315da621957a3da341613dc99a8d6cc3517d8218
As most of you already know, the Splinterlands team is working on the land surveying feature which will allow players who own land deeds to survey their land and determine the terrain type, rarity, resources, and special buildings that their land contains.
This proposal being put to a vote by the SPS stakeholder community will allow players surveying their land to pay 10,000 (10k) DEC tokens (roughly $6 at current prices) OR 10,000 (10k) DEC-B tokens per plot surveyed in order to gain double the normal chances of getting Rare, Epic, and Legendary plots as well as double the normal chance of getting a magical or an occupied plot. Please note that this will be one single option/payment to boost BOTH the chances of getting a more rare plot and the chances of getting more rare resources. All tokens spent for the land survey bonus would be burned.
For some context, there are 150k total land plots in existence. Let's assume that 100k of those get surveyed within a few months of surveying going live and choose to get the bonus. Let's also assume that it is almost entirely paid for with DEC-B (since it would be the cheaper option) and that half of the DEC-B used for the land survey boost was bought with DEC and half was bought with VOUCHER tokens. In this scenario we will have 400M DEC burned (about 6.6% of the total supply) and 2.5M VOUCHERs burned (about 35% of the total supply) just on the land survey bonus alone.
Please note that we intend to have minimum guarantees for the number of plots of each rarity and the number of plots that have a magical resource or are occupied within each Tract. This means that within each Tract of land, there will be a minimum guaranteed number of Rare plots, Epic plots, Legendary plots, plots with a Magical resource, and Occupied plots. If the boost is purchased to survey all plots within a Tract in a single transaction, then the minimum guaranteed amounts will be doubled for that Tract.
The SPS token economy is based almost entirely around there being significant demand for both the DEC and VOUCHER tokens, which primarily comes from the utility of those tokens within the Splinterlands game. While we expect the land expansion, among a number of other features, to provide significant DEC and VOUCHER sinks in the future, those changes are not likely to be available until later in the year. Land surveying, however, is expected out within the next couple of months and we feel that the land survey boost concept provides a great opportunity for the increased utility of DEC and VOUCHER tokens within the game to begin sooner rather than later, while also taking up to half of all DEC-B tokens available in the first sale out of the system.
Generally, we feel that it is extremely important that new sinks for both DEC and VOUCHER tokens are continually added into the Splinterlands game where appropriate, and we are asking for the support of the community to do so. We see only upside for SPS token holders from this proposal.
For those staked SPS holders who are also land holders, we encourage you to consider the long-term value and utility of your tokens over a short-term additional cost. Especially considering that, through the DEC-B mechanism, large staked SPS holders will likely have enough VOUCHER tokens to cover the majority - if not all - of the land survey bonus costs, effectively making it free (which is one of the intended benefits for staking SPS).
After initially voting in favor, I've decided to change my vote to a No.
Thanks to @azircon for discussing it with me, and to @jarvie for his clear and thoughtful comments below.
My decision to vote No is based on the following:
These are mostly valid points. I don't want to sway voting one way or another (I'm happy with whatever the community collectively decides), but I do want to address a few things that I think are incorrect:
Implementing this proposal is hardly any work. We are 100% prioritizing the full build-out of land, and whether or not this proposal passes won't change that at all. We would not have proposed it otherwise because we agree that building the actual land gameplay is the top priority.
This is correct. This proposal is not intended to benefit land holders, it is for SPS holders and the goal is to help bring more value to the SPS token. It is up to the SPS stakeholder community to decide if they want it or not.
This one can go both ways. Initial plans are never perfect and it's important to be able to make changes to the initial plan later on. I'm not trying to say that this particular change should be made - again that's up to the SPS holders - but generally I think it's a bad precedent to say that nothing can happen that wasn't in the initial plan.
Thanks for the reply Matt.
Matt, how can SPS holders benefit, as most land holders will sell SPS to buy DEC for the survey? The price of SPS will take a hit just because of this.
"again that's up to the SPS holders"
Cause of this Splinterlands does all to bring this proposal through, they even use the help of hive-engine who should IMO be neutral and not vote in Proposals ?
What do you mean? I haven't done anything to "bring this proposal through" and am happy with any outcome that the SPS stakeholders vote on. More than anything I like that the community is discussing and debating this and will ultimately decide the outcome.
