#IIP XX.2 - Exclusive Illuvium Zero Battle Board Rewards (Revised Regional Skin IIP)

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

shut crystal
#

**Sponsor: **
@spring steeple

Full Proposal:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/15ggdUNd-MBxWrDyF6FU8tz01edRkP2mVtwtU1g954o8/edit?usp=sharing

Previous Version:
IIP-XX - Exclusive Alpha Season Regional Ranger & Moz4rt Skins
https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1146665567206506537

Simple Summary:
This proposal aims to commemorate the participation of Illuvium Zero land owners with an exclusive “Illuvium Zero Battle Board Reward”. This Battle board will be granted to all Landowners who meet the threshold of Lv 7 Nexus in the time period leading up to Open Public Beta. (After the conclusion of the Minting window for Alpha).

1 Battle board redemption ERC20 token will be dropped to each qualifying wallet at the end of the fuel production lead time. The distribution of these redemption tokens will be either automated or done manually with a snapshot, ensuring that land owners who have achieved the required building level receive them at an appropriate time after Public Open Beta. These tokens will be NFTs so tradeable and sellable.

Google Docs
Copy of IIP-XX.2 - Exclusive Illuvium Zero Battle Board Skin Rewa...

IIP XX.2 - Exclusive Illuvium Zero Battle Board Rewards (Revised Regional Skin IIP) Simple Summary: This proposal aims to commemorate the participation of Illuvium Zero land owners with an exclusive “Illuvium Zero Battle Board Reward”. This Battle board will be granted to all Landowners who m...

blazing hollow
#

I preferred the previous proposal, but this one is decent too.

Is the board skin gonna be visible to the owner only, or all players in the game? I feel it should be the latter

cosmic vessel
#

"1 Battle board redemption ERC20 token will be dropped to each qualifying wallet" - Do you need to move lands to multiple wallets if you want more than one token?

spring steeple
spring steeple
cosmic vessel
spring steeple
#

I will make a note to self if the iip passes to ensure that it is clearer that it is a plot based reward not a wallet based reward

cosmic vessel
spring steeple
cosmic vessel
spring steeple
#

The main reason for making it the nexus is so that it is very simple clean and easy to understand and hopefully to implement

spring steeple
#

The period of time for the intended reward would be just the lead time between alpha and open beta

cosmic vessel
shut crystal
spring steeple
shut crystal
#

Nexus Level 7 is good progress along for the lands to get them advancing for fuel production - obtainable in a week or two of grinding on a Tier 1 - and very achievable on any higher tier in less than 2 weeks

cosmic vessel
#

Yep, I understand. The objective is to make it easy to get.

spring steeple
shut crystal
# cosmic vessel That's true, maybe 750

Only comment about Levels - you can build a bunch of converters to power level (edited = pass the Elements around in a circle exchanging them around) and meet the lvl threshold without progressing land - the silver lining tied into this proposal = encourage lands to get developped and progressing quickly 😉

cosmic vessel
spring steeple
cosmic vessel
spring steeple
cosmic vessel
spring steeple
#

The place holder token would be dropped and the board would be created and redeemed at a later date

spring steeple
cosmic vessel
#

I guess they're both called public beta in the roadmap

image.png
#

You need to earn this between the last two.

spring steeple
#

Terminology can be revised

fickle magnet
# shut crystal **__Sponsor__: ** <@931478091384098817> **__Full Proposal__:** https://docs.go...

Currently we’re aiming for IZ to launch at least 4 weeks prior to OB Launch, however that is just a target and it may end up being a smaller time frame before OB Launch (which could mess with this proposal in a big way)

The incentive for people to play and go as hard as possible prior to OB Launch is that you will earn orders of magnitude more than people who don’t try as hard in this period and get a huge headstart, this is already a financial incentive, so incentivising play before launch is not a reason…

Why exactly are we giving IZ free additional rewards? For what reason?

