I have been made aware that my not-so-secret abrasive way of communicating on the forum (and IRL) has hurt some people. I want to take this opportunity to make an apology. I am sorry when I have crossed lines during our interactions, IRL and online. Being a highly passionate character and coming from a culture of workplace directness, I often forget the line where directness stops and offence begins. I wouldnât hold it as an excuse though, and I will attempt to be productive in milder and less abrasive ways.
I can see how your ânot-so-secret abrasive wayâ could upset people but I am glad you are part of this community because you often provide a contrarian view and you are not afraid to voice your opinion, pointing out what others might be thinking but unwilling to say.
Perhaps being milder and less abrasive may be a good thing and bring about greater reward but I think most would agree that your intentions are good and you genuinely want what is best for this community, which is easily the best I have come across.
Out of curiosity, what is the policy of the DAO for removing deeply toxic people from the forum?
@inplco is clearly only posting this to farm for likes which he will use in his analytics subgroup to show how much engagement he gets in the forum. I cannot be the only one who sees this.
Why would people want to participate in the DAO when they know that everything they do is going to be criticised? This is probably the most toxic forum I have ever seen because there are a few bad actors like this who make it unbearable. People like this add nothing and should be removed.
Youâre right, someone having a different opinion from me does not necessarily amount to toxicity. @inplco seems to have developed a clique of low quality contributors who have no voting control in the DAO, but have made it their mission to make the forum an intolerable place for others. Such behaviour is objectively toxic. Do you think this âapologyâ came out of nowhere?
I donât think @inplco is toxic. He is direct - sometimes too much - thatâs true, but being direct is not the same as being toxic. It is simply a matter of different discussion habits stemming from coming from other cultures, and web3 should be tolerant of that.
He also knows how to apologize and when to end an argument, which is an admirable characteristic in my opinion.
Well, of course you donât. Youâre part of the clique, arenât you?
I canât help but think that I have foiled an attempt to game the Steward elections.
Letâs play this out. @inplco, who is farming engagement in the forum, wants to start a subgroup responsible for analyzing contributor engagement. Using farmed data, this subgroup will show that the âbestâ contributor in the DAO is none other than⌠wait for it⌠@inplco.
And if @inplcoâs plan works, he will be able to use that data to convince delegates to vote for him, who have no context for his toxic behavior in the forum.
Am I warm?
P.S. Guys, make sure to keep liking each otherâs posts. No-one notices the âlikeâ farming. Itâs really going under the radar.
Iâm glad youâre self-reflecting on your behavior
For what itâs worth, Iâve observed that you (and some others, usually the same group) often come into threads convinced that your opinion is the majorityâs, and fill up the thread with so much noise that it creates a âperception of majorityâ, when in reality if a vote of token holders was taken, it would likely strongly go against your opinion. No one wants to participate in a DAO when they have to shout over noise to get their point across, not when they have 10 other DAOs/projects they could put their time into.
Iâd encourage allowing for some room for others to chime in with their thoughts too before deciding thereâs a majority opinion established that you need to defend. Itâs fine to have a strong opinion, I certainly often do too as Iâm sure youâve seen! But the important part is to not start derailing a thread with accusations of bias or rule breaking every time itâs not going your way. Sometimes people just arenât going to agree with your idea.
No delegates Iâve talked to so far put much stock into the âDAO karmaâ stuff tbh, at least not in the current form. The metrics chosen arenât the right metrics for what makes a good DAO delegate/steward (for example, post count is a bad one. The best operators will be way too busy to participate in the forums all the time, because their attention is in high demand). Amount of likes on the forum is also a useless metric for ranking good DAO decision makers.
I wouldnât be too worried about this scenario, and I donât think thatâs what @inplco is doing here, for what itâs worth. I think heâs genuinely trying to reflect!
FYI: Engagement metrics wonât be used for anyone, stewards or contributors, in the future. Future metrics will all be survey-based; likes and post counts can be easily gamed. In this term, engagement metrics will be used only for stewards in the Health Cards (which have been made already). It is all in the agenda of the subWG. I wish I had the gall and skill to go through with the devious plan described couple of comments above.
back out to the community if you want
