I'm so sorry I'm late to responding to your budget breakdowns and cost, I've been super heads down working. I do appreciate you both @RDixon and @mdandrea for giving me your responses, and a clearer budget breakdown. I see this didn't pass this go round, but I would say please do resubmit. Maybe shift some things, based on ppls feedback and see if it helps give a clearer picture and eases their concerns. I think even if the response wasn't desired, there was a lot of community engagement and that is a big positive.

Nexus Market District Build-Out, Phase 1 This proposal is now in status: REJECTED. Voting Results: * Yes 26% 619,177 VP (39 votes) * No 74% 1,689,803 VP (33 votes)

Hey I appreciate the post and I get it about name dropping. As stated I feel grants should be things that are based on merit and how they benefit Decentraland. I also am a realist tho and know sometimes people put money before faces. Faces content and abilities are what will make or break this world. Not personal grudges and vendettas. A lot of sentiment in this dao seems to be focused on money. Personal history and that to me is understandably humanly but ethically hinders progress. Really it is all of us as a whole of decentraland that will sink or swim the platform. Im now realizing even myself am sometimes to vocal and oppositional. We need progress as a collective and unified front to make more options and things of interest or some other metaverse will. I hope those who read my words understand that as a whole.

Thanks @TheCryptoTengu . I also think that $60K is a reasonable price to get this build done, and all of us on the team have a track record of delivering successful games and builds in Decentraland. I seriously didn't think we would have so much controversy. It's a good point about the 61 district members. Some are active players, and some are players who donated to the district early, around the initial land auction time and haven't been too active since. I won't drop names but maybe I can get some of them to post here too. We manage the whole district as one estate right now. We will deploy the shared features like the Crystal City structure and the event stage within that estate. Those will stay as permanent structures. The interior of the Crystal City will have leasable spaces for people who just want to set up a shop or gallery without doing their own big build. But we'll also carve out areas and give deployment rights to companies and creators who want to lease land and create their own bespoke builds. All we ask is that they respect some basic design guidelines so that their builds integrate well with the rest of the district. We'll deploy paths and landscaping features among the bespoke builds so that the whole district flows together well. I still think it's a good concept that can create an interesting new hub of activity within DCL. Thanks!

Im go in a different direction with this Can you tell us what 61 people own land or some the faces people might know. Those who are invested and contributing to the current VP you have. Not out of malice but to see who else we would be helping. It really shouldnt matter grants should be based on merit. In reality tho sometimes faces of those around us help to garner support from others. If we knew more about the people involved and who all benefits other then just a number. People want to help those they know. I dont personally feel 60k to develop all that land is a bad deal. I think its actually incredibly low. Running around I saw like 2 houses and that old game. Are your land parcels like Aetheria and tied of another contract? If your builder builds these are you going to make them permanent structures or will those coming in be able to change there own rented land build. If thats the case do you feel it would make the Nexus build irrelevant or will land still be for ale but the Nexus would remain. Id like to know more so if not this time maybe we can try again to get this area developed.

Thanks for the support! I understand your perspective in the other proposal comments too, and the need to respond when someone's criticizing unfairly. (I responded a lot here myself). I was just worried that too much back-and-forth would tire people out, and make it harder to get a fair vote for your proposal too.

Im vote yes. I dont think you dropping the vp for your owners should be a conflict. @michi there collective vp is less then half the proposal. I dont think thats them abusing vp. Maybe im weird but if was over 51 percent if be thrown off. My delegate hasnt voted i would say this tho. In another post you made it seem i was starting a fight with another person i do that but when behind the scenes someone comes to trash on a whole project over there distaste for one person. That speaks volumes. I respect you for being a OG. id ask you to consider looking at how much some the people in this forum spend and when they make new accounts to chime in for some debates if you have time. @SinfulMeatStick take look see what you think of this one.

@ckbubbles At LEDY, we view ourselves as Decentraland creators and a part of the community, but I understand and respect your right to view us differently. We view ourselves as such because we’ve been building projects in Decentraland since January, have deployed multiple complex builds, and brought good PR attention to Decentraland in publications around the world (over a dozen countries). We have owned land and MANA since last December and have held on to them despite the poor market conditions because we believe in DCL and are here to contribute to it and achieve its promise.

