Objective:
To enhance the process of awarding the “Cat of Culture” role by ensuring regular evaluation of potential candidates and reviewing past members who might deserve this recognition.
Background:
Currently, the process for awarding the “Cat of Culture” role appears to be less consistent, which might result in deserving members not receiving the recognition they deserve. Observations over the past few months suggest that some members who demonstrate exceptional engagement and contribution on and off discord are not being considered for this role.
Implement a structured review process where team members check the Discord channel at least twice a month.
During these reviews, identify and assess prospective members who have shown notable engagement, contribution, and adherence to community values.
Historical Evaluation:
Review past members who have been active and contributed positively but were overlooked for the “Cat of Culture” role.
Evaluate whether any of these members should be considered for the role based on their contributions and engagement.
Review Process:
Respective Cat of culture role holder, CAWG, CWG and moderators responsible for these evaluations to ensure that the process is fair and consistent.
Use specific criteria for assessment to maintain objectivity and transparency.
Feedback and Communication:
Provide feedback to members who were considered but not awarded the role, offering constructive suggestions for future consideration.
Communicate any changes in the process to the community to maintain transparency and manage expectations.
Benefits:
Ensures that deserving members are recognized and rewarded, fostering a more engaged and motivated community.
Enhances the credibility and value of the “Cat of Culture” role, making it a more prestigious accolade within the community.
Conclusion:
By implementing these changes, we can ensure a fair and consistent approach to recognizing and rewarding outstanding members. This will not only improve the overall quality of engagement in the community but also uphold the value of the “Cat of Culture” role.
I felt every active user on twitter deserves role as well because like me I’m more on Twitter to discord, being active on twitter I hope we can be consider and offer a role as well only if we actually deserved it.
this topic indeed needs attention. if memory serves me it pops up from time to time, we talk about it and somewhere down the line it disappears again.
while i do agree with the by you mentioned possibility of good candidates being overlooked, i also look at the other pov. not that i have a concrete example at hand but it’s possible that people get promoted too fast.
tldr: good to have this topic back on the table. thank you!
We all are active users on twitter too and still actively contributing on Jupiter discord , the discord houses lot of people where communicating is mostly possible and information can easily be disseminated.
Catdets have a group chat on twitter.
I will not buy the idea that twitter folks should have role. There are lot of twitter users talking about Jupiter exchange, they can come to the discord to showcase anything they have if it worth role giving, then they’d get it.
Yeah, when looking at positive side of the message I post, th negative side too cant be overlooked.
Ever since I start getting active on Jupiter discord months ago, I have only witness one CoC role given to a community member, we have people that deserve it and it won’t even look as if they are promoted earlier, they worth to be given the role.
I will be happy if the people i tagged for the review process get something happen.
The community don’t necessarily need to know the actual requirements to get through role , such that people are working towards and trying to get it, let give it to outstanding members that deserve it.
Since to me the “Cat of Culture” role is as very special role i think that it should be taken care with a detailed attention. I think its not easy to grant somebody a role related to culture as it requires evaluating soft skills, not only measurable things. I think this role should be chosen by the existing CoC members supported by the team so this should be reputation based, backed up by results that show how that person has helped grow the JUP brand internally or externally.
This is a solid proposal, addressing the inconsistencies in the current process effectively. I especially appreciate the emphasis on both bi-monthly reviews and historical evaluations, ensuring that no one deserving is overlooked.
My only suggestion would be to consider adding some form of community input or voting during the review process. This could enhance the transparency and give community members a more active role in recognizing their peers.
Overall, great work on this! Looking forward to seeing this implemented.
Definitely think the current process can be worked on. It’s something we are evaluating as well so glad that you brought it up here too!
Currently our focus as CAWG is to get the Catdet processes more consistent and widely understood by everyone first. There’s still much work to do there — I think we are getting there though! After all a cat of culture is first and foremost a Catdet as well, so this part is super important to get right.
Whenever we make significant process changes a lot of community work and discussions are needed in order to drive at a consensus so I am really happy that you are starting the discussions here. Like some of the posters mentioned here, there are benefits and risks to any revamp so we do need to talk about these with the current core community more.
It’s definitely something we want to visit in-depth after we are happy with v0/beta of the Catdet documentations — guidelines, rules, ethos and onboarding documents, and making sure the existing core community members are able to implement/practise these in identifying and helping other new members get up to speed on how to join the Catdets fam.
Thanks for your idea cat, regular bi-monthly reviews and reconsidering past members for CoC role could make the process more consistent and fair. Involving the right people in evaluations and providing feedback to those not chosen are also great idea for keeping the process transparent. These changes should help better recognize and motivate every cat
All role on Jupiter discord is special.
Catdet: you need to follow some guidelines to get it , you can’t just hop in the discord; saying hi, hi, hello and think you are creating value, even though the value been provided are as directive given. But some are still following it while majority are not.
Imagine a discord that contain over 150k members and less than 1k(less than 0.6%) member have the role , if that doesn’t define ‘special’ , I don’t know what it means.
CoC: I already said it , I don’t think there should be guidelines for this such that community member will be working towards getting it, once individual’s contributions towards J.U.P shows that they are eligible for the role, they should be assessed and granted.
Hmmm.
It maybe okay to have this ,
Provided the team will not change the role name after proposed JUPUARY
Cos I was here since 2022, and I witness Jupion, Jupioneer and Jupusador role.
It was changed after the JUPUARY.
I know what it takes to get the role then, even though I tagged it as luck, but you will work your way to the luck.
CoC is attached with lot of values.
Scarcity bring about increment in value , I will want it to be scarce but I still want evaluation of certain community member for CoC role
