Community management

Hi,

I would like to share my concerns about community management on telegram.
In my eyes telegram is monitored with a way too defensive tone towards the community. I always thought Nash was all about community, and sadly I’ve seen this worsening for a while now.

Sometimes I see community members almost being treated like they’re the enemy. Sometimes poor communications lead to uncertainty. This uncertainty is created by Nash’s own doing, but concerns of community members are not taken seriously.

I do understand community management on telegram can be stressful and that a lot of complaints of the community are unjustified, but this shouldn’t influence the general tone of the channel.

Lastly, sorry if this is going to sound offensive. But I would suggest training for community management similar to what the support team had. Telegram and support are like night and day. With support you really feel respected, but on telegram it’s almost like the community is treated like the enemy sometimes.

I really hope this feedback is taken seriously, especially since I believe Nash is really entering the growth phase now and the importance of the community shouldn’t be forgotten. Community has always been the backbone of Nash, but lately it feels like that might be lost.

8 Likes

This is the topic that has been raise many times and a valid concern of many members. I would say that a bad moderator is not only bad in his role but he makes the whole project look bad and suspicious with his aggressive and hostile tone.

Nash has some great moderators, guys that tolerate even some harsh criticism and always reply with constructive posts and arguments. There are probably more but examples of these types of moderators are @pplvee, @Oldsport and @chris.fenwick.

1 Like

I wouldn’t go as far as naming specific staff/ambassadors, but I do want to explain a bit better what could be improved by two examples. The delay in Earnings product and the uncertainty around revenue share of Earnings to NEX stakers today.

First example, the delay in Earnings:
In my eyes this situation could have been handled so much better. I have to say it does seem Nash realised this at some point, but so much drama could be prevented if the tone wasn’t so defensive (even if you are not wrong). Personally, I agreed with Nash, delays can happen and timelines are estimates, but that’s not the point. The point is that Nash staff themselves were putting oil on the flames by constantly starting discussions about whether timelines are deadlines or estimates. Why? The later small updates that came just informing the community why there were small delays were enough for 99.9% of the community. You always will have the odd one out that will complain no matter what. Point is a lot of the fuzz created on Telegram was created by Nash staff by going into those semantics discussions whether it is a deadline or estimate.

Then the uncertainty around NEX stakers getting Earnings revenue.
Again in my eyes drama is created by the doing of Nash staff which is unnecessary. There has been a communication error for a long time about stakers getting revenue from Earnings which was corrected today. Ofcourse this raises some questions and doubts around the community, it is not a small change. What is the response of Nash staff? Defensive, like always. Saying nothing was officially announced (again you’re not even wrong here), sharing the picture of NEX fee sharing where it states fees of Earnings from fiat->crypto->fiat conversions will be shared. Those have been abandoned. Sure, again you’re not wrong. But I’ve seen the question a thousand times in telegram “how do nex stakers benefit from earnings”"? Answer: “earnings makes revenue and revenue is shared like other services”. So the defensive tone is really not appreciated here. Again, just throwing oil on the flames. The response on my topic about the NEX token here on the forum by Chris was 100x times better already.

4 Likes

I didn’t want to go as far as naming specific staff. But since I was not allowed to really comment on it on telegram and told to continue here I do add this screenshot.

This here is exactly the problem I have. The tone is very condescending and defensive. The community is immediately the enemy because I say something that you don’t like. Again I get it that community admins get a lot of shit thrown at them on a daily basis, but that doesn’t justify treating all of the community like they’re the enemy.

I’m really dissapointed that I go to the lengths of writing this and trying to explain it clearly what I think the issue is. And the response is that it is an derogatory attack on an admin. Is this really all you took from all of this? And just to be clear I never questioned whether the admins/ambassadors take a lot of time to help people or push the project. All I’m doing is giving feedback on things that could be handled better in my eyes. I believe admins/ambassadors should be putting out fires politefully instead of adding oil to them.

Also, I hope it is clear that my goal here is exactly the same as from admins/ambassadors. I also want to push the project. I believe now we enter the growth phase this part is also important. My goal is not attacking admins/ambassadors.

4 Likes

This needed to be said. Thanks for taking the initiative. I hope the team takes the feedback in right spirit.

1 Like

One last advice from me. If you don’t want discussions in the telegram, which I believe is a good decision to limit them, then don’t participate in them. Stick to that telegram is not the place for such discussions, even if it’s hard to not say your piece. The screenshot above is also a perfect example of that. First commenting on it, which is fuel for discussion, but then saying you can only comment on the forum. If this is your rule, why not give the right example and leave your comment on the forum yourself? The way this was done was asking for people to comment on it in the official channel, kinda creating the fuzz.

Anyway it did came to my attention that giving feedback on this matter is quite sensitive. And that not only admins/ambassadors see it as an attack but some community members also see it like an attack. This is unfortunate, because it is not meant to be an attack. I sincerely think Nash can improve in this regard and that it is not of non-importance, but I also understand it can be painful for those in question to read this kind of feedback when all they want to do is help.

3 Likes

Is anyone managing the Telegram admins specially “Valentine”?
Messaging someone direct is scammy and can be misconstrued as a personal attack on someone.

I have seen this admin treating the users unfairly several times. This thread is a testament to his unprofessional behavior.

1 Like

Hello AG,

  1. You have accused an admin of not receiving feedback, this is completely untrue.
  2. I have informed you to not make these type of comments and advised that you read the whole conversation
  3. I gave you a formal warning (Team agreed to send DMs to not cluster the main channels)
  4. You posted our conversation as you did here, in official.
  5. You have been muted for 3 days.

Please follow the rules of the channels and admin requests, especially since I see you are a new account.

Have a great day.

You are muting users for giving you constructive feedback. That makes my statement true then.

I have followed Nash’s development since ICO and their growth is in my interest. Regardless of the users’ history (old or new), it does not make their comment any less important than others. Again your actions are derogatory and based on biased opinion.

It is inappropriate to post direct messages (DMs) from admins or anyone else here or in any place. This is a tactic used by FUDers who wish to attack the project or individual admins/ambassadors. It is also a violation of privacy and totally unacceptable. Admins may occasionally DM individuals to give warnings.

Nobody is being muted for giving constructive feedback. People get muted for unwarranted criticisms, FUD, etc.

As far as I can see, Valentin has acted reasonably here. He explained the context of the remarks and issued warnings.