I see it a bit differently.
Before, major votes were by The Sandbox itself. Now we have 12 delegates with different voices, which feels like a step forward and definitely less “controlled.” There will likely be more delegates in the future, and anyone is free to apply.
I think that’s the whole point of a DAO, open discussions, diverse voices, and a process we can all learn from.
Thanks for voicing out!
I believe Lanzr and Meowl has been pretty clear about the follow up delegation questions.
As to the question of how some wallet have over a 1000 delegated addresses and yet hold a disproportionately low VP, I’m also as puzzled as you, I suspect bots? Or a test
account, or something.
Beats me 
Thank you for the explanation on delegation, but again, I’m not here to discuss that.
I understand this SIP isn’t trying to solve Sandbox’s bigger problems, but as I mentioned earlier, I’m more concerned that it might start a different problem—opening the door to a wave of SIPs where everyone starts asking for 0.03% to fund their own initiatives, like making Sandbox fridge magnets.
Also, as I said before, what would be the success criteria for this SIP? I’m sure you don’t plan to stop at 15 episodes and will want to continue the podcast beyond that. So how do we determine whether this was money well spent?
I was responding to this question of yours.
I think they have every right to if they can clear DAO Admin team SIP curation and obtain a majority Yes vote on snapshot.
Right now, the success criteria is the production of content. Publishing completed episodes meets that criteria.
I don’t know yet. There’s a clear benefit (education & news), but it isn’t clear to me yet what we should be measuring to determine impact. Views are an obvious but misleading metric in TSB ecosystem. My intuition tells me it’s engagement (retweets, replies, snapshot voting, forum activity).
I want to keep things going to determine what impact should be measured.
I’m a little perplexed, I just discovered that the dao has launched its podcast, which makes me reconsider my thoughts.
Several points all the same:
1- the communication from the official one is certainly too faded, I missed a lot of episodes. (and yet I’m interested)
2- it happens when Lanzer offers his sip, I don’t really know what to think about it.
3- I still think that the amount is not excessive but this new podcast calls everything into question and I am no longer sure that this sip is essential.
But I still wonder, would the official podcast have, with the same freedom, highlighted the links between the entities managing TSB and the DAO in the way that Lanzer did in his dedicated episode.
4-In discussing with the community, I realize the fears of some of seeing more and more of this type of request. So despite my first intention, I don’t really know what to vote for anymore.
I still agree with the idea that we need to support dedicated content creators. Maybe referencing them should be done by the team.
Determine the major players based on regions of the world, type of content, etc.
The DAO is, in certain aspects, a business, we must manage it, which involves determining who can do what, to whom certain tasks are delegated, etc.
Right now, I think I should vote no, a little reluctantly but in the hope of seeing things evolve.
I know refrigerator magnets are just an example but I’m not afraid of that. I’m sure the community would vote no. 
@sebga I’m actually really happy that we’re talking about this. I think this has been (as we say in English) “the elephant in the room” the whole time.
Voting for SANDDAO now doesn’t commit anyone to voting for it in the future, nor does it commit anyone to voting for fridge magnets.
I submitted this SIP back in July. I was on SANDDAO 6 at the time. It went through five months of intense curation with the DAO Admin team. I published MY 53rd EPISODE when it went to Snapshot on Dec 24th.
When DiTS Ep-001 came out Nov 17th, I was on my 42nd episode. (Just realized that @Oldwon was both my 6th and 42nd episode, hahahaha 
)
Anyways!
DiTS and SANDDAO cover VERY different topics, and we cover it very differently. I do longform content, it is deeply researched and I can be as critical as the situation requires. I delve into topics that the DAO Admin Team can’t or doesn’t want to…like Birth of the DAO episode, and at a much faster pace….10 delegate interviews in 7 days.
That’s what it take to keep up with what goes on in our DAO.
Funding this SIP means I’m paying a team to address things I don’t have the time to do:
My vote is NO
First, I want to thank @Lanzer for his dedication and enthusiasm towards The Sandbox and its DAO. Your podcast has been a valuable means of learning for me and many others in the community. I was surprised to know that The Sandbox DAO planned to launch its own podcast some time ago rather than support an established project led by a community member. However, after a thorough analysis, my vote will be NO, and I explain my reasons below.
As this is my first vote as a delegate, I took the responsibility and dared to contact as many community members as possible (even in holidays😅): builders, players, studios and solo devs that have left the platform, and others involved in the Sandbox Community. I talked to more than 40 people (with and without VP) to get their opinions about this SIP and the DAO in general.
Most are not interested in SIPs that, according to them, do not directly improve the platform on which they Work, Build or Play. Approximately 50% of these people do not plan to participate in the DAO unless they see proposals that are truly worthwhile.
In my opinion, a podcast, be it The SANDDAO Podcast and The Sandbox DAO’s Diggin’ in the Sand, does not contribute significantly to improving the platform, much less fund both, at least not now. We need SIPs that directly benefit Builders and Players, strengthening the ecosystem and encouraging greater participation in the DAO.
