🔊 Seeking an Experienced Community and Social Media Manager


#Sandfam, we’re looking for a talented Community and Social Media Manager to join The Sandbox DAO team and take charge of our socials.

If you’re a proactive, detail-oriented professional with a proven track record in community management, we’d love to hear from you!

Key Responsibilities:

  • Develop content strategy for 2 social media channels: LinkedIn, and Twitter. Including but not limited to creative brief development for assets, copywriting for all social posts, scheduling, and reporting.
  • Actively moderate community discussions to maintain a respectful and productive environment on Discourse.
  • Collaborate with the Project Management team for the SIP workflow.
  • Keep the community informed about upcoming voting and deadlines to encourage participation and decision-making.
  • Prepare and host AMA sessions, and answer community questions. Coordinate with speakers and prep them for the AMA.
  • Weekly report to the DAO Administrator

Requirements:

  • Minimum of 3 years of experience as a Community Manager.
  • Fluent in English, both written and verbal.
  • Capable of engaging effectively with a diverse community.
  • Meticulous attention to detail.
  • Strong leadership skills and mindset.

Conditions:

  • Freelance contract, full-time.
  • Salary based on experience.

We encourage you to apply! Please send your resume to contact@sandboxdao.com and why you’d be a great fit for this role.

We look forward to welcoming a new member to our team!

3 Likes

I am thrilled to see the opening for the Community and Social Media Manager position and am eager to apply. With over 5 years of experience in web3 gaming and metaverse exploration, particularly focused on The Sandbox, I am confident that I am the perfect fit for this role.

Having been deeply involved in the SandFam community, hosting spaces, podcasts, and daily streams, I have a profound understanding of our community’s needs and a passion for fostering engagement and growth. My background as a social media manager for top web3 gaming content creators and my active participation in multiple other DAOs uniquely position me to bridge the gap between the community and The Sandbox team effectively.

I will be submitting my resume and application via email shortly. Thank you for the consideration! I am excited about the opportunity to contribute to The Sandbox DAO and support our amazing community.

SandFam Strong Together :fist:

6 Likes

I am Lanzer and I approve this message (and I’m not even getting paid for it hahaha).

Seriously though, I think Krafter would be a great fit for the position. He’s been involved in the SandFam community for a long time and already does AMA-like events with community members.

@Geraldine

2 Likes

Thank you sir for the kind words! Appreciate the support and hope to become even more involved with the community and assist with awareness around the DAO!

Gotta throw my name in the pixelated hat here
 :handshake:t3:

Krafter looks great, no doubt, but I’d love to make my case, too:

:space_invader: As an active ambassador of TSB for the last 4+ years, I understand the ecosystem, the pulse of the community, and the underpinning values of the web3 gaming ethos. I’m pretty deep in web3 gaming, having been at the forefront since the early Axie days and organizing the first major Axie LAN event at HyperX Esports Arena in 2021.

:eyes: Many OG’s are familiar with my name (and my 𝕏 account, theKuntaMC).

Long-time $SAND HODLer (and staker) and LAND holder since 2020


:muscle: My SUPER POWER is developing and deploying creative communications, content, and marketing strategies to strengthen and grow vibrant, engaged communities, foster high-value partnerships, and launch successful campaigns across industries. I’ve been honing my craft, upskilling along the way, since AOL discs came in the mail.

:building_construction: In addition to marketing agency experience, I’ve worked in various sectors, including emerging tech, gaming, nonprofit, academia, politics, live entertainment, specialized consulting, customer support, & logistics. That’s 29 years of marketing experience with the last 5 specializing in blockchain and emerging technologies.

:computer: My work in those fields includes community engagement, social media strategy, content development, communications strategy, digital marketing, public relations, relationship management, experiential design, direct/IRL marketing, & event planning. I’ve managed teams of up to 26 direct reports.

:books: I have over 230 relevant COURSE CERTIFICATES validated on my LinkedIn bio, where I previously held 7 “Top Voice” badges and have a successful weekly newsletter that simplifies social media strategies.

:bulb: Further exemplifying my drive to improve and upskill constantly, I was recently invited to be on staff at Social Media Marketing World [SMMW], the largest SMM industry conference, where I led roundtable discussions with marketing leaders from Fortune 500 brands!

