Does the DCL Foundation's launch worlds seriously violate the rights and interests of existing landholders?

by 0x2846a9bfbcaab8690b00f01d9e7f92c5ff8a58bf (dunlei)

They recently announced the launch the world beta. People can buy a name for 100 mana， and then they can get a 2x2 world for free and permanently, which is equivalent to the size of four lands. Compared with land, the world has basically the same functions except that it has no voting rights and cannot be displayed on the map. Although the world can only allow 100 concurrent accesses, no land has ever had 100 concurrent accesses so far, so this restriction is meaningless. Because the name can be sold in unlimited quantities, it means that the world is unlimited. So, are the rights and interests of the existing land holders seriously eroded as a result? Because for newcomers who can get the world at a very low cost, why should they buy expensive land? Even renting is unwise. As early contributors, the land holders, especially the small land holders, felt betrayed and abandoned: they thought they were buying limited edition assets and could benefit from them as the project grew, but now the new worlds has greatly diluted their rights and interests. This is very unfair. The DCL Foundation used technical means to circumvent the original commitments, which obviously violated the spirit of the contract.

I am not against developing worlds, because the project needs to lower the threshold to attract more people to participate and bring prosperity, which is a good thing. However, DCL Foundation should compensate for the dilution of land holders' rights and interests, and re empower land without sacrificing the interests of early investors.

As early investors of the project, we can bear the risk of poor development of the project, but we do not want to bear the risk of infringement of rights and interests due to the breach of trust of the project fund. What do you think about the changes in the rights and interests of landholders after the launch Worlds?

• Landholders' rights shall be compensated
• Landholders' rights need not be compensated
• Landholders' rights have not been violated
• Invalid question/options

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO