I dont see how this is different from @JohnX situation @Dabbie3229
While others are working to add value, we have a few cmint to grab tokens in whatever way. This is not funny at all.
I wish there is a better wsy to handle things but one suggestion i will make is that its high time we stop throwing bounties out there just anyhow. People that have shown proof of work over time.can be called upon to do stuff.
Saw all the comments, and really appreciate your feedback and apologize for my mistake.
But as you see, I just Onboard people who are true artist and not from web3 background, because of lack of knowledge of Web3 socials, just helped them to communicate in my way , which I saw it’s not right.
But seeing all the comments, so many people still thinking I am fraud or doing mallicous activities near . Which is I am not , just I took wrong way to bring people for the bounty.
I request to all people please forgive me for my mistake and let’s build together again 
Because - WE ARE COMMUNITY
It’s totally different @IgbozeIsrael The person not much active on tg that’s why I replied behalf of them .
It’s not about asking funds or proposing any thing on behalf of them.
You have been a part of the NEAR Ecosystem since October 29th, 2021, and yet you are still engaging in such behavior?
@Albhion
I want the moderators to know this @creativesdao-council @marketingdao-council how he uses the mods name to make quick bucks.
I don’t know whay do we entertain such people. Now he goes and puts another post to divert the topic.
Hello @JakieRodz
What kind of allegations is this, do you have any proof just tell me.
Please share the proof I want to know what kind of misunderstanding is this !!
Give me one name that I told that I am a NEAR member even you can see I just mentioned on my Twitter only NEAR DAO Member
Why would Ill do that and in which context?
Also if you have still doubts let’s connect on meet adding any council member in loop, Thanks
It is my duty to share my updates, you can see there are so many posts and updates I share if you check my proposal
Your illegal activities are being exposed, others will be too. Don’t worry.
Just because members/mods/people don’t react doesn’t mean they are fools and can be taken for granted.
I don’t have to prove it to anyone. They already know about you.
All I can say is to keep trying to improve. We all make mistakes, but it’s important to learn from them and not repeat them. It’s a learning process, so there’s no need to be defensive.
Thanks.
For community mods:
Such activities only brings a bad name to the community and the ecosystem as a whole. It is up to you to decide whether to ban him from the portal. The concern is that nobody in the ecosystem wants such malicious activities to occur.
@Ola I am not defending myself, it’s like the mistake I had done I already apologize and I am trying to build my reputation again . It’s been more than year I serve to Near as Volunteer, DAO Memeber . But yes I know that Because of my 1 mistake my overall reputation is on stake .
I appreciate that you are supporting me , but the allegations of mods influence I am not aware and I haven’t done that it’s like you are misunderstanding.
If you want talk to any person in near that they have saw me as I told them I worked as Near Core member. I am also stating because I got the tag . That’s it
This seems to be a good case for the Community to have actual discourse to find an appropriate corrective action. I inquired directly to @Albhion about this subject, and he indicated no wrongdoing other than helping communicate on behalf of another individual. Due to his MOD role it is a violation.
This is a conversation about offline communities, contribution, and what masquerading is.
I also advised for this post to be created to fully come forward with the hope of true discourse and direction by the broader community on how to address such things. This will indeed be an ongoing conversation.
A good question to ask via a poll may be. How many times have you posted as another individual or another account on behalf of another individual? This would be a poll to the Community to gauge a sense of this activity level. One assumption may be that there will be proxies for individuals in Web3. In the context of a bounty. Is a proxy warranted?
It does appear at the outset that proxies should not be an option for Gigs, Bounties, or REQ’s.
Developing the context of the issue helps us identify the level of severity. Was this a major infraction due to the nature of holding the title MOD. If he was not a MOD would it be any less?
Please keep in mind we do not have laws or rules in Web3. We have Crore Principles and Guidelines. In addition, reputation is being built onchain for Humans to help address these issues. In the new model of reputation, this would be a DINK or DING on his reputation.
Is the DINK or DING so large of an infraction that he should no longer be able to contribute to NDC? Or is it a blemish with MOD roles removed? If banned, is there a timeline for re-entry? Does the Community offer second chances?
@Dabbie3229 should the Truth and Reconciliation WG discuss this further?
We (the Community) collectively must bring order to the chaos that is web3 with common sense approaches, that people make mistakes and processes for reconciliation to the Community.
Please review the Code of Conduct drafted by GWG and contribute with a comment. If you are a counselor, HR, therapist, or an individual focused on truth and reconciliation, please join the NDC Reconciliation WG.
The reconciliation WG has deliberated on this in our Friday meeting and we came up with these
This case has already been taken care of as the culprit had been removed as a moderator.
The case currently is not causing any visible conflict as the offender has admitted being responsible
It is not the duty of the Reconciliation WG to pass judgement, rather to seek reconciliation when necessary.
If there’s a length of time included in the penalty given by the Mods team, then the reconciliation WG can take it up from there.
We are still developing suggested weight of punishment that would be given to an individual based on the weight of the offense they committed.
To answer your question @blaze
IMHO, It would have been easier to understand if the offender isn’t a Mod or someone in charge of controlling the same act he got involved in. This shows a high level of power mismanagement be it as it may. How can you trust someone who misuse a little opportunity with bigger opportunities? Since the Transparency Commission is not live yet, I think this should be voted upon:
What will be the weight of punishment given to offenders?
Will it warrant a punishment within the premises of the offense or should it involve the NDC or Near Protocol at large.
