Since the update to Decentraland 2.0, the number of wearables that no longer work properly and whose creators have left Decentraland has increased. This is particularly annoying if you have paid a lot of money for the wearables and can no longer use them to their full potential. I myself have had to adapt a few of my wearables so that they work with the new client again. But who repairs a defective wearable? And how do you upload it into Decentraland again if the original creator is no longer available? But although I'm still available to fix my wearables, there are other hurdles. For example, only the original curator seems to feel responsible for a new release. But what if he doesn't respond or has perhaps even left Decentraland? This is all very unsatisfactory and there are possible showstoppers in the process. It should be avoided at all costs that users who have paid money for wearables can no longer use them. That would be very damaging for the ecosystem. Since creators keep leaving wearables and their users behind, this is a self-reinforcing problem that needs to be addressed in a sustainable way. I would therefore suggest the following: "It's all in the blockchain" From a technical point of view, a fix seems to be impossible because its "everything in the blockchain" in easy words. From my understanding, only the creator can upload a fixed version of his wearable. While the NFT/Collection "ownership" is always attached to the blockchain, the appearance of a wearable or emote can be altered at any time as DCL still is the render end point, which is the Engine. "Man in the middle" To fix it, a change in the engine is needed which is using a list/database of wearables who do not work. These can be "intercepted" by using this list and a modified version can be saved by DCL as a different variant and then displayed in the engine instead of the original. "We can fix it" The wearable can then be repaired by someone else, either voluntarily or for a fee, curated and uploaded as an alternative version. The original is flagged as defective and the repaired version is used in the engine instead. "He didn't respond" Of course, there also needs to be a process to ensure that this is not abused, e.g. only if the creator has not responded after a given time frame and there is at least one complain about that wearable. "Now he complains" If the creator responds later and complains there can be a process that either the creator fixes his wearable on his own or the fixed variant will be used instead. The wearable then gets unflagged and the fixed variant can be uploaded again by the creator. "Curator does not respond, too" I think we also need a process how to deal with Wearable updates (or at least I haven't noticed there is one already). What happens if the curator does not respond at all? In my case, I'm currently waiting since 3 weeks for a re-review of 3 wearables, and even with tagging, nobody really seems to care about it. It would then be desirable for one of the other curators to take on this job and perhaps be paid accordingly. In the case of necessary changes such as the DCL upgrade, DCL should bear the costs; if the creator wants something changed, the creator should pay for it. Just some brain farts from by side.
