SPS Governance Proposal - Abstain from HIVE Governance Voting
This draft has been approved by all members of the SPS Foundation board unanimously.
Context
The purpose of this proposal is to see if the SPS DAO would like to participate in HIVE governance voting or not. It's been brought to my attention that everyone may not fully understand that we previously agreed to delegate our HIVE governance voting power to the @steemmonsters account and what that means.
HIVE governance voting is different from curation voting. These are two very different and distinct things. To make sure voters can make an informed decision I'll break down what these two types of voting are now:
Curation voting is how an account can use its HIVE Power to upvote content on the HIVE platform and in return the account will receive curation rewards. This provides an APR on the DAO's HIVE investment. This proposal will not in any way impact the current curation settings that we have to follow the Splinterlands curation trail.
Governance voting on HIVE relates to both Witness voting and DHF proposal support and does not directly relate to earning any kind of APR for our HIVE stake.
Witnesses are the block producers for the HIVE blockchain and HIVE stake can be used to support specific witnesses that we trust to uphold the integrity of the HIVE blockchain. Witness rewards are based on a tiered ranking system. The top 20 witnesses are the primary block producers, earning the highest amount of rewards, while the 21st and 22nd witness serve as backups for the top 20 and rewards are reduced the lower in ranking a witness is. You can find a breakdown of witness earnings here.
DHF proposals are requests for funding from HIVE's Decentralized Hive Fund (essentially HIVE's DAO) that are meant to support projects that the HIVE community finds valuable. For example, Splinterlands previously ran a DHF proposal to request support for a marketing budget and received approximately $400,000 in funding. DHF proposals must maintain a level of stake-weighted HIVE Power support greater than the current threshold set by the Return Proposal in order to receive funding.
Currently the @sps.dao account's governance voting is proxied to the @steemmonsters account. This in turn amplifies the power of the @steemmonsters account's governance voting decisions.
The @steemmonsters account is owned and managed by the Splinterlands team. To be completely clear, this means that the SPS DAO is currently entrusting the Splinterlands team to manage how its HIVE Power is being used to influence HIVE governance voting decisions.
Ultimately this proposal aims to ensure that all members of the DAO understand explicitly what the governance voting proxy means and that the DAO collectively has informed consent on the decision to proxy our HIVE governance voting to the @steemmonsters account.
Proposal
If this proposal passes, the SPS DAO will revoke its HIVE governance voting proxy from the steemmonsters account and abstain from any HIVE governance voting decisions unless a subsequent proposal is passed to change this decision.
If this proposal fails, then the previous proposal will stand and the SPS DAO will continue to entrust the @steemmonsters account to manage its HIVE governance decisions.
Thanks for your time and consideration on this issue.
If Blocktrades can vote, you can vote.
Fair enough 😂
how will this grow Splinterlands ecosystem? If it doesnt affect it, why waste time writing it? Seems like you have a lot of vacant time to spend.
This isn't about growing the Splinterlands ecosystem. I had a treasurer bring up that we're essentially proxy voting on behalf of the DAO without consensus. I felt the previous proposal already cleared this up, there was disagreement and in general it seemed like there was no consensus amongst the treasurers on this and I brought it to the foundation board for their opinion. It was ultimately determined that the DAO should make the decision on how to proceed.
Between working with the team to make sure Conclave Arcana is a quality set that will return the DAO's investment, working with multiple law firms to get the foundation set up, meeting with multiple payment processors to try to get SPS on/off ramping approved, and dealing with the SPS validator launch amongst all of the routine housekeeping things I do like treasury reports, making tournaments and the rest... not really sure where you'd get the impression I have a lot of vacant time.
If you're just trying to say this proposal is a waste of time... well whether or not I agree on that point is irrelevant. Enough people the DAO trusts felt that it was worth bringing to the DAO's attention so I wrote the proposal and you guys can decide if you think this is a relevant issue or not by approving it to go to a full vote or shutting it down. I'll be abstaining as my only agenda on this one is to make sure the DAO has informed consent on what is being done with its stake. Thanks for the feedback.
don't shoot the messenger @mrchillph
I suggest to BAN this person @clayboyn. He has been messing up the gaming ecosystem for a long time.
Yes, let's make sure that our SPSDAO HP is being used for good governance that the SMC team supports. Better than letting our HP do nothing at all!
Thanks duce!
I have mixed feelings about this. I have no problem with steemmonsters abstaining from Hive governance voting, but I think the DAO should abstain too. I don't want to see a bunch of proposals where we get involved in Hive's internal politics. If whales want to influence the Hive witnesses then they should use their own personal Hive and leave the DAO out of this.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
If nothing else, this at least allows the guys voting against everything on principal to finally vote for something I guess :D
Well you're not wrong.
hahaha KH! :)
In and of itself, I think that every stakeholder has the right to vote - decisions on the HIVE-Ecosystem and in which direction go its funds do feed back to Splinterlands eventually (and please correct me if I'm wrong, not too knowledgeable yet). Having a big stake in the Ecosystem, the SPS DAO absolutely has a right to vote. I don't think abstaining from votes is the right way (unless there's no compromise within the team on how to vote).
