►
From YouTube: Ideascale Ideas for F9 Group Discussion May 4, 2022
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
initial
session,
here
with
looking
at
some
of
the
sensed
issues
with
idea,
scale
in
fund
eight
and
some
ideas
just
collaboratively
on
what
could
be
accomplished
here
for
fun,
9,
to
simplify
the
process
and
then
maybe
be
easy
fixes
for
the
confusion,
points
that
happened
across
the
process
because
these
things
weren't
in
place.
So
we're
just
going
to
start
a
conversation
about
that
today
and
then
see
if
we
can
get
some
easy
answers
and
some
marching
orders
for
different
things.
A
A
There's
four
different
ones
here,
and
we
try
to
also
put
the
reasoning
for
it
and
yeah.
Let's
go
from
there
go
ahead.
A
B
A
A
That
check
box
for
the
proposal
that
they
would
say.
Okay,
I'm
actually
done
and
then
so
that
we
would
eliminate
the
number
of
proposals
that
make
it
into
the
process
into
the
qa
process
that
actually
aren't
completed
or
weren't
intended
to
be
pleaded
completed
or
are
still
in
draft
form
and
haven't,
even
though
they
may
look
like
they
have
a
good
amount
of
work
done
on
them,
aren't
ready
to
be
assessed.
B
That
will
help
that
will
help
marika
team
a
lot
because
he
don't
need
to
come
down,
go
through
each
of
them
and
then
he
need
to
put
into
the
reverse
or
a
reserve
or
being
archived
properly.
That
will
help
him
a
lot
and
the
ca
may
just
jam
on
and
then
read
them
first.
I
mean
start
with
that.
First,
if
they
finish
early,
probably.
E
D
Now
the
checkbox
itself,
it
would
indicate
that
proposal
is
ready
to
be
assessed,
but
it
won't
prevent
proposer
from
editing.
B
D
Updating
the
proposal
itself
until
the
end
of
finalized
stage
correct.
So
for
me,
for
me,
it
is
great
from
from
my
perspective,
it's
great
it's
great.
It
will
be
much
easier
for
us
to
to
move
final
proposals
from
finalized
to
a
cell
stage
and
for
the
assessors
it
will
be
easier
to
focus
only
on
complete.
A
Yes,
great,
okay,
good
for
that
one
anything
else
on
that
one
yeah.
A
B
A
I
think
the
value
there,
though,
is,
is
greater
than
the
misuse
potential.
I
agree
it
does
give
people
a
chance
to
well
we'll
come
back,
okay,
these
two
auditing
of
self.
So
this
is
adding
self
audit
questions
to
allow
the
proposer
to
create
transparency
around
the
scope
of
their
current
proposal
load
and
previous
funded
proposal.
Results.
A
So
the
first
question
would
be:
this
would
be
maybe
we're
not
sure,
but
maybe
in
the
feasibility
or
audit
plate
section.
Have
you
been
a
part
of
any
catalyst
funded
projects
in
fund
seven
or
before
that
remain
unfinished?
If
so,
please
provide
links
to
your
proposals,
your
ongoing
work
and
an
explanation
of
why
they
remain
incomplete.
A
B
Very
simple
that
skip's
new
ca
and
the
ca
or
whatever
proposal
and
order,
maybe
another
whoever
tried
to
monitor-
and
I
don't
know
from
ca
right,
new
ci
right
proposal
right
for
whoever
want
to
look
into
that.
Whatever
that
guy
project
would
be
help
a
lot
and
that
will
be
give
a
tap
on
the
shoulder.
If
the
proposal
tried
to
submit
more
than
a
number
a
number
of
proposals.
B
Because
they
need
to
provide
the
evidence
if
they
don't,
you
say
why
they
submit
so
many
proposals.
So
the
new
ca,
look,
hey!
You
send
me
one
two,
three,
four,
five,
whatever
you
have
the
same
thing,
so
I
don't
know,
does
give
the
proposal
to
think
twice
before
they
hit
the
button
for
multiple
proposals.
B
E
B
B
Impact
the
impact
for
community
to
vote.
