SIP-19: WakeUp Labs creating The Sandbox UGC Platform Development Team

[KCL]

@theKuntaMC

This is a very valid point, Rocksy!

For this SIP, we released an RFP (request for proposals) to get some proposals together to start the discussion process. Perhaps the creation of the RFP by the Admin Team was premature and could have waited for more conversation around the topic so people could voice their opposition to the idea altogether. But either way, if the majority is against it, they can kill it.

I can confirm that the announcement of the RFP was done before on the forum and we could have commented on it at that time. i also realized that the RFP maybe came at a time before the announcement of the delagates and engagement was still low.
A sa final note all remarks are valid and we ar DAOing and progressing. Admin team will learn from that and now we have this vote. Lets make it pragmatic and vote “abstain/none of the two” to discard this SIPs or vote for one of the 2 if you think an extra UGC is needed. Love all that passion SandFam

[rocksymiguel]

I was also somewhat aware that the DAO was looking for teams of developers to apply a few months ago.
But I recognize that it is my bad for not being aware of this proposal at the time.
But I think it’s true, we just have to be pragmatic at this time.

[KamiSawZe]

In the US (TheVisionEx and myself) and UK (our lead web developer) that is a pretty normal rate for a studio to bill clients for skilled programers. It also accounts for overhead costs like software “seats” (licenses for enterprise software), hosting and bandwidth, etc.

So that’s not a a full $125 an hour to a single programmer, that’s what it costs to pay them + required taxes + business operating expenses.

[Lanzer]

Yeah, I definitely think the abstain vote is a good way to indicate that you would prefer neither of them. I agree that the abstain option should be renamed to “none of these”

[wahpaks1]

I voted for The Council, already saw their concern and commitment to the community, obvious choice for me.

[KamiSawZe]

Hi KCL, I read your comment on your vote and checked back here. I’m sorry I missed replying to this sooner - I’ll lay blame on the reply structure making me jump up and down through the timeline.

I think it’s a noble idea to suggest the teams working together, but from a practical side, I don’t think it makes very much sense. I already have a strong rapport with Joe and Tom - Joe and I working together for nearly five years, and Tom having collaborated with us on two websites already.

Absolutely no shade to throw in Gonzacolo’s direction, but I just haven’t worked with him or his team before, and I don’t know much about them. I’m confident in my teams ability to execute on an objective given a budget, but I can’t vouch for our ability to work effectively with WakeUp Labs.

Additionally I’m not sure how adding more people would make the whole project more cost effective. I think if the DAO would like one team to integrate some ideas from the other team, that’s something that can be discussed and worked into the roadmap.

[KCL]

Hi KamiSawZe,

Thank you for replying. Better late that none. I can understand that it is easier to work with people that you are used to, Gonzacolo repsonding more or less the same and I respect this.
In the meantime I wish you both good luck for the voting and let’s see what the community decides.

[sebga]

@rocksymiguel

Perhaps we want to get things done quickly, but feel that important steps are being skipped. This limits community participation and misses the opportunity to generate valuable dialogue about whether these decisions are truly responsive to everyone’s needs.

hey @rocksymiguel
I tend to agree with you when you say that we should talk about it first. But on the other hand, I tell myself that the “abstention” vote amounts to the same thing.
It is true that we should perhaps avoid exceptions, this will avoid disputes in the future.

Despite everything, I have the impression that it remains a useful tool for everyone.
My vote is influenced by the visibility that the Coucil QA members has had in TSB for a long time, which makes me think that they have a sharp and relevant overall vision.

I feel sorry for the other team, I would have liked everyone to work together but that doesn’t seem possible.
So I’m thinking of voting for team A (the council QA)

[Gonzacolo]

Hello everyone! We are glad that the voting process has begun.

This process has provided insights and lessons that will improve The Sandbox DAO.

Now that the initial excitement has passed, we would like to share a few thoughts:

1. RFP processes are often initiated by DAOs, core teams, foundations, or technical teams behind the DAO. Each community determines its own process, budget, and timelines.

   It became clear that, for this DAO, while running RFPs is essential, the community would like a “temp-check” to either support or dismiss an idea.
   We also see this as the right approach.

