In this post, I will tell you about an incident that happened to a top ambassador — https://twitter.com/Auri_0x
He has a tweet about it, but here I will tell you more about what really happened.
First I will tell you about the project and what the ambassadors did in it, then I will describe the essence of the problem. I think that this should be read by every Ambassador to understand how it can be and why you can’t rely on 1 project. Support this article to show everyone this truth….
ClayStack is a De-Fi project that provides “innovative steaking opportunities.
Investors.
Based on their announcement of July 13, 2021, they managed to raise $5,200,000 from:
CoinFund, ParaFi Capital, Coinbase Ventures, Spartan Group, Animoca Brands, LedgerPrime, Solana Foundation, Shima Capital, D64 Ventures.
What did these guys do?
- Recruiting staff;
- controlling the quality of content and automating that process;
- the interaction of the community;
- promotion of the project on social networks.
A team of guys who essentially organized the entire work of the ClayStack Ambassador Program from scratch decided to write a letter to the project team in which they shared their concerns about the fact that the project team had unclear/ineffective communication with the key participants and contributors to testnet during the 8 months of their work.
One of the problems was that during the second month of collaboration, the project team promised $USDC awards to everyone, but no awards were given out.
The guys didn’t pay attention to this as sometimes it takes time and were sympathetic to it.
Over the next 6 months, every time the guys asked about their rewards, they received no response or received empty promises of other potential rewards.
But that wasn’t what their letter to the team was about; the letter asked for clarity and a change in attitude toward key contributors.
The point was that ClayStack continued to increase their key performance indicators (or as they call it, “efficiency”) for participants each month, and anyone who failed to achieve this efficiency was removed from their positions.
It is important to note that in all 8 months, contributors were not even thanked for the work they were doing.
Instead, they were more often bombarded with personal messages saying “why didn’t you contribute here, are you still interested in this position?”
In addition, team members literally stole authors’ ideas and shared them with others as their own (hello, Sid is the only person who communicated with ambassadors from the team).
While mohakagr, the founder of the project, showed up in the beginning when he was recruiting this team and now when he responded to our email.
The situation was beginning to seem rather surreal — the ambassadors were asked to work harder, while our ideas were stolen, without a “thank you” or even the slightest interest in what we wanted or how we felt.
But we didn’t even get to the problem.
The question is how the founder reacted to the letter and the actions of the team that followed it.
In short, “the world doesn’t care about the contributor, it’s the contribution that counts” — A good philosophical statement.
So, let me tell you about the contributions that the ambassadors have made to the ClayStack project.
1. over 5,000 users applied for an ambassadorship role and all of them were manually researched and only 2,500 passed.
2. Every assignment and strategic change in the ambassadorship program was done by us.
3. the automation of the submitting of completed tasks was developed by us.
4. The educational programs for the community, were developed from scratch.
5. Localization of key documents and blog posts in 6 languages.
6. Continuous feedback from the community.
7. Held more than 20 AMA sessions in different regions and languages, reaching 100,000+.
8. A system of analytics at the end of each season of the Ambassador program and extensive feedback.
We did all this during the bear market, but now look at how much investment and how many partnerships the project has managed to attract and conclude.
After seeing a post from mohakagr, “suspiciously good feedback about the Ambassador program” as a counterargument to our negative review of the team.
Were we infuriated? — Yes, because we designed this clear ambassador program, it’s our BREAKING.
And the team used this argument close to your phrase “loyalty is determined by effectiveness.”
We were effective and had a significant impact on the project, but we were still ignored rather than valued.
After receiving a politicized ambiguous letter from the team, the purpose of which was to deflect attention from the problem and place the blame on the authors of the letter.
There was absolutely no response to our concerns or respect, let alone gratitude, in the letter.
We then set up a friendly call for everyone involved to discuss the problem and talk things through.
After the team found out about the call, the real surreal began.
I still can’t understand everything that followed.
In a nutshell: the project team said that one of the participants had used private emails from ClayStack to arrange our friendly call.
And this is a violation of program rules and a very serious problem.
Just let me let you know up front that all of these emails were open to anyone who received emails with project updates from members of the ClayStack team.
So no one needed or ever wanted to steal this information.
However, the team refused to listen to this or any of our arguments and wanted to find the person who “stole the emails.”
At this point, no one wanted to communicate with the team, so we just backed off.
Until the team told us that our silence was unacceptable and they would handle the matter on their own.
Or was it that we tried to talk to the project, but the project didn’t want to talk to us, so they foiled all our attempts by creating false drama?
I really don’t know what it was about, but the top 3 members (board members) were instantly banned from the server when they shared their opinions on the issue.
Some opinions were polite, some were emotional.
Another interesting point is that all the posts in the #council channel were deleted by the team.
If you have nothing to hide, why resort to glossing over and deleting information?
I would have been happy to include mohakagr’s reply if it hadn’t been deleted.
I know emotion has nothing to do with it, but we tried to be calm and collected when we were humiliated and deceived.
So, we were banned with a promise of $800 for 8 months of work if we remained silent on the whole issue.
Here’s another humiliation and total lack of respect.
It’s depressing, I’m emotionally drained and can’t find the words.
The core members who still remain in the program support us 100%, but since we are cut off from communicating with the larger community and the project team refers to the fact that “we kicked the fodder out”.
That’s the whole situation, I hope you can help in spreading this…