Why are ILV stakers/holders who have waited far longer receiving no additional rewards?

spring steeple
fickle magnet
spring steeple
#

This iip is here to judge sentiment around a one off commemorative battle board

spring steeple
cosmic vessel
#

There's no need to set an end date of Public Beta launch, just make it 4 weeks or however long you think from the beginning of ILZ Public Beta

fickle magnet
spring steeple
spring steeple
cosmic vessel
spring steeple
fickle magnet
spring steeple
#

I think the iip is reasonably clear and simple

cosmic vessel
fickle magnet
main blade
#

I always thought beyond was for Ilv holders. To give the whales a game.

spring steeple
#

Commemorative skins, battle boards or holo battleboard S

fickle magnet
wooden zodiac
#

For me, the IB rewards incentivises people to buy more disks (rev for DAO). I don’t see how this proposal would benefit the DAO.

main blade
#

I do see the potential for every sector to start asking for a reward.
Yet I don't feel this is so bad considering the game being delayed. (although I'm glad it was)

spring steeple
main blade
#

I'm okay with this as long as it is one off.

spring steeple
main blade
#

Cool

cosmic vessel
spring steeple
#

And unlike the last proposal will not impact the skins supply or values

fickle magnet
blazing hollow
# fickle magnet It was a serious question, what is the reason for giving IZ owners an additional...

Why are you so spiteful and arrogant towards something so harmless? It's spilling over from the previous proposal into this one.

Why does Beyond get any rewards at all? Who voted for that? Ilv stakers and holders are already going to be earning more than the 5% land owners get. You can make an argument Bps can offset that but it is far from guaranteed. Land owners must also spend time on the game, for earning less. The arguement that you get to play the game is void, as there are simply better city builders at this point, unless there was investment incentive no one would be playing it rn.

The fact you making it seem like we are begging for free stuff is disgusting. Land sale was marketed everywhere as a huge success. Apart from the 2021 hoax, land owners were promised game 2 months after the sale, yet we all know how that went.

So to summerize, beyond are getting different rewards for generating far less revenue than what land sale did. Ilv stakers and holders are most likely gonna out perform anything generated from lands.

And those are not even the main reasons. It's just a token of appreciation for all the early investors/players that stuck along with the project all these years. No one is begging for any free stuff here, if I can I'd trade my useless 15bps for something like this.

fickle magnet
# blazing hollow Why are you so spiteful and arrogant towards something so harmless? It's spillin...

Zero spite I promise

My job as a council member is to be objective and to do what is best for the DAO

I do not think it is best for the DAO to make it a precedent that we as a community all vote to make our assets more valuable. This is not the point of being a DAO.

ILV owners were promised a game in 2021 and currently over 70% of the community expect a game will come in 2024.

There is zero evidence that investing in ILV will outperform investing in Land per $ invested.

I have nothing against a token of appreciation to Land Owners or to ILV owners or to any asset holders.
I have an issue when this token is mandated via proposal, maybe I have a different understanding of a "token of appreciation" 🤷‍♀️

main blade
blazing hollow
# fickle magnet Zero spite I promise My job as a council member is to be objective and to do wh...

No need to explain yourself man, you are passionately against this for some reason.

Again you are looking at this as if we are trying to scam the project and enrich ourselves, where something like this has been done in so many other games.

The fact proposal is coming from the community and not from team(reward given without expectation feels nice) goes to show you how land owners feel right now. You can choose to look at it like we are trying to extract value for ourselves, that's your choice but it's not the case.

There is no hard evidence revdis will outperform land revenue, as it's all speculation right now. But there are many calculations made over the years who predict that, you know that well. It's a valid concern, don't try to downplay it.

In the end what this proposal suggests is just a thank you to land owners for sticking with the project after so many missed promises, it's not about enriching ourselves with 1 skin lol. If you feel it's screwing stakers in some way feel free to write your own proposal for that. I feel that answers your 2 questions above

raven mossBOT
#
DMs are scams

Mods and Team members will never DM you.
Never trust advice or links received in DMs.

Beta access, giveaways, and promotions are not given out via DM. Scams are designed to trick you into installing malicious software to gain access to your wallet or to convince you to enter your seed phrase into a website. Never give your private key (12 to 24-word seed phrase) to anyone.

Support is not provided via DMs

Support is handled publicly, or in threads within the Illuvium Discord. People offering support via DM are scammers.

Please follow the instructions pinned in #report-scammers to report bad actors so we can remove them from the server.
fickle magnet
# blazing hollow No need to explain yourself man, you are passionately against this for some reas...

Please point me to a case study of when in another game asset owners made a proposal to have their assets become eligible for additional rewards, I may have missed this.
(to my knowledge any such bonuses have always been freely given and not by request)

I also want to make it clear that I also am a Land Owner.

