►
From YouTube: DXstrategy Call [2022-05-20]
Description
00:00 DXstrategy Call [2022-05-20]
00:10 Budget Presentation
21:36 DXgov discussion
53:00 web2/web3 UX discussion
A
B
A
Yeah,
so
this
is
the
the
dx
voice
kind
of
budget
discussion
sheet,
and
I
think
I
think,
broadly
budgeting
is
incredibly
important,
obviously
especially
coming
into
what
we
can
only
describe
at
this
point
as
a
bear
market.
You
know,
in
my
opinion,
every
aspect
of
dx
dow
should
have
a
budget
not
just
to
protect
the
treasury.
For
you
know
areas
of
over
over
expenditure,
but
to
reinforce
our
strategy.
A
You
know
areas
of
underexpenditure,
et
cetera,
and
it's
also
portion,
of
course
it
would
be
transparent
about
our
expenditure
squad
focuses
et
cetera.
I
think
the
most
important
thing,
though,
is
justification.
I'm
probably
gonna
mention
justification
quite
a
bit
here
but
like
how
do
you
justify
a
budget
right?
I
think
that's
pretty
important.
A
So
this
is
how
we
kind
of
handled
it.
We
did
a
bit
more
discussion
focused
and
haven't
quite
in
this
document,
of
course,
set
formal
targets
and
that's
obviously
I'll
chat
a
bit
about
that
in
a
minute,
but
I
think
this
will
differ
very
much
so
squad
to
squad.
We
have
a
couple
of
unique
situations
which
I'll
touch
on
a
bit
below
but
kind
of
to
start
off.
A
D
A
We
see
a
bit
better
now,
yeah,
that's
good
cool,
yeah
I'll
leave.
This
I'll
leave
a
link
to
this
here
in
a
minute
as
well
to
go
through,
and
I
think
this
will
hit
the
form
in
some
form
or
another,
so
we'll
have
the
chance
to
kind
of
read
through
all
the
stipulations
and
everything
and
our
kind
of
thought
processes
as
we
went
as
well
yeah,
but
we
started
with
kind
of
our
framework.
A
This
will
be
a
bit
more
difficult
if
your
squad
didn't
do
any
kind
of
justification,
kpis
or
budget
for
the
previous
year,
we
had
the
benefit
of
funding
our
multisig.
That
gave
us
a
kind
of
initial
budget
and
obviously
we
had
some
targets
and
social
targets
last
year
that
we
did
hit.
So
we
had
those
kind
of
as
a
baseline
and
then
used
our
squad
review.
Those
stats
is
kind
of
the
baseline
for
the
year
yeah.
It
was
important
that
we
were,
you
know
flexible,
yet
justified,
especially
since
this
is
a
discussion.
A
I
can't
necessarily
come
directly
out
here
and
say
what
our
budget
is.
I
could
always,
you
know,
come
to
vx
down
and
say
marketing
needs
more
budgets,
give
us
10
million
dollars.
You
know
why
would
that
ever
pass?
You
know
without
an
effective
plan,
justification,
etc.
So
I
want
to
keep
the
the
discussion
dynamic.
Let
everyone
kind
of
share
their
thoughts.
You
know
justify
what
I
think
is
right,
but
allow
everyone
to
kind
of
share
their
thoughts
and
and
where
we
can
take
it.
A
So
we
moved
kind
of
through
key
metrics,
and
this
is
a
little
bit
more
dx
voice
specific.
But
you
know
we
can
have
some
challenges
here,
with
traditional
metrics
being
difficult
to
track.
You
know.
Advertisement
through,
like
google,
gives
a
lot
of
data
that
you
can't
do
in
a
dow.
You
know
product
interaction.
We
don't
necessarily
have
info
on
you
know.
Also,
since
dxdow
is
not
generating
significant
revenue,
you
know
cac
or
ltv
customer
acquisition,
cost
and
or
lifetime
value
of
customers
are
basically
impossible
to
track.
A
So
we
opted
for
two
kind
of
inferred
methods,
first
of
which
being
purely
focusing
on
our
our
social
engagement.
So
obviously
inferring
our
baseline
and
then
kind
of
building
off
that
you
can
basically
infer
a
lot
of
data
off
of
just
pure
social
growth.
I
think
so
a
lot
of
the
things
we're
targeting
fit
into
that
bubble.
Alternatively,
of
course,
we
have
the
the
on-chain
product
focus,
which
would
kind
of
make
our
targets
a
bit
more
focused
around
the
products.
A
The
challenge
there,
of
course,
being
that
these
targets
that
we're
kind
of
identifying
as
relevant
to
marketing
are
also
very
relevant
to
the
product
squad
itself,
so
swapper,
for
example,
volume
protocol
tdl.
