Abolish THESANDBOX's Centralized Player Ban Authority to Uphold WEB3 Principles

đź’ˇ SIP: Ideas All Ideas
1

Background and Current Issues

As a blockchain game rooted in WEB3 ideals, THESANDBOX GAME has drifted away from the principles of decentralization and user sovereignty by implementing arbitrary player bans. These actions undermine community trust and threaten the foundational values of a decentralized ecosystem.

In the earlier Season 1 and Season 2, the game flourished under an open and fair environment, where players could freely participate without fear of unjust penalties. However, issues began surfacing in Season 3, where players faced bans over leaderboard disputes and were required to provide video evidence to appeal such actions. By Season 4, the situation worsened as bans based on IP addresses became widespread, sparking significant backlash.

Key Problems

  1. Misalignment with WEB3 Principles
    WEB3 represents freedom, decentralization, and user control. However, the power of THESANDBOX GAME’s official team to ban players at their discretion mirrors the centralized authority of WEB2 platforms, eroding the decentralization that WEB3 games are meant to promote.

  2. Lack of Transparency and Due Process
    Player bans are often carried out without clear, transparent guidelines or justifications. This opaque decision-making process alienates users and fosters distrust in the game’s management.

  3. Unfair Burden on Players
    Requiring banned players to provide video evidence to prove their innocence shifts the responsibility unfairly onto the users. This is both burdensome and counterproductive, as it contradicts the ethos of trust and user-centric design in WEB3.

  4. Regional Discrimination Through IP Bans
    The use of IP-based bans disproportionately affects players in certain regions, limiting global inclusivity and participation—a core value of WEB3.

  5. Historical Examples of WEB3 Failures
    The misuse of centralized control in other WEB3 projects, such as DAO collapses due to central decision-making or uneven enforcement of rules, demonstrates how such practices erode trust and stifle community growth. THESANDBOX risks repeating these mistakes.

Proposed Solutions

To address these issues and uphold the values of WEB3, we propose the following:

  1. Establish a Community Arbitration Council
    A DAO-elected arbitration council should handle disputes related to bans. This ensures fairness and transparency while removing unilateral decision-making power from the official team.

  2. Implement Blockchain-Based Ban Records
    Use smart contracts to record ban decisions and their justifications on the blockchain. This will provide immutable and transparent records of all actions, ensuring accountability.

  3. Abolish IP-Based Bans
    Replace IP bans with more inclusive and sophisticated compliance tools that do not unfairly target players based on their geographic location.

  4. Restore the Spirit of WEB3 from Season 1 and 2
    Draw lessons from the more decentralized and open governance models used in Seasons 1 and 2, where community engagement and trust were at their peak. For example, early seasons featured minimal interference from the official team, fostering a competitive and fair environment for all participants.

Additional Examples to Strengthen the Case

  • Axie Infinity’s Transparency Model
    Despite facing significant challenges, Axie Infinity has embraced transparency by publicly addressing community concerns and ensuring fairness through clear rules. THESANDBOX can adopt similar practices to regain trust.

  • Uniswap DAO Governance Success
    The Uniswap DAO effectively governs decisions related to its ecosystem, demonstrating how decentralized models can create robust and fair systems. Introducing an arbitration mechanism inspired by such examples can benefit THESANDBOX.

  • Decentraland’s User Empowerment
    Decentraland’s DAO empowers users to vote on land disputes and other key decisions, fostering a strong sense of ownership and participation. A comparable community-driven approach could resolve ban-related disputes in THESANDBOX GAME.

Benefits of the Proposal

  1. Alignment with WEB3 Principles
    Removing centralized ban authority will ensure that THESANDBOX aligns with the core ideals of decentralization, user freedom, and transparency.

  2. Restoration of Community Trust
    By transferring dispute resolution to a transparent and decentralized process, the game will rebuild trust with its user base.

  3. Global Inclusivity
    Eliminating IP-based bans will enable players from all regions to participate freely, fostering a truly global community.

  4. Sustainable Growth for the Ecosystem
    By empowering users and removing centralized control, THESANDBOX can position itself as a leader in the WEB3 gaming space, attracting more players, developers, and investors.

Conclusion

To ensure the long-term success of THESANDBOX GAME as a WEB3 pioneer, it is critical to abolish the centralized ban authority and adopt a more community-driven approach. We urge all DAO members to support this proposal and champion the principles of decentralization, transparency, and fairness.

Let us work together to create a future where THESANDBOX GAME truly reflects the spirit of WEB3—a world of freedom, inclusivity, and trust.

1 Like
2

What will your recommended solution be in terms of bots?

3

I do not share your view @xummer. I am a gamer and I do not suffer from any ban in season 4. I am enjoying the season and TSB is doing great job to protect legit players from bots.

1 Like
4

Amen to this idea. Go on the Discord. Hundreds of people there complaining about unjust bans with no recourse and no explanation.

@KCL I realize you’ve not been banned yet, so this doesn’t directly affect you, but I would read this and see if it changes your view: First they came ... - Wikipedia…

5

I wish there was a way to be more transparent about bans to fix false positives, but the truth is that many of the people you see complaining about being banned are fairly banned for multi-accounting schemes and false positives are a very small percentage of the overall bans.

When the Discord and Jira tickets seem overburdened with a flood of complaints, it’s often because of botting users who are trying to drain the reward pool, so the legitimate complaints are in a sea of bad actors complaining that they can’t claim more than their fair share anymore.

I do believe we can do better and be more responsive, but decentralizing player moderation makes the systems that protect against bot scammers more exposed and vulnerable. A proposal like this is opening a door wide to attackers. I believe you have the best of intentions Xummer, but this is one aspect where decentralizing would have the potential to ruin everything and leave all of the SAND rewards in the hands of those who just want to extract money from the community and cash out.

2 Likes
6

Your observation of the banning problem is incorrect.

Season 1 and 2 had Multi accounts, bots and cheating. This is the smoothest season so far.

I think the current approach is right. The problem is that the support part and the review part takes a long time.

2 Likes
7

I’ve been told the same from other staffs within TSB as well (and I suspected so too). Even in Telegram chats it’s obvious that most of the complainers are typically botters/multi accounter, in their last ditch attempt to convince ppl that TSB is doing a bad job at banning accounts, kinda like a psyop.

2 Likes
8

I find this specifically hilarious because it was clearly written by chatgpt. Agree with everything said here, especially want to follow up in the intern’s point:

The bots we knew from runescape and WoW have evolved, they can speak now. They will go on twitter and forums and try to make you scared that Sandbox is doing horrible things to honest players, so they can make bot restrictions more lenient. Don’t let them psych you out.

You should only get worried if your friends and people you trust in the community start being banned and denied appeals.

1 Like