►
From YouTube: DXproductstrategy Gathering [2022-09-09]:
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
A
's
Friday
strategy
call
September
9th.
Today
on
the
agenda.
We
got
our
first
of
a
series
of
DX
legal
assessments.
We
have
our
friend
Ashley
that
we've
actually
had
the
chance
to
even
meet
in
person
already
in
Paris.
A
Just
recently,
then
we're
gonna
chat,
TX,
Dallas,
decentralization
strategy
from
a
legal
perspective
and
also
the
and
on
look
on
to
the
like
a
U.S
status
of
the
organization
again
from
a
legal
perspective,
and
if
there's
any
time
left,
we
will
touch
on
the
latest
proposal
in
terms
of
refocus
and
restructuring
for
the
Dow
this
time
posted
by
Keenan.
B
Right
yeah,
it
was
a
pleasure
as
well
and
I
think
all
the
people
here
so
I
will
skip
it.
Is
there
anyone
here
yeah.
B
Okay,
yeah
I
I
really
apologize
because
there
was
some
construction
in
my
apartment
building,
so
I
had
to
come
out
for
the
call,
but.
A
Yeah
I
mean
when
you
speak,
you
kind
of
like
you
are
at
the
Forefront
and
we
don't
hear
the
noises
that
much
but
when,
when
you're
silent
and
they
take
the
stage
and
it's
a
bit
like
weird
but
yeah,
if
you
speak
into
the
mic,
it
should
be
all
right.
B
C
B
Headset
on
so
I
will
just
keep
talking
and
because
we've
got
a
lot
to
cover
today,
but
let
me
share
my
screen,
so
I
will
be
presenting
both
es
decentralization
strategy
and
also
the
US
legal
challenges.
A
B
Yeah,
and
so
the
agenda
will
be
I,
will
talk
about
the
U.S
legal
challenge
first
and
the
global
decentralization
strategy,
and
then
I
will
just
spend
a
few
minutes
on
the
key
takeaways
and
then
we'll
head
to
the
Q
A's.
The
reason
that
so
I
will
first
assign
the
U.S
legal
challenges,
but
because
of
my
interest
in
background,
I
come
from
a
US
legal
background,
but
also
having
worked
globally
and
also
with
the
extiles
vision.
I
really
think
that
tackling
the
global
decentralization
will
be
the
key
in
moving
DXL
forward.
B
So
hence
so
I
asked
for
additional,
like
whether
I'll
be
able
to
contribute
on
this
topic
as
well.
So
here
I
am
so
I
will
be
talking
about
two
subjects,
so
get
yourself
a
cup
of
coffee
or
tea
because
it
will
be
a
while,
but
I
will
try
to
make
it
as
engaging
as
possible.
But
also,
let
me
know
if
you
have
any
questions
along
the
way
and
so
first
for
the
U.S
legal
challenges.
B
I
will
first
talk
about
what
are
what
is
style,
dxl's
current
status
in
the
US,
and
also
the
intimate
risks
such
as
the
general
partnership
liability
and
the
talking
offerings,
and
also
tax
agencies.
As.
B
C
B
Important
about
DXL
is
really
this
vision
of
being
a
self-solving
identity
and
because
of
this
I,
think
a
lot
is.
How
does
DX
dial
can
how
can
I
stay
original
while
avoiding
and
minimizing
legal
risks,
especially.
B
Token
offerings
and
Taxation,
so
its
current
situation
right
now
is
that
it
is
an
incorporate
anywhere
in
the
world
and
it
has
contributors
as
LLCs
as
a
protection,
and
also
there
is
a
prioritization
of
cell
sovereignty.
So
essentially
it's
like
given
preference
and
its
Vision.
What
are
the
keywords
right
now?
So
the
first
key
ego
risk
is
really
the
general
partnership
liability,
as
we
know
that,
and
especially
so.
B
This
happened
when
I
was
interviewing
with
DX
Dao
and
the
first
case
of
its
client
regarding
general
partnership
actually
came
out
in
California
in
May
and
in
this
case
this
bzx
style.
They
were
sued
for
negligence
and
they
were
asked
to
compensate
crypto
theft
of
55
million,
and
this
actually
exposed
a
key
issue
in
the
US
about
whether
Dao
can
be
considered
a
general
partnership,
exposing
its
liabilities
to
joints
and
several
liability.
A
So,
can
you
try
to
like
zoom
in
a
little?
Is
it
possible.
B
Let's
just
do
it
this
way,
yeah,
and
so
so.
What
happened
so
with
bzx
style
is
that
it
is
even
though
it's
called
the
doubt,
but
most
of
members
are
located
in
California
and
it's
also
developed
by
a
us
developer
wrapped
as
LLCs,
and
in
this
case
it's
a
landmark
case
and
it's
first
of
its
kind.
B
So
the
jurisdiction
issue
will
likely
be
the
key
Contender
here
and
what
that
means
is
that
weather,
even
though
it
claims
to
be
a
doubt,
but
given
its
strong
presence
in
California,
does
California
Court
have
jurisdiction
over
this
case,
but
but
this
jurisdictional
issue
actually
exposed,
like
its
implication
for
DX
style,
actually
shows
that
it's
less
of
an
issue
for
DX
now.
Why
is
that?
Because
it's
really
hard
for
any
U.S
state
to
claim
jurisdiction
over
GX.
B
Now,
given
its
decentralization
at
the
moment,
for
example,
in
DX
style,
there
is
no
inquiry
if
there's
no
contributor
living
in
the
same
state
as
other
contributors
and
that
so,
basically
that
we
have
currents
residing
in
Tennessee
and
we
have
contributors
in
Texas
and
California,
but
there
is,
but
they
are
the
only
contributory
side
of
Industries.
A
B
Of
this,
and
also
this
decentralization
of
the
X
style,
any
U.S
states
is
unlikely
to
have
jurisdiction
over
DXL
and.
C
B
Basically,
is
that
if
you
look
at
where
the
contributors
are
located,
they're
really
lacks
this
critical
mass
of
U.S
contributors
in
one
state
or
there
is
there.
B
U.S
Center
in
one
state
and
also
there
is
this
genuine
shift
of
This
Global
decentralization
as
we
are
witnessing
of
having
a
lot
of
non-us
contributors
right
now
and
especially
leading
so
because
of
this
true
decentralization.
B
This
case
is
like
it
doesn't
really
apply
to
DX
style
and
actually
shows
that
DX
that
I
do
that's
likely
to
have
any
sort
of
stakehold
jurisdiction
and
for
the
U.S
court
is
that
we
do
have
some
key
U.S
contributors
in
the
US.
But
then,
given
the
numbers
of
other
non-us
key
contributors,
there
is
really
this
genuine
shift
away
from
the
US,
but
but
even
with
regard
to
all
these
risks
and
a
lot
of
people
that
really
consider
general
liability
as
this
biggest
risk
for
any
Incorporated
doubts.
B
I
would
say
that
these
risks
are
very
preemptive.
They
can
be
prevented
in
many
ways,
for
example,
the
key
issue
is
that
it's
not
that
dolls
are
afraid
of
being
sued.
It's
more
that
when
we
work
this
out
because
of
its
ownership
structure,
its
governance
protocol,
it's
less
likely
to
have
all
down
members
agreeing
on
any
sort
of
Compensation
Plan.
So
in
this
way
it's
actually
more
about
governance,
such
as
you
can
have
some
sort
of
governance
agreement
regarding
liability
claims
and
you
can
have.
B
You
can
have
some
risk
assessment
built
in
with
that
liability
claims.
For
example,
like
you
can
have
you
can
have
your
own
algorithm
or
you
can
have
your
own
protocol
on
how
to
assess
risk
in
terms
of
some.
B
If
someone
files
a
claim
against
you
and
then
you
can
also
have
a
protocol
regarding
the
amount
you
are
likely
to
have
like
you're
willing
to
compensate
and
to
avoid
any
sort
of
legal
disputes
and
and
also
the
treasury,
they
can
reserve
an
emergency
fund
or
any
font
that
can
like
that
can
be
dipped
into
in
case
some
claims
are
filed
and
after
the
governance
risk
assessment
and
voting
protocol,
and
then
the
form
can
be
released.
B
So
I
will
talk
more
about
having
this
as
one
of
the
recommendations,
but
I
think
it's
just
really
the
idea
that
this
is
contrary
to
what
what
else
are
thinking
regarding
general
liability,
because
given
DX
that
was
truly
Global
decentralized
structure,
they're
they're,
very
light
less
likely
to
have
any
sort
of
stakehold
jurisdiction,
and
even
if
there
could
be
some
liability
risks,
you
can
still
have
some
sort
of
agreement
built
in
place
beforehand.
B
To
avoid
this
and
moving
on
to
token
offerings
so
token
was
was
one
of
the
key
issues
for
a
lot
of
dials
in
the
past
few
years.
But
after
some
Court
rulings,
this
has
come
into
so
I
would
say
that
the
decision
or
the
conclusion
is
more
clear-
that
on
DXL
right
now
their
tokens
are
considered
utility
tokens
and
I
will
explain
why
why
this
is
the
case.
B
So
the
key
issue
is
that
are
the
Dow
tokens
offered
that
consider
security
subject
to
the
SEC
regulation
and
in
determining
whether
this
is
subject
to
a
cc
regulation
and
I'll
considered
Securities.
The
SEC
applies.
E
B
What
it
looks
like
is
whether
this
token
offering
is
considered
an
investment
of
money
in
a
common
Enterprise,
with
a
reasonable
expectation
process
to
be
derived
from
the
efforts
of
others
and
SEC
also
made
the
clear
distinction
between
utility
versus
security
token,
and
what
is
the
difference
is
that
security
token
is
more
viewed
as
a
financial
token.
So
that
is
the
one
that
satisfies
the
how
we
test
as
people
invest.
B
In
this
token,
with
the
expectation
that
this
will
rise
in
value
that
they're
able
to
make
some
profits
from
that
and
they're
also
expecting
it's
from
the
others.
So
the
third
parties
that
are
making
profits
for
them
and
for
the
utility
tokens
that
it
has
other
functions
other
than
the
financials,
pure
Financial
speculation.
For
example.
B
If
you
have
some
sort
of
voting
function
or
governance
function,
building
that
is
more
likely
to
be
used
as
a
utility
token
and
the
DXL
tokens.
Because
of
this
they
are
viewed
as
utility
tokens,
especially
afterwards.
After
the
offering
there
is
a
bifurcation
of
the
governance
and
the
financial
tokens,
and
this
further
bolts
through
the
claim
that
the.
B
Dx
dial
tokens
offers
they're
considering
this
performance
because
it
has
this
dominance,
function
built
into
it
and
also
because
the
people,
the
token
holders
of
these
tokens
of
the
DXL
tokens
they
are
actually
they're.
Not
they.
Their
father's
program
is
not
expecting
to
make
Financial
benefits,
but
rather
to
contribute
to
Dao
to
be
involved
in
those
activities
and
also
because
they're
all
down
members.
So
this
Prophet
doesn't
really
come
from
efforts
of
others.
B
It
actually
comes
from
themselves
as
well,
so
all
SL
members,
so
I
would
say
this
compared
to
the
general
liability
and
also
on
the
taxation.
This
has
completely
significant
risk
for
DXL
at
the
moment
because
of
the
very
clear
SEC
rulings,
and
also
the
the
other
Dow
token
president
and
moving.
B
It
wasn't
mentioned
in
the
prompt,
but
after
further
research,
I
I
do
think
that
taxation
is
right
now
it
presents
the
most
risks
among
all
U.S
type
of
risks.
Right
now.
Why
is
that?
Because,
first
of
all
is
that
taxation
risk
is
tied
to
profits,
so
they
cannot
text
you
if
you're
not
making
profits
and
if
DX
style
is
currently
more
of
their
English
product
development
stage.