As for the
hive-engineaccount specifically, that's @aggroed's account and it's no different than any other staked SPS holding account as far as governance voting is concerned. I don't know why he decided to stake SPS there, but as far as I know it's not like it's SPS held on behalf of hive engine users or anything like that.OK I wrote "Splinterlands" cause I don't know about the connections, so I even don't knew (before) who's account it is, but IMO hive-engine should not vote in a proposal, so when @aggroed want vote with his stake why he bring them to hive-engine and not to his own account ?
I am fine with the point that he vote, I am also fine with the fact that the four biggest accounts vote with more than 20 million to "for" but maybe under this circumstances increase the border to accept a proposal from 66.67% to 75% so that really a majority of the player should be behind the proposal and not only the whales. How about this suggestion ?
I have no idea, this is a good question for @aggroed
That's a fine suggestion, but it's not for me to decide. You can feel free to submit a proposal for this change for a governance vote.
" That's a fine suggestion, but it's not for me to decide. You can feel free to submit a proposal for this change for a governance vote."
Probably I would do when their wasn't the 100k DEC fee for this.
I hope it is okay if I come back to this topic.
I just saw that as bonus for paying 100k dec for a proposal you even get destroyed your reputation if you have bad luck like you can see here:
https://peakd.com/@mangowambo/convert-busd-dao-holdings-into-dec-dai-lp
I really don't understand why Splinterlands not at least equalize such things, as they definitely has enough hivepower to do it without any problem.
After I see this I will definitely not submit any proposal and I think that many others think like me as I can see that now nearly no new proposals come from players.
Not really attractive to pay 100k DEC for letting your reputation be destroyed.
Many thanks for doing this. I am certain SL team is totally capable of bringing a better solution
WHY A NO VOTE
Doubling the rarity chance of a land plot should be worth much more than 10k DEC that seems crazy.
The reality is we don't actually know what double rarity will benefit the users... so the previous point is an assumption that double rarity chances is too much based on past rarity implications of other items in Splinterlands but there is a chance it may not be worth the paid cost... the point is we have no clue what it will mean and so it's not the time to do such a feature.
Paying for a chance increase is much less interesting and much more divisive than paying for land development and buildings on the land... that is a much better focus and I and others are willing to wait for these DEC sinks and not rush things just because DEC is temporarily down because of present lack of demand for DEC based products.
First tell us what rarity means before giving a paid feature to double the chances of a more rare version of that feature.
The term "Potion" seems uncreative and lazy and a term could be much more related to land, surveying, development. Leads me to believe that it just doesn't seem really thought out, it could have had a much more appealing presentation.
Explorers of praetoria have returned to their home lands with fanciful stories of the lands they have visited ... a rough map of the vast continent has been created and wealthy citizens of the Splinterlands have rushed to own a piece of these lands sight unseen. It has been well over 2 years since the first explorers have journeyed to praetoria and agreed to sell off large chunks of the land while leaving many plots open to public use, conservation or for the previous inhabitants. Now groups of surveyors are returning using some of the funds from the land sales of years past to survey and classify the lands of each of the 150k plots of land.
Thus the surveying of the land is a free exercise that was counted as part of the original cost. However it is noted that with the vast amount of land to survey these crews will be working quickly and they are unexperienced crews of surveyors, seeing that their homelands have been mapped and surveyed for hundreds of years if not longer. The work and skills of this group of free surveyors is being lambasted as simply not adequate for some of the new owners of Praetoria who are launching a campaign to enlist an elite team of Dark Elvish surveyors who will use their astute understanding of the lands and magical powers to do a much better job recognizing and more importantly documenting and classifying the new land of praetoria. Their services are not cheap and we these teams will demand 20k Dark Energy Crystals in order to survey the land... they say the Dark Energy is needed for the actual process they will use in their investigations into each of the plots.
For their work there is NO guarantee of success as some land is very straight forward and even the original surveying crews would get it right. But the dark elves are guaranteeing a doubled chance your lands are more rare and valuable. Not a doubled rarity but a doubled chance of an increase in rarity.
What does a more rare land mean... it means greater production of the land and while the actual production increase is not specifically known it is said that it could be very worth your consideration of hiring this elite team to survey your land.
