It might be that you have a few peope very close to the Community Management Team who like to exploit their weakness and be in control, manipulate them as they want…
One thing is certain you need strong, independent characters, top talent with proven successful career to strengthen that Team. Peope with integrity, their own voice, self determined and super intelligent. Hire the very best from the market, that’s nothing less Cardano deserves!
You do realize there is a technique of public consultation to involve a wider Community?
You do also realize that suggestions from almost 6 months back regarding the program were ignored and not responded to? (like ones about incentives and other roles)
You do realize that once the program has been announced and the Community commented on the thread there has been zero response on the feedback from the Community for like 6 weeks now?
You do realize it´s pretty unfair to split the Community into three groups, and having separate discussions in the public Forum area, VIP Lounge Forum area and now the VIP Plus Ambassador Slack area?
We see a total centralization of Community Power & Influence … and there is the weak Community Management Team to support it.
Let´s not create the false illusion these programs are developped together with the Community. Please.
oh cause where else would they be from? and the validity of quality was not in any way undermined by being able to nominate yourself… and the selectors of the finalist was not done by a few in private but by the community in the open as well right?
This is another case, to me, of Bert being not wrong, but also a case of: is this necessary?
To me the increased complexity doesn’t increase effeciency enough to make the venture worthwhile. This seems to me something “the office people” do to try to make the system more effective but it just ends up being more complicated.
Nothing sabotages a healthy conversation like rudeness:
Be civil. Don’t post anything that a reasonable person would consider offensive, abusive, or hate speech.
Keep it clean. Don’t post anything obscene or sexually explicit.
Respect each other. Don’t harass or grief anyone, impersonate people, or expose their private information.
Respect our forum. Don’t post spam or otherwise vandalise the forum.
We take harassment seriously. Harassment includes offensive verbal comments related to gender, age, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, religion, but also includes deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, sustained disruption of conversation. Harassment of admins or moderators will not be tolerated.
These are not concrete terms with precise definitions — avoid even the appearance of any of these things. If you’re unsure, ask yourself how you would feel if your post was featured on the front page of the New York Times.
This is a public forum, and search engines index these discussions. Keep the language, links, and images safe for family and friends
To summarize, this post is about the definition of “ambassadors” in relation to the Cardano community and if anonymous members “should” be given this label.
The creators of this program has defined what this label means.
Some members feel the description of these roles do not perfectly reflect a Webster or social understanding of the word “ambassador”, exclusively in context of the inclusion of non-proper (and by assumption legal) names.
Perhaps alternative titles could be presented as a point of consideration. Perhaps a new title could be given to members that suit the programs’ intentions and still satisfy one or both Webster or social word associations.
I would be willing to have a private conversation with any members that would really like to make the case regarding the need for real names in such a program, and other considerations for anonymous user names.
If this really is an issue, let’s put it for a vote. Changing things for the entire community on the whims of “some members” is not a good road to go down.