B
It's
it's
not
a
major
concern,
but
once
the
products
are
starting
to
make
profits
this,
this
risk
will
be
more
accurate
in
that
way,
and
and
also,
if
we're
looking
at
the
criteria
of
what
kind
of
doubt
activity,
even
though
they're
in
incorporated
or
foreign
doubts,
if
they
have
significant
development
performed
in
the
U.S
or
they
have
some
sort
of
U.S
income
tied
to
to
that
governance,
tokens
or
if
some
U.S
entity
controlled
the
style
for
some
time
for
a
period
of
time.
B
B
Happening
and
where
is
the
IP
developed
and
where
are
the
key
contributors
located
so
even
though
VXL
is
not
developed
by
a
us
developer
so
and
also
the
previous
developer
of
the
DX
style.
Already
so
I
would
say
that
USD
part
carries
less
risk,
but
but
if
we
look
at
how
whether
you
can
come
through
if
the
IP
is
developed,.
B
Or
you
are
looking
at
very
product
specific
kind
of
cases,
situations,
for
example,
if
you're
talking
about
3x
Cloud
as
a
whole,
we
do
have
some
U.S
key
contributors
right,
but
we
also
have
a
lot
of
non-us
key
contributors.
So
in
this
case
it's
less
likely
that
you're
able
to
argue
that
the
key
IPS
developed
in
the
US,
if
you're,
just
looking
at
the
Excel
as
a
whole.
B
So
this
is
really
so
I
would
say
that,
even
though,
like
in
terms
of
key
contributors,
there
is
a
significant
number
of
non-usp
contributors,
but
if
you're
just
like
looking
at
product
by
product,
there
might
be
the
case
that
that
yeah,
the
U.S,
can
see
some
key
U.S
IPS
are
developed,
but
but
then
again
as
I
was
saying
that
this
is
so
because
taxation
is
tied
to
profits.
B
This
won't
be
the
time
where
we
really
need
to
start
paying
attention,
as
regarding
oh,
like
we'll
just
have
some
kind
of
key
U.S
taxation
in
this,
and
what
that
means
with
all
these
three
types
of
keywords
is
that
so
in
terms
of
the
level
of
risk
assessment,
as
I
was
saying,
taxation
has
the
biggest
risk
once
there
is
profits
coming
and
for
general
partnership
liability.
B
Is
that
it's
not
the
risk
is
not
as
big
as
other
people
think,
especially
given
DX
house
Global
decentralization,
but
but
the
but
the
problem
is
that,
and
the
best
you
can
do
is
actually
and
it's
very
preventable,
because
you
can
actually
think
about
certain
governance
agreements
in
place
to
prevent
us
from
happening
and
token
offerings.
This
is
the
clearest
route
right
now
that
the
Excel
focuses,
and
because
of
this.
B
So
the
minimum
steps
is
that
these
are
the
minimum
you
need
to
do
if
you
are
not
expand
or
if
you're,
if
you
keep
expanding
and
you're
recruiting,
people
is
that
you
need
to
have
this
continuous
risk,
monitoring
and
assessment
with
a
contributor,
Squad
and
governance
and
strategy.
So.
B
G
B
B
Products
DXL
is
developing.
There
could
be
some
products
that
have
more
U.S
taxation
or
legal
risks
compared
to
other
products
because
of
the
countries
which
is
involved
in
one
specific
product
and
for
the
treasury
is
that
the
treasury
also
needs
to
be
very
careful
with
activities
that
can
be
can
be
tied
to
the
US,
but
but
overall
I
think.
B
C
B
Is
that
these
stageuristic,
like
general
partnership
liabilities,
can
be
avoided
because
of
the
governance
protocol
and
and
I
would
say,
besides
the
minimum
steps,
you
can
also
think
about
more
aspirational
or
like
the
bad
or
more
ambitious
ways
to
tackle
this,
and
that
will
also
help
the
Excel
events,
its
Mission
as
a
self-sovereign
identity.
C
B
So
it
doesn't
just
mean
that
DX
style
can
just
recruit
globally,
but
also
it
means
that
the
extra
style
needs
to
actively
source
and
hire
non-us
key
contributors
in
different
products,
especially
for
their
most
visible
or
profitable.
Products,
and
also
for
the
talent
strategy.
Is
that
on
the
DX
style
really
need
to
have
a
system
that
cultivated.
F
B
Of
global
contributors,
for
example,
you
can
hire
Global
contributors
coming
at
school
level,
four
or
five,
but
you
really
want
to
when
you're
hiring
you
still
want
to
be
able
to
have
you.
Can
you
need
to
Envision
that
this
contributors,
one
day
they'll,
be
able
to
grow
into
a
very
keyboard
or
like
level
like
the
highest
level
of
edx
style
and
I?
Think
this
Implement
like
doing
this,
but
just
in
terms
of
the
growth
or
how
contributors
grow
or
call
their
developing
products?
B
This
is
something
that
the
talent
team
can
also
think
about,
and
another
thing
is
so
besides
the
talent
strategy,
it's
also
the
treasury
and
the
government's
governance
strategy
regarding
the
liability
insurance,
so
I
would
say
that
the
key
is
to
have
an
agreement
that
will
be
able
to
outline
a
kind
of
protocol
procedure.
Regarding
how
do
you
assess
the
claim,
the
risk
of
different
claims,
and
how
do
you
vote
in
case
sometimes
arise,
because
you
can
first,
you
can
vote
on
you?
B
Can
you
can
take
in
the
opinions
of
the
in-house
Council
or
you
can
also
take
the
opinions
of
outside
legal
council
as
well,
but
also
you
need
to
have
essentially
it's
this
internal
agreement
among
down
members
that
they're
willing
to
compensate
in
case
there
is
a
decision
to
compensate
right,
and
so
essentially
it's
about
how
this
decision
can
be
made.
B
So,
basically,
is
that
this
mechanism
would
allow
people
who
are
actively
contributing
for
key
contributors
in
in
this
to
be
able
to
first
ensure
themselves
against
any
sort
of
planes,
but
also
to
be
able
to
have
a
more
visible
role
in.
How
do
you
assess
the
breast
and
how
do
you
vote
so,
but
actually.
A
B
Sorry,
what
is
the
post
like.
A
Just
the
noise,
the
noise
is
becoming
a
little
unbearable,
it's
hard
to
follow
and
we're
actually
very
much
interested.