(This is the part where you can also share some thoughts about what increased land may be able to do and perhaps in less specific but interesting storytelling fashion)
I agree, and have a more lore friendly version in my comment to the proposal.
These are valid points except for the last one. The term "potion" doesn't appear at all in the proposal. It's just been used as a placeholder since what is being proposed here is similar to the existing potions in the game. This proposal isn't about lore and naming, it's about whether or not the community supports the concept. If it passes, then there will definitely be the appropriate lore and naming created for it. There's no reason to spend the time on that before we even know if it's something the community wants first.
Excuse my long winded reply, but there are a lot of issues here.
1. Regarding vouchers (for DECB) making it essentially "free" to get these, let's consider some actual math here.
I have 1k plots (not even top 25), that's 10M DECB needed to get the survey boosts. 10M DECB / 200 per voucher is 50k vouchers needed. I (used to) have 2M+ SPS staked for a long period of time,(top 25) yet I have nowhere near 50k vouchers.
That's at least partially due to the fact that I've been using those vouchers for their original intended purpose of giving access to "all the cool stuff." But it's certainly NOT essentially free to anyone who hasn't been hodling every voucher they get from staking.
2. These have been talked about a LOT as being an optional thing. Making them double your chances for every better rarity and resource is NOT optional for anyone in their right mind.
3. "We see only upside for SPS token holders from this proposal"
Really? Because I've been unstaking and selling my SPS like a mad man to try and have enough DEC to cover this unexpected expense. Not sure how that translates to something good for SPS holders. Certainly not good for my SPS holding.
4. The people who bought land in the original sale paid anywhere from 7.5k to 20k DEC for their land plots. Those of us who have held our land even through the $1000 peak are arguably your most dedicated supporters. Tacking on an additional 10k DEC(/B) to our purchase cost is extremely disheartening and hurtful to your biggest supporters.
There are other things I could talk about as well, but they've been hashed out in the discord quite a bit, so I'll refrain from writing it all here.
In summary, this is not a good idea. Build an enjoyable engaging land gameplay and you'll get your "DEC to par" dream to come true. Trying this thinly veiled tax on the most exciting thing in the Splinterlands ecosystem is not going to help anything here.
This is a great comment and you won my vote over.
Changed from Yes to No
Just to add context to this 10M DEC-B figure for those reading
10MDEC-B=8M DEC or 50K Vouchers
50K Vouchers is obtained in 1200 days for staking 1M SPS (vouchers only), or 137 days including SPS + GLX rewards 600 or 69 days for 2M etc (at current drop rates, would be obtained faster through past rates)
1M Staked SPS voucher only reward would yield you 1 Plot survey per 29 Hours or per 3hours 20minutes for all rewards
8M DEC = $4950 (at 1k DEC = 0.61875, voucher cost is slightly less)
1K plots = $130,000 (This is based on last market price, which is highly illiquid)
Tax rate is around 3.8% (very subject to price movements)
You can simply times amount of plots owned by $4.95 to get USD amount (current prices, using DEC-B discount).
This is an unethical step towards the small players who have remained loyal throughout the years
To even suggest it is a slap in the face
The only thing I disagree with is the bit at the end, suggesting that Land is the most exciting thing in the ecosystem. We're already 2+ years late on land, and the "overly optimistic" roadmap only has the very very basics scheduled this year, too.
When will we see the immersive experience Nate keeps shilling in the town halls? Let's be real. Not optimistic, let's be real. It is going to be 2026 ish at this rate, if ever.
No to land potions that must be used at the time of surveying.
Yes to a "Surveyor mechanic" "that can "discover" rarities of a land at any given time during its existence.
The same way as you would level up a building in a guild hall, except your "surveyor" explores your land to find rarer properties that may not have been identified at the initial survey.
This could burn even more DEC over time than a single use only potion; and is an additional mechanic to allow "second hand" plot owners to get value out of land that may be put to market by existing holders.
This is a good move to raise the price of DEC, but it would ultimately devalue the price of rare, epic, and legendary plots, as they will become more common with multiple explorations.
You can tweak it.
Common Lands could be surveyed once.
Rare three times.
Epic four.
Legendary five times.