Hi @ckbubbles ! The breakdown of the stated budget comes to: Design, 3d modeling, and refinement: $29,000 Coding for interactivity, event management, and tenant support features: $24,000 PR and Marketing: $4,000 Buffer to apply to the above as needed: $3,000 As I said earlier, we hope to source the coding work from developer resources in the community. For the design and 3d modeling, LEDY worked with a well-known architect to present a number of interesting concepts, and then did a lot of work to refine the Crystal City concept that we liked best. My feeling is that when someone does the initial design work, they are best suited to complete that work too. It ensures that the artistic vision stays intact all the way through. Not to mention, cutting out someone who did spec work on their own time, but still using their design, would be a pretty bad business practice. If the project goes forward, we can provide many more opportunities for indie creators in Decentraland, in addition to the coding and interactivity work. There will be more demand for 3d modelers as we add details and features to the shared spaces, and when new companies want to create builds for their own spaces. Thanks.

I know you've been around, I def wasn't questioning your time in DCL, nor the capabilities of LEDY, in my response. Merely asking for a clearer budget break down per role and aspects of the build. And then mentioning that paying an outside company, even if they've done 4 builds, doesn't equate to the amount of community impact that could be had — if looking for active in world for creators to help build a space that is for them as well. Because that could open up the space for creators, having considered their future uses/needs in the district. I say this quite often with a lot of things, that we should be considering all who are affected by what we do or create, and if we're fully considering them. This has been my challenge on a lot of projects.

Hi @ckbubbles, I understand your points. But I've been in Decentraland since the start, and LEDY has already deployed 4 builds in-world, so we are not exactly outsiders. And I think I've been very open about our position on returning a percentage to the DAO (stating it over and over again, lol). In my response, I only disparaged those other proposals that use statements like "we will give X% back to the DAO!" in a pretty blatant attempt to gain votes. Thanks.

Hey again! I'd like to see those costs broken out if you or the team can present them that way. This is where I'm most focused on. Because there are plenty of talented people who are architects and modelers that could contribute to this, that would more than deserve to be paid for this. I'm somewhat wary when I see outside companies being the ones working and building big projects in DCL mostly, and who aren't actively participating in the world — to see how best to connect to those that would be accessing and experiencing a space. As for the last point, it's never been presented as a requirement in any situation I've addressed it. Which has been a total of twice, this being one of them. And it's been a simple question to gauge someones interest. I do not think asking this question should warrant such a response. We are building a new future of society and these conversations are ones we should be able to have openly.

Hi @ckbubbles , I appreciate your comments. This proposal is basically me as the district manager working with a small team of experienced architects and modelers to create what could be a nice new landmark and event space in DCL. It's as simple as that. The budget is simple too but it does show that we'll use most of the funds to pay for the design, 3d modeling, and deployment of the buildings and other models, and then for the coding needed to bring some interactivity to the builds. We hope to engage some developers from the community to help with that. The small amount spent on marketing is meant to attract some outside companies and creators to set up shop with us in Decentraland. In spite of the falsehoods some other people are spreading, I never said we were against giving a percentage back to the DAO. But we are in a tough position since we already have 50% of profits earmarked for the original contributor group. It doesn't leave us with much to work with. I'm also wary of those proposals that advertise giving a percentage back to the DAO because it just seems like a ploy to buy votes. Not something I would usually engage in. But I guess it's now a requirement for any proposal to pass? Anyway, thanks for the feedback!

Thanks for sharing! The fact it’s so offensive a % be returned to the community from an already established body shows you’re not here to support the community. Why should you pay a % of return? You already have the resources to build this project but would rather HOLD onto those resources and request funds. Then go on to charge the community to use these spaces you create. I think if you don’t like the idea of ROI or giving back to the community it would be good to make the space completely free to use to help onboard brands and creators into the space. Including those middle brands that aren’t interested in creating. Then your ROI will come from doing the creative for those spaces. It will also be part of the “creating for the space” idea and not yourself.

