Hello,
Recently, there have been some strong opinions expressed in opposition to the way the Harmony ONE Subreddit is run and controlled.
Many in the community feel that the current way the Reddit is run is out of sync with the wider community values of inclusion, transparency and fairness.
The reason for this stems from the way that the current moderators do not appear to have an established process on how to make rules or how to apply them, which has led to different rules being applied differently to different people.
This is problematic as it has created a lack of understanding between what the community wants, versus what the moderators believe is good for the community, and vice versa.
It is also problematic as it allows the moderators to apply rules with zero accountability, often contradicting the rules that are in place, at times creating friction within the community for what is perceived as an unfair application of the rules.
There is also a legacy problem relating to how long moderators are allowed to stay as moderators. When the Subreddit was Initially set up, there was apparently no need for moderators to be elected, as the community was relatively small. Now that the community has exceeded 40 thousand members, there is a growing need for a fair and open process for how the community is represented - and we believe an election process would solve this.
Additionally, we propose is a community led review so that a new charter of rules is established, and this should be fairly applied.
I invite you to express your support or opinions on this topic.
Thank you
2 Likes
Thanks for sharing this. Definatley would be cool to consider having a down for the Reddit or maybe integrate it with the creator dao. Totally agree while blockchain tech is immutable community mods probally shouldnāt be
1 Like
Thank you for the feedback. We will be posting this thread shortly to the r/Harmony_ONE Reddit community to encourage additional feedback and thoughts in hopes of receiving a more inclusive perspective.
EDIT: For transparency, it should be mentioned I was informed the original poster was warned multiple times for violating post and comment rules by adding a signature, which was then recently followed by a temporary 7-day ban by a new (non validator) Reddit moderator. I feel context is needed in this thread.
In the meantime, OP can you please describe in detail what you mean by āa lack of understanding between what the community wants, versus what the moderators believe is good for the community, and vice versaā?
Please note that moderators on Reddit have not been elected, as previously described in another channel. Nor have the Telegram or Discord moderators. These have so far been 100% unpaid, volunteer roles assigned to community members who go above and beyond to expand the community. These folks do their best to help and grow the community and, like all human beings, are not perfect in everything they do. The time they spend on managing online communities to the best of their ability is incredible.
We strongly encourage other community members to voice their opinions on this thread and will request the Reddit community chime in as well so we can work to make it a better place for all Harmony supporters.
Edit #2 - I would like to add that we have plans for organizing more structure around our community management and leadership. As a new team member, this is on my to-do list with the primary goal of helping the communities collaborate and form a more cohesive structure while creating/refining processes. This will take a bit of time to perform, but itās a priority. We are also looking into decentralizing the process of moderator on-boarding and management, but that too will take some time to bring to fruition.
More to come @HeavenONE-Validator
2 Likes
Iāve been part of the community for around half a yearā¦ I donāt think you can just claim that āthere is a friction between what the mods set and what the community wantsāā¦ Imo the current mods(who volunteered to grow this community in the best possible way and keep it so organisedā¦ without anything to gain in return ) are doing and have so far done a very commendable job.
2 Likes
Nobody is under any illusion about my motivation for posting this dpagan, so nice attempt at making me look like I did something really wrong.
I do not know you, have never spoken to you, and you have massively left out the majority of the context in your post, which is very aligned with the censorship which goes on in the HarmonyONE subreddit, so I shouldnāt be surprised.
If you want context, how about this?
The moderators broke their own rules, yet still banned me for breaking the exact same rule. I can show you screenshots of this. Itās all over my twitter feed. www.twitter.com/heavenonecrypto
They practised zero discretion, and as it seems to me they have always practised zero transparency, basing their āruleā under which they banned me on a 1% community vote which was very closely split, and was changed based around something they had already benefitted from using, but had decided to stop others using. I call that banning the competition, how about you?
Do some research into this and you will find everything I am saying is true.
For you to claim that they do not benefit from their positions, doing it as some sort of āunpaid workā while advertising their validators (see my twitter posts) is massively naĆÆve and pretty embarrassing for you to claim.
They currently work like a cartel. No votes in, no votes out. If you support that, I do not support you posting your biased, corrupted view in the Harmony_ONE Subreddit about this post. It sounds to me like you have picked the side you support, and I do not need your support in arranging reform on this matter.
You clearly want to brush this under the rug as quickly as possible.
Thanks for contributing though!
Iām confused as to what the issue is honestly, your concern is that you were banned from the Reddit and feel the mods handle things too harshly? Is it possible you were behaving in a way that wasnāt productive?
