RevGenius Community Updates: New Member Approval, Spam Controls, and Engagement Improvements | RevGenius

RevGenius Community Updates: New Member Approval, Spam Controls, and Engagement Improvements | RevGenius

Jared R.
·
·
Let's give it up to Mike C., Pat H., Paris P. Nicholas P. Eric J. Nandini R.!!!!
👏4
🕺1
🙌19
Nandini R.
·
·
Thrilled to be here full-time and diving in with the team! My DMs are always open if you have ideas, feedback or just want to say hi. Let's build some amazing conversations together! 🚀
✅4
Ashley R.
·
·
Thanks, everyone!
🙏1
Chris M.
·
·
Thank you
🙏1
Charlie C.
·
·
Thanks for the efforts Jared R. and team. Why don't we have private channels that are for GTM operators and exclude the good folks that sell GTM solutions?
❤️2
Jared R.
·
·
Charlie C. great idea, can you dive into specifics into how you'd define a GTM operator vs good folks that sell GTM solutions ?
Charlie C.
·
·
A couple of ways to operationalize this: 1. Have a form people fill out to join the new channel, where they list their LinkedIn URL. Batch approve by having AI inspect their present role and assess whether it sells to GTM, and Community manager adds. Decision can be appealed to human. 2. Another option is to invite a few folks and make it recommended invite-only and ask people to keep the members focused on operators.
Jared R.
·
·
Ya I'm cool with either of those ways Charlie C. - the question was more around how do you define who's able to join? My pov is allow directors+ into a channel. All functions- sales marketing ops cs
Charlie C.
·
·
Right, but we have a lot of founders selling GTM solutions. We could just say it is for Directors+ at companies that don't sell GTM solutions.
Mike C.
·
·
I'm liking where this is going
Jared R.
·
·
I see what you're saying Charlie C. - I'd want to test being inclusive of those folks too with the ability to remove anyone trying to sell anything from the group with a strict 1 strike you're out policy.
Jessie T.
·
·
Thanks for acting on this Jared R.. I actually raised this with Nicholas P. recently as well. One thing worth noting is that business dynamics globally have shifted a lot in the last 24 months. Many experienced operators are leaving corporate roles to start their own ventures or consulting practices, so the line between “operator” and “vendor” is naturally more blurred. Personally, I’d love RevGenius to remain inclusive. Communities like this can also help good startups, emerging tech, and services get visibility, especially when they don’t yet have strong distribution. To me the key is less about excluding roles and more about encouraging value based behaviour. Direct pitching is actually fine, especially if it comes with a story, insight, or learning, and happens in the right channels. What tends to create friction are things like: • posts framed as “asking for help” that are really lead generation • recommending a product without disclosing you represent it • promotional content spread across channels rather than kept in dedicated spaces Transparency and context go a long way. It might also be worth looking at the growth of outbound driven members (SDR, BDR) in the last year. The behaviour patterns there tend to be quite different from operators or founders.
Jared R.
·
·
Jessie T. you're spot on. We are finding the sweet spot to be inclusive of all operators, and restrict high-risk (to not drive value based behaviour - who are here to generate leads/sell first) folks from joining.
1
Jared R.
·
·
is everyone on this thread getting a few less dms and seeing a small improvement yet? 🙂
Charlie C.
·
·
Yes, I'm not getting many direct solicitations like that. To me, it's more about folks posting questions that are thinly-veiled cover to bring up the "problem" that their solution happens to address. It comes across frequently like the questions aren't really legit.