We translated this letter for our community.
We translated this letter for our community.
For anyone looking for the specific time for the AMA, here’s the Twitter announcement. Looking forward to it!
Hi Marko, just a quick update. The NDC represents the government (governing bodies) of the “NEAR Digital State,” which encompasses the entire ecosystem.
The Governance Working Group (GWG) is a community-driven initiative to define evolving governance models that ease the Ecosystem into decentralization, and it is the formation/discovery phase. We’ve been working to define the scope, deliverables, and budget. After the initial discovery, it was identified that it made sense to take a pragmatic approach to decentralization instead of a “big bang,” so the transition will take place over time.
The community has been working on a volunteer basis thus far, so no funds have been received or bounties issued. Now that we have the scope, deliverables, tentative timeline, and 1 YR budget we will move to onboard both the community through bounties and a few resources to work in a more dedicated capacity. You can learn a bit more here:
Thank you for this encouraging words Illia. Looking forward to tomorrow’s AMA.
Rough seas make stronger sailor, so cheer up near fam!
Thanks for the response @blaze. Quoting the original formation post:
Signed: Pagoda, NEAR UA, NEAR Foundation, Proximity Labs, MOVE Capital, NEAR Balkans, MetaWeb, Orderly, NEAR Vietnam, Satori, Open Shard Alliance, Open Forest Protocol, Human Guild, Aurora, HAPI Labs, Calimero, OnMachina, Kikimora, AstroDAO, and NEAR Office of the Co-Founders
These are all spin offs of NEAR organizations or directly backed by NEAR. This is not a “community” driven initiative when no outside projects were involved in the formation.
The community has been working on a volunteer basis thus far, so no funds have been received or bounties issued.
No funds have been received. Have any funds been allocated by NF or any affiliated organizations? How will future funds be governed?
Thanks for everything @illia .
AMA will be amazing!
We at fraDAO will be strong and keep our DAO projects and governance firm and strong.
we wish you positive vibes and peaceful energy
i genuinely believe in near. we’ll be fine and better than ever thank you for this.
Thanks for writing this @illia . For the things I want to build with WebAssembly Music there are really no other platforms than NEAR to make it real.
I started using NEAR long before most others because of the unique approach of being able to use it as an application platform accessible even to non-crypto users, and I still believe most people out there have not understood what separates NEAR from other blockchains here.
And that it’s actually a evolutionary milestone when it comes to delivering Web applications, that actually deserves to be regarded as the next generation of the Web.
For sure worth building on beyond the hype.
Ecohing Marko on the transparency related to the funding process. It is also raised in this thread about the lack of transparency for marketing related payments via Flying Rhino and favoritism being played to organizations close to the Near Foundation. Funds should aim to be distributed transparent via forums like OWS mentioned below Bring back ows[how to improve near & its ecosystem through rolling opportunities]
Thanks Illia! See you all today!
This was a “call to participation” requesting the Community organize and lead the initiative to establish a governance framework, on-chain decision-making, and a community treasury. The signers were in agreement with the vision cast by Illia at ETHCC. The Governance Working Group (GWG) has assembled to meet the call, and it is community-driven.
One realization we quickly had in the GWG is that we need a glossary of terms that defines words we all use but may not have consensus on, like “Community.” What does Community mean?
community = the people building, using, investing, and collaborating on NEAR
So in that sense, the signers are part of the community.
There are no specific funds allocated by the NF at this time. There was originally a proposal for 139M NEAR, but it was decided that pragmatic decentralization would be a better approach.
The treasury is the Community Treasury that will be governed by governing bodies as proposed by the GWG and adopted by the Ecosystem. The GWG is working to define a governance model for the Ecosystem, with the goal of the broadest community participation possible.
The first draft of the NEAR Constitution that outlines the governing bodies has been published for broader community review and comment.
How does the GWG intend to engage the broader community? We have two workgroups, Community Engagement, and Communications, that have been drafting plans to best engage the community in the broadest sense possible.
