RE: RE: Revamp Market Fees to Include 2% DAO Royalty
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Revamp Market Fees to Include 2% DAO Royalty

Words
423
Reading
2 min
Listen
Play
3y

No thanks. Don't want earnings (in many cases the partial clawing back of huge losses) being reduced from future sales so more money can go to the Dao, one that because of the team's insistence on allowing bot armies to accumulate the most assets has been allowed to fall into the hands of big fish who have all the voting power on how to use those funds, and the bit about the Dao will fund the Splinterlands company too, no thanks, they have been raking in millions of dollars in sales regularly over the past few years, why should I pay an extra percentage from my asset sales to them, when there is a reasonable case to be made that their better-late-than-never-but-still-not-enough anti bot efforts (or lack of) have really negatively affected the game's economy and therefore my and many others' bottom line in the game, now you want an extra percent to come from me to go into a piggy bank for the team to use should they need it? Erm no thanks.

And can everyone please stop with this naive idea that any measure in any proposal has any chance of getting DEC back to peg? It's either backed dollar to dollar or it isn't, and it isn't, so therefore all such measures achieve is the odd bump to the DEC price before the free market continues determining it anyway. Every other proposal I hear "get DEC back to peg", well I've been in the game about 15 or 16 months and throughout all these proposals, it's literally never been at peg in that time except the minute that it fell through it. It was above peg when I started playing and has been well below it at all sorts of values between $0.0005 and $0.0009 ever since, but I've never seen it settle at $0.001, so can we as a community stop just assuming "Oh this random one off proposal will magically make it stabilise at that price when there is no dollar backing it."

Sorry to be the party pooper. No problem with incentivising marketplaces to do better things, just not out of my pocket thanks. Ban multi account bots from all of the game though and ask me again and I might be flexible, as there won't be fun/value nerfing changes ever needed again; indeed many such changes would be able to be undone (2 day min rental, soulbound rewards, capture rate wouldn't have to exist etc); so I'd have greater belief in the future of these assets.

@adhdave: No thanks. Don't | Ecency