►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Okay,
so
what's
your
so
we
have
the
the
you
wrote
up
the
petition
document
for
adjustments
and
improvements
to
this
fund.
You
shared
it
with
the
intention
of
getting
a
working
group
together
to
adjust
it
and
then
I
work
on
it
for
this
fund
and
then
in
line
with
the
momentum
of
the
fun
Danny.
Has
the
vpa
document
open
for
edits,
and
so
that's
sort
of
the
monkey
wrench
in
the
plan
here
and
then
I
guess.
B
Address
I'm
actually
curious
to
see
what
Jeremy
has
to
say,
because
I
know
he
had
ideas
and
I
was
just
curious
to
hear
more
about
those
cool.
C
D
Setting
assessments,
it
should
have
read
fun
10.,
that's
like
a
simple
typo,
but
I
I'm,
very
interested
in
seeing
where
the,
where
we
have
problems
in
the
assessing
phase
or
the
review
phase
of
the
assessments.
For
that,
just
a
small
thing
you
know,
but
it
slipped
through
and
part
of
it,
was
because
at
the
very
end
of
the
ca
process
it
kind
of
got
out
of
hand.
D
So
one
thing
the
working
group
does
is
It's.
The
final
word
on
those
and
anybody.
You
know
a
working
group
has
unlimited
membership,
so
this
isn't
about
like
dating
the
process,
but
and
any
working
group
could
form
itself
and
make
these
statements
clear
to
iog
could
draft
up
a
document
and
say
this
is
what
the
group
is
coming
to
say.
The
target
here
is
everybody.
D
That's
working
on
the
vpa
guidelines
is
in
the
working
group
so
like
there
wouldn't
be
anybody
left
out
of
that
conversation
in
terms
of
saying
yeah
we,
this
is
our
effort
that
we
put
into
it
and
we
you
know,
we
feel
that
we
have
said
what
we
had
to
say
about
this.
There's
several
conversations
in
those
guidelines
right
now.
Do
you
have
a
proof
of
Life
somebody
brought
that
up.
D
Do
you
have
do
we
want
to
change
the
requirements
to
be
a
vpa
to
include
a
filter
out
ratio
or,
alternatively,
an
excellent
component
to
assessments,
so
these
are
conversations
that
are
going
on?
Can
we
get
them
done
in
five
days?
D
That's
you
know
remains
to
be
seen,
but
when
it
comes
to
updating
those
guidelines
at
the
end
of
that
five
days,
we
need
to
decide
on
the
language.
That's
in
there
from
the
people
who
are
having
that
conversation,
so
they
can
say:
hey
I
wasn't
done
going
through
that
thought
process.
John
W
had
some
really
good
input
on
the
ca
guide
related
to
language
alterations
in
that
whole
star
rating
language,
where
it
says
I
agree
that
it's
feasible
or
I
disagree.
It's
feasible.
He
had
started
to
kind
of
work.
D
Instead,
we
have
three
different
types
of
language
on
three
different
types
of
assessment
criteria
and
it's
kind
of
weird
and
I.
Don't
know
how
confusing
or
helpful
that
was
to
the
to
the
Pas
at
the
end
of
the
day.
So
so
that
process
really
does
need
like
a
validating
element
to
it.
A
kind
of
stamp
of
approval
from
the
community.
A
working
group
can
do
that
because
it
has
unlimited
membership.
Anybody
can
lend
their
perspective
to
that
stamp
of
approval.
D
We're
handling
of
the
documentation
is
always
on
this
idea
that
the
guidelines
are
only
commentable
for
a
very
short
window
of
time
is
not
acceptable
for
documentation
on
a
process.
That's
at
the
core
of
a
rewarding
protocol
in
in
the
Catalyst
Treasury
that
always
on
that
needs
to
be
always
beyond
that
feedback
loop
on
the
on
our
documentation
needs
to
always
be
available.
D
There
should
be
another
version
of
that
document
that
is
in
a
get
book
or
a
GitHub,
or
even
just
a
PDF,
something
that
can't
be
commented
on
and
doesn't
have
a
lot
of
confusion
around
it
and
isn't
in
an
iterative
phase.
But
in
the
background
there
should
always
be
a
commentable
doc.
So
we
need
to
upgrade
our
documentation.
D
Situation
in
a
working
group
is
a
good
place
to
base
that,
out
of
because
they
have
certain
they'll
be
funded
and
they'll
have
certain
responsibilities
like
maintaining
a
place
for
documentation
and
making
sure
that
it
has
a
start
and
end
date.
It
gets
to
the
community
basically
offload
this
from
Danny.
It's
there's.
No
reason
Danny
should
be
having
to
write
hurt
on
this
except
to
receive
the
end
product.
At
the
end
of
the
day,.
B
Yeah
I
feel
like
it
was
also
very
rushed
at
the
end
like
it
was
like.
The
document
got
opened
up
what
like
a
week
or
so
before
the
PA
process
actually
started
and
then,
like
idea,
scale
registrations
were
open
and
it
was
linking
people
to
the
guidelines
that
were
still
in
draft
form,
which
was
also
a
mess,
because
if
anyone
was
to
look
at
that,
they'd
be
like
what's
going
on,
I
don't
know
what's
happening
so
I
think
that
also
needs
to
be
at
least
from
the
iog
side.
B
C
D
D
D
It
would
be
nice
to
be
able
to
within
24
hours
fund
the
group
that
needs
to
work
on
that.
You
know
that's
going
to
be
held
accountable
for
that,
because
if
you
don't,
then
you
don't
fund
anybody
nobody's
held
accountable
at
the
end
of
the
day,
you
get
something
like
the
ca
guide,
which
is
kind
of
a
dog's
breakfast
and
stuff.
D
That's
on
me
and
I
feel
like
we
can
still
go
forward
without
that
administrative
Group
by
just
having
the
community
do
that
work,
and
then,
at
a
later
point
we
can
say
you
know
it'd
be
a
lot
easier
if
the
community
would
just
assign
an
administrative
group
to
this,
so
they
didn't
have
to
keep
convening
to
take
care
of
these
things
presented
in
that
way,
I
think
there's
an
option.
There,
there's
probably
other
options
we'll
find
as
we
go.
It
does
need
an
administrative
layer.
D
It
does
not
need
it
at
the
exact
moment
we're
in,
but
somebody
needs
to
do
those
things.
The
community
as
a
general
rule,
could
at
any
time
they
want
to
give
supporting
documentation
or
create
documentation
or
do
whatever
they
wanted
with
the
tools
that
the
treasury
provides.
So
I
feel
like
it's
within
my
scope
to
say:
here's
a
working
group
Charter.
D
Does
anybody
want
to
try
and
fill
these
rules
as
a
community
member
I
feel
like
I
can
do
that
and
and
then
it
goes
into
discussion,
and
then
it's
not
about
what
what
I've
submitted
anymore?
It's
about
whatever
gets
iterated
within
the
discussion
and
added
to
and
and
all
that
kind
of
thing,
and
then,
of
course,
it
has
to
evolve
on
its
own
in
use
so
I
tomorrow,
I'd,
like
I,
think
I'll
be
done
tomorrow
with
it.
D
I
should
be
able
to
submit
that
to
a
discussion
thread
to
the
vpa
channel
in
the
Discord,
as
well
as
the
treasury
discussion
Channel,
and
we
can
get
that
discussion
going
and
hopefully
soon
I
would
say
no
more
than
48
hours
be
able
to
at
least
have
the
structure
there
so
that
the
people
who
are
participating
in
that
know
what's
coming
next
and
then
it's
a
question
of
how
do
we
want
to
validate
the
working
group?
Do
we
want
to
you
know,
advertise
around
in
the
threads
and
get
some
more
participation
and
hold
a
vote?
D
Do
we
want
to
leave
it
in
the
hands
of
just
the
vpa
role?
Basically,
people
who
are
either
working
on
the
petitions
process
or
working
on
the
documentation?
The
the
guidelines
right
now
like
those
are
going
to
be
options,
but
I'll
write
up
the
working
group
first
and
we'll
base
those
discussions
off
of
that
Charter,
since
that
Charter
will
include
information
like
why
it's
convening
the
working
group
in
the
first
place
so
I
think
that's
the
next
step
there.