To
do
all
this,
I
mean
not
to
look
into
their
their
ability
in
the
past
and
current
and
possible
in
the
future,
so
that
from
community
point
of
view,
but
for
proposals
I
think
oh
okay,
should
I
put
that
information
here?
Should
I
rewrite
it
or
should
I
just
don't
do
this
proposal?
I
have
to
think
twice
because
someone
will
will
look
into
their
data.
D
Okay,
I
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
tommy
I
taught
oh
someone
else.
I
totally
agree
with
you
we'll
cut
that
part
that
it
should
come
directly
from
the
ui,
but
it's
not
possible
to
do
it
within
idea
scale.
For
few
reasons.
First,
we
don't
store
the
project
status
on
the
idea
scale
only
in
the
external
spreadsheet,
and
there
is
no
connection
between
the
spreadsheet
and
idea
scale.
So
we
can
rely
only
on
proposers
and
their
honesty.
D
Basically,
and
we
can,
we
can
have
this
information
stored
either
in
the
feasibility
section
in
the
proposal
itself
or
we
can
add
another
profile.
Question
in
each
profile
basically
are
involved
in
any
other
proposal
and
maybe
ask
people
to
to
do
it
in
the
profile
instead
of
copy
and
paste
everything.
For
example,
if
you
have
a
proposer
who
will
submit
20
proposals,
so
he
will
submit
the
first
in
the
second
proposal.
D
He
will
just
add
a
link
to
the
second
one,
sorry
to
the
previous
one
and
so
on
and
so
on
and
after
he
submit
20
proposals.
He
will
have
to
get
back
to
the
first
one
and
again
gather
all
the
links
copy
paste
to
the
first,
the
second
to
the
and
so
on
and
so
on.
So
maybe,
instead
of
keeping
that
information
in
the
in
the
proposal,
maybe
we
can
store
it
in
the
proposal
in
the
proposal
profile
page.
B
Just
a
suggestion:
all
right
can
can
you
possibly
if
I'm
logging
us
at
my
name
and
then
right
behind
in
id
scale
right
and
right
behind.
They
show
me
the
number
three
example.
If
right
behind
me
is
have
number
three,
it
means
I
have
three
proposals
regardless.
What
fund
is
that
possible
for
next
five
days.
B
You
got
what
I'm
saying
so
example.
I
submit
the
proposal
under
my
username.
So
if
you're
a
ca,
you
move
to
my
username
right
right
right
behind
my
username.
There
is
a
number.
So
if
I
have
three
person
me
myself,
someone
else
and
rob
right,
then
you
move
the
mouse
onto
the
icon.
It
shows
three
username,
so
the
first
username
to
proposal
I
mean
number
two.
D
We
can,
we
can
ask
ideas
how
to
to
develop
it.
But
again
this
is
third-party
software,
so
they.
D
B
B
A
E
A
A
This
is
this
is
one
and
then
I
guess
the
implication
is
we
have
to
update
the
ca
guy
to
say,
if
you
want
to
see
the
scope
of
this
person's
work,
you
need
to
go
to
their
profile
and
check
it
out.
I
think
this
is
a
helpful
thing
for
the
ca
and
the
proposer,
because
so
much
of
the
conflict,
I
think
here
came
about
because
of
lack
of
ability
to
present
to
present
feasibility
based
on
scope
versus
individual
proposal,
and
second
is
just
lack
of
clarity
on
lifetime
scope
and
and
outcomes
of
that.
A
So
I
think
this
is
one
of
the
more
important
ones
to
to
consider,
and
maybe
it
also
needs
more
input
from
the
composer
side
which
is
totally
appropriate.
But
what
do
so?
Let
me
just
clarify:
is
that
what's
being
said
here
that
we're
going
to
use
the
profile
section
to
answer
this
kind
of
material
and
what
will
those
questions
be
or
what
will
those
be?
First.
D
Question
would
be
put
in
the
proposal
in
the
feasibility
because
when
we
are
or
sorry
not
visibility
or
maybe.
