►
From YouTube: DXproductstrategy Call [2022-10-28]
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
With
hello
and
welcome
to
Jake's
Dallas
weekly
strategical
Friday
October,
the
28th
today
on
the
agenda,
we
got
restructuring
and
refocus
phase.
Two
we're
gonna
talk
about
swappers
emissions
and
marketing
plans
and
if
we've
got
yeah,
we
got
Zed
here.
We
could
also
talk
about
Mimi's
incubation.
A
B
It's
any
specific
reason,
but
you
sound
especially
like
a
radio
host
today
so
glad
to
have
you
hosting
cheers.
B
B
I
guess,
first
of
all,
like
the
current
status,
I
think
most
of
us
here
know
but
October
3rd,
we
passed
the
follow-up
proposal
phase
one
that
included
the
three
key
actions
that
I
won't
dive
into
here,
but
the
event
budget,
auditing
budgets,
length
and
frequency
of
calls
Etc
and
now,
of
course,
being
phase
two
time
which
we've
been
focusing
on
the
last
month
and
I.
B
Think
it's
good
and
I
tried
to
highlight
here,
but
the
idea
of
phase
two
isn't
to
have
all
of
the
answers,
but
instead
point
to
a
direction
in
a
sense
that
there
will
still
be
questions,
of
course,
and
I,
don't
think
anyone
can
solve
things
without
these
questions
kind
of,
in
the
small
amount
of
time
that
we've
had
to
focus
on
phase
two,
but
instead
pointing
to
it.
Okay,
this
would
be
a
good
solution
and
then
phase
three
is
like:
how
do
we
get
there?
B
You
know
what
do
we
need
to
do
to
get
there
so
I
chatted
a
bit
about
findings
and
discussions
from
the
DX
retreat.
Let
me
take
a
look
here.
I
basically
highlighted
like
the
the
findings
of
kind
of
working
with
lateral
and
the
presentations
that
kind
of
went
through.
So,
of
course,
I
started
with
a
recap
that
Nathan
kind
of
mentioned
that
just
ran
through
everything.
Up
until
that
stage,
you
know
phase
one.
B
The
proposals
Etc
there
wasn't
much
to
abstract
from
that
for
use
in
phase
two,
but
it
was
pretty
valuable
in
my
biased
opinion,
in
setting
up
the
stage
for
kind
of
the
discussions
and
like
okay,
this
is
where
we
are.
This
is
where
we're
going
next
up,
of
course,
was
Chris,
who
kind
of
led
the
the
structure
focused
talk,
or
accountability
and
governance
and
by
the
way
I
have
the
presentations,
Linked,
In,
This,
Thread
and
they're
highlighted.
B
So,
if
you're
looking
to
look
at
the
actual
slides,
you
can
find
them
in
the
post.
But
three
kind
of
highlights
there
from
the
the
governance
side
is
crystals
and
three
new
pillars.
So,
six
month,
budgetary
cycle
for
squads,
which
would
usurp
the
traditional
free-for-all
contributor
proposal
process,
the
implementation
of
a
layer
between
execution
and
governance,
to
provide
an
unbiased
accountability
to
product
initiatives
and.
B
Ward
that
lives
Downstream
of
overarching
goals
and
vision
of
DX
style,
so
those
are
kind
of
the
main
structural
changes
and
I
see
a
comment
from
thank
you
we'll
touch
on
in
a
minute
when
we're
kind
of
running
through
the
the
five
main
topics
here.
B
That
leads
us
to
moving
forward
or
my
my
talk
on
vision
and
Direction,
which
was
on
I,
think
the
Wednesday
in
Cartagena,
but
basically
I,
say
here.
The
goal
is
to
highlight
our
current
lack
of
Direction
and
where
we
can
point
to
in
the
future,
I
had
a
highly
opinionated
presentation
based
on
individual
squads
and
I,
say
here.
The
most
important
thing
is
that
not
everything
was
was
new
ideas.
Really
a
lot
of
these
were
kind
of
just
things
that
we
were
talking
about
for
a
long
time.
B
B
B
What
is
the
definition
of
vision
versus
Direction
and
priorities,
and
why
do
we
need
it
and
then
pointed
to
like,
where
we're
going
and
how
the
Pieces
come
together,
so
I
think
I
think
it
went
incredibly
well,
particularly
those
talks
when
we
all
chatted
and
kind
of
deliberated,
some
of
the
things
from
all
of
these
presentations
and
the
lateral
side
of
things.
The
discussions
were
incredibly
healthy.
Things
moved
in
the
right
direction.
B
You
know
questions
weren't,
intimidating
or
anything,
so
it
was
fantastic
to
see
that
process
and
that
kind
of
leads
us
to
today,
which
is
the
phase
two
kind
of
off-chain
consensus
collection.
I
note
here
that
the
we
kind
of
have
this
yes
or
no
off-chain
informal
consensus
collection
in
the
sense
that
we
want
to
take
it
to
a
proposal
that
will
pass.
And
how
do
you
reach
that?
B
So
this
isn't
like?
Oh,
let's
use
off
chain,
pulls
to
decide.
You
know
the
way
that
we're
going
forward,
but
instead
it's
like
okay.
Do
you
agree
with
this?
Do
you
disagree
with
this?
Ignoring
any
semantics
or
anything?
You
know
any
individual
kind
of
pieces
of
it
and
if
you
can't
vote
yes,
what
would
it
take
you
to
lean
in
that
direction?
B
I
think
that
I
know
here
it
just
kind
of
simplifies
consensus
collection
and
removes
a
lot
of
stress
in
the
process
and
inefficiency.
Of
course,
I
think
this
approach
was
very
successful
in
Phase
One,
so
hopefully,
and
I
can
see.
I
will
chat
in
a
second
with
this.
The
polls
are
looking
relatively
clean.
So
far,
we'll
talk
about
it
in
a
second
moment,
yeah
and
I.
Just
read
it
right
here.
B
The
signal
proposal
for
Facebook
does
not
require
DXL
to
have
the
perfect
solution
to
each
of
its
issues,
but
instead
can
identify
an
equitable
path
forward,
even
if
it
will
require
additional
exploration
within
phase
three,
so
Direction
I
guess
is
the
key
word
and
kind
of
understanding
the
goal
of
what
we're
trying
to
pass
through
in
phase
two.
So,
in
that
note,
there's
kind
of
the
governance
and
structure
area.
B
There's
three
polls
for
this
that
include
the
budgetary
cycle,
Squad
accountability
councils
and
the
priorities
board,
Chris
kind
of
because
you
lid
the
presentation,
I,
don't
want
to
bore
people
with
my
half
asleep
voice
here.
I,
don't
know
if
you
want
to
talk
to
those
individual
points
and
then
maybe
I
can
kind
of
answer.
Yankees
questions.
D
Yeah
I
think
venki's
questions
and
some
of
the
other
comments
in
there
and
that
you
were
saying
all
kind
of
come
into
this
like
how
much
do
we
know
what
the
structure
is
versus?
How
much
do
we
need
to
have
some
consensus
to
move
forward
in
that
direction?
D
So
I
think
like,
for
instance,
like
the
starting
with
like
a
budget,
all
the
kind
of
questions
I
think
he
laid
out
I
think
we
can
have
some
answers
now,
but
we
haven't
obviously
codified
all
of
that,
but
if
we
want
to
codify
all
of
that,
it
takes
time
and
effort
to
like
put
forth
a
process
or
come
through
with
different
solutions
for
that
like,
for
instance,
I.
D
Think
for
if
we
do,
you
know
the
the
budget,
the
six-month
budget
that's
going
to
require
just
a
lot
more
work
by
everyone
involved
in
like
a
squad,
leadership
position
and
so
I.
Think.
If
we're
going
to
answer
those
questions
and
kind
of
put
an
overall
structure
on
it,
we
need
to
have
some
idea
of
it
going
forward.
D
Having
said
that,
I
think,
just
in
terms
of
like
where
to
try
to
get
into
specifics.
In
terms
of
of
what
we
can
do
more,
what
I
think
would
be
expected
I
think
broadly,
the
goal
of
this
structure
is
to
give
squads
autonomy.
D
So
if
you
look
at
the
kind
of
the
questions,
I
think
that
vinky
was
going
through
a
lot
of
those
questions
are
like
well.
Will
the
squad
be
able
to
do
this?
Will
the
squad
be
able
to
do
that
and
I
think,
as
as
like
a
geeked
out
governance
perspective,
we
kind
of
just
pushed
those
ideas
onto
the
squad
itself
and
so
for
swapper
Squad.
D
That
may
actually
have
a
slightly
different
governance
structure
than
another
Squad,
that's
making
decisions,
so
maybe
we
need
to
have
different
ways
of
how
those
squads
make
decisions,
but
I
think
by
and
large
the
only
thing
that
governance
is
doing
or
approving
is
like
that
budget
at
the
beginning
of
the
term.
Now,
of
course,
that
budget
is
going
to
have
specific
roles
and
likely
people
associated
with
it.
That
is
getting
approval
to
pay
that
out.
D
So,
if
you
do
wanna
hire
someone
as
a
squad
you're
going
to
have
to
get
approval
in
your
six-month
budget
for
that
role.
To
be
included
so
that
you
can
hire
that
person
and
then
the
squad
itself
will
have
some
ability
or
some
autonomy
to
actually
select
the
person
that
they
want.
But
again,
then,
that's
coming
up
after
six
months,
they're
going
to
have
to
go
back
to
governance
and
get
reapproval
for
that
role.
D
So
I
think
that's
where
the
accountability
comes
in
in
terms
of
like
governance
there,
and
that
the
squad
really
has
the
autonomy
to
act
as
they
see
fit
and
I
think
this
even
gets
into
like
compensation
within
the
squads,
and
then
the
contract
contractors
within
the
squads,
like
I,
think
that
should
all
really
be
up
to
the
squad
itself.
If
they
can
get
the
job
done
in
you
know,
by
hiring
one
person
at
a
level.
Eight
then
like
they
should
do
that.
D
If
they
want
to
do
four
people
at
level
two,
they
should
do
that
if
they
can
get
a
contractor,
they
can
kind
of
do
all
that
I.
Don't
necessarily
think
you
need
to
have
governance,
making
those
restrictions
on
the
squad
itself.
I
do
think
that
the
squads
will
end
up
borrowing
a
lot
of
process
and
standards
from
DX
style
itself,
so
I
actually
think.
For
instance,
like
the
the
pay
scale.
D
On
that
structure,
sure
when
governance
is
evaluating
the
budgets,
because
there's
some
similarity
between
the
different
Squad
budgets
and
we
can
kind
of
easily
know
we'll,
let
you
know
how
much
a
level
seven
or
or
whatever
is
and
then
I
think
the
same
way
in
terms
of
borrowing
from
the
resources
of
DX
style,
like
I,
think
the
contributor
X
squads
like
goal
is
to
help
onboard
contributors
to
Duke
style
like
kind
of
squads
and
products,
and
so
they
could
still
be
providing
that
service
to
to
others.
B
You
know
I
guess
even
more
high
level
approach
to
that
is
just
for
example,
venki
says,
would
squads
have
autonomy
over
who
they
onboard
off
board,
and
then
you
know
our
squads
with
Dev
squads
or
should
start
seek
into
account
the
growth
marketing
Biz
Dev.
Obviously
this
is
a
very
complex
topic.
I
mentioned
this
on
the
retreat,
specifically
about
DX
voice,
ndx
Biz,
but
it's
like
there
needs
to
be
autonomy
on
both
the
operation
side,
as
well
as
the
product
side.
In
my
eyes
and
I.
B
Think
a
strong
piece
of
phase
three
is
going
to
be
how
exactly
these
pieces
interconnect
because
of
DX,
Biz
and
DX
voice,
specifically
can't
integrate
directly
with
these
autonomous
squads,
especially
you
know
pertaining
to
a
larger
kind
of
goal
and
like
Flagship
product,
for
example.
B
Then,
should
those
squads
exist?
That's
kind
of
the
question
so
I
want
to
talk
a
bit
more
about
that
and
kind
of
how
they
interlinked,
but
I.
Think
the
like
Chris
kind
of
highlighted
the
most
important
thing
is
the
autonomy
of
each
Squad
and
allowing
them
to
make
those
decisions.
Another
thing
to
kind
of
think
about
and
another
reason
why
phase
three
will
be
so
important.
Is
you
mentioned?
B
E
B
Already
read
that
but
I
think
it's
like
we
want
contributor
X
to
have
that
autonomy
to
kind
of
assist
or
have
some
kind
of
say
in
that
and
work
directly
with
the
squads.
I
think
it's
like
exploring
exactly
how
they
can
be
autonomous,
makes
sense
for
phase
three
and
I.
Don't
know
if
we
can
really
just
have
the
answer
you
know
like
overnight
in
my
eyes.
That's
my
perspective,
though
open
to
Alternative
views.
Of
course,
foreign.
A
You
know
bringing
up
such
questions.
It
seems
like
it's
not
hard
for
us
to
reach
any
consensus,
but
these
are
kind
of
like
it.
You
know
the
structure
that
the
Dell
has
and
follows
is
like
a
contract,
and
it
has
these
different
sections
and
those
sections
have
articles
to
them.
How
do
we
put
those
micro
agreements
on
chain
so
that
they're
ratified
and
that,
once
on
one
side,
people
can
easily
look
into
without
asking
questions?
A
For
example,
if
a
new
person
joins
the
Dao
instead
of
asking
people
about
how
the
Dow
is
functioning,
they
should
be
just
pointed
to
a
place
where
they
could
see
this.
Like
an
Unchained
proposal,
that's
been
passed
instead
of
asking
people
and
on
the
other
hand,
it
will
help
with
like
disagreements
later
on.
Did
we
agree
on
this
or
not?
You.
B
B
The
idea
is
like
a
monthly
check
and
Chris.
You
can
kind
of
talk
more
to
it,
but
that
would
be
kind
of
enacted
on
shame.
As
this
gospel
place.
D
There
is
like
before
you
even
get
to
the
priorities
board,
there's
little
like
what
is
the
overall
flow
and
structure
of
DX
style
governance
really
in
terms
of
making
these
decisions,
and
not
just
if
you're
like
a
new
contributor
but
like
I,
think
the
same
process
can
be
used
to
like
you
could
have
a
new
product
idea
or
a
new
Grant
idea,
and
you
could
propose
like
a
six-month
budget
directly
to
gxtau
to
say,
I'm
gonna,
you
know,
I've
got
two
people
who
I'm
gonna
work
to
launch
this
new
product
or
whatever,
and
it's
going
to
help
DX
Dow
out
in
this
specific
way
or
it's
gonna.
