Please review and leave constructive feedback under each of these posts in order to help ensure that the framework for overseeing the NDC’s Community Engagement is a strong one that the Community endorses.
We will check back in after two weeks - so on October 7 - to collalesce all of the edits into one finalized version to exist in tandem with the documents presented by the other NDC Working Groups.
Any general questions, thoughts, or ideations at a general, high level can be posted in this thread but otherwise, please help us to better tailor productive edits to each section of the above documents by commenting your edits under the specific post linked above.
In the meantime, a bit about me for those who don’t know me! I am a former NEAR Foundation employee who has been working within the NEAR Community since May 2021. You’ll have seen my icon around the Forum with posts predominantly from the time when I formed a part of the NF Community Team - assisting with the formation of the Creatives DAO, the management of the Guilds Program, the development of various guides and documentation for payout process throughout the Community, and so on.
As of my departure from NF at the end of June 2022, I’ve become the C.O.O. of the Marma J Foundation and an advisor to NEAR Hub; and I hope to, with several others, to support the overall management of the Community Engagement Working Group for the NDC.
i’m here now just because of my interest in web3-communities developing .
i didn’t see by my eyes the situation why Rebecca now is ex-NF-core member
as well as i have nothing common to these 2 funny characters who didn’t post no one proposal by themselves but without any sort of gentle or business talking manners give advises to every topic without asking it from them. so i don’t support any of this sides
i’d like to examine instruments for community engagement that i’ve studied during last year on different web3-events from many web3-communities
but from every side i feel the false. i feel the broken trust to Chloe and Rebecca from the NEAR ecosystem community; from other side i see, how the community is ready for open dialog with respectful analytics and non-insisting advices. we are also ready to clean our space from @pathfinder and so on in order to support and understand each other more clean and direct.
so as i web3 and NEAR believer i’d like to ask with some clarification from Rebecca and Chloe about the reason - why such an attitude is appearing here. just because the history has a tendency to be repeated.
as for these characters like @pathfinder - all of us have a choice to give them just NO reply. so it’s the most logical solution that came to me to keep Near forum space clean and honest.
at the moment we can see 3 drafts posted here, anyone can ask to participate and put there his\her points of view. or even to create and propose another document.
the question is the one in all the threads - how to do Trust these teams and people. they’ve already had a chance to create community on NEAR, but as we can see - we’re now on the same point with no progress. this make me doubted in professional skills of some candidates. but i can deal with it until both of us believe in one common idea of the project - its usually described in white paper and all the members can cooperate to each other and trust to each other because they all are agree to its main points
so i honestly feel it’s ok to ask honest questions and give honest answers to them, to talk about responsibilities, to be doubted in someone. then to present arguments for and against, to listen to the community, and to candidates.
Chloe herself said about her biography and after that I asked my question to be clarified. She provided her biography in order to create a committee. Therefore, this question and clarification matters in the current branch. If she has a good and transparent resume, I am ready to support her and recommend her to others.
Hello @mecsbecs@chloe@IgbozeIsrael@Dabbie3229@Monish016@sarahkornfeld and others who also have contributed one way or the other for your contribution on the community guidelines for the NDC it really a good work we’ve done.
But a little question for clarification
Is this the final document for the engagement community or an initial? @chloe and @Monish016 did they contribute off post or on a call?
If they’ve involved with a contribution post is there a link to that post so I can read what they’ve for us.
Once again thanks for the V2 of the community Engagement post well organized and written big ups
I am not making any claim or proposal to lead anything with regards to the NDC so I felt it would be the most straight-forward to add a small post-script to this post with some preliminary information about me as a frame of reference instead of a formal post. Feel free to also go through my activity here on the Forum and onchain under ‘rebecca.near’ if you would like to know more about my time in the ecosystem to date.
For those who are unaware of the restructuring that NF underwent at the end of June, which resulted in the elimination of certain employement roles, here is the blog post NF put out. I would like to think that there is no reason for anyone in the Community to have broken trust with me as a result of a circumstance outside of my control as outlined in the 3rd paragraph from the bottom in this post.
Could you please elaborate on the attitude that is at issue here? Could you elaborate upon this below remark?
Anyone is welcome to interact with these documents and if the Community decides nothing in anything of these serves them or matches the goals of the NDC at all, anyone is welcome to redraft and repost for the Community’s consideration. I do not own these words or ideas, I was only helping to organize them in a clear and direct manner for Community discussion and analysis.
Please feel free to share more informatin about the instruments for community engagement you’ve been studying. In fact, I know @IgbozeIsrael and @jlwaugh have been discussing the possibility of organizing some workshops for the community in general to discuss some of the topics contained within these draft documents and to better understand how the Community + NDC on the whole can relate to and work with one another. Perhaps these tools could find a place to be put into practice there to start?
Hi, @Psalmy I’ve been working directly with Blaze on my suggestions with the existing documents that he developed and put out. I think – from what I can see – these documents here have additional content that builds on Blaze’s (or perhaps it is the entire team’s work, not sure) that includes ideas built on comments from the long thread from last week.
@mecsbecs reached out to me via email here to see if it would be ok to include some of my suggestions from the threads from last week. Totally cool with me.
But I am confused as well now, is this list of content in alignment and being coordinated for and with NDC? Or, is this another group?
Either way, it seems like we need to continue to work together to develop suggestions and best practices. Does that help?
Answering your question: this is just the latest version for continued Community edits and feedback. There could very well be a v3 if folks feel it’s warranted. There seems to be some hope that continued momentum across all NDC Working Groups will result in more finalized materials being completed by the beginning of October but I think we’re all of the same mind that even these documents will continue to be ‘living’ ones and so will undergo revisions as needed, periodically even after this point.
With regards to @chloe and @Monish016’s involvement you are correct in saying it was conducted over a call with @IgbozeIsrael and myself. I took the notes and adjusted wording to have it match into the formats you see in the embedded posts.
Thanks for the support and please detail any specific edits or points of clarification if you feel they’re needed across each of the posts!
Yeah, for general reference the Google Drive folder shared in the NDC Discord and where we’ve been working out of to build on what had been drafted there (as of last week) and also posted originally by @IgbozeIsrael is here: 05_Community Engagement - Google Drive
You’ll see a Doc added called “NEAR Digital Collective (NDC) Community Engagement notes + v2 drafts” which is where we drafted the edits that resulted in the v2 version of the documents you see here. @sarahkornfeld other contributions I think may have been missed because I cannot find the Doc she contributed to (this is part of the fun mess of document drafting!) but she and I will resolve that in DMs to not clutter up this thread.
Everything that has been posted here as v2 is an evolution of what was posted before and can definitely stand for more suggestions, so looking forward to reading them from anyone and everyone in the wider Community interested in contributing!
To bring clarity, I reached out to both Chloe and Rebecca to help bring their collective NEAR community expertise to reviewing these documents. It’s the first form of expert review, with additional reviews likely. Here is the link to the drive that is publicly accessible for community guidlines:
I would welcome your contribution to this process in an even more constructive way. Being a watchdog of the process is certainly a role, but these individuals are contributing, not applying for a specific role. What expertise can you offer to help meet the communities goals and the NDC initiative?
Any community member can contribute to this process, and I am reaching out to many with deep ecosystem experience regardless of affiliations.
I got some notifications on the draft docs I submitted earlier. I did not reply further because a more refined draft was put on the forum here after @mecsbecs, @Monish016, and @chloe and I had a call.
The earlier draft was put together by @Dabbie3229 and I.
We are all expecting the community to make comments and contributions on this very docs as the former is improved on.