L1 Wearables Voting Power Allocation Proposal

Governance
1

Vote Here
https://snapshot.org/#/snapshot.dcl.eth/proposal/QmPGdEDy92aLeH2WjNYMfvzFgYXec91u33Ewzi3q5gpLtq

L1 Wearables Voting Power Allocation

This proposal is to allocate Voting Power (VP) for all L1 Ethereum Wearables. Just like mana, land & names, L1 wearables should also have VP.

These wearables were created and designed by the Decentraland team. Proportion of these wearables were designed by individual teams via special licensing agreement. As of right now you can create your own wearables on the Polygon (Matic) network without any licensing.

L1 wearables date back to 2019. There was a pre-sale at Opensea for the epic, legendary & mythic wearables. During the initial stages before the platform launch small portion of these wearables were given out as prices.

Wearables form a strong part of the Decentraland ecosystem. Just like mana, land and names. It was the early adopters who believed in this platform and invested their funds in these assets who made Decentraland what it is today. Think of it as distributing the Voting Power across the platforms assets.

Some players just have mana or land, some have names and others have wearables. By not allocating voting power to wearables owners is unjust in my honest opinion.

L1 Wearables Voting Power Allocation Proposal

  • Mythic 1000 VP
  • Legendary 100 VP
  • Epic 10 VP
  • Rare 5 VP
  • Uncommon 1 VP

Most of these Wearables were made by the Decentraland team. You could purchase them from Opensea Pre-Sale back in 2019. Pre-sale wearables were only Mythic, Legendary, Epic & Swanky

Opensea Presale Prices & Mint Numbers

  • Mythic 5000 MANA (10 Mint)
  • Legendary 500 Mana (100 Mint)
  • Epic 200 Mana (1000 Mint)
  • Swanky 80 Mana (5000 Mint)

Prior to official launch in 20.02.2020 small portion of these wearables were given out during special events. On the official launch date Uncommon (10000 Mint) category was added. Wearables licensing was given to selected individuals and team in order to create new wearables for the Fashion shows and other events. New wearables got introduced by the team during Halloween & Christmas events also.

Please vote Yes or NO

If you have any questions or would like to share your opinions and thoughts please feel free. Thank you in advance.

By JasonX

https://snapshot.org/#/snapshot.dcl.eth/proposal/QmPGdEDy92aLeH2WjNYMfvzFgYXec91u33Ewzi3q5gpLtq

3 Likes
2

I am going to vote no on this even though I believe L1 wearables should have VP. For such a major decision this proposal seems like it was thrown together in 10 minutes. Give background. Give a thesis. Explain where you got these numbers. My guess is they were just arbitrarily picked or you probably would’ve gave background on them.

Decentraland is out of whack with the tokenomics of almost everything as well as the DAO not keeping up with tech rollouts and the ramifications such as L2 wearables.

We users who own wearables and land should demand a higher class of proposals that actually goes in depth on mechanisms and why they need changed. Also, a deep dive on what it should change to.

1 Like
3

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

There was a previous proposal which explains all of this

I just had to come up with the numbers

You are welcome to vote Yes or No. That is entirely up to you.

4

Yes. Not only did I vote yes on this, but I brought it to the attention of a few other whales that were unaware of it and agreed with me that gave it a tremendous push. Just off the top of my head I would ask why would you give those numbers and not look at the historical precedent that DCL itself provided for L1 wearables?

In the initial marketplace, Mythic were issued for sale at 5000 Mana. Legendary at 500. etc etc. If the goal is to honor the OG’s and preserve the value of the Mana that they spent to purchase those wearables vs just holding it…wouldn’t it be the most logical to start the conversation at that point?

Full disclose: I own zero L1 Mythics so this argument doesn’t even benefit me the most. I also came to DCL late even though Ive invested heavily since arriving in land and wearables.

IMO what you have offered does not help/even out the value destruction that has happened for, in this case wearables, and in a bigger case LAND, vs holding mana and not participating in the actual metaverse.

MANA shouldn’t be the highest growth asset in DCL. It should be LAND, then Wearables, then MANA.

2 Likes
5

Thank you. I figured since the Voting Power for each land parcel is 2000 VP even the Mythic wearables should not exceed this amount.

