That sounds like FUD to me honestly. I mean nothing but the best here.

I'd like to vote yes on this, because I'd like DCL to remain free of real-world politics. We're trying to build something new here, why bring old and divisive issues into decentraland? To what end? But with the way you worded the proposal? I can't being myself to do it.

[quote="DooMLord, post:6, topic:1446"] those people who were crying to ban bad"Jew" names, now saying no to this proposal ! [/quote] [quote="DooMLord, post:6, topic:1446"] those people who were crying to ban bad"Jew" names, now saying no to this proposal ! if you people agree with hate speech , what is this then? [/quote] You mean people who voted to ban a name that is derogatory, hateful, and promotes violence against a group of people based solely on their religion? As opposed to a name that targets an individual public figure, and expresses an opinion on his character or performance? There is no equivalence between the two and the former is by definition "hate speech."

those people who were crying to ban bad"Jew" names, now saying no to this proposal ! if you people agree with hate speech , what is this then? you people are funny

Ok bet probably wise. Maybe some sort of system where the banned names can have wild cards with potentially rare exceptions to a rule. Really tough to come up with something overarching here but I agree this is a non-optimal use of voting power and the DAO.

I don't think we call it either of those =)

Do we call it a whitelist or a blacklist?

We need to have a committee or even algorithm that filters name ban requests for hate and derogatory speech. This is about to get very trolly very quickly.