:ballot_box: Included in my email: Expanded CV, Cover LETTER, Intro VIDEO, List of SOFTWARE familiarities, Sample of CERTIFICATIONS verified on my LinkedIn bio, Primary REFERENCES, & More :globe_with_meridians: Âł :video_game: :rocket:

:memo: My references include former employers (like Peter Ing from BlockchainSpace and Alper Esen, a co-founder of Yoda Labs, my most recent employer), prominent founders across industries (like Seb Borget from The Sandbox Game and Mona Shaikh from Web3 is a Joke), a best-selling author whose MarComms techniques I’ve mastered (James Carbary, “Content-Based Networking”), as well as marketing and communications execs from Meta, Allied Esports, New Jersey Devils, Madison Square Garden, and more!

:handshake: ₿obby Kunta àł„àŸ€àż
LinkedIn.com/in/theKuntaMC
𝕏 = x.com theKuntaMC
TG & Discord = theKuntaMC
:icecream:Newsletter = linked from my LInkedIn

ɠaɱe on! :space_invader:

I wish you the best of luck but I think it is very apparent from the Special Council and the Advisory Board that they don’t want anyone actually connected to the SandFam community to have any part in the DAO unfortunately :pensive:

1 Like

Kristen!!! Your presence has been missed. :heart:

I agree that the Special Council and Advisory Board hasn’t been as active as I first thought
but the deeper I go into this with my SANDDAO podcast, the more I’m okay with how this is unfolding. I think it’s clear that they have every intention of moving the DAO out of their hands and into SandFam hands. It’s going to happen December 2025 versus sooner.

Yes, and they did it without even allowing any community representation on the DAO or even a discussion first.

They wanted the community to stake their SAND and then refused to allow those who staked the opportunity to vote or even the chance to unstake their SAND before voting so the most VP went to those who knew ahead of time that their investment in the project wouldn’t count.

All to rush a select handful of people into position that paid them 110,000 SAND a year for two years.

It has been a nice 6 or so weeks stepping away from TSB in general but I am slowly getting back into it. The Sandbox is a completely separate entity from The Sandbox DAO and I got involved with The Sandbox because I care about the project and the SandFam and watching The Sandbox DAO scam the SandFam like that was very heartbreaking so I had to step away from everything, but I am trying to get back into it.

But I guess if they do actually end up handing it over to the community in 2026 then I will eventually vote yes for something in 2026. Until then, every single vote I make will be No because I will not vote for a project that is actively scamming The Sandbox and the SandFam that I love.

Where did you calculate the 110K SAND per year? I tried finding the numbers to calculate myself and didn’t see anything of use.

When you say scamming, doesn’t that usually involve some kind of fraud? They’re certainly pushing things fast and have made errors of out haste, but I don’t see it having reached a threshold of stealing money from SandFam. Their rush to install the Special Council & Advisory Board would’ve happened with or without us knowing ahead of time. Seb and Cyril made clear those initial seats were given to those they trusted to start the DAO on the right foot. And then in Dec 2025, we vote either replacements or reelections? That part is somewhat unclear to me

Exactly, the DAO was completely and totally decided ahead of time. There was no reason to even have a sham vote because our voice in it never mattered. If it did, we would have been allowed at the very minimum a conversation before voting, but it was made completely clear that our voice never mattered in this.

The entire Special Council, who is supposed to ensure SIPs align with the community’s interests, is compromised of absolutely no one from the community. At the time of voting, from looking at their posts on twitter and discord (our largest gathering for community members) you can see that there are only 11 posts in discord since the beginning of 2023 from all 5 of them combined and all 11 are from Seb which are mostly him popping in saying hi. And outside of Seb on twitter there’s only been 21 posts from Yat since 2018, 3 from Shannon ever, 2 from Jean-Michel ever and 0 from FrĂ©dĂ©ric, and that includes the posts thanking The Sandbox DAO for placing them on the Council before the vote even took place. How on earth can any of them even know what the community’s interests are since they are not involved in the community in any way? They already made it clear 45:24 into the first AMA when they stated that community members said they didn’t want those who staked to get any VP, which no one from the community said.

