Linked Wearables Redesign This proposal is now in status: PASSED. Voting Results: * Yes 98% 6,135,693 VP (63 votes) * No 1% 42,338 VP (4 votes) * Abstain 1% 16,696 VP (2 votes)

That redesign would centralize the linked wearables on a Foundation-hosted service and remove all potential flexibilities offered by linked wearables. All of that because they cannot figure out how to fix the problems on the client side. Put a 1 second timeout on the API call, parallelize them and only call APIs for linked wearables enabled by the user. Using RPC won't solve all the problems. What if I want a linked wearables that depends on 100 nfts smartcontract? (For example: If you have any other DCL wearables, then you get that linked wearables too) You are going to do 100 RPC calls to get the NFT balance on each contract. Even with a single contract, if you have 100 NFTs in the same collection and you get a different linked wearable for each tokens, with BAYC for example, you will need to do 100 calls to fetch them all. (getToken 1, getToken 2, etc...). All of that instead of a single API call that returns "0x123 has access to linked wearables x, y and z".

Would be great @Nacho, because current curation process for linked wearables and wearables at all is unfair and should have balance system. > I believe curation proccess and curation payments for linked wearables should be reworked too. It’s totally unfair when one curator gets 10k$+ payment for reviewed linked wearables, just because he was fast enough (or his bot/parser was fast enough to take collection) while other curators got barely around 2-3k for whole time for approved linked wearables collections.

Hi! Curation will remain the same. If we want to modify something related to that topic, we can work on another proposal.

How would this work on the curation side? If we go this route and suddenly have several projects willing to pay the fee to create Linked Wearables, how does that work with collections of 1,000 or even 10,000 NFTs/Wearables? That is *a lot* of wearables to curate/approve. Will this fee help cover the costs of that curation or will that be on the DAO to cover?

would really like to get @MakeAnft's thoughts on this.

As we can see @Nacho is right. @Tobik saying they can enact the proposals as they have in the past, but refuse to and alternative solution is to no joke make a 5th proposal now to be again voted Yes on the community AGAIN! Where there is no guarantee it will even get enacted at that point again since may be a new reasons not to and could possible have to go through even 7+ rounds there is just no end in site. If they were truly were acting in good faith we all know they would just make the 5th proposal for us and both vote Yes on it Tobik and @HPrivakos with his main and fake accounts to show the community this was the final time so the community would know and we could finally be finished. But we all know and can deduce it is just a plan for them to try to get whales to vote it down so they can find an excuse to not do their jobs and abuse power as gate keepers. In the end our differences aside, however I think even Tobik and HP will agree with that this solution has been a nightmare for us all and this is a way better solution. So thank you All for voting Yes!

Hi, Aaron. You are acting in bad faith, even when I've tried to help you multiple times. There is no such thing as 'abuse of power' but rather you not getting how the DAO works. On December 21, 2022, Aaron won the proposal [for adding Waifumons to Decentraland](https://decentraland.org/governance/proposal/?id=a7d5d880-7bff-11ed-ad27-015f26e7c35c). This proposal had many mistakes, for example, **he didn't specify** the correct smart contract address of the NFT collection but instead put a random wallet address. This proposal was wrongly enacted by a DAO Committee member around that time. This thing can be reverted by reducing the slots but a decision hasn't been taken yet. Because this light error happened once, it doesn't mean that is okay to keep allowing it. The proposals you later published had the same mistakes. Your proposals are invalid and Kyllian is right (despite you thinking is something personal). I've consulted with the rest of the core units, and no, the consensus is that is not correct to overwrite proposal details as this seems something that doesn't respect the protocol. So no, **I won't do something that goes against the core values of the DAO.** In other words: I've tried to help you, but it wasn't possible and you didn't like the answer. But even more, I told you to send me a new proposal so I could review it for you in case you needed help. In other words, I've tried to be good, and I still have to read these stupid messages of 'abuse of power' (when it's the opposite). Btw, Gen-2 got approved a year ago and you haven't deployed an API resolver that matches the Waifumon NFT collection with the models. Disappointed.

I believe curation proccess and curation payments for linked wearables should be reworked too. It's totally unfair when one curator gets 10k$+ payment for reviewed linked wearables, just because he was fast enough (or his bot/parser was fast enough to take collection) while other curators got barely around 2-3k for whole time for approved linked wearables collections.

[quote="dao, post:1, topic:22361"] the current model also presents bureaucratic challenges and can be cumbersome for content creators. [/quote] hahah 1000% agree. 3 Years now and my linked wearables for Waifumon, Decentraland Dinos and ApeCoin Armory Club are still not active in Decentraland. 1. Have to do massive campaigns sometimes 4+ times to get community votes. 2. Even when they do pass sometimes I have had Waifumon Gen-2 enacted but then you have people like @HPrivakos and @Tobik saying they refuse to do the next two and now has been months of delay due to abuse of power. 3. Then have to get wearable committee too look through them all and they have to deal with going through all there red tape as well. Never in my life have I voted YES so fast. I even volunteer our 3 collections as tribute for the first beta collections to be migrated. THANK YOU! @Nacho !! :saluting_face: :mountain: :heart: :woman_fairy: :t_rex: