Returning VP burned in publishing process to the community

Questions
1

Since the introduction of layer 2 wearables in the marketplace, more than 5,500 publications have been made. At the current publication fee, this process has burned over 5.5 million Voting Power which has been taken out of the ecosystem and lost.

I’m planning a proposal that will return this to the community. The objectives and anticipated results of this action are as follows:

  • Return VP to creators and supporters of the ecosystem and avoid punishing the community by burning VP they otherwise would have held if they did not sacrifice their MANA holdings in exchange for fancy clothes.

  • To restore faith in the democratic process of the DAO and encourage more participation in voting, while attempting to address the extreme imbalance of power in the system.

  • To prevent a further decline in value of Layer 2 wearables by encouraging users to purchase and hold the higher rarity wearables.

  • To ensure the continued funding of the DAO via the publication process.

It is important to note that this proposal will not generate any more Voting Power than what was burned in the publication process. In fact it will generate a great deal less, if passed. (Consider how many wearables were published at the 500 MANA rate before the change to 100 MANA was made) The goal is not to gain an advantage over long time holders of land or names, it is to bring a level of fairness to the DAO system that has never existed.

Summary

Grant VP to all layer 2 wearables with a rarity of EPIC or higher at a rate that is equal to their share of the publishing fee. I’m opting to leave items which are of a rarity Rare and below out of the proposal entirely, as the VP this proposal would grant is relatively insignificant. I am open to considering including them in the official DAO proposal.
.
EPIC: 0.1 VP
LEGENDARY: 1 VP
MYTHIC: 10 VP
UNIQUE: 100 VP

It’s apparent to most of the active community, who log in every day that Decentraland is dying. Many of us are taking an active role to attempt to mitigate this by onboarding, educating new users, and collaborating to find solutions to what is causing this mass exodus. The challenge isn’t going to be an easy one regardless of the outcome of this proposal, but it will be nearly impossible to overcome if some changes are not made. It is in the best interest of land and MANA whales to support this cause, because ultimately if the user base is non-existent, all assets will deflate until they are completely worthless. This isn’t intended to be a request for some act of charity, rather a formal request for some sort of appropriate action to be taken to restore confidence in an ecosystem that hasn’t been fair for a very long time.

Possible challenges/Points of contention

  • Compiling a list of every wearables contract address involved in the proposal and organizing it in a way that can be used to execute the distribution of VP for items that have already been published.
    Solution: Nominate a member or team from the community to collect and compile the lists, so that the only need would be for the dev team to audit for accuracy.

  • Objections from early creators and investors in the ecosystem who published or purchased items at the 500 MANA publishing rate.
    Solution: Isolate the items from those collections and grant them a higher VP amount than the others. I don’t think this is necessarily the best option and would encourage conversations to help objectors realize that some VP is better than none. It’s also important to keep this process as simple as possible, as it would already be fairly labor intensive

  • Convincing land and MANA whales that this is mutually beneficial to everyone, including the largest holders of VP.
    Solution: Stress the importance of the democratic process of the DAO. Decentralization doesn’t just mean the power isn’t held by a single person or entity. It means that the power should be distributed in a fair way that gives everyone a voice. If the community feels the DAO is corrupt much longer, I sincerely believe we will find another virtual world to build and create in. There is no value in a dead and deserted virtual world and if the community dies, the value of the assets will die with it.

Thanks for your time, consideration and feedback. I look forward to publishing this as a pre-proposal poll in the near future. Any suggestions that could make this better are welcome!

.

7 Likes
2

When publishing does MANA really gets burned?

As I understand it doesn’t get burned and instead is distributed like this:

4 Likes
3

Frank raises an important point: without the artists’ work, you just have a bunch of land with pretty buildings. Why do users come to DCL? To have fun, maybe to make money. The wearables are certainly a reason to stay here as a regular visitor, otherwise there wouldn’t be so many and so many wouldn’t be bought.

But: when I just have 100 Mana in my wallet as money, I’ll get 100 VP for this. But if I use these 100 Mana to publish a single wearable, I have 0 VP. Well, I could get “rich” with my wearable, but in reality most artists will never see their Mana again and only lose VP.

Ok, I could buy land with more Mana, but if I don’t develop it I have VP but don’t contribute to the community, still having full VP for this while the artists actively create values but get no VP for this.