The only one with any ties to the community is Seb, who should be on there because TSB deserves a voice on the Council, but that’s exactly what his voice is, the corporate TSB voice. Not the community’s voice.

One thing you can see from the community in Discord, especially the channels for other languages, is that many people voted yes because they just want a DAO and couldn’t even understand what this DAO was about because they didn’t properly translate into their native language when they tried, or they never even took the time to read it. Which everyone on the Council could have understood ahead of time would come into play when the community went to vote.

As far as where the 110k is mentioned, it is in The Sandbox DAO Constitution:
The compensation for the initial Special Council members will be
110,000 $SAND per year and per member.

So we are paying 1.1 Million SAND to 5 people to represent our voice when they don’t even know what our voice is, we weren’t allowed to discuss anything and we were rushed into voting for them before the community was even given the right to get their VP in place including moving it from Staking. Staking is something many community members did because staking supports the project, so those who supported the project were essentially screwed out of being able to vote unless they knew ahead of time what the plan was, and unless you were an insider you wouldn’t have known. That’s over 85 Million VP at the time of the first vote.

The fact that they won’t even just give those community members and supporters the right to is beyond shameful. Yes, I understand that they say they didn’t have to follow the whitepaper and they can do whatever they want (another red flag) but to not even understand that the community wanted that and believed they would be given that right (or at the very minimum enough notice to move their SAND out of staking to have their VP in place before the snapshot) is just disgusting to me. Those are community members who didn’t sell when prices dropped but instead placed their trust in the project and staked in the project and they don’t matter at all to The Sandbox DAO.

And then after the end of their first two years we get to vote again. Given the worldwide election rate for incumbents is an insanely high number, unless they step down we put them back in their same positions.

Their response to all of this? Some extremely sugar coated AMAs where no one pushes back on anything.

Is scam the right word for it? Maybe not, but that is exactly how I feel given how this went. I invested a lot of SAND and time into the project to give us the DAO we were promised and their response was this sham of a DAO years and years later which essentially just pays their friends 1.1 Million SAND of The Sandbox’s money. And as we saw with SIPs 4 & 5, if a SIP is ever not going the way the Special Council wants, the Special Council can just have The Sandbox put 27 Million VP to whichever way the Special Council wants.

I must be totally blind. I don’t see the 110K sentence in the Articles of Association, the Memo of Association, or SIP-1, SIP-2, SIP-3. Can you pretty please point me to where that sentence is?

So it makes sense to me that people like Yat and Jean-Michel and the others don’t have the time to closely scrutinize the particulars of Sandbox DAO matters. They’re more of strategic leadership, and the day-to-day management of the DAO is falling to Arasakio (Cyril’s team). The Special Council’s team is high-level advice, not day-to-day supervision of DAO interests.

I agree with you on why people voted yes. I voted yes because of that as well. I just wanted to get us started. Getting that 15.5M SAND endowment is a big deal to our ability to do something.


85 Million VP
wow. I didn’t realize it was that much.

And I agree the AMAs didn’t have the full representation and understanding of SandFam. Joseph and Krafter were probably the most on the ball with their questions, while I was still trying to figure out what a DAO is. I fixed that though, so when I interview Seb next week and hopefully find some availability with Cyril, I think we can ask the right questions.

Are there any questions you want me to ask them separately?

The 27M VP applied to SIPs was a publicly admitted mistake by Cyril. Seb confirmed they do not intent on voting with their 27M VP in future SIPs. That aside
yes
it was rushed, and yes, there were some pretty glaring loopholes + assumptions that probably should’ve had discussion beforehand.

So I agree with a lot of what you said. I think we draw different conclusions. I see it as mistakes that Cyril and his team are trying to do better on. They’re learning and evolving just as we are. I’ve heard Cyril enough that I give him and his team the benefit of the doubt
for now :slightly_smiling_face:

And I also heard him and the Special Council both say that community members don’t want people who staked their SAND to support the project to be able to have any VP for doing so (45:24), so I don’t trust anything they say anymore since they very clearly are willing to blatantly lie to us. Either that or they don’t even have the slightest idea whatsoever what the community’s interests are that they claim themselves they are paid for to ensure the SIPs align with and they don’t care to support those who invested in the project. Not sure which it is, but there’s no way it can be anything either than one of those two things.