Maybe I'm still too tired, but I don't quite understand the problem - is there a believe that the Steemmonsters team will abuse of the voting power, against the decisions made by the SPS DAO?
Or is this whole proposal just for information purpose?
The issue was that the DAO has not expressed clear consensus for each issue/witness the team may vote to support. Personally I don't think there's really much chance of having the DAO micromanage its own HIVE governance votes at the moment due to the nature of HIVE multisig. It requires us to get 6 treasurers online within a 1 hour window to get anything done which can be very difficult as we're spread out over the world.
The "easy" solution is to just trust what the team does with its HIVE stake. Is that the right solution? I can't really say, but I do feel like this proposal should make what you're voting on/for absolutely clear so we can't say the DAO was unable to make an informed decision on what it agreed to here.
Thank you for the explanation! I think we should trust the team to make educated decisions that favor Splinterlands. So, if I understood correctly, I will vote against the proposal.
Thank you for making it public and assuring that everyone has a say (and understands it 😅 )!
Yea voting against it means "don't change anything" basically.
Done, thank you!
I am entrusting the @steemmonsters account to make such decision on behalf of the @spsdao so that the team can focus on important priorities such as getting Hive on Coinbase, and then SPS on Coinbase, our marketing strategy, etc.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this topic!
Yes, in my opinion, just let the team decide where the HP should be used. Leave it as is. Voting no.
We should not follow steemmonsters vote on dhf and witnesses, abstain or vote for what helps spl
So we have a negative vote for the positive of keeping on keeping on! so confusing.
I know it may be a little confusing. We had a vote that passed so to overturn that previous vote you need another passing vote. Just to make sure there's no confusion:
Imho, and not being a big shareholder to give any opinion... Markythemark released some data showing that spl onboarded a few % of hive accs (and I won't even get into the topic of real people or bots), while that is the project which takes the most payout on DHF, also one the projects that makes the most transactions to block process... Is tough to measure pros and cons here, not saying we should also take isolated data to back any argue... I think it's ok for spl to abstain on votes... But let's say, probably a lot more of market cap also went to Hive and others tokens through splinterlands than the average hive acc, since it's a game that demands some high capital than most... I myself convert spl stuff into other hive stuffs...
So, I really dunno... It's a good questioning. So the main debate is, is spl contributing for hive growth or it's taking out of hive more than it's contribution? And there is a way to balance it so both parts stays happy? There is always a yes option, I see Matt supporting all new projects and diverses stuffs... Since some of current and previous spl devs and owners were also the ones that made hive engine and keychain...
The main argument as presented to me was that we were using our HIVE governance influence without consensus from the DAO and that people didn't even understand what the previous proposal meant. So I wrote this post to hopefully ensure that the DAO can make an informed decision. If the DAO wants to continue as is, we will. If the DAO wants to stop having the company manage our HIVE governance influence we can do that too. I just want to make sure everyone understands what's going on.
Yeah, I get it... I'm just anticipating some hive talk over it... Well, blocktrades said he already spent more than DHF on hive development, which makes it looking not that high in terms of what is needed... Anyway, this won't take out the topic of what is a contribution or not for growth, it's not only about nominal values going here or there but finalities, causes/effects...
Just giving some opinion, maybe there is some onboard option at China stuffs, or even Singapore... I honestly don't get how everywhere I search the same games are listed as bests in web3, included splinterlands between the top... Its weird since it looks stagnant in terms of people joining since uaw remains similar. I mean, I'd need to check again, but I guess so...
The most important thing to understand here for people less familiar with hive is this:
At this point with HIVE having 1 hour time windows on the multisig, I feel like the only options are to trust management to a third party or to just not participate. As far as which of those options is right, I suppose the DAO will decide. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
After reading @azircon ’s arguments on the matter, I’m changing my vote to a yes. Thanks for your explanation!
With respect, the arrangement seems to have been mutually agreed between SL & DAO and if SL company no longer wants DAO HP then why don't they just ask the DAO to end it. Unless I am missing something obvious I don't see the necessity to have this voted on. Or does SL company still want DAO HP ?
Feels like making a tradeoff decision between supporting the team and the DAO retaining power more directly if I'm understanding correctly?
Happy to keep supporting the team here. Not sure the DAO has much long-term viability outside of the Splinterlands game.
I can not support this proposal because I think the SPS DAO should vote on Hive governance issues, rather than abstain, which is just ducking engagement and responsibility.
You are understanding it wrong here. The proposal is not saying it should not participate in Hive Governance. It's saying the power of using SPS.dao stake should be in the hands of the SPS treasure/SPL players. Currently, the SPL company is using this, and it's not right because they are not the owners of SPS.dao stake; the players are the owners of SPS.dao stake. So why should they use this?