Personally Iāve been a member of the reddit community since it was about 1k Users and havenāt really noticed any sharp changes for the worse with the mods, understandably they have more on their plate as it grows and must be slightly less lenient with actions that donāt align with the values of the subreddit so as to save time.
This post is positioned as a concern from the community at large but seems more aimed at a personal slight you may have dealt with (not anything most community members are upset about) and Iām just trying to get clarification on the matter.
Here is all the context you need
Then this tweet
There are varied concerns amongst the community that the moderators operate in unfair practises. Those tweets should explain a lot!
Thereās a few things to unpack here:
- You wrote these tweets, not an unbiased third party so it kind of negates the āwe as a community feelā angle of it
- Understandably you canāt have every single validator self promoting on the reddit, it would turn into a spam fest in an instant, the validators listed while sure, depending on how you look at it could be seen as āunfairā (not my take on it) understand they work for free, 2 of those Iāve personally watched moderating the reddit all year and even longer, for no money at all, the least they can get is some minor promotion of their validator to make up for it.
- Thereās not exactly a huge rallying cry of complaints from other community members on those tweets, just saying.
- it mentions in one of the pictures on the second tweet that youāve been a repeat offender on the reddit which is what led to the temporary ban?
I get your concern but I may have to side with the mods on this one, while their approach isnāt perfect and should always be open to critique, it seems relatively justified at the moment.
2 Likes
Heaven, as with previous commenters, I am not entirely clear if this is a complaint about the mods doing a terrible job managing the subreddit, or you are upset that they banned you and in your view mismanaged the situation. I agree with other folks that it is not easy to manage a platform with 40K+ people (if you have a group for your validator, you probably already know how it is to manage people) and sometimes decisions need to be made in a snap. People make mistakes and those can be spoken about, but accusing them with bias and censorship has implications beyond you might be willing to state.
I have been a member since 20K and Generally speaking, mods have always been transparent about what they do and why they do. I donāt believe they get paid, so in my view, it is only fair for them to use the Validator tag so people can delegate with them, but as of a few weeks ago, i donāt think that is even happening now. This is not a double standard because they are actually doing the work IMO.
Cheers mate.
Thanks for your comment.
I cannot however bring myself to agree to your saying it is ārelatively justifiedā for moderators to live by a different standard, no matter how many people comment on the tweets.
There are ways and means for a good standard of moderator to manage promotion of validators. There is a 40k+ community on the Reddit, and to suggest that these moderators are the only people capable of doing a good job`, or that they have somehow not benefitted from being moderators, is simply naive.
They have used exactly the same method themselves to promote their validators, and in my opinion, the entirely unscientific way in which they create rules (yet to see transparency on this), should surely be a cause for concern.
It is not right for us to simply brush a poor standard under the carpet. The moderators are in the perfect position to utilise the resources within the community, yet they choose to operate a closed shop up to now.
Myself and other validators would be perfectly happy to have a roundtable discussion with the moderators to discuss our concerns and offer our services in improving the way communities are managed, as this situation has clearly exposed an issue which is neither fair nor warranted (the way rules are chosen and applying different standards to different people).
I understand both sides of the coin.
In this situation, I think it wasnāt handled well by either party. Rules should apply universally despite the position. However, I will point out the people who became mods had that choice to be mods. Therefore, even as an unpaid position, they do not get the benefit to use that position as a way of promotion of their validator status.
Heaven.One broke the rules but the mods did as well. I do think the argument he is putting out there is wrong,as it seems to me, more of a personal vendetta rather than righting the wrongfulness of the actions but people have feelings and he is entitled to feel.
However the real question is this. Are harmony reddit moderators allowed to use their position to benefit themselves personally while denying others the opportunity. Thatās the real issue. The rules say no but they did so anyways. Thus, we should find solutions to ensure this does not to happen again so instead of this conversation of he said, she said. The conversation should be what things will be put in place to ensure social equity of those who promote Harmony projects.
I donāt know the full extent of everything outside that but just looking at the facts. This was my conclusion of the situation.
3 Likes
Thanks for your comment.
At this point, I would have to say it is a combination of both poor management of the situation related to myself, and the level at which the broader issue of making rules or applying them is concerned.
We can clearly see right here what can go wrong, and I am glad the discussion is actually happening.
For the moderators to work well within a community, there needs to be scrutiny, and that is what is happening here.
I keep hearing that they are working for free. There is an inherent benefit of being a moderator, as it denotes credibility to the users of the subreddit. This then leads to trust, and ultimately perhaps in many cases, delegation. The moderator wellnessONE even admitted this on a telegram call with me, that moderators benefit from being moderators in this way. That is point one.