It
seems
pretty
straightforward,
I,
don't
know
if
I'm
missing
anything
or
not.
B
So
are
we
sorry
I
just
want
to
try
to
clarify
we're
doing
like
we're
filming
like
one
kind
of
big
board
game
group?
That's
like
very
fluid
people
can
come
in
and
out,
but
that's
going
to
sort
of
cover
the
vpa
guidelines
and
then
eventually,
that's
also
going
to
cover
the
petitions
document.
D
Yeah
the
way
I
would
describe
it
is
it's
like
a
vpa
sub-circle,
and
it
could
be
broader
than
that,
but
that
just
means
a
new
Charter
in
order
to
broaden
it
out.
There's
no
real
need
for
that,
because
we
kind
of
have
a
specific
idea
of
the
jobs
that
it's
going
to
have
right
now,
and
it
could
do
those
jobs
and
be
done
and
they
could
form
a
different
working
group
later.
So
it
would
be.
D
The
working
group
would
form
and
the
one
of
the
characteristics
of
a
working
group
like
iog
is
going
to
be
setting
up
through
there
through
what
they
were
talking
about
with
bringing
on
the
guy
from
the
Linux
Foundation
they're
going
to
be
setting
up
committees
and
that's
how
they
describe
that
committees
differ
from
working
groups
a
little
bit.
The
way
to
think
about
the
difference
is
that
working
groups
tend
to
have
unlimited
membership,
there's
really
no
gating
of
membership
to
working
groups.
Just
are
you
interested
and
do
you
want
to
participate?
D
They
also
don't
tend
to
have
funding
just
for
membership,
or
anything
like
that,
although
they
do
tend
to
fund
anybody.
That
does
like
a
coordinating
or
facilitative
role
within
it
in
order
to
maintain
documentation
or
anything
like
that.
So
there's
usually
like
a
core
team,
that's
funded
in
a
working
group
and
they
have
some
responsibilities
and
in
our
working
groups
one
of
them
will
be
appointed
they'll,
be
elected
by
the
working
group
to
join
the
trustees
that
have
the
keys
to
the
treasury.
And
then
this
way
we
expand.
D
That
can
either
be
the
working
group
just
kind
of
working
on
that
or
they
can
establish
task
forces
and
assign
the
work
that
way
and-
and
you
think,
of
the
task
force
as
being
to
something
that
spins
up
and
Spins
down
over
very
specific
time
period
like
a
week
or
10
days,
or
something
like
that.
It's
it's
really
specific,
whereas
the
working
group
may
be
much
more
open-ended
and
say
you
know
we're
going
to
be
convening
once
a
month
into
for
six
months
or
something
like
that
and
there
may
not.
D
There
may
be
a
little
less
specific
direction
for
them
and
more
of
just
like
an
ideation
of
you
know,
the
vpa
group
is
convening
for
six
months
to
meet
at
least
once
a
month
in
order
to
stay
on
top
of
the
changes
that
are
occurring
in
the
veteran
proposal
assessing
ecosystem
the.
And
so,
if
you
look
at
like
committees
that
tends
to
be
very
limited
membership
and
they
tend
to
be
compensated
to
be
those
members,
they
don't
have
open-ended
membership.
You
can't
keep
adding
more
people
to
it.
D
They
tend
to
have
really
strict,
because
it's
a
limited
membership,
there's
Fallout
from
that
they
have
strict
quorums.
They
have
strict
boating
procedures,
and
things
like
that,
so
working
groups
are
a
lot
more
free
flow,
a
lot
more
open-ended.
You
can
do
a
lot
more
stuff
with
them,
but
the
compensation
is
commensurate.
It's
not
really
there
for
a
lot
of
the
stuff.
However,
I
do
believe
that
one
of
the
benefits
of
setting
up
this
working
group
is
that
we
can
set
up
some
Trust
for
getting
funding
to
the
people
who
get
work
done.
D
So
it's
it's
just
a
trust
and
validity
layer
that
that
gets
added
to
it
and
later,
if
it
keeps
building
out
you've
got
dids.
They
can
fall
underneath
this
this
premise,
and
by
issuing
a
did
you
get
to
carry
that
validity
into
a
lot
of
the
jobs
you
do.
It
doesn't
even
have
to
be
just
in
the
vpa
ecosystem.
So
so
there's
scaling
there
at
some
point,
but
but
yeah
for
now
the
working
group
we
set
it
up,
and
we
come
to
some
agreement
about
how
long
it's
going
to
be
in
place.
D
How
often
it
will
meet
and
if
there's
going
to
be
any
funding
available
to
it
and
for
a
core
team.
There
should
at
least
be
one
or
two
people
to
get
funded
to
maintain
it,
and
then
we
immediately
get
a
proposal
from
the
working
group
to
fund
the
finalization
of
the
the
vpa
guidelines
and
then
also
there
should
be
another
proposal
from
the
working
group
to
establish
the
task
force.
That's
going
to
facilitate
the
petitions
process.
G
And
on
a
little
bit,
then
Jimmy
yeah
working
group
pulley
on
with
that
I
support
that
and
for
the
timeline,
I
scored
thinking.
We
have
five
days
to
assume
that
to
stay
with
that
for
next
fund.
So
five
days
to
the
20,
for
example,
today
the
16
right
I
mean
the
15
of
your
time,
so
I'll
say
15.
We
have
five
days
to
the
20
years
and
then,
in
that
five
days,
what
I'm
thinking
that
we
just
in
your
child
style
you
set
up
the
five
days
to
the
vpa
style.
G
The
community
will
no
longer
input
on
the
actual
document.
Then
two
days,
the
working
group
have
two
days
right
after
that,
we'll
go
on
the
document
and
then
one
day
hand
over
to
Daniel
and
then
Danny
finish
in
24
hours
and
because
we
give
that
time
to
Daniel.
So
he
know
that
he
received
that
two
days
prior
to
the
actual
VP
action.
So
there
is
five
day
right
before
five
days.
We
have
nothing
to
do
with
that
left
Community
common
as
they
want
as
much
as
they
like.
G
So
that
way,
if
we
project
that
timeline
of
the
front
of
the
guy
line-
and
then
all
the
community
said-
oh
okay,
I
have
to
come.
I
have
to
input
before
five
days
and
then
the
working
group
like
kicking,
they
said:
okay
I
have
two
days
to
do
it
and
then
it's
like
okay,
that's
after
one
group,
I
have
24
hour
the
formula
and
then
propagate
it.
G
The
reason
I
have
put
two
day
at
last
that
because,
like
myself,
I
had
to
help
other
people
do
vpa
as
well
so
question
here:
okay,
is
the
document
ready,
I
have
40
hours
already
to
help
the
community
as
well
so
or
maybe
I'm
a
vpa
I
need
some
time
to
digest
as
well,
so
I
do
I
ready
or
do
I'm
not
ready
for
that.
So
at
least
I
have
40
eyes.
I
would
think
about
my
roles
as
a
vpa
or
I'm.
G
Helping
other
people
to
do
a
vpa
as
well,
so
if,
if
that
timeline
held
in
and
we
put
that
like
higher
for
dinner
Circle
in
front
of
the
the
the
vpa
guidelines,
so
people
knowing
next
one
what
they
got
in
their
head
to
form,
you
know
their
you
know
for
for
their
Readiness
all
right.
If
that
helps
with
a
timeline.
D
It's
it's
a
it's
a
definitely
a
time
crunch
and
it's
going
to
be
a
matter
of
hours
in
getting
everything
squirreled
away
where
it's
supposed
to
be
at
the
right
time,
I
think
in
the
background,
obviously,
the
commentable
document
should
probably
be
left
open
the
whole
time,
because
up
until
the
last
minute
you
might
be
able
to
capture
things
and
but
I
do
like
the
idea
that
at
a
certain
date
the
working
group
is
going
to
say,
okay,
we're
working
on
finalizing
all
these
suggestions,
we're
working
on
checking
them
against
themselves
and
holding
public.
D
You
know
in
the
public
threads
having
because
you
can't
really
have
a
great
discussion
in
the
side
of
a
Google
doc.
It
doesn't
work
out
that
good,
it's
really
hard
to
get
anything
resembling
consensus.