D
You
know
solve
this
one
specific
problem,
so
I
think
that
we
can
having
a
clear
idea
of
how
this
structure
works,
both
for
like
existing
groups
and
squads
that
are
producing
value
for
DXL,
but
also
I.
Think
in
the
future.
I
think
is
really
important
and
I
think,
like
the
key
part
of
that
is
just
documentation
and
I
think
documentation
in
a
whole
bunch
of
way
days,
and
it's
just
kind
of
communicating
this
in
a
more
public
way
and
I.
D
Think
that's
what
we
need
to
do
over
the
next
couple
months
is
not
only
get
like
a
proposal
that
lays
out
some
of
this
additional
structure
so
that
it's
kind
of
ratified
on
chain,
but
then
go
through
the
process
of
like
how
does
that?
How
is
that
communicated
more
broadly
and
how
is
that
accessible
to
new
new
people
and
so
I?
D
With
this
priorities
board,
which
is
like
okay,
we
need
kind
of
a
constant
check-in
with
governance
with
different
stakeholders
in
the
Excel
on
like
what
the
major
priorities
are,
so
that
when
squads
are
executing
on
the
The
Vision
that
they
have
an
idea
of
what
the
overall
priorities,
so
they
can
put
that
in
in
a
better
thing
in
a
better
framework.
D
So
I
think
this
could
take
the
a
place
of
like
a
monthly
check-in
in
terms
of
like
this
is
the
main
task
and
priorities,
and
this
is
again
accessible
for
new
people
coming
into
DXL
like
just
as
they
like,
hey,
like
things
are
going.
Maybe
you
know
things
are
operating
and
it's
hard
to
see
what's
going
on,
but
having
that
check-in
will
be
like
this
is
actually
the
main
things
we're
all
working
on
and
we're
all
focused
on.
D
Even
if,
like
every
week,
it
seems
like
there's
a
different
story
that
we
have
to
kind
of
shift
to
there
having
that
kind
of
check-in
I
think
the
on-chain
endorsement
of
that
is
going
to
be
I.
Guess,
there's
just
a
little
bit
of
a
tricky
problem.
I
haven't
exactly
thought
how
we
can
do
that
I
think
we
maybe
need
to
have
some
additional
like
polling
and
signaling
tools
within
Dow
talk.
D
If
we're
trying
to
like
get
some
understanding
of
what
what
Teague
style
thinks
is
a
priority,
but
I
think
that
definitely
needs
to
be
an
element
of
it
and
it's
you
know
just
as
important
I
think
as
that
constant
communication,
so
that
people
are
aware
and
aligned
on
what
the
overall
priorities
are.
E
Yeah
I
I
mean
if
we
want
to
push
for
phase
two
there
we
have
these
Squad
budgets,
I
mean
I'm.
I
have
already
started
working
on
these
Squad
budgets,
for
for
swapper,
with
z
and
I
mean
we
need.
E
Some
of
these
answered,
at
least
like
I,
mean,
should
I
already
budget
for
DX
voice,
Dev
or
if,
if
so,
I
have
no
idea
how
to
budget
for
for
marketing
spend
and
the
business
spend
so
I've
got
to
probably
understand
what
kind
of
budget
would
be
there
for
that,
and
then
and.
D
I
would
I
would
presume
that
Keenan
has
an
idea
of
whether
GX
voice
can
provide
that
service
or
not
or
and
and
Sky
kind
of
knows
and
so
I
think
DX
Dao
wants
to
fund
Biz,
Dev
or
growth
for
swapper
and
honestly
I
do
think
long
term.
It
would
be
good
for
swapper
to
have
that
stuff
internally,
but
in
terms
of
who's
filling
that
role.
I
think
diet
is
agnostic
at
this
point,
so
it
would
be
like
someone
needs
to
include
that
in
their
budget
and
I.
Guess.
D
If
you'd
ask
me,
I
think
it's
probably
better
for
that
budget
to
be
included
in
DX
voice
for
now,
but
making
sure
it's
accounted
for
now
and
then
maybe
going
forward,
that's
different
where
it
falls
under
or
what
what
Squad
it
falls
under
could
change.
B
And
I
think
the
idea
from
our
end
is
DX.
Voiceful
do
its
best
to
use
its
resources
to
support
dxdos
current
priorities,
in
the
sense
that,
if
you
know
a
budget
is
voted
through
and
DX
that
deems
it
like
a
medium
priority,
then
dxoils
will
do
its
best
to
support
it
in
a
medium
capacity.
B
The
last
question
you
had
been
key:
that
can
we
engage
with
contractors
again,
I
think
we
kind
of
answered
this
but,
like
I
said,
I,
think
it's
it's
really
up
to
the
team
in
the
sense
that
you'll
have
a
budget
and
you
can
spend
it.
Whichever
way
you
want,
hypothetically,
you
can.
You
know,
move
away
from
the
pay
scale
that
we
have
at
the
extau.
You
can
do
whatever
you
want
with
that
budget.
B
The
only
thing
is
you
get
money
and
you
need
to
accomplish
what
is
stated
in
this
six-month
budget
and
I
also
think
that
Chris,
you
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong.
The
idea
is
to
kind
of
work
through
all
this
in
phase
three
and
start
with
a
the
trailing
six
month
budget
process
for
the
first
month
of
the
year,
of
course,
so
we
can
run
from
January
to
June
without
any
complication.
Sorry.
D
I
think
this
would
be
a
process
and
like
it's
not
so
much
of
just
thinking
in
debt,
preparing
a
budget
and
then
that
going
to
to
vote
like
I
think
there
will
need
to
be
I
think
there
should
be
a
more
formal
process
of
like
you
know.
Budgets
are
submitted
at
this
date
and
then
there's
a
discussion
for
you
know
a
week
or
two
there's
a
call,
and
then
maybe
revisions
or
anything
like
that,
and
we
try
to
get
things
in
so
I.
D
Think
as
part
of
this,
we
also
want
to
introduce
some
process
to
how
these
budgets
are
processed
through
governance,
because
that's
actually,
where
the
inside,
like
the
the
input
the
valuable
feedback
can
come
through,
is
when
those
discussions
are
are
happening
and
yeah
and
so
I
think
we
in
terms
of
like
how
this
would
work
going
forward.
I
think
that
the
timeline
really
is.
Can
we
get
this
a
structure,
an
overall
process
and
structure
approved
by
Deep
stock
governance
and
start
to
implement
it,
for
you
know
things
starting
January?
D
First,
for
six
months,
the
only
thing
I
was
like
thinking
about
is
whether
it
makes
sense
to
have
some
things
be
a
little
staggered.
So
it's
like
not
like
we're
always
doing
budget
things
in
June
and
December
for
all
squads.
Maybe
we
have
half
the
squad
start
then,
and
half
the
Squad
Squad
elsewhere,
I'm,
not
sure.
If
that
makes
it
easier,
Russ
says,
stagger
yeah.
B
Yeah
like
process
starting
in
the
new
year
makes
of
course,
a
lot
of
sense
to
me
and
maybe
like
a
monthly
kind
of
cadence.
You
know
swapper
dxgov
kind
of
operations,
side
of
things.
E
Wouldn't
it
be
better
to
just
do
it
together,
I
mean
for
for
DX
Dows
benefit.
If
you
stagger
it,
swapper
goes
first
and
then
gets
an
approval
and
then
DX
goes
next
and
then
they
don't
have
they
don't
get
enough
budget
because
for
whatever
reasons
and
the
market
has
changed
or
don't
you
think
it's
better
if
DX,
that's
that's
the
way.