The issue is not with how a moderator benefits, however. It is with the standard of moderation at hand. Many people might disagree with me, and say oh its fine, let them ban who they want, even when they break the rules themselves, they work hard. Other people might say, why should they be allowed to live by a different standard, which leads to my next pointā¦
Show me where the door exists for other people keen to prove themselves as moderators exists, if they knew and understood the benefits and wanted to get involved in that way? Are we saying that these moderators are the pinnacle? Hard as they might work, in-fact wellness even told me he finds it hard to manage, why do they not reach out to the community for support?
This is not an option for non-moderators to decide. The current system operates like a walled garden, with zero willingness to properly address this type of concern I raise. That is evidenced in why zero discretion was applied to my situation, and there was no way to challenge it. Am I saying I didnāt break the rules? No. Did they break the same rules? Yes. Was any corrective action taken? Only in the way that it benefitted them.
And look now, weāre having a nice open discussion about it. Why? Because it is important to question standards.
Thanks for your comment.
I am not seeking a vendetta however, just a fairer system for others who might and possibly even have encountered a similar situation.
If you can sense the emotion, that is correct. I, like anybody, am not happy that the ban was upheld despite the moderators breaking the rules, and zero discretion or corrective action was taken. This to me seemed like extreme arrogance on their part, and the feeling they think it is right for them to be judge, jury and jailer despite their own mismanaging of the situation.
I know I broke the rules, but as you say, so did they. I was the only person who received immediate consequences, even after I appealed.
The only way this can be reached is through listening to all perspectives. I am still banned from the subreddit, even though they have posted this thread there.
The standards of the moderators seem to be very blurred, and I agree the conversation should be exactly that, what things will be put in place to ensure the social equity of those who promote harmony projects.
Thank you.
Fair enough, I think itās perfectly understandable to want the mods to adhere to the same rules and regulations as those theyāre overseeing, from my understanding they did remove their names from the reddit promoting their validators after the fact, so thereās acknowledgement on their end of the it.
I also think the door should always be open to new critiques to keep things in line, so on that note, appreciate you giving out feedback. Also, a discussion could be useful to find some middle ground and allow new people a chance to gain mod status.
2 Likes
Iāve been watching your Twitter activity and now this post and Iāve got to say Iām shocked at such behavior from a Harmony validator. You may think of yourself as a brave person standing up for your version of ārightā but all I see is a petulant child throwing a tantrum.
See Iām an large investor in Harmony and I donāt appreciate ignorance being on public display on a platform like Twitter for the world to see. Itās a bad look no matter how wronged you think you are. Potential investors could be watching a validator trashing a part of Harmony and thats not kosher.You should be careful how you put a coin you represent in the public eye
As for Reddit sub I lurk there and Iāve seen the mods both validator and the ones who arenāt validators put in a lot of effort into the sub and more. Your opinion isnāt shared by hardly any1 else so please stop with the fake bullshit about how many people feel that way. U donāt speak for me or any1 else. Funny because I donāt see any of your army comenting or liking your tantrum twitter posts. So far its obvious the comunity doesnāt agree with you. but you are too much of a victim to realize when you should shut your trap and move on. Grow up.
Any1 playing into this bs and supporting this tantrum should think hard if this is what you want to put your name with. I can promise you I wonāt be spreading my ONE to you or any other validator singing your tune. You donāt represent Harmony in a way I think it should be, far from it. If you are what Harmony represents then maybe I need to reconsider my investment.
Theres always room for improvement as a coin gets popular and perhaps an adult convo could result in pay or comp for the mods or other changes to Harmony Reddit and other SMplatform on ONE. by convo i mean a discourse btween parties who are mature enough to have them.
I never talk in this community but watching my investment gettin put in a neg light in public caused me to take time out of my day to address it. So Iām out now that Iāve said my peice and wondering if I should even hold or just move my coin elsewhere
2 Likes
Nah, you should stake that with Harmony Universe validator, now that we are publicly talking about it 
2 Likes
Thanks for your comment.
Iām afraid casting light on topics such as this is not always easy. Calling people a victim is also not very constructive. And your claim that āhardly nobody else shares my opinionā is also totally unscientific. Also, if youāre here to share your opinion, donāt tell me to āshut my trapā, we are all entitled to our opinions as members of this community. This situation however has not resulted from an āopinionā, but a wrong which was not righted. I can get over that, but I do think this topic needs to be looked at more closely.
