All Web3 initiatives end up promising the same thing.
This is going to be decided by the community.
Pixels is not an exception. The PIXEL token roadmap is aimed at governance token holders will have a significant say on the parameters of the economy, content direction, resource balancing.
That, on paper, is real decentralization.
Practically, I continue to put the same embarrassing question: rule what, when? And who has tokens enough to count?
The following is the truth of token government that no one speaks frankly.
There is no democratic governance power in the token-based systems. It's proportional. Players who have the highest number of $PIXEL get the highest votes. The people with the largest $PIXEL are nearly always the first investors, the biggest land holders, the individuals who invested in Pixels prior to the knowledge of the vast majority of the existing community that Pixels existed.
With Pixels, in due course, ceding governance to token holders, which I believe they will, the question is whether they are representing the real community of players or merely the capital-intensive early adopters.
A landless player with six months of logging every day, reputation building, contributing to the economy, a member of Unions - they may have virtually no $PIXEL compared to a whale who purchased a big position and plays virtually.
Who is to define the future of the game?
The whale has a token.
The health of the game is likely to be based on that of the daily player.
Pixels is not the only film with that tension. It is the core issue of unsolved token governance in the entire Web3. However, it is especially keen in a game economy where those most impacted by governance decisions, the active players, are not the most powerful people in governance.
This is a design solution that Pixels has not fully invested in yet. Reputation-weighted governance. When you do not simply have a proportional vote based on token ownership but also include your activity, your contribution, your investment in the ecosystem.
This has been tested on some projects. None of them has completely addressed it.
It would be quite impressive of Pixels to arrive there before the governance question comes to a head, before a hot decision divides the community between whales and players.
Otherwise, the governance promise will take the same route most Web3 governance promises take.
Loud announcement. Quiet disappointment.
I am observing in what direction it moves.
Do you believe that token holders should be in charge of Pixels? Or should active players be more represented irrespective of the amount of money invested in the company in the form of PIXEL?
Article
Pixels Has a Governance Issue No One is Talking About Yet.
Avertissement : comprend des opinions de tiers. Il ne s’agit pas d’un conseil financier. Peut inclure du contenu sponsorisé. Consultez les CG.