I agree with the overall direction, however I think that maybe we're using a sledgehammer where the solution may require a greater degree of finesse.
Firstly, I think that DEC-B was one of the worst decisions we ever made. That option never should have been introduced to begin with in my opinion. Unfortunately, just saying or including the word "DEC-B" is enough for me to vote "no" on this, haha.
Secondly, I can appreciate wanting to solve the "voucher issue" as quickly as possible, but we really should take a breath to see if we can replace vouchers with a different incentive before removing them entirely. I understand the reasoning that anything we replace it with could theoretically compete with DEC no matter what we do...but I dunno. I think there ARE viable alternatives. It's something worth considering, since we are talking about incentives for two very critical aspects of our ecosystem: Staking SPS and owning Node Licenses. Playing fast and loose with those two fundamental building blocks is risky to say the least.
Short-term and Long-term considerations must be balanced equally. We can't sacrifice one for the other without shooting ourselves in the foot.
I see no reason we couldn't conceptualize a gamification of our DeFi products. That gamification could be based on "points" or "achievements" or whatever the heck we want. We don't have to limit ourselves to "tokens" and "digital assets". We can just as easily say "the more SPS you have Staked, the better your Liquidity Pool APRs". Unlock higher tier APRs by participating in Splinterlands DeFi. You can also say "buy more Node Licenses to unlock higher discounts on DAO proposals" or introduce discount tiers for transaction fees for bridging/buying...or whatever the heck DeFi benefits we can think of.
Bottom line: I think we COULD come up with cool DeFi incentives for those who are participating in the DeFi aspects of our ecosystem. And those incentives do NOT have to compete with DEC.
Once those new incentives are fleshed out, it will be a lot easier to transition away from Vouchers. Plus we don't have to mess with DEC-B! Just stop Voucher distribution, then let players spend the Vouchers like they normally do (until they run out of circulation), or perhaps jump-start the "voucher extinction" by offering players the option to somehow convert them into benefits within this new DeFi gamification system.
I agree that DEC-B was a tragedy. I fought hard against it. I fought hard against most of the stuff everyone came out later and agreed was a mistake lol. I also agree we should just let vouchers burn out instead of mandating that they all become DEC-B.
But, none of this is a new discussion. People have been talking about the trouble with vouchers since they were introduced. So to see someone like cryptoeater finally put a possible solution to a vote and then hearing, "wait! we should think about this first!" is kind of shitty. Sorry. If it was so easy to come up with these solutions to a problem we've been begging for a solution for, why is it only now that we're hearing about all the creative ways we could fix it?
The community has been begging for a solution to this and all the asset problems for years and its fallen on deaf ears. All we've heard (and are still hearing) about vouchers, SPS, cards, DEC, and everything else is that that we just need lots more people. But that's a slap in the face when for 32 months straight of being told the solution is more players, the player base has shrunk without a single exception. It's shrunk as the flood of assets, including vouchers, that we've begged you to do something about crushed the value of player holdings and made this project a money pit that even passionate supporters had to walk away from.
The answer has always been, cut the fat. Make the economy healthy again by cutting the fat and then we can grow again. Not the other way around. Create an environment that supports player investment of their time, passion, and money by having an asset base that matches your player base, instead of 20x more game assets than we need. It's really not that complicated. Making a great game is complicated and you did that. Incentivizing passionate players to burn a bunch of what they have too much of by getting a little less of something they really want is not complicated. Sunsetting a token we have to invent reasons for it to exist is not complicated. This should have been done years ago. It shouldn't be just entering the planning phases.
Thank you for acknowledging how terrible Dec-B is. This is literally why I gave this a no right away.
Glad to see your thoughts here Nate! Thanks