So I think it is a good idea to compensate this somehow. I would even multiply Frank’s values by at least factor 10 but cap the VP for Unique items as only one person can wear them.

Frank’s suggestion doesn’t really cost money, just courage to change this.

4 Likes
4

@Shiny Thank you for posting and for providing feedback!
While the MANA may not be burned, I think it’s important to note I didn’t state that MANA is burned, rather voting power. The two are certainly related but not one in the same. You are correct that the MANA spent from creators is distributed as described in the Restructuring Wearables Submission Fees proposal. However in none of those situations would the MANA be returned to the community in my understanding/opinion.
If the proposal passes, which I hope it will, the funds are allocated as such:

  • 33% or $50 USD to the curators - Most of which I’m assuming would be cashed out so the curators can use the funds to actually receive pay that is usuable IRL. (You can’t buy groceries or pay rent/mortgage with MANA.) Most of the curation team do not actively create wearables with a few exceptions. *Michi, FabeeObreen, and Yanakkis being the exceptions I’ve seen. Even still it could be assumed that the MANA they are paid would go right back into the DAO as they publish new wearables.

  • 10% = 15 USD to supporting catalyst servers - You can’t pay for hosting or replacing servers in MANA and the proposal states this is distributed in USD – and would also be held in perpetuity until the funds are needed to be used.

  • 57% = 85 USD going to the DAO to support the Grant’s Program. – This is fantastic, but also important to note it would likely need to be converted to USD to fund whatever the objective of the grant is. You can’t pay developers, 3d modelers, design teams ect in MANA. MANA granted would exclusively be used for LAND purchases. And most of those proposals get voted down currently as the option to rent land VS purchase land seems to be preferred by the community and the DAO.

So while I didn’t state MANA is burned, it certainly doesn’t seem like it would ever re-enter the ecosystem in any substantial capacity. It seems like it is redistributed in USD which does not contribute to the MANA based ecosystem.

2 Likes
5

Thank you @METATIGER you raise some very important points. I agree that many times our talented creators don’t even sell half of their published collections. They are lucky to even break even on the investment made with publishing, let alone making a profit or get a substantial return in the form of voting power.

And 99% of the time any profit they do make, it goes back into their next wearable submission. I don’t believe the proper solution is to increase the values I’ve suggested as this could easily be abused. (Consider if a creator made wearables exclusively, to exponentially grow their power, rather than actually selling or otherwise distributing the wearables) The point of this proposal is not to generate VP, it’s more geared at NOT punishing the creators for blessing the community with their talent, nor the community for supporting those creators.

As it stands, if a wearable does sell out, it’s usually a legendary item that is priced at 2-3 MANA and the occasional TOP QUALITY and/or budget friendly Mythic/Unique.

But I absolutely agree that most of our creatives are at least looking at other options already, because they don’t agree with the current system, but have no power to change anything with no voting power.

1 Like
6

Great job @Frank :clap: :clap: :clap: I personally believe this is a step in the right direction for achieving a truly decentralized platform and DAO! My only concern would be how it would be implemented with the proposal that could pass and how the MANA/VP is allocated separately and within the limits and in balance with current or possibly near future systems in place.

But all in all, I agree as unbiased as I can that VP should be reallocated to creators and holders of the wearables because at the end of the day they are assets in our world and contribute to the ecosystem. Also agree on the fact that it would add more of a sense of value for L2 wearables even with L1’s also giving some sort of VP allocation.

Look forward to seeing what we can all come up with as a community!! Thanks Frank.

2 Likes
7

Thank you @Frank for raising awareness on the imbalance of voting power where content creators are inadvertently (at least I hope inadvertently) punished for investing in DCL. By spending their MANA to publish their creations, the unfortunate correlation is they are reducing their voting power.

I submitted a proposal not too long ago in an attempt to draw attention to voting power allocations and offer a rebalancing solution but unfortunately it did not pass. I still believe it was a success! It helped spark constructive debate on many platforms with great feedback. Needed attention was given.

I hope this becomes a proposal and will certainly vote in favor.

