Subnodes

Our node voting mechanism restricts voting privileges to the top 5 NFT minters to mitigate collusion risks and ensure diverse representation among voters. This approach strikes a balance between democracy and efficiency, fostering fair and timely decision-making within our community.

While a fully democratic system would allow every member to vote, this could lead to prolonged voting processes if even a single address abstains, potentially stalling decisions indefinitely. Additionally, imposing time limits may disadvantage key contributors who miss deadlines, skewing outcomes. By entrusting voting rights to the top 5 NFT minters, we expedite decision-making while upholding fairness and community consideration.

The significant investment required to attain a top 5 NFT minters position incentivizes prudent voting behaviour. Address owners who have committed substantial resources to secure their position are unlikely to jeopardise the ecosystem's success through reckless decisions or sabotage.

However, recognizing the possibility of self-interested behaviour, we implement subsidiary nodes to further dilute the influence of potential saboteurs. Each new address minting or receiving our NFT is randomly assigned to a permanent subnode number, expanding the pool of top 5 positions and reducing the likelihood of collusion.

Votes cast by any subnode are universally applied. For instance, if a game is successfully voted in by subnode 5, it gains approval across the entire network. Conversely, if subnode 8 votes to remove a game, it becomes inaccessible to all users.

Our node system is designed for flexibility and scalability. Initially starting with 2 nodes, we can adjust the number of nodes as needed, gradually expanding to 5, 10, 20, and beyond. As nodes reach capacity, we adjust subnode numbers or reopen previous nodes to accommodate growth, ensuring a dynamic and adaptable governance structure.