These
are
all
you
know,
byproducts
of
marketing,
as
well
as
a
joint
effort
of
the
product
team.
A
A
Let's
see
here
yeah
so
the
first
one
is
obviously
a
part
of
the
extent
expenditure
marketing
to
expense
ratio,
and
this
is
obviously
the
bigger
challenge
because
there
isn't
budgets
outside
of
dx
voice.
Currently
so
we're
kind
of
just
tracking
this
ballpark
figure
and
or
total
outflow,
which
may
not
make
total
sense,
but
having
it
as
a
total
of
marketing
to
expense.
We
can
kind
of
focus
on
you
know:
do
we
need
to
increase
marketing,
spend
around
the
board?
A
You
know
comparing
it
to
market
averages
currently
last
year
we
are
at
about
12.19,
and
this
is
obviously
with
a
couple
of
stipulations.
I
think
this
is
slightly
increased.
It
should
be
a
little
bit
lower,
but
not
accounting
for
every
variable,
of
course,
and
so
you
know
a
couple
options
suggesting
moving
it
up
slightly
moving
up
a
little
bit
more
and
then
obviously
chatting
a
bit
more
forward-looking.
A
Setting
up
a
plan
for
what
percentage
of
revenue
might
look
like
a
more
traditional
kind
of
budgeting
for
marketing
as
well,
and
then
the
last
thing
I
think
we
tavic
talked
about
is
budget
utilization,
which
is
of
course
more
internal
but
important
for
justification
of
the
budget.
In
the
first
place,
we
toyed
around
with
the
idea
that
we
had
in
the
previous
year,
which
is
kind
of
these
blankets
of
funds.
You
know
40
going
to
branding
and
design
expenses,
for
example.
A
Unless
that's
this
has
everything
be
streamlined,
focused
on
certain
brackets,
but
throughout
our
discussions
and
what
I
kind
of
propose.
I
think
we-
and
obviously
we
still
do-
need
to
discuss
this
a
little
bit
more,
but
we
chatted
a
bit
about
the
70
2010
rule
very
specific
to
marketing,
but
this
lets
us
spend
our
budget
a
little
bit
more
freely
in
a
70
bracket
towards
safe
and
tested
marketing
methods.
So
this
is
more.
You
know
current
defensive
content,
dx
presence
at
events,
etcetera.
A
The
20
is
more
moderate
risk.
You
know
emerging
audiences,
higher
costs,
but
capturing
groups
that
we
don't
necessarily
focus
on
all
the
time.
You
know
the
excel
hosting
our
own
events
or
hackathons,
sponsoring
other
events,
awarding
grants
at
hackathons
et
cetera
and
then
the
final
10
is
total
experimental,
high
risk
campaigns,
and
that's
more
you
know
the
caret
awareness
activation
and
other
crazy
stuff
that
we
can
come
up
with,
so
we
we're
kind
of
liking.
A
This
blanket
again,
maybe
a
combination
of
the
two
to
keep
things
in
check
make
sense,
but
this
is
kind
of
the
the
way
that
we
moved
into
justifying
the
budget.
And,
yes,
I
mean
there's
a
whole
bunch
of
options.
Here
I
mean
to
share
the
link,
so
everyone
can
take
a
quick
look
and
the
justification
is
important
for
your
own
squad.
A
Next
steps
for
us
is
going
to
be
finalizing
these,
of
course,
preparing
a
forum
post,
that's
kind
of
a
formal
target,
so
you
know
this
is
what
we
will
be
following
and
then
pointing
to
all
the
justification
discussion
process.
I
think
it's
important
that
feedback
has
the
ability
to
make
its
way
in
before
anything
is
formalized.
Of
course
you
know
if
we
decide
that
from
12
in
the
previous
year.
15
is
a
good
expenditure
for
this.
A
Coming
year,
just
as
an
example
and
the
majority
of
the
dow
does
not
agree
with
that,
it's
good
to
kind
of
workshop
that
and
chat
a
bit
more
outwardly
and,
of
course,
justification
important
there
as
well.
I
guess
an
open
discussion
point
for
the
group.
I
think
that
everyone,
of
course,
should
start
working
on
budgets.
We
should
have
this
prepared
asap,
but
would
the
squad
leads
prefer
to
work
off
a
budget
and
kpi
template
that
I
were
to
prepare,
or
would
it
be
better
to
independently
structure
your
own
budgets
curious?
E
That's
unique
and
why
you
got
like
why
it
was
first
in
terms
of
doing
it
well
last
year
was
that
it
had
like
a
multi-sig
funding
that
it
was
paying
things
out
of
and
that
like
kind
of
has
a
budget
of
itself,
because
there's
all
these
other
expenses
that,
like
dx
voice,
has
on
top
of
just
like
the
contributor
ones.