You may think otherwise, but telling people to āmove onā and āgrow upā when they are trying to open up a discussion to the community is pretty ridiculous and does not display tolerance on your part. In my opinion a lack of tolerance for other points of view is far more poisonous to the community than anything I have said.
I am surprised you are not more concerned about the points I have raised, as they could potentially be far more threatening to the social equity and growth of validators from a social media standpoint than anything I have said.
Attitudes like the one you have displayed here, Iām afraid, drive a far bigger threat to user-validator relationships than my open discussions over this topic. Or should we all just post what you think is acceptable, is that how you think a working community should function? All perspectives must be considered, no matter whether you like them or not. This is not about creating a āgood lookā, itās about encouraging people to listen to each other and try to push for better outcomes.
Thank you
Youāre pulling mod posts from 150 days to 200+ days ago. When they signed their names as validators. With the community ranging 2k-10kish. When there were no other validators on the sub really.
They did their best not signing their names going forward once the sub began to expand since they knew itās a conflict of interest. Iām sure if you look through their thousands of comments youāll find one or two. Maybe. But theyre human. With the thousands of comments on there with the other validators, Iām sure youāll find one or two that slipped through with their name signed on the bottom of a comment or post.
But most the other validators, including the mods, have been told not to or know not to and have done their best not to self advertise.
Iāve checked your posts and you literally say āstake with meā on multiple posts. Or āhey decentralize. Small validators. I am one. Stake with meā. All your posts have been focused on gaining delegates in a low key shill.
You were asked nicely to not do that going forward and you ignored their message. And when they did a 7 day ban, you created your own sub where you can ātalk freelyā about Harmony, called them out on Twitter, and now here on talk.Harmony.
The mods created the rules and are applying them to everyone. You just donāt see them if youāve never been a mod. Posts get deleted everyday. People get messaged every day. People get warned every day. And people get banned everyday.
The community loves the sub because of how itās ran by the mods. It would have not grown to its numbers now or with how helpful and respectful everyone is on the sub if it wasnāt for the mods. So your sentiment about the sub and mods is not a majority. I love how the sub is and how itās ran. Iāve been there since 2k subscribers in February.
1 Like
Thanks for your comment.
I think you are totally missing the point. This is not about saying āyou did this, I did thatā or crap slinging, this is about the fair application of rules.
I have not denied that I broke the moderators rules. They have not denied that they also broke their own rules.
Your point seems to be along the lines of the fact the mods are human. I get that. But humans can also apply rules fairly. They were given the opportunity to do that, when I pointed out that it clearly wasnāt fair, in this particular instance, that the rules were only applied in one direction, and asked them to clear up the ban as a goodwill gesture. They literally proved that goodwill in that instance only applied to themselves, and not to others. The system is broken. They took corrective action, and even complained on my twitter post that I should DM them when there is a problem (and now it is clear why). It turns out it was the right thing to do, posting it in public, because as a result of this, people could see that even though corrective action was taken that made them look like they had done nothing wrong, when they clearly had, zero discretion was used, even when I suggested it would be fair it should be.
It clearly made sense that it would have been fair. If they want to be moderators, they need to accept the rough with the smooth. They still have me banned right now. The system is not working as it should, and this is why this discussion is taking place. I cannot speak for other people who have been banned and I do not know the circumstances under which they were banned. The mods do though, and there is zero transparency around how the rules or made or how they are applied. It is only because I pointed out the unfairness of the way it is managed that this has been brought to light. Who knows if the way they ban other people is unfair or not? Maybe I just call it out, while others donāt have the time or patience. I have personally spoken to people who have issues with how various platforms on Harmony are moderated, and the fairness of how they continue to be moderated. If you want to be progressive, these things need to be challenged. And thatās what Iām doing.
There have also been points made toward the fact that while the rule states āNo Validator advertisementsā, many of them have their validator name as their username. Same as me. Some even have āVALIDATORā tags on their username. That is advertising. So why not ban everyone with that? Itās because there is no true transparency on how the rules apply, or are being applied. This needs to be approached constructively, not shut down because people feel uncomfortable talking about it in public. I have tried to make these discussions public, transparent and open, but continue to be banned on the subreddit.
I will continue to push for a better system. I do not believe in censorship, especially by de facto moderators. I would be stupid to think there would be no support for the status quo, but this is true across any area of life where you apply a counter argument. But I will also listen and respond to anybody who produces a fair argument to the contrary. In this instance, there are clear issues which I will not let them try to brush under the carpet. If I had not challenged it, it would have been accepted as ājust the way it isā. But its not just the way it is, itās wrong and needs to be reviewed.