cyberworm1
commented
6 years ago As an aside, I'm not well versed in economics, psychology, or law. This idea is put forward on the premise that people are people and that even the best intentioned of groups can fall apart without a central authority. In the event that a group of people decide to form a "neighborhood" with specific goals and ideas, having a way to resolve conflict (especially in terms of property disputes) should be a positive thing for the community.
I'm not advocating particularly that I would be the escrow company, but that a board could be formed to create such a device for what I am proposing.
I’m proposing a LAND escrow service to facilitate contiguous groups of land/neighborhoods. To facilitate organizations similar to how a Home Owners Association (HOA) functions, in lieu of a central authority to resolve disputes in a social contract.
My premise is that this escrow service would hold in reserve a set amount of LAND equal to what it would hold in escrow for members of neighborhoods, communities, or organizations (an entity). This escrow organization would be an arbiter for disputes or breach of social contract in the aforementioned entity. In the event that an entity is unwilling or unable to abide by the rules of the organization it is a part of, their holding would be traded in escrow for LAND outside of the organization's defined space, at the escrow/arbitor’s discretion. In essence, this gives some teeth to an individual/member organization looking to build a contiguous community, while protecting the value/investment of the individual members.
An example could be (but is not limited to) the following:
A group of individuals would like to build a neighborhood, with set rules for style, physics, and other misc details. In order to accomplish this, they have purchased or traded LAND to have a contiguous plot on which to build. In lieu of an “honor system” each individual places their ownership into escrow.
As time goes on, one member cannot live up to their obligations of this social contract. To prevent degradation of the community, this member can opt to trade land with the escrow service to maintain their investment, without loss, and allow a new or current member of the community to take their place. The LAND in the community will be continued to be held in escrow until a replacement owner can be found, with allowances made for community maintenance to preserve the intended purpose of the LAND. As time goes on, a member changes their mind and does not with to abide by the rules of the organization that they are a member of. The parties may bring their issue to the escrow service and make an even swap of the LAND. The neighborhood/HOA property reverts to escrow, and an equivalent amount of LAND is given to the user who is being removed from the community. The escrow service may allow for community maintenance of the property inside of their neighborhood and the person maintains their LAND holding, making all parties whole.
The main premise here, is to allow for a neutral third party to add trust to community building and protect everyone’s investment without the fear of a single entity collapsing an entire neighborhood or project. This can also aid the economy of DCL through preservation of MANA, by preventing MANA burn to purchase new land/holdings.
As the maintenance and administration of an escrow service requires the time of real people, there should be fees attached for maintenance of escrow services. These fees are yet to be determined, but could be valued at percentage of land held in escrow.
Some basic rules for the escrow service should be in play.
1)Escrow service should have an equal or greater stake of available LAND holdings vs. what is held for clients. This is a common sense rule, to prevent a run on the escrow service and financial backings.
2)Escrow “owned” LAND may be commercially or freely used at escrow discretion, but with the caveat it could be reclaimed at any time for transactional purposes required.
3)TBD
As Decentraland is an unfinished project at this point, there are many issues with this type of service that would still need to be fleshed out, particularly instances of contiguous land holdings, availability of contiguous LAND held in escrow, and other issues remaining to be brought to light.
The main tenet of this proposal is to allow for community building, arbitration, and value preservation in lieu of a central authority.