It's
really
quality
information
that
we
want
to
take
in
in
in
a
better
environment,
so
we
could
follow
up
and
continue
next
time
at
a
more
quiet
environment
like
you
could
have
like
another
five
minutes
to
go
briefly
through
the
next
slides
that
we
could
go
into
detail
next
time.
B
Yeah
actually
I'm
wrapping
up,
so
this
is
the
end
of
the
US
legal
strategy.
So
why
don't
we
say
from
the
global
decentralization
strategy
for
the
next
time,
because
I'm
really
sorry
about
the
background,
noise
and
I-
do
want
to
have
some
time
like
a
more
quality
time
to
talk
about
this.
If
that's,
okay,.
B
Yeah
yeah,
so
this
is
actually
the
end
of
the
U.S
strategy,
but
but
I
will
work
with
Melanie
schedule.
The
other
one
I'm
really
sorry
about
this.
E
A
Thanks
very
much
Ashley
sounds
like
good
work.
We
would
really
like
to
see
what
are
the
options
that
there
are
some
pretty
interesting
recommendations
that
we
haven't
discussed.
That
would
be
good
for
the
Dow
to
review
next
on
the
agenda.
We
got
the
alternative
proposal
to
the
refocus
and
restructuring
for
dxdel
I
see
we
got
Keenan
I
haven't
given
him
the
heads
up,
but
it
of
course,
like
the
fact
that
Keenan
has
posted.
It
doesn't
mean
that
he's
the
person
that
should
be
talking
about
it.
A
We
will
all
discuss
it,
as
he
has
actually
pointed
in
in
The
Proposal
itself.
It's
a
down
matter
that
the
Dao
will
collectively
discuss,
but
if,
if
he
would
like
to
give
us
an
intro
for
those
that
may
not
have
read
it
yet
because
it's
a
bit
of
a
I,
don't
know
what
do
you
call
it
when
it's
in
writing
not
a
mouthful
but
yeah.
A
Wall
of
text,
yeah,
I'm,
sure,
I'm
sure
a
few
people
may
have
looked
at
it
and
they
will
definitely
be
reading
it,
but
they
may
have
postponed
it
for
the
weekend.
So
a
bit
of
an
intro
would
be
good
and
then
we
can
discuss
it.
C
Yeah
100,
so
I'm
I'm
sure
most
here
are
familiar
with
the
restructuring
discussions
that
have
been
happening
lately
in
the
stress
that
it's
kind
of
placed
on
the
organization
I
wanted
to
Grant
a
kind
of
alternate
path
for
the
Dow
to
follow,
since
there
is
some
disagreements
with
the
initial
proposal,
so
I
kind
of
put
this
together,
a
lot
of
thought
and
love
went
into
it.
I
highly
highly
recommend
taking
a
look
here,
so
this
is
kind
of
like
I
mentioned
an
alternate
proposal.
C
I
want
to
accomplish
similar
goals
because
I
think
the
underlying
goals
of
the
original
are
very
important,
but
obviously
tackling
it
in
a
way
that
has
less
friction.
I
kind
of
recap:
the
current
discussion
I
highlighted
a
variety
of
challenges
that
we
currently
have
at
the
Dow
goals
for
what
we
need.
You
know
moving
forward,
what
we
need
to
accomplish
and
then
kind
of
a
three-phase
approach
to
solving
them,
and,
of
course
this
has
deadlines
and
kind
of
forcing
functions
as
opposed
to
a
kind
of
broad
statement.
C
Take
a
look
at
the
proposal
in
the
chat,
but
there's
a
kind
of
overview
recap
image:
the
budget
from
3.5
million
currently
to
2.2
million
annualized
Runway
moving
from
3.26
years
to
5.21
years
raw
Stables.
We
want
to
better
involve
DxD
within
governance
and
its
direction,
introduce
accountability,
structure
and
scheduling,
focus
on
financial
justification
of
initiatives
and
proposal.
Standardization
and
Associated
punishments.
I
think
those
are
the
the
key
kind
of
overlying
points
that
need
to
be
solved.
C
Oh
my
buttery
voice-
hopefully
it's
legible
I'm,
very
tired
I
actually
haven't
slept
yet
tonight.
Hopefully
that
isn't
coming
through
yeah,
but
lots
of
lots
of
love
went
into
this
tonight.
I
guess
tonight
today.
Whatever
day
it
is
I,
don't
know
where
I
am
right.
Now.
C
This
is
a
super
super
important
proposal
to
me.
I
wanted
to
frame
it
in
a
way
where
I
didn't
have
a
political
bias.
I
don't
have
anything
to
to
gain
from
this,
in
a
sense
that
this
proposal
doesn't
implicate
me
on
a
role
of
leadership.
It
doesn't
implicate
me
me
or
my
role
in
any
way
and
I
don't
interpret
my
role
to
be
affected.
Whether
or
not
the
original
proposal
were
to
pass
or
fail.
C
Of
course,
I
near
the
bottom
here
implicate
that
provided
that
no
one
else
will
step
up.
I
would
love
to
step
up
and
help
Drive
the
necessary
things
that
needs
to
happen.
But
that
is
separate
from
this
proposal
and
the
first
thing
that
needs
to
be
solved
is
kind
of
structure
in
a
way
that
we
can
move
forward.
C
C
So
if
you
go
through
the
facts
section,
you
can
only
read
the
Bold
section
and
and
have
a
good
idea
of
basically
the
rest
of
the
content,
the
rest
of
its
justification,
kind
of
put
through
for
those
that
are
less
familiar
with
the
situation,
those
that
are,
you
know,
paying
attention,
but
not
you
know
around
on
the
day-to-day
level,
so
it
is
very
long,
but
try
to
get
through
it.
I
think
it's
very
important
I
would
love
critical
feedback.
I
just
want
to
move
us
in
the
right
direction.
A
C
Yeah,
absolutely
and
I
was
kind
of
paraphrasing
at
start,
because
I
wanted
to
do
this
on
next
Wednesday,
but
I'll
go
through
this
as
well
now,
but
basically
I'm
kind
of
proposing
and
the
actual
proposal.
I
think
spicy
suit
mentioned
this
in
in
Discord.
