Should the DAO Mandate an Annual Review and Update of All Governance Documents? This proposal is now in status: PASSED. Voting Results: * Yes 99% 2,257,321 VP (9 votes) * No 0% 0 VP (0 votes) * Abstain 1% 2,000 VP (1 votes)

The Decentraland DAO adopted the following mission statement through a governance vote in September 2024: **"Ensure the sustainability of the Decentraland Ecosystem through representative governance, efficient management of collective resources, and technical innovation."** The proposal establishing this mission included three specific commitments: 1. The DAO will focus on long-term financial sustainability 2. The DAO will create mechanisms for community members to actively shape the direction of Decentraland 3. The mission and vision should be clearly stated and reflected in all relevant documentation of the DAO, including governance processes, communication materials, and any documents that represent Decentraland, the DAO, or the project as a whole **Assessment of each mission component against current practice:** **"Representative governance"** The governance system produces outcomes that do not consistently reflect broad community sentiment. In May 2026 a binding proposal received 47 yes votes and zero no votes and did not pass because large VP holders did not participate. Approximately 28% of all voting power is held by wallets with zero participation history. One wallet holds enough VP to determine binding outcomes independently. The governance system as currently structured produces representative outcomes only when large inactive wallets choose to engage, which is irregular and unpredictable. This does not meet the standard of representative governance. Additionally the proposal establishing the mission explicitly required that it be "clearly stated and reflected in all relevant documentation." The mission statement is not published on the DAO website, the governance portal, or any official platform-facing resource. It exists only in the governance proposal where it was voted on. The mission is therefore not being communicated as the proposal required. **"Efficient management of collective resources"** Regenesis Labs has demonstrated competent operational management of the funds within its custody. Treasury diversification and professional management represent genuine progress. However roads, plazas, and critical LAND parcels committed to the DAO in writing by a former Foundation leader have never been transferred on-chain. The Foundation retains ownership of those assets with no documented transfer plan. Governance documents describing how collective resources are managed remain outdated, in some cases by two years or more. The Governance Legislative Tracker, the DAO's own record of governance decisions, is inaccessible and two years out of date. Efficient management of collective resources requires accurate, maintained documentation of what those resources are and who is responsible for them. That documentation does not exist in a current and accessible form. **"Technical innovation"** The mobile client development, web client work, and Godot engine migration represent genuine technical progress. This is the mission component most clearly being pursued in practice. **"Sustainability of the Decentraland Ecosystem"** The Foundation vesting contract ends February 2030. No publicly available, governance-approved transition plan exists for that date. The DAO's independent income is approximately $4,833 per month. The cost of operating the platform independently after 2030 has not been formally calculated or published. The mission explicitly states the DAO will focus on long-term financial sustainability. No documented long-term financial plan exists. This is the most significant gap between the stated mission and current practice. --- **Conclusion** Of the four components of the adopted mission, one is being actively pursued (technical innovation), one is partially addressed (efficient management, with significant gaps), and two are materially misaligned with current practice (representative governance and long-term sustainability). The meta-requirement of the mission proposal itself, that the mission be clearly stated and reflected in all relevant documentation, has not been fulfilled. The mission statement is not published anywhere the community is expected to look. This assessment is not a statement about intent. It is an observation about the gap between a community-approved commitment and documented current practice. The gap is measurable, specific, and addressable.

As much as this is an ardous process considering that the docs may be outdated, the upkeep is required, if not for anyone, but for LLMs to also be fed the most updated and accurate information when giving details to its users. I mean just imagine if decentraland SDK docs were outdated and LLMs pull their data from there when you use Claude to vibecode. Everything will break and vibe coders will leave.

While I initially stated that I would not be pursuing this further because of the lack of VP required to pass (plenty voted) on the 2030 proposal, I figured since the current proposal on reducing the wearables submission fees is being introduced by someone from the Foundation @esteban and @ginoct with RegenesisLabs, I thought this would be the perfect time then to bring this up again since that proposal will require document updates. Thank you.