How far along is the development? Who all is involved at this point? What are the founding organizational principles? What do you have in terms of a strategic roadmap so far?
Are there already specific projects and initiatives you have lined up to be begun or in development? Partnerships? Etc.
I get the conceptual overview. Though if I or anyone else would like to get tangibly involved, we need that bridge to understand the full scope of what all the project is, where it's at in its development, what the needs are, etc. Structure required to ground down the conceptual into the tangible from which we may constructively direct creative energies in executing deliberate strategies tailored to specific, measurable goals and outcomes.
Really not sure how far anything is at this point, so at the least, may this comment provide some priceless feedback to direct the output of upcoming content describing the answers to these, as a path forward for readers to engage more deeply with the project from such that we may see what specifically we may have to contribute that could be of value at various points in the developmental timeline... ;-)
thing is, the initial concept is very brief, very broad, rather vague, and resembles the general opening statement of several similar ideologies about changing the world driving well-intentioned projects and missions.
you seem to be expecting people to want to jump in immediately and offer a big commitment to one single idea just because you've written a few short paragraphs about the general idea. but as objective feedback: it is not crystal clear about what you're asking from people.
sure, you might attract a few people that are gung-ho and willing to jump in and shoot in the dark trying to figure out exactly what to do. though if you articulate the vision more clearly to paint a more detailed understanding of where exactly you'd like this organization to grow to and what's needed, you're much more likely to inspire support and attract the specific resources that are need once that "what" is clear.
and off the bat, for some linguistic feedback: the "collective" bit is a highly overused word. and I'm not certain "conglomerate" may be a label most conducive to ushering support from the decentralization community - given its predominant associations with corporations, which kinda stand in ideological opposition to parts of what you're aiming for. I've seen other projects in the blockchain space take very similar strategic approaches, and... well, there are reasons for this feedback.
you're throwing around all the right words, though I don't feel the substance beneath the surface, given the concept is so fresh. I could be completely wrong - though having written the above from the frame of "we," there is still the question of whether you're the one-and-only person behind the idea at this point, or whether there are others onboard, its been an idea in development for a while, and what their roles are.
At this point, I'm 34, married, experienced alot in life, have my time and energy committed to a few different projects, and would need more details to properly assess whether it'd be of value to either of us to pursue interest in any project. I've done my diligence in this space, have graduated from the MIT Fintech course, and seen enough ideas and projects in the blockchain realm to fairly assess what they do and don't have going for them...
and while I can respect that you choose not to divulge too much information, you're likely realistically going to have to provide at least a bit more info before garnering the support you're hoping for.
do keep writing and sharing more. curious to see how it evolves and where I may be able to step in and help at some point if there is an alignment... :-)
I appreciate you taking the time to reply. I think it's crystal clear I am just reaching out to gather people to begin building a business.
I'm really happy for you being so involved in so many projects, but honestly I'm more looking to gather together people willing to take a chance and put in the work to build out the idea from scratch. Why does it seem like you're trying to discredit me? I think when I say, "Sometimes, the best thing you can do is say FUCK IT, let's just try! That's what we are doing. Starting a conglomerate collective organization which will focus on strengthening the collective vision of the blockchain cryptocurrency industry and thus strengthen our market as a whole. We are starting small but our plans are big and we are looking for people who have ideas to contribute and that are willing to put the work in to see our vision become a reality. If you're interested in getting involved, please reach out to me through steemit chat or via my email at [email protected]." It's really clear my idea is in the early phases and I'm looking for people to get started building from the ground up. Thanks for letting me know most people won't be interested until the hard part is over... I appreciate you looking to keep me grounded and can assure you I am well aware.
My apologies for reaching out to a community and not providing exactly what you're looking for. I really wish that people who might have been interested in contacting me, didn't have to see all of this since you know self fulfilling prophecy when you say many will not want to know more until... Guess what? The value of my post has already gone down. Really sorry it's not exactly what you're looking for. I hope next time you go to give criticism you might consider the channel on which you are communicating and how that may affect the thing or person being criticized. Blessings to you.
No apologies necessary. And there's no intention of discrediting you or the project - only constructive criticism. Your enthusiasm level is high and I get all the good intentions, though I've been through alot over the last 15 years so understand where you're coming from and some of the inherent weaknesses in the approach are.
I get your frustrations - and aren't going to try sugar-coat anything when I see they're likely to continue with the approach taken. It seems kinda like you've gotten offended because I haven't hopped on the positivity train off the bat - but your expectations are about as realistic as expecting to sleep with someone halfway through the first date. I don't mean that to put you down in any way - but offer honest, valuable feedback as otherwise you're likely to keep getting frustrated as running in high gear and wondering why no one wants to jump on the wagon before slowing down enough navigate the way through a gentler, paced relationship-building process.