The
actual
proposal
is
relatively
short,
a
lot
of
that
post
is
contextualization,
but
the
proposal
itself
has
three
phases:
phase
one
low-hanging
fruit
that
aims
the
targets.
You
know
stuff
that
needs
to
be
expedited
stuff.
We
can
do
right
now
with
very
minimal
contention.
C
Of
course,
that
is
to
be
voted
on
at
a
later
time.
Getting
this
proposal
passes
for
the
structure
and
then
we'll
have
like
a
phase.
One
kind
of
discussion
period
and
proposal
with
the
specifics
of
that
can
be
worked
out,
but
kind
of
pushing
through
and
Expediting
the
least
contentious
changes.
That
includes
you
know,
limiting
auditing
budget
limiting
event,
budgets
involving
vxt
holders
and
restructuring
process,
disengagement
from
contractors
Etc.
C
Those
are
things
that
most
people
seem
to
agree
on
and
have
an
immediate
quantifiable
benefit,
especially
in
our
own
way.
So
the
thought
is
to
put
that
through
immediately
effectively
whenever
this
proposal
goes
through,
provided
it
does.
Of
course,
next
up
is
accountability,
access
and
Anatomy
structure.
Of
course,
it's
kind
of
the
meat
of
solving
our
core
issues.
I
I
pose
a
lot
of
questions
in
this
section.
It's
like
how
do
we
prevent?
No,
because
the
solution
is
not
perfect
and
other
cultural
issues.
C
C
Basically,
I?
Don't
think
anyone
has
just
the
immediate
snap
of
the
finger
answer
to
this
and
I?
Don't
think
that's
a
one
or
two
people
should
be
the
ones
to
to
necessarily
make
that
decision.
C
In
this
section
for
timelining,
Bogota
is
essentially
where
we
had
planned
on
discussing
a
lot
of
this
prior,
maybe
informally
so
I
propose
that
the
pushing
function
of
getting
a
proposal
and
getting
this
passed
and
the
changes
for
after
Bogota
late,
October
I
put
28th
it's
a
bit
arbitrary
and
that
kind
of
pushes
into
phase
three
stepping
back
while
pushing
forward
I,
also
love
the
the
mid-journey
AI
images
by
the
way
I
just
wanted
to
to
mention
that
those
are
using
the
keywords
for
the
face
names,
but
phase.
C
Three
is
I,
described
as
difficult
discussion
surrounding
the
newly
introduced
priority
justification
and
its
implications
on
the
budget.
By
focusing
on
financial
viability
and
accommodating
our
overall
budget,
we
can
trim
away
fat
where
needed,
while
focusing
on
capitalization
of
important
opportunities
and
crafting
a
suite
of
products.
So
basically,
we've
spent
the
time
at
this
stage.
You
know
assessing
our
structure
making
ourselves.
You
know
more
robust
and
then
now
that
we
have
a
prioritization.
How
exactly
can
we
push
forward
on
those
priorities?
C
That
is
essentially
that
step
I
interpreted
an
average
of
reduction
of
three
time:
three
full-time
contributors,
it's
possible
that
we
find
a
niche
at
that
point
and
capitalize
on
it
strongly
and
don't
need
to
reduce
anyone
in
the
same
way
that
it's
possible
that
we
identify
less
and
do
more.
This
is
just
an
average
I
also,
basically
propose
a
blanket,
stable
salary
reduction
as
long
as
market
conditions
and
or
DX.
That
was
not
particularly
profitable
or
successful.
C
This
is,
of
course,
opinion
and
there's
lots
of
discussions
we
had
on
these
individual
phases
and
how
to
tackle
them.
But
the
most
important
thing
is
that
these
are
basically
my
suggestions
and
I
want
the
Dow
to
vote
on
this
structure
and
kind
of
digest
what
needs
to
happen
to
hit
those
goals.
C
C
Yeah
I
think
that's
my
piece.
I
want
to
talk
more
about
this
next
Wednesday.
Apologies
that
this
was
a
bit
messy
like
I,
said
a
bit
shy
on
on
sleep
here,
but
please
give
it
a
read
over
the
weekend,
if
you
think
it's
too
long,
which
seems
to
be
the
main
criticism
so
far,
just
read
the
Bolden
areas
they're
set
up
in
such
a
way
that
you
can
skim
through
it
and
get
the
gist
of
everything.
It's
mostly
context.
Otherwise,
yes,
agusto.
E
Yeah
I
have
to
say,
I
read
already
like
two
or
three
times
on
it
is
long
cars.
It
has
to
be
long
like
we
need
to
be
very
clear
in
in
which
way
we
want
to
take.
Where
do
we
want
to
go
set
up
some
clear
objectives
on
fixing
the
issues
that
we
identified,
that
we
are
raised
and
we
identify?
We
are
knowledge.
Some
of
them
are
very
hard.
Actually,
most
of
them
are
very
hard,
are
very
hard
for
a
traditional
company,
and
we
are
we
right
now
so,
which
makes
things
even
harder.
E
I
just
want
to
say,
congratulations
Keenan,
because
I
think
you
did
a
great
job
on
online,
identifying
a
lot
of
these
points
and
I'm
proposing
a
solution
that
is
going
to
that.
We
can
work
on
right.
This
is
something
that
where
we
can
actually
work
on,
because
it's
very
well
described,
and
it
is
a
strong
Foundation
to
where
do
we
want
to
go
in
the
next
years?
Oh
now,
you
can
take
a
break,
take
a
regular
Joy
recover
and
there
is
a
lot
of
work
to
be
done.
Colombia.
E
It's
very
close.
It's
a
perfect
place.
Perfect
timing,
a
lot
of
the
decision
we
have
to
make
Italian
USANA
as
an
organization,
and
we
have
to
execute
us
an
organization.
We
cannot
rely
a
lot.
We
cannot
rely
actually
on
on
a
small
group
of
individuals
to
make
this
work.
We
need
to
do
it
together.
For
this,
we
need
to
build
the
tools
and
the
rules
and
agree
on.
Where
do
we
want
to
go
from
the
technical
side?
