Thanks for the clarification. I didn’t see the updates. And yes I would like to be involved in the discussion on Friday.
1 Like
Oh to be clear, there were no updates to this post! This post has remained unchanged since publication so don’t worry, you didn’t miss anything. I’ll invite you to the call on Friday.
1 Like
I hodl. But I just don’t expect everyone to do what I do.
Do I think people should buy Stacks. Of course I do. Do I think it is a good idea for evangelists to own Stacks. Yes.
But that’s not the point.
I know that evangelists can give value, be a great part of the community, write articles, be engaged, teach classes, promote the community without being required to own stacks.
Anyway, it’s moot because the community has come up with great ideas for the program.
Maybe we’ll have to have to agree to disagree, and I don’t think it’s moot. I’d wager that any evangelist program I believe would be the most effective, would require some level of hodling. I think we have to lead by example.
I do think people can contribute effectively without hodling, we’ve seen that, but I also don’t think contributing alone makes you an evangelist. Anyone can and should contribute how they see fit, holder or not. But evangelists? There’s more to the role imo. Firmly believe they should have STX, even if just for their own benefit.
Worst case, it’s a bad look if we have a bunch of evangelists that don’t/won’t have Stacks. You don’t have to look far for bad examples of influencers who don’t actually use their product or follow the diet they represent, etc. - the fallout and trust damage in those cases is real. With crypto we have a unique opportunity to provably, verifiably support something in an unimpeachable format, why wouldn’t we lean into that? On the macro-level, I don’t see why anyone would listen to a group of people that aren’t practicing what they preach (for very long).
Beyond that, it’s a big way someone can benefit from being an evangelist.
And again, not pay to play or anything like that. In my mind, we’d obviously make this super easy, but I will fight hard to make sure any evangelists that are part of any flavor of program we roll out have STX for these and other reasons.
1 Like
thanks @jrmith and rest of the folks for their comments above . Time to check out if this idea has wings . if evangelists are given a fair chance of becoming hodlers of some micro value ( or if it addons to their existing hodl) periodically by random selection then that may increase the probability to remain a stx hodlr ( specially among newbies) and / or keep the spirits up in general . Running the experiment just a few times might be good enough to validate the underlying assumptions. The frequency of dispensing these micro rewards can be decided upon. E.g $100 worth stacks distributed over a period of time. something on those lines. Having said all of the above i still believe we need to check if most of folks are in agreement ( which kinda seems they are with comments in telegram ) or whether this has too many implementation overheads.
1 Like
@cuevasm thank you for this post, you make some great points.
For me, the issue really boils down to the topic at hand, which is a proposed update to the Evangelist program. Presumably this major update would also reflect the transformation in branding from Blockstack to the Stacks Ecosystem. Meaning, that the Evangelist will be responsible for promoting the Stacks Ecosystem. While the Stacks token is essential to that ecosystem, it is only one component of it. Perhaps additional indicators can be added, such as hours volunteered to active projects, for example.
I can see why stx ownership/hodling would be an appealing indicator for Evangelist eligibility since it is easily verifiable and quantifiable. Perhaps the need for additional indicators for eligibility will be reduced once the Ecosystem continues to develop, more apps are launched, etc. Given how the token is meant to play an active role in many of these projects, perhaps new Stacks users in the future will come across stx more quickly and organically. I think some of the issues that come along with using stx ownership as an eligibility indicator come from the fact that it is still a relatively “early adopter” process for average low-medium information users to get stx (use relatively obscure trading platforms, use beta wallets, etc.). As token utilization continues to increase (and barriers to acquiring tokens decrease), perhaps token ownership will become a more valuable key indicator for Evangelist participation.
1 Like
Definitely open to other measures in addition, I think that’s a pretty standard thing to do - sort of measure engagement of a program like this among its leaders. No argument there, I think Jenny mentioned a number of ways we can look at engagement.
While the Stacks token is essential to that ecosystem, it is only one component of it.
Here I fundamentally disagree. To me, the Stacks token is inseparable from the Stacks Ecosystem - you can’t take out the economic unit of an economy and expect it to function. If the economy dies, so does the ecosystem. It’s also the thing that makes crypto communities so interesting and potentially powerful - not sure why we’re afraid of requiring our leaders to hold the asset even if just symbolically. My guess is that most of the folks we consider evangelists today are already STX holders so we might be really over-rotating on this.
As token utilization continues to increase (and barriers to acquiring tokens decrease), perhaps token ownership will become a more valuable key indicator for Evangelist participation.
