Based on recent events of anon accounts demanding transparency, unfounded accusations, insulting community members, and creating FUD. It’s time to begin the conversation around transparency.
What is Transparency?
What are the criteria needed to raise a concern about transparency?
Can anon, newly created accounts raise concerns without any background of who they are and how they contribute to the ecosystem? Aka, what information should a reporter provide?
Guidelines to separate FUD from real concerns. In transparency, we (the Community) must contemplate that there are bad actors, manipulators, disgruntled individuals, and fudsters. Yes, some people want to harm NEAR and other people.
What is a conflict of interest?
Transparency is a very fuzzy word. It’s up to the interpretation of the individual at this stage. It needs to clearly be defined with processes and procedures to investigate, report, and call out FUD and bad actors when they occur.
The toxic behavior in the community today does not build community or innovation but division.
I’m glad the community responded to the call of this workgroup and am very excited to see how we (the Community) can shape a better community based on true transparency and not accusations and fud.
Are you a concerned community member that would like to join the conversation around Transparency and define the process and procedures of how it is handled?
Hello Blaze! Could you please disclose your monthly payment for NDC advisor’s work? And we need to remove some trusses due a conflict :
/t/ndc-trustees-and-conflict-of-interest/33548/4
of interest.
We (the community) need your help. What the process?
Dropping my input here.
With the consciousness that people don’t like been cheated and want to have complete access and ownership of their assets.
The Community needs transparency
Normally we know transparency is the tendency for an object to allow light to pass through it so that the object behind can be seen or noticed, it’s also a quality of been opened and honest in your activities to provide no room for doubt or misconceptions
In my own definition transparency is been accountable and opened to the extend you’ve nothing to hide, when you’re been transparent you have nothing to hide cause you been open and candid and everyone knows what you’re up to, transparency brings about trust and confidence.
It has to be a community related issues not a personal issue.
Most issues that requires transparency are mostly related to community funds how it was spent, how it was managed or to know if the community funds was mismanaged or used to build traction and community growth.
So lack of result or report from an individual or project can be demanded from a community member for transparency sake.
But the key fact is that you’ve to proof you’re a community member by given a constructive feedback before demanding for transparency
Anonymously shouldn’t be allowed to demand for transparency mostly a new created account not up to 3-4 month old.
Also an inactive community member should not also demand for transparency, till he or she proves active before and gives a constructive feedback before he/she can legally demand for feedback or transparency.
Please find my fully disclosed grant here. It indicates upfront, monthly, and incentives (which none have been received):
You may find the information regarding the Community Treasury, trustees and details on conflict of interest here:
This is complete transparency. What other information is needed?
I welcome the Transparency Commission Working Group to review your request further to establish any further level of transparency needed.
Also, could you provide more on your background, the nature of your request, and your contribution to the ecosystem? It looks like you joined here on March 10th. Tnx
As someone who has faced discrimination in various forms, I believe that transparency is crucial for building a fair and equitable community. Transparency means providing clear and accessible information about decisions, actions, and policies that affect the community. It helps to foster trust and accountability, and it also allows community members to make informed decisions and provide feedback.
Regarding the criteria needed to raise a concern about transparency, I believe that any community member should be able to do so if they have genuine concerns. However, it is important to have clear guidelines in place to prevent unfounded accusations and FUD. An anonymous, newly created account should be able to raise a concern, but it may be helpful to provide some background information about why they are raising the issue.
In terms of separating FUD from real concerns, it is important to have a clear understanding of what constitutes a conflict of interest. This can help to identify potential biases or motivations behind certain claims. Additionally, having a transparent process for investigating and addressing concerns can help to separate legitimate concerns from unfounded ones.
Overall, I believe that promoting transparency and accountability is essential for building a strong and inclusive community. By working together to define clear processes and procedures, we can create a more equitable and just ecosystem for everyone.
Lack of good public justification for decisions made by authorities.
Lack of community knowledge about all the discussions made by the different working groups, moderators, etc. (we should record every debate, discussion, or conversation, and let it be accessible for the entire community)
Lack of transparency about who is receiving the resources and what the resources are building.
Lack of transparency about who is the decision maker and his/her relations to funding.
I think my concerns could be considered also criteria to raise concerns about transparency.
Now, if anon should be able to raise concerns about transparency or any other topic, this I dont know how to answer. It is a difficult question, because the concerns could be good, or they could be just FUD or something like that. Maybe, if it seems fud, anons could be asked to reveal themselves, if they want to be listened. If it is not fud, maybe we should objective evaluate it. But I dont have strong opinions on the matter.
Conflict of interest is when the decision maker (or its party/friends) is going to earn or lose something from the decision. So there is a conflict of interest when an authority has the power to evaluate or decide about something, and that evaluation or decision has influence over the own authority or over the authorities’ friends or partners, in a way it could benefit oneself or one’s partners, or to harm an enemy (or someone with personal vendetta) or the enemy’s partners. To solve at least part of this problem, I would suggest for anyone to be able to reject a decision maker or an evaluator as an evaluator or decision maker of the own project/etc.
