First off, did you vote my proposal?
Just kidding, I don't have one.

You would have be living under a rock to not catch wind of the Splinterlands proposal. I'm not here to talk about the proposal specifically, but the events surrounding it.

I personally don't play Splinterlands, so I don't follow it too closely. I do however have a few Splinterlands assets so I do have an interest in the game. While I don't follow it, I do see it come up on Twitter quite often. A surprising amount in fact.

A few days ago, I came across this tweet.

The tweet from @aggroed is what caught my attention. In this tweet, @aggroed suggests pressuring people to unvote the return proposal. I personally vote the return proposal, and I would vote it harder if I could. I think it is important the return proposal be high enough to create a reasonable barrier to entry to funding from the DHF. In my opinion, it is still too low.

What is being asked here is to reduce the governance because a vote didn't go the way they wanted. I know this is fairly standard practice to go around begging for votes and asking people to remove their return proposal votes. Other large proposals have done the exact same thing, the larger the community the more pressure applied.

Another top 20 witness suggested whoever raised the proposal to remove their vote as the return is too high and it shouldn't be higher than 20M.

There is currently 441M Hive in circulation, of that, 177M is staked. 20M represents only 11% of the total available governance votes. The current return proposal sits at around 16% of the total available governance vote currently. I don't expect it to stay that way, I am sure it will be reduced in the near future.

I have no illusions this is going to stop or magically go away. This practice is unhealthy, hurts the Hive ecosystem, and is short sighted.

We are currently spending $1.6M/yr on active proposals, plus an additional $600K+ from the Value Plan proposals. This is significantly less than it was recently.

Just something to think about.