It'd
be
great
to
have
a
meeting
like
this
to
get
some
of
the
consensus
on
more
of
the
discussion
type
points,
the
conversations
and
I
hope
we
can
facilitate
something
like
that.
But
it's
not
there's
nothing
scheduled
for
that.
Just
yet.
But
hopefully
the
working
group
could
do
that
schedule.
D
A
a
working
group
meeting
that
anybody
could
attend
in
order
to
get
the
the
conversation
points
sussed
out
in
one
last
kind
of
round
of
what
what
do
we
think
about
proof
of
life
or
something
like
that,
because
there's
at
least
three
points
like
that
that
are
in
this
iteration
of
the
guidelines
that
are
being
discussed
that
have
the
potential
to
go
in
they're,
they're,
iterative,
they're,
small
changes,
they
have
a
chance,
but
we
don't
even
know
if
we
want
them.
Do
we
want
mandatory
feedback?
You
know
there's
pros
and
cons.
D
We've
got
to
talk
about
it,
so
so
I
like
the
idea
of
like
that
two-day
window.
It's
it's
not
huge
if
it
was
longer,
but
it's
big
enough
for
a
group
of
people
that
are
actually
working.
The
problem
to
here
give
each
other
enough
time
to
get
asynchronous.
Synchronously
connected,
get
the
information
out
there
about
what
they
need
to
talk
about
and
hopefully
get
like
a
meeting
in
and
and
get
that
talked
about.
Get
that
conversation.
A
A
A
D
Yeah
yeah
about
benefit
of
the
task
force
is
you
can
distribute
the
work
that
way
which
may
include
D
work,
you
know
being
able
to
put
certain
things
into
bounties
and
stuff
like
that.
There's
a
lot
of
work
left
to
do
like
tag
that
administrative
group,
one
of
their
main
responsibilities,
one
of
the
first
things
they
would
have
done.
If,
when
they're
brought
into
existence,
is
they
figure
out?
D
What
does
a
proposal
look
like
in
this
ecosystem
and
what
we've
discovered
is
there's
like
four
or
five
different,
reasonable
approaches,
and
none
of
them
are
ideal
for
any
of
the
others.
Bounties
are
not
ideal,
for
you
know
longer
term
projects
asking
for
more
money.
Retroactive
funding
is
not
ideal
for
bounties.
You
know,
there's
there's
basically
three
at
least
three
up
to
five
distinct
approaches
that
have
thing
that
we
can
do.
We
have
the
tools
to
do
them,
so
why?
D
Wouldn't
we
and
it's
all
about
getting
our
Concepts
organized
and
figuring
out
what
the
Fallout
or,
if
there's
any
errors
or
mistakes
or
problems
that
are
involved
in
the
process,
so
that
would
have
been
tax.
Jog
tab
doesn't
exist,
so
we're
just
figuring
it
out
as
a
community,
which
you
know,
because
all
tag
was
in
the
first
place
was
just
Community,
concentrated
yeah
and
the
first
part
of
your
question.
What
was
that
it
was
consensus,
yeah
concerned
so
you're,
asking
about
consensus
about
the
formation
of
the
working
group.
Like
you.
D
Yeah,
so
if
we
submit
a
charter,
if
anybody
submits
a
charter
for
a
working
group,
the
community
discusses
and
decides
among
the
things
that
are
in
the
charter
it.
It
has
to
have
alignment
with
the
principles
in
the
governance
framework
in
the
treasury,
so
it
can't
be,
and
it
can't
be
antithetical
to
what
the
treasury
is
trying
to
do.
So
it
can't
be
about
funding
people
outside
of
the
ecosystem
or
side
proposals,
or
anything
like
that.
D
It
has
to
be
about
the
issues
that
were
laid
out
in
the
treasury
that
got
voted
on
by
the
on
the
armander
protocol
and
and
and
side
pocket.
It
get
the
treasury
on
get
the
side
treasury
going
so
that
alignment
has
to
be
there,
but
also
it
can
have
other
things
in
addition
to
that,
if
they
don't
conflict
with
those
things,
so
it
could
have
other
principles,
it
could
have
its
own
purpose.
It
could
have
some
other
elements
to
it.
Those
would
all
be
included
in
the
charter.
D
It's
highly
likely
that
any
working
group
would
have
something
specific
like
privacy
or
risk
or
inclusion,
or
something
that
was
kind
of
as
driving
motivating
factor
to
come
into
existence,
because
something
needs
attention
in
this
case,
it's
the
vpa
process
quite
generally,
which
is
an
alignment
with
kind
of
the
way
Catalyst
United
is
set
up
with
operations,
veteran
proposals,
regular
proposal,
assessors
normal,
just
standard
proposal.
Assessors
so
I,
don't
know
if
those
stick,
you
know
as
a
general
rule,
but
it
makes
sense
that
the
veteran
proposal,
assessor,
is
a
kind
of
a
role.
D
That's
already
been
delimited
and
defined
a
little
bit
and
there's
space
for
it
we'll
accommodate
later.
And
so,
if
we
take
the
the
formation
of
that
working
group,
the
community
really
needs
to
talk
about
and
say
and
come
to
an
agreement
that
yeah
it's
okay
for
this
to
form
to
be
funded
and
to
have
permission
to
fund
other
things
up
to
some
kind
of
limit.
D
So
that's
there
definitely
is
consensus
needed
by
how
much
depends
on
how
much
it's
asking
for
I
mean
this
is
this
is
a
conversation
Randall
and
I
are
happening
earlier
today?
How
do
you
get
steak,
figured
out
in
self-interested
actors
working
in
an
ecosystem
of
distributed
work?
You
know,
how
do
you
get
agency
and
and
stake,
and
and
how
did
you
describe
it?
D
D
You
know
you're
trying
to
get
a
group
figured
out
and
the
hope
there
is
that
you
can
make
groups
you
can
you
can
conceptually
Define
your
groups
in
such
a
way
that
they
can
come
in
and
out
of
existence
without
too
much
trouble,
because
the
last
thing
you
need
is
to
define
a
group
and
then
end
up
with
group
politics.
That's
the
last
thing
we're
after
where
the
group
doesn't
really
exist,
but
it
tries
to
exist.
It
tries
to
accrue
resources
to
itself,
it
tries
to
accrue
borders
and
boundaries
and
inclusion
and
exclusion.
D
D
Whether
there's
other
areas
of
consensus
internally,
the
working
group
will
have
to
have
consensus
mechanisms,
but
that
should
be
left
pretty
open.
I
think
to
the
way
the
working
group
does
its
work
and
how
many
members
it
has-
that
really
needs
to
be
able
to
be
flexible
and
a
plus.
It
should
really
play
hard
on
what
kind
of
decisions
are
being
made.
So
contextual
decision
making
there.
A
Because
of
the
time
crunch,
so
I
guess
I
have
two
questions.
One
is
I,
just
wrote
that
thing
up
the
other
day
about,
should
we
should
we
do
some
kind
of
an
official
like
the
an
after
town
hall
or
or
invitation
to
a
one
or
several
meetings
where
we
sort
of
really
like
publish
the
work
here,
a
little
bit
and
say
this
is
available.
This
is
here's
where
you
can
reference
everything
related
to
it
as
far
as
the
treasury.
D
Yeah,
it's
I
honestly,
don't
know
what
to
do
for
stuff
like
that.
How
do
you
get
it's
a
it's,
a
participation
thing,
there's
people
that
will
be
impacted
by
the
decisions
of
the
working
group
who
might
want
to
say
in
it
and
who
don't
know
that
it's
happening
and
there's
no
way
around.
That
I
mean
you've,
got
to
get
the
Outreach
done,
but
you're
limited
in
resources
to
be
able
to
conduct
that
Outreach.
Also,
you
need
to
get
to
the
right
people.
It
doesn't
help
to
tell
everybody
if
the
right
people
still
don't
hear
it.
D
So
there's
so
many
challenges
in
that
area.
You
know
we've
got
Q
in
the
room.
That's
that's
a
big
part
of
getting
the
word
out,
but
but
in
general,
like
I,
don't
know,
I,
don't
know
how
you
get
all
the
right
people
in
the
right
place.