I agree that this does go to show "how land owners currently feel" and this sentiment should be taken seriously. The way the Team is addressing the FUD in the community is with a "head down, ass up attitude" working their buts off to deliver the best possible product as soon as possible because that is what will silence all FUD once and for all and what will benefit all in the DAO the most.

Done a good bit of math on it lately and I think theres reasonable evidence to suggest that those who take developing their Land very seriously could easily end up outperforming ILV staking, it may take added work but it also doesn't require locking your assets...

I dont feel this proposal is screwing stakers, I just dont think IZ have been screwed over more than anyone else in this project.
If I bought ILV during the land sale, or bought land for the same $ value I would be down on both investments, but I'd be down far more had I bought the ILV...

If IZ owners who havent participated in IB are looking over there at the cool rewards and wanting some for themselves they can feel free to buy D1sks and earn those rewards for themselves.

ILV and Land have incredibly solid value propositions built into them from their foundation.

IB has no value proposition beyond the purely aesthetic and speculative and even with "fancy rewards" is still struggling to sell all that well...

smoky rune
# fickle magnet Please point me to a case study of when in another game asset owners made a prop...

Some pretty good points in there.

Just want to point out one thing though:
"Done a good bit of math on it lately and I think theres reasonable evidence to suggest that those who take developing their Land very seriously could easily end up outperforming ILV staking, it may take added work but it also doesn't require locking your assets..."

Playing IZ does by definition require you to lock assets in your wallet (your plot) in order to develop it to a level where you can get rewards, and it requires that it stays locked if you want to collect those rewards over an extended period of time. So it's essentially no different from staking when it comes to how the asset is to be managed. Lands still require more work to give you anything once the game goes live.

blazing hollow
# fickle magnet Please point me to a case study of when in another game asset owners made a prop...

Again you are missing the point, it's not about assets and additional rewards. It's a token of appreciation for early adopters. Web2 games have done this for ages. Wow, dota, league, Ragnarok, I can go on all day. I always found this cool, and being NFT only make it cooler.

What fud are you talking about? No one is attacking the team here, we know how hard they are working on this.

It's a harmless proposal, one skin for land owners. It's alright to have a similar reward for stakers too. As I said web2 games had this for decades.

spring steeple
#

There is no negativity or fud or criticism of the very hard working team Vetamor. I think that is pretty clear in the way that I have worded the iip and the sentiment behind it. You have made your position clear both in this conversation and in the last iip. It’s a simple vote no need to get bogged down in big arguments.

fickle magnet
fickle magnet
# spring steeple Then who would propose this.

I have no issue with the community asking the team for something like this in the form of #1020759212172775464

but am against Governance being used for this kind of thing as to me it does not feel appropriate and I'd prefer we not set the precedent.

"But they got more rewards, so then we should get more"
"well now that their rewards were increased its time to increase ours"
and around and around we go

I have nothing against these exact rewards requested being petitioned for as feedback and with the Team choosing to grant them, zero against that, my stance against this is purely on the principle of governance being used in this way specifically

fickle magnet
spring steeple
smoky rune
#

@spring steeple Regarding the proposal (after reading your clarifications), I'll say I like this idea better than the previous one. It's simple and straightforward, although a little indeterminate on the timeframes, which is understandable since we only have estimates on when minting or release is to happen.

spring steeple
feral yacht
#

As nice as it would be to have a special battle board, I agree with Vetemor.

acoustic swallow
# shut crystal **__Sponsor__: ** <@931478091384098817> **__Full Proposal__:** https://docs.go...

Ok... so here we have an example of a Good proposal https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1151269195535880192 with good intents and aiming towards bringing more players (which = more money to the DAO...)

And yet, the common agreement there is that we don't have the resources to allocate to such a feature...

But somehow, @spring steeple seems to think we do have resources to spend on selfish interests that bring no long term value to the project, only the same individuals over and over trying to extract as much as they can from it.

And what is EVEN more surprising, is how many people hurried to upvote, definitely more worried about getting more value for themselves than about the project itself. Very much illustrates the kind of community we are building and the behaviours our community encourages, and i can't say i like it.

Big downvote for me.

topaz monolith
#

Thank you for your work, @spring steeple we validate it 100% 🙂 It's been 2 years since I saw the land in my portfolio losing value.. (we're stopping the free market, we're giving Blueprints rewards without having land) big feeling that I'm I'm being scammed.. With your proposal it motivates me ❤️

raven mossBOT
#
DMs are scams

Mods and Team members will never DM you.
Never trust advice or links received in DMs.