So
I
think
it
looks
yeah
a
little
different,
but
I
think
it's
a
good
process
and.
A
Yeah,
I
agree
with
that.
I
think
our
position's
a
bit
unique
and
the
approach
will
definitely
not
be
the
same
or
even
similar
for
some
of
the
product
squads,
but
I
mean
the
most
basic
and
like
easy
way
to
kind
of
start
is
basically,
you
know
active
contributor
expenses,
adding
that
to
a
budget
and
just
kind
of
workshopping
from
there.
E
E
E
E
We're
kind
of
like
focused
on
making
that
product
like
successful
for
lots
of
strategic
reasons,
but
I
was
gonna
say
this
before
just
like
a
broad
thought
in
terms
of
what
the
other
squads
can
can
do
and
kind
of
how
we
can
do
this.
So
yeah
we're
still
working
on
updating
the
expenses
from
february.
I
don't
know
if
anyone's
been
paying
attention
to
the
the.
E
Chain
the
last
week
and
a
half
there's
been
a
lot
of
expenses,
wanted
to
get
some
of
the
amsterdam
ones
through
there
and
then
I
think,
of
course,
dave
is
literally
right.
Now
I
guess,
like
I
don't
know,
you're
at
the
at
the
arena.
Is
that
what
it
is
but
yeah,
I
think
we'll
hopefully
have
that
in
like
two
weeks
and
that
will
be
like
a
structure.
E
D
E
Like
well,
what
about
the
allocation
of
that
budget
between
these
different
initiatives
that
were
that
we're
doing
here,
whereas
I
think
yeah
looks
like
ross
is
saying
like
the
yeah
it
actually
there's
it
got
refilled
this
morning.
So
if
you
have
stuff
that
you
didn't
have
claimed
there,
there
was
a
trade
from
w
or
unwrapped.
C
D
F
F
F
It's
like
we
have
kind
of
like
work
to
do
amongst
squads,
and
then
we
also
have
work
to
do
like
kind
of
stitching
that,
together
into
like
an
overall
sense
of
like
runway
and
plan-
and
I
think
kind
of
like
very
broadly
speaking-
we
can't,
like
you
know,
predict
where
the
market's
going
or
the
you
know
or
the
future
what
yeah,
what
crypto
is
going
to
be
doing
like
market
wise
and
price
wise
over
the
next
couple
years.
But
it's
like
we
can
be
prepared
for
different
scenarios
right.
F
We
can
think
critically
about
that
and,
like
yeah,
I
mean
I
think,
looking
around.
Currently,
it's
very
important
for
us
to
to
have
a
good
conservative
plan
for
if,
if
we
kind
of
just
go
into
a
bear
market
right,
because
we've
seen
that
before
in
crypto,
I
think
something
that
worries
me
in
like
kind
of
abstract
sense,
is
that
we've
sort
of
been
on
this.
Like
13-year
macro,
bull
run
and
crypto
has
existed
like
solely
within
that
bull
run.
F
And
if,
if
the
macro
we're
not
saying
it
will
do
this,
but
I
think
there's
some
decent
chance
at
this
point
that
you
know
macroeconomy
goes
into
a
big
recession
like
that
could
be
kind
of
ugly
for
crypto
and,
like
I
think
we
have
the
fortunate
position
of
actually
being
able
to
survive.
Something
like
that,
and
we
should
be
ready
if,
for
that
kind
of
a
possibility.
A
Yeah,
I
completely
completely
agree
just
to
answer
ross
had
a
couple
questions
here.
He
says
the
budget
needs
to
be
strict,
so
if
you're
in
a
situation,
hiring
a
new
contributor
would
go
over
budget,
what
would
the
process
be,
and
then
nathan
says
I
hope
not
rather
not.
We
not
go
down
that
route
and
he
says
the
budgets
are
more
guides.
A
A
G
Yeah-
and
I
I
feel
like
if,
if
I've
understood
chris
correctly,
I
feel
like
we
should
be
led
by
our
ambitions
in
our
roadmap
and
not
the
other
way
around
so
and
where
money
would
have
been
would
have
mattered.
More
would
be.
Are
we
in
a
bear
market
or
a
bull
market?
So
we
we
have
the
road
map
we
want
to
achieve.
G
We
know
what
needs
what
it
takes
for
us
to
build,
what
we
want
to
build,
and
if
we
were
in
a
buu
market
we
would
have
felt
a
need
to
rush
and
expand
and
grow
the
dev
teams,
but
we're
right
now
in
kind
of
a
bear
market.