Heaven's
normal
company
is
right.
B
Yeah
I
think
that's
two
things
to
consider
in
that
front
and
I
I
generally
agree:
I,
think
voter
apathy
and
voter
attention
is
difficult
and
I
think
the
the
worst
case
outcome
of
this
process
is
implementing
all
this
process.
B
B
Yeah
bureaucracy
would
be
the
issue.
Yeah
I
guess
that's
kind
of
like
the
main
thing.
I
think
it's
also.
We
want
this
to
be
like
a
living
breathing
I
mean,
of
course
we
are
a
living
breathing
organization
and
I.
B
Think
things
are
a
little
bit
more
Dynamic
I
agree
that
starting
things
where
some
project
starts,
you
know
get
their
budget
and
then
next
month
another
one
I
think
the
start
of
that
might
be
a
bit
Rocky
like
you
just
described,
but
I,
think
long
term
in
every
budget
Beyond
this
first
one
I
actually
see
it
as
a
more
Dynamic
process,
and
we
can
kind
of
think
you
know.
Okay,
what
are
we
doing?
How
can
we
fit
things
into
this
That's?
My
kind
of
perception,
I.
E
A
A
Yeah,
as
Chris
said,
this
is
something
that
will
take
some
time,
maybe
a
couple
of
months,
if
we're
efficient,
it's
great,
that
it
was
posted
just
last
night
and
and
so
many
people
already
commented
on
it
and
I
love,
it
seems
like
we'll
love,
venki's
questions
trades
on
point
that
that
can
help
us
further
pan
out
this
structure
it
properly
and
move
on,
as
these
would
probably
be
the
guiding
tenets
for
how
the
Dao
would
operate
and-
and
it's
very
important
that
everybody
raises
any
concerns
they
got
and
we
iron
them
out.
A
If,
if
you
need
to
take
another
read
of
edit
like
over
the
weekend,
it
it's
a
complex
thing,
I
think
of
all
the
questions
that
may
rise
put
them
on
on
the
dial
talk
and,
let's
all
discuss,
because
otherwise
it's
it's
gonna,
be
it's
going
to
take
longer,
and-
and
it's
not
like
for
just
Chris
or
Keenan,
to
bother
with
this
and
for
us
to
say
three
months
down
the
line.
We
don't
like
it
we.
Why
did
we
do
it
that
way
like
this?
A
Is
your
chance
to
chime
in
and
and
say
whatever
you
got
to
say
and
if
you
feel
like
something
needs
to
be
included,
you
know
this
is
the
time
to
to
do
it.
So
next
we
got
this.
B
Super
quick,
yeah,
Nathan
programming
is
insane
on
you
today,
I'm,
not
sure
where
this
radio
man
is
coming
from,
but
we
do
have
to
quickly
talk
about
the
vision
and
Direction
side
of
things.
Then
thank
you
kind
of
mentioned.
I
didn't
get
to
them.
Quite
yet,
if
that's
okay
with
you.
B
Excellent
yeah,
so
in
the
vision
and
Direction
side
of
things,
sorry
for
ruining
the
programming
here,
there's
kind
of
two
key
actionable
Direction
focused
things
to
kind
of
put
through
in
phase
two,
the
first
of
which
is
just
broad
over
our
vision
and
that's
you
know:
True
North
has
kind
of
become
a
little
bit
of
a
meme,
but
that's
really
what
it
is.
B
So
the
question
is:
should
be
Excel
formally
established.
It's
true
north
or
vision
statement
as
enable
Community,
Freedom
and
I
think.
The
context
I
put
here
is
quite
valuable
in
understanding.
Why
we
should
do
this.
I
say
DXL
hasn't
had
a
formal
Vision,
maybe
ever,
although
some
have
tried
it's
more
clear
now
than
ever,
that
it's
required
to
look
back
upon
and
guide
our
decision
making
enable
Community,
Freedom
kind
of
points
to
our
approach
of
solving
problems
in
Dao's
as
a
Dao.
B
You
know
Dao
first
organization,
I,
think
we're
here,
because
we
strongly
believe
Dao's
are
the
future
of
coordination,
we're
kind
of
putting
in
the
effort
to
create
that
freedom
for
ourselves,
and
you
could
very
easily
wager
that
our
overarching
goal
is
to
create
that
freedom
for
all
online
communities,
in
the
sense
that
we
are
building
for
ourselves
first
and
know
how
to
guide
that
process
to
create
freedom
to
communities
kind
of
globally.
B
We
want
to
onboard
all
communities
into
kind
of
doubt
format,
so
this
is
a
good
conversation
we
had
at
The
Retreat.
Actually
Skye
was
mentioning
that
all
GitHub
repos
will
be
Dao's
in
like
five
years.
You
know
stuff
like
that.
It's
like
how
can
we
provide
autonomy
to
these
kind
of
organizations?
Is
the
the
fun
kind
of
overworking
vision?
B
And
this
is
the
last
contextual
piece
I
say
the
statement
should
be
a
vague
at
powerful,
overarching
narrative
that
we
all
connect
with,
whereas
a
mission
statement
would
articulate
an
approach
to
solving
it,
which
I
interpret
as
a.
D
B
Action
that
phase
three
is
understanding.
Okay,
what
exactly
are
we
doing
to
enable
Community,
Freedom
right
and,
of
course,
we're
pointing
to
that
direction
here
in
the
next
segment,
which
I'll
talk
about,
but
I
think
discovering
exactly
what
that
is
and
putting
the
other
mission
statements
will
be
kind
of
will
be
a
key
action
of
phase
three
in
my
eyes,
and
that
leads
me
to
the
last
voted
piece.
Where
are
we
going?
B
B
This
is
all
surrounding
the
idea
of,
and
this
has
been
an
idea
for
some
time.
It's
not
a
new
idea,
but
dxf
should
be
building
products
that
exist
in
some
kind
of
pipeline.
Of
course,
Suite
of
products
has
been
kind
of
termed
dog
food
over
the
last
while
and
really
I.
B
Think
the
the
presentation
does
this
more
Justice
than
this
form
thread,
but
the
idea
is
to
create
a
suite
of
products
that
are
fully
interconnected
kind
of
revolving
around
our
governance
base,
and
so
I
described
like
this.
Really
creates
a
incredible
moat,
especially
in
an
open
source
kind
of
way,
because
we've
seen
discussions
in
the
past
of
like
oh,
maybe
we
should
sorry
we've
seen
some
people
come
in
and
say
like.
Maybe
we
should
close
source.
So
we
can.
We
can
have
a
moat
I,
don't
think
that's
the
approach.
B
The
approach
instead
is
to
provide
something
that
is
so
great
and
interconnected
within
its
own
ecosystem,
that,
of
course,
you
could
come
and
Fork
any
individual
piece
or
even
the
whole
pie,
but
that
would
take
away
from
this
ecosystem
that
we've
created
in
the
communities
that
are
built
around
it.
So
the
idea
is
kind
of
to
capture
communities
that
want
to
decentralize
or
projects
that
want
to
launch
and
lock
them
into
this
ecosystem
by
say
you
come
and
launch
a
token
natively
in
that
kind
of
token
race
contract.
B
A
portion
of
that
is
locked
immediately
into
swapper.
As
you
know,
permanent
LP
you
get
a
dow
directly
on
Davi.
You
get
kind
of
social
tools.
