Proposal: Simplifying Community Funding

NDC Community and nodes Community Fund
3

Great Proposal @erik.near
Looking forwards for this changes. It is all for the cause of bettering the funding structure.

Here is the Introduction of @ConciergeTeam : [Introduction] NEAR Concierge Initiative

As the team looking forward to moving further with community and NF, we believe in the mission of uniting NEAR as 1 singularity and #MassAdoptionisNEAR

8 Likes
4

Hey Leader! :pray:
We are still expecting more and more suggestions/feedback/concerns about the simplifying community funding, please feel free to show your comment down below. @GiuseppeBk @naveen_in @marianeu @INFINITY @derymars @gonemultichain @theChosenOne @whoiscavenaghi @johanga

6 Likes
5

@Paul @claudinhabelha @Dedeukwu @blaze @tabear @eviejugo @Tafsirul555 @IgbozeIsrael @Joshjacques @Dammy

4 Likes
6

@Edgar @sterryo @Ozymandius @ALuhning @duOCELOT @Jujusca @CONARID @satojandro @nacho.near @josedlujan

I can’t able to tag 10+ people in a single post and can’t able to reply more than three posts at a single time so please feel free to tag your co guild leaders here in the post to know their thoughts.

Thanks :heart:

5 Likes
7

First of all I would like to thank @erik.near for starting the guild initiative and stepping up again to remind/reshape the program seeing the growth within the ecosystem.

For me, this post covers our huge diversified ecosystem of which we are just a small part. Sharing any feedback from the context of the guild type I am leading or by anyone else who is leading can mix up the overall conversation. Especially the young guilds.

Seeing this, I would request/suggest to have four different posts based on the broken down categories with the Guilds/Community leaders getting tagged/diverted to that post for having much better insights from them.

Second thing, I can corelate the overall development of our guild structure with the Spiral Model of which I have witnessed one complete iteration. Hoping to see amazing things coming up in the next one. :slight_smile:

image
image1024×853 60.9 KB

Thanks.

7 Likes
8

It’s very good that things are moving towards simplification. Simplicity is the key to understanding.

1 Like
9

I will give good feeback as soon as I am back from Amsterdam :slight_smile:

1 Like
10

@Samtoshi_F_Baby @vandal @Dawns @LilianPS @jedimindtricks @LuisAponte99 @Sofia_Alum @robert @cryptoheitzi @cizi31

Sorry, I had to ping you all - please go through this proposal and leave your feedback (not mandatory but we appreciate feedbacks and questions)

Thank you :slightly_smiling_face:

4 Likes
11

This is a solid and very insightful proposal from @erik.near regarding how we define the On-Chain community in the future

I do agree with @naveen_in, looks like we need different treatment related to the category of On-Chain community as mentioned before which consists of Region communities, normal / common interest based communities, Professional Services etc.

We will discuss about it with our Council members and will be back with feedback soon

1 Like
12

Sorry guys! I’m creating this post again by tagging multiple people at once but it is urgent because we need your valuable attention here. @Symbolik @jeph @Milen @Primaveralina @Naokiakazawa @tolehico @sidpillai91 @coyotefugly @Mazi @frederikhansson

1 Like
13

@cuongdcdev @decentricity @JCB @vrdoingthings @Christine @AtharvaITSMYNE @agungdjs @MostafaLotfy @RileyTran

14

@JMaenen @riqi @garikbesson
@pathrock @OrvardJam @lenara @leader2704 @SkyNik @xBruceTheGoose @mikedotexe

15

@weiser @luciotato @royo @chadoh @josh @Ash @jodishwaran @murilooon @Angela and @ConciergeTeam

Sorry for the ping but this is a proposal following the guilds AMA a few weeks ago. Please go through it and provide feedback (if any).

3 Likes
16

Yeah, I d agree with it with the community funding support
one question is for someone, like a personal KOL in Crypto, how to get any rewards or support for NEAR team

1 Like
17

Thanks @erik.near! I am glad we are always improving. Nice proposal!

18

Luv this proposal brought up

19

I agree with @erik.near on the approach. It’s clear that communities have intermarried with projects and the funding models are completely different. A meetup group (community) per se has completely different needs than a project or “guild” that is focused on a service, product or building a specific part of the ecosystem.

Many projects and services have fallen under the guise of Guilds because that was a path to funding. Separating these is a good thing for scaling and administrative purposes.

Finally, recognizing that there are members of the community that go above and beyond and that there needs to be a compensation model for those contributors as a community or ecosystem lead (Ambassador). This has been a clear gap that has led to a lot of confusion and frustration.

3 Likes
20

Hey @erik.near, thanks for this detailed proposal. I’m glad you brought this up, because the @ConciergeTeam is everything but a concierge service.
You can see what the different sub-teams of the Concierge Initiative are currently doing in our Introduction created by @KriptoRaptor:

My idea is, just as we have a Marketing DAO for marketing activities, to create an Operations DAO.

The Operations DAO would have its own treasury and council and fund the operational activities as above.

This would make us more independent from the NF, which would also allow decisions to be made faster, as we are currently in an extreme growth phase.

I look forward to your feedback on this and am curious how the initiative will develop.

6 Likes
21

This is an awesome proposal and looking forward to further explanation/expansion of the total goal put in here.
:heart_decoration:

22

Hi everyone, sorry for the delay in replying.

I think that with what has been mentioned above by @erik.near we are moving towards the right direction.

I’m part of a recently born regional guild that belongs to the 80% of guilds that can be considered a community.

Based on my experience, we need to aim to simplify the guild system giving it more structure and to ensure sustainability in the long term.

I agree with the sentence “You can easily kill the culture of a community with too much funding”.

In my opinion funding is a really delicate topic and can be a double edge sword. Too much funding can bring to laziness or “speculation” (can’t find a better term) but too few might lead to demotivation. I agree with the tiring system: basic, active and engaged but we need to ensure that the system is rewarding for the “heroes” that go above and beyond to create an on chain community that is consistent and reliable.