I would have created a poll on the forum here but due to the fact that we now have trusted humans in Near, I solicit the poll be made on Near Social to allow only human voting.
Things like this is bound to happen as long as there are gigs and bounties. To be fore prepared will help address issues like this without much stress on the issue…
Let’s keep building 
Thanks for this initiative, I hope this will create fair Transparency and other people will not pointing out and making them guilty inside 
again and again.
Hello Members @Dabbie3229 @blaze and Mods,
We must establish a mechanism on our NEAR website, or a dedicated page, that clearly outlines the names of all members and DAO mods along with their respective departmental affiliations. This will ensure that no individual can falsely claim to be a mod or have insider knowledge.
By allowing moderators to directly connect with members, we can effectively eliminate any potential for fraudulent behaviour like that of @Albhion It is only through his knowledge that no one is keeping watch that he is able to continue to perpetrate such scams. We still don’t know how many individuals have been taken advantage of or had their names used to secure funds or grants? We do not know how long these things have been happening in the ecosystem. Why would anyone in their right senses do such a thing? Identity theft is a serious offence.
Let us take action now to prevent this from happening in the future. We need to build a safe community and a betetr ecosystem.
Hey Jackie.
Really appreciate your concerns in safeguarding the Near community governance but such allegations should preferably be supported with evidence if discussed on the forum. If you’re uncomfortable with that please follow up with the relevant parties offline
I appreciate you coming forward, taking responsibility and addressing this publicly. If not for your efforts, I wouldn’t have known about it at all. This episode verifies the failure of the nonsensical i-am-human promotion.
At this point I believe there are less builders than there are people playing politics and taking money to produce PDFs.
Most notably, there is no need to verify the humanity of someone who is actually creating value. Yes, it is true that only a human can create value. Therefore verifying the ‘humanity’ of a value creator post-hoc is redundant. The verification procedure only makes sense if we are incentivizing those who do not create value to participate as warm bodies or forum politicians.
Maybe I am mistaken in assuming that NEAR has current aspirations to become a platform for value creation?
Expect more malfeasance until the underlying incentives are addressed. @Albhion set a positive example by taking responsibility. When will leadership live up to this standard?
Sorry let me chime in here.
We’ve had records of people using different account to collect the Community Funds and as part of the community I find this as a misconduct and an unfair approach to the community, many use puppet account to insult and discredit other dedicated contributors and their reputation matters a lot and to reduce all this drama and chaos we need proof of humanity.
We need to know you’re not a puppet account before considering you as a person.
How can we differentiate between
How about the fact people open accounts on forum account of 4days ago and start causing chaos in the ecosystem.
How can we solve this solution? But with IAH you’ve proof of being real and not puppet or bot account.
Btw it’s not compulsory to verify to be a human but I believe it’s inevitable to participate on activities in the NDC without being verified
Thanks for your concern 
If forum politicians were creating value for the ecosystem, NEAR would be on the moon right now. Instead we’ve had cycle after cycle of vaporware being funded from the top and dumped on the community. Meanwhile released projects are ignored by podcasters taking thousands per month to produce programs with 20 YouTube views. Paid social media accounts celebrate “1000 projects building on NEAR”, but nothing is released and most projects have been abandoned.
Time for a fresh approach. What I see here are more malign incentives and doubling down on the failures of the past.
I understand you are trying to respond to my post here, but you’ve talked past my concerns. It is a non-response, rationalizing more of the same.
You can’t vote value into an ecosystem. Democracy is a political system, not an entrepreneurial system. The entire premise is antithetical to value creation, which starts with individual human action.
If those bad actors created applications with users, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. As a creator of the only active, unsubsidized game on NEAR, I’ve been banned from this forum for “encouraging dissent”.
All of the freebies are just bait for people with bad intentions. Remove the malign incentives and the problem goes away. As long as humans/bots/aliens/bad actors can vote themselves or others funds, the problem remains.
There’s no incentive for value creation. You can verify that water downstream of the dam is wet, but it is irrelevant to the function of the hydroelectric plant. It doesn’t generate value. Worse yet, it is tautological and absurd.
Creators don’t want to compete with people who are subsidized by insiders’ votes. Rent seeking drives people away from the ecosystem. The political economy has eclipsed the actual value of the ecosystem. The only people earning in NEAR are the people eating subsidies. There’s nothing “sustainable” about this.
This episode illustrates these points perfectly. Insiders can take it as a lesson or continue with more of the same…
Hey bro, Please avoid bringing my name into situations like this. I am not trying to grab tokens in any way. I personally feel that this language is actually too judgemental and disrepectful that you even had to tag me. I do not justify whatever i did regarding using two accounts, like i stated in the letter, i got frustrated from people blocking my effort to contribute to the NEAR ecosystem due to a past mistake, that how can a grudge last up to two years.
It is also good that you note that when i used another account i proposed a genuine project just like i always did. When i did the Fashion DAO with @Dabbie3229 I made sure that we announced the bounties and paid the winners, we fulfilled the projects that we proposed and minted their NFTs with physical versions available and created cryptovoxels 3d model for the star winner of our Fashion choice from the community, I made sure we paid all the graphic designers, also made sure the council was cummensorately taken care of.
I have made notable contributions to the ecosystem, i co founded beatdao, metaversedao, built the NEAR library, created the signature trivia system for NxM and many others.
Just because a person made one mistake doesnt mean the person is up for condemnation, i will advise you to watch your language next time
Please take a look below
