A. Delegation Address: bebekxbt.near
B. Forum Username: @beek520
C. Twitter Username: Simon
E. Target Voting Participation: 100%
F. History of Interactions with NEAR Protocol:
Beek’s first iteration with NEAR Protocols is via HERE Wallet campaign on February 2024, NEARLearn was my first handbook to Learn tehnologies through 2024. I am an active community member on Telegram, Discord and x/twitter. This Lead me to be the early to Near_Legions initiatives. I am recently keen to spread NEAR through IRL events and some collaborations.
G. History of Governance Participation (in NEAR or other ecosystems): None
H. Top 3 Priorities for the NEAR Ecosystem:
-
Bringing more education about NEAR visions and technologies, we can have curated content on the x/twitter timeline.
-
Doubling down on stablecoin adoption through DeFI on NEAR Mainnet or Near Intents.
-
Bring back DAO as the backbone of every community building on NEAR, and break it down into small, focused teams, depends on their niche (meritoracy type DAO, for curated perspetive)
I. Reasoning for any past votes in the NEAR Ecosystem: N/A
J. Conflicts of Interest: None
K. Answer Hypothetical Delegate Scenario: Prompt: The NEAR ecosystem is evaluating opportunities to stimulate onchain activity. In this hypothetical scenario, there are three different proposals for the Foundation to consider:
A proposal to allocate incentives to DeFi protocol users to benefit protocol metrics.
A proposal to establish a subcommittee to market the NEAR Protocol to developers and users.
A proposal to establish a Protocol-Owned Liquidity position by the House of Stake on major DeFi protocols in the ecosystem.
For the first Proposal. (2)
For the second Proposal. (1)
For the third Proposal. (3)
I will begin with the lowest-priority area (Second Proposal). NEAR does not need to focus its marketing efforts on attracting developers primarily through grant funneling, especially those who are still in the exploratory phase of understanding NEAR’s technology. Historically, grant-driven onboarding has shown limited long-term retention and ecosystem commitment. A more effective approach would be to prioritize funding for projects that are already deployed on NEAR and demonstrate both the capability and willingness to scale within the ecosystem.
Then (First Proposal), we need to also deploy more DeFI related project in NEAR that has potentioal growth like stablecoins or payment that leveraged Near, it should be served as an early funding that projects a retention, the tech must 100% using near techstack so we could capture the economics activities as NEAR, as long as its generates a positive revenuees after the funding rounds it would be good things.
The last (Third Proposal), which i considerd priorities. I believe it is strategically inefficient to hold a large treasury without active deployment. Allocating a managed portion of the treasury into established DeFi positions referably across major, reputable protocols could provide more sustainable funding and resilience, even during unfavorable market conditions. Long-term survivability is a prerequisite for technological growth and success.
L. What is your motivation for becoming a NEAR delegate?
I am particularly interested in how NEAR positions itself within the broader market beyond DeFi, and how this strategic positioning is reflected in its governance narratives and long-term priorities. The direction articulated by Illia and the broader NEAR leadership provides a clear framework for how the ecosystem aims to grow through deliberate, and often challenging, strategic choices.
This also represents my first formal participation in a DAO-governed organization. I find the governance model compelling due to its non-hierarchical structure, transparent proposal mechanisms, and distributed decision-making process. Compared to traditional organizations where change is typically constrained by an approval chain_of_command, DAO governance has capacity for adaptability, faster iteration, and collective alignment around innovation.
M. Anticipated delegation support (if applicable) (Please describe the anticipated breakdown of delegated voting power, including any relevant self-delegation or large investors/core team members you wish to disclose).
No delegation support expected.
Self-Assessment Criteria(7/10)
A. Experience (1/2)
Contract development, i currently have no experience in this matter.
DAO governance, i currently have moderate knowledge about DAO votings, but might have none in regards to DAO forum discussions
protocol growth, i currently have small experience in growing protocols,
community development, i have experience in several RL community growth outside web3
Regarding DeFi market operations, I have none. I’m keen to apply my operational knowledge in budgeting and cost-related metrics.
B. Diversity of Perspective (2/2)
My professional background includes people development, sales, and data-oriented roles, which shape how I approach discussions and decision-making.
C. Alignment with NEAR Ecosystem (2/2)
I am aligned with NEAR’s values and objectives as outlined in the House of Stake Proposal and NEAR’s roadmap.
D. Governance Engagement (0/2)
I haven’t participated in votes over the last 18 months, but going forward I’m committed to maintaining near-100% participation. Deep engagement isn’t realistic on every proposal, I will engage within my area of expertise (budgets and human), but I’ll dedicate more time whenever it’s needed / when you feel it’s important.
E. Conflicts of Interest (2/2)
My introduction to this forum came via the Near-Legions campaign, and as a result, my perspectives may reflect certain biases regarding governance, operational priorities, and the narratives the community believes NEAR Protocol should emphasize.
Public Acceptance
We accept the NEAR Delegate Code of Conduct and commit to being fully aligned with the success of the NEAR ecosystem.