I cannot comment on that. What i can say is that this project is in the hands of IOHK/CF/Emurgo and that they have every fucking right to do it the way they want it to do - and i would have done the same so far. (Excluding Parsons, that is.)
Well yes and no. After Parsons era, doing things in the background again and not being open & inclusive with the Community doesn´t feel reassuring to achieve the best possible outcome. Especially looking at the first release of the Ambassador program & not being open to respond to feedback & criticism after.
Yes, it’s purely his own opinion, this I can back him up.
I prefer anonymity as well.
Right now most of the Ambassadors tasks remained online and within Cardano community, and it’s also only a voluntary work. I guess it’s okay to remain anonymous if you just want to write some contents and do some translations for the community.
However, IF, and IF the ambassadors start to receive funds from CF or community, or start to go out and represent the Cardano community, I’m sure a real name plus sort of background check shall be necessary.
We don’t want that one day we found out one of our ambassadors was exposed and discovered involving with sexual criminal or child porn cases.
Ya, but for sure, the program needs to improve and evolve, nothing too much now from the program except a web page + badge.
I get your feeling Bert. But i think if the feedback and critism really was valuable for them they would have responded to that - and unfortunately they didn’t.
I would agree but I do think there must be a way to qualify people without exposing their identity to the entire web. Especially if they desire to keep that information hidden.
" (…) outsiders could attempt to co-opt the conversation in an effort to force their particular tangent to become the only relevant topic. Everyone has a sacred cow." - C. Hoskinson, Why Cardano? 2015
It took me some time to locate it. I find that quite relevant to what has been happening today here.
While I think IOHK Research Team is absolutely fantastic & world class group, I don´t have this reassuring & safe feeling about the Community Management Team (most people) originally hired by Parsons. And we do very well know Parsons interest was not to hire top talent. Actually even if that would have been his intent, he wouldn´t have been able to do so, unless getting lucky.
So for me it´s much harder to trust that they don´t respond because a question of mine is of no value or they have just no idea. The only thing I may trust is proven competence, experience & results and sorry to say but this seems to be lacking. I don´t see anyone there with strong professional career & huge success in their career in Community Management.
As said many times, their weakness is an opportunity for others to exploit and there is an urgent need to hire exceptional people to strengthen that Team.
What is happening here?
Tom, Maki, Lei and Yeji got rehired by IOHK and still are employees as of this date. You have to realize that what you are saying is weird, because if they really would have been incompetent as you say they wouldnt got rehired in the first place.
I am sorry Bert, but i think you are holding so much on to your ideas and views that it makes you blind for other peoples opinions, particularly from those that arent really in line with yours.
Still no hard feelings though!
Ok, I can do that. I absolutely see all the effort you put into Cardano and I don’t doubt in your best intentions to bring Cardano forward. It’s just that I have always the feeling that a bulldozer is up on me if I discuss with you. I’m not even sure if it qualifies as discussion. You can convince me about things sometimes and you have done so already. But I think that you never changed your mind because of what I said. That might be because my points are not valid or my rhetoric is not good or maybe just because a bulldozer doesn’t change its direction just because someone is talking to it. I think I’m just not strong enough to withstand the bulldozer so I retreat after a while and leave a discussion without having the feeling that it was really finished. Maybe others feel similar, I don’t know. I would appreciate much more if you could reduce your enormous power and pushing others in discussions.
I hope you take it for what it is. I opened my feelings because you explicitely asked for it. I don’t want to educate you but give you the feedback you asked for. And as always: I’m not your foe, I appreciate your work even if I often disagree with your opinion of what is the best way for Cardano.
Well we both know that CF hired them, and then IOHK took over. It´s not the same.
I am not saying they are incompetent (please!), you should not only think in the extreme ends of the spectrum.
But I do say they are not top talent, definitely not the best on the market (otherwise many things would look different today and I might have got a response to a few more difficult questions) and why wouldn´t Cardano take the best to strengthen their Team? I also think their “weakness” is convenient and an opportunity for some.
I do like however the outcome of today´s discussion. It has become clear there is a big need for the Watchdogs.
Thanks for your feedback Martin, I will think about it.
Are you talking of identifiable persons as not top talent in social media?
Bert, this post is full of assumptions. You know that it’s not the right thing to do right?
Furthermore: i don’t think there is any need for watchdogs at this moment. Or as you would like to state it: there is no need for watchdogs simply because the officials have the full right to do what they want(with the trust and respect from a decent part of the community), without others intervening who believe they are doing the right thing - blinded by their own beliefs who arent open for others who think otherwise.
I don’t try to be mean here Bert. But as others also said it appears that you have a hard time with re-evaluating your thoughts, and be open to that from others.
Good night everyone!
This thread is amazing. The discussion around privacy is important. My preference would be for Amabassadors to not be obfuscated by a persona. I feel like it’s more authentic and builds trust. Isn’t the block chain about trust? Feel free to be anonymous, but you leave your reader wondering “why?”. It’s fine to leave me wondering why. I respect that. But I’m spending cycles wondering why.
I am glad to read this. I can understand why some ambassadors would like to remain anonymous to the public.
I can see how exposure in public could lead to several adversities, especially for someone who has their life’s saving in the current financial system. If we are locked out of the current financial system because of active involvement in Cardano, then I am not sure how many of us have any alternative financial system to fall back on. It’s a slightly different story for those who have already made their millions with Bitcoin, but for the rest of us it would be a severely adverse situation.
In my opinion, asking for people to use their real identity in public as “Cardano Ambassador” is effectively putting up a barrier which they must overcome in order to contribute. I would rather the ambassador contribute as they can - as long as the contribution helps carry the message to those who haven’t received it yet or to those who are still skeptic about Cardano.
I am sorry but as long as there is Cardano, there will be Watchdogs … and who knows how many similar other groups.
Read up the intro.
Good night Gents!
Very good discussion i would say!
Everyone held different opinions and how should we find consensus?
Yes Bert you are a bulldozer. You get a lot done and you’re fucking brilliant, but you do tend to push others around on your way.
It’s important to have a smoothly running, fair system, but after a certain point perhaps the energy being used to perfect the system is simply wasted energy, as nothing will ever be perfect, especially humans.
We are lucky to have you on our side to be sure. However, as a wildland firefighter I can say from experience that sometimes a bulldozer is required, but often a chainsaw is adequate.
The issue of “anonymity” here is surface level. It’s being used to spark a fight. Notice the issue starts with the Ambassador anonymity but it doesn’t stay there too long, it spreads into other areas like hiering “exceptional people” to manage the community. It’s a non issue for me, I’m out in the open. It can also be resolved by putting it up for a vote amongst Ambassadors. If but really when Ambassador anonymity is revoked, it won’t reconcile the deeper divide here. There’s a reform faction forming to oppose the conservatives, it’s only natural.
Cardano Ambassadors? Cardano Community Champions!