Another Controversial Proposal from the Splinterlands Team
Yesterday, the Spliterlands team put forth another proposal that generated a lot of controversies and generally negative and salty comments on the proposal post, at least when I checked it.
The proposal is not up for voting yet, but this may be another one hard to pass.
I sometimes wonder if the team puts certain controversial things on these proposals on purpose or if simply they don't think about the effect each paragraph they write will have. And I don't know what is worse between the two.
You guys talked in recent town halls about some sort of discord channel where weirdbeard will be gathering some feedback from the community or something like that.
Wouldn't it be better if you'd go through such a process with these proposals before you actually put them out into an official proposal post? That'll reduce the chances of them being rejected, maybe.
Now... about this proposal in particular.
If we read it at the surface, why wouldn't you like it, right? If you want to use DEC for some of the use cases listed in the proposal, to burn it at a later date (like guild building upgrades, land building upgrades and maintenance, land survey "potions", etc.), a 20% discount if you pre-pay for it, sounds advantageous, right?
Not only that, but you can pre-pay with either DEC or VOUCHER, and receive DEC-B (a new token, "DEC Batteries", if the proposal passes) in return.
DEC or VOUCHERs would be burned and DEC-B tokens will be received in return at a rate of 0.8:1 for DEC:DEC-B and 0.005:1 for VOUCHER:DEC-B.
In theory, if the amount of DEC burned through this pre-pay method is enough to move the price of DEC above the peg, it'll be a win because then the SPS burning mechanism kicks in and a lot of focus was put only to see this start working sooner rather than later.
Here's where pitfalls start.
For a reason I can't understand, the team decided to make DEC-B tradable in their proposed design. We know from experience you can't expect the market to do the logical thing and price DEC-B 20% less than DEC to avoid creating any extra inflation. And there will be plenty of speculators who will burn DEC only to get more DEC in return by trading DEC-B.
End result may be the reverse. More pressure on the price of DEC instead of moving toward the peg.
Then, this is a two-step process. There is no utility for DEC-B if this proposal passes until other proposals pass with specific use cases for DEC-B. At least one of those future proposals will be controversial enough that the team felt the need to mention it expressly in this proposal.
What happens if this proposal passes and none of the follow-up use-case proposals do? That's highly unlikely, though, because whoever votes yes on this proposal will need to vote yes on some use cases for DEC-B as well.
Personally, I would have voted yes on this proposal if DEC-B was soul-bound. In this form, I'll have to think about it.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
We don’t need another token.
Yeah, that's another discussion too. Seems like some failing tactics applied in the defi world.
It is going to make it more confusing and drag down the price of all tokens.
I agree.
This post has been manually curated by @bhattg from Indiaunited community. Join us on our Discord Server.
Do you know that you can earn a passive income by delegating your Leo power to @india-leo account? We share 100 % of the curation rewards with the delegators.
Please contribute to the community by upvoting this comment and posts made by @indiaunited.
This is a very bad idea. 2 tokens already with more supply than demand, what’s a 3rd going to do? Even more supply and shifting demand from existing to this new one? How’s that going to help lol.
Supply would come at the detriment of DEC or VOUCHER supplies (which are burnt), but unfortunately, it would create more DEC inflation, because of the discount and the fact DEC-R is tradable.
The burn needs to come from organic growth and use cases. Not failed financial engineerings that are not designed properly.
I am going to vote against it.
I'll think about it. While there are things about this proposal I don't like, there is a chance to boost the Splinterlands economy enough to get back into a rising cycle. The problem I have with this is that it's a probability game which may create more problems than it solves, not a sure thing.
We need new players. Without it, we are just cycling the same dwindling purchasing power among ourselves in this environment.
I agree. But probably we have to wait for the bull market before new players will become interested again. Or maybe land gameplay will create enough curiosity even before.
The last thing Splinterlands needed is another token. No matter what promises are made about it. It needs user growth and that'll solve pretty much every issue the game may or may not have.
!CTP
Yeah... That'll make things more complex without any clear advantage, if not a disadvantage.
Agreed!
Not another token!! I hope this doesn't pass.
Hmm, we'll see. Looks like there are whales in both camps.
Whatever the creators want, but after the news, the rate of DEC and VOUCHER increased somewhat... Or is that what they wanted? A kind of rocking the boat, perhaps even in their own interests...
!invest_vote
Yeah, the market tries to incorporate the new information.
@stdd denkt du hast ein Vote durch @investinthefutur verdient!
@stdd thinks you have earned a vote of @investinthefutur !