It is in the Constitution which is linked in SIP-1.

85 Million VP at the time of the first vote’s snapshot. I haven’t checked since then. And that’s not just people who hold SAND but people who actively invested it in The Sandbox staking program to support the project, which most people consider to be even more powerful than just holding and flipping SAND. A lot of people didn’t realize that, nor did they realize that these people have had as close to zero interaction with the community as is possible. But I do my research before I speak. Unfortunately the people we pay 110,000 SAND a year for multiple years don’t. But it’s like they said in another AMA, they basically don’t care about those people and they didn’t have to follow the whitepaper and we shouldn’t trust anything in writing because they can do whatever they want.

I’m completely okay with the Special Council being high level advice, but to claim this is what they are there for is a blatant lie:

Special Council members provide guidance on Sandbox Improvement Proposals (SIPs), ensuring that they align with The Sandbox DAO’s vision and the community’s interests.

They should completely remove the part about the community’s interests since it is beyond obvious that they have absolutely no interaction with the community whatsoever and therefore have no idea what the community’s interests even are.

They knew many people would feel the way you do, which is exactly why it made sense to rush a sham DAO to ensure they got the DAO to be exactly what they wanted in order to ignore the community while giving the illusion that the community has a voice.

They rushed it through the community, they didn’t care about the community, they didn’t involve the community, they didn’t make sure the community could understand the DAO, they didn’t give the community the chance to get their VP in place and in the end they got themselves 110,000 SAND a year, every year, from The Sandbox by doing so, all while saying they were doing so to protect the community’s interests knowing that the community would just vote yes because the community wanted what the community believed a DAO would be. They scammed the SandFam. They lost my benefit of the doubt when they blatantly lied in the AMAs already.

You and I must have heard different things. I already had notes on this one and I went back to relisten to that portion (thanks for the link). Here’s what they said.

  • [45:00] Krafter: What about staking SAND counting as VP?
    • Cyril: We see people arguing for it, and some arguing against it. It’s something that could be implemented, we’ll put a SIP out to the community and see what the people decide.
    • Seb: It’s a good suggestion. We have to do a review, staking is staked in contracts and pools so we have to figure this out

Both Seb and Cyril said they were okay with the idea. Both of them said that counting staked SAND as VP had technical hurdles to overcome. And both of them said that they would put it as a SIP for the community to decide. What did you hear that told you different?

The Constitution. Holy smokes. I completely missed this document. When Cyril referenced it I thought he was talking about the Articles of Incorporation. I’m going to need to go through this and add it to my upcoming podcast episode on Sandbox Foundation docs. Thank you for that.

The second sentence of that statement on The Foundation is just as important, “They also hold decision-making power and can veto proposals based on legality, redundancy, conflict, and community interests.”

That’s how they’ve (Seb & Shannon & Cyril) been explaining it in the AMAs. We’re only 1 community SIP in (all the other 8 were TSB-inspired), so time will tell if that’s all they wield their power for. But it’s too early to say. The only way you can be sure they aren’t doing things in the best interest in the community is if they start denying SIPs that the community wants. How do you know this to say they aren’t doing things in the community’s best interest?

That is exactly what I heard. And then I went back and checked every source of our community’s interactions since even though I had basically lived in The Sandbox’s different Discord servers and on twitter, I figured I must have missed something.

I didn’t. Not a single person said those who supported the project by staking their SAND in the project should be given 0 VP. The only debate was if they should be given more VP than those who just hold SAND without staking.

They blatantly lied to us because they didn’t think anyone would check. I did check. Just like I checked how often the people we pay 110,000 SAND to each year for two years even interact with the community. They don’t.

