Create a Community "Inner Circle" with Entry Bar

I’m facing an issue that I’ve noticed in the space, where it is quite difficult, and even impossible, to differentiate the project’s community from the general population.

Some might say that this is the point, that it should be free for everybody. But to me the real point is that it should be free for everybody to join. It would not be very scientific to let “just anybody” have the same influence as a committed member (whether through their vote OR through their capital), but that is for later.

What I propose is much more meager. Setting a bar to entry for a discussion and announcement platform (like the lounge), and set the bar very clearly and very low.
This will give everybody a platform to communicate with a group that has somehow shown its commitment to the project (and revealing it to the general public only by extension). I would like to think this will reduce the noise and elevate the level discussion, while offering some protection from malicious outsiders.

We don’t exclude anyone, we become exclusive, and we stabilize and protect the system.

So what do you think about having an “Inner Circle”? And what should be the entry fee?

  • Apply for a “Community Profile” that vests for 3 months
  • Heck no. It’s a party!
  • Apply for a “Community Profile” that vests for 6 months
  • Send min. amount of ADA to prove ownership.
  • Get a signed written reference from CH
  • Apply for a “Community Profile” that vests for 1 year
  • It’s a dumb idea because it won’t work/help

0 voters

Hi @rin9s,

Having been involved in the past with inner circles when I read this it makes me smile :slightly_smiling_face:
I think there are several inner circles at this point in time where the participants know who is who and likely they exclude all the noise that comes with public participation, in the future participation in the project will likely reach the level you suggest of setting a bar, exploring the catalyst fund project and roadmap convo has me convinced that “Skin in the game” will carry more weight than it does now, and observable commitment through positive involvement will likely create merit among many people who will slowly become familiar with each other and each other’s views, and hopefully these folks will find common ground for the betterment of the ecosystem.
As for now I think we are going to play a waiting game of sorts for planned developments and then trial and error as voting is practiced and liquid democracy is adopted or rejected, all the noise coming from random Ada holders that bought ‘today’ likely will filter out as the committed refine and define how we move forward as a global community and those participants likely will begin to be recognizable from the general population and likely carry more influence with their gained experience, what do I know though?
I do think we are headed in the direction you would like to see realized to some extent, it’s just going to take a lot of work=time.

Thank for the smile!:+1:

1 Like