I suspect that for proposals with a negative council vote, will not get the sandbox abstain vote as well.
1 Like
It seems really irresponsible on the Sandbox part to keep pretending like this Forum matters and wasting peoples time. Since the Sandbox is not allowing the community to weigh in on what needs to be done there will never be quorum unless the Sandbox wants to raid its own economy then the Sandbox votes on its own DAO like a completely ineffectual corrupt socialist regime. Folks just seeing right through the scheming.
There is still 12 hours to go. So lets give them the benefice of the doubt and that the TSB has not voted yet because Seb Borget is flying back from Singaporeā¦ We will see tomorrow morning
1 Like
I sure hope they vote for it. Thereās only 3 hours left before it ends.
Tbh Iām a bit puzzled as to why there wasnāt an Abstain/Quorum vote from TSB on this SIP, especially since there were votes for the past two SIPs. It was clearly communicated that this workaround would be implemented until the overly high quorum could be officially adjusted.
1 Like
TSB did not voteā¦ I really do not know what to think about this behavior. First they said that TSB will not vote than they started to vote to help the SIPs council gave positive recommendations getting the quorum, now that a SIP has negative recommendation from the council they did not vote to get quorum leading to rejection of the SIP.
They are basically using the quorum like a voting mechanism.
What a shame honestly. Even if you do not support this SIP this would have been easy during the feasibility phase to put argument together to not continue the development and you would have shown at least that you have some consideration for the DAO process
PS: not sure those words will help my application as delegate. But so be it
3 Likes
well, honestly I want to give the benefit of the doubt, in itself we are a very young DAO, we can imagine that everything is not yet perfect.
It doesnāt seem to me that they voted for the SIP on the delegation of the nft collection, I admit that would have been problematic.
We are a new DAO, but with a mature ecosystem. There arenāt many excuses when we have brothers who are already veterans in the ecosystem and also have their DAOs, like Mocaverse, Open Campus and Apecoin.
TSB needs to understand that all of this is creating unnecessary extra stress that could be resolved quickly with clear guidelines.
ok, I see what you mean, but weāre not mature , weāre just older in the space than all your examples.
And these DAO that you cite, what did they do?
What is the project behind it other than promises? Honestly, how can you compare TSB to Open Campus, what did they deliver, I donāt know but it seems very recent (besides an L3 cannot be old).
Mocaverse, the same, you take them as an example, but mocaverse is Animocaās showcase (and itās very young too), do you really think theyāre going to leave the project in the hands of the community if they donāt do it with TSB?
And what is Ape? Are they the ones who wanted to get out Otherside? is that it? Where is it?
Besides, it seems to me that someone has suggested learning lessons from the disaster of this DAO.
I find that we strive to spend our time and energy attacking the DAO, leading the DAO rather than building and moving forward.
We all have talent, why do we waste our time like that, I admit Iām perplexed.
I too canāt stand corruption, lies, manipulation, and if I saw it here I would be the first to denounce it but now I think it goes too far. We donāt give TSB a chance.
And I think we should because they proved over time that they were serious, they made so much money, they could have kicked everyone out and moved on to something else like a lot of busted NFT projects (from Animoca too) , but they havenāt done it and continue to improve things, yes itās slow, yes it frustrates me too but I donāt think they are being bad.
On the other hand, I recognize, and this is an important point, that apart from Geraldine I do not see the usefulness of the other members of the council. I would like to see what these members are doing for TSB.
I really have no idea. I can only follow TSB on this 3-year journey, but itās also not a Creatorās responsibility to be aware of the entire complexity of the Animoca ecosystem.
But for educational purposes, Iāll share an article here where I discuss my view related to Animoca. 
[https://x.com/Dankoyy42/status/1827087734592159809]
BUT,
Along those linesā¦ There are previous DAOs, even within the Animoca ecosystem, to learn the good and avoid mistakes from lessons learned. Iām not an expert in DAOs, but I believe lessons from other DAOs are available.