   In this case, there was an attempt to do so, though it was not very explicit:
   Forum Link

2. Our product has always aligned with the RFP requirements, as this approach has consistently led to the best outcomes.

3. We applied because we saw the opportunity and viewed it as a way to start engaging with The Sandbox DAO. We were already involved in the ecosystem and wanted to contribute in areas where we could add value.

4. We proposed a competitive budget. WakeUp has a senior technical team with experience working with Optimism, Arbitrum, Coinbase, Starknet, and ParaSwap, among others top players.

   We understand how to communicate and provide regular updates.

   This experience is something The Sandbox DAO NEEDS, and we are ready to contribute.

   We see it as strategic to incorporate fresh perspectives from other ecosystems to understand what works—and what doesn’t. New viewpoints can foster balance, drive innovation, and help prevent future disputes.

5. We hope to be selected for this initiative. If not, we now have a better understanding of the community and the challenges The Sandbox and The Sandbox DAO face. This will help us stay engaged and propose solutions to improve the DAO and the ecosystem.

6. We remain open to feedback, ready to listen, and willing to discuss necessary changes.

   On Friday, we will be participating in the community call/space on X. It would be great for anyone with questions to join us there! We look forward to seeing you!

[sebga]

I think you’re suffering from finding yourself facing Alex’s team. They have a reputation in the ecosystem which makes you want to entrust them with the project, but it is true that your budget is really interesting.
I’m waiting for Friday to listen to you.

[Gonzacolo]

Far from being a burden, it’s a pleasure to chat with others in the ecosystem. See you on Friday!

[rocksymiguel]

@sebga

I tend to agree with you when you say that we should talk about it first. But on the other hand, I tell myself that the “abstention” vote amounts to the same thing.
It is true that we should perhaps avoid exceptions, this will avoid disputes in the future.

Yes I know, I think that for the moment it is time to be practical and focus on what the proposal intends to present. (I am trying to advocate that topic in another proposal that I was “able” to enter into discussion in time, and maybe we will have time for that to be added)

---

Waiting for the Space of this SIP, I already have some questions for @KamiSawZe , @Gonzacolo and The DAO Admin Team.

[Lanzer]

Yeah I’m still on the fence too. I see merits in both proposals. I’m looking forward to the space.

[hishmad]

[INDONESIAN]
SIP-19: Proses Pemilihan Tim Pengembangan Platform UGC The Sandbox

Ringkasan Singkat;

Apa:

Berdasarkan Permintaan Proposal dari DAO The Sandbox, kami telah menerima 2 proposal. SIP ini akan menentukan kandidat terpilih yang akan bertanggung jawab atas pembuatan dan pengelolaan Platform UGC The Sandbox.

Mengapa:

TSB DAO bertujuan untuk memberdayakan komunitas dengan cara memberikan kepemilikan platform kepada anggotanya. Platform ini akan meningkatkan visibilitas dan aksesibilitas pengalaman para kreator di The Sandbox melalui situs web UGC independen, yang pada akhirnya akan mendorong peningkatan trafik, keterlibatan pengembang, dan retensi pemain.

Bagaimana:

Platform ini akan diimplementasikan oleh tim yang terpilih, dengan dukungan pendanaan dari DAO. Tim ini juga akan mengembangkan model pendapatan agar platform dapat terus berjalan dalam jangka panjang.

Kapan:

Berikut adalah jadwalnya: Diskusi dimulai 11 Desember. Pemungutan suara dibuka 25 Desember dan berlangsung selama dua minggu. Para kandidat memiliki waktu implementasi 3 hingga 4 bulan.

Siapa:

Berikut adalah 2 kandidat, The Council dan Wakeup Labs, dengan proposal-proposal terkait yang dirangkum dalam tabel di bawah ini.

KANDIDAT

Rincian SIP

Latar Belakang/Konteks:

Sandbox DAO memiliki fokus untuk mengatasi beberapa isu utama, yaitu:

• Bagaimana cara meningkatkan trafik ke pengalaman-pengalaman di Sandbox yang sudah ada.
• Menyediakan platform bagi para kreator independen untuk memamerkan dan mendaftarkan hasil karya mereka.
• Mempermudah pemain dalam mengakses berbagai pengalaman dan memberikan insentif SAND sebagai imbalan partisipasi.