So
we
still
have
the
road
map
same
ambitions
and
where
we
should
be
mindful
of
the
budget
would
be
not
to
rush
it.
F
F
The
market
is
certainly
not
like
going
in
a
good
direction
for
the
treasury
and
yeah
I
mean
we.
I
think
we
do
need
to
start
to
think
about
what
the
constraints
are
right
like
and
you
know,
what's
the
team
size
that
can
be
supported
on
an
individual
product
or
for
an
individual
squad
like
I
think
yeah
we
we
do
have
constraints
it's
just
like.
Maybe
if
you've
worked
here
for
the
past,
you
know
less
than
a
year,
maybe
hasn't
you
haven't
really
felt
that,
but
that
doesn't
mean
they
don't
exist
right.
E
E
E
First,
you
want
this
like
organic
period,
where
things
are
happening
and
there's
not
much
structure
around
them
and,
like
you
know,
something
emerges
that
kind
of
works
and
then
once
that
thing
kind
of
emerges
that
works,
then
you
put
this
like
structure
around
it
that
you
can
build
more
on
as
a
foundation
and
then
like
that's
a
stage,
and
then
you
know
you
have
another
wave
of
like
organic,
like
bottoms
up
things
emerging.
So
I.
E
F
F
We
raise
this
capital,
we
have
these
products,
we're
trying
to
make
succeed
and,
like
I
think
we
want
to
be
able
to
like
support
those
efforts
over
like
a
decent
time
frame,
which
is
probably
like
you
know
three
to
five
years
and-
and
so
I
think,
that's
like
one
way
to
view
like
the
constraints
right
like
we
need
to
be
able
to
support
like
a
runway
of
like
three
to
five
years.
I
would
say.
E
A
B
All
right,
yeah,
so
yeah,
I
guess
I'll
you're
free
to
read
through
this.
As
you
like,
it's
more
kind
of
a
draft
document
for
now
summarizing
a
discussion
we
had
yeah.
I
guess
it
was
the
start
of
this
week,
so
yeah,
it's
the
the
context
is
like,
as
you
might
have
seen
like
the
expo,
just
kind
of
being
a
bit
unstable
in
places
and
then
like.
I
was
talking
about
how
we
improve
that,
while
still
building
like
the
next
thing
like
and.
B
You
yeah,
so
I
guess
you
probably
all
know,
like
the
emphasis
has
very
much
been
on
guilds
for
a
bunch
of
reasons,
I'll
kind
of
go
into
aside
from
just
obviously
getting
it
ready
for
swapper
and
everyone
else
to
use
yeah.
So
I
guess
like
at
the
start
of
dxgov,
when
it
was
going
beyond
just
the
gusto
doing
his
own,
like
project,
to
make
our
governance
more
resilient.
The
like
the
goals
generally
were
to
like
make
everyone
use
the
expo.
B
B
B
We've
also
been
getting
dark
involved
with
branding
for
that,
like
new
unified
application
that
we
already
have
all
the
designs
in
the
ux
for
with
guilds,
and
it's
then
just
going
to
be
also
used
for
the
whole,
like
dow
stack
architecture
that
we
use
in
the
nda
style.
Currently
so
yeah
that
will
be
forped
off
and
then
the
idea
is
that
we'll
have
the
export
legacy
which
we're
going
to
put
as
much
effort
into
as
we
can
efficiently
to
make
it
stable.
B
So
we're
not
going
to
take
out
all
the
stuff
that
was
all
the
like:
we're
not
trying
to
improve
it
anymore.
We're
going
to
look
at
on
registering
some
schemes
that
aren't
used
simplifying
the
code,
a
lot
there's
a
few
other
things
as
well,
that
are
going
to
do
like
just
paying
for
some
premium
rpcs,
because
a
lot
of
the
issues
come
from
reliance
on
rpcs
and
then
changing
and
obviously
we'd
like
to
use
things
like
pocket
in
the
future
and
have
it
be
free
and
stuff.
B
B
We've
kind
of
been
having
as
well
as
obviously
like
simplifying
things
as
much
as
we
can,
so
that
it's
more
maintainable
and
so
aside
from
bug
fixes
once
that's,
nice
and
stable
that'll
be
frozen
and
we
want
like.
Hopefully
none
of
augusta's
time
will
be
going
towards
that.
Now.
In
my
time,
we'll
be
going
towards
that
aside
from
occasional
debugging,
which
hopefully
will
be
few
and
far
between
the
other
part
of
that.
Is
that
we're
getting
the
audits
back
from
omega
team,
hopefully
relatively
soon,
for
the
new
architecture,
with
wallet
schemes?