TSB DAO has great great potential. Iāve been aware of the DAO since the whitepaper, so I think itās a fundamental tool for the TSB community, especially for UGC Creators.
1 Like
@Pepe I heard the same but I wasnāt able to find the source where TSB said it. Can you give me the link where you saw this?
We are not spending our time to complain we just want clear communication from the TSB voting principles. I was suprised by their voting to meet quorum last batch of SIPs. Fine they explained that was to help meeting the quorum until we put urgently the delegation. Do we have the delegation tool working ==> no. So why they did not vote for that one to give quorum?
It would be even fine if they said look guys we do what we want and keep full control on SIPs until XXX date. But communication, transparency and consistency is key here.
2 Likes
Agreed @KCL , I was going for some communication too. Did they say somewhere that it was to help them meet quorum? I canāt find any communication anywhere on them
No there is not. There was official mention by seb that TSB should not vote that is why they resubmitted the first batch of SIPs. Since they decided to use voting last batch of SIP to help with quorum 0 communication. Except post of operations that top prio is delegation
1 Like
@DrMetaverso did me a solid and sent me this tweet from Seb earlier in the month. I totally missed this! Seb did make mention of the possible courses of action. I wrote up a short SIP Idea for lowering the quorum count. I think this will help, but Iām going to need A LOT of SandFam feedback on what the new quorum % should be.
1 Like
Hi @cryptodiplo, the DAO team cannot direct SIPs to The Sandbox for voting. However, The Sandbox can choose to vote on SIPs they believe will benefit the ecosystem. Weāre currently working on an article to clarify this process.
Regarding the SIP, it hasnāt passed the quorum and therefore wonāt incur any expenses on the DAO. That said, the idea has generated interest within The Sandbox team. Iāll keep you updated if thereās any possibility for them to explore this further in 2025.
Here is my take on current state of DAO. To preface I want to say I still believe in the team working to make this more decentralized but I also want to heavily emphasize the following statement:
Itās not a DAO right now. Full Stop. Not worth participating at this point, because your vote literally does not matter.
There have been 15 total proposals put through, 4 of these have been passed without the Sandboxās vote. Of those 4, 3 of them are the initial proposals to set up the DAO, and initially passed WITH the sandboxās vote, and were resubmitted to be without them. The other 1 was just a free money handout to people that have voting power.
As such there are only two paths to getting a vote accepted today:
- Giving out free money to people with voting power
- Getting the Sandbox to like your idea
I have no short term solution to this problem. I see three mid-term strategies to fix this:
- The delegate process increasing the voting power ability to reach quorum
- Creating a SIP to reduce quorum
- Longer term - Working with Sandbox to better define DAO resources around Sandbox team feature requests
I have applied to be a delegate and will let you all know more if that pans out, but regardless we should start figuring out a better way to coordinate.
1 Like
Iām saddened to see how things are going for the DAO. We seem stuck.
I did end up creating a SIP Draft for thisā¦but Iām getting push back from the DAO Team that only they can propose a āConstitutional SIPā ā¦
I know itās 30 days after you last commented, but I hope youāll accept a response now : )
- delegation is almost in place
- a SIP to reduce quorum would be a āconstitutional SIPā which would require an even higher than that which weāre already failing to meet
- iād love for you to expand on this thought
HMU in the TSB DAO DMās on X if you wanna chat more directly sometime @cryptodiplo ā I cannot DM first ā but Iām happy to even jump on a video call sometime ā youāve been very active and I think weād all love to see that continue!
1 Like
Hey @theKuntaMC, thanks for the response! Understood on 1&2.
3 I talked with Fawne a bit about, generally just defining templates for each of the types of budget, and better outlining the actual powers that the DAO has to start (limited at first and larger as we figure out what works).
Ready to step up my game whenever you all are. Iāll DM you.