Manfaat bagi Ekosistem Sandbox:

Platform UGC baru ini akan menjadi wadah bagi para kreator untuk mendaftarkan, memamerkan, dan mempromosikan pengalaman-pengalaman UGC mereka di ekosistem Sandbox.

Manfaatnya antara lain:

• Meningkatkan trafik ke berbagai pengalaman di Sandbox.
• Memberikan platform bagi para kreator untuk menampilkan karya mereka.
• Mempermudah akses pemain ke pengalaman-pengalaman yang ada dan memberikan insentif SAND sebagai imbalan partisipasi.

Persona Utama:

• Kreator: Meningkatkan visibilitas dan menarik pemain untuk mencoba pengalaman yang mereka buat.
• Pemain: Lebih mudah menemukan dan berinteraksi dengan berbagai pengalaman menarik.

Sumber Daya yang Diperlukan

Anggaran yang diajukan akan diambil dari Kas Konten Game.

Model Pendapatan

• DAO akan menerima 100% dari pendapatan yang dihasilkan oleh perusahaan pihak ketiga sampai investasi awal DAO sepenuhnya dikembalikan.
• Setelah investasi awal tersebut kembali, pembagian pendapatan menjadi 50/50 antara DAO dan perusahaan pihak ketiga sampai DAO mendapatkan keuntungan 3 kali lipat dari investasi awal mereka.
• Selanjutnya, pembagian pendapatan akan berubah menjadi 80/20, dengan mayoritas pendapatan untuk perusahaan pihak ketiga.

Analisis Risiko

Risiko pertama adalah adopsi platform yang mungkin berjalan lambat karena para kreator masih ragu atau kurangnya keterlibatan dari para pengguna. Cara mengatasinya: Kedua proposal menawarkan insentif dalam bentuk $SAND untuk mendorong partisipasi.

Risiko kedua adalah keterlambatan jadwal yang bisa mempengaruhi penyelesaian proyek. Cara mengatasinya: Peninjauan rutin terhadap pencapaian target dan pengawasan oleh DAO.

Risiko ketiga adalah bagaimana memastikan model pendapatan ini berkelanjutan. Cara mengatasinya: Kedua proposal menyertakan rencana pembagian pendapatan yang detail dengan target-target yang jelas.

Opsi Pemungutan Suara

• Dewan
• Wake Up Labs
• Tidak ada dari proposal-proposal tersebut

Anda akan diminta untuk mendistribusikan kekuatan suara Anda di antara 2 kandidat atau memilih “tidak ada dari proposal-proposal tersebut”.

Contohnya:

• 100% pada kandidat A, 0% pada kandidat B;
• 50% pada kedua kandidat;
• 20% pada kandidat A, 80% pada kandidat B.

Perlu diketahui: API TSB tidak harus ada dalam SIP ini. API memang bisa membantu kita mendapatkan data analisis untuk tiap pengalaman, tapi yang lebih penting sekarang adalah bagaimana caranya menghasilkan MVP situs yang solid dan disukai pemain serta kreator. Dengan begitu, kita bisa mempertimbangkan pengembangan lebih lanjut bersama Tim Produk di tahun 2025. Karena nilai API-nya masih belum pasti, untuk sekarang SIP ini akan berjalan sendiri, terlepas dari Tim Produk.

[Lanzer]

I doubt I can attend tomorrows space due to work. Here are my questions. I apologize if my questions come across as disrespectful in any way, that’s not my intent. These are the questions I’m weighing when it comes to deciding which way I want to vote.

For Council QA

• Your monetization strategy reads really ambitious to me. I believe you have the capability to deliver what you said, but what leads you to believe that the marketplace activity will support the cash positive estimates you’ve written out in your proposal?
• What are your thoughts on the observation that if your projections are accurate, your royalties will put you in a position of immense power and financial wealth within Sandbox?

For Wakeup Labs

• What is it about your proposed solution that allows it to be so much cheaper than the Council’s proposal? Specifically, what are we NOT getting?
• Can you please comment on your team’s experience in the SandFam ecosystem?
• How should we measure your ability to deliver on your proposed solution when compared to the demonstrated capability of the council QA?
• Again thank you for submitting a proposal Gonz, it’s really cool to see a new team throw its hat in the ring.

[Gonzacolo]

Hi, Lanzer!

