RE: Land SPS distributed to those who have surveyed - (A Splinterlands Proposal)

avatar

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

I am trying to understand the pros and cons of this. The text above didn’t make it clear for me.

For clarification:

I am a land owner. I already receive SPS for my land holdings. I have converted my land tokens to land deeds already and will survey all my deeds. How does it impact me if the proposal passes or doesn’t pass?



0
0
0.000
8 comments
avatar

It should help you get more of the SPS dropped daily. Since there are bound to be some people who don't claim and survey and they would be ineligible.

0
0
0.000
avatar

People who have not surveyed their deeds will cease getting payouts, therefore the pool will only be distributed amongst those who have. The likely outcome with you surveying 1000 plots would be a larger share of the SPS pool until everyone has surveyed.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Well. I guess it's fine then. Maybe the purpose of this proposal is discouraging "not surveying"? Maybe land token flipping? I am cool with this. Likely will pass

0
0
0.000
avatar

Maybe the purpose of this proposal is discouraging "not surveying"?

I think the actual purpose is to encourage people to continue to participate, considering the original proposal was enacted due to the delays associated with land. More functionality is being added, so people should no longer be rewarded for being passive-- they need to take the next step to continue to earn rewards.

Maybe land token flipping?

More likely more surveyed land flipping in the short term, as people who don't want to hold common and rare plots sell them off.

0
0
0.000
avatar

It's a well worded way of saying "let's cut off those people who aren't active enough to read this and vote no"

Out of principle we should be against things like this that alter the terms after the fact. Imagine if you bought high dividend stock in a company and didn't attend their annual meeting and they decided at the annual meeting that anyone who wasn't present at the meeting would not be eligible to collect dividends. This is no different. Pure shady and dishonest insider schenanagins.

0
0
0.000
avatar

The proposal will pass

0
0
0.000
avatar

of course it'll pass - "hey let's ask the people who directly benefit from something if they'll vote for it"

0
0
0.000
avatar

I agree with you 100% even for those who are paying attention it is still not that obvious for land

0
0
0.000