I thank you, Nyte, for your time and thoughts.
I think it's no secret that I am also a strong opponent of bots.
As a dedicated gamer, botting goes against the principles of gaming for me.
And of course, I have already pondered all your thoughts countless times. That's why I struggled for some time to even tell anyone about this solution. Even after discussing it with many people and making calculations, I still wrestled with whether or not to actually publish this, because if we could really get a bot ban, I would essentially be throwing them a lifeline.
Ultimately, I had to admit that my desires are not achievable.
For example, it was always easy to say: "Yes, if land comes, people can just go there with their assets." But is this really the reality?
Do asset owners even have suitable land plots for their cards?
I think it should become clear how easily these arguments we've been throwing around can be seen as mere points to win a discussion.
Or infinite energy - a nice wish, but it would be dismantled in any serious discussion within 5 minutes.
Or do you think people would allow infinite energy that is not 100% bot secure? And we know that no bot protection in the world is 100% secure.
and your other 3 points could also be implemented with this solution!
So do we want to continue being robbed while waiting for a dream that will likely never come true?
Very smart Bronk. A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush.
This is a good compromise and I hope people on both sides of this issue understand it. Voting "no" and holding out for better opens up the possibility that things get worse for the "no voter". Why risk that, if you think about it?