Honestly, I must say, governance is a lot of work. With the DAO Proposal system in place at Splinterlands, there are proposals published, feels like every other week. Since I am personally quite passionate about this game, I take this proposal system quite seriously. As a large stakeholder, I find it is not only my responsibility to vote, but it is also my responsibility to make others aware of the details and hidden agenda of many of these proposals. Trust me, they all have an agenda (they better!), and often hidden agenda, which is not easily visible to a casual player/stakeholder. There is nothing wrong with that, as this is politics. Therefore, it is my duty to make people aware of the hidden agendas as I see them personally. Then it is upto YOU to cast your vote and make an informed decision.
The proposal in question is currently in pre-proposal phase. This is Revamp Market Fees to Include 2% DAO Royalty. From the title it reads good. Even on the body it is rather well written with pros, and cons clearly marked as per author's opinion. However, here are my issues with it, if this proposal is implimented:
Less incentives for development of new tools by the third parties because everyone will try to build the same card management interface. Not an efficient use of development time.
Increased costs for the cards buyers. Previously cards sellers were paying the market fee which they can easily include into the total price, and buyers could have gotten a discount by using certain marketplaces. Both parties were happy.
Increasing DAO fund at the expense of the players.
Yes, the money will be going to the DAO, and you might ask, as a big supporter of DAO why I will have a problem with it? Trouble is, DAO is well funded now, and will be for the next forseable future. This proposal also takes a small chunk of revenue from Splinterlands company and regular players. Heaven knows, the company needs every single ounce of revenue we can muster!
As a consumer, I like competition, and I dislike monopoly. This proposal can potentially kill all 3rd party competition and take away all our options. Not only that, many small players rely on these 3rd party tools for the small benefits they provide. In my view, this hurts those small players in a big way.
Again, I discourage unnecessary proposals. This one is certainly not needed. This doesn't improve game play, doesn't do anything for the players. I request to you all, please consider voting NO to this Indecent Proposal.
The Splinterlands