Since the Names are receiving 100 VP and Land at 2000 the wearables had to be somewhere is between.

It can be argued to have more or less VP per wearables category.

While back I put these numbers out on the social media and everyone seemed content with it.

6

I think these numbers are reasonable. The biggest question I think that has comes up re: the L1 vs L2 wearables in conversations I have had is surrounding the fact that at some point the distinction between L1 and L2 will be somewhat moot, so there will be movement between the layers fairly easily. So if there is simply a way to do a snapshot, and denote certain wearable policy ID’s up to the L2 as having VP, and in their description on the marketplace make it so that is indicated with a (vp) or something like that. In that way, regardless as to which layer they are on, they have the VP allotment.

7

Excellent points. This is my interpretation. Since L2’s are minted in unlimited numbers/batches if the VP points were to be assigned to L2 wearables this can be used to manipulate the votes in major decisions in DAO. Because the L1 numbers are firm and already minted plus has a fair distribution same case is not applicable to L1.

bridging and swapping between L1 to L2 is another topic on its own.

Even if/when this happens I strongly believe only L1 should have VP. But this is my opinion.

1 Like
8

Please Note: This proposal is strictly for the Ethereum Layer 1 pre-minted wearables. All new wearables minted on the Matic Polygon L2 chain are excluded.

9

It’s unfortunate this VP assignment to L1 wearables passed. That said, I’m flatly voting no on this one. Here’s why. (I also mention this on twitter since this is pumped a lot by people on twitter, but now I’m here answering on the forum too :wink: )

That proposal was created before we even know if L1 wearables will stay on L1 or if the ability to move them to L2 will be created. I’ve heard it will be created. So, we’ve essentially IMO created a proposal about something that might or might not happen. Cart before the horse.

If wearables can go between chains, why should we allow prioritization of a chain just to obtain VP? Do we only assign VP to L1 MANA? No. If / when LAND can move between chains, do we only assign L1 LAND VP? It’s a snowball effect that is a current waste of time since we don’t even know if these possibilities will exist. I strongly disagree that we peg anything to a specific chain if it’s technically possible to have those items exist on many chains. This could hinder adoption of Decentraland if people retain things on certain chains for certain perks. Right now, I don’t think that is helpful.

I would rather see efforts focused on proposals like this one : Patch Builder to latest SDK

The builder is way behind in terms of SDK versions and has many breaking changes. THESE types of proposals IMO actually enhance the platform, foster more content creation and expand the reach of Decentraland to new users. All these VP proposals IMO come off as having ulterior motives.

I understand, or hope I understand, the intent of this L1 wearable proposal is to give more VP to more community members. I do agree on that; I currently disagree this is the right approach. Also, not everything in DCL should be rewarded with VP…

2 Likes
10

This proposal is still in it’s voting stage and hasn’t passed yet. We really don’t know whether or if there will be a bridge for the wearables to cross back & forth. The only reason why I made this proposal was because after seeing the reaction and positive input onto Swiss’s proposal.

" https://governance.decentraland.org/en/proposal/?id=d936afb0-c82f-11eb-9861-ebb8fcfd58d2"

And since the Name VP allocation passed, I believe it makes sense to include the last remaining Decentraland asset for wider distribution of the VP. This is not about adding value to L1 wearables although some can argue the opposite. Either at the end of the day everyone should be able to vote. Regardless of the assets they have.

As for the chains, swaps, integrations I can not comment on these subjects.

Perhaps someone from the team can assist us how it will all work.

11

Here, here! I am more in support of development and expansion of content creation whilst all of these VP enhancing debates kind of just distribute power to players who were around in the beginning and somewhat disincentivize people wanting to get involved if decisions are constantly out of their hands due to VP accumulation whales etc… I could be mistaken though but this is what it’s looking like from a newer contributor to the world. Always eager to understand the bigger picture from multiple viewpoints!

12

Development & content creation/expansion is what we all want to see the focus on. This is what will bring new users, players, builders, investors and brands.