B
I
know
you've
probably
heard
about
us
going
about
wallace
games
a
lot,
but
they
do
really
improve
a
lot
of
the
complexity
in
the
current
system.
So
it's
it
makes
building
the
entire
ui
just
a
lot
nicer.
It
means
you
can
make
improvements
easier
to
how
the
cache
works
optimize.
It
get
rid
of
a
lot
of
those
frustrations,
and
so
the
idea
that
we've
had
is
that
we'll
have
the
export
be
stable,
especially
focused
on
mainnet.
B
Obviously,
and
then
we
can
put
more
of
that
effort
into
moving
over
to
the
the
new
architecture,
as
well
as
a
new
application
which
we
can
develop
faster,
because
we
wanted
to
support
the
the
legacy
stuff,
because
we
have
the
export
there,
it
will
all
still
be
working
so
yeah.
I
think
that
mostly
covers
it.
I
just
wanted
to
take
a
look
through
the
article
or
the
write
up
and
double
check
this
stuff.
B
Yeah
any
questions,
it's
still
very
much
like
a
mostly
work
in
progress
writing
this
up
like
we
scheduled
the
call
with
chris
and
dave
and
stuff,
because
currently
it's
basically
just
been
it's
basically
just
been
internal
and
john-
was
also
a
big
part
of
the
call
that
we
had
earlier
this
week.
So
there's
still
stuff
that
we
can
change
in
here,
but
that's
the
kind
of
current
idea
going
forward
just
to
make
sure
we're
putting
effort
into
the
right
places.
F
Obviously,
like
you
know,
these
are
like
new
contracts,
we're
getting
them
audited.
Now,
you
know
you'll
be
seeing
the
omega
team.
Dx
vote
audit
published
probably
pretty
soon
like
within
weeks.
I
would
think
the
guilds
are
getting
audited
by
sigma
prime
currently
so
you'll
be
seeing
another
report
for
that
pretty
soon
but
like
when
you're
dealing
with
like
a
significant
amount
of
value
it
it's
you
know.
Obviously
this
is
a
little
bit
scary
to
deploy
something
new.
That's
like
unproven,
and
you
know
it's
just
starting
to
get
audited.
F
So
I
think,
like
doing
a
bit
of
a
ramp
up
is
like
a
little
bit
more
of
a
conservative
approach.
That
makes
sense-
and
I
just
kind
of
put
numbers
on
this
right,
like
on
main
net
dx.
Dow
has
you
know,
like
90
million
wait,
70
million
of
value.
That
depends
how
you
account
for
the
dxd
right
like
there's
like
30
million
of
non
data
of
assets
and
then
another
like
30
million
xd
and
more
on
the
way.
F
So,
like
total,
like
current
value,
is
about
70
million
with
the
txt
and
the
swapper,
and
actually
you
know
with
the
dxd
still
trickling
in
over
the
next
year
from
the
lock-up
contract.
That's
actually
higher
on
gnosis
chain.
Okay,
like
the
dow
itself,
doesn't
have
a
whole
lot
in
the
treasury,
but
swapper
has
about
20
million
in
tvl,
and
you
know
the
dao
is
also
providing
liquidity
into
swapper
as
well.
Now
swappers
like
core
amm
contracts,
are
like
commutable
and
not
governed
by
anything
right.
F
Certainly
a
lot
of
value
at
stake
on
mainnet
and
kind
of
indirectly,
a
good
amount
of
value
at
stake
on
swap
on
gnosis
chain
as
well
a
little
bit
less
so
on
arbitrary
and
arbitrary,
actually
already
using
the
new
wallet
schemes
as
well.
So
you
know,
depending
on
the
value
at
stake
in
the
particular
chain,
we
can
you
know
kind
of
calibrate
how
quickly
we
move
or,
like
you
know
what
we're
willing
to
use
based
on
that.
F
I
think,
but
you
know
those
where
it's
more
critical,
like
you
know,
may
end
up
being
the
most
significant
example
of
that,
like.
I
think
it
makes
much
more
sense
to
be
conservative,
like
the
dow
stack
contracts
that
we're
using
you
know,
they've
been
in
use
for
years.
Gnosis
had
a
couple
of
rounds
of
audits
done
on
those
like
back
in
20
end
of
2018,
beginning
of
2019.
F
C
B
So
we
still
have
that
like
previous
reference,
because
obviously
the
avatar
address
is
it's
generally
controlled
by
reference
by
ens,
but
it's
still
an
important
thing
to
have
consistent
if
we
can,
and
so
that
gets
rid
of.
Basically
all
the
security
risk
from
like
before
we
would
just
have
one
like
switchover
moment.
I'd.