Beta access, giveaways, and promotions are not given out via DM. Scams are designed to trick you into installing malicious software to gain access to your wallet or to convince you to enter your seed phrase into a website. Never give your private key (12 to 24-word seed phrase) to anyone.

Support is not provided via DMs

Support is handled publicly, or in threads within the Illuvium Discord. People offering support via DM are scammers.

Please follow the instructions pinned in #report-scammers to report bad actors so we can remove them from the server.
marble crest
#

I agree with this suggestion
The NFTs you get here are worth nothing, but if illuvium is still around 10 years from now, who wouldn't want to keep them as proof of their investment from the beginning?
It's a question of how the team feels about the initial investors.
If you don't want to spend your time on something completely worthless, you don't have to make it.
I don't think we need to bother with IIP.

#

The NFT game should not just collect NFTs, it should also record the history of those people!
For example, you can give out NFTs for the 3rd or 5th anniversary, or you can give out NFTs to early investors, as in this case.
They are all memorials.

blazing hollow
# acoustic swallow Ok... so here we have an example of a Good proposal https://discord.com/channels...

Did you even read both of her proposals mate? It was stated numerous times that in order not to stress the team further before OB, this can be worked on after that and claimed the skins with a token. No one is asking for this to be made a priority or to delay OB for this. Just like the language proposal, this can be worked on once they have more breathing room.

It's a good proposal for the current investors, you know the ones that participated since the beginning and helped make this project possible?

If you remove the scope creep from the equation, which was stated numerous times we don't want any delays, there is 0 downside to this.

feral yacht
#

For the sake of accuracy it should be noted that Illuvium Beyond only gives rewards to the top 100 wallets.

People who don’t make the top 100 don’t get rewards and they also don’t get any rewards after open beta launches, when land holders will make money on fuel sales and finding blueprints.

Anybody can say they want free stuff, but using Illuvium Beyond as an argument is flawed.

If approved, this IIP would set a damaging and divisive precedent.

blazing hollow
#

In essence, this has nothing to do with beyond or wanting free stuff, especially the latter is dirty type of thinking.

It's something many web2 games have done over the years, even axie had a similar thing with their 'mythic' axies.

It baffles me how something so small and cute as this can gather such strong negative sentiment. I haven't seen this in any other project

main blade
#

I voted yes

main blade
main blade
#

Like splendor mentioned, you have made your case. I get what you are saying, I'm voting yes because I feel a lot of people are wanting it to be acknowledged.

#

I like the changes. A battle skin won't interfere too much.

smoky rune
main blade
#

I thought this might be useful for those wishing to calculate interest.

Screenshot_20230913-205758.png
feral yacht
blazing hollow
#

To clarify further, this would have been as good of a proposal even if we were just beta testers in a web2 game and no monetary value was involved. I'll leave it at that

cosmic vessel
burnt whale
#

@shut crystal comment on vote

cosmic vessel
#

Reaction placeholders

shut crystal
#

25 VOTES 👍 ACHIEVED ON THIS PROPOSAL!

<@&1107754780744487002> is reviewing with @spring steeple (OP/Sponsor) on how she would like to proceed. More information will be shared shortly - but still feel free to continue to share any and all feedback and your vote (👍 or 👎) Atlas_Love

spring steeple
#

Thank you to everyone who voted and shared their opinions.

marble crest
#

At Galxe (GAL), you can get various OATs and NFTs for listening to AMAs, watching Youtube, and participating in Discord.
I wonder if the same thing could be done with illuvium?
For example.

  1. voted for the Council.
  2. Town halls were viewed.
  3. Participated in a tournament
  4. Some degree of ILV staking.
  5. Raise LAND to a certain level.
  6. Raise the rank of the iluvitars
  7. Give out NFTs to commemorate anniversaries
  8. Worked for the community.
  9. and others

Staking, LAND, and illuvitars can be different types of NFTs depending on rank.
These NFTs have almost no value, but if we can keep them as our own record, I think the community was bigger than it is now.
It would be better if you could see them as your status

dusky echo
whole venture
#

Good pivot with the revised proposal, respectful of the team’s large backlog of work and not inflationary towards the planned economy 👍

shut crystal
#

Sorry for the delay in getting this message out, it is a bit of a long one!

