Splinterlands Proposals: A Voting Dilemma
Greetings, everyone!
I have a question for you all, and a voting dilemma. I loved the initiative with the Splinterlands Proposal, which gave the people the power to influence and decide on certain mechanics of the Splinterlands ecosystem. For those not familiar, owners of SPS have the possibility to vote on proposals, with a vote that is proportional with their SPS Stake.
As every time in the world, the power to decide comes also with the associated responsibility. The same as in a democracy. Your vote comes also with the responsibility of your actions, independent how you use you vote, or even if you decide not to use it at all. Of course, I'm talking here about the moral responsibility.
And now the question to all of you: what is your thinking process behind your vote on Splinterlands Proposals? Do you use your vote for your direct interest, or do you consider what is maybe the best for the community? Of course, there is no good or bad answer, but just different approach. Philosophically speaking, the collective is the sum of the individuals.
My trigger for this dilemma was the Proposal #21: Boost Land Survey Chances By Burning DEC/DEC-B, were I have to decide if the game should allow players to spend DEC or DEC-B to improve their chances for getting a better quality lands.
I have a bit of savings in DEC, and I would definitely benefit from a higher demand on it. And I have no investments in land, and therefore I will not have to pay the cost of a decision. Yet, I do not like that this proposal is changing "the rules of the game" for the investors in land, after they made an investment decision.
What are your thoughts?
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
My issue is that when I learn about proposal and get to vote for them I realize my vote will not change anything because the big whales have already expressed their view and the proposal will either be accepted or rejected regardless of how I vote ...
I don't have land but I don't really think it's a good idea to grow the difference between land users. So in a way, I also think it's weird to change things in the middle.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
If 66% will upgrade it, it will take up 6% of the available DEC, where DEC is out of peg by 30%. So only a dent in the economy, as it will not fix anything.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta