►
From YouTube: EIPIP Meeting #5
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
B
Sure
and
hello
everybody,
my
first
time
here,
I'll
just
introduce
myself
quickly,
yeh,
so
my
name
is
Sam.
I
am
a
web
developer
at
the
etherium
foundation,
so
I
mostly
focus
on
aetherium
org,
which
is
primarily
on
just
education,
improving
onboarding,
particularly
for
developers
entering
the
ecosystem.
B
Previously
I've
just
worked,
you
know
at
various
like
web
agencies,
doing
a
lot
of
SEO
and
like
user
testing
and
web
design.
So
this
is
like
an
exciting
area
for
me
to
help
out,
ideally
with
this
game
community.
So
what
I
was
asking
about
in
telegram
and
like
why
I
wanted
to
chat
with
you
guys,
it's
really
not
so
much
about
changing
any
of
the
like
VIP
process
per
se.
It's
really
just
focused
on
like.
B
Can
we
improve
SEO
and
discoverability
of
the
like
existing
a
IP
website,
which
I
think
like
is
an
excellent
resource
for
people
to
you
know,
find
a
specific
IP
they're
looking
for
or
browse
existing
ones
and
see
what
their
current
statuses,
but
the
TLDR
is
just
that
website
does
not
rank
at
all
like
if
you
search
any
given
yeah,
if
he,
it
probably
won't
be
on
the
top
two
pages,
so
the
thought
we
had
was
well.
What
can
we
do
to
improve
that?
B
What
we've
tried
so
far
is
just
a
lot
of
like
optimizing
meta
tags
on
that
site
to
just
be
more
targeted
in
terms
of
like
the
keywords
that
it's
going
for
and
we've
also
added
links
from
the
core
etherion
org
domain,
like
in
the
footer,
for
instance,
on
various
resource
pages,
to
try
to
just
like
push
organic
traffic
that
way
and
signal
to
Google
and
all
the
other.
You
know
search
crawler
BOTS
of
the
web,
that
hey
this.
B
This
website
exists
and
is
important
that
it's
valuable
so
far
that
really
hasn't
accomplished
much
so
the
proposal
I'm
putting
forward
is
hey.
What
if
we,
you
know,
keep
the
existing
a
IP
repository,
as
is
it's
great
for
what
it
does,
but
merely
mirror
or
migrate
that
content,
so
that,
with
every
new
VIP
that's
merged,
we
could
set
up
an
automated
process.
B
What
information
you
might
like
to
know
what
like
concerns
or
doubts
or
questions
you
have
and
just
like
what
are
my
blind
spots
because
I'm
coming
at
this
from
a
very
particular
angle,
you
know
I'm
sure
I
have
a
somewhat
biased
opinion,
given
that
I'm
already
working
on
this
website.
Hey
it'd,
be
great
to
add
this
and
have
this
but
yeah
looking
for
her
I
guess:
there's
just
much
feedback
as
possible
on
what
we
think
of
this
and
how
we
might
go
forward
or
how
I
might
gather
additional
input
from
the
community.
C
I
think
my
general
feedback
is
like
this
is
a
great
idea
and
I
have
like
some
specific
I
guess:
implementation,
details,
questions
but
like
with
it
conceptually,
like
you
know,
highlighting
AI
piece
on
a
theory
about
org
feels
like
and
like
like
all-around
win,
I,
don't
know,
I,
guess
in
terms
of
specifics.
Is
it
like
too
much
to
like
move
all
the
eeap's
website
they
ethereal
org
or
you
know,
maybe
we
could
have
like.
Or
do
you
want
to
have
like
a
page?
You
know
on
ethereal
dollar,
that
kind
of
explains.
C
So
maybe,
if
you
had
like
a
you
know
like
a
one-page
explainer
and
then
perhaps
like
the
newest
VIPs
or
the
e
IPS
that
are
just
like
associated
with
the
upcoming
upgrade
or
something
like
that,
like
a
subset
of
them,
that's
kind
of
curated
and
that's
a
bit
harder
to
do,
because
you
need
to
take
carried
them
somehow.
But
it
seems
like
it
might
just
be
more
valuable.
Because
this
way
people
aren't
like
just
looking
a
list
of
150
IPS
without
any
context.