2 Likes
8

Yes I am defiantly for this! Someone how has spent estimated over $10,000+ on wearable submissions would like the VP back as well. Also if you want to include the wearable purchase portion as well like you Layer 2 idea I would not make it so complex and break it down based on (epic,legendary,mythic) etc but rather just how much MANA was spent on each wearable. Some common wearables even go for more than UNIQUE etc. And since cost is all relative should be tied to the proof of spent. Thanks for this!

1 Like
9

@ParzivalKazuto - Thanks so much for your feedback. My thought in regards to the implementation:
A) For all existing wearables, the contract addresses for each category would be compiled into lists. One list for each rarity. Devs would use those lists to code a one time ‘fix’ for any item that already exists and meets the criteria we determine. VP would be granted to each individual item from each individual collection. Any which have been minted VP would go to the holder. Any which have not been minted VP would go to the creator.
B) For all future wearables, a new wearables contract could be written, which would act in the same manner as my proposed ‘quick fix’. In the event that the publishing cost is increased or decreased in the future, this could easily be adjusted in unison with that change.

Let me know If I answered your questions or if you were asking something else. It’s early and I’m just now having my coffee.

@VinnyPiazza Thank you for your feedback. I believe that the imbalance that the publication process has contributed was unintentional. Nobody could have known that such a large volume of wearables would be created over the past year. I’ve been wanting to present this proposal for roughly 6 months now, but the concern that it would just get voted down is what has prevented me from doing so. Thanks for offering your support preemptively for my proposal. I’m hopeful that through conversation and problem-solving here the community can come together on this issue.

Hey @AaronLeupp! Thanks for commenting! I have considered your thoughts on granting the items which have already been purchased the MANA that was given, and including the lower rarity items as well. However after researching every single proposal pertaining to Layer 2 wearables/publication and with my own research, I have some concerns about that:
1)Some early sales data seems to disappear from the marketplace log on marketplace.decentraland.org. I’m not certain that a complete database or log even exists of every single purchase. If needed I can attempt to find some examples but I’ve seen this happen countless times.
2)Some items have exchanged hands many times over the last year. Which sale would we use to add VP for sold wearables? The most recent sale, the minting sale? My fear is that the more complex I make the proposal, the more likely it is to be voted down. I’m in the school of thought that KISS is the best option here. (Keep it Silly Simple) It’s already going to be a lengthy process as I’ve outlined it.
3)This could easily be abused with multiple accounts or friends working together to take advantage of the proposed VP system. Example: I create a wearable. I purchase it from myself on an alt account, then send the mana obtained through the sale back to that alt account, and repeat. This would generate a system that would basically be able to generate* endless VP depending on an individuals personal wealth/MANA holdings/willingness to invest the time.

I definitely understand that some items have a higher cost than the average cost for that rarity class. The best example would be Ice Poker wearables which are 1000-several thousand MANA. It just goes back to my thoughts that if we want this to pass at all, we need to remember KISS and try to avoid generating ‘extra VP’. A little VP is better than absolutely none IMO.

I welcome any additional questions from anyone, as well as concerns and criticism. I don’t know the perfect solution to the imbalance in VP. But after a substantial amount of research and approximately 7 months watching the market all day every day I do believe I’m pretty close to a mutually beneficial and amicable solution for everyone. There would still be a lot of work to do in regards to making the voting system 100% fair but I sincerely believe this is a great way to start. Thank you all, gentleman. I appreciate your feedback.

2 Likes
10

I love the sentiment of this idea however VP given without the anchor of the token (acredited to an account etc…) leaves the window for abuse and botting for VP burner accounts.

E.g a wearable creator submitting a wearable, creating burners or substitutes with funds to buy their own wearables to farm VP.

(Unless I totally misunderstood the concept :sweat: )

11

@Malloy thanks so much for your comment and for voicing your concerns! That is exactly why I opted to make a forum post before publishing the official proposal.

If the VP is tied to the individual wearable, and transfers from the creator account to the purchaser account, I don’t think it could be abused. The value of each individual publication would only ever be equal to the 100 MANA total and dispersed among the entire collection with my proposed idea. It would follow each individual item. Let me try to explain further with an example.

A creator publishes a Legendary wearable for 100 MANA. 50 of those legendary items are sold, so 50 of the total VP for that collection would be transferred or ‘follow’ those sales to the purchaser(s). 50 VP would remain with the creator, until more of those items are minted. If a collection sells out, the creator would no longer hold ANY of the VP given from that publication.

