Announcing our first group of Cardano Ambassadors!


psychology historically tells us that this has the opposite effect. this illustrates a concerning lack of knowledge of conflict resolution. someone who is frustrated, is someone who feels unheard. silencing them only adds fuel to the flame. instead, in the future how about taking them aside and talking to them?

very valid points objectively. with solutions.

Whataboutism offers no solutions, neither does it address the very valid points raised. is this inability to take accountability let alone address the key bigger picture issues - what we’re to expect with anyone with a modicum of authority in this community?


Socratic method, asking questions


ok. so asking questions about the least likely scenario?


Sorces? Arguments?


police officer training. yours?


I meant academic, since we’re talking about psychology.


mic. drop.


Yes, it can be tough backing up opinions disguised as arguments.


I wonder if the second group announced (at some point in time I guess), will be as heavily discussed as the first group. :wink:

Poll: Should anonymous profiles be allowed to become a Cardano Ambassador?

I wonder if the second group will be capable of more adult, open & impersonal dialogue and objective, constructive & efficient debate about an important topic :slight_smile:

We shall see …

Ps: members of first group who didn’t participate or didn’t feel this description fits them please ignore it :wink:


@knysna was banned yesterday for less personal “attack” … not smart.




In the interest of the community I will happily take a ban in opposing your dis-contention.
You simply have a way of creating toxicity in a group setting that is not fruitful when you have no direction.
I mean really what are you really trying to accomplish here?


Please feel free to check out all the other topics I have recently created or replies I have made on other topics. You look for the opportunity to fight and release your emotions and not for the opportunity to collaborate… at least be honest about this. Thanks


Thank you CF to publish the first bunch of ambassadors and the first step of the ambassador program! I like the chosen name and wonder how certain individuals can insist in changing name and meaning of the role, after they had proposed additional ambassadors categories some days before.

In my eyes this program is a recognition to those who contributed for many months in the different categories and with no incentives in sight. They organized meetups, wrote summaries to make topics more accessible for newbies, translated from English to their native language in order to support community growth at their home region. They wrote first kevm examples and shared their findings about cardano-sl metrics and reward schemes here in this forum, back in time when it was filled with more constructive and positive energy, than now, where it’s an embarrassing bunch of group politics and artificial drama shows.
Ambassadors care about Newbies by pointing them to the right piece of existing information instead of ignoring them. They actively participate - for example by adding piece by piece - to the cardanowiki. A real and honest contributor would never try to take it over because its cool what others build from ground zero, but now has to be changed substantially because of his opinions.
Ambassadors listen to the community, sumarise and give feedback. They try to connect people because they know and remember individuals and their ideas also over time. (Two Portuguese translators who learn to know from each other can join their skills and efforts and do much better than as individuals. Same for potential meetup organisators, developers, …)
This is team forming for a certain task, having a clear definition what it is about. It’s not group politics by attempting to establish a brand and then talk in the name of “the community” for all kind of far-fetched non-issues. I never believed in this groups idea and saw dangerous behaviour in it. Now much more than ever.
We se contributions to this forum starting with a long text and final opinion on all different kind of topics. in my opinion these are not good contributions but a bad example of what an influencer can try to achieve. It’s embarrassing and annoying to see how it is expected from others to adopt and agree to this declarative statements.

I really hope we can recover this forum and make it a great place for honest community building, ideas sharing and networking again. This I see as one of the biggest tasks for us ambassadors now, together with everyone who want to become a little individual piece of it, without aims to rule and drive so incredibly much.


You say you do not believe in this group idea but push your own groups ideas and for your own agendas. You have no transparency in neither identity nor salaries recieved nor prior contacts with CF. These are facts. There has been no statement on salaries or monetary compensation. There are members who are undisclosed. When it comes to pushing agendas I freely admit this is my speculation but anyone who have read these forums have to wonder why every single topic raised with important questions will then be followed with critisism from a group of ambassadors. You sure behave as a group with an agenda.


Why do you continue to insist of this group defintions? It’s a pure invention of you guys.
Do you have understood what decentralization is about?


I am not attacking the program. I was bringing up the issue of anonymity in the context of responsibility & representation and suggested a fair solution to debate.

Everything you wrote up there is what you want to put in my mouth, but you can’t back it up.

I am sorry but you are full of lies.

This is only a poor attempt from you to try to split the Watchdogs and try to make @Mihori and @Bullish feel uncomfortable with it.

You should have been banned after your first personal insult like @knysna yesterday. Your posts were flagged, nothing happened. This shows the current status of the Forum, fully biased.


Yes you have been attacking the official program, no matter how you see it to justify your attack you are attacking it, and it is a good program for the community and @Bullish and @Mihori should absolutely stand up and defend it against you as they are participants of it.


There is no ‘‘group’’. This should be clearly understood. I am not to be ‘grouped’ with @werkof, nor is anyone else who’s an ambassador as far as I know and am concerned.


…indeed it is but your speculation. And would be great if you kept speculations and rumors out of the discussion.

Yes, individuals with an agenda. The agenda to do exactly that which is described in the Ambassadors page, and exactly that which these individuals (including me) have been doing from the very first day they joined this community and project: to build the community and contribute the best each and everyONE can.

Who are you to ‘demand’ transparency from a random individual on the internet anyway? o_O

To be asking or even suggesting this is ridiculous and breaches forum policy imo. Then again, you seem to be ‘just speculating’.

And on that note, a great Sunday to you all! :slight_smile: