Since joining the Doodles community in June of 2022 I have fallen in love with what it means to be a doodle. In that time I have pursued many ventures that I believe have bettered the community. I believe my experience in co-founding TGID as well as doing community research for the TGIDigest has given a comprehensive perspective on our community. I believe that my ability to communicate on multiple medias will help me achieve the goal of the watch, to provide transparency of council activity to the community as well as make sure the community is fairly represented to the council. I intend to utilize all my applicable skills and platforms to make me the most effective watchperson for our community.
Why are you running for the Doodle Watch?
I don’t know how better to say it than working for the betterment of the doodles community brings be great joy and fulfillment. I learned some time ago that I should pursue things that energize me and Doodles is that. The more I do for our community, the more I want to do. So I want to continue to serve our community in a greater capacity as well as utilize the watch as a feeder program for the council, which I would love to serve on.
Any supplemental information (documents, links, etc.):
Thank you all for your time, support, and community. If honored with the ability to serve on the watch, I will do my best to represent the doodles across the globe. Every doodle who has reached out to me for help knows I will bend over backwards to help a fellow doodle, I will continue to do that and more if given the opportunity.
Thanks for your application lifts and I’m always appreciative of the compensated work you’ve done for this community.
2 concerns:
I noticed you mentioned you’d love to “provide transparency”.
You’ve said in the past WRT to TGID’s expenses for that 10e given by the bank in it’s previous iteration several months ago, that “A budget review was always in the plan but would love to make a post mortem publicly available! Great idea.”
I’m taking this opportunity to ask: Where is it?
I don’t see it. Even though that statement was not a direct commitment to provide said information, it speaks to your commitment to transparency; and that transparency was not provided. Is there anything you’d like to say on this matter?
Previously you ran for council chair. I posted a concern there and expected a response but all I got was a like. I’ll ask it again in hopes of getting one:
TGID started as a 69e proposal. The community gave feedback to reduce the scope, that feedback not was applied in the final ask set out to vote on.
Consequently it did not pass. In that instance, I don’t think the community felt heard. Following that, the TGID team were forced to adjust scope and execute the initial feedback given down to 10e in order to receive funding.
The Watch is required to listen. I want my representative to take feedback and not be forced to do so. I want that person to ask the difficult questions.
What can you say to me and the voters out there to alleviate this concern?
Thanks for your application lifts and I’m always appreciative of the compensated work you’ve done for this community.
2 concerns:
I noticed you mentioned you’d love to “provide transparency”.
You’ve said in the past WRT to TGID’s expenses for that 10e given by the bank in it’s previous iteration several months ago, that “A budget review was always in the plan but would love to make a post mortem publicly available! Great idea.”
I’m taking this opportunity to ask: Where is it?
I don’t see it. Even though that statement was not a direct commitment to provide said information, it speaks to your commitment to transparency; and that transparency was not provided. Is there anything you’d like to say on this matter?
Honestly, this one is a fumble on my part. I wont speak on Tony’s behalf but for me I have been so focused on forward growth that I hadn’t stopped to take the time to gain the insights from a post mortem. Truthfully I felt like we had learned a a lot from season one, and most of it wasn’t about cost since we did a lot with a little, which I guess I can address in your second question. But in fairness, you’re right, the community does deserve a report. I’ll hold myself accountable and tell you I’ll get it published by 9/15/2023. And lastly I would hope that my body of work can be weighed against this misstep.
Previously you ran for council chair. I posted a concern there and expected a response but all I got was a like. I’ll ask it again in hopes of getting one:
TGID started as a 69e proposal. The community gave feedback to reduce the scope, that feedback not was applied in the final ask set out to vote on.
Consequently it did not pass. In that instance, I don’t think the community felt heard. Following that, the TGID team were forced to adjust scope and execute the initial feedback given down to 10e in order to receive funding.
The Watch is required to listen. I want my representative to take feedback and not be forced to do so. I want that person to ask the difficult questions.
What can you say to me and the voters out there to alleviate this concern?
I apologize if I didn’t address this while I was previously applying for council chair. To address your concern specifically, what you may not know is we spent months workshopping the proposal before it ever saw the light of day. The initial proposal that we sent around for was 220E, which I still stand by is a reasonable amount for the project we wanted to undertake, but we needed to prove ourselves first. So the proposal that we scaled down to to produce multiple fully animated shows and all other kinds of content, a full blown media company that employed 4 people was 69E. Yes there was some pushback on the amount, which was warranted, but sometime is business in creative endeavors you have to take risks, and so we did. During the vote I believe we got 1300 positive votes, so to say that the community did not support us at all is a bit of a mis-categorization. And when the community voted with their wallets, we listened and made the incredibly difficult decision to part ways with our animation partners and pursue the leanest viable version of our vision. So just as important as being humble enough to listen to your community is the importance of having the conviction to pursue your dreams. So I believe we did take feedback, and a lot of it. I certainly understand how you feel like it maybe didn’t happen that way but hopefully with some context you can see it from a different perspective.
Thank you Roops for all you do, I mean that genuinely. Let me knwo if you have any additional questions.
Honestly, this one is a fumble on my part. I wont speak on Tony’s behalf but for me I have been so focused on forward growth that I hadn’t stopped to take the time to gain the insights from a post mortem. Truthfully I felt like we had learned a a lot from season one, and most of it wasn’t about cost since we did a lot with a little, which I guess I can address in your second question. But in fairness, you’re right, the community does deserve a report. I’ll hold myself accountable and tell you I’ll get it published by 9/15/2023. And lastly I would hope that my body of work can be weighed against this misstep.
I will hold you to that due date.
I apologize if I didn’t address this while I was previously applying for council chair. To address your concern specifically, what you may not know is we spent months workshopping the proposal before it ever saw the light of day. The initial proposal that we sent around for was 220E, which I still stand by is a reasonable amount for the project we wanted to undertake, but we needed to prove ourselves first. So the proposal that we scaled down to to produce multiple fully animated shows and all other kinds of content, a full blown media company that employed 4 people was 69E. Yes there was some pushback on the amount, which was warranted, but sometime is business in creative endeavors you have to take risks, and so we did. During the vote I believe we got 1300 positive votes, so to say that the community did not support us at all is a bit of a mis-categorization. And when the community voted with their wallets, we listened and made the incredibly difficult decision to part ways with our animation partners and pursue the leanest viable version of our vision. So just as important as being humble enough to listen to your community is the importance of having the conviction to pursue your dreams. So I believe we did take feedback, and a lot of it. I certainly understand how you feel like it maybe didn’t happen that way but hopefully with some context you can see it from a different perspective.
I disagree. It was not a miscategorization. There was not 1300 positive votes. It was 974. Further, several holders at the time chose not to vote since the founders voting skewed it and the No vote would have pushed it to quorum effectively making it a Yes. This was one of the issues with the old system and I’m glad for the move to inkubator in its current state. This was one of the instances where that number you see in front of your face was not a true reflection of community sentiment. If you took the time look at the discord, it divided the community and there were discussions surrounding it at that will explain the numbers. The first opportunity to apply community feedback was not taken from when the prop was made public. The feedback was taken only when not given a choice in the matter after the fact. I would have liked that to be taken at the start. That is the voice of the community. They matter and should be put first. I hope if you are selected for the watch, that you will commit to that at least.
We can differ in opinion on this one and I’m fine with that.