Hmmn interesting. Thanks for this analysis. I was loooking for where to get this info
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Yep, interesting indeed. Seems it may have not been the idea of the Splinterlands team, initially. At least that's what I understood after listening to the Monster Mavericks show.
Splinterlands overcomplicated the game setup a long time ago. They are way beyond the point of repair. The game is over. It's more or less the money grab for the whales.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
That's... drastic. Although I haven't seen many good things lately. Let's hope the bull market will break this cycle, at least.
We'll see.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Why do we need a new token? This is like creating a whirlpool of mess
Because savvy whales love when things are complicated.
I think players of sprinterland don't need other token. Sprinterland team work hard on new updates of game and new people's come and join this game and sps going up soon.
We'll see what happens.
I just went through the proposal, it really does feel like a temporary fix, except there’s something I’m probably missing
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
At most a temporary fix, but it may backfire as well and instead of helping DEC with the peg it will move it further away. It's hard to say. But yes, it's more of an experiment.
Are they playing lassecash style games. !LOLZ
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
lolztoken.com
A hippocrite
Credit: reddit
@gadrian, I sent you an $LOLZ on behalf of @emaxisonline
Delegate Hive Tokens to Farm $LOLZ and earn 110% Rewards. Learn more.
(2/4)
Not familiar with it, so I can't say.
Oh, it is a 2nd layer token of Hive, and if you add lassecash liquidity, the token will send you tons of shitcoins.
!PIZZA
I knew there was a token, but I wasn't familiar with the details. Thanks!
img tribaldex
The last thing we need is ANOTHER token with no utility that will drag the other assets down. SPS has seen nothing but red days since November, DEC can't reclaim its supposed peg, VOUCHER was just a terrible idea to begin with that could easily been avoided and re-priced into "additional costs" by using the 2 native tokens already. The team should be, in my opinion, focusing on the game and not the economic aspect of it. These assets the are being produced by the game are only as strong as the game, and will rise and fall with it.
I may not have massive voting power, but this is a hard no from me.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I also strongly agree that the team's main focus should be on adding or improving gaming elements.
I have vouchers so I don't mind having another use case for vouchers. The list of items that burn DEC seemed kind of short.
!PIZZA
I have some vouchers too, and I will probably swap them for DEC-B if that will be introduced, but I don't find this proposal great. Good enough? Maybe, but if it backfires it won't be good enough either. At least it's just an experiment.
I am wondering why they are so concerned with the price/peg value? It makes people think there might be a reason to bail. Riftwatchers packs/cards are holding their value due to being priced in USD and not crypto. There appears to be many new games gearing up which will pull in the new players. We can only hope land or tower defense will put some life back into Splinterlands. !PIZZA
They put a lot of trust in that SPS burning mechanism to come to the rescue once DEC goes above the peg. But I believe trust in this mechanism is too high. It is mostly the lack of demand due to the bear market and some hard-to-swallow decisions that keep things down. If the demand remains low, with or without the mechanism started, DEC will fall below the peg again. And then, the mechanism will stop working again.
I gifted $PIZZA slices here:
ijat tipped gadrian (x2)
@emaxisonline(2/5) tipped @gadrian (x1)
Learn more at https://hive.pizza!
I think it's also a bad idea for another token to be created. I don't see a point in it when SPS was built to take out a lot of the use case. I remember how LEO acted when CUB and PolyCUB was created. It was great to have a platform but it's generally the same pool being spread out against all the tokens.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
If DEC-B was proposed as soul-bound (non-tradable, non-transferrable), I could have understood its purpose better. Pay forward for later scheduled expenses at a discount. Can't use them any other way except for the list of use cases mentioned or added later (mostly to upgrade buildings). Reduce the supply of DEC at the same time.
To be honest, my head begins to hurt a little after hearing about yet another token to be added to Splinterlands...
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Yeah, nothing is simple about Splinterlands. I can only imagine how things will be with Ragnarok, which theycallmedan promotes as the most complex game ever.
Oh man... Still, have to probably ape in that one too!
Still wondering if I should invest in it besides the airdrop or not.
!BBH
!ALIVE
!CTP
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
@gadrian! Your Content Is Awesome so I just sent 1 $BBH (Bitcoin Backed Hive) to your account on behalf of @bradleyarrow. (6/50)
@gadrian! You Are Alive so I just staked 0.1 $ALIVE to your account on behalf of @bradleyarrow. (1/20)
The tip has been paid for by the We Are Alive Tribe through the earnings on @alive.chat, feel free to swing by our daily chat any time you want.
Agree, We don’t need another token.
Yeah, the solution proposed could have been much better.