Imagine
john
maynard
probably
won't
get
much
sleep
before
that,
but
this
way
we
can
have
a
much
slower,
more
controlled
rollout
process.
B
F
Yeah,
it's
like
we,
you
know.
Obviously
we
have
the
auditing
work.
That
needs
to
be
done.
We
need
to
have
like
a
testing
plan
that
we
need
to
execute
on,
and
I
also
there's
also
like
the
operational
plan
right
like
how
do
we?
How
are
we
going
to
like
get
on
board
into
like
a
new
system
and
like
actually
manage
that
process
of
of
ramping
up
a
new
system
operationally?
F
E
B
Yeah,
I
don't
know
about
the
final
thing.
I'd
imagine
if
we're
transferring
ownership
of
the
avatar,
then
the
funds
would
go
with
it.
I
think
the
idea
is
that
we
would
have
like
slowly
moving
funds
in
to
make
more
use
of
the
new
dow
probably
makes
sense,
and
so
I
don't.
I
think
we
want
to
avoid
the
whole
treasury
being
moved
at
once.
B
F
F
F
Ultimately
we
end
up
with
like
the
governance
2.0
like
implementation
right
and
then
we
need
to
prove
that
system
right.
So
it's
going
to
get
audited,
it's
going
to
get
tested
and
then
I
think
we
can
deploy
it
on
mainnet
and
actually
start
transferring
some
responsibilities
over
to
it.
Like
just
send.
F
You
know
some
number
of
millions
to
it.
Maybe
right
like
and
maybe
ramp
that
up
right.
So
you
have
like
a
little
bit
of
a
built-in
bug:
bounty,
honey
pot.
There.
We
also
get
the
operational
exercise
of
the
new
system
to
see
that
it's
like
working
as
we
expected,
and
you
know,
gives
us
more
time
to
like
test
it
essentially
and
prove
it
and
then
so.
F
I
think,
there's
this
question
of
what
happens
with
the
avatar
right.
So
I
think
there's
two
approaches.
We
probably
we
need
to
think
about
this
a
little
more,
but
one
would
be
like
once
you've
like
gotten
to
a
point
of
confidence
with
the
new
deployment
and
how
much
funds
it's
using
and
how
it's
operating
you
could
transfer
all
of
the
funds
over
and
then
we
have
a
new
avatar.
F
That's
maybe
unattractive
from
the
perspective
of,
like
you
know,
ether
scan
and
whatever
recognizes
the
avatar
and
there's
like
history
and
everything.
So
you
know
if
we
can,
maybe
we
want
to
avoid
that.
I
think
it
maybe
can
be
avoided
even
while
testing
the
deployment
by
actually
eventually
just
switching
the
avatar
over
to
like
you,
can
keep
the
avatar
and
like
register
the
new
schemes
in
the
new
system.
I
I
think,
I'm
pretty
sure
this
is
possible
and
yeah.
F
I
mean,
with
the
downstack
architecture,
supports
that
we
haven't
like
fleshed
out
the
governance.
2.0
plans
completely.
So
I
don't
want
to
like
commit
to
that
statement,
but
I
think
it's
likely
that
it
that
we
could
take
that
approach,
in
which
case
after
testing
it
on
mainnet
for
a
while.
You
could
then
flip
the
avatar
to
the
new
consensus
mechanisms
and
then
transfer
all
the
funds
back
and
music.
So
I
mean
it
gets
a
little
complicated
like
this.
F
F
F
The
time
text
is
actually
a
parameter
called
like
time
to
execution
in
the
dow
stack
like
system
and
the
upgraded
version
that
you
know,
gusto
primarily
built
like
last
year,
had
changed
some
things
and
the
time
to
execution
was
set
to,
I
think
one
day
and
what
ended
up
what
this
ended
up.
Meaning
is
that
when
you
had
boosted
proposals,
the
boosting
period
and
like
time
to
actually
like
pass
a
boosted
proposal
was
actually
longer
than
one
day,
and
so
they
basically
any
boosted
proposal,
was
effectively
expiring
before
it
could
be
executed.
F
C
F
B
Around
the
like
mistake
that
was
made
with
arbitrary,
like
the
main
actually
doing
in
parallel,
isn't
like
the
main
way
we're
even
addressing
that
the
main
way
we're
addressing
that
is
just
around
testing
and
how
we're
actually
working
on
the
code,
which
is
what
we're
already
doing
with
like
scripts
and
local
deployments
and
writing
better
scripts
to
actually
deploy
things.
So
it's
not
just.
C
F
We
had
done
a
parallel
deployment.
Well,
yeah.
The
new
deployment
would
have
been
dead,
but
then
we're
okay,
because
we
hadn't,
really.