D
It
will
be
the
best
section
for
it
for
all
the
previous
previously
funded
projects,
because
when
the
ca
open
proposal
and
see
okay,
this
is
very
good
proposal
and
then
see
the
section
about
previously
funded
proposals,
and
he
can
see
that
hey.
This
team
hasn't
delivered
any
funded
projects,
so
this
may
be
a
yellow
or
red
flag
or,
like
already
so
in
my
opinion,
it
could
be
and
it
should
be
put
in
the
proposal
itself,
but
information
about
being
involved
in
the
current
fund.
E
Yeah
or
remember
that
there
is
a
last
question
on
the
auditability
that
it
says
there
is
a
linked
project
to
this
one.
So
this
is.
This
is
linked
to
a
previous
one.
So
I
think
that
is
in
the
same
scope.
You
can
put
everything
in
there
something
like
several
questions
on
the
on
the
same
same
screen,.
A
So
what
about
that's
a
great
point
row?
What
about
then
mark
a
question
about
like?
Could
we
have
a
checkbot
question
at
the
end
that
says,
are
you
involved
in
any
other
proposals?
This
fun
question
mark
check
box,
yes,
and
then,
if
that
is
the
case,
then
we
can
encourage
them
to
go
to
the
profile,
just
as
a
saving
of
time
for
for
cas.
That
might
be
really
streamlined.
So
then
you
get
it
in
the
proposal.
The
cas
then
understand.
A
A
So
question
three,
so
this
came
about
because
of
the
there's
a
lot
of
discussion
right
now
around
having
there
be
community
feedback,
more
community
feedback
done
in
the
pre-proposal.
Sorry.
B
A
A
Yeah
right,
okay,
so
number
three.
This
came
about
because
there's
a
lot
of
discussion,
especially
in
the
joint
after
town
halls,
that
mercy-
and
I
did
about
really
encouraging
additional
support
of
the
proposers
and
commentary
and
sort
of
assessment
on
the
work
and
not
just
the
proposal,
but
here
very
primarily
the
ideas
in
this
in
this
pre
finalization
stage.
A
So
this
is
an
idea
about
adding
a
targeted
question
where
the
proposer
can
request
community
feedback
in
order
to
direct
and
encourage
community
feedback
on
things
that
the
proposer
needs
and
hopefully
creating
some
increased
engagement
during
the
proposal
finalization
stage,
this
is
like
not
really.
I
don't
think
this
is
like
directly
solving
this
problem
yeah,
but
you
know:
are
there
any
aspects
of
your
proposal,
idea
where
you
would
like
community
feedback
or
collaboration?
This
has
and
then
that's
not
part
of
the
that
one.
A
F
A
B
So
if,
if
the
change
that
ignites
scale
that
helping
the
ca
can
get
an
early
alert,
an
early
alert,
whether
this
proposal
can
be
a
game
or
can
be
whatever
that
purpose,
then
the
ca
will
alert
first
and
then
they
comment
that
that's
the
whole
point
of
I
mean
that's
the
main
point
that
we
want
to
do:
implement
infinite
because
to
do
with
id
scale,
as
marx
mentioned
that
it's
pretty
everything
had
to
be
on
the
you
know
the
pet
backlog
backlog,
so
it
take
take
time.
B
That's
something
we
expect
to
avoid
a
minimal.
The
me
I
mean
to
maximal
the
data
out
to
the
community
or
cia
can
see
that
first
and
they
alarm
them
first
in
early
stage,
so
that's
somewhere
that
ca
can
go
in
because
they
want
they
don't
want
to
get
the
mark.
I
mean
that
they
won't
get
the
points
one
to
five,
so
they
need
to
see
the
data
so
the
whole
point.
Now
we
try
to
serve
the
ca
mainly,
and
we
give
the
proposal
on
the
shoulder.
B
Hey
have
a
look,
and
you
know
if
they,
if
they
provide
whatever
data
they
provide.
You
know
misinformation
in
that
box
that
they
see
it
they
find
out,
and
then
they
whack
it
up
down
one
month
right
away,
so
the
proposal
is
have
to
think
twice.
