What is wrong with NEAR’s community building strategies?

[Crypto_Garbaggio]

I’m writing this post today to initiate a discussion on NEAR’s Foundation community building strategies as I believe that I am not the only one who has perplexities about it.

In the past six months, the NEAR community has witnessed amazing growth. There are over thirty active Guilds that are helping grow the community by providing services, guidance, and attracting new people to the NEAR ecosystem. The work of 4nts, Human Guild, and OWS has been particularly notable and the majority of other Guilds are composed of active members that believe in the future of this ecosystem.

It is quite evident that the individuals and initiatives that are really helping the NEAR community grow are not part of the NEAR Foundation. The people that are really helping the community grow are those that make their hands dirty by getting involved in initiatives, connecting people, and helping projects out. It is people that spend their time working for the community and not just talking and telling them what to do.

It’s quite obvious that you can only build a community from within and the NEAR Foundation is clearly very disconnected from its community. This disconnection from the community is quite evident in the approach to marketing and community building. Talent and people are not valued as much as they should. The community builders resemble more a branch of the IRS than people who help empower the community that they are supposed to grow.

Despite the availability of funds for the community, community members outside the NEAR Foundation are being defunded instead of being supported in achieving their goals. They are being asked to prove their work with metrics and to justify every NEAR spend, while the NEAR Foundation is happy to spend plenty of money for doing a series of events (So-called Gen C) that half of NEAR’s Twitter community was not even aware of.

Now, I am wondering, what are the metrics that show that NEAR’s Foundation community builders are being helpful to the community? What I personally see is a bunch of people policing Guilds and demanding metrics instead of getting involved in their efforts. Is this a problem of community builders themselves or is it the fault of the flawed strategy that they were hired to fulfil? Either way, this situation is aggravating a disconnection between the NEAR Foundation and its community, and that is surely going to bring no good. Horizontality should not only be predicted but also practiced and the community should be listened to and included when it comes to strategies that affect them directly. Let’s not forget that those working on Guilds have no protections whatsoever, no benefits, no contract, they live in a state of perpetual precarity, it is only fair that they are listened to and helped when things do not go as planned.

I would be happy to hear the community’s opinion about this. Although this post might sound harsh, it has no malicious intentions, its only aim is to point out an issue that threatens to hinder community development. We have lots of great community builders and people that have started initiatives to grow the NEAR ecosystem. We should have them work closely together with the NEAR Foundation instead of having another layer of intermediation between them and the top, a layer that creates only more alienation and disconnection instead of integration. In short, the NEAR Foundations should focus on creating a more humanly sustainable relationship with its community.

Best,

Crypto Squirrel

[ScaleWeb3]

I don’t perceive it like this but I’m also not deeply involved so far.

Maybe it would be a good idea for some guilds to get funding from other sources than the foundation (see Gaming yields like Yield Guild or MetisDAO). I think this would be a big step for the professionalization of guilds and growth of Near community & ecosystem - and ultimately lead to the foundation being an important part and funder of core infrastructure & tools in the ecosystem with more partners equally driving growth (similar to the Proximity Labs play)

[David_NEAR]

Hey!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this!

@Crypto_Garbaggio

It is quite evident that the individuals and initiatives that are really helping the NEAR community grow are not part of the NEAR Foundation

This is intended. The role of the Community Team in the NEAR Foundation is, IMO, to empower those within the Community to build out and achieve their goals. It wouldn’t be possible without you all!

@Crypto_Garbaggio

It’s quite obvious that you can only build a community from within and the NEAR Foundation is clearly very disconnected from its community

Can you expand on this, please? How do you see the disconnect between NF and the Community?

@Crypto_Garbaggio

Talent and people are not valued as much as they should

In what way?

@Crypto_Garbaggio

Despite the availability of funds for the community, community members outside the NEAR Foundation are being defunded instead of being supported in achieving their goals

We’re distributing a tonne of funds to different DAOs and initiatives on the regular. Can you share a specific example, please? More than happy to address anything

@Crypto_Garbaggio

They are being asked to prove their work with metrics and to justify every NEAR spend, while the NEAR Foundation is happy to spend plenty of money for doing a series of events (So-called Gen C) that half of NEAR’s Twitter community was not even aware of.

Providing reports and implementing metrics is essential for Community Driven Accountability. If we fail to keep those who’ve been granted NEAR accountable, we run the risk of both:

• Opening up the funding system for abuse

AND

• Failing to distribute NEAR in a responsible manner

On the Gen C front; AFAIK the funding for that did not stem from the Community Fund. In fact, the vast majority of prizes ( ~$750k) were funded by projects building on NEAR, not the NEAR Foundation. For instance, Paras put up 2x $45k Marketing bounties.