That way you'd discover the rarity when you "re-survey", or get a conclusive report of "yup, nothing here."
This for me is a hard NO.
$6 in DEC is roughly 230 SPS
Land currently gives roughly 1.3 SPS a day
Splinterlands is asking for 177 Days out of 1,825 (9.6%!!!!) worth of your SPS rewards and if you don't pay then your rewards will effectively reduce (because others will inevitably pay)
If everyone who owns land buys the potions the average rewards remain the same. The only profit from this comes from those who either cant afford or are unwilling to pay.
Generally, we shouldn't ask for additional money for a product that is already sold. This goes against the value and integrity of what Splinterlands stands for. Downvoted to express my opinion.
Surprisingly I am with you this time, 100% in agreement
You see Uwe, that is the way life should work. We don't have to agree on everything, as long as we agree on something. My heart is in the right place, no matter what you imagine :)
Cheers!
Yes man - i always been sure your heart is in the right place, however might disagree on things within this game and in general on Hive - but what united us is we both want these things to succeed as a whole.
This time I have to agree with you. Land was sold ages ago, without the mention that it shall have another money sink coming in.
this is the way a healthy debate should work. There will be issues we will agree and there will be others when we won't.
You are a good guy @azircon, even we had disputes for a long time. Let's make SPL great again :-)
I like that you care about my investments and that you draw me a plan for my money.
How much land do you have? If you don't own a single plot, I would suggest stopping dealing with this topic, as it does not concern you.
Well, I'm always in for a debate. If you have that amount of skin in the game, I have to go with you about it. For the sake of privacy, delete or edit your name out of the comment. I care about it a lot.
Regarding the assets in SPL, s mall disclosure, I have above 5.5 mil collection power and a tract, beside the others, so this can comfort that we both know the game and are heavy invested.
The reason, and it has to be a reason for a decision, is that the land is not done yet. Economics are not set, we don't know what it looks like, and we are asked to pay again for it.
The proposal is not a constructive one, as it punishes people who are not paying for the land survey, as the initial investment loses half it's value. There is another proposal going on, which is basical another DEC sink, where the SPS stakers are rewarded with the possibility to buy a card, depending on the stake. This is a good example how a DEC sink shall look like.
I think without knowing the other costs related to land, it is unfair and onerous to ask for 10K for each plot which would make land owners holding for years now need to wait more to get them all surveyed when available. I would rather higher costs for building, staking, maintenance which are yet to be decided instead of the potion.
I have two tracts and have been holding them for a long time. While I have gotten a lot of stuff for holding them once again it seems if you end cards and land and kept your SPS you are asked once again to fix the mistake of giving too much weight to DEC in the airdrop. This inflated the supply and the value. Then it all crashed. Now I have to come up with 1200 dollars to add to just burn it away or face owning 2 tracts with half the rare plots of someone who spends it. I isn't the end of the world but it is a bummer to have do it.
No potions for Land please, it makes no sense aside from wanting to squeeze more money out of players in order to help fix the mistake made of printing DEC into oblivion. Basically, early investors paid 10$-20$ for land plots at the time there was no guarantee whatsoever that it was going to be a good buy. There was also no indication whatsoever at that time of potions that would increase the chance on rarity. Now it's ~10$ extra just to have a higher chance of rarity or in other words not to see your chances decrease a lot compared to those that do pay extra.
I could do without the extra expense, so it's a NO for me (not that it will make any difference to the outcome).
"What game is free" really? like thousands and thousands of them...
Aside from that this isn't free either way. It's also meant to be a game not just an investment or revenue source.
After reading all your comments and going through your posts I hope you dont have much sway over anything because you are the last person I would want coming up with ideas for the longevity of the game.
Ps voting your own shitposts from your own accounts is a douchebag move.
In order to meaningfully vote for or against this proposal we have to know the base chances of getting a legendary/epic/rare or common plot (likewise for magical or occupied). This will allow us to make some calculations and figure out what we are getting for the price we are paying for the potions. Please consider updating this post with the base chances for the rarities, or writing a comment about it. Thank you.
Yes please! We need good information to make good decisions!
So many tales of woe. My heart goes out to those with 1k+ plots and feeling the strain of this extra expense to get something more shiny and new.
In reality, you already made bank so stop whining.