I hope this provides some clarity, it’s a very large topic, and the Governance Working Group (GWG) is working to “make it feel simple” and easy to communicate. Of course, as a community initiative, we need more contributors (authors, reviewers, communicators, PMs, etc.), so please consider joining and providing your expertise. We are working to have bounties for contributors.
Thank you @illia for all you have said… Your words are so encouraging… My soul is lifted… Near is the future and the future is Now
Thanks alot @illia
The future is NEAR
I appreciate your thoughts and effort, @illia keep the good work moving, can’t wait to be a part of the meeting
lovely sentiment, glad we’re still here – building!
Great stuff. Some of the most important points from this and the AMA:
NEAR isn’t competing with other chains/ecosystems as much as trying to reach the massive (uncaring) world of web2, including the giants like wechat and meta. There’s still a very long path between here and there, and we have the tech to make it happen. Squabbles and movements between ecosystems for short term incentives are inevitable but ultimately minor.
We’re going to try lots of stuff and fail a bunch of times and that’s normal. We do need to make sure there’s transparency wherever possible along the way so we can learn together from those paths. The developer ethos this was started with has been good so far and let’s work to keep that transparency-first, quality-and-results-driven mentality.
The NF isn’t and can’t be the only entity out there driving things forward (normal web2 ecosystems don’t have large funders behind them – entrepreneurs just build great stuff with the help of dedicated dev rel teams and get VC funding for it). While we look to the NF for thought leadership and it has an important role in funding, we as the community need to continue to take over the NF’s functions (funding, marketing, project discovery, launch support, etc). The NF was designed not to exist and that deconstruction is a prerequisite for its eventual downshift.
There’s still lots of opportunity for nontechnical people in the ecosystem to step up and provide clarity, help onboard people, create guides or otherwise make it easier to navigate things here.
The path isn’t always straight but we’ll get there.
Great POV and vision.
Also, love this one:
Thank you for this encouraging words Illia, high discuss AMAs.
Thanks @illia for reminding us to have the long-term growth mindset and reiterating the importance of communicating to better understand and work together with each other.
The issue is very simple. Just support developers who have released projects with active users.
I missed this kerfuffle. Mostly keep my head down in the text editor. From our perspective many of the things listed here are red herrings.
We all have our political concerns and problems. Some of us more than others and it isn’t without sympathy that I make this observation. Some of us may have concerns about keeping our information private because of our own situations.
So many projects promoted by the NF have been vaporware thus far. Some of the projects which have received support and heavy promo have exited the ecosystem. The reasons and specifics for those actions are besides the point.
It just looks bad when released projects don’t get the same support or any support.
You don’t need a PHD in economics to understand that subsidizing certain projects hurts other projects. There is only so much attention in the NEAR ecosystem. When grant recipients can throw around budgets for marketing (with the same stable of NEAR media people) or exchange liquidity, projects that are growing organically can’t compete.
When we want to participate in the community barriers seem to come out of nowhere. Meanwhile vaporware projects get promoted by the NF, take grants, run pre-sales from NEAR users and then move to Solana.
The issue is very simple. Just support developers who have released projects with active users. From our side we’ve tried to be generous with our interpretation of what’s going on with the ecosystem, but it is hard not to see it as insider gatekeeping. When NF puts out a hashtag like “#CreateWithoutLimits”, that’s the cherry on top.
From our side nothing about this dev experience has built trust. So it is hard when we go back to:
Some of us may have concerns about keeping our information private because of our own situations.
Then we get to hear about how inclusive NF is and all of that… It really is too much. The sloganeering doesn’t match the action. Words must mean actions or else what are we even talking about?
From our side we showed up and delivered a working project. Would be great if you could take a step back and look at what is going on from our perspective.
Hope this post helps us reach a proactive solution. I have a responsibility to support my users. Not interested in arguing. The reasons and rationalizations for the current situation are besides the point. Need to see some concrete action on this. All is well which ends well.