Lanzer SIP #7 - Builder's Challenge Working Group

[Lanzer]

Would you all support a SIP to form a Builder’s Challenge Working Group with an elected community committee that would form the rules & process for Builder’s Challenge 3?

I, like many others who participated in Builder’s Challenge 1, felt it could’ve gone better. There were a lot of lessons learned from that one (like more advance notice, allocation of rewards, cheating protections). I’ve been focusing on the DAO since then, but I’ve heard how Builder’s Challenge 2 has unfolded (shoutout to @Krafter), and it too seems like it too has issues that need addressing.

We could write up a SIP that would create a Builder’s Challenge Working Group, which would have the authority to determine how it would go. We then have the election and give the committee members some SAND as compensation and a few months to engage the community and come up with a comprehensive plan. Then TSB puts that into effect for Builder’s Challenge 3.

Thoughts?

Lanzer SIPs:

1. Enable Window Resizing & Resolution Options
2. Creating a Roadmap for Sandbox Releases
3. Insert In-game Inventory Filter for Equipment
4. A Study of Revenue Options for the Sandbox DAO
5. The SandDex - A list of top Landowners & SAND holders + public ways to contact them
6. The SANDDAO Podcast - An educational & news show about the Sandbox DAO
7. The Builder’s Challenge Working Group (BCWG)
8. Sandbox Governance Working Group (GWG)

[DAO]

Will this be an advisory role to TSB?

My understanding is that BC is sponsored by TSB and not the DAO so it seems that even if there’s a WG for it, the prerogative remains with TSB on how they decide to use those funds because they’ll have their own metrics for success.

Would be a good start though. But I’m thinking better to keep the group small(team of 3) and diverse(mix of studio, indie creator and player) since it’s payroll sponsored by the DAO and there’s no guarantee any advice will be placed in full effect. Team can expand if TSB decides to let the DAO have reins.

[Lanzer]

Thanks! I’m unsure about the advisory part. I think there’s room to word it as the main rule setting body. I’m unsure what expenses Builder’s Challenge has versus the revenue it earns from new users and Sandbox community participation resulting from new users. In that light, it seems more reasonable to me to have it be a rule setting body. Maybe we make it advisory for BC 3 just to see how it functions? Then we worry about making it more after we see the results.

[DAO]

Understood. I still have my doubts as to whether TSB will be agreeable to let this panel be a rule setting body even if the proposal passes and a team is set up, because, well back to the point of TSB being the sponsors of BC instead of the DAO and also them having possibly a different key metrics of success.

Its worth a shot, perhaps for 1 or 2 seasons of BC, but we should maintain budget prudency since we won’t know if any of the recommendations will be binding.

IMO I think that a better way forward for TSB would be to get feedback via polls on the main TSB forum instead of via the DAO.

[Lanzer]

Yeah, I think it’s at least worth a shot. I suspect there will be some very motivated nominees who will want the nomination for all the right reasons to help better the BC experience. The BCWG should help with the polls as well. Aggregate as much data as possible to help TSB make better decisions. It’ll help the TSB team take a load off their workload and augment their efforts.

[Lanzer]

I reached out to an ApeCoin DAO GWG member and CityDAO member to do podcast episodes on educating us on how a Working Group works and what their DAOs do different from ours.

[Lanzer]

SIP submitted to sip@sandboxdao.com on 2024 Sep 16.

What

To form a working group of elected committee members who gather recommended rules for Builders Challenge 3 to TSB.

Why

Many who participated in Builders’ Challenge 1 & 2 felt it could have gone better. There are many lessons that can be learned (such as more advance notice, increased equity allocation of rewards, and cheating protections).

The AMA between Krafter and TSB and Sandbox Forum threads reveals a number of issues remain.

How

This BCWG would not replace TSB’s ownership and management of the Builders’ Challenge Program. It instead formalizes the way community input is assembled and given to TSB. The recommendations given from the BCWG are non-binding and may be implemented at the discretion of TSB.

If this SIP is approved, Elections will be held within 30 days. The top 5 nominees with the most votes are elected to the committee. The BCWG then gathers all relevant information from SandFam related to Builders’ Challenge, then develops a comprehensive report with recommendations to TSB.

Additionally, the committee then briefs the plan to SandFam via a public & recorded venue, such as: X/Twitter space, Twitch Stream, YouTube video, or podcast.

When

Elections will be held 30 days after/if this SIP is approved. The plan is due to TSB within 90 days of SIP approval. The brief to SandFam is due 100 days after SIP approval.

Who

MetaWorlds is a Sandbox Trusted Partner that publishes mini-games to the Sandbox and hosts the SANDDAO Podcast. Publisher of Floor Droppers, Lava Defense, and the upcoming Portal Run.

https://linktr.ee/metaworldsmeta

Lanzer: SANDDAO Podcast Host, Landowner, Experience Publisher, Program Manager, Contract Writer & Negotiator, Entrepreneur, Guinness World Record

Donsun: Business Owner, Entrepreneur, Program Manager, Contract Writer & Negotiator, Proposal Writer

Keisha: Philosophy graduate, Proposal Writer, Deep Analysis Researcher

Thoughts?

Lanzer SIPs:

1. Enable Window Resizing & Resolution Options
2. Creating a Roadmap for Sandbox Releases
3. Insert In-game Inventory Filter for Equipment
4. A Study of Revenue Options for the Sandbox DAO
5. The SandDex - A list of top Landowners & SAND holders + public ways to contact them
6. The SANDDAO Podcast - An educational & news show about the Sandbox DAO
7. The Builder’s Challenge Working Group (BCWG)
8. Sandbox Governance Working Group (GWG)