldnt pass with his own 3.8mill vp.
Again this had no chance to be decided by the community alone.
Lol decentralized Dao at its fn finest lmfao. Hillarious @stateless this type bs I always warned and talked about. Essentially he could of broken up the mana before proposing this and had it passed sneakily using multiple wallets. So on one hand I commend them for honesty but other hand their is no damn way someone should be able to solo pass a poi, grant, or proposal. lmfao
BUMMMMER! A self serving business gaming the system in their best interest. Offers nothing to the community except undemonstrated products, NFTs, and “maybe” promises. POIs should be given to active users that have demonstrated value to the community. If it was Mountain Dew or Absolut, I’d vote YES, because they took the time and energy to do it right! But unfortunately it’s not, so I have to vote NO. Not that it matters, the bank will just sit back and laugh at the users over a somewhat unimportant POI. Rest assured though, the community won’t forget.
Does this seem unfair? Please join the discussion about VP Distribution in the DCL DAO Discord here. I want to say thank you to MetaArchs and the 3.3M VP donor for providing the community with an excellent example of why we need something like a “reputation based DAO”.
Consider reading the below articles to further your own understanding of the flaws and weaknesses in current DAOs and how to improve them.
I will be voting NO.
A POI is earned, not simply just applied for. In this case it seems you are buying your way into a POI based on your very large VP vote for your own proposal! That is extremely unfair and unjust.
I am voting no.
Thanks for these resources, Scott! Will try to find some time to read through!
Add the location -30,-31 to the Points of Interest
This proposal is now in status: PASSED.
- Yes 86% 3,836,382 VP (38 votes)
- No 14% 629,871 VP (13 votes)