That's
just
you
gotta
trust,
distribution
and
decentralization
and
that
people's
interests
will
bring
them
in
when
the
fit
is
right
and
the
time
is
right
and
that's
kind
of
Hocus
Pocus.
But
frankly,
that's
how
it
works.
D
It's
like
it's
a
decent
conversation
to
have,
but
it
gets
kind
of
tricky
because
if
you
weren't
part
of
the
validation
of
that
earlier
incentivization,
how
much
trust
you
have
in
the
incentives
that
people
are
getting
so
you
know
this.
This
is
like
the
idea
that
we
ran
into
with
this,
like
circular
reasoning,
on
tag,
it's
hard
to
set
it
up.
If
people
don't
know
it
exists,
they
don't
know
it
exists.
D
If
it's
not
set
up,
so
we
kind
of
came
into
it
and
very
organically,
just
from
discussions
with
people
like
Phil
and
now
with
dang
working
on
this
petitions
thing
we've
said
well
where
you
know:
where
do
we
need
it
like
right
now?
Where
does
this
tool
need
it?
What
can
what
can
it
do?
So
you
know
if
you
go
out
and
you
start
digging
with
a
shovel
people
start
figuring
out.
The
shovels
are
good
for
digging
and
I
kind
of
feel
like
that.
Maybe
is
our
way
forward.
You
got
something
on
that
queue.
F
F
F
A
Oh
no,
it
seems
so
there's
a
there's
a
couple
things.
One
of
the
things
is
the
treasury
is
one
one
conversation
is
the
treasury
is
forming
and
and
becoming
available
kind
of,
just
naturally,
bait
and
in
with
adherence
to
the
framework
that
is
attached
to
it
or
that
guides
it
and
also
that's
happening
in
a
very
natural
process
where
things
are
coming
forward
that
are
needed,
and
so
it's
sort
of
coming
into
existence
at
the
same
time
that
it's
doing
its
work
and
so
there's
a
thought
process
around.
A
How
that
can
that
can
best
be
done
to
make
sure
that
it
adheres
to
what
it
should
be
adhering
to
and
also
that
the
things
that
cause
it
to
adhere
to
the
things
that
it
should
be
adhering
to
come
into
formation
as
well,
and
then
the
other
side
of
it
is
one
of
the
things
that
was
being
thought
of
for
for
after
submission
to
the
treasury.
A
Did
a
pav
ba
treasury
was
the
Improvement
and
like
null
application
of
knowledge
and
experience
learned
from
Fond
eight
in
the
PA
and
the
BPA
petition
process
to
the
vpa
petition
process
via
a
group
that
would
come
together
and
work
on
it,
which
dang
sort
of
started
to
get
ahead
of
things,
and
the
thinking
was
that
that
group
might
also
then
update
the
materials
as
a
response.
But
one
of
the
initial
issues
is
that
that
document
is
now
up
for
edit
before
those
things
could
happen.
A
So
there's
a
time,
there's
a
time,
a
need
of
time
of
a
group
of
people
forming
to
really
make
sure
that
that's
done
according
to
not
a
sort
of
a
chaotic
bunch
of
people
jumping
into
it,
but
that
those
people
are
actually
applying
the
things
that
we
learned
of
taking
those
things
into
consideration
and
that
maybe
the
treasury
be
used
for
that
and
I
guess.
The
last
piece
of
that
is
that
we
have
more
work
to
do
in
making
it
more
broadly
understood
that
the
treasury
is
available
and
how
to
interface
with
it.
A
That
will
take
probably
a
longer
Runway
than
is
available
for
this
vpa
project
to
be
able
to
take
advantage
of
so
I
think,
there's
sort
of
two
things
happening:
they're
related
to
each
other,
but
they're.
Also
a
little
separate
did
I
miss
anything
on
that
and
correct
me.
If
I
miss
explained
anything
there.
D
Yeah
there's
one
other
issue
that
kind
of
goes
along
with
this,
and
it's
that
there's
risk
associated
with
any
kind
of
like
we
set
up
a
working
group.
There's
risk
associated
with
Distributing
those
funds
anytime,
anytime,
funding
moves
in
Catalyst,
you're
tracking
risk
to
the
underlying
concept
of
the
very
idea
of
catalyst,
because
it's
a
treasury
so
where
every
proposal
is
a
side
treasury
we're
specifically
describing
ourselves
as
a
side
treasury
for
Rapid
funding
in
the
community.
D
In
a
sense,
every
proposal
needs
governance,
most
of
them
lean
into
the
protocols
of
catalyst
as
it
exists,
and
those
aren't
very
great
and
we're
seeing
every
day
how
we
need
to
make
those
protocols
robust.
We
need
better
auditing.
We
need
better
reporting
every
and
every
little
tool
helps
templates
for
kpis
for
proposals
proposals
all
that
stuff
helps.
So
it's
it's
it's
definitely
it
takes
a
village
so
where
we're
at
with
this
is
I
feel
like
we're
kind
of
implicitly
tapping
the
incentives
right
now
without
talking
about
it.
D
Yet
but
I
just
haven't
heard
suggestions,
yet
that
made
me
think,
like
there's
they're
like
we're,
opening
up
a
vector
that
is
either
bad
for
the
side,
treasury
or
bad
for
the
people
who
want
to
participate.
You
know
it's
not
much
funding
it's
it's
very
similar
to
like
swarm,
giving
out
58
bounties.
They
have
no
governance
for
their
process
and
it's
okay,
because
the
fault
tolerance
is
exceptionally
high
for
a
58.
A
bounty
like
the
Catalyst
can
absorb
that
all
day,
long
and
twice
on
Sundays,
it's
not
a
problem.
D
It
feels
like,
like
a
working
group,
is
not
considered
like
a
major
funding
expense
for
this
treasury
task
forces,
especially
so
they're,
just
kind
they're.
Basically,
at
the
same
level
of
bounties,
but
they're
they're,
more
governed
than
a
bounty
might
be
and
they're
not
established
by
the
Community
First,
although
they
could
be
so
so.
It
feels
safe
and
I'm.
D
Task
Force
seems
safe
to
me
the
idea
of
actually
getting
a
focused
group
of
individuals,
especially
the
ones
that
are
working
on
it
now,
because
they
are
working
well
on
it.
They're
working
together,
really
well
for,
like
the
guidelines
like
to
see
that
kind
of
collaboration
to
see
the
collaboration
we
saw
around
the
original
vpa
petitions,
and
we
need
to
remember
this,
like
I'm,
not
on
board
with
the
vpa
petitions
in
general,
because
I
don't
think
this
deviation.
Script
has
any
hope,
but
it's
becoming
less
and
less
about
that
deviation.
D
D
These
are
all
things
we
need
in
our
toolbox,
so
so
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
at
with
this,
like
I
I,
understand,
there's
risk
to
putting
any
product
any
payment
from
the
treasury
out
into
public,
but
I
think
as
long
as
we're
using
it
publicly
and
with
the
understanding
that
anybody
wants
to
participate,
we're
welcoming
it,
we
just
can't
seem
to
get
the
word
out.
You
know
to
the
degree
that
we
tell
people
they're
interested
until
there's.
D
Nothing
to
see
like
the
governance
framework
is
its
reference
material
for
somebody
that's
finding
their
way
through
the
treasury.
It's
not
the
way
that
you
look
at
a
treasury
from
the
outside.
What
we
need
are
the
how
to's
the
facts.
Things
like
that
and
you
get
those
from
actually
having
a
process
that
people
can
see
from
the
outside.
In
my
opinion,.
A
D
Well,
it's
got
to
be
user
defined
right,
some
people,
a
document
works
really
good
I'm.
A
reader
I
like
to
read
stuff
I
can
get
everything
I
need
from
just
reading
about
it.
Some
people
need
to
be
in
a
meeting
like
this
and
collaborate
with
people
and
bounce
ideas
and
be
able
to
kind
of
handle
it
like
clay
and
get
kind
of
a
a
3D
perspective
on
how
an
idea
Works
other
people
are
going
to
want
to
see
proof
they're
going
to
want
to
see
some
evidence
that,
like
you,
can
actually
get
something
done
before.
D
They'll
have
confidence
that
participating
in
it
is
worth
it
for
them.
So
you
know
this
is
one
of
the
principles
of
the
treasury
is
a
user
design
experience
that
makes
it
challenging
if
nobody's
using
it?
