Anti-bot proposal for tournaments and brawls (41) and Anti-Battle Helper proposal (42) PASSED!
We passed Splinterlands Proposal 42!
I am no stranger to community proposals. I have often written about them. I have lobbied for or against them many times in the past. I consider this as a duty as a citizen of Pretoria, a duty as a stakeholder to this game and a duty as a community member. Although I have done this many times, but rarely I have felt this passionate about a single proposal. I want to write a post after the proposal have passed so that I keep a record at my blog and look back at it later.
Source -1 Source - 2 Source - 3
A simple google search showed me the issue is a major problem all over web-2 conventional games. There are many reditt threads of the topic and some of it is quite revealing. One user write about a game (the name doesn't matter, we can say this about bronze league a few weeks back)....
I finally convinced my little brother to play this game after nagging him about it constantly. Like others, he was discouraged because of the top down camera and having to click to move. But I finally convinced him to see what the hype was about. So we go in, make new characters, get to Prideholm, and what's the first thing he notices? Bots. Absolutely everywhere. I swear it was me, him, and about twenty bots in the starting zones. Just teleporting everywhere and spamming their mounts. Area chat is filled with gold spammers and not a single real person can be seen anywhere. I honestly felt bad for him and feel like it gave him the impression that this game is cheap and has absolutely no moderation at all. The first "ban wave" did nothing apparently. Maybe other games have botting problems as well. If they do I can't tell. But in Lost Ark you literally see lines of people teleporting everywhere and it's insane how this problem hasn't been fixed yet. This is definitely not the first impression you want new players to see when starting the game.
I like for you to please read this above and read it again, pause and reflect. Ask yourself, do we want our game to be like this? 69% of the staked SPS holders said NO! Thank you @davemccoy for writing proposal 42 (and 41 for that matter, which passed 93-7!)
I like to formally thank the community to help us pass the proposal. And to those who voted NO for the proposal, I like to think that you are also part of the community. We may not have gotten your vote, but I do belive you want this game to succeed as much as we do who voted YES for it.
And it passed. After a lot of bickering and against some powerful and influential people voting against it, including one of the founder, our respected friend Yabapmatt. Now Matt is a person I respect a lot. I am 100% in favor of him regarding how he brought the game to us and made it balanced and successful! His objection of the proposal was enforcement via code. Frankly speaking, that was the objection by the majority. I am in agreement with this stance.
However, I do not look at this proposal from the direction of enforcement. I look at it from the direction of stance the game and the community is willing to take against wide-spread commercialized automation which only leads to extraction of the value of our cumulative assets. I look at this from the social aspects, which I guaranteed can be successful. Majority of the people like to follow the rules that is agreed upon and given. Yes, there will be those that won't follow the rules. Trust me, they will be minority. Trust me, we will be watching you :)
@azircon I don't know the whole story of splinterlands, I joined the game in 2021, but I took a break in early 2022 due to exhaustion, and came back in August 2022, I really enjoy playing splinterlands! it's a game that I raise the flag to defend, many like me, in the past had to make a choice at some point, or join the bots, or stop playing, because it was almost impossible to beat the bots, and now with all these changes I see a light at the end of the tunnel.
I always see you always trying to be impartial and thinking about the community, that nowadays makes the difference, it's really hard to find people who seek to reach the widest public, not just live in a bubble.
I am very happy with the direction that splinterlands is taking, the interaction with people is returning, and at this moment in the world, something that really matters is the dialogue, in my guild for example, hearing friends saying that they were happy to win a difficult battle, it is gratifying to see the personal evolution of each one!
Let's go for success with splinterlands! I am looking forward to TOWER DEFENSE, I sincerely want to continue being part of splinterlands history, the vast majority of the Brazilian community believes in splinterlands, and we will help in whatever way possible to see the game become even more successful! See you at the praetoria fields!
I need to look out for new players. Without new players we are doomed. So I am trying to facilitate the game in a way so that it benefit new or relatively new human players.
I completely agree @azircon, I think we made a major leap forward in this space. I think one of my guildmates said it best today in our discord:
I also appreciate all the people that voted and supported the proposal, they made their voices known. I agree most of the people that voted against it also want to see the game succeed too and I'm respectful of their votes too.
I'm thankful that everyone was able to share their opinion by using the SPS DAO voting system. We had a record number of votes in total. In my eyes that shows how strong our system of governance is becoming, which over the long run is a major plus.
Thank you for all the help AZ, I know you worked hard on this and its not possible to thank you enough!
Do you have an idea of how long it will be until the ToS is updated?
They have land 1.5 within 7-10 days time, until then it is all hands on deck. I am sure they will work on the text next. It is two proposals. The first one was overwhelmingly voted in favor. #41, I am sure they can and will implement that no problem next. After than, it will be this one.
1.5 is staking? I can't keep up with everything happening all over the place! :D
Will be interesting to see if play changes.
Yes. You will be able to stake cards, clear land. If you have occupied plot you will be able to earn SPS.
You know the poison ability?
The poison is collected from my plots. Nothing grows, nothing can live.
LOL. You can always buy a occupied plot or 'soon' rent one!
I think I paid over 3000 for these 10 plots...
Current common regular land is $40.
Occupied common (the most sought after common) is $370
I don't know, but Aggy said on the Town Square last night they will take it serious and work on it when they are able to. My guess is land will suck up all the oxygen, but after that I think they will get on it.
And thanks for the support on the vote @tarazkp ... you definitely helped with your views on the prop!
Dave, I have received many notes of 'thank you' so far. From tiny accounts which plays in bronze and silver. It is there the game need to shine though. I feel responsible that we can't let these people down as a community.