No one is forcing you to improve your land.
But for the less greedy among us, who only own a few plots purchased at a remarkable $140-$400 price point, $6 (current) is barely a sniffle.
We welcome the opportunity to get something shinier, for such a low cost. Thank-you SL.
Can I suggest you Land Barons complaining so much, perhaps sell a few plots to improve your chances and embrace the potions. Because I'm sure the bulk of the new players would love the opportunity to get some cheaper land around here.
I understand why adding a potion for land is a cost (since people won't want to be left behind). So I can see the point of view of those that will oppose this. That's why I'm super glad they included vouchers in DEC-B.
Anyone with land, received SPS. If that SPS was staked, then they got vouchers. They can use the vouchers for these potions, which is a big benefit to staking SPS.
I definitely see the team's point of view that they feel land should have many sinks to give the players that invest in it an edge over those that don't.
Everyone should vote for what they feel is right, but I'm definitely happy that ANY player with staked SPS can get this nice benefit if they held their vouchers.
I know many players don't think staking SPS is worth it, they feel they are getting worthless vouchers. Well if this passes, then those players that staked because they were told vouchers would give players "cool things" will be rewarded.
creative mind there @bcarolan639 :) ... I have no idea on the economics of that idea, but love your spirit and ingenuity! :)
Is this thing a preproposal?
Because if it is it already has 273 votes so thats probably just curation trails at work
don't worry about autovotes, it won't have any impact
Fuck no
I'd feel better about this proposal if that 10k served as a "down payment" that could be used toward building upgrades in the future. I'd be willing to burn even more DEC now as a down payment. That guaranteed value feels better than a chance at better rarity.
Yes, this idea seems to satisfy both the people voting for this and those saying they should allow purchasing buildings earlier instead, wish they saw this before launching this proposal
This I actually like as I haven't had much luck with potions.
I voted yes at first but then I realized, in nominal terms this is a 50% tax on plots that people paid $20 for and then patiently waited years for functionality. It seems like there are better mechanisms to burn DEC when it comes to land.
Why is no one talking about the minimum guarantee of rarities, magical resources and occupied plots in a Tract?
Land was always created with scarcity in mind, hence the 150k max supply. Why would you strip all the value away from it if it is just a simulation and not actual RNG? This completely kills the value of any rarity. No one asked for this.
This is in itself a massive change to the land whitepaper I agree.
I do think (subjective opinion) however the majority of players prefer guaranteed airdrop cards, even if it does inflate supply.
This would advantage smaller land owners and disadvantage large region sized land owners
Seems like if this is voted for positively.. than you will almost certainly HAVE TO pay the 6 dollars to increase your chances. depending on the number of people who do that, it will either negate the effect, or push all of the "common" plots to the back of the line and to the people who dont pay the $6.
So depending on how many people do it.. seems like if you do it without, than you are almost guaranteed to get a common.
A couple of days ago I had 20 plots. I was against the proposal.
I sold all of them by now for SPS. I am now for the proposal.
Land potions are broken.
This is basically the Michael Scott Paper Company going back to their customers and asking them to pay more money after already completing the transaction. That's a definite NO from me.
I am for this as I want the option to get rarer lands. The value this brings to me not only in land but an improved economy as a whole seems like a no brainer. The community needs to be all in on voting for any sinks we get thrown at us as long as they are optional.
It is not really optional, if you double your chances in getting a better plot.
Just like it is with potions for card packs.
You really feel that you NEED to use them or you get left behind.
that's why you reject the chance from the start?. where is the difference now if you reject the potions later if they should exist? the only difference is that you have taken away the chance from all people. because you don't want to pay for the chance, no one is allowed to have this chance?
If those numbers are met it would be a good burn. 400M DEC burned (about 6.6% of the total supply) and 2.5M VOUCHERs burned (about 35% of the total supply)
no if you need to pay for them
Maybe I'm over simplifying this but wouldn't doing this simply add to inflation later while only doing a temp quick fix to get DEC burned. You'd be producing far more resources off of lands then initially thought which means far more tokens from lands which will drive the price down of all of those land tokens.
That being said my vote on this is going to be no unless someone can explain how this has a long term benefit.