Obviously,
so
this
is
just
one
way
among
many
like
if
I
had
more
time,
I'd
be
making
even
more
documentation,
but
I
feel
like
like
that's
not
getting
to
everybody,
the
people
who
can
get
to
that,
it's
gotten
to
them.
You
know
what
and
I
was
looking
at
my
my
one-page
companion
guide.
D
It's
out
of
date
already
like
it's
I,
gotta,
rewrite
it
so
challenging
right.
In
the
meantime,
we
got
five
days
to.
We
don't
have
to
fund
a
group
to
to
suss
out
the
guidelines
we
didn't
for
the
ca
guide.
We
don't
need
it
for
the
VCA
guide,
but
we
can
make
an
improvement
if
we
do
so
it'd
be
nice
to
it'd,
be
nice
to
to
put
some
some
hustle
on
it
and
get
it
done.
E
A
A
A
For
me,
so
much
of
what
everyone
says:
I
really
need
a
lot
of
time
with,
but
when
it
comes
to
this
I
feel
like
we,
we
put
it
out,
and
we
say
in
simple
terms:
hey
this
is
where
we're
at
treasury's
starting
to
chug
along
we
got.
We
got
this
opportunity
coming
up,
it's
a
real
need.
When
you
can
is
it?
Is
it
inappropriate
to
call
for
a
working
group
to
form?
Can
we
instigate
the
formulation
of
the
working
group,
or
do
we
do
people
need
to
like?
This
is
a
question.
A
This
is
maybe
a
process
question
if
the
community
sees
hey,
we
have
a
need
for
this,
and
someone
raises
the
issue
and
it
could
be
anything,
but
we
just
collectively
can
see
this
one.
Clearly,
someone
could
say:
hey,
I,
think
we
need
this.
Can
we
can
we
can
someone
get
together
and
propose
for
this?
Can
we
can?
How
specific
can
we
be
in
proposing
that
a
working
group
could
or
should
form
can?
Can
the
community
say
go
and
a
group
comes
together,
who's
naturally
already
formed
around
it.
A
B
Yeah
wait
I
feel
like
at
least
in
this
case
for
the
vpa
guidelines,
because
it's
such
a
short
timeline
and
then
we
do
agree
that,
like
it's
a
good
idea
to
have
like
a
meeting
kind
of
like
this,
where
they
like
finalize
the
guidelines
or
this
group
like
comes
together
and
they're
like
let's
go
through
each
point
and
like
that,
is
a
little
bit
like
contentious
and
then
let's
discuss
it
and
then
make
a
final
decision.
Do
we
agree
that
that's
kind
of
like
a
good
idea,
or
at
least
this
case.
A
How
how
we
did
it
last
time,
which
was
really
good,
which
is
not
how
we
did
the
ca
document,
either
time,
but
the
vpa
one.
Last
time
we
had
like
two
days
of
people
submitting
comments
to
it,
and
then
we
had
like
an
eight
hour
period
where
people
just
sort
of
came
in
and
out
with
each
other
and
hopped
in
rooms
and
talked
about
things
and
talked
things
out,
and
a
lot
of
that
was
done.
A
At
the
same
time,
most
people
most
people
could
go
at
certain
times
and
then,
if
anyone
was
missed,
they
hopped
in
at
a
different
time
and
could
explain
what
was
talked
about
so
that
you
didn't
get
a
huge.
So
that
seemed
to
work
really
well.
So
maybe
if
that
group
could
agree
on
a
more
specific
time
than
this
kind
of
a
conversation
could
happen
on
the
heels
of
getting
those
initial
thoughts,
chronicled
and
able
to
hit
the
ground
running.
B
And
also
like
I
said
like
if,
in
the
formation
of
this
group
for
the
vpa
guidelines,
we
say
like
I,
don't
know,
for
example,
next
Wednesday
like
like,
if
you
can
like
be
free,
you
know
around
these
times
so
that
the
group
can't
fall.
I'm
like
that
would
be
like
it's
hard,
because
people
are
all
over
the
world,
but
I
feel
like
you,
also
kind
of
need
to
go
in
with
it
like
go
into
it
having
some
times,
because
it's
usually
hard
to
coordinate
people
in
such
a
short
time.
Like
amount
of
time.
A
A
Then
we
have
48
more
hours
to
get
everything
submitted
and
to
work
through
the
guide
and
then
another
day
to
actually
asynchronously
or
not
asynchronously
in
a
in
a
collected
way
talk
about
it,
make
finalizations
and
then
submit
it
to
Danny,
and
we
give
that
kind
of
a
schedule
out
in
the
beginning.
So
people
could
know
what
they
were
agreeing
to,
because.
A
B
Yeah
I
think,
like
I,
don't
know
doctor
Town
Hall
period.
Is
there
a
town
hall
this
week?
It
should
be
right,
like
I,
feel
like
that
period,
because
there's
already
a
lot
of
people
there.
If
you
were
to
have
some
kind
of
after
Town
Hall
like
session,
because
people
are
already
there
they'll
be
inclined
to
participate.
C
C
C
A
A
I
think
that
timeline
makes
sense.
I
can
certainly
I
can
certainly
like
hold
the
space
and
help
process
stuff.
If
that's
helpful
in
terms
of
like
setting
the
space
up
talking
to
it
or
you
can
or
anyone
else
can,
but
that
seems
like
a
realistic
timeline.
What
does
everyone
else
think
what
are
the?
What
are
the
downfalls
of
that
anything
that
wouldn't
work
there.
B
F
We've
got
proposers
flagging
assessments
right
now,
so
we've
got
people
engaged.
You
know,
I
think
I
think
I'm
not
worried
about
Wednesday
all
even
having
a
final
humanitar
go.
You
know
the
final
review
final
opponent
on
Wednesday.
You
know
what
we
can
get
done
between
today
tonight
and
Wednesday
morning.
F
A
Okay,
so
that
seems
so,
let's
take
it
with
the
two
things
that
are
involved
here.
The
one
thing
is
the
working
group
and
treasury
overlap,
and
the
other
thing
is
the
timeline
for
the
group
actually
doing
the
work.
So
those
things
need
to
be
kind
of
synchronous,
because
the
working
group
has
to
also
form
in
this
timeline
right.
A
Monday
Saturday
Sunday,
I
guess:
we'd
have
Saturday
Sunday
to
let
people
consider
their
request
to
join
a
working
group.
Does
it
make
sense,
Jeremy
that
then
Monday
or
Tuesday,
they
would
submit
the
the
request
to
the
treasury
for
the
task
force
simultaneously.
As
that
those
edits
are
happening,
and
then
we
would
actually
have
the
finalization
of
it
on
Wednesday.
D
Yeah
I
mean
I
would
look
at
it
as
far
as
the
group
is
concerned.
For
now.
Let's
just
look
at
it
as
the
people
who
are
working
on
it
are
going
to
work
on
it,
get
organized
self-organized,
get
it
done.
I
will
get
the
treasury
running
as
a
side
protocol
alongside
it,
and
if
we
can
jump
in
at
some
point
and
hitch
a
ride,
that'd
be
great.
If
we
run
out
of
time,
then
we'll
just
I
think
we
still
form
the
group
there's
not
like
the
vpa
works
done
in
five
days.
C
D
So
we'll
get
that
group
established,
get
some
get
some
funding
for
six
months
of
ideation
and
tracking
and
and
data
acquisition.
You
know,
ccv4
is
coming
soon
they're
going
to
want
some
data
from
this
community
too,
and
this
is
the
place.
Is
the
status
Cruise
it'd
be
nice
not
to
have
that
piling
up
on
one
person
again,
so
so
yeah
I
would
say
just
let's
have
the
treasury
run
alongside
and
we'll
do
our
best
to
as
a
community
to
support
the
people
who
are
working
on
this
I
mean
that's
really
what
it's
about.
C
A
So
dang
do
you.
Wanna
I
will
happily
tag
team.
This
with
you,
I
can
request
the
answer.
Town
Hall
and
I
can
be
present
to
sort
of
help.
