I love it when someone is relentless digging to the bottom of something 
2 Likes
Learned from my life experiences that when you aren’t tolerant to others who offer fair & honest criticism, you motivate those you disrespect to dig deeper or question more.
3 Likes
That is all what I wanted to ensure- that you are sharing your own true thoughts. That is, not just true in essence, but true to yourself. So thank you for making that clear as I might’ve gotten the wrong impression.
All of the points you had stated are reasons as to why multiple working groups cannot co exist while addressing similar problems, as you said.
I felt, if I think about it from that POV, why would there then even exist a seperate Reddit WG when there is already an Uplink Working Group?
Wouldn’t it then make sense that the Uplink Working Group takes care of Reddit as well, as it is just another social media platform?
My colleague Purp worked with the Reddit Working Group & with this in mind, the thinking behind this wasn’t that we are overlapping. More so, honing in on a certain area and working on the specific tasks mentioned- which also have the same end goals of
because these are the same feelings and the same experience we want our community and members to have- they are not the same tasks.
I believe working groups can indeed work very well. The current existing WG’s are a testament to that. & not to mention, they coexist, while aiming for the same end goal- overall, improving and bettering the JUP DAO.
In regards to our Catdets producing content on YouTube and X and us incorporating our ideas on these platforms-We agree that the content being put out and all that is currently taking place is indeed incredible. We arent looking to take away from any of the already existing initiatives. How I saw it, we would just be further contributing to the community in our own ways. As the DAO is a Decentralized Autonomous Organization, this is how my thinking and perspective transpired. I personally don’t have any reservations around community members wanting to create their own WG’s so the thoughts & opinions of others is definitely good to know.
& I appreciate your discussion so no offense is taken! The intention isn’t to offend or disrespect anyone when asking further questions or making statements; only to better understand & i hope you would see it as just that as well. Regardless, your opinion & POV is valid.
2 Likes
I personally see the strengths and the value to having multiple working groups co exist.
If you do not believe in the formation of additional working groups, your opinion is valid.
My colleague, having been part of the Reddit WG and having had this specific experience of being apart of a Working Group, was able to highlight the pros of this method. Our solutions also come from our personal experiences and how I saw it, what we did was propose solutions to those very issues.
It is also stated earlier that these are ‘micro’ issues. I personally think tackling just about anything at the micro level, will positively affect the macro. However, I don’t actually believe the issues we’ve outlined are micro.
If it is overlap you see; I do respect your opinion, but I don’t actually see it this way. Our POV wasn’t that. The specific tasks listed (ie. workshops based around leadership, onboarding and off boarding etc.) are not currently taking place.
We saw this as a gap we can fill and are more than willing to do so, again, especially due to our personal experiences leading us to believe this is what would better the community and members.
If it is DAO funds that is of your concern, I will state again, there is no budget added as that was not our focus here.
It is here that I will also state we are not looking to get recognized. That was not the reason this proposal was written. How I envision our core projects- they all streamline one another and work hand in hand. It only made sense to write it up as a proposal to establish this complete concept/working group, surrounding these specific ideas.
3 Likes
I think this is where we fundamentally disagree as my believe is that we can reach better outcomes if we reinforce most of the WGs currently existing instead of working ‘in our own ways’. As such there is strong synergy within the DAO, little or nothing is overlapping and in fact whatever we do syncs well for the good of all. With draft proposal being currently debated on how to facilitate and approve new WGs, one of my suggestion in the ongoing debate is for there to be a process in the preliminary stages of approval where except a problem a new WG is trying to solve is NOVEL, there should be consideration made for the group and its ideas to be redirected to another existing group addressing similar issues and then part of the budget required to address the problem they want to solve is redirected to the existing group that’s directly or indirectly dealing with it, they deliver on their promises and the WG they are sign posted to ensure they have hit their targets and then pay them. This just reduce the need for a lot of WGs except those that are solving some novel ideas that haven’t been addressed yet.
Not sure if you have been following the recent proposal draft by @CWG posted by @Slorg to create a framework to set WGs going forward. It’s been an interesting debate so far. Please see below and follow up if you can. A lot of points people raised while debating your WG proposal are being suggested to be considered for final approval of that draft proposal.
1 Like
Thank you for pointing that out. I can see that perspective on slight crossover with games.
I will clarify that the games aspect was something less major in our pitch, as it isn’t listed as a core operation, but instead as an additional idea within the focus of Culture Appreciation which we listed under community enhancements (& I did see the event announcement so congratulations on that btw! i’m looking forward to the events). Our focus on Culture Appreciation would include storytelling for example, as listed. The games were simply another chance to try to shed more light on cultures in the community, as this was just a proposal with several ideas, involving member inclusion and enhancements to the community. I am happy to see you are working on the specific area of gaming and quite literally, spearheading it.
I appreciate your suggestion to reach out to the CAWG. I’d like to mention, as a newer member to the community with several ideas, I figured the most formal way to present these thoughts would be in a proposal. I am aware of the upcoming CWG proposal for WGs being put to vote soon, and plan to work towards that.
I did however make mention of the first ideas I had of this proposal back in May to a CAWG member. I also mentioned it in the chat of last week’s CWG Office Hours, as well as spoke about it — mentioning I was working on a proposal relating to the CWG’s meta proposal. I will continue to promote our work & do hope to hear thoughts & feedback from community members.
2 Likes
Thank you for sharing! I look forward to the establishment of a concrete path that can be followed by all members including myself.
3 Likes
Since you solicited feedback during the Office Hours I’ll do my best to provide it. Like people have mentioned previously, there is significant overlap between this proposal and the already existing workgroups.
Since this proposal was launched, a larger re-structuring of how workgroups are established has also happened, so for all intents and purposes, my feedback will be directed towards narrowing your proposal into a more compact scope of work, in order to fit within a grant.
Your proposal has three core pillars. Learning and development, conduct and support. Conduct and support is where you have the most overlap in my opinion, and where you would be butting heads with the CAWG extensively. So I would suggest that you focus on learning and development. Like it was said in office hours, Jupiter has an incredible funnel to bring people in through various lanes of content creation etc, but I’ve often noticed that people discover Jupiter, gets really excited about the possibility of contributing, but without finding any ways of doing so.
So, with that in mind, I wanted to propose that you pivot towards providing the community with the knowledge to utilize their skillsets within the DAO. Arming community members with the knowledge to be able to contribute. By that I’m talking about for instance learning material, sessions, bootcamps etc. Off the top of my head I’m thinking something along the line of the Jupiter DAO Academy, wherein you could host regular sessions on anything from the most basic elements like reading a block explorer or understanding the different Jupiter products to more advanced stuff like Figma, Midjourney, other forms of content creation, video editing, analytics and so forth. You could even give away cute little cat-certificates for completed bootcamps.
Jupiter Academy WG at some point in the future?
5 Likes
That would be great and we can start educating newcomers on the main site by having the help-bot pop-up explaining different features of the site. Could help reduce questions in the community, especially the repetitive ones.
3 Likes
This is a good idea but like we said, once something like this is given a grant & succeeds to move to trial, the goal should be then to cut the fat on other WG by transferring all resources that’s got to do with education/ learning/training/media etc towards the academy so that there is no overlapping. Once something like an academy WG can be established for example all other grants application to deal with anything that falls under learning/education etc gets sign posted to the academy to see if it’s necessary & then they manage and provide a path for for it to be incorporated.
5 Likes