No, it won't change the amount of resources produced from the land at all. All of that hasn't even been figured out yet, so we will determine the amount of resources that should be produced from the land when we get to that point (soon!) and then work backwards to find out how much each type/rarity of plot should produce. So this would actually burn tokens without any inflation whatsoever.
This says to me that if I choose not to do it then my tracts have half the amount of rare plots. Then when you do this and work backward to plan out resources. I will earn around half the amount of resources as the guys that did do this. That isn't optional for anyone with a serious amount of land. You have added a tax that lowers the production of my land in half if I don't pay it.
you halve the chance even if you reject the proposal. so that's not really an argument. their reason for rejecting is that they don't want to pay for it, and that's why no one else should have that chance! so they want to force their decision on others!!! so it is because of their character and not because of good reasons....
Ah ok makes sense then. In that case it makes sense and could potentially burn a fair amount of DEC/Vouchers in the process. Since there's no set numbers yet land owners really don't know what they are getting yet and thus in reality nothing has changed. Other then the potential of the survey being better if paid. It does kind of almost require a payment. I'm still a little on the fence about it though since it's almost like asking for more funds for plot owners in order to better there plots. However the flip side of it means doing it on your plots should give it more value anyways so the value is there in either selling the plot or harvesting on the better plot.
I need to do more thinking but I'm leaning a little more towards a yes now and mainly because I want to see the game returned back in value. That being said it's going to be up to the company still to help in restoring and keeping that value as well. I think things got a little too crazy in terms of giving away stuff and the bots just took advantage. Now we are doing with the over supply from all of those what I would consider "fake" accounts.
we only get more value compared to people who choose not to pay. Matt said there is just 1 pie we all share. If no one pays each tract should have the same amount of the pie. But if just one tract plays that guy just twice as much till the next guy now they both get more and so on but if we all pay then we all split that same pie
if that's really the case, then i guess i'll have to rethink my opinion!
From what I'm understanding if you do not purchase the potions for a "tract" you will get the standard amount of rares, epics, etc. But if you look at the wording if you purchased potions for you're tract in one transaction you would receive double the normal amount of land types. So tract owners actually can double the amount of land types gauranteed. The plebs have to keep their fingers crossed.
exactly double down for 10K is way too much hell no
!PGM
BUY AND STAKE THE PGM TO SEND A LOT OF TOKENS!
The tokens that the command sends are: 0.1 PGM-0.1 LVL-0.1 THGAMING-0.05 DEC-15 SBT-1 STARBITS-[0.00000001 BTC (SWAP.BTC) only if you have 2500 PGM in stake or more ]
5000 PGM IN STAKE = 2x rewards!
Discord
Support the curation account @ pgm-curator with a delegation 10 HP - 50 HP - 100 HP - 500 HP - 1000 HP
Get potential votes from @ pgm-curator by paying in PGM, here is a guide
I'm a bot, if you want a hand ask @ zottone444
it would be interesting to know how high the chances are, so that you know what the double means
As the proposal is now, I’m voting against it:
What are the chances of getting a rare, epic, legendary and/or occupied land at the moment, and what will the change be with an extra potion? Furthermore, how is this going to influence the chances of those that don’t use a potion? And last but not least: it doesn’t feel ok to pay extra for an expensive product that’s already been bought.
So you are telling, that you want a minimum of $6 for the land to be kept as it was initial planned?
Like most in here, the land was already paid for, stop getting money sinks out of our pockets, for stuff that is not ready.
I'm a Region Owner and I fully support this proposal.
If nobody is willing to spend then this whole thing is going to fail.
I'm more than willing to spend, I'd even be open to potions costing more than 10k DEC. I voted no for the proposal in its current state and would prefer revisions take place before it goes to final proposal.
I would rather have something guaranteed for the DEC I'm spending, rather than just a chance at better RNG. I have 25 plots, so I don't have the luxury of the tract+ guarantee. If the land potion gave some other benefit (early reveal, chance at a totem, a promo card, anything really), I'd be much happier to spend on it.
i get the arguments of why not. Hurts even more as pressure is being put on staked SPS hodlers with the proposal of a DAO tax.
Figure i would have bought the same amount of land that i did even if i knew there was gunna be a land tax tacked on, so voting yes as see potential benefits.
EDIT: Changed my vote to NO. There are better ways to tax the community then this. Appreciate those that reached out to discuss.