The Gen C event (and all the others we’ll host) can live in harmony with the Community Fund, and it should.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

what are the metrics that show that NEAR’s Foundation community builders are being helpful to the community

It would really depend on each proposal/initative.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

What I personally see is a bunch of people policing Guilds and demanding metrics instead of getting involved in their efforts

Generally, the NF Core team get involved as much as we can! However, I don’t think it’s feasible to expect NF members get hands on with every Guild/initaitive. Not only is it not feasible, it doesn’t align with the long-term goals of NF - that being to make itself redundant and pass the torch over to the Community entirely.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

Either way, this situation is aggravating a disconnection between the NEAR Foundation and its community, and that is surely going to bring no good

Can you share some specifics on this, please. The team are accessible almost 24/7 and we’d love to be alerted to any concerns like this prior to them spilling over into a post.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

it is only fair that they are listened to and helped when things do not go as planned.

Hear you, and we’re always working to strengthen the connection between Guilds and NF:

Attention all Guild Leaders- Office Hours are Here

First things first, for those of you who don’t already know who I am/ those that are yet to bombarded with my request for a one-on-one meeting… I’m Jess, (Guilds Programme Manager)- my priorities are in helping guilds to improve their processes, optimize their workflows, remove bottle-necks and generally scale and thrive within our ecosystem. I am here to listen to the needs of Guilds and guild leaders. – if you haven’t yet had the chance to get on a call with me to discuss your guild,…

@Crypto_Garbaggio

In short, the NEAR Foundations should focus on creating a more humanly sustainable relationship with its community.

How would you envision this? Where do you believe the gaps are?

[Crypto_Garbaggio]

The disconnect that I’m talking about is experienced by the community as an added layer of bureaucracy that separates them from the NEAR Foundation. The community builders hired by the NEAR foundation are more absolving the function of gatekeepers than community support and building. Perhaps is a matter of understanding community building in different ways? In my understanding community buildings means being engaged with projects, connecting people, and finding ways to better support them and connect them with the resources that they need. You are right, community builders cannot be involved in everything, but being involved does not simply mean being in a chat and sending surveys.

Also, I understand that as the NEAR ecosystem progresses there is a need to implement guidelines and make sure that the resources are allocated is wisely spent. But I think that a better balance must be found between making sure resources are spent well and mistrusting.

Ultimately when I say that the NEAR Foundation should focus on creating a more humanely sustainable relationship with the community is to have a direct and disintermediated line between them and the community. It is frustrating to see community builders that know little of crypto and that have no direct experience with the NEAR ecosystem trying to tell the community how to best do things. I would like to see fewer barriers between the Foundation and the community and have it better represented in matters of community building.

[Dacha]

Let’s not forget that those working on Guilds have no protections whatsoever, no benefits, no contract, they live in a state of perpetual precarity, it is only fair that they are listened to and helped when things do not go as planned.

Guilds should find ways of self-funding. NF can help them at start, but it cannot to be permanently.

[Dacha]

@ScaleWeb3

Maybe it would be a good idea for some guilds to get funding from other sources than the foundation (see Gaming yields like Yield Guild or MetisDAO).

Absolutely agree with you

[Crypto_Garbaggio]

Wasn’t the idea of having Guilds to promote and help the NEAR community grow? If they have to find other sources of income outside the NEAR Foundation then what would their relationship even be with it? Also, if they start getting paid for their work directly by projects, that are still funded by NEAR, what would the crucial difference even be? Wouldn’t Guilds be reduced even more to a group of freelancers?

[David_NEAR]

@Crypto_Garbaggio

The disconnect that I’m talking about is experienced by the community as an added layer of bureaucracy that separates them from the NEAR Foundation

When it comes to distributing the amount of funding that the Community team do, I think it’s expected (and beneficial) to have a certain level of beuracracy. It’s not a free-for-all, funding should be distributed responsibly.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

You are right, community builders cannot be involved in everything, but being involved does not simply mean being in a chat and sending surveys.

I tend to think the team do a great job of being involved, that being said I’m not privy to everything (and ofc a little biased!). What else would you like to see?

@Crypto_Garbaggio

But I think that a better balance must be found between making sure resources are spent well and mistrusting.

That’s part of the goal we’re heading toward There’s never any mistrust, at least not in my experience. However, we can’t construe mistrust for avoiding the irresponsible distribution of NEAR.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

is to have a direct and disintermediated line between them and the community

Interesting, in what sense? The Community team do aim to be accessible all of the time.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

I would like to see fewer barriers between the Foundation and the community and have it better represented in matters of community building.

Could you substantiate this more, please? Perhaps with an example?

[David_NEAR]

@Crypto_Garbaggio

Wasn’t the idea of having Guilds to promote and help the NEAR community grow?

Absolutely, and to support projects and individuals building on and around NEAR

@Crypto_Garbaggio

If they have to find other sources of income outside the NEAR Foundation then what would their relationship even be with it?

Maybe this is where there’s been a disconnect in terms of communication.

One of the ultimate goals of the NEAR Foundation is to make itself redundant. With that in mind, we’re aiming to foster a plethora of Guilds who can become self sufficient. Think of the current funding schedule as the seeding of these Guilds which, like 4NTS, may well become revenue generating and self sufficient

The NF Community Fund is not bottomless.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

Also, if they start getting paid for their work directly by projects, that are still funded by NEAR, what would the crucial difference even be?

It comes around to having projects and Guilds becoming self-sufficient in time.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

Wouldn’t Guilds be reduced even more to a group of freelancers?

Quite the inverse IMO, I can see certain Guilds, for example, including Flying Rhino, Stars, Swine, and Kitchen, becoming full-fledged crypto-focused marketing agencies.

All that from a joint goal and interest in the NEARverse, how awesome is that?!

[damboy22]

This is quite interesting as many actually as pinpointed various aspects you raised concerning community and marketing strategies currently put in place. We know fully well that to actualize the vision on NEAR we have to look at the full picture holistically, especially when it comes to finding solutions to the problem at hand. A structure as to be in place to manage guilds so that maximum output can be achieved.

My opinion is that we can get feedback from the community both global and regional communities how respective guilds has added to the growth of NEAR at large

[Blacksheep]

The points mentioned are agreed. From my perspective, currently Community are playing with free hands. Going forward, we should expect strict rules. Might be useful to specify which Guild you are referring to.

[Crypto_Garbaggio]

I do not really understand how guilds like the 4NTs Guild would become revenue-generating and self-sufficient. They are doing communication and promotion of all things NEAR, and so are many other projects. If not the NEAR Foundation who would give funds for that?

As you also said, the idea of having guilds is to support projects and individuals building on and around NEAR. Guilds offer services for projects that do not have enough bandwidth and resources to have social media promotion for instance. If they had to pay for it, two things could happen 1) they simply would have a worst service 2) they might choose someone outside of the NEAR community. What would be exactly your vision of having Guilds stick around on NEAR but being self-sufficient?

Sure, the NF Community Fund is not bottomless but the token gets a 5% inflation per year with 0.5% of that going to the community, it’s still plenty of money.

[Crypto_Garbaggio]

How would you envision this self-funding mechanism? Who will pay for the promotion of NEAR if it’s not the NF? Ideas?

[Dacha]

NF have couple guilds which do promotion for NF.
During last 6 months I spend my own money for my guild. I don’t know why some guilds leaders think what NF it’s a great place to get money. We need true Web3 believers in community, not people who chase money here.

[KriptoRaptor]

please let’s not be fooled by other projects doing agressive marketing and end up thinking we ain’t doing nothing.
this is just from one event we planned altogether with @JMaenen @David_NEAR @jcatnear @3UN1C3 and executed lately together with @David_NEAR @KriptoRaptor https://twitter.com/coinmuhendisim/status/1460628923654590470?s=20

as for new ideas and proposals I agree we should thrive and we definitely do!

imho if we want to contribute to Community Building and Marketing:
-come up with a well planned solid proposal
-make comments on current proposals
or
-offer/introduce a willing expert who can do it better

[David_NEAR]

@Crypto_Garbaggio

I do not really understand how guilds like the 4NTs Guild would become revenue-generating and self-sufficient. They are doing communication and promotion of all things NEAR, and so are many other projects. If not the NEAR Foundation who would give funds for that?

The vision (at least from me, anyhow) is that projects will Those who need the services will reach out to the Premier League of Guilds (those who’ve been here since the early days especially). Guilds add value to a project, immense value actually. It’s one of the leading reasons projects come to build here, in my experience.

The NEAR Foundation will not be here forever, and the Community Fund is not a bottomless pit.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

2. they might choose someone outside of the NEAR community

They very well might, as is the case in any free market I guess.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

What would be exactly your vision of having Guilds stick around on NEAR but being self-sufficient?

Why are Guilds here now? I certainly hope it’s not exclusively for funding. We want Guilds and individuals who are passionate about a free and open web. The funding is, IMO, more like bootstrapping a new generation of focused services within the NEAR Ecosystem.

@Crypto_Garbaggio

Sure, the NF Community Fund is not bottomless but the token gets a 5% inflation per year with 0.5% of that going to the community, it’s still plenty of money.

Plenty now, but will it be when the Community and ecosystem grows 50x +