Let
me
bring
up
the
the
presentation
here.
I
was
going
to
share
in
the
chat,
I
guess
maybe
I'll
share
my
screen,
quick.
B
B
Yeah,
so,
let's
quickly,
this
is
kind
of
a
good
slide.
I
wish
I
could
share
just
a
photo
in
the
chat,
but
this
is
kind
of
like
based
on
our
current
initiatives
and
what
we
kind
of
have
now.
What
does
this?
Like?
Mothership,
you
know,
Flagship
products,
look
like
and
I.
Imagine
it
as
this.
You
know,
I
want
the
products
to
exist
in
their
own
capacities.
For
example,
if
we
have
a
tight
carrot,
integration
with
this
Flagship
product,
carrot
should
still
exist.
B
On
its
own
I
mean
its
contracts
still
exists.
There's
no
reason
for
it
not
to
have
its
own
front
end
would
be
a
bit
silly,
but
instead
kind
of
DX
style.
Focusing
its
efforts
on
this
ecosystem
makes
a
lot
of
sense
to
me.
So
I'm
not
sure
you
can
see
my
mouse
in
this
screen
share,
but
kind
of
taking
this
pipeline
as
Davi.
Being
this
like
core
underlying
piece
of
the
dxt
puzzle.
B
Of
course,
we
have
like
instant
Treasury
and
governance
when
you
launch
token
or
companies
looking
decentralize,
they
onboard
directly
into
our
governance
framework,
may
need
Aqua
for
kind
of
equity
and
then
like
Integrations,
directly
into
governance
of
like
okay,
maybe
there's
some
fun
things.
We
can
do
to
get
some
fees
and
kind
of
provide
a
service
like,
for
example,
documentation
hosting
using
docs.it.
B
Maybe
we
have
some
kind
of
native
mixing
for
dads
using
mix
built-in
gas,
social
layer
Etc
and
it's
kind
of
just.
How
do
we
build
around
create
an
experience
lock,
people
into
it
with
permanent
liquidity
and,
of
course,
no
one's
truly
locked,
but
if
you're
participating
in
the
ecosystem,
there's
no
reason
to
want
to
leave
right
so
example:
Cara
can
offer
conditional
sale
conditions
where
you
know
nfts
are
minted
when
certain
Milestones
are
reached
or
something
along
those
lines.
B
D
B
And
kind
of
expand
that
pipeline
I
think
is
very
important
to
Future
decision
making
and
kind
of
product
initiatives.
In
my
eyes,
that's
like
the
the
very
Bare
Bones
interpretation
of
it,
of
course,
DX
style
being
here.
B
The
kind
of
focus
to
this
was
to
see
like
where
we
can
be
profitable,
because
this
is
something
that
I've
talked
about
for
a
while,
but
I
don't
know
if
Davi
itself
can
be
a
profitable
tool
in
the
sense
that
governance,
probably
shouldn't
be
a
a
service
that
is
paid
for
I,
don't
think
it's
scalable
in
the
sense
that
it
might
not
catch
on
when
there's
so
many
free
governance
Frameworks.
B
B
You
know
you
know:
some
fun
quotes
like
that,
so
it's
instead
kind
of
locking
into
this
ecosystem
and
pointing
directly
to
things
to
siphon
fees
in
the
way
that,
like
we,
don't
become
profitable,
because
Davi
has
some
kind
of
like
governance,
not
governance
as
a
service,
but
you're
not
paying
for
your
governance
base
on
Davi.
B
Instead,
you
are
launching
a
token
and
having
liquidity
directly
through
swapper,
you
know,
native
interconnectivity
of
maybe
daus
can
directly
interact
with
the
swapper
contracts
to
do
swaps
that
goes
to
the
Eco
router
fun
stuff,
like
that
is
kind
of
the
idea
for
the
Baseline.
E
Having
done
some
sort
of
pre-sale
activity
over
guilds
to
figure
out,
if
there
are
more
projects
that
wants
to
that
wants
to
create
guilds
with
Davi
and
yeah
I
mean
how
do
they
feel
about
paying
fees
for
every
vote
and
also
that
it
is
going
to
be
token
based
yeah?
Have
you
done
some
sort
of
business
validation
for
that.
B
I'm,
sorry,
can
you
repeat
that
I
Got
a
notification
in
the
first
step,
you
said
guilds
and
like
yeah.
E
I
mean
I'm
just
curious
if
we
did
some
sort
of
business
validation
as
to
how
much
Davi
will
be
adopted
by
other
projects
in
the
ecosystem,
because
this
is
this
is
going
to
be
all
on
chain
so,
which
means
like
Yeah
The
Waters
have
to
pay
fees.
Are
we
going
to
include
by
economy
where
we
pay
for
for
fees
yeah
exactly
I
mean.
Do
we
have
some
kind
of
launch
Partners
outside
of
the
DX
dial
products.
D
Yeah
and
maybe
I'm
Ross
could
speak
to
this,
but
I
mean
I.
Think
Davi
is
a
stand
in
for
a
core
governance
structure
and
I.
Think
DX
Dao
should
be.
Is
the
core
user
of
that
governance,
structure
and
I?
Don't
really
think
that's
fully
finished
until
Davi
has
governance,
2.0
and
DX
Dao
is
running
on
it.
D
So
I
think
the
guilds
right
now
are
a
piece
of
that
and
you
can
obviously
have
like
a
rep
based
model
on
that,
but
I
think,
like
long
term
what
you're
building
for
it's,
both
DX,
Dao
and
servicing
DX
style,
but
then
also
using
that
model
to
service
others,
and
so
like
I,
wouldn't
think
it
would
just
be
like
our
Guild's
gonna
be
adopted
next
year
or
something.
C
Yeah
just
to
add
on
to
that,
like
we
know,
many
people
here
have
had
conversations
over
last
year
and
these
are
hypothetical
conversations
because
we
don't
have
anything
to
show.
But
when
you,
when
you
explain
the
idea
of
governance
2.0
and
why
it's
important
and
why
dicks
Dow
needs
it.
And
then,
if
you
have
that
conversation
with
people
in
the
space
they're
like?
Oh,
that's,
really
interesting.
That's
a
new
thing
compared
to
liquid
token
governance
and
that
that
that
end
thing
is
governance.
2.0,
that's
actually
the
thing
that
DX
Dow
needs.
C
That's
the
thing
that
DX
Dao
has
was,
is
building
and
was
supposed
to
be
building
this
entire
time
that
governance
2.0
a
combination
of
liquid
token
governance
with
non-transferable
token
governance
and
combining
it
in
some
way,
hopefully
in
a
super
flexible
way
where
anyone
can
change
it
to
how
they
want.
Is
the
interesting
thing
that
at
the
end
of
the
day,
when
you
explain
that
to
people
already
they're
like?
Oh,
that's
really
interesting.
C
We
very
rarely
have
ever
just
explained
Davi
or
erc20
guilds
to
people,
because
that's
like
a
step
along
the
way,
but
like
that's
as
we
know,
like
erc20
token
voting
on
mainnet
ethereum
is
not
that
already
exists
right,
like
it's,
not
very
unique.
It's
the
governance!
2.0
thing,
it's
the
the
unique
thing
that
we've
already
we've
been
talking
about
for
two
years
now,
and
people
are
interested
in
the
the
risk.
Is
that
we're
too
late
right
that
by
the
time
that
comes
out
which
we're
building
for
ourselves
by
the
time
that
comes
out?
