SPS Governance Proposal - Require KYC for DAO Sponsored Tournaments

avatar

DAO Sponsored Proposal

The purpose of this proposal is to help combat abuse in SPS DAO Sponsored Tournaments. Requiring accounts to pass a KYC check will help to reduce the number of alt accounts as well as ensure that any violations of Splinterlands Terms of Service, such as the use of battle helpers or bots, are tied to a real identity to help aid in enforcement of the Splinterlands Terms of Service.

If this proposal passes, all future SPS DAO Sponsored Tournaments will require accounts to verify their identity with the Splinterlands KYC partner to be eligible to enter SPS DAO Sponsored Tournaments and win the associated prizes. To be clear, this proposal will only affect SPS DAO Sponsored Tournaments and will not make KYC mandatory to earn ranked play rewards or tournaments hosted by other parties unless they choose to require KYC as well.

spsproposal spsdao splinterlands sps dao
0
0
0.000
19 comments
avatar

I'm a fan of this and not a fan of this at the same time.
Overall my vote will come to a YES for this proposal, but . . .

✅

  • No multi accounting
  • Riskier to bot
  • Riskier to use battle helpers
  • Tournaments move back towards more skill based gameplay

❎

  • KYC is not a good look for a Crypto Project
  • There will be players that either can't or don't want to provide KYC, who will have a wayy smaller pool of tournaments to choose from
  • Competition overall lessens in tournaments (Less players, gives top players an easier time to farm top rewards)
  • Outside media could interpret Splinterlands use of KYC and give us a bad name (Might not happen, but could, it's just my thoughts)
0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar
(Edited)

as a maybe-crypto-veteran with more than 10 years wobbling around in crypto-space, kyc has always been a red flag for me and will be a turn-off imho, although i disagree on the multiaccounting / bot - issue:
if the bots pay the entry fee, i am fine with that ;P
100% GTFO for me here...

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

There's no entry fee... hence this problem.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar
(Edited)

bots would still be present if they only implement the KYC upon tournament registration. since they could just manually do KYC while using other people's credentials (Ex: Family members, friends, black market data sellers) and run the bot after the KYC. if their target is to remove the bots in such tournaments, they should go for a third party software detector that follows a set of algorithm in every games in the tournament and block it.

Though i don't think it will give top players an easier time to farm, since they would still need to battle it out from other players. but as you've mention, it will lessen the overall competition since less players could actually join.

I also agree that it would push other players/users not to be competitive or totally avoid it all in this tournament especially for countries which has strict issue about data privacy.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

I get it, but yuck. Maybe I'm wrong but I think this will tank tournament entries. I'm definitely not going to go through the hassle of KYC to play a splinterlands tournament. If you want to reduce bots why not implement some sort of CAPTCHA? Sure it wont help with alts and battle helpers but I think that's way more palatable than a KYC check.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

captcha can't really block battle bots or any program regarding third party softwares. i'm an online gamer for 25years and played multiple games with captcha, play protect, or any softwares to block the use of bots but all of it doesn't seem to work. One example of it is Mir4 which implements the use of captcha to block bots, if you played it, i think i don't need to mention. But i'm not saying KYC is more secure to block bots. i mean, it could lessen the user participants by restricting multi accounts on the tournament but can't really say it can actually block bots.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

I was able to pass the KYC for Coinbase and American Binance but for some reason I fail the one in Splinterlands and it doesn't tell you why you failed.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar
(Edited)

If you talk to the support team they can manually verify you I think. I know they help people with this. I think there's even a support ticket option for KYC iirc.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar
(Edited)

How would that work? I have a RF account and a GF account. Can I only KYC one to participate in tournaments?

It's a bit annoying that SPL always encouraged building more than one deck, and now we get punished for that.

Not to mention I don't like KYC at all.... There's exactly 1 exchange that has my details - that's my on- and off-ramp, and that's it. I don't want my details out there. Who will be keeping the KYC-info? How will it be treated?

Also: buying KYC details is a thing these days, so I'm wondering how foolproof this is gonna be

Guess I might be retiring altogether if this gets pushed through... shame

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar
(Edited)

You could still KYC and play with both, you just couldn't enter the same tournament with both. It would be using the same KYC system Splinterlands already uses for purchasing credits.

For the record this was not my suggestion, but it's been brought up a lot, so we're going to have a vote. I don't know if this will even make it to a full proposal.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Let's hope not. 'cos even though I'm detaching from the game and the community more and more, I'm not fully ready to completely leave yet 😂

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Here we see again how whales (= in 99% the time people with alt accounts) are able to negatively or positively impact a proposal.

This proposal is clearly a way into real player oriented gameplay and rewards.

Nevertheless, it will never pass, as this will reduce the chance/payout from bot farms, as they are not able to spam bots in tournaments anymore.

I told it before, only KYC-approved accounts should be able to vote in proposals, and only with 1 vote.

And the statement that KYS doesnt work, yeah, no, you can let devs manually approve KYS via support if the automated process doesnt work.

Sad to see good proposals beeing rejected by botters. I love splinterlands, but in the long run, if these basic things doesnt change to a more player oriented way, it will die out as soon as there is a better, more playerbase-friendly P2E / cryptogame.
And this will not take long anymore..

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

I agree to finding ways to limit the rewards bot farms can get but I feel like KYC would put a damper on new players coming in.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

I've been a crypto advocate for many years and I've learned the mainstream consumer/gamer does not care about KYC, as long as there is confidence that personal information is kept secure. Selling a web 3.0 game as decentralized game and having parts of the game require KYC does not mean the parts of the game that are decentralized are now centralized. Privacy and decentralization are not the same thing. At the cost of KYC for capturing mainstream gamers, I vote for KYC. We will likely see a drop in tournament participation since most of today's market are crypto advocates, but we gotta start building the foundational pieces for the larger picture. This is really a small start but an important one. Besides this is opt-in KYC. Maybe not all of the DAO tourneys are KYC.

0
0
0.000
Reply