Thanks for your questions! Many of them were answered in today’s Space, but I’ll leave them here in writing:

1. Our costs and margins are reflected in that budget. With that amount, we should be able to lead a software development squad that meets the scope of the proposal within a 3 to 5-month timeframe.

2. We don’t have prior experience with the Sand ecosystem. The only one who has tested the tools, played the game, and owns assets and tokens is me.

3. While every project comes with its own challenges and complexity, we have worked on technically more demanding developments for some of the world’s largest crypto protocols and projects. We have contributed to producing AAVE forks for clients, building UI for bridges, and developing tooling for developers on Arbitrum.

4. We will try to stay just as active even after this SIP.

[Lanzer]

Okay, great! I’ll listen to the space.

Awesome, thank you for the answers. I appreciate your openness Gonz

[theKuntaMC]

For all to consider…

HERE is the recording of the X Spaces we hosted with representatives of both proposals.

2 hours of great conversation that expands upon the comments in this forum.

[TheVisionEx]

Alright Lanzer, love the questions!

Here’s a full rundown of what happens and why, from our proposal, and I’ll address them per bullet point for you.

You asked, " *Your monetization strategy reads really ambitious to me. I believe you have the capability to deliver what you said, but what leads you to believe that the marketplace activity will support the cash positive estimates you’ve written out in your proposal?"

The key component of our proposal, and the bulk of earning potential that differentiates both pitches is our Access Pass minting feature. When we added this option, this was an essential viability piece to earning nearly any income. Specifically, when it comes to the Sandbox Marketplace Activity, our proposal is targeting the expansion of marketability of the Sandbox ecosystem for developers, which will expand the DAU (Daily Active Users) with an increased incentive for high quality developers to join and stay within the ecosystem, now that they will have access to a “CD-Key” type of infrastructure that they might have been familiar with in a Steam, Epic Games, or similar ecosystem.

Now with that in mind, Cash Postitive Estimates as written in our proposal are shown with multiple figures within. Potentiality. What we know today is there are stronger DAUs during Seasons of content in The Sandbox. We know that developers are more incentivised to develop when The Sandbox pays them in SAND. We know that Partners are looking for a method to each income, similar to how the Snoop Dogg team sold Access Passes – though in limited offering of just 10,000 units. We will expand this opportunity.

Now, to your second point, “What are your thoughts on the observation that if your projections are accurate, your royalties will put you in a position of immense power and financial wealth within Sandbox?”

We actually addressed this within the longer documentation for our pitch, but there’s a lot going on in there, so I’ll highlight it here.

First and foremost, Alex and I have been in this ecosystem since before there was a SAND token at all. Building before we were earning any money doing it. We’ve been here for intense growth, losses, and everything in between. We’re here regardless of a Bull Run or Bear Market. But that doesn’t address the concern.

Speaking right to the “power”, as per our agreement with the DAO, we’re giving power to the DAO via financial power. The DAO has requested that regardless of the amount issued, whatever we might ask for from either team, 100% of the funding would simply be Borrowed funding. For our $150,000 request, we have to have a financial strategy to reimburse this money 100% before we can earn a penny to our company. Ads don’t cut it, as advertising for these sorts of websites earns about $0.40-$0.75 per 1,000 viewers. Assuming that the website gets all of the 500,000 users from Alpha Season 4, that would only be $375/month earned in advertisement revenue OPTIMISTICALLY without the use of the Minting Contract system to generate access passes, which we included.

So the DAO has an opportunity to earn back all that investment through our proposal, within a reasonable timeline. But it goes further toward the future of the DAO. For the next $300,000 earned, the DAO will capture another $150,000 of that profitiability, which is 50% of all earned income (EBITDA). At that point, we go into other ways where The Council plans to give Power back to the community, not hold it.

" Second, and our primary resource for Marketing, we intend to go to market with any and all top-quality experiences, spending as much as 50% of bottom-line Gross revenue on your games!"

As shown here, of that $150,000 that we might retain from the second phase of funding, as much as $75,000 could go directly into the marketing of the experiences that MINTED their access passes through our service. As we have developers connecting to our platform to mint their passes, we’ll be helping them promote their content through traditional marketing channels, Press Releases, Reviews, and all of the traditional gaming mediums that The Sandbox is lacking today.

We intend to give more Power to the developers, and Empower developers who may not have experience in the Games Journalism environment that I have been a part of for over 10 years as a member of the Press Media.

