DAO Poll for District X
Hey all,
We have started a poll for the governance of District X. As we explained in our last post, the present self-acclaimed leader RobL has taken over the project, appropriating all the Land in the District. We are currently seeking multiple avenues to stop his evil plan. One of them is a poll on the DAO of Decentraland which, we hope, will bring justice for our cause, either by means of a return of the Land or through a royalty system. Please consider voting for justice (no gas fees!).
You can vote in the poll until 11 December at https://governance.decentraland.org/proposal/?id=706c3a30-5548-11ec-9c52-0d9746a59174
More Information
This proposal aims to return Land to the community of original Contributors of District X (formerly known as “Red Light District”). District X, which is one of the largest on the platform, has been appropriated by a District Leader who has chosen to flout community rules, ignore contributors whilst operating and managing the District as a single entity for personal gain. This, we argue, goes against the rationale and ethos of Decentraland and its community.
Abstract
The District Leader chooses to ignore the ratified Startup Agreement set out in the Project’s initial start-up plan (Version 2.1.1); they contravene their own rules; they censor critics, and they aggressively harass the community. They should no longer be in control of the management of the District X project and the associated 2,001 Land. Instead, we propose that District X contributors should be given the opportunity to present their case to the DAO in order to regain decentralised, accountable and democratic control of the District. If approved, Land ownership should be transferred back to Contributors.
A short summary of the Case against the Leader of District X
We believe the Leader has acted in bad faith with regards to both Decentraland and the original Contributors.
Shortly after taking over the Project’s leadership, the new Leader rushed a vote with only 21% of contributors present. Contributors were given no opportunity to be heard or ask questions, and instead were forced to choose between two options as to the future of their Land: 1) receive a royalty for contributed land, or 2) privately manage but not “own” their land.
The subsequent sections of the so-called License Agreement contains concrete details on the royalty payments and stipulates that the “agreement will provide annual royalty payments to each verified and eligible contributor based on the number of such LANDs contributed.” It also lists all the Ethereum addresses of contributors as Licensors.
After a two-year locking of Land and a prolonged period of silence and lack of communication, the District Leader has once again modified the Agreement. This time, however, leaving the contributors completely empty-handed and without any right to their Land. Contrary to all evidence and facts of the case, they claim that no form of repayment or royalty to contributors was ever inferred. The District Leader presently controls all Land in District X, totalling a current market value of roughly $40USD million.
The Leader of District X believes there is no relationship, obligation or any form of agreement with the contributors and considers all the contributed MANA that helped establish the District as a donation to Decentraland from which only his own private company (“District X LAND Holding LLC”) now reaps the benefits. We disagree with their authoritarian outlook and, in accordance with Decentraland’s philosophy, seek to regain decentralised control over the District.