@fickle magnet – Regarding the potential launch window, I appreciated your comments in the Land/Fuel proposal, you were extremely active and shared vital information - very much appreciated ser. Since you do have a lot of insight on this, especially compared to others, let me pick your 🧠

Currently we’re aiming for IZ to launch at least 4 weeks prior to OB Launch, however that is just a target and it may end up being a smaller time frame before OB Launch (which could mess with this proposal in a big way)

Would you have a possible solution for this? Perhaps setting a timeframe of 4 weeks or 6 weeks after IZ Launches (regardless of when OB launches) – Since the lands will not reset, we can have the snapshot taken of the lands at a set date/time. [This touches on some comments shared by @cosmic vessel]

================================================================================

Seeing this as a "token of gratitude/appreciation" or "rewarding Landowners" are all fair comments - This proposal reduced the scope/pressure on the Team which was one of the main feedbacks from the past version of this proposal by @spring steeple.

We all know there was massive misinformation around "Alpha Season" regarding the blueprints being exclusive - and this added to the frustration of many Landowners - essentially there was not going to be anything special. The Team did an excellent job, as well as Council, reiterating the benefits of getting the 15 BPs unlocked early prior to OB - I am not arguing that. Sentiment is still low amongst the Landowner Community and that moment in time could have been a perfect opportunity & timing for the Team to present something for Zero Alpha Players. We are here now, and a proposal is being utilized to have this accomplished.

Will this set a potentially harmful precedent of asking for rewards? Potentially.... - However, there is a solution for that! Introducing: @royal furnace and their "Spider Illuvial IIP 🕷️ " -** The FIRST and the LAST time an Illuvial proposal got passed!** How can the same not be applied to this proposal? Setting precedent here might be troublesome and future proposals might arise – this will need to be managed and a solution determined by Council, if this proposal passes.

================================================================================

@acoustic swallow – I will be honest & start off by saying that I did not appreciate your post or your approach here (#1151354055059308577 message) - You are entitled to your opinion and so is everyone, but this is quite discouraging to anyone that participates in Governance and more specifically anyone that supported this 👍 and the previous proposal.
This is a revised proposal from the previous one (https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1146665567206506537). The upvotes came in quickly because many were waiting on this one to get posted. Feel free to read over the previous one to get a deeper understanding on both sides and the history on where this revised proposal came from. As of the time I am posting this message, I did notice that you did not take the time to vote on the previous iteration or share your feedback/concerns.
Lastly, just to say that** this formal IIP proposal **[Community member proposed] and **Vet’s Feedback Idea **(not a formal proposal) [Council Member proposed] require different resources to be allocated and one will most definitely delay Open Beta (PS - I am in favor of helping other languages and have been for a while)

================================================================================

Thank you to anyone that took the time to read this (sorry it was a bit long)!

main blade
flint cosmos
flint cosmos
flint cosmos
# fickle magnet IZ Owners ALL earn 5% of all Fuel Revenue in all future Illuvium games only 100...

I think the difference here is clear to me.

Currently Illuvium Zero buyers have zero exclusivity. Everything they earn or acquire during the 12 months the game has been live are not exclusive rewards, if you buy land off someone in 5 years or from a new Dutch Auction you will obtain everything perfectly the same.

Being early in staking yielded you vested ILV rewards. Being early in Beyond yielded you launch party benefits and the chance to mint Illuvitars never mintable after each sales end.

Now obviously being early in Illuvium Zero allows you early access to the game, but to say all things are equal is absurd.

#

To make assumptions on people acting in bad faith is a cruel way to approach being a council member. Everyone is allowed to make proposals and have their voices heard, that is the point of the DAO.

Need I remind you about your 'Untradeables' proposal. https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1092111899845472406

Although I would never assume this is done in bad faith. Someone starting a discussion around removing all paywalls from the game sounds like 'free bonus reward' to me. However it didn't get the positive reception like you suggest all proposals of this nature will.

spring steeple
flint cosmos
#

And to say this proposal wont benefit the DAO is super silly. If u add an exclusive reward u just watch that trading volume increase. Which is all more royalties for the DAO. Objectively speaking thats a benefit for the DAO

trail oxide
#

I agree with scoriox a lot here, Vetemor has done many "reduce cost, make free things" proposals in the past, him now saying this could lead to a bad precedent seems out of place.