I had reservations about voting for this proposal. I really don't like the idea of banning accounts, or requiring some form of kyc to play, but I do agree there should be a safe space for newcomers to compete against each other without being eaten alive by bots.
I wouldn't have voted for it if it had included wild, as I still hold the position that bots can add plenty of value to the game, experience, and economy, but I also agree it's a shot in the foot to expect someone who just dropped $10 or $20 into a modern deck to be immediately thrown to the terminators. Overall, I think this will be good for the game as a whole.
Yes. We have wild for bots. I think in time that will evolve into to PVE arena.
We are just creating a safe space for human players.
Greetings! Well, I was one of those who voted against the two proposals. It is not that my vote was going to make any change, because I barely have a little more than 1K staked sps, but it seems to me that it is not the appropriate way to impose changes in this ecosystem.
As I told @bhattg in his article yesterday Banning Bots in Splinterlands: A New Era for Fair Play and Rewards, I don't use any kind of bots or helpers, although I have learned to accept them as other necessary members of this ecosystem. I don't like bots and I have a hate/tolerance relationship with them, but what I'm sure of is that I don't like the way to force changes to TOS through the DAO at all.
I don't know to what extent the DAO's decisions can be binding for the company behind Splinterlands, and if the DAO can really force the change of the terms and conditions of use of the application. This is the part that seems counterproductive to me and that may set a precedent that they may regret in the not too distant future. If we learn from history, and from the forced takings due to the amount of staked cryptos, everyone should have voted a resounding no and looked for a more pragmatic formula that does not involve changes in legal issues within the operation of the company behind Splinterlards.
Now, the company behind Splinterlands must make a decision, and decide whether to "accept" this decision or take other types of solutions that align with the spirit of the proposal. It is one thing for them to announce a control on the use of bots in the modern format and to implement it through the modification of their TOS, and quite another for them to have to modify the TOS because that has been the decision of the DAO. Whatever the decision, it is indelible, written in stone on the blockchain.
I believe that very hasty decisions have started to be made, driven by the revelry created by the increase in rewards, without giving enough time to analyze and evaluate the consequences of these changes in the medium term.
We waited five years for the first actions to be taken with the disproportionate use of bots. I think we could have waited a few more months before making new decisions, at least until the true effects of these changes on the ecosystem economy were seen.
If the often mentioned fact is that the number of accounts struggling with bot usage can be much more than 50% of users, then this decision goes against the majority of gamers. For game economy purposes, an account is a player; robot or human
All Splinterland company members are also DAO stakeholders. So DAO is not imposing anything on the company. I am friends with all team members including CEO and CTO and trust me they like DAO to be active
Definitely a huge win for the game. Hope there comes a time where all battles are human vs human!
Soon!
With the Modern League being Human Only, Splinterlands has just increased its player base (Existing players are happier, ex players are coming back and potential players are showing interest) It kind of reminds me when I had first joined the SPL ecosystem, I am seeing messages everywhere on Social Media Platforms about how to join, where to get spell books, what's the earning potential etc. These 2 new proposals, even without implementation have only strengthen this. Thank you for fighting for the little people, those with voices unheard, soon those little people will be able to support you in the masses.
Appreciated Mango.
It is our player base. Without the base we are nothing. It's a symbiotic relationship:)
I most definitely Agree!
👍
I think the definition of a Battle Helper is poorly worded in Prop 42 which is why I ultimately switched my vote against it.
For instance, let's say someone shares their spreadsheet of notes about battle conditions with me -- so how much do I need to edit or change before the spreadsheet is different and materially mine?
What about websites that offer card information and general strategy like splinterguide or splintercoach, but don't necessarily tell you the best cards for the specific battle conditions -- it is against ToS to refer to the sites just to use a premium function for abilities that is superior to what's available in game?
I like the idea of Prop 42, but I strongly have issues with the wording, let alone the actual ability of the company to enforce it. Sounds like we will have to rely on the honor system and goodwill.
I don't think we are worried about a static spreadsheet being shared :)
Trust me that is not going to be a problem. Although you won't be using that in tournaments anyways. 3-min is not a lot of time.
The wording is slightly vague on purpose and it is upto the team to update the wording of TOS. I have some conversations with the team and they have a solution.
Sit tight and battle :)
I've been battling, but I felt like we were voting for the wording -- not just the spirit of the ToS. I do think it will be interesting to see the final language that the company decides on for limiting battle helpers. The current wording is NOT GOOD.
As Matt says, how can we enforce it? I'd rather it be in place than not. There's going to be a lot of flaunters to this ruling.
There are ways brother! Da wae! :)
a great change for splinterlands! now gamers can finally tell their gamer friends about splinterlands without having to be ashamed of it!
We certainly hope so. Thank you for stopping by :)
Te felicito Kaonashi, al tener el pensamiento, de que se tomaran en cuenta a aquellos usuarios que juegan limpio en cada juego, porque muestra que eres una persona integra y le brindas apoyo a las pocas que sigan las reglas.
You are welcome.
It was definitely a nail biter! Glad to see it pass though as I agree with you it should be looked at from a stance and spirit of the game rather than what can be enforced. If the team is able to find ways to properly enforce then even better.
There seems to be a natural division between the community. We plan to bridge that with time.
Hi, I wrote a Peakd Article on the blatant usage of battle helper in the tournament and how battle helper addicts use it to extract the reward at the expense of genuine gamer. Perhaps this will change the view for some people's neutral stance on the battle helper issue.
https://peakd.com/@omg-sp1/unveiling-the-veiled-exposing-the-advantages-xbot-battle-helper-addicts-desperately-conceal