Medium Post: Simple Steps To Joining The RChain Developer Community

[ResonanceXX]

Benefit to RChain

Steps and processes + pictorial guide to nudge potential members into signing for membership and contributing to Development
Get in touch with a guide (https://github.com/rchain/bounties/wiki/Bounty-Task-Guides ) to align your contribution with goals of the RChain cooperative.
Replace these 3 lines with your answer
Medium Post

Budget and Objective

Please make the issue SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timely.

Estimated Budget of Task: $[450]
Estimated Timeline Required to Complete the Task: [2 Days]
How will we measure completion? [Published]

See CONTRIBUTING.md for details on budget and reward process.

Legal

Task Submitter shall not submit Tasks that will involve RHOC being transacted in any manner that (i) jeopardizes RHOC’s status as a software access token or other relevant and applicable description of the RHOC as an “asset”—not a security— or (2) violates, in any manner, applicable U.S. Securities laws.

[casanwugo]

@ResonanceXX.. Nice piece you got there... But the membership fee is $20, and not 25 as stated in the content.

You might need to correct that if its a typo. Great work. Kudos.

[ResonanceXX]

@casanwugo I've had that fixed. Typo, caused by weary eyes. Thank you. Cheers.

[ResonanceXX]

Feel free to applaud and comment on the post.

[casanwugo]

Ok. Will do.

[ResonanceXX]

Also would want every area pertaining to this issue be resolved by the guide. @pmoorman Hello there also!

[pmoorman]

@ResonanceXX reached out to me on Discord (and commented above) because he was frustrated about not getting a vote on this issue and #777 alike. He felt "left out" of the process.

I thought I'd move my response here, rather than in DM on Discord, so it can act as future reference for other people, too.

So here are my thoughts on the matter:

• First of all: ideally we'd want the guides to automatically pick up on new issues that are created, and immediately vote a budget for it. This is what the ToS calls for: pre-work approval. Unfortunately, this is something that has been working only partially, so far. The system of the TAC (task approval committee) and guides is still young and in development.

• Pre-work approval means that if a project is not funded, it should be assumed that it shouldn't be worked on yet. If you haven't gotten a budget yet, you haven't gotten a "go" about the project, and you're taking some risk.

• For future reference, it's good to ping guides early, if you want to be sure a project is funded. If we're already in the final week of the month (that is: the 1st week of the next month, when rewards get set), it's a good idea to ping us in the issue, like you did above.

• Finally, for projects like these, it would be good to include indications of traffic / engagement and reach. The value of content depends largely on the audience it's reaching. Little reach = little value.

As guides (cc @AyAyRon-P @kitblake ) we'll make sure to go over this project in the next couple days, but I thought a public response would be helpful.

[ResonanceXX]

@pmoorman All that you wrote is fair.

I would love to see a more actionable response. And it is my genuine concern that these administrative bottle necks do not impede the creative freedom that most RChain members once expressed.

[ResonanceXX]

I have said this before, if genuine work is not duly regarded, where ever, discontent is bred. Whatever the issue was, is, or will be - please give due attention to ALL MEMBERS of the forum.

Regardless of what you may/may not consider, and in the course of forming these new level of cooperations ensure that a hierarchal system is not produced.
Because then we would become shadows of the darkness we once tried to destroy. (Centralization)

[pmoorman]

As noted above, the marketing guides missed out on these issues last month. I've now voted a budget for this issue for July, and encouraged the other 2 guides to do the same.

I'm voting a budget significantly lower than what's being asked for, for the following reasons:

1. The quality of content isn't great
2. The article has had very limited reach
3. Because the article isn't on a Coop-owned property (like our own blog), it doesn't represent a significant content asset to the Coop

As guides, we try to allocate budget in proportion to the value being created for the Coop. In the case of external articles like these, value is in the reach and engagement, both of which seem to be low.

A similar reasoning (and vote) hold for issue #777, which is alike in nature.

[ResonanceXX]

@pmoorman I understand the obvious bias. And I also would want a bit of specificity.
As to 1 2 and Why the Coop, which I belong to, and have promoted with plenty of efforts cannot be an indirect owner of the content, which I did not lay any copy rights to.
Its a moral obligation to accurately sight detailed reasons for negating the ease/fluidity of a certain process.
Cheers.

[pmoorman]

as far as detailed explanations go:

1.1 - the entire document is badly formatted. Everything is in bold, which makes for a weird 1st impression
1.2 - at 303 words, we're not really going in depth into anything. It's just scratching the surface
1.3 - odd wording such as sheets and spreads when you mean spreadsheets
1.4 - the content is not tailored to the audience. If you write for developers and you say "create a Github account"... that's just weird
1.5 - neither steps 1 nor 2 are technically required
1.6 - overall, the document doesn't feel like good quality writing to me. I don't think a professional writer would approve of it

2.1 - as far as I can tell, there hasn't been any reach on the article apart from being posted on your own Medium, and possible some basic promotion. If I'm wrong and this article has reached thousands, then please correct me.

3.1 - to make it an asset to the Coop, an article should be posted on the RChain blog for instance, so it can help rank for SEO terms, drive traffic, etc. etc. Right now, none of that happens.

I hope this helps. For #754 essentially the same points hold. If you still feel wronged about it, give me specific pointers why you think significantly more value is being created.

[ResonanceXX]

1.1 - Badly formatted, like according to which index/type of text formats (Paragraphed, Tenses and/or spellings) Your statement is vague and ill conceived.

1.2 - For a - How to - can there be really so much depth. Especially when this is not a video, and its a marketing drive. How many 1 hour ads have you watched? You can share some links to them maybe!

1.3 - Is that a typo, and is that odd.
The RChain front page website had a dozen or more errors, which I had pointed out in issue # (Forgotten about that, cooperatively)
1.4 Tailored to audience - How? Are we making dresses here? I cannot understand, should the article be executable? Weird is odd or unusual - Are accounts not created? I am lost.
1.5
1.6 Approval of a professional writer? The websites/texts/articles which had errors, did not need approval or disapproval did they? Why are these pros not members of the cooperative?
2.1 - So on Quora was a good place for us. But #197 got a bit of beating.
3.1 - But @ResonanceXX does not run the blogs? Should a parallel website be created just for the thrill of it? I didn't think so.... I'm sure you do not.

I can never feel wronged. Maybe a bit under appreciated, just maybe. And then when you are in a position to ''pull the shots'' in a decentralized organization, try to adhere to the fundamental principles guiding that.
Give applause, give a knock.. But still stick to the basics.

All of this position and sudden critique of the work reeks of bias and flawed discernment.

The fact that the issue was left untreated, even as you assumed the sensitive position - is discriminatory and a deviation from the core principles that attracted me to the organization.

[ResonanceXX]

Participation in a venture where a Guide sits idle, allows a published article skip his mind, because he was so busy. Uncomfortable stuff there.

And defining things as weird and needing the approval of professional writers? Come on! And talks about the creation of value.

This seems to me like a - valuation of what is created. And one done in disproportionate amounts as is conducive to the valuer.
I have a precedent, and I am reluctant to undermine that. So do what ever you please.

Cheers

[pmoorman]

I haven't got much to add to what I've already said above.

If you can make a case how significantly more value has been created, then please explicitly do so.

[TrenchFloat]

I'm tentatively closing this due to inactivity and a budget agreed upon in the rewards app.
Please re-open if anyone feels the discussion should continue.