C
Maybe
there's
a
lot
of
other
solutions
that
that
accomplish
something
like
governance,
2.0
and
you
know,
ever
since
the
soul
bound
token
launched
and
everyone's
talking
about,
like
reputational
based
governance
in
other
ways
and
bicameral
systems
like
optimisms
using
lots
of
people
are
experimenting
in
this
space,
and
so
there
are
it's
a
competitive
environment,
and
so
it's
very
hard
to
know
like
the
fact
that
we
can't
actually
use
it
ourselves
or
show
anyone
what
we're
talking
about.
We
just
speak
about
it.
Hypothetically
people
are
like
yeah.
C
Oh,
that
sounds
awesome
like
when
you
explain
governance
2.0
to
pretty
much
everyone
in
the
space.
That
knows
anything
about
governance.
They're
like
that
sounds
really
interesting,
even
like
the
biggest
investors
in
Brave.
Also
think
that
sounds
really
interesting.
Like
you
can
sell
it,
you
can
explain
it
really
well,
but
whether
or
not
people
can
use
it.
You
know
you
know
Copenhagen
Flames,
we're
also
supposed
to
use
some
of
our
governance
stuff
and
we
never
got
to.
C
We
never
got
to
try
but
like
whether
or
not
this
like
doing
all
this
research
and
knowing
if
people
are
interested
in
it
before
we
build
it
in
terms
of
governance,
we
never.
We
never
even
had
that
conversation.
We're
building
this
thing,
because
DX
Dow
needs
governance
2.0,
like
that's
the
reason
we're
now
building
it,
whether
or
not
and
the
assumption
that
we're
making
is
if
DX
Dao
needs
it,
and
it's
the
only
solution
that
we
actually
will
solve
our
needs.
C
We
think
that
other
people
would
probably
also
get
value
of
it
out
of
it,
but
all
we
can
do
is
hypothetically
talk
about
it
and
when
we've
done
that
in
the
past
about
governance,
2.0
people
seem
interested
in
it,
but
the
question
is
yeah:
is
it?
Is
it
still
relevant
to
people
we've
been
talking
about
it
for
two
years
to
people?
Is
it
still
relevant?
Is
the
question.
E
Yeah
I
mean
my
my
only
reason
why
I
was
asking
was
that
I
totally
understand
the
reason
of
government
2.0
governance
2.0,
but
since
we
are
going
to
be
using
that
as
the
flagship
product
and
then
every
other
budgetary
discussions
and
the
Investments
or
everything
would
be
hinged
upon
the
success
of
this
I
am
a
little
bit
a
little
bit
skeptical
towards
yeah.
Should
we
should
we
have
a
flagship
product
like
that.
C
Yeah,
that's
a
good
question
because,
because
these
are
building
blocks
like
like,
if
you
took
kenan's
graphic
with
all
those
different
things
as
we
talked
about
the
retreat,
you
could
actually
replace
different
parts
of
that
with
products
that
already
exists
in
the
space.
So
you
could
actually
you
could
actually
have.
You
know,
carrot
and
swapper
tied
together
and
it
could
actually
in
the
middle
instead
of
Davi,
someone
could
use
a
NOS
is
safe.
Now,
like
you,
can
replace,
because
these
are
all
interoperable.
C
You
could
actually
build
an
infrastructure
like
that
with
products
that
already
exist
in
this
space
or
if
someone
already
has
one
of
the
things
like,
if
balancer
already
has
balancer,
they
could,
but
they
actually
want
to
use
Davi
and
carrot,
they
could
build,
they
could
use
balancer
with
Davi
and
carrot.
They
don't
have
to
use
swapper.
So
that's
always
going
to
be
the
option
of
communities
to
take
certain
parts
of
the
of
the
suite
and
and
replace
different
parts
of
the
suite.
B
B
You
made
a
good
point
about
this
at
The
Retreat,
if
I
recall
correctly,
but
I
mean
if
we
believe
in
Taos
and
we
believe
in
the
future,
and
that
we
have
a
system
that
is
unique
and
provides
something
novel,
and
we
can
kind
of
tie
it
into
this
ecosystem
of
products
that
we
already
are
building.
It
seems
like
a
reasonable
debt
to
make
as
an
organization
in
my
eyes.
D
D
Advantage
is
that
it
knows
what
Dao's
need
and
because
it
is
a
Dao
and
I
think
just
the
only
way
to
take
advantage
of
that
is
by
building
them
there
for
like
Ford,
Excel,
four
dowels,
and
then
that
is
a
way
to
inspire
the
types
of
products
and
product
Direction.
They
should
go
in.
B
Cool
and
the
last
thing
I
want
to
highlight
here
for
phase
three
is
kind
of
the
individual
Squad
actions
that
I
presented
at
The,
Retreat,
I
guess
I
can
I
could
share
my
screen
again,
but
I
don't
want
to
hold
this
hostage
any
further
since
I.
Imagine
that
a
lot
of
these
focuses
will
be
for
phase
three
specifically
but
I
think
contextualizing
a
lot
of
what
we're
talking
about
here,
kind
of
and
how
that
works
going
forward
and
a
good
example.
B
I
put
here
is
kind
of
my
chat
about
dxgov
as
kind
of
some
bullet
points,
and
these
are
of
course
opinionated
not
with
Dao
has
ratified
in
any
capacity
but
just
kind
of
like
what
can
we
can
kind
of
look
to
discuss
over
these
next
couple
of
months?
I
say,
ascertain
and
Governor.
Stupid
now
is
prior
to
number
one
continuing
forward
on
that
front,
and
then,
of
course,
once
the
governance
stage
of
the
pipeline
is
operable
pivoting
Focus
to
the
social
element
of
Dao's.
B
How
can
we
adopt
that
Mantra
while
retaining
open
source
and
decentralized
values
in
the
sense
that,
like
iMessage,
isn't
an
insane
product?
It's
kind
of
just
Wi-Fi
texting
right,
it's
nothing
crazy,
but
it
does
provide
this
moat
where
it's
like.
Okay,
why
would
I
not
want
to
be
in
this
ecosystem,
especially
if
you're
already
inside
of
it,
of
course,
not
looking
to
fight
with
any
Android
people
here
in
the
chat.
E
B
And
to
be
clear,
it's
not
what
we're
building
now
this
is
like
looking
forward
and
where
Dobby
and
the
government's
team
can
can
point
their
attention
at
like
the
social
element
of
dows
is
where
that
lies.
In
my
opinion,
like
what
can
we
add
as
like,
even
just
a
simple
ease
of
use
to
the
pipeline
of
the
creation
of
a
Dao
or
deployment
of
a
Dao,
that
kind
of
operates
in
the
same
way,
I
mean
like
I.
B
Don't
imagine
it's
it's
anything
that
we
have
right
now,
that
is
this
iMessage
or
like
you
can't
go
anywhere
else,
but
very,
very
simple,
yet
High
ease
of
use
like
high
value
things
that
we
can
integrate
to
our
pipeline
that
work
in
our
Pipeline
and
not
anywhere
else
right,
I,
don't
know
if
I
have
the
answer
to
what
that
is
exactly
I.
Imagine
this
kind
of
Native
social
kind
of
elements
to
Dao's
and
how
they
can
interconnect
is
kind
of
how
that
works
like
okay.
B
B
But
that's
my
thought,
but
yeah
I
I
agree.
It's
like
like,
of
course
Replacements
for
the
things
we
have
right
now
makes
sense,
but
it's
more
like
Forward
Thinking
anyways.
