Embracing Effort and Constructive Feedback in the Zcash Community

General
1

Hey everyone,

I’ve noticed a lot of bashing towards Zcash Media, QEDIT, and other creators, developers, and researchers who are putting in tremendous effort for the Zcash project. This trend is really disheartening. Effort is the core of building and achieving success. Without it, progress stalls.

Bashing and personal attacks are the antimatter of effort—they destroy rather than build. We shouldn’t discourage effort; instead, we should steer and align it. If you disagree with the strategy, mission, or goals of these projects, there are constructive and positive ways to express your concerns.

Think of effort as the fuel that drives our collective engine. Without it, we go nowhere. When we bash those who are expending effort, not only do we harm the individuals involved, but we also risk making others in the community second guess whether this is the environment they want to invest their invaluable effort in.

Imagine we’re all part of a construction team building a bridge. Instead of criticizing how someone is laying bricks, let’s guide them to make sure the bridge is strong and aligned. Personal attacks aren’t constructive; they hurt the recipients and damage the image of Zcash and its community. When people scroll through X.com, do we want one of the few Zcash posts they see to be unconstructive bashing of projects and their builders?

Effort is what moves us forward. If you have suggestions or concerns, share them constructively so we can harness and direct the energy toward our common goals. Let’s build together rather than tear down.

Please, voice your objections in the ZCG elections if you disagree with my support for 37L and QEDIT. Feel free to vote me out in the next election. But let’s stop the bashing. It’s giving us all a bad name and doesn’t help anyone.

Thanks for reading, and let’s keep the discussions positive and constructive. :blush:

Your fellow Zcash supporter

20 Likes
2

What has happened so far is not something to blame anyone for; it’s part of the community’s growth process.

Everyone was aware of what QEDIT did, but not all of us had a detailed understanding of the technology.

Let’s refrain from blame and focus on preventing the same problems from happening again.

I’m always grateful to the ZCG committee members who dedicate their time to Zcash.

8 Likes
3

The dev fund is about money. And from the outside over the years I can see that money distribution issues do more harm than good for Zcash. Especially when there is an acute shortage of them and we are approaching a point where it is getting worse. Money, or rather dollars, is the reason for all the attacks.

6 Likes
4

I appreciate the desire for civility. We need civil discourse. I appreciate you @GGuy and the leadership you are showing here.

In full disclosure, I reached out to GGuy to ask what prompted this post given some drama today and think highly of him and what he is expressing in this post.

That said, I perhaps see it through a different lens.

Let’s not stifle discourse for the sake of civility.

I too have concerns about the funding levels and performance of ZCM. And I applaud those who have the courage to speak openly about their frustration about how much Zcashers have paid. I don’t know about you, but for me, $1M is a lot of money. Those that accept that kind of money from the community should be held to a very high standard, ECC included.

Effort is not enough. Our standards must be higher!

Positivity and civility are not synonymous, and civility should not be used as a weapon to quell speech.

We can choose to focus on the words said, and imply motive, or we can choose to dig into the source of those words and measure them on the substance of the message and conviction from which it comes.

I value kindess. But I also value truth, strength and conviction. Speaking truth to power often comes at a cost. What we are attempting to do with Zcash will come at a cost. These kinds of debates are trivial comparatively.

Today I was disappointed to hear of DMs flying around, and calls made to try to influence public narratives. I was on one of those calls. As I sit here tonight, it’s troubling me. I’m questioning motives tied to money, image and control.

Instead of back channels, we need more public discourse, more public truth-speaking, more community voice, as uncomfortable as it can be for me or anyone else in a similar seat of accountability.

Let’s encourage truth and strength. Let’s not vilify those who speak out. Let’s listen to the substance of what each other has to say.

Our cause is great. Our headwinds are strong. We mustn’t compromise strength and truth for civility.

More speech! We’ll be stronger for it. We’ll thrive because of it.

15 Likes
5

Are we prepared for the fact that the grant could be 10 million? A million dollars is certainly a large sum. But why are we talking about the amount without considering the result?

For example, Zcash Media (it is clear that this million dollars is meant). If you or I don’t like the authors showing their face more than the Z sign, I have to ask myself first of all, in which case will there be more touches on this video? In the case that there will be a letter Z that nobody wants, or will there be a person’s face? It’s a psychological aspect that is not known to the general public, but a human face attracts attention much more than abstract logos. Especially when it comes to new users. The effect is what matters, not our personal thoughts. If the result is that these videos will collectively be watched by 10 million people in the next 5 years, then $1 million is a wise investment. We’ll get results.

