How are anonymous accounts Gatekeepers? I am not imposing my authority through a pre-established identity, nor do I have any official decision making power. I am an anon from the community, asking honest questions.
To answer your question - the value that the anon accounts bring is directly proportional to the quality of the questions they ask.
Are the questions fair and reasonable? Then they bring value.
Are the questions bringing out serious issues that need to be addressed, even if they make some people uncomfortable? Then they bring A LOT of value
Are they just sharing offensive memes and spreading conspiracy theories? Probably lower on the value scale.
They should assume that the anon person asking questions is part of the NEAR Core team and grant them the basic decency of responding in a concise and respectful way. No one is beyond questioning.
agree. However, I feel that as long as NF is still involved in the organization of these systems the community should first and foremost engage with it and demand fairness. Going after individuals who abuse influence misses the point, most of the times.
Chicken and the egg situation. Why would the NF pay attention, or even suspect anything is going wrong when the community is entirely silent? Worst, gladly chirping along?
NF responds to community. There is this concept of going up the Chain of Command.
First you riase concerns with other community members, see what they think. (Most members I’ve spoken to think a lot of Creatives DAO proposals are crap)
Then you raise concerns with the projects (Most of my questions to these projects are flagged, hidden, and never answered. Now there are even separate threads seeking even more cencorship).
Then you raise your questions and concerns to decision makers. My questions and feedback on the proposal to reform creatives has also been flagged, hidden and never addressed. Coordinated attacks to suppress the truth and bring in accountability.
Then escalate to the Foundation, who should’ve been more involved and intervened earlier.
I just don’t think it is fair to give a free pass to everyday operators just because they are ‘meant to be supervised’ by a larger entity. Every single person along the chain of command needs to assume responsibility or step down.
well, when I was council of the Creatives Dao, last december, I tried often calling out unfair situations and abuse and was either ignored or told each dao/vertical had absolute power to make decisions…
So while I understand the chain of command, I do not think those in the verticals have enough support and, bc the system allows for abuse, abuse happens. I try not to individualize guilt when the system is flawed
i think anonymity is good to some extent but doesn’t favor us past a point. someone just trying to test the waters and figure things out can stay anonymous, but once it comes to gate keeping and moderation? i don’t think that helps the ecosystem in anyway.
on another hand, some people have all the right intentions, but deal with a lot of anxiety.
maybe more kyc’s would help, this way they remain “anon”, but the system would “know” them.
NF people failed experiment with NDC and now are trying to demolish the balance in Community between Vertical DAOs (less than 1% of total NF expenses) and Community which had consensus before. These two verticals have been working excellently, been a gorgeous example of transparency for the Near Foundation grants team (we have never seen any reports, and 75% of granted apps are not working) and regional hubs Sancore, Balkans, etc. (we have never seen any reports, Sancore hub leadership refuses to contact with African local guilds and contributors).
I think we’re in a Decentralized system where everyone has the right to speak his mind. If someone doesn’t feel satisfied about any report, I think it’s not bad to air their views. If the approach was rude you can flag as rude or inappropriate.
The problem is that they are always rude most times,the arguments don’t even relate to the proposal.
It always feels like one person is creating multiple accounts just to question everything that is not going their way and if appropriate answers are given, they’ll ask questions or bring things not relating to the topic just to make the proposal look bad.