B
On
this
topic
either
because
I
think
it's
like
phase
three
we'll
really
dive
into
like
what
this
looks
like
and
and
how
we
can
move
forward,
it's
more
so
setting
the
direction
now.
I
just
want
to
highlight
that
yeah
I
think
that's
kind
of
the
key
topics.
I
know
here
at
the
bottom,
like
a
massive.
Thank
you
to
everyone,
everyone
that
participated
at
The,
Retreat
or
even
tried
to
do
their
best
to
tune
in
the
discussions
were
super
super
great
quality,
healthy
and
I.
B
Think
we
really
moved
in
the
direction
where
we're
we're
we're
starting
to
understand
what
we
are
and
what
we
want
to
do,
and
yeah
I'm
super
happy
with
where
we
are,
if
I've
missed
anything
or
there's
any
topics
that
should
be
added
to
this,
please
feel
free
to
add
them
anyone's,
of
course,
willing
to
anyone
is
able
to
make
these
these
posts
or
signal
proposals,
so
anything
I've,
missed
or
any
disagreeances.
Please
share
and
I
think
like
the
discussion.
B
Elements
like
this
call
specifically
is
one
of
the
the
key.
You
know
off-chain
consensus
collection
mechanisms,
of
course,
there's
these
polls
with
the
kind
of
act
as
forcing
functions,
really
someone
like
venki
coming
in
with
all
of
these
questions,
especially
as
someone
that
was
outside
the
retreat
and
allowing
everyone
to
talk
about
them
and
kind
of
figure
out.
Okay.
What
are
these?
You
know
what
what
is
going
on
here?
What
are
the
intricacies
of
it?
B
I
think
that's
kind
of
where
we
reach
a
mutual
understanding
of
them
and,
of
course,
if
any
changes
need
to
be
made,
that's
when
they
can
be
made
yeah
more
questions,
please
more
questions.
Thank
you.
Questions
are
super
valuable,
I.
Think
I,
guess
considering
this
I'm,
not
sure
what
you're
thinking
Chris,
but
the
original
deadline
for
the
submission
of
the
phase
two
proposal
was
October
31st,
that
is
Monday
I.
B
Think
because
of
travel,
I
was
a
bit
sick
and
this
is
out
a
day
or
two
later
than
I
wanted
it
to
be
I'm
thinking.
It
makes
sense
to
defer
the
submission
date
until
after
the
governance
call
at
minimum
next
week.
I'm
not
sure,
if
there's
any
opinions
on
that,
but
I
think
of
course,
this
period
of
time
is
very
valuable
and
it
shouldn't
go
to
a
signal
proposal
after
only
being
deliberated
for
a
couple
of
days
and,
of
course,
a
couple
of
those
days
being
a
weekend.
A
Course,
thanks,
Keenan
I
I've
been
listening
like
from
kind
of
a
third-party
standpoint
here
and
finding
ourselves
in
some
kind
of
groups
and
like
asking
each
other.
What
are
you
going
to
do
about
that?
It's
kind
of
a
weird
dynamic
like
why
should
Ross
have
to
answer
about
what
the
purpose
or
future
strategy
of
of
the
guild
should
be.
Yes,
he's
kind
of
like
the
team
lead,
but
any
one
of
us
is
equally
responsible
and
like
if
we
don't
take
part
along
the
way.
A
We
cannot
just
wait
and
then
ask
Ros:
what's
your
strategy
right?
So
it's
like
what
is
our
strategy
and
at
The
Retreat?
We
were
talking
about
what
the
mission
of
the
Dao
should
be
when
we
Face
the
world,
but
like
what
is
also
our
mission
as
a
Dao
within
ourselves
as
a
collective
and
I.
Think
the
the
the
word
should
be
connections,
connections
on
on
a
social
level
between
teams
and
members
and,
on
the
other
hand,
connection
on
a
technical
level
between
the
products
and
instead
of
like
thinking
of
a
flagship
product.
A
Let's
just
talk
about
interoperability
and
connections,
let's
connect
the
products
and
and
also
there
are
valid
points
you
know
people
are
raising
on
the
call
like
what
what's
kind
of
like
the
launch
strategy.
For
example,
if
we
take
nimi,
it's
easy
to
onboard
tens
of
thousands
of
people
with
name,
so
we
could
probably
start
with
Mimi,
and
then
we
could.
A
Of
course
we
don't
have
aqua,
but
it
would
have
been
cool
to
have
aqua
and
then
Aqua
could
be
incorporated
with
carrot
and
then
all
of
that
plays
in
with
swapper
and
so
and
and
when
you
think
about
it,
all
these
parts
working
together,
sound
amazing
and
you
can't
say,
whichever
is
like
the
main
part
or
the
pilot
or
Flagship.
It's
all
about
Connections.
A
So,
but
we,
we
all
have
to
start
with
the
social
connections,
feel
like
a
team
again,
because
we
don't
feel
much
like
a
team.
We
we
kind
of
like
these
individuals
and
at
at
times
we
clash
with
each
other.
We
should
connect,
feel
like
a
team
work
together
and
then
also
create
these
connections
between
the
products
as
well
on
a
technical
level.
B
And
maybe
I'll
add
to
that
quickly.
Thank
you.
Nathan
I
agree
like
strongly
agree
with
everything
you're
saying,
I.
Think
that's
what
you're
describing
really
isn't
that
far
disconnected
from
this
idea
of
a
flagship
product
in
the
sense
that,
like
what
are
we
trying
to
do
and
how
do
we
coordinate
and
I
just
see?
Venky's
comment
like
Flagship
kind
of
threw
me
off
guard
because
Flagship
means
all
hands
in
this
product.
You
know
in
this
previous
startup
and
I.
B
Think
my
actual
interpretation
of
this
is
that
that
is
something
that
we
we
want.
We
want
to
solve
a
goal
as
an
organization
we
want
to
stop
becoming
I,
guess
heroes
in
the
sense
that
the
squads
have
individual
focuses
that
are
disconnected
from
this
overarching,
Vision
and
I.
B
Think
of
course,
squads
still
exist
and
still
interconnect
outside
of
this
Flagship
product,
but
my
interpretation
is
that
this
is
what
DX
now
wants
to
build,
not
only
for
itself
yeah,
not
necessarily
all
hands
on
a
product,
but
all
hands
on
a
vision
makes
a
lot
of
sense
and
I,
don't
think
it
inhibits
our
limits
in
any
way.
B
Our
focus
is
these
Connections.
In
the
sense
that
like
if
we're
working
on
this
Flagship
product,
which
I
kind
of
interpret,
of
course
being
built
around
Davi,
may
be
led
by
the
Davi
team,
I
think
the
access
still
has
plenty
of
room
to
incubate,
even
outside
of
anything
relevant
to
this
pipeline.
For
example,
you
know
if
we
have
a
product
idea
that
just
makes
sense
and
can't
fit
in
this
pipeline.
It
doesn't
mean
that
we
shouldn't
focus
on
it,
but
instead
curating
this
kind
of
vision
and
Direction.
B
And
of
course,
when
we're
talking
about
this
Flagship
having
all
squads
working
and
thinking
on
it.
Of
course,
all
hands
on
deck
is
actually
my
kind
of
interpretation,
I.
Think
it's
important
structurally
and
not
something
that
we've
had
before.
B
A
No,
it
it's
been
amazing
and
I
I'm,
just
I,
don't
know
why.