Just imagine one day ZEC hits the $1,000 mark and some person hears about it in the background from someone he doesn’t know, perhaps he was flipping through a feed in a crypto news column. He didn’t even read it, but his eyes touched the word Zcash completely unreasonably. He wouldn’t even catch the gist of it, because he might never have heard of Zcash before and his brain wouldn’t have clung to the word. But thanks to Zcash Media, he happened to see shorts where the word was mentioned and it was said that it comes instead of Bitcoin, which of course he knows very well. And so these people are going to the exchange and giving back to the community multiples of this investment in the future, buying ZEC already at $1200 and filling the coffers of the DevFund. Only the final effect per dollar matters, not the costs expressed in absolute values.

PS I believe we can distinguish between civilized discussion and attacks. And what I see in X is about attacks, not about discussion.

3 Likes
6

By the way, I may be wrong, but I can guess where this conversation is going. The conversation is about reconsidering the amount of the grant, I will note before the performer has presented all of his work. I suggest that everyone think about this before this proposal appears here. Because this could have very negative consequences for the community.

For starters, just remember when the decision was made to award this grant. It was during the boom period. We had the money, to put it bluntly. We already had two videos from ZM. We were excited and the sea seemed to be high. That’s normal, we’re human, and humans are usually oriented to the situation around them, not predicting the worst events in the future. But here was the event that happened. The price of ZEC was sliding where we did not expect to see it. Is this a reason to change the rules on the fly based on subjective criteria?

First, it’s a precedent that, if I were a contractor, would make me wonder if this decentralized company, which values the opportunistic truth of its insolvency above its previous arrangements, is worth getting involved with.

Second, it’s a reason for the grants committee to tell future likely members of the grants committee to recuse themselves from their role, because they might think all sorts of unpleasant things about themselves.

Third, the current Zcash Media project could simply be stopped when it is needed, even if most people no longer recognize the need.

Look, I can’t think of a single upside to this situation. Name them to me if I’m being too shallow on this. But saving $300,000 doesn’t look like a valid argument to me, I can tell you right off the bat.

If my guess has no ground, then tell me what this attack leads to besides additional tension in the community?

2 Likes
7

I have a friend who made video for other token for 2k and video had over 200 k views and not middle influenser… So you can all have picture where you waist investors money… for 300000 $ me alone will rise the price on zcash with milions dolars people investing on it…there s so simple marketing strategies for people to come to zcash only you need to know selling…Also I know people from poor countries will make for the less money…i’m not making my self big only I make you see your BIG mistake and this grant that looks more corupt then any logic for normal human being…

I last speak with Albanian rich underground people who used XMR for illegal operations… that is big shit when you are witness on biggest nothuman legal activities…

I have people who read here forum and invest in Zcash and like small community this grant is dizaster…video is not bad but this money are out of this world…you dont bring new people… you dont have that marketing people to know with zcash, to explain wallets how to use it in this video this guy speak only abstract…

2 Likes
8

Nor are criticism and incivility!

I take seriously substance when the substance is relevant. When the substance is blameful personal attack, then there is nothing productive going on and it should not be condoned in the community or made excuses for.

Speak out! Yes. With integrity and respect and focus on the values at stake. Scapegoating feels good because it relieves frustration and channels group anger, but it doesn’t address actual causes and it does not make us stronger, it makes us weaker.

5 Likes
9

Policing speech is tricky, and we shouldn’t be in that business.

This is from the X thread that sparked this. I’m not calling this out other to say that I read this as a personal attack and unproductive. It felt harsh. That said, I respect your right to say it and appreciate that you have the freedom to speak your mind.

image

10

Yes, I see what you mean. It doesn’t quite attribute intentions, because I’m talking about how it looks rather than what I think, but it’s a short inference, and you are right to call it out. I acknowledge that and I hereby apologise to Tatyana @peacemonger for that implication, and I will follow up on X as well.

My actual belief about Tatyana is that she cares deeply and personally about the mission of Zcash and that her commentary originates from wanting the absolute best for Zcash. The question to my mind is, is Tatyana also capable of acknowledging anything inappropriate in her behaviour, seeking reconciliation with those she has harmed, or otherwise moving forward constructively, or does she continue to believe that devisive personal attacks are a fitting way to voice criticism in this community?

Frankly, I’m disappointed: in all of the accusations and drama over the past few days, I’ve seen a only few people take responsibility, while everyone else seems to be mostly pointing fingers or remaining silent. For example, regarding the QEDIT grant, ZCG expressed that we are committed to doing better at communicating. What I’m hearing from others is a lot of “I’m too busy and it’s not my job to keep track of what’s going on.” It’s not very motivating. None of us can do this alone.

2 Likes
11

With respect, it sounds like you missed my point. I wasn’t calling you out for speaking your mind, I was attempting to illuminate that policing speech is challenging. A tweet doesn’t capture tone, context or even intent very well. There are all sorts of dynamics at play. We need more truth-telling, even at the cost of hurt feelings. :wink:

In the tweet thread, which includes a number of Zcashers, I see frustration that we spent a lot of money for footage that laid dormant for 3 years and a dissatisfaction with what has been received so far. I hope that isn’t lost in this conversation. I also see a positive discussion about use cases and telling the story of Zcash users. I hope that isn’t lost either. It’s a good idea worth exploring.

I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but in the case of QEDIT, Jon and I spoke on Thursday about how the process could be improved so that concerns and challenges could be raised earlier in the process.

I also believe a change in how funding decisions are made under a new dev fund, through a decentralized multisig type decision-making structure, would would be a powerful means for ensuring funds are allocated well and key contributors are in the loop and supportive.

6 Likes
12

I guess I didn’t connect it because I’m not policing speech or advocating for policing speech. I’m asking for respectful behaviour towards people in the community when you say what you want to say.

4 Likes
13

Thank you for that. I’m very grateful. Although I don’t think I was aware of this (maybe you said something about it and I forgot; there’s a lot going on!), it’s a good example of private communication not being nefarious. Sometimes 1:1 communication just works better for getting to a place of collaboration.

4 Likes
14

Love this. This process is messy, but we all want Zcash to succeed. I hope more folks choose to speak their truths, in the kindess way possible, so our community can grow, learn, … , succeed.

5 Likes
15

I try to be authentic in my disagreements with my dear friends in this community.

I aspire to disagree with care. My hope is that I contribute skillfully enough that even my mistaken positions are beneficial to everyone.

In recently recall having significant disgreements with:

@joshs
@ZcashGrants
@skyl
@nuttycom
@hanh
@dismad
@daira
@peacemonger
@_jon

Respectfully… you are all wrong, and I am right!

JK. I am profoundly grateful to belong to a community where disagreement does so often yield tangible positive growth.

I profoundly grateful for this whole communities heroic and tireless effort to cultivate dignity and freedom for all those who will be.

9 Likes
16

My (repetitive beating a dead horse) 2 Zennies:

If you’re seeing it on The Xitter then it’s almost certainly an attack… because The Xitter is a powered by outrage.

We all know this, and yet I still feel my dear friends paying The Personal(ity) Tax that is extracted by being on The Xitter. I am grateful to you, my homies who work in that toxic environment.

Maybe we should move our discourse to free2z? Isn’t there an alternative to The Xitter there?

3 Likes
17

I am +0 on continued funding of ZM.

I thought that the ZM video I saw was excellent and I personally felt a bit smarter at the end. So props to @37L for that!

On the other hand I am sympathetic to critical positions like those I have heard from @joshs @peacemonger and others in private, it took a long time to produce! Was that time well-spent, given that funding of 37L meant that the community was paying an opportunity cost?

My only real contribution here (other than to beg for a more mature discourse than that found on the Sewer of Interaction, The Xitter) is to strongly agree with @artkor that the number to think about is $300_000.

That’s the amount that could potentially be saved by defunding ZM. Right?!

Actually I have changed my mind. I am really grateful for the first ZM video. I learned a lot. I think we should keep funding them (not that there’s any real discussion of not doing so, as far as I know).

18

For what it’s worth, I often choose not to engage in discussions even though I strongly disagree because I don’t have the time and energy to debate.
So I am just going to say that IMO, it is too hard to have a constructive argument when the other party can get offended at any time. :expressionless:

9 Likes
19

what ive seen: people have given feedback on things first mostly neutrally.

and after this feedback if not much actions has been taken.
then people become more personal and got more negative towards them. which is not ideal.

i think Qedit grant got mostly constructive feedback and they reacted on it very neutral imo and didnt get personal attacks.
lets remember its possible to make new grant proposals with updated feedback on projects if needed.

Zcash Media grant got a lot of feedback on things they promised at first but then changed some details etc. but any sort of community involvment that was expected in the first phases was disappointingly 0.

and then over year of delay us as community memebers its hard not to be upset. and now even when we want to spread it we get hesitant.
ive seen there is some very personal seeming attacks and those seem bit much.
:man_shrugging:

the first new ZM video probably wasnt as awesome as many were hoping for (like the first ones years ago) (the budget for this kind of videos tho seems really high) but i cant say its bad video, its good mostly but just not sure who its targeted for exactly.

at end of the day when people are very involved with Zcash and care a lot they will get super emotional and personal about stuff that seems wrong to them.

we gotta chill a bit and be able to understand whats done is done and do better in future.

btw the videos cost for this batch is not 300k or 1m but $600k so far afaik.

edit: also we can only 100% tell how well videos were recieved after all are out by end of year and then some time later how the views are going etc. maybe for some audience 1 or 2 of the videos will be a good match, we dont know it yet. but thats just some hope :cowboy_hat_face:

7 Likes
20

I appreciate how you always keep my toes to the fire.

I think more carefully because I know that your critical eye is on my posts. I even @mention you to force myself to slow down.

Thanks @hanh !