We
were
ramping
up
things,
slowly,
right
and
yeah,
and
so
basically
that's
like
that's
the
kind
of
thinking
of
why.
I
think
this,
like
a
parallel
deployment
and
a
ramp
up
to
prove
that
deployment
is
like
a
more
conservative
and
like
secure
approach.
That
makes
sense
when
we
have.
B
B
It
also
actually
lines
up
very
well
with
just
what
we
want
to
do.
What
I
talked
about
previously
with
the
like
front
end
in
the
application
having
all
the
new
stuff
just
being
the
new
application,
is,
it
probably
makes
a
lot
more
sense
and
people
actually
working
on
it.
It's
like
a
very
clear
difference,
but
also
just
from
developing
it.
It
helps
a
lot
to
be
able
to
actually
focus
on
the
new
stuff
and
not
have
to
consider
legacy
in
there.
F
B
It's
a
kind
of
it's
kind
of
security
in
the
like.
It's
limiting
complexity
as
well.
Having
two
separate
things
is
a
lot
better
than
us
having
one
dow
with
multiple
types
of
like
the
the
new
wallet
schemes
function
differently,
they
use
dxd.
What's
the
like?
Having
that,
all
in
one
system
is
also
maybe
just
not
a
good
idea
from
like
keeping
track
of
how
everything
works
as
well.
B
F
Yeah
there's
an
operational
burden
here
right
of
doing
it's
sort
of
like
a
trade-off,
and
you
know
by
my
judgment.
I
think
it's
like
a
worthwhile
trade-off,
but
we
want
to
be
careful
right,
I
mean,
but
we
want
to
be
conscious
of
what
that
trade-off
is
right
and
like,
hopefully
not
you
know.
Hopefully
we,
the
timeline
is,
is
expeditious
right,
like
not
going
to
turn
into
this
thing.
That's
like
just
this
like
draining
burden
of
like
operational
overhead,
we'll
try
to
be
mindful
of
that.
B
Yeah
so
like
just
a
big
thing
that
we
didn't
have
before
is
like
just
a
script
like
a
ghost,
that's
been
putting
a
lot
of
effort
into
that
and
we're
using
it
in
testing,
but
it
will
still
be
using
that
in
deployment
as
well.
So
that's
something
that
it's
just
code
we
can.
We
can
test
it.
We
can
have
multiple
people.
Look
at
it.
F
Hopefully,
the
like
governance
2.0
system
will
make,
like
you,
know,
rep,
syncing
and
stuff
kind
of
an
easier
exercise.
So
I'm
hopeful
that,
like
you
know
when
it's
the
governance,
2.0
system,
that
we're
actually
deploying
you
know,
rep
syncing
like
during
this,
like
ramp
up
period,
will
hopefully
not
be
like
that
it'll.
B
A
F
B
F
Exactly,
but
I
guess
like
where
are
we
this
is
where,
like
you
know,
where
what's
our
plan
on
deploying
that,
are
we
doing
that
on
main
net?
That
may
probably
you
know,
we
got
to
be
mindful
of
the
operational
burden
so
like
these,
like
1.5
governance,
1.5
or
whatever
like?
Where
are
we
actually
using
that
we
got
to
figure
that
out?
I
think.
B
Yeah
I
mean
yeah
just
from
like
a
super
high
level
like
there's
still
a
lot
of
stuff
that
needs
done
in
testing,
since
we
like
at
the
current
moment,
won't
have
the
ui
for
that
we're
working
on
refactoring
and
then
implementing
that
in
the
new
unified
application.
But
it
will
essentially
go
localhost
testing,
which
is
what
we'll
do
in
developments.
Of
course,
we'll
do
a
rank
b,
testing
and
then
it'll
just
be
arbitrage.
Training
then
main
net.
F
C
A
B
The
like
the
logic
behind
everything
is
the
same.
It
allows
us
to
the
wallet
schemes
will
still
be
used
in
governance
2.0,
so
we
get
to
test
that
out
first,
but
I
think
the
other
important
part
is
we
get
to
test
out
this
whole
process
first
as
well
before
we
do
governance
2.0,
which
has
its
own
risks
regarding
like
what
the
power
structure
ends
up
becoming.
B
I
think
we'll
depend
on
time
scales
a
lot,
but
it's
a
discussion
we
can
have
later,
certainly
like
hypnosis
chain
is
something
that
is
definitely
going
to
be
using
the
1.5
version.
I
think
we'll.
I
think
it.
It
very
very
least
makes
sense
to
have
it
in
parallel,
whether
it
has
funds
and
whether
we
have
the
goal
to
ever
move
current
down
to
1.5
before
2.01
main
net.