So let’s assume that goes perfectly. The later half of your question becomes more important. Power. How can we continue to grow with the intent to give power back to the Developers in the ecosystem without centralizing?

Assuming this happens, we’ve got a very good problem. First is, the DAO has now doubled initial investment income, allowing for two projects with a similar impact to be build, and DAU figures on the main TSB dashboard would be much higher. Secondly, the DAO now has a permanent 20% cut of all Council revenue from the new UGC website forever. That’s the agreement as written, and we’ll honor that forever.

With an 80% share of $300,000 (per year, let’s assume for simplicity keeping the same numbers) we can hire $240,000 worth of staff to expand wide our existing systems. Advertise at conventions, but not for the sake of player acquisition. That’s why The Sandbox does marketing. We’ll look for exposure to other Publishers in the gaming industry, exposure of upcoming game releases and connecting those developers to journalists. Expanding this ecosystem to truly have an Epic Games level of platform.

Development Tools. Publishing Tools. Revenue Tools. Marketing Tools.

While the core tenant of the pitch is to expand the DAU figures in The Sandbox, we believe that comes from high quality experiences first. We hope you agree, and hope you’ll give us your vote and your confidence that we’ll continue to build the future of the platform for the players!

[TheVisionEx]

좋습니다, Lanzer, 좋은 질문이네요!

제안서에서 무슨 일이 일어나고 있는지와 그 이유를 간략하게 요약해 보겠습니다. 요점별로 나눠서 설명하겠습니다.

질문하셨습니다: “*귀하의 수익화 전략은 정말 야심적입니다. 귀하가 말한 대로 할 수 있는 능력이 있다고 믿지만, 시장이 제안서에 설명한 현금 긍정적 추정치를 지지할 것이라고 믿는 이유는 무엇입니까?”

제안서의 핵심 구성 요소이자 두 피치를 차별화하는 수익 잠재력의 대부분은 액세스 패스 채굴 기능입니다. 이 옵션을 추가했을 때, 거의 모든 수익을 창출하는 데 필수적인 실행 가능한 옵션이었습니다. 특히 샌드박스 마켓플레이스 활동과 관련하여, 저희 제안서는 개발자를 위한 샌드박스 생태계의 마케팅을 확대하여 DAU(일일 활성 사용자)를 늘리고 고품질 개발자에게 Steam, Epic Games 또는 이와 유사한 생태계에서 익숙할 수 있는 “CD-Key” 유형의 인프라에 대한 액세스 권한을 제공하여 생태계에 가입하고 머물려는 인센티브를 높이는 것을 목표로 합니다.

이제 이를 염두에 두고, 제안서에 설명한 현금 긍정적 추정치와 여러 숫자를 소개합니다. 잠재력. 오늘 우리가 알고 있는 것은 샌드박스의 콘텐츠 시즌 동안 더 강력한 DAU가 있다는 것입니다. 샌드박스가 SAND로 지불할 때 개발자가 개발할 인센티브가 더 크다는 것을 알고 있습니다. 파트너가 Snoop Dogg 팀이 액세스 패스를 판매한 방식과 유사하게 각 수익 스트림을 수익화할 방법을 찾고 있지만 10,000개로 제한된다는 것을 알고 있습니다. 이 기회를 확대할 것입니다.

이제 두 번째 요점인 "예측이 정확하다면 로열티가 샌드박스 내에서 엄청난 힘과 재정적 부를 줄 수 있다는 관찰에 대한 생각은 무엇입니까?"로 넘어가겠습니다.

사실 피치에 대한 긴 기사에서 이 문제를 다루었지만, 거기에는 많은 일이 진행 중이므로 여기서 강조하겠습니다.

우선, Alex와 저는 SAND 토큰이 전혀 없기 전부터 이 생태계에 있었습니다. 돈을 벌기 전에 구축했습니다. 우리는 엄청난 성장, 손실, 그 사이의 모든 것을 위해 여기 있었습니다. 우리는 강세장이든 약세장이든 상관없이 여기 있습니다. 하지만 그것은 우려 사항을 해결하지 못합니다.

