Limit Max VP accounted in a vote from a single address This proposal is now in status: REJECTED. Voting Results: * Yes 32% 5,865,184 VP (57 votes) * No 67% 12,161,201 VP (34 votes) * Abstain 1% 4,800 VP (3 votes)

This is a tough one. I agree with the general principle of limiting the scale of individual voting power, so one fickle or self-interested party can't dictate the results. But this particular approach isn't fair across the board. It seriously hampers districts and other organizations, as @Poutine said, but it only mildly inconveniences other whale voters. There might be one or two districts that vote in unpredictable ways, but most districts are responsible voters (or rarely vote at all), and all of them represent many people who contributed Mana to their formation back in the day. We've decided to vote against this proposal for now because of the way it disenfranchises districts and large estate holders. But maybe the ideas in this proposal could be reworked in the future. The "no single voter over 50%" concept is sound if it can be applied more fairly.

I spent a long time thinking about this, knowing that it would benefit liquid holders over illiquid holders, however the VP amounts cap is still so large, I only see it affecting very few people, of whom it is likely to only impact by 25-30% of their VP at most on the majority of categories. For now, I think it's worth a try, obviously any MANA voters can split their votes up still, but I think unless they have 4M+ VP, it's unlikely to be a major issue. Districts having a massive VP has been both a blessing and a curse, so I really think this is one of those strategies we really need to test out to sense impact. Let's see, and we can roll it back if it causes issues, or while we work on diversifying VP to the community and creators.

I am voting **NO** because an address doesn't have to represent only one individual. If we want other organizations to be part of Decentraland progress, we need to allow them to vote in groups. I dont see how single individuals can take good decisions. What if other DAOs want to be part of our progress but they are suppressed by this ? This seemed to be targeted at specific people and this is not the solution. If there is something I am misunderstanding, please let me know so we can debate and discuss

Voting **Yes**, it's not a perfect system, but is good enough™ Will encourage people with too much VP, that may not be voting now, to vote. And if the 50% limit is 500k, for example, someone with 4M VP would need to divide that VP into 8 accounts. Not impossible, but cumbersome and noticeable enough to discourage it for a while. And those 8 accounts will have event a lesser impact on smaller proposals with lower limit.

How about requiring the districts to delegate their VP to people that own land within the estate? Just found out that people within a specific estate, Not X, one person has a large amount of land within a district, but has 0 VP because the owner of the district controls it all. If we state that land comes with VP then that should be held true. Otherwise why would anyone want to own land within one? Also, how about a cap on the amount of VP land can equate to. So after 100,000 VP in land, the amount to acquire more VP means you have to acquire more land than normal to gain anymore. So if land = 1000 VP after 100,00 VP in order to acquire more 1,000 VP it becomes 10 land = 1,000 VP or 1 land = 100 VP. Something like that? Just some thoughts

so anyone with liquid mana has the ability to do whatever he/she likes but estates not sounds like a compression to land owners. Instead of awarding land owners for holding their land we surpress them “bad proposal” tbh

Stops estates/districts and creates added security/documentation risk fir bad actors

Sounds like there is a very big gap in your proposal, the person that has the VP can easily split his VP So, I know what you were trying and that its for a better cause but i dont see this working.

Will this account for the upcoming system that will let a single wallet delegate to multiple wallets?