E
This
is
where
I'm
going
to
be
focusing
on
more
closely
with
the
DX
Club
Squad,
because
the
technical
tools
to
implement
this
I
need
an
execution
chain
is
very,
very,
very
important.
I
feel
like
we
need
to
start
Crossing
more
on
code
and
write
as
much
call
that
can
enforce
these
rules
as
possible.
So
I
will
try
to
do
that
part
to
work
from
my
side
on
on
the
future
and
yeah.
This
is
what
I
think.
C
A
Yeah
I
I,
really
like
the
difference
in
the
approach
we
were
subjected
to
a
proposal
that
required
almost
blind
trust
right.
There
was
a
call
to
some
restructuring
to
some
refocus,
but
there
was
nothing
laid
out
and
it
kind
of
implied
that
a
majority
of
the
Dow
will
not
even
be
a
part
of
deciding
what
that
plan
would
look
like,
and
it's
just
mind-boggling,
I
I.
A
The
reason
I
haven't
responded
properly
with
a
post
similar
to
keenans
is
that
I've
been
lost
for
words.
It's
it's
just
a
little
weird
like
if
it's
a
Dao,
it's
a
Dao.
If
there's
a
protocol,
there's
a
Protocol,
no,
no
one's
above
the
protocol,
you
cannot
say
that
you
want
restructuring
without
actually
saying
what
the
restructuring
would
look
like
technically
product,
wise
roadmap,
wise
and
saying
a
majority
of
the
Dao
will
not
be
a
part
of
it,
and
and
now
the
proposal
that
Keenan
put
as
an
alternative
is
exactly
what
a
dow
looks
like.
A
E
Like
you
said,
on
the
first
proposal,
the
solution
was
to
rely
on
a
smooth
group
of
people
that
they
also
are
responsible
for
some
issues
that
we
are
facing
right
now
in
the
Dao
which
make
the
which
made
it
even
harder,
and
he
proposes
moving
together
and
facing
the
product
where
us
and
as
an
organization,
foreign.
A
It
is
very
difficult
for
remote
only
organizations
to
do
something
like
this
and
it's
very
easy
to
try
and
push
an
agenda
when
people
are
struggling,
communicating
over
a
digital,
medium
right
and
it's
almost
like
people
are
disarmed
like
I-
want
to
speak
my
mind,
but
I'm
disarmed.
Others
want
to
speak,
but
they're
disarmed
and
and
it's
it's
it's
very
easy
to
try
and
push
an
agenda,
but
I
I
believe
the
best
way
to
do.
A
This
is
when
we
are
all
face
to
face
and
we
can
easily
speak
and
it
would
have
been
a
lot
different
to
have
a
a
proposal
like
the
first
one
we
we
saw
if
there
was
no
retreat
on
on
the
schedule
for
for
next
month,
like
if,
if
we
had
just
had
a
retreat
two
months
ago,
but
it
was
unproductive,
we
we
did
nothing.
We
wasted
our
time
and
now
is
the
time
for
for
real
restructuring.
Then
yeah
you
gotta.
F
Yeah,
first
of
all,
I
also
want
to
upload
this
post,
keen
on
it's
very
comprehensive
and
yeah
I.
The
criticism
about
it
being
too
long
like
I,
wouldn't
put
that
much
energy
into
it.
I
mean
it's
a
comprehensive
one
and
it
should
be
try
to,
like
you
know,
tackle
this
from
all
kinds
of
different
approaches
and
I
think
you
did
a
great
job
on
that.
F
With
that
said,
I
do
have
some
questions.
I
I
think
you
said
that
you're
gonna
bring
it
up
on
Wednesday
again,
but
I'm.
Looking
at
phase
three,
for
example,
when
you
mentioned
like
reduction
of
full-time
contributors
and
blanket
stable
salary
reduction,
small
question
about
that
is:
is
this
like
prone
to
change
depending
on
phase
two
so
and
and
not
like
something
that
is
I
guess
you
know,
this
is
one
of
the
foregone
conclusions.
F
It's
more
like,
depending
on
what
phase
two
brings
to
the
table,
we
will,
you
know
either
need
to
maybe
like
make
a
stable,
a
blanket,
stable
salary
reduction
reduction
of
full-time
contributors,
but
it
also
may
be
that
I
mean
another
Direction.
Even
if
you
know
it's
a
bear
market
and
everything,
but
it
could
be
that
we
need
to
propel
even
further,
because
we've
found
some
profitable
goal
to
reach.
Instead,.
C
Yep,
that's
exactly
correct
and
I.
Think
in
in
hindsight.
There's
a
lot
and
there
was
a
lot
of
writing
I.
Think
I
perhaps
didn't
communicate
that
portion
of
the
actual
proposal,
the
best,
but
basically
the
actual
actions
of
The
Proposal
that
I
am
kind
of
bringing
up
here.
C
They
are
mostly
suggestions
because
I
want
the
Dow
to
be
able
to
decide
these
things
and,
like
you
say,
you
know,
I
title
phase
three:
stepping
back
while
pushing
forward
to
identify
areas
of
weakness,
so
we
can
step
back
from
in
areas
of
strength
that
we
can
push
forward
from
so
I,
of
course,
blanket
interpret
this
as
a
reduction,
but
if
we
can
find
a
niche
in
this
time
frame,
then
I
think
that
we
should
devote
more
resources
to
it
right.
C
If
we
find
that
competitive
motive,
we
find
an
area
that
we
can
be
profitable
or
something
that
we're
passionate
about,
says
broadly
agreeing
with
everything
you
say
in
that
section.
There.
F
And
yeah
just
to
add
on
that
I
think
that's
a
very
good
like
level-headed
approach.
I
think
one
of
the
biggest
problems
I
had
with
the
previous
country
proposal
is
basically
a
cut
cost
and
then
there's
no
action
or
no
goal.
So
what
I
really
liked
about
this
one
was
that,
like
we
are
stepping
back
we're
finding
our
goals,
we
are
looking
for
a
way
forward
and
from
there
we
can
determine
you
know
what
what
is
this?
F
What
is,
does
this
like
implicate
on
you
know,
or
what
does
this
imply
basically
on
our
budget?