The VP would be anchored to the individual wearable token itself, not the full collection. I hope that makes sense and I am understanding your concern and explaining it better. Each collection (or item really would only ever generate 100 VP total) Sales would only ever transfer the VP, not create additional VP.

I hope I’m understanding clearly and provided a clear explanation as to why I don’t think this could be abused. If not I would be more than happy to try to elaborate further.

Edit for additional thoughts:
The marketplace in its current state already generates additional MANA (and VP if that MANA is held) via sales, which may be your point. I still don’t see why one would go through the trouble of publishing a wearable, minting it out or purchasing the entire collection on alts, only to be granted the SAME amount of VP they would receive if they were just to purchase and hold MANA. In a free market and open, we can’t dictate what a creator prices their wearables at regardless. And IMO it would still be pointless and much easier to hold MANA and avoid the whole process.

1 Like
12

Frank, I think your approach to the problem will spread the butter thinner than it already is. And not many will like the taste of dry toast. VP is be a means of devaluing the time and money spent on creating the wearables. It will also contribute to a increase in corruption due to whales being the centralized voting power.

I think an adjustment to the proposal in the from of awarding time spent, activities completed(mining metes, golfing, Etc…), and offering performance based earnings with a proof-of-stake production and verification system will enable the growth and prosperity of the community. VP is the reward for these actions. Wearable value can be instilled past buy and sell with a tenor and longevity. Not just look and style. The wearable worn during the tasks can accumulate VP. The individual who owns the wearable will be allotted the given VP based on accumulation through aforementioned awarding. During voting seasons the individual can join the voting meeting within the Decentraland digital space. You must attempt the meets that will be announced with an ample notification window.

A blackout window for sales of the wearables with above average VP value will occur to prevent individuals from power mining VP and selling the high VP wearables to bias party’s with intention to weight the vote.

Wearables owners have the option to burn a portion the current rarity value, excluding rarities below epic, of the wearable to gain VP value at a lesser rate suggested. (Reason being is all wearables are the same price to craft, so this would level the playing field for people choosing to create mass quantities or smaller more valuable collections. *Example: An EPIC wearable burning down will become one or two lesser rarities levels but gain VP value.)

This will still allow for the sale and exchange of the items for given listed value. An EPIC with extremely high VP due to consistency of actually being worn within the DCL community will have a greater market value then a LEGENDARY or MYTHIC with no time of the field or not used within activities.

Look everyone, I enjoy DCL for its open sprawling landscape and ability to offer virtual space for event and community gatherings, but also the potential of a return on
Investment, especially when it comes to smashing metes for 10 minutes a day as digital therapy. The next step is down hill if there aren’t any changes. I have been working on figuring out an idea for this space to flourish and I think this may be it.

If we utilize this revalue system to gain VP while still holding a portion of the MANA value of the wearables, it will inject funds into the space while still allowing users to feel their time has value past human connections. Don’t you all believe in this spaces potential to sustain a livelihood and transform into world of growth and development.

13

Guys, don’t hide my posts. This is a decentralized community. Your not
Offering everyone an opportunity to voice their opinions when your filtering valid input. Additional I received a like before you took it down. Very sketchy for a community struggling to hold users due to speculated corrupt activity

I’m re-submitting this post. If it’s taken down again I will begin a petition to remove the corrupted party from the situation. Let decentralization ring.

Frank, I think your approach to the problem will spread the butter thinner than it already is. And not many will like the taste of dry toast. VP is be a means of devaluing the time and money spent on creating the wearables. It will also contribute to a increase in corruption due to whales being the centralized voting power.

I think an adjustment to the proposal in the from of awarding time spent, activities completed(mining metes, golfing, Etc…), and offering performance based earnings with a proof-of-stake production and verification system will enable the growth and prosperity of the community. VP is the reward for these actions. Wearable value can be instilled past buy and sell with a tenor and longevity. Not just look and style. The wearable worn during the tasks can accumulate VP. The individual who owns the wearable will be allotted the given VP based on accumulation through aforementioned awarding. During voting seasons the individual can join the voting meeting within the Decentraland digital space. You must attempt the meets that will be announced with an ample notification window.

A blackout window for sales of the wearables with above average VP value will occur to prevent individuals from power mining VP and selling the high VP wearables to bias party’s with intention to weight the vote.