I think not. Please consider this direct quote from this post "If this proposal passes, the SPS DAO will revoke its HIVE governance voting proxy from the steemmonsters account and abstain from any HIVE governance voting decisions"
Understand, but it will be better if we don't use that just to avoid hive drama. Also, it's a public fund so the company should not use this as their own.
I do not think the Splinterlands DAO should be getting involved in any internal Hive politics, this could potentially adversely affect our future DHF proposals. I won't pretend I understand much about Hive politics, but I will say staying politically neutral is almost always the best for any entity
I want to stay neutral too CE. This is one of those votes that the community is happy to give support to @yabapmatt, and I think that's also a good thing.
I just hope that people don't get upset either way with this vote, we have some amazing things coming and people will be excited when its revealed! 💪
The goal here is to separate Matt from the SPS.DAO as much as possible for business prudence. If this proposal passes DAO's independence is sealed.
“@themarkymark: Your Scam Farm Empire with @buildawhale Exposed—When Will You Stop Destroying Hive?”
Meta Description:
Bilpcoin uncovers @themarkymark’s abuse of Hive’s reward system through @buildawhale’s scam farm. The evidence shows years of corruption funded by @blocktrades’ delegations.
To @themarkymark:
You’ve had years to change your ways, yet you continue to exploit Hive’s reward system. Let’s break it down:
1. The Evidence Against You
The blockchain doesn’t lie. Here’s how you’ve been abusing Hive:
a. @buildawhale’s Daily Grift
Curation Rewards from Spam Posts:
Over the past 2 hours, @buildawhale generated over 270 HP for spam posts like this.
Total Power:
2.4M HP delegated from @blocktrades—97% borrowed, not earned. Wallet Proof.
b. Self-Voting and Alt Abuse
You use alts like @buildawhale to self-vote and siphon rewards away from honest creators.
c. Years of Corruption:
From vote selling to scam farming, your abuse has gone unchecked.
2. @blocktrades’ Role in Enabling Scams
Why does @blocktrades delegate 2.3M HP to @buildawhale?
These delegations fund spam farms, centralize power, and steal rewards from creators.
3. The Hypocrisy: “Spam Fighter” vs. Scam Farmer
You claim to care about Hive, yet:
The Irony:
You lecture about morality while enabling scams. Transactions don’t lie—you’re part of the problem.
4. The Community’s Wake-Up Call
Hive’s integrity is at stake. Every curation reward from @buildawhale’s bot votes:
Action Steps:
Final Message to @themarkymark:
Keep pretending you care about Hive while enabling and operating scam farms. The blockchain has already recorded:
Find all our exposés
The Truth Hurts:
You’re a puppet for scam farms. We’re here to fight for Hive’s integrity.
#HiveBlockchain #ScamFarmsExposed #DownvoteCartel #Bilpcoin #BlockchainTruth
Transactions don’t lie. The evidence is here—investigate it.
Sincerely,
The Bilpcoin Team
https://www.publish0x.com/the-dark-side-of-hive/at-themarkymark-your-scam-farm-empire-with-at-buildawhale-ex-xwvlrxk
This makes the most sense out of all the points I've seen so far.
Again we force ourselves into 'one or the other' boxes with with no middle ground or room for nuance.
Add a provision to vote on things that DIRECTLY affect SPL without a separate 'permission' proposal. That way we can vote when necessary if something imperative to SPL operation comes up, but stay out of the general hive drama otherwise in case we ever need funding again.
That was the point of this wording. If a subsequent proposal is submitted then we can assess individual issues on a case by case basis. Basically, "No more automatic voting based on what steemmonsters does." Trying to dictate the terms of when and how a vote can be had is ultimately irrelevant as that could just be changed by whatever proposal gets put forth. Like if I say "can only vote on proposals that are deemed directly in line with the SPS DAO" that gets very subjective and ultimately still requires a vote, so I just cut out the filler and went straight to the point. If this passes, Splinterlands can't vote for us and someone would need to make a proposal to compel the DAO to get involved in HIVE politics.
Guys, we should vote for this. It makes the DAO more independent. In fact, we should have Splinterlands proposals to decide what direction to vote on for Hive props that are relevant to us.
This change is ONLY for governance, not for curation. It makes sense for us to separate ourselves from the company for governance votes.
Thank you brave. I like to make it abundantly clear that the purpose of this proposal is to make DAO as independent as possible which was the original purpose of constructing the DAO in the first place
Right now I see the DAO's vision of Splinterlands and our relationship with Hive and the Hive community aligned with @yabapmatt's vision. If that changes at all in the future I think we should consider this. For now, I don't think adding one more thing for our community to debate over is the right move. I want us to be as aligned as possible over the next 6 months as we rolling out some major updates to the game. I would be happy to revisit this in 6 months.