January Governance Proposal
Cryptospells Management.
Here are the governance proposals submitted in January 2023.
The original text and responses are provided.
Proposal 1: Change the method of implementing governance proposals (A)
Currently, I believe that users vote and decide whether to adopt the proposal that is judged to be the highest TAV in the order of TAV and feasible by the management among the governance proposals made during the month. Therefore, we would like to make the following changes to the governance proposals. First, I think it is fine to keep the requirement that proposals must have a TAV of 1% or more. Let’s say we have 5 proposals for the month, A, B, C, D, and F. Of these proposals, the first one is the one that is feasible for the management to implement. Among them, we would like you to first select the one that is feasible for the operation. At the selection stage, the TAV value is no longer taken into consideration. Suppose that the management selects A, B, and F as feasible. We would like the users to vote on which of the three remaining proposals will be put to the final user vote. If proposal B is the only one of the three, I would like the users to vote on whether or not to pass the last governance proposal on this proposal B. I think the final user vote should be the same as the one we have now, so that proposals with a TAV of more than 1% are equally eligible, and we will not have to deal with the very demotivating situation where the reason for rejection is that the proposal is not good enough. I don’t think there is currently any reason to try hard to rent and increase TAV to make a proposal. I think that if we have 1% TAV, we can make a proposal, and from there it is up to the proposal, we can come up with ideas that we have never had before, or that we have never noticed before. However, I think that the only people who would lose an advantage to governance voting with this proposal would be those with a high TAV, because 1% or more is equal. I believe that many of the high TAVs currently own legend cards, and if the proposal is equal to more than 1%, many users will rent the legend cards for that reason. This is because they are guaranteed to be able to make a proposal. I think this is a good thing. I believe that the users will decide when this proposal is voted on by the users if it loses the advantage of the governance proposal. Also, the management will have to add a vote to limit the number of proposals to one, re-propose the schedule, and select whether to accept or reject the proposals that come up. I think there will be changes and additions to the system. However, I am hoping that we can listen to the proposals of various people and decide on a proposal together. I have written many things, but the idea is that if there is more than 1% TAV and the proposal is accepted, it will be adopted. I also want the management to write down the reasons for rejection. The proposal was made with passion, so we would like the management to answer with passion. Advice such as, “If you do this, we may adopt your proposal” would also be good. Thank you in advance.
Proposer (4069)TAV31639
I can make a proposal.
・Governance proposals can only be made by users who own more than 1% of the total TAV.
・The management will select the feasible one among all proposals. (The TAV value is not considered at this time.)
・Vote on which of the selected proposals will be put to the governance vote.
・Vote on the selected final proposal.
Proposal 2: Change in the way governance proposals are implemented (B)
We propose the following changes to the rules for proposing governance proposals. Change 1: The target users for governance proposals shall be “users holding at least 0.5% of the total TAV”. Change 2: The order of priority for proposals will be “(1) Users whose proposals have not been subject to user governance voting in the last month or two months,” “(2) In order of highest TAV,” and “(3) First come, first served. Change 3: Up to three proposals will be subject to the user governance ballot in order of priority from the proposals that can be implemented, and the proposal with the highest percentage of approval among those proposals for which more than half of the votes cast were in favor will be passed as the proposal to be implemented. Change 4: At the beginning of each month, the management will announce the users who have the right to make governance proposals for the month, along with the order of priority. Change 2: For Change 1), the proposals after this proposal (including this proposal) will be considered, and proposals before this proposal will not be considered. Regarding Change 3, if two or more proposals have the same percentage of votes in favor, the order of priority shall be followed. Regarding Change 4, “(iv) First-come, first-served” will not be considered, as it has not yet been determined.
Proposer (1405)TAV21968
Proposals are possible.
・Governance proposals can be proposed by users who hold at least 0.5% of the total TAV.
・The order of priority for proposals shall be “(1) Users whose proposals have not been subject to user governance voting in the last month or two months,” “(2) In the order of highest TAV,” and “(3) First-come-first-served basis.
・Of the proposals that receive more than half of the votes in favor, the proposal with the highest percentage of approval will be approved as the proposal to be implemented.
・At the beginning of the month, the management will announce the users who have the right to make governance proposals for the month, along with the order of priority.
Proposal 3: Reduction of the minimum rental market price
Change the minimum rental market amount from 100 SPL to 10 SPL. (The same as the minimum amount in the Trade Market) Comment: Only a few Gold cards are worth the minimum cost of 100 SPL for a week’s card rental, and we believe that there are many Gold cards for which a rental is not viable at 100 SPL. I also find it disconcerting that the minimum cost for the trade market is 10 SPL, yet the minimum cost for the one-week rental market is 100 SPL. Disadvantage: There is a concern that the rental price of Gold Cards, which used to be 100 SPL, will go down (we believe that the rental cost will be adjusted to an appropriate amount based on supply and demand). Benefit: Gold cards that were not available for rental at 100 SPL will be easier to rent and will be rented more often (stimulating the rental market). (Activation of the rental market). Increased demand for rentals will increase opportunities for renters to earn SPLs, and for operators to earn commissions.
Proposer (9438)TAV21742
Proposal is possible.
・Change the minimum amount of rental market from 100 SPL to 10 SPL.
Proposal 4: Proposal to increase means of obtaining guild funds
Proposal to increase means of acquiring guild funds Increase opportunities for users to acquire SPL at guild events by “adding dedication points” or “distributing SPL based on guilds’ Gilbat rankings”. By increasing the amount of SPL that each guild can distribute to users, the number of events and quality of products will be improved, and the game as a whole will be more active. With few guild leagues and other events being held, users will create the significance of the guilds’ existence.
Proposer (13283)TAV19070
Proposal is possible.
However, it is difficult to add new functions and the current reward distribution amount will be reviewed.
・We are considering adding a new feature, such as “an increase in dedication points” or “distribution of SPL according to the guild’s Gilbat ranking”.
Proposal 1 by the proposer (4069) with the highest amount of TAV will be put to a vote.
Voting will be held for one day on 1/31.
Voting is being conducted via snapshot.
Click here to vote.
NFT Game “CryptoSpells” Related Links