There might indeed be a few people interested in starting from scratch - though you'll attract the right people the further you go in articulating the vision and details, versus such a broadly-sweeping general concept...
as is transparency in discussions of a "collective" project in a forum where an idea is collectively being developed.
the degree of productivity is dependent on how the feedback is acted upon.
you wanted contribution to your idea - you got it. not in the form of unconditional positivity you wanted. but in honest, authentic, objective feedback. maybe I offered too much too soon when it wasn't asked for, so my bad.
OR on the flip side - it could be a challenge. and rather than getting defensive and shrugging it off, you could use the questions to stimulate an elaboration into the details missing from your first take to clear up the misunderstandings generating the feedback.
I really wish that people who might have been interested in contacting me, didn't have to see all of this since you know self fulfilling prophecy when you say many will not want to know more until... Guess what? The value of my post has already gone down.
If you're serious about this as a venture, there'd be no hesitation at having these questions laid out upfront. it'd be greater leverage for everyone involved to have such prerequisite conversations established in the open rather than attempting to juggle multiple of the same in private.
Re: the value of the post is my doing. I had initially upvoted at 100% to attempt giving a boost in attention (something I rarely do). after seeing it didn't do anything and receiving the impatient private response I did rather than a thoughtful elaboration validating the full voting power, I changed it to 50%. The further drop is because I was about to bump it back up to 100, but the site won't let me change it more than once apparently.
OKay well thanks for your half assed support. Appreciate it. Can you leave me alone? You're beating a dead horse, you have a job right and how many other projects. I said I'm DONE with the conversation. STOP MESSAGING ME.
I want you to comment, edit, add, subtract, to this and all of our documents, if I’ve asked you to look this over, my expectations are somewhat high for your involvement and that starts immediately if you are up to working on this collective vision together
Clearly VERY, unrealistically high, given the amount of time and energy I bothered to invest only lived up to "half-assed" in your eyes.
good luck with your idea. you'll need it, with your current strategy and communication approach. ✌️
p.s. apologies for the miscommunications generated through the split conversations between here and Facebook. had the entire dialogue been kept to one platform or another, there would have been less misunderstanding as parts of my comments here may seem out of context and confusing due to parts missing from the FB side.
Great starting intention.
Now, for the structure...
How far along is the development? Who all is involved at this point? What are the founding organizational principles? What do you have in terms of a strategic roadmap so far?
Are there already specific projects and initiatives you have lined up to be begun or in development? Partnerships? Etc.
I get the conceptual overview. Though if I or anyone else would like to get tangibly involved, we need that bridge to understand the full scope of what all the project is, where it's at in its development, what the needs are, etc. Structure required to ground down the conceptual into the tangible from which we may constructively direct creative energies in executing deliberate strategies tailored to specific, measurable goals and outcomes.
Really not sure how far anything is at this point, so at the least, may this comment provide some priceless feedback to direct the output of upcoming content describing the answers to these, as a path forward for readers to engage more deeply with the project from such that we may see what specifically we may have to contribute that could be of value at various points in the developmental timeline... ;-)
Its very early on.
thing is, the initial concept is very brief, very broad, rather vague, and resembles the general opening statement of several similar ideologies about changing the world driving well-intentioned projects and missions.
you seem to be expecting people to want to jump in immediately and offer a big commitment to one single idea just because you've written a few short paragraphs about the general idea. but as objective feedback: it is not crystal clear about what you're asking from people.
sure, you might attract a few people that are gung-ho and willing to jump in and shoot in the dark trying to figure out exactly what to do. though if you articulate the vision more clearly to paint a more detailed understanding of where exactly you'd like this organization to grow to and what's needed, you're much more likely to inspire support and attract the specific resources that are need once that "what" is clear.
and off the bat, for some linguistic feedback: the "collective" bit is a highly overused word. and I'm not certain "conglomerate" may be a label most conducive to ushering support from the decentralization community - given its predominant associations with corporations, which kinda stand in ideological opposition to parts of what you're aiming for. I've seen other projects in the blockchain space take very similar strategic approaches, and... well, there are reasons for this feedback.
you're throwing around all the right words, though I don't feel the substance beneath the surface, given the concept is so fresh. I could be completely wrong - though having written the above from the frame of "we," there is still the question of whether you're the one-and-only person behind the idea at this point, or whether there are others onboard, its been an idea in development for a while, and what their roles are.
At this point, I'm 34, married, experienced alot in life, have my time and energy committed to a few different projects, and would need more details to properly assess whether it'd be of value to either of us to pursue interest in any project. I've done my diligence in this space, have graduated from the MIT Fintech course, and seen enough ideas and projects in the blockchain realm to fairly assess what they do and don't have going for them...
and while I can respect that you choose not to divulge too much information, you're likely realistically going to have to provide at least a bit more info before garnering the support you're hoping for.
do keep writing and sharing more. curious to see how it evolves and where I may be able to step in and help at some point if there is an alignment... :-)
I appreciate you taking the time to reply. I think it's crystal clear I am just reaching out to gather people to begin building a business.
I'm really happy for you being so involved in so many projects, but honestly I'm more looking to gather together people willing to take a chance and put in the work to build out the idea from scratch. Why does it seem like you're trying to discredit me? I think when I say, "Sometimes, the best thing you can do is say FUCK IT, let's just try! That's what we are doing. Starting a conglomerate collective organization which will focus on strengthening the collective vision of the blockchain cryptocurrency industry and thus strengthen our market as a whole. We are starting small but our plans are big and we are looking for people who have ideas to contribute and that are willing to put the work in to see our vision become a reality. If you're interested in getting involved, please reach out to me through steemit chat or via my email at [email protected]." It's really clear my idea is in the early phases and I'm looking for people to get started building from the ground up. Thanks for letting me know most people won't be interested until the hard part is over... I appreciate you looking to keep me grounded and can assure you I am well aware.
My apologies for reaching out to a community and not providing exactly what you're looking for. I really wish that people who might have been interested in contacting me, didn't have to see all of this since you know self fulfilling prophecy when you say many will not want to know more until... Guess what? The value of my post has already gone down. Really sorry it's not exactly what you're looking for. I hope next time you go to give criticism you might consider the channel on which you are communicating and how that may affect the thing or person being criticized. Blessings to you.
No apologies necessary. And there's no intention of discrediting you or the project - only constructive criticism. Your enthusiasm level is high and I get all the good intentions, though I've been through alot over the last 15 years so understand where you're coming from and some of the inherent weaknesses in the approach are.
I get your frustrations - and aren't going to try sugar-coat anything when I see they're likely to continue with the approach taken. It seems kinda like you've gotten offended because I haven't hopped on the positivity train off the bat - but your expectations are about as realistic as expecting to sleep with someone halfway through the first date. I don't mean that to put you down in any way - but offer honest, valuable feedback as otherwise you're likely to keep getting frustrated as running in high gear and wondering why no one wants to jump on the wagon before slowing down enough navigate the way through a gentler, paced relationship-building process.
There might indeed be a few people interested in starting from scratch - though you'll attract the right people the further you go in articulating the vision and details, versus such a broadly-sweeping general concept...
Meh this conversation is unproductive. I explained how I felt, private critiscism is professional.
as is transparency in discussions of a "collective" project in a forum where an idea is collectively being developed.
the degree of productivity is dependent on how the feedback is acted upon.
you wanted contribution to your idea - you got it. not in the form of unconditional positivity you wanted. but in honest, authentic, objective feedback. maybe I offered too much too soon when it wasn't asked for, so my bad.
OR on the flip side - it could be a challenge. and rather than getting defensive and shrugging it off, you could use the questions to stimulate an elaboration into the details missing from your first take to clear up the misunderstandings generating the feedback.
If you're serious about this as a venture, there'd be no hesitation at having these questions laid out upfront. it'd be greater leverage for everyone involved to have such prerequisite conversations established in the open rather than attempting to juggle multiple of the same in private.
Re: the value of the post is my doing. I had initially upvoted at 100% to attempt giving a boost in attention (something I rarely do). after seeing it didn't do anything and receiving the impatient private response I did rather than a thoughtful elaboration validating the full voting power, I changed it to 50%. The further drop is because I was about to bump it back up to 100, but the site won't let me change it more than once apparently.
OKay well thanks for your half assed support. Appreciate it. Can you leave me alone? You're beating a dead horse, you have a job right and how many other projects. I said I'm DONE with the conversation. STOP MESSAGING ME.
Clearly VERY, unrealistically high, given the amount of time and energy I bothered to invest only lived up to "half-assed" in your eyes.
good luck with your idea. you'll need it, with your current strategy and communication approach. ✌️
p.s. apologies for the miscommunications generated through the split conversations between here and Facebook. had the entire dialogue been kept to one platform or another, there would have been less misunderstanding as parts of my comments here may seem out of context and confusing due to parts missing from the FB side.
And thank you for the wealth of lessons. :-)