And why should something that absolutely everyone wants even be put forth as a SIP and go through the process of delaying those 85 Mil VP even longer when we were already told we would be given them in the whitepaper? Oh right “because we don’t have to follow the whitepaper” is what they said. Not a good enough answer. What else are they not going to follow that they promise us just because they don’t want to? Things they said in AMAs :woman_shrugging:

And yes, I’m very understanding of the fact that there are technical difficulties, but it doesn’t take a genius to figure out a solution here. Two weeks before the first snapshot you put out messages everywhere explaining it and saying if you want to be given the VP you were promised and you deserved, then withdraw your SAND from staking. Done. Problem solved. Every single person we pay 110,000 SAND to each year for two years should have known that was a solution and fought for the community to have that right. Why didn’t they? Just look at the tweets. Every one of them knew before the vote even took place that they were already on the Special Council and Advisory Board. None of them asked for our votes. None of them told us why they would serve us well. They were guaranteed those positions before a vote even took place. As we saw in the beginning, this is likely because they knew TSB had the majority VP and would vote them in. It wasn’t until the DAO knew that they would win without that vote that they decided to re-do those first SIPs where TSB didn’t vote. The public outcry was instantaneous so there was no way they missed it, those chose to wait until they knew what the vote would be like without TSB’s vote to try to convince everyone they actually cared when it was obvious they didn’t. Also, if they put out that message then they knew the community would have had a chance to at least discuss the SIPs before voting on them and from their responses on twitter, they were 100% adamant that they did not want the community to have the time to even discuss it. I wonder why


And I don’t know anything about the future and what they will decide to do. All I know is they have all the power and they chose to not put a single person from the community in any position of power and to also ensure that those who invested in the project and supported the project through staking were not going to even have a chance to use their 85 Mil VP against their wishes when they had every opportunity to give the community that power before the vote even took place. Why should I give them the benefit of the doubt when they already had that from the beginning and chose to go against the community? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

That’s an extremely harsh take, Kristen, and I find myself agreeing with a number of things you said. The only rebuttal I have is the way you’ve characterized their intent and condemning both the Council and Advisory board at the same time. I just finished interviewing Loretta Chen and I found her to be genuine when she said that she knew almost no one else on the Board and she had almost zero input on the formulation of the DAO.

There seems to be a difference in how you characterized their actions, and the way their accounting of how it all came to pass. It’s looking like there was no malicious intent, and except for Seb & Cyrils drive to get the DAO started at the cost of positive community sentiment, we’re here now talking about what to do about a functioning DAO, versus still debating if we should have one.

While I critique their sacrificing of positive community sentiment as you do, I can’t discount the fact that it’s enabled me to submit 5 SIPs advocating for change, whereas before I had no way to do this.

I’m interviewing another board member next week so I’ll ask few more questions geared toward this.

You’re right. I don’t blame those people for something they were promised by the people who formed the DAO. That doesn’t mean they colluded with them. And many of them likely deserved to be there as well, but that doesn’t mean that the community should have absolutely zero voice so they could all be there. The only ones I blame are every single member of the Special Council and DAO management team who willingly chose to either not speak up beforehand when they should have easily seen the issues or not speak up when the community was so vocal about the issues. The only other explanation is that they were so detached from the community because they chose to never involve themselves in any way with the community that they didn’t know the community cared about these issues, which is another issues all together given their powers.

And there is no discussion as to whether we should have a DAO or not, they ensured that from the beginning by forcing us to vote without a discussion knowing people would hear DAO and just want to support having one like we’ve begged for and been promised for years without even fully looking into everything. Take yourself for example, you’ve interviewed many people, you’ve read so much up on it, but you weren’t even aware of the Constitution we all were rushed into agreeing to without any feedback beforehand.

My requests were extremely simple:

  • (1) member of the community on the Special Council
  • (1) member of the community on the Advisory Board
  • The chance to discuss the SIPs before voting on them
  • The chance for those who supported the project through staking to have the chance to withdraw their 85 Million VP before the snapshot.

And as someone who was as extremely active in The Sandbox community for years as I was up until the formation of this scam of a DAO, I can assure you that these requests came from not just me, but the community at large. Not a single one of these requests were considered worth it to those running the DAO. How am I supposed to believe they care at all about the community they claim to represent? Once bitten, twice shy. Fool me once. Etc. These are sayings for a reason. First impressions matter the most and their first impression was something they should be ashamed of.

There’s not much I can argue against on that one.

Agreed, it was rolled out in a rushed and hushed way. It started itself off on the wrong foot with the community, and created some easily avoidable suspicion.

I’m choosing to focus on fixing the future and I completely understand if DAO leadership/Special Council has exhausted any trust with you + SandFam. In some ways, I have little option left to me if I have any hope to keep up with the DAO’s activity.