Does
it
mean
that
we
need
to
cut
costs
like
that?
I
think.
That's!
That's
a
question
that
that
was
missing
in
in
the
previous
presented
proposal.
So
in
this
one,
I
I
really
like
and
also
like
the
three-step
approaches,
makes
it
more.
F
A
I
I
think
everything
is
up
for
discussion,
absolutely
everything,
but
there's
there's
nothing
fixed
like
there's,
no
starting
point
we're
starting
from
Ground
Zero
and
like
even
even
for
the
contractors
like
I'm,
not
saying
I'm,
against
cutting
the
contractors,
but
like
contract
contractors
are
not
paid
in
DxD
they're
getting
paid
in
Stables
those
are
professional
companies.
They
have
skilled
professionals,
they're
used
to
working
with
us
us
letting
them
go.
A
It's
just
like
saying.
We
have
absolutely
no
idea
what
kind
of
products
we
wish
to
develop
and
we
have
no
management
skills
in
managing
Manpower,
because
we've
been
struggling,
onboarding
developers
and
at
the
same
time
we
have
this
group
of
skilled
developers
that
we're
gonna.
Just
let
go
so
I'm,
not
saying
no
but
I'm
saying
everything
should
be
up
for
discussion
and
there
should
be
no
starting
point
with
anything
set
already
and
and
and
we
should
even
consider
reconsider
that
can.
G
Can
I
just
speak
behalf
of
the
contractors,
at
least
so
I
agree
what
you're
saying
there's
some
some
problems
with
the
contractors.
I'll
tell
you
two
two
big
problems:
one
is
their
boss
can
any
day
say.
Oh
this
person
that
you
worked
with
is
going
to
be
moved
to
another
project
and
all
the
time
you
onboard
it
and
they
learn
your
code,
and
all
of
that
will
be
gone,
and
this
actually
happened
to
us
with
Daniel
Daniel,
where
their
most
senior
developer.
He
was
actually
leading
the
contractors.
G
I
don't
know
who's
yeah,
okay,
I'll
I'll,
not
spread
rumors
or
whatever,
but
but
I've
heard
both
stories
so.
G
Yeah
I
mean
we
really
needed
contractors
when
we
got
them
right,
but
I,
remember
saying
at
that
time,
like
our
goal
is
to
replace
contractors
with
actual
contributors,
because
we
are
not
guaranteed
these
these
people
right.
We
are
not
guaranteed
to
have
this
specific
person.
If
we
build
up
the
trust
and
skills
with
them,
we
might
lose
them
any
day,
and
this
happened
to
us.
That's
Point
number
one
Point
number
two
is
I.
Think
our
contractors
are
not
happy,
and
the
reason
is
this:
we
are
not
the
normal
company.
Everything
we
do
is
transparent.
G
They
can
know
exactly
how
much
every
single
person
makes
and
I
I.
We
got
this
feedback
from
them.
When
we
started
talking
about
swapper
token
and
a
bunch
of
other
stuff,
they
they
want
part
of
it
right.
They
feel
like
a
part
of
this
team,
but
at
the
same
time
they
have
a
boss,
basically
outside
of
digital
and
it's
it's
I
I,
feel
the
frustration
I
hear
like
how
they
talk
about
stuff
and
I
think
they're,
making
like
one
tenth
of
what
what
we're
paying
for
them
right.
G
So
we
need
to
understand
like
just
because
we
are
happy.
It
doesn't
always
always
mean
we.
They
are
happy
I.
Don't
think
our
contractors
are
happy.
I,
don't
have
proof
for
this.
It's
just
my
feeling
as
a
squad
lead.
So
that's
two
things
I'm
thinking
of
that.
G
Maybe
we
don't
want
long-term
contractors
and
we've
we've
had
these
guys
for
a
while
now
I
think
we
should
try
to
replace
it's
not
them.
Personally,
just
like
we
try.
We
need
to
replace
contractors
with
the
contributors
because
contributors,
you
could
actually
work
with
evolve
and-
and
you
have
much
more
control,
at
least
at
least
that
the
person
working
can
decide
if
they
want
to
work
or
not
and
and
I
think
that's
the
direction
we
we
want
to
go.
D
I'll
just
add
some
thoughts
from
my
side,
I.
Think
personally,
I
think
the
Excel
is
actually
very
well
positioned,
I
think
if
you
compare
it
to
any
other
dial
who
is
just
sitting
on
their
own
token,
we've
done
very
well
last
year
acquiring
a
lot
of
stable
coins
a
lot
of
the
time
or,
like
every
time,
I
see
a
Runway.
It's
purely
measured
in
our
stable
coin.
Holdings
right,
I
think
we're
in
like
a
very
privileged
position
to
even
have
such
a
long
runway
in
purely
just
stable
coins.
D
So
I
think
we're
actually
very
well
positioned
for
this.
You
know
what
people
call
Bear
market
and
perhaps
I
have
a
bit
of
a
different
point
of
view,
but
I
think
the
Dao
should
look
to
spend
as
much
money
as
possible,
given
that
that
money
gives
the
dollar
return.
You
know
so
I
think
it's
much
more
for
me,
a
question
about
allocating
Capital,
efficiently
and
I.
Think
that's.
D
Where
kind
of
like
a
lot
of
the
work
Chris
started
over
the
summer
with
the
budgets
team
doing
their
budgets,
then
after
six
months
we
review
what
has
been
delivered
and
based
on
that.
You
can
then
make
a
decision.
You
know
how
much
do
we
keep
funding
this
team
and
so
for
me
overall
I'm,
somewhat
surprised
by
this
whole
heated
argument
that
started
around
this
whole
restructuring
and
rethinking
or
whatever
it
was
called,
because
I
actually
think
we're
in
a
very
good
position
and
I.
D
Think
even
you
know,
after
the
merge
staked
Eve
is
planned
to
return
a
lot
more
apy.
We
have
a
ton
of
Eve
I.
Think
right
now
we're
in
a
good
position.
Of
course
you
know
if
you
look
at
yielding
on
the
treasury.
We've
also
decided
to
not
undertake
certain
things
because
they're
not
fully
decentralized
and
I,
think
that's
actually
a
good
thing.