What barriers? The STX token is incredibly easy to get for a vast majority of people. And again, not asking them to come up with the funds themselves if that’s the issue. But as far as barriers, I don’t accept that it’s so difficult to get STX that we couldn’t reasonably ask evangelists to have them. To be really clear here, again, I want to find ways to give these folks STX - in my opinion, you should be looking at this as a benefit, not a requirement. And, as a tool for helping in a job vs. a burden to carry. If as evangelists, you don’t have a strong desire to hold STX, that’s a bigger problem we need to address in my opinion.
I don’t think we have to settle this issue to move on with getting the rebooted program off the ground, so everyone should feel free to press forward here, but I do think this discussion is important. If we can understand why there’s possible resistance to STX here among our most engaged leaders or perhaps we’re not on the same page about the importance of the token to what we’re doing, we should really explore that further.
Small aside: ‘Blockstack’ should be out of our vocabulary at this point, except when referencing project history. We’ve been pushing Stacks and building up that brand for months now, there’s no question that should be the brand the evangelists focus on. Your first paragraph left me a little unsure if you were totally clear that that transition has already happened. 
Regarding my statement “While the Stacks token is essential to that ecosystem, it is only one component of it” I do not mean to diminish the importance of the token in operation and development of this project. I also agree that the token is inseparable from the Stacks Ecosystem, described as a fundamental building block of the ecosystem, and one could argue the most important component. And I do agree that, in practical terms, most people pursuing Evangelist status probably already own stx.
For reference, I am aware that the full transition in branding has occurred. This seems to be the first major update to the Evangelist program since that rebranding. I feel the project’s historical context is significant, given we are discussing proposed changes to a program essentially focused on outreach and engagement around said brand. Especially when the changes seem not to be arbitrary but rather a deliberate shift between a focus on core project components (block + stack) to the totality and harmony that the ecosystem use case brings. From a non-technical standpoint, I would just think that shift might possibly be reflected in other program components, such as eligibility, etc.
Full context on me, because I know I just popped out of nowhere: just an enthusiast, hodler and lurker coming to the surface. Discovered the project in 2018 while going down internet search rabbit holes for app projects floating around my head. I am not a developer but am familiarizing myself with that world as much as possible. I’ve been following Stacks developments on Twitter, watching anything I can find with Muneeb, reddit, discord, etc. I am such a big fan of this community and hope to contribute more as it grows. Thank you for everything you and others have done to see this important project to fruition.
1 Like
Also you are correct that Jenny’s proposal already mentions possibly adding ways to determine eligibility. I love this statement: “The idea though is for potential evangelists to prove their commitment to the community, not for us to impose greater barriers to participation.”
I just love the discussion going on in here so thank you for indulging in my brainstorming. I support Jenny’s proposal as it stands.
2 Likes
Hey guys - I’m happy to take a look into the Evangelist program.
I have 16.3K Subs on Youtube and 250K+ On TikTok.
Email me - [email protected] . Would love to maybe set up a time to chat. I think theres alot of potential in this and the word will be getting out organically but I think having some people with a small following kick start it faster would be helpful to everyone (future holders and the current community)
It’s great right? Thanks for being here 
Evangelist needs to be participative, to have involvement, to use his assets as well as to maintain, we must have some requirements for those who want to be part of this new phase.
+1. Evangelicalism has done real trauma to this world. Not only does that make using this name incompatible with our “Can’t be evil” mantra, but it presents a trigger for folks who have suffered harm from these traumas. For myself personally, the title Evangelical for this program presented an emotional barrier that actually kept me from applying.
I’ve been tossing around better names in my head since I first heard of the program, and especially so since reading this forum post. Today, I joined the wonderful people working on the Dada cryptoart ecosystem and learned their term for “ecosystem steward” that I think beautifully applies to what we’re doing with the program: Gardeners.
Stacks Gardeners grow and tend to the Stacks community in the way they know best, just as gardeners tend to the life in their gardens. Gardeners plant new seeds when they create new apps or bring in new people. Gardeners pour their water (time/energy/spirit) into the new life growing in the ecosystem and feel joy as they watch the garden flourish. Gardeners love to share knowledge and create new teaching materials.
Very interested in the Evangelist program. I’ve now been involved with Stacks for 6 months and learning more about the ecosystem and have taken on small responsibilities recently.
I’m personally looking forward to the Clarity Universe starting in September and then I’ll have a better idea of how I can be of service to the community thereafter.