What
the
reason
is
why
we
don't
have
many
more
people
in
this
call,
but
like
I
wish
I
could
see
like
at
least
30
people
on
this
call
and
and
with
just
a
dozen
of
us,
I
I
think
a
lot
of
them
are
still
traveling
and
it's
good
we're
recording.
A
So
if
they
have
the
time
they
could
listen
to
it,
but
we
should
be
having
more
conversations
like
this,
like
it's
almost
like
a
virtual
retreat
and
we've
been
saying
this
time
and
time
again,
like
I
I
know
the
the
structure
of
the
calls
is
tiring
and,
and
so
many
calls
we
have
like.
We,
each
of
us
has
like
two
or
three
calls
a
day
outside
of
the
regular
calls
and
it's
it's
tiring
but
like
we
could
easily
have
a
call
like
this.
A
Whenever
we
want
it,
I'm
not
saying
we
should
have
it
and
and
proposing
anything,
but
we
could
literally
have
a
call
like
this
whenever
we
wanted
and
and
it's
as
easy
as
this,
the
the
more
we
talk
about
it,
the
the
more
the
idea
would
crystallize
in
our
heads
how
we
should
move
forward
and
I
think
we'll.
We
will
end
up
agreeing
on
a
lot
of
things
and
it
just
gets
easier.
A
C
Yeah,
we
can
continue
this,
but
yeah
yeah.
A
B
Right
yeah,
as
I
say,
Monday
definitely
makes
sense
for
some
kind
of
dialogue.
Maybe
some
additional,
like
form
questions
or
like
comments
over
the
weekend
to
kind
of
reflect
upon
on
that
Monday
call
and
I
guess
really.
The
take
away
from
that
call
will
determine
whether
or
not
we
need
to
push
back
to
the
governance
call
which
of
course,
would
be
the
the
more
formalized
one.
But
we
can
chat
about
that
next
week.
I
think.
C
Yeah
I
I
see
one
conflict
where
the
the
phase
two
Keenan,
with
like
these
budget
numbers,
which
are
assuming
DX
dial,
is
gonna
work.
The
way
it's
been
working
and
or
is
it
organized
the
way
it's
been
organized,
but
if
you
actually
alter
the
entire
system
into
like
full-on,
their
own
budgets
for
different
squads
and
things
like
the
swapper
squad
might
say
over
the
next
six
months.
C
We
need
two
million
dollars
because
we're
gonna
hire
a
bunch
of
people,
we're
going
to
hire
some
senior
devs
like
right
away
that
that
destroys
the
the
established
budget
in
the
phase.
One
phase
two
restructuring
like
it,
hasn't
it's
totally
different
model,
so
they
don't
go
together.
So
by
passing
phase
two
these
questions
and
then
restructuring
into
Squad
accountability.
And
then
the
squads
have
to
come
up
with
their
own
budgets.
B
So
I
think
there's
two
key
ways
to
perceive
this.
First
of
all,
the
reason
we're
not
making
any
formalized
action-based
decisions
in
this
and
instead
are
setting
a
direction
is
that
phase
three
is
entirely
surrounding
the
execution
of
those
larger
ideas
and
how
we
restructure.
B
So,
like
you
said,
maybe
the
the
budget
is
impacted
in
a
certain
kind
of
way
relative
to
the
phase
one
proposal,
but
the
important
and
key
point
of
phase
three
is
the
execution
of
what
we
have
learned
and
kind
of
solidified
in
phase
two.
If
we
can
all
unanimously
agree,
for
example,
to
integrate
a
six
month
budgetary
cycle
and
give
squads
more
autonomy-
and
you
know
run
through
the
priorities,
board
and
kind
of
have
this
Flagship
focus
and
DXL
underlying
priority.
B
That's
all
super
important
I,
think
that
guides
the
decision
making
and
those
Squad
budgets
and
I
think
the
passage
of
this
doesn't
implicate
the
creation
of
a
squad
budget,
but
instead
the
execution
of
phase
three.
What
exactly
we
want
to
do
and
how
we
capitalize
on
it
is
how
that's
guided
so
I
I
agree
with
what
you're
saying
but
I
think
it's
a
it's.
Almost
a
different
discussion
in
my
eyes
and
it's
kind
of
accounted
for
in
the
original
signal
proposal.
C
Yeah
I
mean
okay,
it
says
in
phase
two
there's
no
budget
implication,
but
the
budget
implication
was
passed
in
Phase
One
and
like
that
established
numbers.
And
now,
if
we
change
things,
those
numbers
mean
nothing.
I.
D
I,
don't
really
follow
Sky,
it
seems
like
you're
really
nitpicking
here.
I
mean
we're
gonna
go
through
a
budgetary
process
where,
if
swapper
wants
to
request
two
million
dollars,
they
can
request
two
million
dollars
and
they'll
have
to
justify
it
and
there
will
be
a
conversation
about
it.
I
think
signaling
future
Direction
and
how
things
like
should
we
can
try
to
operate?
Doesn't
handcuff
you
in
the
future
on
being
able
to
operate
and
I?
Don't
really
think
the
phase
one?
C
I'm
saying
what
were
the
yeah
if
we're
changing
the
way
the
the
system's
working,
putting
a
putting
some
numbers
around
the
older
system
and
and
fitting
a
budget
that
is
is
like
is
Miss
is
confusing,
because
it's
two
different
systems.
D
B
Yeah
and
I
think
there's
also
some
confusion
in
the
idea
of
a
budget
impact
and
I
will
just
reiterate
that
phase
one
slash
the
initial
proposal
highlighted
budgetary
impact,
but
didn't
use
it
as
a
Crux
of
like
okay.
This
is
what
we're
doing
we're
trying
to
move
the
budget
from
you
know,
four
to
two
point:
five
million
specifically
and
I:
don't
think
that
was
what
was
passed
on
chain.
B
A
Interesting
yeah
yeah,
it
seems
like
we're
all
interpreting
it
in
in
different
ways.
For
me,
it
was
straightforward:
I
wasn't
confused
that
the
way
I
interpreted
it,
and
maybe
it's
not
the
right
one,
but
it
was
like
what
we
passed
in
in
phase.
A
One
was
a
certain
budget
for
the
Dao
and
each
Squad,
and
even
though
we're
doing
some
restructuring
in
phase
two,
it
will
be
working
within
the
budget
restrictions
from
phase
one
and
like
I,
don't
have
issues
with
that
per
se,
but
like
that,
that's
how
I
thought
it
is
straightforward,
but
yeah.
Maybe
if,
if
different
people
have
questions,
wonder
how
it
actually
works,
we
could
work
on
the
verbiage.
You
know
like
documentation
to
make
it
clear
so
that
there's
no
confusion.
Yeah.
A
A
A
D
A
Yeah
make
sense
to
have
it
like
public
documented,
so
yeah.
In
that
case,
we
urge
everyone
to
please
comment
if
they
have
any
questions,
because
if,
if
you
don't
raise
any
questions
right
now
or
comment,
if
you
comment
later
on,
it's
actually
on
you,
you
know
you.
You
cannot
comment
later
on
Now's
the
Time
yeah,
so
good,
I,
I
hope
this
was
a
productive
call.
We
can
end
it
here,
we're
over
the
hour.
A
A
A
D
This
and
all
you've
kind
of
done
there,
yeah
I,
think
we
need
to
chat
about
what
it
what
happens
going
forward,
but
thank
you
so
I
guess
thank
you
for
your
service.
Thank.