That's
that's
something
that
we
can
do
in
fortnite.
If
we
can
do
that,
it
pretty.
You
know,
help
us
a
lot
in
terms
of
ca,
point
of
view
and
the
delivery,
as
well
as
the
quality
slowly.
I
think.
B
No,
no
not
that
question.
This
is
more
into
advertising,
so
I
don't
think
it's
relevant
because
if
we
create
it
will
be
too
many
common
arguments
and
then
you
know,
disagree
agree
on
their
proposal.
It's
become
a
mess.
B
A
A
Right
so
that
so
that
someone
could
say-
and
this
assumes
collaboration
right
in
that
comment-
idea
formation.
Ideally
your
idea
is-
is
well
formed
here
by
the
time
you're
doing
a
proposal.
Obviously,
but
it's
a
little
bit
of
you
know.
Sometimes
the
comments
are
like
hey.
This
is
a
great
proposal,
thanks
for
posting,
this
proposal,
like
not
not
very
specific,
to
helping
that
person
really
think
through
anything
that
they
might
need.
So
I
think
it's
an
opportunity
for
that
person
to
say
does
my
does
my
framing
make
sense?
A
Is
there
anything
that
I
could
be
that
could
be
improved
like
these
are
questions
you
could
ask
and
then
have
the
people
who
come
to
make
comments
on
the
proposals
would
be
able
to
really
help
that
person
for
the
things
that
they
perceive
or
their
struggles
for,
making
the
proposal
successful
and
also
sort
of
guide
them.
As
far
as
where
to
start
helping
that
person.
D
Okay,
this
can
be
done.
This
is
all
I
think
this
is
to
add
only
one
question
to
the
proposal,
so
it
is
easy,
easy
to
be
done,
but.
A
A
Is
that
then,
when
we
get
to
cas
the
cas
are
focused
a
lot
on
the
idea
versus
the
proposal
itself,
and
so
you
have
some
space
for
the
idea
to
get
flushed
out
and
conversations
about
the
idea
and
conversations
about.
So
one
is
the
idea
and
two
is
the
quality
of
the
proposal.
So
a
lot
of
times.
People
have
these
great
ideas,
but
the
quality
of
the
proposal
is
not
quite
there,
so
they
could.
A
F
A
E
Yes,
at
least
you're
gonna
need
also
a
filter,
so
people
who
wanna
help
maybe
mentors
or
whatever
gonna
filter
the
proposal
that
that
needs
to
help.
With
that
question
you,
you
won't
have
that.
E
B
It's
quite
rare.
The
reason
is
rare
for
someone
corn.
To
put,
I
can
see
the
intention
of
the
question
really
nice,
but
only
ca,
purely
ca
and
really
confident
ca
able
to
comment
directly
on
that
before
the
finalize
the
other
proposal.
I
don't
think
they
will,
because
if
you
comment
on
my
proposal,
I
might
check
oh
this
married.
He
not
his
background
is
blah
blah
blah.
I
don't
think
he
got
any.
You
know
any
comments
to
comment
on
my
proposal
because
he's
more
into
business.
This
is
more
into
df.
B
B
A
One
and
then
we'll
just
hopscotch
through
these
these
few
here
because
they're
not
as
well
developed
and
it's
more
just
the
beginning
of
the
conversation
which
will
probably
come
back
to
you,
then
with
more
more
thought
out
or
it'll.
Be
quick,
yes
for
today,
so
suggestion
here
is
have
the
prepaid
proposal.
This
is
yours,
lynn,
so
have
the
proposal
have
the
proposer
frame
their
deliverables
month
to
month
so
that
the
results
could
be
exported
for
a
simple
conversation
about
audit
review?
A
The
question
would
ask
the
time
span,
for
example,
one
two
three,
however
many
months
it's
going
to
go
and
produce
the
corresponding
number
of
fields
month,
one
so
you
select
the
drop
down,
and
then
you
get
the
number
of
fields.
Reasoning
is.
It
would
prevent
a
more
thorough
timeline
from
the
proposal
that
is
exportable
and
enable
specific
check-in
on
progress
conversations
on
a
monthly
basis
so
that
they
could
evaluate
their
project
trajectory
and
then
funding
could
be
distributed
accordingly.
