I came to express my concerns about the management of the ecosystem’s social media, whether it’s the protocol or institutional accounts.
Lately, with all the changes being made by W3F and Parity, we know that Polkadot’s vision and infrastructure are more important than posting and marketing. However, let’s remember that marketing is also essential to attract people interested in the ecosystem, whether in the area of development infrastructure, product usage, or capital investment.
I recently made a post explaining about 265DOTs and Polkadot Capital Group, since very few people in the ecosystem create content to show the public updates, products, and other information within the ecosystem. I made a post related to TradFi with these two companies because it caught my attention, and in my opinion, it’s important to share this. But today, I was surprised to see that the person managing the Polkadot Capital Group account blocked me, and their X account retweets posts that have nothing to do with Polkadot.
In my opinion, if the decision-making approach that W3F/Parity will take in the future is like this, unfortunately, the community that has existed from 2020 until now will slowly disappear. The new roles will be filled by people who are not interested in the ecosystem and are only there to work, collect a salary, and that’s it.
I didn’t like this action, as I was inspired to continue creating content, and this surprise today has discouraged me.
Just saying: if people are going to take on important roles, they should be people truly connected to the community, and if they don’t like a post, DMs are always open.
Hi @w3nerick thank you for raising this and for your continued support and willingness to expand awareness of Polkadot and PCG on X. I appreciate you taking the time to share your perspective. I would like to address a few points directly.
First, the block was not related to the substance of your post. The original intent was to avoid external accounts appearing to represent or speak on behalf of Polkadot Capital Group on topics that touch TradFi, particularly since PCG is not a financially regulated entity, does not provide investment advice, and focuses strictly on education for the traditional finance audience. That said, this should have been handled through direct communication. The team should have reached out to you to discuss concerns before taking that action, and we acknowledge that this was not the right approach.
Second, a retweet was made from the PCG account that appears to have been a spam post that tagged the handle. We take full responsibility for this. The retweet has been removed, and we will be exercising significantly more caution going forward to ensure content aligns with our core mission and intended audience.
Third, Karen is my Investor Relations lead at PCG and manages the PCG account. She is highly professional and is still getting up to speed with the dynamics of a decentralized ecosystem like Polkadot. There was no ill intent behind her actions. I would respectfully ask that she not be personally targeted in public posts.
We value community engagement and thoughtful content creation, and the ecosystem remains open to discussion, support, and contribution. If you would like to continue this conversation directly, please feel free to reach out to me at dave@polkadotcapitalgroup.com. I would be happy to speak with you.
So you are going to block everyone on X right ?
Because how can you prevent people from speaking about you and your actions, if they want to.
It’s a pretty weird “censorship” approach that doesn’t seem to embrace web3 concepts here.
I remind you have “Polkadot” in your name, such behavior is quite embarassing…
If you don’t wan’t people to speak about your entity, maybe just forget X and stick to LinkedIn i don’t know. If you felt “offended” by w3nerick’s post, OMG.
I’m speachless about the explanation you gave to the community.
Maybe YOU should think about “avoid external accounts appearing to represent or speak on behalf of Polkadot”, that may apply to PCG in 1st place….
They clearly replied they don’t want anyone to speak on their behalf, which cannot be avoided in public media like X. It feels like more a deliberate action unfortunately.
But It’s just how media works, your words are repeated.
So no, their reply is definitely confusing about their “censorship” intents.
A brief apology would have probably been better rather than trying to make up weird explanations which are adding confusion on top of the confusion.
Anyway, i think the Community doesn’t need this currently. Let just the people speak as long as these are not insults and attacks.
https://x.com/w3nerick/status/2011520196385915222
