Community voting 🗳 power?

Hello, can I as a member of #Nash community, to have a vote on who is getting banned from community?:face_with_monocle:

This will take the pressure off the #Nash team (just my opinion)
Thank you :handshake:

I don’t trust myself to make rational decisions concerning bans, lol – it should be left to the Nash team imo.

They have a vision of what the community should look like and how it should function. Outsourcing bans to the rest of the community is a slippery slope to anarchy.


Be your own bank
Your keys :key: your coins
No confiscation
Freedom of speech
Equal rights
Equal opportunities…
This are some of the things that I see the value in. This is why I love #Nash vision.
Banning for me is associated with centralized power where little guys has no voice. Where if you say something about me and I don’t like it, I will just kick you out.
How we handle little fights in the community makes a big difference for everyone that are watching.
I just have this amazing dream in my head where people love each other and help each other, understand each other’s differences and have polite disagreements. If it would be me I won’t ban anyone, would accept and give love to that person as long as needed.
:handshake: ( just my opinion )

Don’t get me wrong, I also get mad sometimes :grinning: and I want to ban and talk dirty but this is just a moment in time that should not affect anyone but me :handshake:

It is not possible to have a perfect TG community in crypto especially for an open group where there is not vetting before people join. Some will come to the community to troll while some post all manner of annoying stuffs due to boredom. As for me, I believe banning/suspension is a key component of a sane community. I notice most time that people that FUD have a lot of time, they spend a lot of time on the forum and their messages overshadow every other messages. So I disagree with you, banning is required and the rules should be applied firmly.

I’m afraid this isn’t going to happen. Some users have to be banned to protect the company. This forum and our Telegram are highly visible and will be among the first places potential users come to find out about Nash. If they are filled with FUD posts, then potential users will get a false impression. Those posters are frequently among the loudest, which adds to the problem.

Our community is very important to us and central to our strategy, as Fabio recently discussed. We want to create spaces for the community to have productive conversations and pass feedback to the team.

At the same time, not everyone in the community has a sense of what might harm the company. This is why voting on bans isn’t an option. We give people chances and warnings. But after a certain time, we have to make a decision: is this person a malicious user or not? And here it’s not really a question of asking about the user’s intentions. If they behave like malicious users, then they are malicious users.

Ironically enough, the name for this is the “duck test”: