RE: Land SPS distributed to those who have surveyed - (A Splinterlands Proposal)
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
It's all good i chose to discuss with you because i respect you and also because i thought it was so out of character to vote for what i guess some of us consider to be the greedy choice. (but I guess to kinda steelman what i think is your position is that you're looking out for the economics of people that will be impacted by not getting a few more months of easy sps or that they'll feel anxious about not spending money for starter packs when they do their free surveying)
I guess i brought you in because Sometimes discussing with people that we have no connection with or background with leads to so many problems and i was wanting to discuss with somone.
After looking through the list of voters it does seem like it's mostly some dog and cat accounts that are downvoting it haha... kinda funny.
Also when i did the proposal i really didn't know if it would pass it certainly wasn't a sure thing... i guess i should be impressed by the community that it's doing as good as it is.
I completely understand the points you guys are making and I definitely think the "giving out SPS for just holding land" is not productive.
Also if I knew the timeframe of implementation gave people at least 1/2 the time the game DEVs are giving, then I'd vote yes on this. In other words, I think people should have at least 30 days from the time they "CAN" survey their land to raise the funds to do so. That would be half of the 60 days those packages were available.
I think the proposal will pass as is, so of course there is no need to change anything for me. Also I get that people feel that its wrong to just collect SPS and have no intention of ever playing the game. I not only get it, but I agree 100% that's wrong.
The only thing I think you have wrong is where you said this:
I don't want people to get their "easy SPS", so this particular point is wrong.
But I do feel there are many players that have to make choices between assets in-game and also in real life, so I do believe that anxiety is real and I can sympathize with them.
Glad we are good and I don't mind at all if this passes if that's what the community wants. I have many friends on both sides of this argument.
ps... I didn't vote my bigger accounts against this because I like the spirit of the proposal (getting people off their asses and paying attention to earn money), even though I wish it was for claiming the land instead of surveying it.
I guess I don't understand why the distinction is important. This is a bandaid that must get ripped off at some point. For some reason the argument is that people who are paying up to 30k DEC per plot must continue to subsidize the SPS rewards for the people simply claiming or holding tokens (and make no mistake, it creates a subsidy for the laggards). That doesn't seem right. Rewards after surveying is a natural extension of investing in land to the highest level to maintain rewards. There will never be a comfortable time to stop paying rewards to people, but we need to advance the ball.
I think there are people that are not sure what they are going to do yet, do they buy 1, 2, or 3 starter packages? If so, how are they going to pay for it?
The game devs are giving them 60 days to make that decision and not requiring them to do so on day 1. They are doing that for a reason. I think the main reason is many people don't make "snap decisions". Since those type of people have been patient and waited for 2 years, I feel its only fair that we give them some time to adjust once it is "live" (for surveying). The reason I feel so is because it will require expense from their pocket and I want them to make a good decision and not feel rushed.
So the difference is simple. Claiming the land is an act that doesn't cost money, so anyone can do it and it only requires effort and time. But surveying the land will cost money, and since people will be spending money then I want them to feel they confident in their selections.
The difference is very minor in time - in my eyes 30 days is plenty of time for anyone to get comfortable with the outlay (or not).
I see the point of view that they've all been given SPS for many months now, so its time to cut it off. But I would say why can't we give people 30 days from when land goes live to enact this? That seems like a fair compromise.
If this passes as is, then its cool. I'm just letting you know what would make me change my mind and vote for it. And the funny thing is that if the land goes live on Monday (which Matt said is possible), then this proposal will eat up 2 weeks anyways PLUS the devs will have to code the change. So what I'm asking for isn't even a big deal if you think about it. Its maybe 10 days or so if the devs can code it real quick. So to me I don't see why just stipulating that it will go into effect no less 30 days from when land surveying is live is a big deal. I think 10 days to get much more buyin from those that might not be ready to decide is a very small amount time.
Again though I'm not mad or trying to put a stick in the spokes, I'm just telling you all what I hear from others and how I feel about the concept. I'm happy to make people do things to get their SPS, I don't like the passive income being distributed this way either.
Hope this answers my thoughts, but always happy to explain more if you want me to @joshman :)
That seems like a fair compromise to me. I think that's one that could easily be inserted into this existing proposal.
yes that's my point. That way everyone has at least 30 days to "survey their land". I say at least because the DEVs might not be able to code it before then.
I would definitely push for it hard if that was the case, I'm 100% in agreement that people shouldn't just be getting passive SPS to just sit there and not participate.
I don't get this... are people that greedy they can't leave a single solitary day without claiming their dang SPS? Not even if it helps the entire game, not even if the original intent of SPS for Land was to reward active participants? It's just so dang selfish it hurts me to think about. Just so stinking sad.
FOMO is real. Many people would rather make a bad decision rather than miss out on something they feel they are entitled to.
Its human nature, so don't let it get to you @jarvie :)
Good people can disagree on priorities.
You know what is sad? Bots and waiting years haha
This proposal is doing my head in. i need more time, gunna vote no.
Change it to that and i'll vote yes
Send all land SPS to DAO - Will vote yes for that also
Yes that's my point too @michealb ... I've reflected it to both @jarvie and @joshman .
I agree here if we can't do the above.
Make that proposal from the council right now. Let's see how it goes. I'll vote for it as well. Because this proposal may not pass.
you can edit your proposal and it would work. I think it would pass too. I will vote for it and @michealb said he would too.
If you don't want to edit it though, I will definitely bring it up the the council. But its not necessary imo, since you can easily edit yours to include the start date of this being at least 30 days from the day the surveying is live.
I do think it will pass if you did that.
Pretty sure that is highly frowned upon to edit a proposal that hundreds of people have already voted yes on. (You can edit quickly maybe even first day but not on the 4th day just because things aren't going as well anymore)
Also i personally wonder if it would even pass still... we have had months to prepare for starter packs I think the talk about 30 days after is just a bluff and downvoters really just don't want to miss a single day of a free lunch. So I'm not willing to make that bet with my own 100k dec but if the council does i'll vote on it...
I see just so much greed from the downvoters because I have looked and i see they have a bunch of un-deeded land in great proportion and my pessimism says they come in here and say they want 30 extra days and BS us but in our heart we believe they're just grandstanding and really it's just greed and not wanting to miss any days at all even if it helps the entire game progress. They'd rather the whole ship go down than them not get first class room with a view.
Jarvie, this is a preprosal, not the official proposal. The purpose of a pre-proposal is to get a rough the idea out. Its just my opinion, but I think editing a preproposal is fair. SPL has edited their own preproposals too in the past.
Remember that that the only vote that matters is the proposal itself which is unalterable.
But adding in a provision of how it will be implemented doesn't impact the gist of your proposal at all.
Of course this is my opinion, you and others may certainly disagree.
He answered in the live qa on the day of 1.5 saying that my proposal would be very easy. I assume turning it all off is even easier. But could be good to ask.
ok... I edited my reply after thinking about your point regarding editing. See @joshman's reply, I think he sums up exactly how I've seen it done. Spl even edited their own proposal in the past when they had community feedback.
We should not be allowed to edit proposals once they've been submitted. You could dramatically alter something at the 11th hour that way to force in anything you want.
Terrible precedent to set. I'm frankly shocked that's even possible.
This is just a pre-proposal, not the actual proposal. The part where the language can't be altered is when its officially a proposal.
I think everyone agrees the actual proposal should be set in stone. I see no issue editing a pre-proposal as long as those edits are transparent and obvious. I think it's actually a good opportunity for the community to help tailor the preproposal in advance of the real proposal to avoid people wasting DEC for minor changes. If people are voting actual proposal based upon what they read in the pre-proposal, well that is pretty dumb anyways.
yes exactly my point... @jarvie he states this better than I did.
I don't think some people realize they are two different things.
Still though, if there is discussion and voting happening then any modifications should be made in a new draft.
We agree on that this shouldn't happen. Look at that. hahaha