Furthermore the precedent argument seems weak, as we had things like safety pool pass, which could be argued is a very bad slippery slope, yet most agreed with saying we do it here in this case and won´t refer to it if we wanna make a future change is good enough to avoid it, why wouldn´t it be good enough here?

We have pros and cons for this topic, the process here is to figure out where community stands, as far as I understand our current iteration of governance, trying to cut things off when community agrees seems out of place again.

Overall when reading up on this topic, trying to portray a community member`s concern and idea negatively or attacking the person behind it due to lack of counter points or lack of being able to change communities mind? seems concerning to me as well.
If people have sound reasonings and can respond with such, without contradicting themself or contradicting relevant data points/statistics etc. there is nothing that warrants assuming any bad faith.

fickle magnet
# shut crystal Sorry for the delay in getting this message out, it is a bit of a long one! <...

"Perhaps setting a timeframe of 4 weeks or 6 weeks after IZ Launches (regardless of when OB launches)"
You are correct, this is a completely viable solution that makes my initial timeframe concern irrelevant

To be clear @spring steeple has done a great job with the proposal, it is well written and completely implementable (technically speaking)

My opposition to this proposal is entirely on principle.
I believe this type of change should not be made via Governance and I am opposed to this type of presedent being set.
Rather something like this should be presented as Feedback for the Team to consider (with Council perhaps raising it further to Teams attention if it has strong support.)

spring steeple
#

And how is this different to the iip for alpha distinct stamps as a president

fickle magnet
# trail oxide I agree with scoriox a lot here, Vetemor has done many "reduce cost, make free t...

"increase accessibility proposals" that I have made in the past were very different in nature to this proposal.

The precedent argument is always important to be considered whenever anything is voted on in a system like this and was the strongest case against the safety pool which passed nonetheless because of the financial uncertainly surrounding this project and the desire for added safety from both community and team...

"as far as I understand our current iteration of governance, trying to cut things off when community agrees seems out of place"
sure CSC up vote purely due to strong community support.
But the following Sub-Council and then IMC if it gets there will take into account the community sentiment but will be tasked with weighing this proposal on its own terms and implications for the DAO...

Council's job goes beyond "if the community voted for it then lets just go for it" and if that was all council did what would be the point lol

I agree that personal attacks are out of order.
portraying "a community member's idea negatively" however is par for the course in presenting a counter argument to an idea being proposed

fickle magnet
spring steeple
fickle magnet
spring steeple
#

The iip itself will either pass or fail in its merits

#

I feel that you are attempting to prevent the course of this process

fickle magnet
fickle magnet
# spring steeple I feel that you are attempting to prevent the course of this process

0%

Whether this proposal passes or not will be due to the proposals merit alone.

I'm more thinking aloud as we are currently working on refining governance and in future I do not believe that changes to assets already owned should be done through IIP in this way as post-launch we will be flooded with illuvial balancing IIPs, We've been working on the guidelines surrounding game related proposals prior to your first proposal...

I do not believe any such changes should be made to limit or prevent your proposal specifically, that would be both underhanded and not in the spirit of governance.

flint cosmos
spring steeple
# fickle magnet 0% Whether this proposal passes or not will be due to the proposals merit alone...

I do not think that this is the appropriate time or place for these comments then. If there are discussions ongoing around changes that have yet to be agreed on and implemented then they hold no relevance in this iip. I take exception to you using this platform to try to campaign for changes to the iip process. I also take exception to personal attacks on peoples character. Arguments around iip ideas should remain objective and on topic.

fickle magnet
flint cosmos
#

I will leave my comments until I see it. But I am not in favour of restricting the voice of the token holders. Hopefully its a strong compromise

fickle magnet
# spring steeple I do not think that this is the appropriate time or place for these comments the...

I am not using this as a platform to campaign for changes, just that its a topic I've been thinking through a lot lately and that is where a lot of my oposition to this proposal comes from.

I have also made no personal attacks on anyones character...

I could say that you implying that I've just been out here campaigning and not just sharing my thoughts on your proposal is an attack on my character 🤷‍♀️

spring steeple
#

I object to you attempting to apply iip rules that do not exist currently to this iip. To be clear

fickle magnet
fickle magnet
fickle magnet
spring steeple
#

I have voiced my concerns. I have conducted myself in a manner that is in good faith.

fickle magnet
#

I believe I have also done the same, some seem to disagree

spring steeple
#

I will leave this discussion now as I have nothing further to add. I am disappointed that a sitting council member has the attitude that you do towards fair and honest use of the iip process

flint cosmos
acoustic swallow
blazing hollow
timid pawn
#

I will ask both @acoustic swallow and @blazing hollow from continuing this line of conversation as it is not productive to the proposal at hand.