Example: the requested funding of $1,000 per episode for this podcast is more than what many builders manage to monetize with their games over a long period of time. I see this as creating a disconnect between the priorities of The Sandbox DAO SIPs and the real needs of the Builders.
I think we should focus on improving the ecosystem. Currently, we should prioritize proposals that:
Foster a better environment for builders.
Improve the quality of games and thus attract more players.
Generate sustainable opportunities for creators.
While I recognize the value of podcasts as a means of communication, I do not believe that this SIP is the solution to the current problems of the Builders community.
To @Lanzer: Without trying to sound like a simp 
, I want to acknowledge your dedication and motivation, you are one of few in the ecosystem to be honest. Since discovering your podcast, I have admired your commitment to the community. I would like you to continue with your work, the SANDDAO podcast or any other project on the Sandbox Platform, as it is inspiring and motivating for me, as I said, I thought your podcast would somehow be taken into account months ago as something official because of all the trajectory it has, but still I would like you to succeed on this platform. However, I think the DAO should focus on more urgent SIPs that really impact builders and the ecosystem in general. I hope you understand that my vote does not reflect a rejection of your work, but a call to look for SIPs that generate a more direct and positive impact on the community, especially the Builders community.
My “NO” vote is not a rejection of podcasts or Lanzer, but a call to focus DAO resources on SIPs, and help guide future SIPs towards initiatives that strengthen The Sandbox platform. If we want this platform to thrive, we must prioritize proposals that benefit builders, players and creators, who are the heart of this ecosystem, a Gaming ecosystem.
I hope everyone has a Happy New Year and I wish 2025 to be a great year for The Sandbox.
@rocksymiguel While I’m really sad to see your no vote…I must say, I respect the lengths you went to give SANDDAO SIP your fair consideration. Muchas gracias 
I was super excited to read what you wrote about contacting 40 voters and their responses. Just the fact that you did that and shared the knowledge here was really valuable to me. I’m not at all surprised to see what they responded with.
I’m a builder too. I understand firsthand what they’re saying. MetaWorlds studio hasn’t been able to monetize with how things are either and I spent a whole year trying my hardest to do so. I’ll be doing a podcast on The Business of Sandbox Experience Publishing later this year to show the numbers. If the DAO hadn’t launched when it did in May, I would have stepped back from the Sandbox after Builder’s Challenge 1, for the same reasons Tuschay and Tempest did. Bonus exit interview with Tuschay on SANDDAO 30 here.
In any case. What I’m hearing from you, Biversen, Kurchato, and Hishmad is very fair. There are other kinds of SIPs that builders may feel helps our interests. I encourage all of them.
My passion are SIPs that help build networks, connections, and a robust place for our ecosystem to function in. Things like working groups, councils, tech stacks, governance processes, podcasts, and meeting places.
I think there is enough room in the budget for all of us to contribute in the way we’re passionate. I don’t think it’s a zero-sum game.
I can’t comprehend how the success criteria is just the production of content when you’ve already published 50+ episodes without DAO funds. Of course, you’ll be successful in making 15 more with funds now.
The fact that we don’t have a clear metric to determine success also shows, in my opinion, that this SIP is incomplete.
Please don’t take this the wrong way—I truly appreciate all the work you’ve done for Sandbox out of passion. As someone who also creates YouTube videos, I know how time-consuming it is to make content, not to mention how hard it is to get views.
But as @rocksymiguel said so well, we need SIPs that focus on benefiting the gaming ecosystem of Sandbox.
As a collective, we should prioritize using the 15M SAND budget to generate revenue for the DAO first. That way, we can fund initiatives like this from the DAO’s revenue in the future.
I appreciate the critique @cryptokoosha and I extra appreciate that you understand the work behind content creation (I watched a few of your videos…they’re very easy to watch! 
)
Because the main goal is to keep going.
For me, 1 to 3 hour+ episodes take 5 hours to publish, and can take up to 10 hours if heavy research if required. I’m 54 episodes in out of passion, but there’s a max I can commit when doing this by myself and paying all costs by myself.
So both SandFam and I are at a crossroads. Does SandFam want to use $15K of its $8 million dollar budget to improve what it sees from SANDDAO?
…that is what I submit to the DAO for its decision
I question myself and really look for the fairest vote.
I read your arguments and exchange ideas with many members of our community, try to weigh the pros and cons, and most of the time I arrive at the same conclusion, we must support this SIP.
2 “against” arguments stand out, namely:
1- “finance SIPs that improve our ecosystem” and
2- “this is the door open to SIP refrigerator magnets”.
Here are my answers:
1 - So, yes, I agree, but I sincerely think this one is one of them.
SANDDAO podcasts have already proven their usefulness and highlighted certain aspects, in particular by giving a platform to the different actors involved.
I even believe that this contributed to the evolution of the DAO.
So they are useful to the ecosystem.
And it totally fits into one of the categories of the general budget.
If the distribution of the budget is a concern then it might be interesting to propose another distribution.