That
conversation
happen
just
more
a
facilitator
and
less
content
driven
and
then
to
fill
in
any
blanks
from
previous
stuff
if
it's
needed
as
far
as
the
process
last
time,
but
I
don't
think,
that's
super
necessary
I
think
it's
it'll
that
conversation
won't
be
very
natural
based
on
what
points
are
being
raised
there.
If
you
are
you
comfortable
making
that
post
and
request
for
the
group
to
form.
B
Yep
sure,
because
I
the
main
group
to
tag
would
be
the
vpa
group
like
just
vpas,
but
is
there
anyone
else
I
should
tag.
You
think.
A
D
F
B
D
I,
when
I
set
up
the
working
group-
Charter,
maybe
I'll
just
throw
some
language
in
and
we
can
we
can
play
with
it
later.
That
suggests
that
there
are
some
protocols
for
contributing.
D
Actually,
this
would
be
a
task
force
item
there'd,
be
some
protocols
to
contributing
to
the
task
force,
and
one
of
them
would
be
I
mean
you
can
do
all
sorts
of
stuff.
Under
this
you
can
say:
hey
we're.
Gonna
have
a
meeting
and
in
this
meeting
no
one's
allowed
to
interrupt
anybody
else,
so
you
can
actually
put
that
in
as
a
requirement
of
something
I.
D
Don't
know
that's
necessary
here,
but
the
idea
would
be
it's
great
if
everybody
wants
to
participate,
it's
a
working
group,
it's
wide
open,
but
we're
going
to
assign
people
to
this
task
force
run
anything
you
want
the
task
force
to
know
through
the
working
group
get
some
filters
on
it.
You
know
get
some
reduce
the
noise
so
that
works,
so
that
task
force
can
get
work
done
because
that's
their
main
job
they're
going
to
have
48
hours
to
parse
a
lot
of
feedback
and
to
look
for
conflicts.
D
Look
for
contradictions
find
the
things
that
are
incomplete,
get
them
finished
and
that
may
require
going
back
to
the
community
and
saying
we
just
have
no
idea
what
you
meant
by
this
and
they're.
Only
gonna
have
48
hours
to
do
that,
so
they're
going
to
need
space
and
time
to
work
a
little
bit
free
of
white
noise
and
the
working
group
can
handle
that
because
the
working
group's
going
to
capture
that
they're,
obviously
the
working
group's
an
abstract
thing
right
now.
F
B
Then
foreign
I
guess
so
Wednesday
Town
Hall
we're
kind
of
having
anyone
can
show
up,
but
we're
also
sort
of
finalizing
the
document.
Or
is
it
like?
What
is
a
town
hall,
everyone's
kind
of
doing
this
doing
their
thing
and
then
like
after
afterwards,
the
actual
group
gets
together
and
puts
it
like
created
it.
A
Up
I
think
it's
important.
It
doesn't
turn
into
like
anyone
can
add
new
suggestions
in
that
I
think
it
should
be
very
focused
on
finalizing
the
finalizing,
the
edits
that
were
that
existed,
and
so
the
invitation
to
for
Community
input
can
be
their
beforehand
and
people.
Anyone
can
attend
and
and
be
part
of
the
process,
but
we're
finalizing
the
document
to
go
to
back
to
Danny.
So
not
look
for
us
suggestions.
B
Okay,
so
I'll
add
everybody's
now,
link
to
the
vpa
guidelines
document
say
anyone
can
edit
it.
Please
provide
feedback
whatever
from
the
after
Town
Hall
I'm,
not
going
to
talk
about
that.
Yet
because
that's
going
to
be
like
for
the
actual
working
group
itself,
I
think
that
final
discussion,
or
no,
that
should
be
everyone
as
well
right.
A
If,
if
you're,
probably
right,
one
to
put
specifically
and
so
you're
gonna
we're
inviting
anyone
to
be
in
in
the
working
group,
yes,
so
if
anyone
could
be
in
the
working
group,
I
think
anyone
who
receives
that
invitation
should
have
a
clear
understanding
of
what
the
what
the
timeline
is.
So
what
are
their
timeline
and
our
purpose?
Our
purpose
is
that
we
need
to
accomplish
the
update
and
the
evolution
of
the
the
vpa
guide
and
petition
process
cumulatively,
and
we
have
a
timeline
of
accomplishing
the
finalization
of
that
draft
by
Wednesday.
A
If
you'd
like
to
be
part
of
the
working
group
that
that
offers
this
process
forward,
then
please
let
us
know
in
the
next
48
hours,
if
you'd
just
like
to
add
to
the
document
and
make
suggestions,
it's
opened
for
Community
insight
and
then
on
Wednesday.
That
working
group
is
going
to
meet
to
finalize
whatever
what
is
happening
to
finalize
the
document
itself,
not
just
to
finalize
it,
but
also
to
talk
through
these
different
things.
A
G
G
You
know
what
is
that
heart
break
from
the
PA,
so
they
should
input
something
that
group
would
be
really
care
more
than
a
general
public,
for
my
view,
so
two
weeks
before
the
VPI
kicking
so
Danny
and
on
his
Friday,
if
the
link-
and
so
we
give
them
the
link,
we
give
him
the
link
and
he
only
added
on
okay
vpa
input
as
a
proposal,
you
should
input
blah
blah
blah
and
the
deadline
bank.
That's
it
done.
That's
your
benefit.
F
B
A
A
good
idea,
I
mean:
let's,
let's
spread
it
out
here
and
you
can
put
it
on
Twitter
and
people.
Can
you
know
people
can
get
involved
in
the
process?
This
is
like
really.
It
was
very
grading
on
the
on
the
other
side
of
it
and
fun
day.
It
was
like
the
petition
process
was
much
more
respectful,
but
people
were
upset.
There's
a
lot
of
upsetness
through
this
process,
so
yeah
give
people
more
space,
I'm.
Sorry,
no.
C
A
F
B
D
Like
I,
almost
you
almost
don't
need
to
use
even
the
terminology
working
group,
although
I
think
it
it
kind
of
helps
capture
the
idea,
because
it's
not
officially
a
working
group
until
we
set
it
up,
but
the
documentation
is
coming
from
the
task
force
and
that's
a
limited
scope.
That's
only
going
to
be
you
know
four
or
five
people
and
the
people
we're
going
to
tap
for
that.
It's
not
so
much
about
what
role
they
have
or
anything
else.
It's
who's
working
on
it.
D
These
are
the
ones
that
have
that
are
their
head
is
in
the
game.
They've
got
the
idea,
they're
sussing
it
out.
They've
got
context.
You
know
it
takes.
We
don't
have
enough
time
to
set
up
context
for
people
that
are
just
coming
into
the
picture
they
just
they
can't
do
it
yeah,
so
we're
trying
to
so.
If
we
engage
a
big
conversation
at
after
Town
Hall,
it
should
be
Broad
and
it
should
be
in
the
sense
of
here's
a
process.
That's
going
on
in
your
backyard
Catalyst.
Would
you
like
to
see
it?
D
Would
you
like
to
participate?
Here's
things
you
can
do-
and
we
have
a
group
of
you
know,
involved
community
members
who
are
ready
to
take
what
you
provide
them
and
finalize
this
document
and
that's
the
that's
the
task
force,
but
that
task
force
isn't
going
to
get
voted
on
or
anything
like
that.
It's
not
I,
don't
think
I
mean
unless,
if
there's
a
ton
of
demand
and
a
lot
of
people
working
on
it,
you
might
have
to
to
narrow
it
down.
F
You
don't
have
to
worry
about
that,
but
if
the
task
force
is
going
to
be
limited
to
five,
seven
nine
people,
ultimately
the
round
table
could
you
know
show
that
it
was
voted
on
so
much
approval
before
the
finalized.
Epa
document
went
out
and
you
could
put
you
know
perhaps
some
or
native
Assets
in
there
that's
a
little
bit
of
a
bounty
or
something.
A
Let's
say
this
group
comes
together
on
Sunday
and
we
got
seven
people
who
are
like
yes,
I'm
dedicated
to
doing
this
and
we're
going
to
work
on
this
and
we're
all
going
to
be
there,
and
this
is
a
task
force
does
what
is
then
the
response?
What
what
says
this
will
become
a
treasury
treasury
involvement
as
well
or
the
timing.
Isn't
the
timing
doesn't
work
out
for
it
like
what
are
what
makes
that
work
or
not
work.