Wearables owners have the option to burn a portion the current rarity value, excluding rarities below epic, of the wearable to gain VP value at a lesser rate suggested. (Reason being is all wearables are the same price to craft, so this would level the playing field for people choosing to create mass quantities or smaller more valuable collections. *Example: An EPIC wearable burning down will become one or two lesser rarities levels but gain VP value.)

This will still allow for the sale and exchange of the items for given listed value. An EPIC with extremely high VP due to consistency of actually being worn within the DCL community will have a greater market value then a LEGENDARY or MYTHIC with no time of the field or not used within activities.

Look everyone, I love DCL for its open sprawling landscape and ability to offer virtual space for event gatherings. The next step is down hill if there aren’t any changes. I have been working on figuring out some advice of idea for this space to flourish.

If we utilize this revalue system to gain VP while still holding a portion of the MANA value of the wearables, it will inject funds into the space while still allowing users to feel their time has value past human connections, but with potential to sustain a livelihood and grow into world of growth and development.

14

@mike7fec Thanks for your feedback. I’m having a good deal of trouble understanding your stance, so I’m going to break it up by responding to each individual section. Forgive me for my lack of understanding, I assume there may be a bit of a language barrier.

Guys, don’t hide my posts. This is a decentralized community. Your not
Offering everyone an opportunity to voice their opinions when your filtering valid input. Additional I received a like before you took it down. Very sketchy for a community struggling to hold users due to speculated corrupt activity

I agree with this sentiment, and honestly have no idea why your previous comment was removed. I don’t know if the system automatically did this for some reason, or if an admin did. Either way I welcome your feedback.

Frank, I think your approach to the problem will spread the butter thinner than it already is. And not many will like the taste of dry toast. VP is be a means of devaluing the time and money spent on creating the wearables. It will also contribute to a increase in corruption due to whales being the centralized voting power.

Respectfully I disagree if I am understanding correctly. The Voting Power granted under this proposed solution would actually reward creators for their time and money spent creating wearables. Additionally, as one of the largest holders of Layer 2 wearables in the game, I can assure you that this proposal would not grant nearly enough power to swing vote a DAO proposal at any level. I’ll provide my specific wallet holdings as an example. I own the following quantities of qualifying wearables:

EPIC: 663 - 66.3 VP granted for total holdings
LEGENDARY: 466 - 466 VP granted for total holdings
MYTHIC: 42 - 420 VP granted for total holdings
UNIQUE: 1 - 100 VP granted for total holdings

Should this proposal pass, I would be given a total of 1,052.3 VP - a notably insignificant amount of VP in the grand scheme of things considering there are individual land and MANA whales who hold 500K-1M++ VP. This is not a power grab proposal, but a proposed disbursement of power (Among THOUSANDS of wallets mind you.)

I think an adjustment to the proposal in the from of awarding time spent, activities completed(mining metes, golfing, Etc…), and offering performance based earnings with a proof-of-stake production and verification system will enable the growth and prosperity of the community. VP is the reward for these actions. Wearable value can be instilled past buy and sell with a tenor and longevity. Not just look and style. The wearable worn during the tasks can accumulate VP. The individual who owns the wearable will be allotted the given VP based on accumulation through aforementioned awarding. During voting seasons the individual can join the voting meeting within the Decentraland digital space. You must attempt the meets that will be announced with an ample notification window.

This is not an end all be all solution to the Voting Power imbalance you are seeing in the DAO. This is simply 1 proposal that will attempt to start the process of correcting the imbalance. While I agree with your ideas of gamification and rewarding active users with some form of voting power or MANA rewards, I don’t see what it has to do with my very specific and direct proposal for granting layer 2 wearables VP. I would definitely encourage you to develop your own proposal of this nature and would most likely vote YES in support, if it is well written. With the addition of Linked Wearables, my proposal is geared at ensuring the longevity and health of the ecosystem, and the funds provided to the DAO treasury in the process. I do however disagree that accumulating additional VP by holding a wearable is part of the solution. THAT could cause a situation as you described which could eventually lead to further imbalance of power in the DAO.

A blackout window for sales of the wearables with above average VP value will occur to prevent individuals from power mining VP and selling the high VP wearables to bias party’s with intention to weight the vote.

If I understand these statements clearly, which admittedly I am having trouble with, your fear is that wearables of a higher rarity won’t be purchased as much. I disagree, I believe this would incentivise the purchase/sale of ALL wearables eligible.

*Wearables owners have the option to burn a portion the current rarity value, excluding rarities below epic, of the wearable to gain VP value at a lesser rate suggested. (Reason being is all wearables are the same price to craft, so this would level the playing field for people choosing to create mass quantities or smaller more valuable collections. Example: An EPIC wearable burning down will become one or two lesser rarities levels but gain VP value.)

In my proposed solution, the VP is attached to the individual wearable token, not the collection as a whole. Regardless if a creator chooses to burn the quantity of let’s say EPIC like in your example, 1 EPIC would still only ever grant .01 VP. Burning would not increase the proposed VP value.

This will still allow for the sale and exchange of the items for given listed value. An EPIC with extremely high VP due to consistency of actually being worn within the DCL community will have a greater market value then a LEGENDARY or MYTHIC with no time of the field or not used within activities.

Look everyone, I love DCL for its open sprawling landscape and ability to offer virtual space for event gatherings. The next step is down hill if there aren’t any changes. I have been working on figuring out some advice of idea for this space to flourish.

If we utilize this revalue system to gain VP while still holding a portion of the MANA value of the wearables, it will inject funds into the space while still allowing users to feel their time has value past human connections, but with potential to sustain a livelihood and grow into world of growth and development.

I think here you are proposing some sort of wear-to-earn rewards system. If so, I’d again remind you that that really doesn’t have anything to do with my proposal, and encourage you to make your own. And again, this is not a ‘be all do all fix all’ type solution. It’s more of a step in the right direction (In my opinion) to correct a massive imbalance of power.

I’m glad you are enjoying Decentraland. I think most of us do, and that is why we are all here! However if you have vastly new ideas that don’t pertain to this very specific proposal, I would urge you to make your own proposal. This isn’t Highlander and there can most certainly be more than one proposal regarding the distribution of additional voting power into the community. Let’s continue to think creatively, have conversations, and grow and build Decentraland as a community!

In closing, thanks again for providing your thoughts and feedback on the VP imbalance. It’s clear to me that you care a lot for Decentraland and want to see it grow and flourish. I welcome any additional feedback you have, but please keep it relevant to MY proposal and be mindful that you have every right to make your own. My thoughts and opinions on how to solve the problem will not detract from yours, and I encourage you to always share your thoughts. Just keep it relevant to the conversation please. =)
Best regards,
Frank M./Fancy

15

Thanks again to everyone who has provided feedback on this forum, via twitter, private chats, and the CBD discord. With the recent proposal Restructuring Wearables Submission Fees passing, I’m now only left with trying to decide if I need to adjust the amounts of VP I have proposed here, to more accurately reflect the changes which will take place.

Please feel free to contribute any feedback here, as I take a day or two to determine if a revision is the best course of action, or if I should present the proposal as its written here.

I’ve considered making a ‘two yes option’ pre-proposal poll to let the community decide which is best, but my only concern is that splitting the yes’s up may result in an undesirable outcome. In the event I DO go this route, and the pre-proposal poll passes, I would then move forward with the draft proposal however the community votes.

I’d like to to make this proposal as simple as I possibly can while also ensuring I address any concerns, so a simplification and revision is in order before I present it. I appreciate your patience as I work out the final kinks, and look forward to seeing how the community votes.
Many thanks and sincerest gratitude,
Frank/Fancy

HPrivakos — Today at 4:58 PM

What if the submission price goes below 100 MANA? Which will likely happens as it just was voted that the wearable fee will be lower to 150 USD, so if MANA goes above 1.5 USD there will be more VP than MANA used

(adding this here for personal use in restructuring my proposal)

1 Like
16

Final update:
I’ve decided to forgo publishing this as an official pre-proposal poll.

If anyone else wishes to take this on, by all means, I welcome you to utilize any and all portions of this proposed solution to VP inequity. I’ll wish you the most luck in overcoming the objections of the 15 people who hold 99.5% of the active voting power.

VPpowergap

Thanks again to those of you who gave feedback, support, criticism, and comments. I’m sorry for giving up on this… I’ll continue to advocate for VP equality and community building in other formats.

2 Likes