A
B
Is
that
possible
mark
in
the
audibility
say,
example:
minimum
three
months
right,
some
three
months
and
if
I
assume
there
is
a
you
know,
some
outlier
proposal.
Example,
if
I
have
proposed
I
finished
halfway,
but
I
don't
have
fun
for
last
two
funds,
then
I
submit
I'm
done
so.
That's
different
thing
right!
B
That's
I
mean
that's
a
special
case,
so
we
we
look
at
the
comments,
the
common
ground
here,
that
if
the
proposal
normally
three
months
so
if
they
said
like
three
months
so
they
they,
they
pop
out
three
more
bucks
below
of
that
so
month,
number
one.
What
are
you
going
to
do?
What
are
you
going
to
achieve?
Write
them
down
clearly.
Is
that
all
right,
we
put
some
question
month,
one
what
you're
going
to
do?
What
are
the
other
projects?
The
whole
point
of
this
is
for
ca
to
read.
B
Yeah,
let's
see,
I
do
read
to
see
whether
it
is
possible
to
deliver
it
as
us
based
on
their
feasibility.
So
this
is
the
only
key
point
based
on
the
feasibility.
So
if
they
say
four
months,
okay
month
number
one,
what
are
you
going
to
do
month?
Number
two:
what
are
you
going
to
do?
At
least
I
have
a
plan,
they
don't
have
to
provide
an
actual
outcome
of
coding
or
whatever
just
putting
this
month.
What
they're
going
to
do,
because,
based
on
that
from
the
challenge
team
point
of
view,
it's
really
easy
to
follow.
B
To
be
honest,
that's
the
first
thing
from
challenge
point
of
view
challenge
team
member.
Secondly,
it
give
proposal
think
hardly
okay,
what
I
am
going
to
do.
If
can
I
achieve
50
of
that
month?
If
I
say
yes
now
you
see
so
on
the
way
they
say.
Okay,
I'm
up
for
one
hundred
thousand,
I
might
ask
for
six
months
and
then
they
get
quite
a
lot
of
money
there
and
then
they
just
don't
do
three
months
and
they
say
bye-bye
okay,
so.
D
Where
would
you
like
to
have
the
the
progress
being
stored.
B
No,
what
I'm
saying
here
when
you
create
when
I
create
a
new
proposal
right,
so
I
have
to
fill
in.
If
I
select
six
months,
then
they
have
a
sick
box.
For
me,
I
had
the
feeling
month
one
what
I'm
going
to
do
month,
2
what
I'm
going
to
do
month,
3,
what
I'm
going
to
do
and
then
because
some
of
the
proposal
they
just
list
very
simplified
version.
They
just
tech
tag
tag
it's
no
detail
at
all
if
they
are
for
ten
thousand,
some
of
them
ask
for
hundred
thousand
very
basic.
E
C
A
A
A
E
For
the
ca
point
of
view,
I
think
that
you,
you
read
it
in
the
in
the
feasibility
or
what?
What
is
the
scope
and
what
what
they
they
want
to
achieve.
So
they
can.
The
proposal
can
explain
everything
and
you're
gonna
see
if
there's
a
little
little
warding,
you're
gonna
put
a
bad
rating
right,
so
adding
more
like
more
sections
for
each
month.
I
don't
think
that's
gonna
be
helpful
for
the
ca
too
much
helpful
because
they
can
put
whatever
they
want
on
on
the
other
sections
right.
E
A
E
B
E
B
Not
all
of
them,
but
some
proposal
just
doing
that
because
they
may
have
too
many.
The
team
is
leaving
there's
so
many
reasons
out
there.
I'm
sure
you
know
that.
So
if
we
put
this
up
front
at
least
we
give
them
a
minimal
expectation
that
they
have
to
think
twice,
because
we
don't,
we
don't
put
the
the
threshold
anywhere,
but
we
give
them
a
indicate
the
indicator.
Okay,
you
should
do
that.