2 - To my knowledge, no other content creator has offered content similar to what Lanzer is doing with SANDDAO, which is a podcast totally dedicated to our ecosystem, focused on DAO.
The constancy, regularity and fidelity of SANDDAO is demonstrated.
So yes, the audience is not there but who can really claim to have an audience in our ecosystem, even the official channel is not drowning in views.
@rocksymiguel @cryptokoosha
I think it’s worth giving a chance and showing our support.
To be honest my opinion changes every day and I haven’t made a final decision.
Although the budget is minimal, it requires real thought.
Then all broadcasters should create a SIP here and all should be supported.
They have more viewers.
They get more interaction.
They promote the ecosystem outside the DAO. Etc.
No matter how we look at it, I don’t think it makes sense. That’s why the Council gave a Negative recommendation.
In this case, let’s create a SIP for AndyRichy @shakesbeer @Pandapops @KamiSawZe or any other streamers and ask for 2000 dollars per episode. I’m sure they will get more viewers and engagement than the Dao stream. The data is clear.
Would you vote yes?
If I am not mistaken, AndyRichy’s sponsorship offer of 250 dollars was rejected by Sandbox. Now we are talking about paying 1000 dollars per episode just for DAO Podcast.
I hate to say it, but @Biversen does make a pretty valid point here. I did not see it this way.
I’m assuming some of the people you mentioned here are on TSB’s payroll?
Yes, but it doesn’t matter. They won’t apply to stream on the Sandbox channel. They all have their own channels.
These people are just examples.
Panda, Cyberdragon, and I are staff with The Sandbox, so we have a normal salary and doing streams is just part of our work. Lukus and Joseph (and maybe some others, I haven’t kept track) are part of the TSB Ambassador’s program, where they get rewarded SAND for contributing to the live streams. There are multiple “tracks” in the ambassador program, so not all ambassadors are eligible for that, and not everybody who streams is an ambassador either.
I think it would be great for the DAO to have a community boost chest that rewards streamers (whether ambassador or not) for their hard work promoting TSB/DAO, but that would need to be a different SIP with clear objectives and rules.
I agree. I did consider a somewhat similar concept to compensate builders for rewards that they give out if they held events. Perhaps the one that you recommend can also be encompassed in that.
Apecoin DAO has ThankApe that pays out APE if you achieve certain milestones, and it’s multifaceted.
Hi everyone, my vote is “no.”
First of all, I appreciate @Lanzer 's effort in providing detailed information and consistently creating episodes for Sandbox. I think @Lanzer or his team deserve to be paid for his consistency, but the cost is questionable. On the other hand, I do not see this as an effective way to enhance enjoyment for players. I would prefer the funds to be used for improving the experiences of players and builders rather than focusing on a single project, unless it demonstrates measurable effectiveness.
Additionally, I tend to agree with perspective of @cryptokoosha. I am a bit confused about the purpose of these proposals. Are we continuously voting on whether funding individual projects is beneficial for the community? In my opinion, SIP 17 and 18 are primarily focused on funding single projects. I would rather see proposals aimed at enhancing the overall game experience for players and builders.
Some utilities in the Sandbox documentation are still underdeveloped. Since the SandDAO has sufficient capital, I would prefer to see those funds invested in improving such utilities instead of allocating them to individual projects.
I really appreciate hearing how helpful SANDDAO has been to SandFam. I feel sad hearing that it’s not valuable enough to be compensated at the amount I’ve requested.
15K for 15 episodes was a decision to pay teammates fairly for their efforts. I don’t have the money to pay for that myself.
Thanks for your reply, @Lanzer. The episodes might succeed one day, but I am not sure if $1,000 per episode is really worth it. I’d rather see ideas that show how each $1,000 could improve any gaming experience, even with small, incremental steps of improvement. I’ve cast my vote and will leave the rest for others to decide. Even though I don’t fully agree with this proposal. I truly respect the effort you’ve put into the podcast and the Sandbox community.
Although I truly appreciate the dedication of content creators who contribute to the Sandbox out of passion, as both a builder and a player, I believe that right now the focus should be on enhancing the core product. We need to prioritize efforts that will attract and retain both players and builders in our ecosystem.
While the amount requested may not seem significant compared to the DAO’s treasury, as concerned voters, it’s our responsibility to ensure that every Sand is spent effectively.
So, my vote is “No” for this SIP. However, as @KamiSawZe suggested, perhaps we could propose a future SIP focused on incentivizing content creation for both Sandbox and the DAO. I believe that having an initiative which includes the broader audience will have a far greater impact in grabbing the community’s attention towards the DAO, rather than focusing on individual projects.
Honestly, in conversations I’ve had with some community members, there seems to be a bit of hesitation towards the Sandbox DAO due to SIPs like this. It’s important to ensure that the community sees the DAO as something that benefits the collective, rather than focusing on opportunities for individual gain.
@sebga I’m not entirely sure which category you’re referring to, but since there is a category called “Other,” it seems like every SIP can fit into the general budget — even fridge magnets