Sharing my thoughts here before I consider a vote. What feels missing for me and this proposal, is the lack of community involvement in its creation. It does feel as though it's built by companies, for companies. Community should always be at the core, because ultimately if the goal is to bring in more people to the platform and its community — and it's community that is mostly affected. The money and brands/company will always come and go. It's their business to do so. But community is what lasts. Also the budget breakdown, I would prefer to see a more detailed budget specific to those roles and what they are building. Right now as its broken out, it seems as though its 56k is for the build, and 4k is for marketing and pr. And I don't quite see where exactly this money is going specifically. Lastly, have you considered, since the lands were donated, to give a percentage back of the revenue to pay back to the DAO? So that it could allow funds to go back to the financial ecosystem and help further the platform and it's ppl?

michi, the stated goal of the grant program is “to help sponsor and facilitate the continual growth of the Decentraland platform,” The funds are to be used “to help reimburse their efforts in community building and education, creating 3D content for the world, or implementing new features and improvements to the platform.” https://docs.decentraland.org/decentraland/community-grants/ More specifically, the Content Creator section says “Grants in this category help to support artists to create scenes and models for Decentraland.” That’s exactly what our proposal is focused on doing. The grant program doesn’t mention or contemplate revenue sharing or equity arrangements. I don’t think changing the terms, goals, and process of the grant program is within the scope of what we’re doing here.

Definitely review all the feedback on this proposal and consider the assets, resources and revenue streams you currently own. This proposal was a championing 'no vote' and I'm reflecting on the facts you've shared. To try and combat that vote with your own 'yes' to a grant you have created is unethical and one of the reasons there's a working group to change the way VP is distributed. (which I've also tagged you in on the discord)

Yes, we are voting on behalf of the 61 Decentraland players who are district members and who contributed to the district formation. It seems completely fair that they should be represented in this vote, and not nice at all for you to try to disenfranchise them. Once again you persist in trying to smear our project.

Also just sharing for the community to see that you’ve also tried to drop the VP from the 276 land you were given to a yes on this proposal. Whaling in on your own grant shows that the land should be given back to the Decentraland founding team to avoid further abuse.  

I’ve also seen and read market research around more controlled spaces but also there’s research brands (low, middle and larger tier) prefer Decentraland because they can customize their space to represent their brand how they like. Not only have I supported research for the space but also spoke one on one with web3 studios in Asia. Roblox has a low barrier to entry and the team manages a lot of the campaign, Decentraland allows the brand to have gamified experiences and engagement through event spaces that the brand creates. This is done either through an agency or team in the space or they have the option to buy/rent land (when users arent squandering) to have a permanent fixture. Just returning to my previous comments agree this project has so much potential but why not give a % back to the community your charging and requesting money from? Yes this boosts engagement, yes you have an established team, yes you have the resources, yes you have current revenue streams available and yes you’ll be charging people to rent space that can currently be rented. Not sure the misunderstanding.

I actually just spoke to two agency reps in the past 2 days here at LA Tech Week who currently steer clients towards Roblox and Minecraft because the experiences are more controllable. Both were intrigued to hear about Nexus and have begun conversations with us regarding potential brand entries into DCL because of what we're building in Nexus.

Thanks for the question, bay. Our source for this information is from direct conversations with a number of brands in the middle market that are exploring Metaverse activations, as well as from PR and marketing agencies that represent brands and artists.

Thank you for the replies @mdandrea @RDixon . It would be great to see the research you've done to support this 'middle market' positioning for your development.

Thanks for your comments @bay! Yes, as @mdandrea said above these are exactly the kinds of scenarios we want to support in Nexus: providing cost-effective access to land and shared event spaces for creators and companies. With plenty of options for people who want to deploy bespoke builds as well. We also think that a bit of urban planning and a common design theme can produce an area that's more pleasant and "human friendly" than areas where builds are randomly packed side by side. It should also provide a neighborhood effect where people come to see what's new in the area, not just with specific builds.

Hi bay, thanks for the comment. From what I see, DCL is currently reaching some brands or creators that want to build bespoke environments. We want to reach a new, different audience, i.e. the middle market, brands/content/creators who: * Don't want to build their own bespoke environment, but want to be part of an attractive designed urban plan * May not have the resources of the big brands, so want an easy/less expensive way to get in and experiment, explore, and build * Want the joint traffic of other brands/museums/galleries and events nearby In addition, our plan still sets aside a significant number of parcels within the district for any entities that want to build their own custom buildings/HQs/offices/etc.