You
should
do
that,
so
it
help
almost.
It
leave
the
game
for
everyone
together
than
what
it
is
right
now.
B
B
E
E
A
I
think
your
mindset
moreland
you
and
you
do
a
lot
a
lot
of
work
on
challenge
team
as
well
you
and
vlad,
and
so
you're.
Looking
at
this.
Also
from
the
perspective
of
it
would
help
the
it
would
help
the
evaluation
of
auditing,
maybe
from
the
ca.
I
don't
know
that
that
is
a
tremendous
upgrade
for
what
the
work
is
of
having
this
as
a
function.
B
A
B
A
A
Someone
else
is
saying:
can't
we
just
ask
what
are
your
monthly
deliverables?
I
I
think
we
do
ask
that.
I
think
it's.
I
think
it's
pretty
clear,
you're
supposed
to
put
that
in
there.
This
is
this
is
just
and
what
I'm,
what
I'm
sort
of
sensing
is.
So
the
purpose
of
having
marek
here
is
to
ask
if
these
things
are
doable.
A
Maybe
if,
if
it
is
a
doable
thing,
then
this
part
of
this
conversation
should
probably
go
towards
like
a
suggestion
for
audit
teams
and
for
challenge
teams
as
a
way
to
improve
the
ease
of
review
in
that
process.
I
definitely
think
if
it
were
on
my
plate
to
be
on
a
challenge
team
or
if
they're
on
my
plate
to
be
auditing
projects,
and
it's
probably
a
very
reasonable
thing.
A
I
mean
lots
of
grants,
yes
for
this
kind
of
thing
and
stuff
like
that
too,
so,
where
you,
where
you
know
what
you're
supposed
to
be
delivering
over
time
and
you're
accountable
for
that
delivery
for
your
funding
to
be
released.
So
perhaps
this
is
a
question
that
needs
to
be
actually
implemented
within
a
different
group
or
agreed
upon
within
a
different
group
than
this.
So
maybe
we
can
just
put
a
button
on
this
and
a
pin
on
it
by
asking
mark.
Do
you
think
this
is
like?
A
D
D
D
So
if
you
click
13
months,
you
need
to
see
13
check
boxes
to
fill
the
yeah,
the
vivian
yep
yeah,
kpis
or
whatever.
But
but
there
is
no
automatic
option
in
the
idea.
D
Basically,
I
will
have
to
create
one
dynamic
section
for
just
drop
down
list
and
picking
how
many
months
you're
going
to
in
how
many
months
you're
going
to
deliver
your
project
and
then
for
each
answer.
You
pick,
I
will
have
to
create
another
dynamic
sections
with
regarding
number
of
of
check
boxes.
So
a
lot
of
money
won't
work
and
you
know
things
may
break
even
on
my
dia
scale.
So
it
is
double,
but
it
may
be
a
pain.
However
yeah.
B
E
B
E
A
Okay,
so
we
have
more
so
not
easy
and
we
have
more
work
to
do
on
that
and
not
easy,
especially
for
the
amount
of
potential
we're
thinking
at
this
point,
but
I
think
this
this
line
of
thinking
is
will
be
very
helpful
for
we
need
to
improve
this.
This
audit
process
certainly,
and
definitely
there's
groups
working
on
it.
So
maybe
we
take
some
of
these
ideas.
D
A
F
D
If
you,
if
you
can
open
the
link,
I
showed
this
is
the.
I
picked
the
first
proposal
from
first
challenge
in
the
idea
scale.
It
is
m
labs,
cardano
takes
leap
forward
and
if
you
go
to
the
feasibility
and
auto
auditability
sections,
you
will
see
that
they
already
prepared
what
they
are
going
to
deliver.
What
are
the
funds
breakdown
and
total
time?
D
Let's
say
how
many
hours
they
are
going
to
spend
on
each
section,
then
in
the
audit,
like
our
ability
will
find
what
their
main
kpis
and
their
roadmap
for
3,
6
and
12
months.
D
So
if
some
proposals
proposers
are
using
the
submission
form,
let's
say
correctly
because
in
my
opinion
this
is
very
well
written
proposal.