D
D
So
it
comes
down
to
what
you're
comfortable
with
in
terms
of
forming
the
working
group.
My
feeling
is
that
we
need
a
little
bit
of
consensus.
We
need
a
little
bit
of
that
going
on.
Ultimately,
the
point
of
the
treasury
running
alongside
is
put
funds
in
the
pockets
of
the
people
who
get
the
work
done,
so
they
don't
probably
I
doubt
anybody
working
on
this
now
that
are
going
to
be
the
people
are
going
to
get
funded
for.
Having
done
this
work,
I,
don't
think
they
particularly
care
whether
they're,
pre-funded
or
post-funded.
D
On
this,
as
long
as
we
don't
go
too
far
out
because
I
do
think,
there's
there
should
be
a
in
principle,
hard
limit
on
how
much
time
you
allow
to
pass
before
you
do.
Retroactive
funding
and
I
think
you
need
to
hold
to
that
because
it's
a
serious
attack
vector
so
and
until
we
understand
it
better,
we
should
probably
just
kind
of
have
a
lock
it
down
mentality,
but
we
could
get
them
paid
within
a
week
say
of
having
done
the
work.
D
I
think
we'll
actually
get
ahead
of
the
petitions
process
and
we'll
be
funding
that
facilitator
and
anybody
that's
involved
in
coordinating
that
process
that
will
have
them
funded
in
advance,
or
at
least
they'll
know
what
funding
is
coming
to
them
in
advance.
As
far
as
when
things
get
paid.
That's
why
you
have
the
proposals?
That's
why
you
have
the
the
actual
submissions
of
the
charter
and
things
like
that.
D
So
the
people
can
agree
like
yeah,
you
don't
pay
them
the
whole
thing
up
front
or
they
say
split
it
into
two
trenches
or
just
pay
them
at
the
end
of
it,
and
they
could
agree
with
that.
It's
a
it's!
A
combination
of
consensus
and
consent,
on
the
one
hand,
probably
everybody's,
going
to
make
some
compromise.
Everybody
wants
to
be
paid
right
now,
but
they'll
probably
make
some
compromises
and
be
paid
later
whatever,
but
that's
all
discussion
that
only
happens
with
discussion.
D
A
A
A
vpa
working
group
that
that
in
the
future
or
here
has
a
task
force
around
the
update
of
the
guide
that
then
disbands
and
then
another
task
force
that
forms
around
the
petition
process,
which
may
or
may
not
have
similar
members
to
the
guide
or
could
but
doesn't
have
to.
That,
would
then
form
and
still
be
under
that
umbrella
of
the
working
group,
which
is
there
to
help
the
alt
the
whole
vpa
process.
D
Yeah,
that's
it!
That's
that's
exactly
how
it
should
work
and
the
benefit
of
a
task
force,
as
opposed
to
just
somebody
making
a
proposal
or
asking
for
funds
or
whatever
is
there
should
be
a
streamlined
version
of
a
proposal
that
goes
through
a
working
group,
because
that
working
group
has
already
it's
got
a
charter.
It
has
a
policies
document
that
it's
in
line
with.
It's
got
a
lot
of
governance
attached
to
it.
That
gives
it
a
little
more
trust,
a
little
more
validity.
D
You
should
be
able
to
leverage
that
and
speed
up
funding,
and
that's
like
anybody
that
wants
to
set
up
rapid
funding.
This
is
their.
This
is
their
task.
They
need
to
set
up
structures.
It's
like
a
pipeline.
You
know.
If
you
want
water
to
get
to
a
to
a
hydro
plant,
you
can't
just
run
it
down
the
river
you've
got
to
get
it
into
a
pipe
you've
got
to
get
that
pipe
through
through
you
know
a
nozzle
system
you
got
to
neck
it
down.
D
E
A
Okay,
so
then
it
really
does
make
sense
that
we
wouldn't
necessarily
use
the
working
group
language.
We
might
use
the
task
force
language
for
the
guide
update,
although
foreign
yeah,
because
you
do
need
to
fit
you
do-
need
actually
a
test,
but
but
those
things
are
sort
of
the
task
force
still
would
have
to
I
get
it.
The
working
group
The
working
group
has
maintains
the.
E
D
We
get
to
it,
yeah.
No,
that's
a
good
point.
It's
so
I
think
all
petitions
would
probably
fall
under
the
working
group,
but
the
working
group
has
an
unlimited
membership
and
unlimited
ability
to
absorb
that
and
then,
as
far
as
setting
up
task
forces
like
so
what
the
task
force
is
going
to
look
like
and
my
guess
for
the
petitions
group
is
you're,
basically
going
to
be
hiring
a
facilitator
to.
D
You
know,
convene
the
meetings
record,
the
vote
and
that
should
probably
be
like
a
team
of
two
or
three
people
at
least
to
record
that
just
and
not
even
have
more
input
on
that
just
to
get
a
feel
for
how
much
work
needs
to
be
done
there
and,
of
course,
to
scale
it
probably
yet
either
bigger
task
force,
but
that's
not
necessarily
the
best
idea,
but
multiple
task
force
geared
towards
different
elements
and
the
last
petitions
process.
We
basically
had
two
there's
three,
but
I
would
call
it
two
classes
of
petitions.
D
One
was
deviation,
script
analysis,
it's
pretty
straightforward.
All
those
got
voted
on
all
those
got
handled,
except
one
which
happened,
which
also
had
a
low
Quorum,
and
it
happened
on
the
same
day
as
the
outlier,
which
was
non-db,
I
mean
it
was
found
and
have
found
that
because
he
was
looking
at
deviation
and
it
led
him
down
a
whole
other
path
and
that
had
nothing
to
do
with
the
deviation
script
and
it
got
out
of
scope
for
the
capabilities
of
the
group
and,
as
a
result,
there's
no
Quorum.
There
was
no.
D
The
the
vote
didn't
have
a
lot
of
stickiness
to
it.
There
wasn't
much
consensus
built
around
it
and
no
results,
and
it
was
painful
for
everybody
involved
because
it
felt
like
you
know,
regardless
of
how
you
felt
about
whether
it
was
accurate
or
not.
There
was
a
lot
of
work
that
just
went
down
the
tubes
with
it
with
no
with
no,
it
wasn't
like.
We
got
a
no
vote
either.
If
we
didn't
get
any,
we
got
a
yes
vote
with
no
result.
C
D
That's
like
the
opposite
of
productive,
so
that
could
be
two
working
groups
and
one
of
them
could
be
dedicated
to
looking
at
deposing
that
data.
Now
the
challenge
there
comes
like
for
me,
the
that
petition
six.
It
really
came
down
to
I
needed
information
that
was
different
from
what
we
had
I
needed,
like
detailed
expertise
on
statistical
analysis,
because
I
was
seeing
artifacts
all
over
the
place.
I
just
couldn't
make
any
sense
out
of
them
and
I
needed
like
if
I
was
in
a
jury.
D
I'd
need
an
expert
witness
to
trying
to
help
me
suss
that
out,
and
that
was
that
was
what
was
missing
for
me.
That's
why
I
didn't
participate
at
the
end,
because
I
just
didn't
feel
like
I
could
vote.
I
didn't
think
I
had
enough
information
to
vote
so
yeah
task
for,
and
you
could
set
up
a
task
force
to
figure
that
out,
even
like
you
could
say,
let's
set
up
a
task
force
to
figure
out
how
we
can
figure
out
a
result
for
this
petition
and
they
could
the
goal
of
it.
D
If
you
don't
have
a
lot
of
time
could
have
been.
We
just
want
to
understand:
what's
Happening
Here,
we
don't
want
a
result.
We
don't
want
to
kick
anybody
out
or
slash
Rewards
or
do
anything
like
that.
Nothing
prescriptive,
but
we
want
to
have
a
retrospective
on
this
to
where
we
know
what
happened
and
we
can
obso.
D
So
the
so
the
working
group
exists
as
documentation
and
meetings
of
minutes
that
have
happened
and
the
accumulation
of
knowledge
in
a
specific
area.
That's
why
you'd
like
to
see
them
build
up
around
risk
analysis
or
privacy
is
a
concept
within
an
ecosystem,
because
we've
got
anonymity
like
crazy
in
the
ecosystem,
just
floating
around
and
landing
on
everybody
and
messing
up
people's
plans.