G
F
G
B
B
B
Role,
yes,
so
a
fun
feature
we're
working
on
that.
What's
the
safe
has
beaten
us
too,
is
to
have
tenderly
simulations
in
the
like
proposal
building
process.
We
already
have
designs
for
it
and
the
apis
are
there
now,
so
we
just
need
to
get
around
to
implementing
it,
but
the
the
new
application
will
have
tenderly
built
in
so
as
you're
building
your
proposal,
you'll
be
able
to
see
if
there's
any
issues
occurring
there.
G
Yeah
looking
at
the
agenda,
I
I
realized.
We
were
not
enough
of
us
here
to
actually
have
a
proper
chat
about
the
group
tickets.
We'll
probably
have
to
do
it
in
the
chat,
so
everyone
can
chime
in
whether
they've
managed
to
secure
a
ticket
for
themselves
or
not
so
we
could
prepare-
and
that
leaves
us
with
the
last
point
product
ux
web
2
versus
web3.
G
Fintech
traditional
web
2
fintech
is
pretty
simple
to
be
honest
and
that's
why
it's
easy
for
them
to
cater
to
users
in
terms
of
ux.
It's
not
that
they're
doing
much
work.
It's
just
that
that
job
is
easy.
If
you
think
of
a
bank
offering
you
online
banking,
you
basically
still
have
to
go
to
their
branch
and
they
just
ask
you
what
kind
of
an
account
you
need
and
what
kind
of
a
cart
you'd
like
and
and
all
that
the
online
application
does
is
show
you
your
balance.
So
it's
pretty
much.
G
F
Sometimes
it's,
like
you
know,
there's
temptation
of
doing
things
the
easy
way
or
the
old
way
or
like
the
centralized
way,
because
it
offers
capabilities
that
we
don't
really
have
in
web3.
But
I
think
the
key
thing
is
that
we
don't
have
these
yet
right
like,
and
I
think
they
will
be
built,
and
it's
just
going
to
take
time.
But
that's
it's
it's.
I
think
it's
very
important
in
crypto
to
not
like
lose
sight
of
like
what
is
like
the
core
reason
that
crypto
even
exists
or
why
we're?
F
Even
here
right,
like
kind
of
go
going
back
to
the
original
bitcoin
white
paper
like,
why
did
that
resonate
so
much
and
stuff
right,
and
it
was
all
about
removing
the
intermediaries
like
creating
like
these
trustless
systems.
So
I
think
it's
just
good
to
keep
that
kind
of
core
value
in
mind
as
we
go
through
our
day-to-day.
C
G
Yeah
I
mean
there
are
some
really
fundamental
questions
and,
and
we'll
probably
end
the
call
with
this
that
I've
been
asking
myself
like.
We've
been
thinking
of
running
campaigns
to
have
certain
assets
moved
from
one
network
to
another
network,
but
when
you
think
about
it,
if
there
is
an
application
tied
to
that
asset
on
a
certain
network,
and
if
you
want
those
holders
to
move
a
portion
of
their
liquidity
to
another
network,
what's
the
utility
for
them
like
what?
What
would
they
be
doing
with
that
asset?
G
G
G
We
we
have
applications
running
on
both
mainnet
and
and
on
l1
and
l2,
and
and
that
kind
of
fragments,
liquidity
as
well
and
and
startups
and
and
founders
are
trying
to
they're
busting
the
heads
trying
to
figure
out
what
to
do
so
it
it's
not
like
a
problem.
We
have.
It's
like
the
whole
ecosystem
has
to
figure
it
out,
but
the
one
thing
that
has
come
up
when
I've
been
meeting
people
in
amsterdam
is
that
we
need
fresh
blood.
G
What
is
what
why
do
they
need
it
like
they.
They
they
have
this
innate
like
feeling
that
they,
you
know
that
they're
interested
in
technology.
They
want
to
use
the
technology
they
they
want
to
see
in
what
ways
it
could
improve
their
lives
and
and
or
yeah,
but
they
don't
see
it
like.
It's
not
clear
it,
it
needs
a
lot
of
convincing
and
even
in
the
end,
they're
still
not
sure.
Well
is
this
thing
really
helping
me
or
making
my
life
more
complex,
so
yeah.
F
I
think,
on
the
multi-chain
question
too,
it's
important
to
like
like
see
how
scalability
is
actually
a
ux
like
problem
right,
yeah
like
making
transaction
fees
reasonable
for
the
end
user,
whether
you
know,
on
top
of
all
the
other
ux
problems
that
we
have
right
like,
but
but
scalability
is
like
a
very
key
one.
That's
sort
of
playing
out
with
these
layer,
twos
and
you
know
different
chains.