Should
we
add
another
checkboxes
for
them
to
basically
copy
and
paste
the
information
they
already
put.
A
Yeah,
I
guess
the
thinking
here
was
they
would
replace
that
it
would
make
like
a
specific
place
for
that,
not
replace
it,
but
it
would
say
it
would
allow
for
refinement.
And
again
I
think
the
export
function
was
the
the
export
function
for
the
teams
and
auditing
was
it
so
for
someone
who
does
a
really
good
job
here
like
this,
they
would
just
have
those
in
those.
A
Okay,
so
I
think
I
think
we
went
through
that
pretty
good,
so
we'll,
maybe
we'll
maybe
come
back
to
that
one.
These.
I
think
we
only
have
five
four
minutes
left,
so
I
want
to
just
like
hop
through
some
of
these,
because
I
think
they
are
some
of
them.
A
We
talked
about
actually
like
the
first
one,
more
thorough
filtering
of
proposals
not
intended
to
be
addressed
or
finished,
so
maybe
the
check
box
might
might
help
that
the
this
is
the
request
for
formatting
improvements
or
approach
to
tools
for
writing
assessments
that
had
to
do
with
maybe
how
we
expect.
I
think
a
lot
of
people
had
the
trouble
with
putting
the
putting
the
content
in
and
having
it
empty.
D
A
F
D
F
D
They
don't
plan
to,
they
don't
have
any
plans
to
change
the
formatting
in
the
assess,
assess
textbox,
okay,.
B
A
This
I
just
have
in
there
because
it
was
a
q,
a
I
know.
We
can't
give
people
api.
D
We
can't
yet,
but
just
for
you
to
know,
we
are
working
on
that
since
second
quarter
of
2021.
D
We
are
checking
the
data
and
in
the
api
and
the
replies
from
the
api
just
to
make
sure
that
there
won't
be
any
private
data
leaked
or
any
security
breaches
anything
yeah.
So
we
are
working
on
that
constantly
since
last
year,
yeah
no
break
line.
D
D
D
This
is
this.
Let
me
check
when
we
created
the
group
to
test
that
it
was
like
a
year
ago.
D
D
A
A
Yeah,
I
think,
we're
out
of
time
here,
so
I
want
to
stop
on
time.
I
think
most
of
the
other
things.
These
are
just
things
that
were
brought
up:
topic-wise
opt-in,
to
bundle
proposals.
We
talked
about
that.
I
think
we
solved
that
location
for
reviewing
ca,
work,
voter
feedback
tool;
okay,
that's
not
having
to
do
it
here,
aggregation
proposals.
Okay,
we
talked
about
that
aggregation
of
proposal.
Total
proposed
number
to
help
feasibility
assessments,
yeah.
C
A
So
I
think
we
need
to
revisit
these
glitchy
type
things
not
as
something
that
that
needs
work
now,
but
as
something
that
we
need
to
plan
for
being
very
specific
about
in
the
in
the
guide,
so
that
we
prevent
people
from
doing
stuff
that
we
know
still
has
glitches
or
it's
hard
to
to
tell
beforehand,
but
okay.
So
I
think
this
is
good.
This
is
a
good
beginning.
Anything
else
that
anyone
wants
to
add
here.
A
I
guess
the
question
is
we
just
need
to
come
back
with
some
confirmations
for
you,
but-
and
I
think,
as
far
as
the
proposal
stuff,
maybe
I'll
check
with
mercy
and
vanessa
and
that
whole
sub
circle
and
say
these
are
the
things
we're
thinking
about
any
additional
input
from
the
funded
proposer,
just
overall
proposer
lens
how
how
much
lead
time
do
you
need
for
something
like
that?
Mark.
D
D
A
A
B
A
B
A
Come
back
I'll
talk
to
everyone
who,
I
think
needs
to
have
weigh-in
on
it,
so
we
don't
drop
a
bomb
and
then
we'll
come
back
and
finalize
this
stuff,
that'll
be
great
beautiful!
All
right!
Thank
you.
Guys
have
a
great
day.