I think this shouldn't be a yes/no question. The random (or so it seems) 10k DEC potion makes it hard for me to vote yes, even though I support some dec burning in the form of land potions. 10k is just too much and will have negative effect (more people won't use it from the people with 100+ plots). It should have been given a consideration of several price options, as i belive at 5k potion 3x people will use it and if it's around 3k, probably EVERYBODY that has a land plot will, which in turns will lead to WAY more dec burning, than shoving that huge ammount down the land owners throats. For 10k potion I vote against. For 5k, I vote for and of course anything less than that, hell yeah!
while I understand the problems with this proposal, I think the team is right in focusing now on creating more sinks as this will fix the majority of the economy and benefit everyone
Just no...this would make anyone that does not have massive DEC stashes lose a lot of value
Stop trying to just spread any wealth to the top 1%
Thank you for participating in SPS DAO Governance @splinterlands!
You can place or monitor SPS Stake Weighted votes for and against this proposal at the link below:
Link to this Pre-Proposal
Updated At: 2023-01-24 14:20 UTC
How much will I get and what should I do for getting the chance?
~~~ embed:1615358423922622464 twitter metadata:MTQyOTQxNTI0NjEyOTcyOTUzOHx8aHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0dGVyLmNvbS8xNDI5NDE1MjQ2MTI5NzI5NTM4L3N0YXR1cy8xNjE1MzU4NDIzOTIyNjIyNDY0fA== ~~~
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people( @wilsonthe, @michupa, @kaibagt ) sharing the post on Twitter as long as they are registered with @poshtoken. Sign up at https://hiveposh.com.
You should make able to pay that cost with SPS too so people could burn some sps , otherwise people will just sell the sps for DEC making the sps price to go down
hard pass, whale games again
I see how it is.
I have 18 plots. I bought them way back when they were 10K DEC and I've been holding them since then, which is years now.
I'm OK with this proposal but the rarity chance has to be fair to everyone big and small land holders alike. Keep in mind there are probably going to be dead plots from people that didn't make it through the pandemic, sorry to bring it up, but,..... I don't know how that is going to be handled.
I've received plenty of rewards for holding my plots and I am still receiving them. I understand the feelings of some people that think this is a retroactive tax that we did not agree to and so it feels like a slap in the face.
What I would say to you guys is 2 things:
Can you please be more forgiving on this point? It's a complicated game after all and GROWING PAINS you know. Can we just grow with the game? There is some things in life that you can't just spitball and accurately predict the correct costs of things in the future. Land is going to be exceptionally complicated to develop and balance out. Instead of repeatedly asking them, "how much is this and that, just tell us now and sell us that instead of potions or DEC-B," just stop it. They can't answer that right now. What are you thinking? You're like nagging them while they are trying to develop a very complicated system.
Have any of you played a crypto land building game before? Did you buy a buttload of plots? You shouldn't have done that. That's too much. You created a future problem for yourself. Don't complain to others about the problem you created for yourself. Maybe sell some of them. Land is going to be like a baby, it's going to need constant time and attention but the rewards are going to be outstanding and in the end it will be fun but a chore at the same time. Don't start complaining how hard it is going to be to maintain and build your plots/buildings and how much it costs all the time.
If you want to get an idea of what it might be like go to youtube and search "worldopo" that was a crypto land/building game but it was centralized in Russia and then the Pandemic and the military conflict happened so it shut down, lesson learned.
My point is that if you bought too much land that is your fault. If you don't have the cards, DEC, time and attention to constantly upkeep and improve it that is your fault, you did that, nobody else. Don't act surprised and pissed off when land details come out and you realized you screwed up because it costs way to much DEC, cards, time and attention to own them.
I can already hear the complaints. Instead of complaining sell your plots and bring it down to a reasonable amount that is manageable or ask SPL to let us scholar it out somehow.
More pay to win? I'm continually disappointed in Splinterlands proposal ideas.
to have a chance = always good
burning = increases value of the token
couldn't find any bad, maybe evil is in details 😂
I just wanted to point out that many OG rich players are commenting that they don't like this proposal but the proposal looks like it will still pass.
Credit: schim2
Earn Crypto for your Memes @ HiveMe.me!