"권력"에 대해 말하자면, DAO와의 계약에 따라 우리는 DAO에 재정적 힘을 부여하고 있습니다. DAO는 발행 금액이나 팀이 무엇을 요구하든 관계없이 자금의 100%를 단순히 빌리기를 요청했습니다. 15만 달러 요청의 경우 회사에 단 한 푼도 벌기 전에 그 돈의 100%를 상환할 재정적 전략이 필요합니다. 광고만으로는 충분하지 않습니다. 이러한 유형의 웹사이트에 광고를 게재하면 1,000명의 시청자당 약 0.40~0.75달러를 벌 수 있습니다. 웹사이트가 알파 시즌 4에서 모든 50만 명의 사용자를 확보한다고 가정하면, 액세스 패스를 생성하기 위해 포함한 Minting Contract 시스템 없이도 낙관적으로 매달 광고 수익으로 375달러만 벌 수 있을 것입니다.

따라서 DAO는 합리적인 기간 내에 제안을 통해 모든 투자를 회수할 가능성이 있습니다. 그러나 이것은 DAO의 미래에 더 큰 영향을 미칩니다. 다음 30만 달러의 수익에 대해 DAO는 그 수익의 15만 달러를 더 벌어들일 것이며, 이는 모든 획득 소득(EBITDA)의 50%입니다. 그 시점에서 우리는 다른 접근 방식으로 넘어가는데, 여기서 The Council은 커뮤니티를 유지하는 대신 권한을 커뮤니티에 되돌려줍니다.

“둘째, 마케팅을 위한 우리의 주요 리소스는 모든 최고 품질의 경험을 마케팅하고 최종 수익의 최대 50%를 게임에 사용하는 것입니다!”

여기서 볼 수 있듯이, 2차 펀딩 라운드에서 유지할 수 있는 15만 달러 중 최대 7만 5천 달러는 mint 액세스가 서비스를 통과하는 경험을 마케팅하는 데 직접 사용할 수 있습니다. 개발자가 플랫폼에 연결하고 mint 패스를 하면, 우리는 그들이 전통적인 마케팅 채널, 보도 자료, 리뷰 및 The Sandbox에 현재 없는 모든 전통적인 게임 미디어를 통해 콘텐츠를 홍보하도록 도울 것입니다.

우리는 개발자에게 권한을 부여하고, 우리가 Press Media의 일원으로 10년 이상 일해 온 게임 저널리즘 환경에 대한 경험이 없는 개발자에게도 권한을 부여할 것입니다.

그러니 완벽하게 진행되었다고 가정해 봅시다. 질문의 후반부가 더 중요해집니다. 권한 부여. 중앙 집중화 없이 생태계의 개발자에게 권한을 돌려주는 의도로 어떻게 계속 성장할 수 있을까요?

그렇게 된다면, 우리는 아주 좋은 문제에 직면하게 됩니다. 첫째, DAO는 이제 초기 투자 수입을 두 배로 늘려 비슷한 영향을 미치는 두 프로젝트를 구축할 수 있으며, TSB 대시보드의 DAU 수치는 훨씬 더 높아질 것입니다. 둘째, DAO는 이제 모든 협의회 수입의 20%를 영구적으로 가져갑니다. 이것은 서면 계약이며, 우리는 영원히 이를 존중할 것입니다.

$300,000(연간, 단순성을 위해 동일한 수치를 유지한다고 가정)의 80% 지분으로 기존 시스템을 확장하기 위해 $240,000 상당의 직원을 고용할 수 있습니다. 컨벤션에서 광고하지만 플레이어 확보를 위해서가 아닙니다. 이것이 The Sandbox가 마케팅을 하는 이유입니다. 게임 산업의 다른 퍼블리셔에게 노출되고, 다가올 게임 출시에 대한 노출을 모색하고, 해당 개발자를 언론인과 연결합니다. 이 생태계를 확장하여 진정한 Epic Games 수준의 플랫폼을 구축합니다.

개발 도구. 퍼블리싱 도구. 수익 도구. 마케팅 도구.

피치의 핵심 테넌트는 The Sandbox의 DAU 수치를 확대하는 것이지만, 우리는 그것이 우선 고품질 경험에서 나온다고 믿습니다. 여러분이 동의하시기를 바라며, 여러분이 우리에게 투표하고 플레이어를 위한 플랫폼의 미래를 계속 구축할 것이라는 확신을 주시기를 바랍니다!