#

Zep I see you typing please just walk away

acoustic swallow
# blazing hollow You were wrong cause your main point is there are not enough resources right now...

My main point is that the discussions should go around how to bring more players for the game/make the game more succesful. Not giving more stuff for the people already convinced for X or Y reason.

People wanna "get something for remaining loyal" and i think that's bullshit, the reward for the people who staied is the price bump and knowledge headstart for when game comes out. I think it's out of place to use governance to try to extract more value just for the sake of extracting more value. My opinion won't change and i won't apologize for it.

blazing hollow
marble crest
#

especially when something disagree, tone gets worse sometimes.
I often fail at that and often make mistakes thinking. hahaha🤣
So I don't think we need to worry too much about it.
Sometimes agree it, sometimes against it.
A little more respect for each other would make it better.
We need someone to get back on track when we get off track.
Thank you @timid pawn

shut crystal
trail oxide
shut crystal
#

The Sponsor (@spring steeple) has requested that this proposal proceed to Council vote!

.
CSC will be uploading this to Github and then over to Snapshot for voting. Keep an eye out in #1024051771624136774 for the progress of the IIP and then in #📯〕council-chambers for each Council Member's rationale for how they voted.

Thank you to everyone that took the time to vote and provide valuable feedback! Atlas_Love

fickle kestrel
#

could I vote for this proposal?

spring steeple
round loom
#

I think it would make more sense if the battle board were account bound, so that only IZ holders could use it

shut crystal
round loom
#

But an even better choise could be that land owners can mint battleboards of their lands for a fee, like 100$ per mint, or what the team calculate would be a good cashflow for the project itself

#

That would enhance the utility of land and make it a cash generating asset for the DAO, that could potentially earn what it did cost to make.
If you look back on whats been said on so many interviews by Keiran going years back is that this is not a gaming project that caters to the "OG" by giving away free stuff, then this proposal of airdropping free salable assets to the "OG" goes against that narrative.

And it should not be compared with Beyond, if you add things to beyond like rewards or utility for illuvitars, it generates cash flow, where IZ does not

#

We want every asset to be AAA and perfect, so the battle boards are not something that can just be thrown together, it will take time, and therefor should not be free. And i think that the DAO is not mature yet since the games is not live yet, there are not that many active people here, so this proposal will probably pass, probably not that many land owners need to vote to make it pass. So i would urge not to make big proposals like this making a backlogg for the team, because in all reality there will never be a time where the team does not have real work to do

flint cosmos
flint cosmos
round loom
flint cosmos
#

I think its a decent compromise for the landowners to have to buy them. I don't think that's the ultimate solution but it's a step in the right direction

#

For me personally I really only care about the exclusivity of it. If landowners can buy them after alpha season then it loses the core reasoning for this proposal for me

#

But if there's a season every 6 months or something and the buyable cosmetic changes every 6 months then that sounds kinda cool. Not sure how it fits into the lore

round loom
flint cosmos
round loom
flint cosmos
#

If that wasn't included then I definitely would be inclined to reject this proposal regardless of content

#

Its the same reason I didn't reject the spider proposal

round loom
#

After open beta launch, there are still 4 more regions to be made, a new set of illuvitars to be made and so on

#

At this point in time we should only focus on getting a good game out and getting as much revenue going. And wait for the other fun stuff untill afterwards

round loom
spring steeple
round loom
spring steeple
# round loom ohh, i see that now, sorry, i must have missread

The original proposal was for regional ranger and drone skins but the vote from the community was very divided so a new much more narrow scope and concise proposal was written to help to clarify sentiment and reduce work load and time pressures on the team

round loom
#

Do you see any value in what i have been voicing tough?

spring steeple
# round loom Do you see any value in what i have been voicing tough?

There is value is everyone having a voice and opinion. We are a Dao and the point of having proposals and votes take place is so that we have a robust and diverse conversation about lots of topics. I appreciate all participants in this process that are bringing constructive comments and views for the greater good of the project and the Dao.

flint cosmos
spring steeple
tender escarp
#

I'm against anything that adds additional workload at this point. So thumps down

spring steeple
shut crystal