We didn’t ask you came in our community with your “worth time”. Near is community for enthusiasts, not for people who came to get money here. If you want to help us, do it for free or continue serve for web2 companies.
Great choose of the artist who have nothing mutual with near
Just after listening back on yesterday’s community call and wanted to add in some words that come to mind when ideating some sort of tagline, plus some AI-generated art using those words to initiate some potential visuals to go with it:
Diversity, Collaboration, Creativity, Innovation.
There are a few things which strike me as important to manage:
Integrating new people into ecosystem whilst managing web 2.0 reputation based rent seeking behavior to a minimal level
Avoid individuals who seem authoritative to confidence others into giving them authority in ecosystem and back-filling with their friends / allies whilst crowding out others.
A pseudonymous system with an equitable process to build trust would be preferable i.e. take away conditioning on individual’s parameters to judge the person’s contribution to good decision making. People from big-name institutions are generally seen as good but in last decade there is a trend of grifters from same said institutions milking influence and money in this space because they appear competent and authoritative.
Hi I find the NDC initiative very interesting and look at it as the first step of full decentralization.
But as @maxlev said, there are a couple o things that might create friction and should be observed with proper attention.
With those being:
Proposals to be elected as a “specific role”.
I’ve seen that there are multiple roles to be taken to start this machine going which vary from HR to finances to legal etc…
I strongly believe that opportunities should be given to users that are fully prepared, certified and proven to take part of a specific task.
Nowadays, it is quite easy to put a couple of keywords on our resume or LinkedIn page to be seen as someone who is not there yet, just to get a couple of extra notoriety points.
To make this work, I believe that who request to apply as “specific role” should be screened and tested with accurate tests and tasks to review their actual knowledge on that role and profession. I would also advise considering outsourcing users that are proven for their performance and knowledge, that would bring more transparency and avoid conflict of interest.
The voting system and conflict of interest.
I stand for democracy, and what makes democracy beautiful, it’s the freedom to choose!
The only way I see this to work thought is user that would like to take part of this initiative would have to let their on chain-communities, daos and projects go since if someone is taking a quite important role would create a huge conflict of interest as you can imagine.
For the voting system itself, a lot of individuals have a lot of interests in common or own huge communities with multiple coin holders, it’s quite easy to write down an appealing description why the admin of that community should be elected and generate multiple votes based on a common interest.
I believe that the NEAR Community is the healthiest and most creative community out there, but to be able to keep it that way, I believe that vigilance for scenarios where users are considering a negative impact on the ecosystem for personal gain should be considered.
Thank you, @stanisnear – I’ve just been on in the community for a few months and am learning a lot. And, since I am the one who was in the exchange about questions about my integrity and, essentially being a “grifter” I’d like to share what I have learned:
We really do need a proper onboarding process that (as said above) helps people know the rules of the road so that Web2 behavior (or what’s different now) is addressed upfront – a lot of what I have been doing is un-learning while learning and having a set on-boarding process OUTSIDE of the person who is bringing you in (generally someome you trust and know) might help a lot.
I’m learning that this community has already been through a lot, and when you do something that might seem like an old issue you get attacked. That’s not fair either, so folks that have been here for a while need to take a deep breath, and reach out to the person they have issue with. No one has contacted me personally about anything they are concerned about so their issues become performative, instead of truly about adressing the issue. I am open to learn and address anything, but feeling attacked shuts the learning process down.
Finally, the 2 really big things I learned from the exchanges above are
1.) reporting how you are doing needs a reasonable timeframe – if you are in the midst of a project (as we are) you tend to wait until you are done – if this is NOT helpful, and updates while in the process of a project are better then we do need to agree on this as a whole.
2.) Though the biggest thing I learned from the exchange is that there is a belief that this is an ENTHUSIAST community only – I humbly think this is changing rapidly, where people (some with bad intentions and others with good) are trying to figure out how to build their business of creativity. Our DAO is about writing and media ABOUT what creativity is doing on the platform, so it’s not individual art projects, and I know that’s a different mindset, and not enthusiast. So, perhaps we’re moving from being enthusiast based into something more concrete and professional?
So, I’m coming out again to explain this NOT to be authoritative, but to contribute because I too believe NEAR is deeply creative, yet it’s evolving and I want to share my insights. Thanks for hearinng me out.