That's
been
talked
about
right.
It's
like
DX,
Styles,
maximum
approach
to
decentralization
and,
potentially
you
know,
steering
a
bit
to
still
decentralized
approach,
but
less
on
that
extremist
view.
D
Simply
from
that,
you
know
and
I
think
there
are
other
opportunities
you
can
then
do,
and
you
know
Chris
and
I
have
been
talking
with
the
mimic
guys
who
actually
specialize
or
like
building
treasury
management
protocols,
fully
decentralized
and
completely
trustless,
and
recently
now
we're
exploring
the
cow
swap
protocol
to
be
able
to
do
a
lot
more
things,
trustlessly,
which
is
kind
of
what
blocked
us
going
forward
with
carpet
key
right
that
we
had
like
some
trust
assumptions,
and
so
overall
I
I
personally,
don't
see
this
like
chaos.
D
Situation
I
feel
like
this
is
like
a
boardroom
meeting
at
Lehman
Brothers,
you
know
before
before
they
crashed.
You
know
and
I
think
we're
absolutely
not
in
that
situation,
and
so
I'm,
just
a
bit
surprised
at
the
overall
State
I.
Think
it's
very
good.
Some
of
the
questions
we're
asking
ourselves
and
in
Keenan's
pulse
you
know,
a
lot
of
valid
points
are
made
and
I
think
you
know.
For
me,
the
main
priority
is
allocating
resources
efficiently
and
from
that
doesn't
necessarily
mean
reducing
significantly
to
me.
D
C
And
I
think
we
have
a
very,
very
similar
perspective
and,
like
I
said
I'm,
not
sure
in
retrospect
that
I
did
a
great
job
fully
communicating
that
kind
of
phase
you
know
proposition,
but
I
definitely
agree
with
all
of
that.
I
I've
thought
that
we,
you
know
we're
we're
strongly
positioned.
C
I,
also
think
that
the
proposal
was
originally
kind
of
put
out
in
a
way
that
vilified
people
for
basically
sharing
the
opinion
that
you're
sharing
right
now-
and
this
is
more
of
a
hey.
This
is
the
current
situation.
This
is
everything.
How
can
we
move
forward
from
it
and,
like
you
said,
investing
in
quantifiable
returns
for
the
Dow
is
very
important
and
I
think
that
the
whole
goal
of
this
is
a
to
kind
of
cut
that
immediate,
obvious
fat.
C
While
we
sit
back
figure
out
what
we're
doing
and
then
push
forward
on
it
right.
So
maybe
the
the
step
three
wasn't
fully
explained
and
was
a
bit
conservative
on
on
kind
of
focusing
on
the
cost
cut,
but
I
I,
completely
agree
and
investing
in
ourselves
and
our
products
and
and
pushing
forward
and
I
would
not
be
opposed
to
increasing
that
expenditure,
but
I
think
justifying
it
and
making
sure
that
it's
going
to
be
that
quantifiable
return.
That
we're
talking
about
is
the
important
part.
A
Yeah
I
mean,
like
the
the
other
proposal,
calls
for
the
governance
team
to.
A
To
be
let
go
of
and
for
DX
gov,
that
is
a
purely
Dev
team
to
take
on
that
responsibility
like
given
how
the
buyback
has
progressed
with
all
the
number
crunching
with
the
spreadsheets
and
all
of
the
proposal.
Submissions
struggling
with
DX
votes
day
to
day
I
cannot
see.
Any
of
that
would
have
happened
without
Chris
and
Dave
and
saying
that
the
devs
that
should
be
working
hard
to
build
governance
2.0.
A
F
So
yeah
I
I
also
want
to
just
second
what
Dave
is
saying
like
I
think.
A
lot
of
the
discussion
has
been
going
upside
down.
Basically,
but
the
the
most
important
Point
must
be
how
we
efficiently
allocate
resources
that
must
be
number
one
and
I
would
also
believe
that
the
dxt
holders
would
feel
the
same
way.
F
So
if
you
read
some
of
the
posts
and
comments-
and
you
know
the
from
the
investors
or
the
the
xter
holders
that
are
mostly
most
active
they're-
basically
just
a
bit
like
tired
of
the
fact
that
they're
not
seeing
any
results
for
their
money.
So
another
way
of
doing
this
would
be
for
the
Dow
to
take
this
step
back
through
this
proposal
and
then
propose
to
them
like.
This
is
how
we
will
allocate
the
resources
and
it
will
be
done
efficiently
profitably.
F
E
A
Yeah
and
I
feel
like
we've
kind
of
bridged
the
Gap
and
seen
some
agreement
Lately
from
GXT
holders,
as
kinan
put
it
right,
like
they
were
pitted
against
an
imaginary
enemy
that
doesn't
really
exist
and
it
turns
out
we're.
Actually
we
want
the
same,
and
once
we
have
proper
discussions
regarding
product
roadmap
in
a
way
that
it
should
be
restructured
in
order
to
start
bringing
revenue
and
not
waste
time,
I
think
we
could
totally
come
up
with
some.
A
A
All
right,
we
could
call
it
an
hour.
It's
been
an
interesting
first
half
hour
with
the
Cafe
noise,
but
quite
enlightening
really
interesting
topics.
I
was
intrigued
about
the
taxation
part
I
myself
have
had
some
premonition
on
some
of
it.
I'm
really
happy
that
Ashley
brought
it
up
as
well,
especially
with
the
initial
restructuring
proposal.
I
I
put
it
in
in
keybase.
A
I
saw
that
that
poses
a
legal
problem
for
the
Dao.
If
we
have
certain
appointed
public
leaders
and
those
are
in
the
U.S,
that
is
an
issue
for
the
Dow
and
I'm
glad
that
Ashley
corroborated
that
we
should
be
looking
into
it
more
so
and,
and
the
second
part
I,
think
Keenan's
proposal
posted
last
night
is
a
bit
of
a
breath
of
fresh
air
for
the
Dao
and
yeah
interesting
to
see
what
the
future
brings
enjoy.
Your
Friday
guys
try
and
rest
over
the
weekend
get
some
sleep.