What
we
really
need
is
privacy
understood,
so
we
can
tell
the
difference.
You
know
it's
not
a
case
of.
We
need
Anonymous
peer
review,
there's
lots
of
peer
review.
D
What
we
may
need
is
private
peer
review.
Well,
I,
don't
know,
but
we
need
to
be
having
that
conversation
at
some
point,
so
you
can
get
a
concept
worked
on
at
the
working
group
level
and
accrue
knowledge
and
have
a
place
where
it
lives
and
is
accessible
and
copyable.
You
want
to
be
able
to
make
a
copy
of
that
in
anybody
else's
mind,
and
then
you
set
up
a
task
force
say:
let's
do
this
with
that
knowledge,
Let's
do
let's
you
know,
let's
poke
into
this
specific
area
of
our
lack
of
knowledge.
D
You
know,
let's
go
dig
into
this
area
and
task
force
can
have
that
I
got
a
limited
time
to
do
it.
Specific
funding
amount
tied
to
a
specific
result,
a
very
objective
orientation.
So
you
get
a
little
of
both.
You
know.
That's
that
GPS
framework,
where
it's
saying
you
need
objectives,
but
you
also
need
to
be
working
at
a
higher
purpose
level
too.
Working
groups
can
help
you
zero.
In
on
on
purpose,
a
little
bit
and
objectives
task
forces
can
help
you
get
specific
jobs
done
specific
work
done
as
it
comes
up.
A
Does
it
make
sense
that
we
will
have
this
initial
one
and
after
town
hall,
and
then
we
hold
a
follow-up
on
the
following
week
to
your
point
about
people
digesting
things
differently
and
needing
different
ways
to
to
take
it
in
we'll?
Have
some
we'll
have
a
better
timeline
as
far
as
like
completing
anything
that
would
be
necessary
for
it
we'll
have
this
run
to
sort
of
use?
A
As
an
example,
does
it
make
sense
that
we
would
plan
then
to
have
a
second
one,
the
following
week
and
really
really
give
an
overview
of
this,
and
let
people
come
and
ask
questions
and
see
what
questions
are
asked
and
see
if
we're
missing
anything
and
allow
it
to
sort
of
take
shape?
That
way,
because
we
will
have
been
through
a
lot
of
the
a
lot
of
the
QA
phase
for
this
fund
and
perhaps
other
things
that
people
have
noticed
or
have
been
thinking
about
wood
surface
as
well.
D
Yeah,
maybe
just
calling
it
convening
space
for
consistent
retrospective,
where
we
we
don't
give
ourselves
a
task
going
into
the
future,
but
we
just
say
like
just
consistently
make
a
little.
You
don't
need
a
lot
of
time
an
hour
and
then
see
what
happens,
half
an
hour
and
see
what
happens,
but
just
give
yourself
space
to
not
be
thinking
forward
and
be
thinking
backwards,
a
little
bit
because
a
lot
of
these
meetings
when
they
come
up.
It's
like
okay,
what's
coming
next,
how
do
we
get
this
in
the
schedule?
D
What's
our
next
steps,
we
really
get
focused
on
that
and
there's
benefit
to
looking
back
a
little
bit
saying.
Well,
what
just
happened
retrospective
is
definitely
something
that
needs
to
happen
a
lot
more
often
with
a
lot
of
these
Catalyst
processes
and
we're
all,
and
that's
the
thing
with
like
that-
that
break
that
cool
down
period
for
fun
day
like
either
iterate
rapidly
or
do
a
retrospective,
but
don't
just
stop
and
take
a.
D
Do
one
or
the
other
retrospectives
can
be
relaxing,
there's
I,
don't
know
if
any
of
you
follow
like
Neuroscience
type
process
for
for
self-care,
but
the
idea
of
non-sleep
I
don't
forget
what
it's
called
exactly
it's
non-sleep
deep
rest
nsdr
says
it's
like
meditation
or
prayer.
It's
ways
of
just
kind
of
getting
in
touch
with
purpose.
That
kind
of
thing
I
actually
had
to
Institute
that
for
this
round
of
PA
assessments,
because
I
was
so
off
my
game
and
I
could
not
focus
and
it
was
because
I
was
not
getting
enough.
C
D
Where
I
was
allowed
to
come
into
alignment
with
my
meaning
and
my
purpose,
why
was
I
even
doing
this,
and
so
it
was
I
was
losing
focus
on
the
work
that
I
was
doing
so
there's.
You
know
that
that
I
forget
kind
of
why
I
got
into
that.
But
that's
that's!
That's
a
layer!
That's
available
to
us
to
to
be
implementing
all
the
time
is
thinking
about
how
meaning
can
give
you
a
break
because
it
brings
things
it's
like
stretching
or
or
yoga
like
coming
into
alignment.
D
It's
just
it's
restful
to
come
into
alignment
as
much
work
as
it
might
take
to
do
that,
but
the
act
of
talking
for
me,
the
act
of
of
you
know
getting
to
you
know
your
Dojo
or
whatever,
like
these
are
things
that
require
effort,
but
that
being
in
the
moment,
is
part
of
a
flow.
It's
part
of
a
flux
and
it
gets
you
in
tap
with
what
relaxation
is
of
what
rest
is
and
that's
it
being
in
Harmony
and
being
in
alignment
so
and.
D
But
then
you
get
productivity
and
then
you're
better,
because
and
you
can
look
at
the
neurochemistry
of
it
you're
making
dopamine
when
you
do
that,
you're
getting
all
those
little
brain
chemistry
revitalizations
that
allow
you
that
kick
you
into
gear,
make
you
more
creative,
they
can
make
you
more
productive,
they
can
keep
you
focused.
I
mean
focus,
is
everything
you
either
Focus
or
you
don't
that's
kind
of
your
only
choice
in
life
and
anything
that
you
can
do
from
caffeine
to
to
whatever
it
can
Aid
you
in
that
res.
D
D
A
So,
there's
a
whole
discipline
of
yoga,
which
is
Yin,
which
is
a
Stillness
practice,
not
for
the
sake
of
not
moving,
but
because
the
teaching
is
that
you're
practicing
a
frequency
that
is
opposite
of
motion
and
cultivates.
Those
qualities
and
I
was
explaining
to
people
like
if
you
don't
have
the
frequencies
of
color
frequencies
of
red
and
orange
and
yellow
you're,
just
always
painting
only
with
certain
other
ones.
You
don't
have
that
whole
spectrum
of
The
Experience,
so
that
you
can
actually
make
a
much
more
realistic
realistic's,
not
the
right
word.
A
D
C
D
And
so
Harmony
is
harmony
with
all
things,
not
just.
A
Good
for
your
joints,
that's
the
other
part
of
it
is
that
that
most
of
the
other,
the
most
of
the
the
physical
practice
of
yoga,
which
is
such
a
tiny
discipline
of
it.
But
this
the
muscle
base
the
flexible.
What
most
people
think
about
is
Yoga
of
the
physical
body
treats
mostly
your
muscles,
but
your
connective
tissue
and
your
joints
that
speak
totally
different
language
from
the
rest
of
the
body,
and
so,
if
you're,
only
a
treating
one.
Yes
I
am,
if
you're
only
treating
one
of
those,
then
yeah.
C
B
Okay,
sorry,
random
tangent.
A
I
just
talking
about
yoga
tonight,
okay,
that
was
the
intention
here.
Is
it
okay
I'll
talk
about
that?
Okay,
no.
B
F
E
F
C
F
A
C
A
A
D
So
here's
kind
of
a
quick
question
I'm
going
through
the
governance
framework
because
I'm
doing
this
stuff
and
the
logo
is
obviously
outdated.
I,
don't
know
what
to
put
on
it
like
I,
don't
know
what
to
call
if
the
governance
framework
of
any
work.
So
we
changed
the
names
of
everything
we're
also
doing
Catalyst
United
as
the
server
we're.
Also
looking
at
Crossing
proposed
like
roll
boundaries
with
it
I
don't
want
to
delimit
it
unnecessarily.
D
C
A
E
C
B
D
There's
no
roll
gating
on
that
channel.
Is
there
I've
kind.