Up until now the Voting Power was only limited to Land owners and Mana Holders. Someone who only owned wearables but not any land or mana didn’t have any voting power. Wearables being one 1 of the 4 Core platform asset and not having any voting power doesn’t fit well with decentralisation and VP distribution/rights.

Recently another proposal just passed for all the Name holders to have 100 VP. So it only made more sense to include wearables in the VP allocation.

The new wearables can be minted by anyone and everyone. We have already seen 30,000+ new wearables creations on the Polygon Matic Network. Only the L1 pre-minted wearables are included for this proposal because they were minted by the team or licensed by the team.

13

To reply to both comments. Jason, your reply first “As for the chains, swaps, integrations I can not comment on these subjects.” – In my opinion, if that hasn’t been hashed out yet, then these proposals shouldn’t have been created.

And you can opine on why you think wearables should have VP, but it shouldn’t be tied to the thought “because this one gets VP so should this one.” Again, a snowball effect that doesn’t foster development.

To reply to Jason’s response to Malloy…VP doesn’t equate to development & content creation/expansion. ** EDIT - VP won’t bring in new players or content creators as much as having the tools and resources to create the content ** Yes, VP can help guide the ecosystem, but this early on, it’s all political. I just loaned a bunch of mana to someone thus reducing my VP. That has no correlation to me continuing to develop and create content in dcl. Let me be clear: you can and should develop / create content within dcl WITHOUT VP. You dont NEED VP to be a content creator.

** EDIT - My opinion is VP is not the way to attract more people to DCL. **

2 Likes
14

I understand that, but my concern was people with large VP from L1s, being able to vote through changes that will restrict the creative freedom and distribution access for L2 wearable artists. Changing or inhibiting the freedom of distribution costs of wearable NFTs from artists at the source will disincentivise a lot of talented content creators. Seems to be a lot of ‘save wearables’ rhetoric on the social medias, which in turn, doesn’t sound inticing for an artist/content creator to hear. At the moment it seems like an empowering system for artists who can 1) self publish artwork through the vending machines, 2) create free giveaways for events and help promote events, 3) provide pay for hire jobs etc… It is currently a great system for artists and if these freedoms were to be restricted (which driving force seems to be that the status quo has changed from how wearables used to be traded based and how their value was perceived). If these such freedoms were infact inhibited or restricted to appease L1 collectors and the environment they were used to, I’d personally be less inclined to create content as a wearable artist. I’ve read some of the proposed ‘solves’ for L2 wearables and they seem to create a lack of accessibility for players with not a high volume of MANA and to counter the argument of ‘value’, surely if an artist wanted to create a mythic set and set the price above 5000 MANA, they’ll do so, and the inherited value of that L2 wearable will be reflective of that primary sale price. I infact set a legendary set MANA price at ‘500’ after reading a discussion in the Discord channels and received multiple DMs from the community that it was far too high to even think about purchasing.

I feel the new system just needs time to establish a new status quo and all of this political jiving is to protect the value of L1 collectors.

Again, just a 3rd party perception, could be completely wrong!

15

You misunderstood what I said.

I never said or mentioned VP is needed to attract new players, users etc. Please do not twist the words.

“Development & content creation/expansion is what we all want to see the focus on. This is what will bring new users, players, builders, investors and brands.” Where does it mention once about VP ? in this sentence ?

Recent vote was casted and passed as to why L1 Wearables should have VP.

I suggest you go back to that for your answers.

https://governance.decentraland.org/en/proposal/?id=d936afb0-c82f-11eb-9861-ebb8fcfd58d2

16

I suggest you read this and accept the voting results in order for you to move forward.

https://governance.decentraland.org/en/proposal/?id=d936afb0-c82f-11eb-9861-ebb8fcfd58d2

17

If I misunderstood what you said, then your answer is misleading. Your reply comes off as the way to get more people and brands involved is to distribute VP to more people.

I am voting no on this current proposal. I know what has passed prior and what will need to be reviewed. I’m highlighting these proposals as being distractions shilled by people with at best the lack of research and thought and and worst ulterior motives. The focus should be on the platform not on the politics. Full transparency, Jason blocked me on Twitter after having an opposing opinion.

2 Likes
18

You should feel free to vote Yes or No. This is what DOA is for :grinning: