I fully support the idea of incorporating a reputation-based approach into the governance design of the Decentraland DAO. In recent years, we’ve observed how community members holding significant voting power (VP) but who do not actively participate have single-handedly passed proposals or influenced vote outcomes without community recourse.
The DAO’s governance mechanism, originating from the early days of decentralized governance, is now outdated. The token-weighted voting model has faced criticism from various quarters, not necessarily advocates of centralization while reputation-based voting is actively being tested in multiple DAOs as a way to fight power concentration (see references in Vitalik, Token Engineering Academy). While a complete overhaul of power distribution is challenging due to resistance from major stakeholders, a hybrid approach that empowers active community members who contribute positively to the ecosystem is a viable starting point. This approach may not fully address all governance issues but represents a significant improvement.
As the leader of the Governance Squad, responsible for implementing the technical solutions needed for the DAO’s operations, I confirm that the ideas proposed in this discussion are technically feasible. Additionally, while badges are currently awarded semi-automatically, they could be issued automatically based on governance proposals. Once a proposal defining a reputation badge and its criteria passes, we (or any future DAO maintainer) could develop the code to automatically grant badges whenever a user meets the specified criteria—similar to our current system with the Legislator, LAND owner, and Top Voter of the Month badges.
Regarding the implementation pathway, I support the use of VP multipliers for badge holders and the formation of a Projects Council (preferring ‘Projects’ over ‘Grants’ to prevent confusion with bid projects). This council should vote transparently, ensuring the community also has a voice in these decisions. Therefore, I endorse option 4 for the Council’s structure.
I would also suggest exploring other ideas already presented to the community in various Strategic sessions that could work alongside this revamp or on its own like the unused LAND VP decay or limitations or disincentives to last-minute proposal voting.
Finally, based on community feedback, I suggest that this proposal should be published and voted on point-by-point, similar to our approach with the Grant Restructuring program in 2023.