B
Totally
yeah,
that's
a
great
question
and
the
short
answer,
I
would
say,
is
both
like
whether
or
not
we
do
decide
to
migrate
the
EIP
content
to
a
theory
or,
like
I,
absolutely
think
on
etherion
org.
We
should
have
a
like
beginners
introduction
to
hey.
This
is
how
like
changes
to
the
protocol
happen.
C
But
yeah
I
think
that
yeah
that'd
be
really
good
and
maybe
you
know,
like
the
the
intro
page
I,
think
I'd
etherium,
the
Lord
kind
of
links,
a
bunch
of
videos
that
talk
about
this.
So
maybe
like
linking
you
know
a
few
of
those
and
whatnot
and
and
just
like
yeah,
giving
some
feedback
on
what
it
is
forgiving
some
information
on
what
it
is
and
then
providing
the
option
to
like
dive
into
the
details.
Yeah
I.
D
D
Historically,
so
then
it
just
it's
like
well
I!
Guess
no
one's
gonna
be
able
to
do
that.
So
not
having
people
behind
the
web
side
is
holding
back
the
EIP,
updating
the
EIP
process
side
and
then,
and
in
general,
just
isn't
really
very
usable,
and
without
people
who
are
focused
on
usability,
you
just
won't
ever
get
anywhere.
I.
A
Agree
and
I
think
that
this
is
a
great
idea,
I
would
say
as
long
as
we
have
redirects
from
the
old
EIP
site
to
the
new
one,
because
that's
heavily
linked
out
also.
We
need
to
separate
this,
although
we
need
to
keep
this
in
mind.
We
need
to
separate
the
translation
effort
from
the
overall
proposal
that
you
put
there,
because
that's
a
big
effort,
the
translation
project.
However,
you
should
design
the
new
site
so
that
it
can
easily
be
translatable.
I
guess
so
maybe
integrate
Crowden,
but
don't
use
it
until
we
want
to
use
it.
A
B
Yeah
and
would
definitely
be
looking
for
you
folks,
on
some
guidance
around
like
what
next
steps
would
be
like
I'd,
be
happy
to
put
together
a
more
formal
proposal.
At
this
point
it
was
kind
of
just
like
hey
I'll
link
out
to
the
github
issue,
so
you
guys
can
see
the
discussion
and
get
some
contacts.
C
So
I
think
one
thing
that
we
want
to
do
as
like
a
next
step.
I
agree:
I,
like
more
formal
proposal,
is
really
good,
but
just
gave
the
buy-in
from
like
VIP
editors
like
there's
the
Guillory,
IP
Channel,
all
right
and
I
think
that's
like
they're
all
people
who
will
have
good
opinions
on
this
stuff.
Ok
and
trying
to
link
you
and.
E
B
That
seems
like
a
great
idea
and
I
have
chatted
with
a
couple
like
Hudson
I
know,
we've
talked
about
this
I
did
have
a
call
with
Nick
Johnson,
who
is
like
had
some
sceptic
points
that
he
brought
up
but
was
overall,
not
opposed
to
it,
but
I
definitely
agree
worthwhile,
just
getting
everyone's
input
on
it.
The.
A
B
At
least
to
start,
my
thought
would
be
to
like
not
touch
or
change
that
aspect
of
the
process,
like
I
think
that
we
can
keep
as
like
an
isolated
piece
of
the
system.
If
you
will
the
way
that
I
imagine
at
least
initially
implementing
this
is
like
anytime,
an
EIP
document
is
merged
into
the
EIP
repo.
We
have
some
like
Travis
or
automated
github
bot
watcher
that
just
grabs
that
same
markdown
file
and
copies
it
over
into
the
like.
B
E
A
Whenever
you
submit
an
EIP
so
like
I'm,
writing
any
IP
and
I
have
it
and
it's
just
a
brand
new
fresh
VIP
pull
request
right.
What
it
does
the
bot
does.
Is
it
checks
the
header
file
for
compliance
and
then,
if
it's
compliant
it
ships,
it's
a
draft.
And
then,
if
you
get
further
along
in
the
process
and
editors
approve
of
it,
then
it
gets
put
to
accept
it
or
whatever.
A
The
next
step
is,
but
it
always
checks
that
header
file,
so
if
you're
gonna
make
a
bot
that
does
that
anyway,
I
think
reusing
and
upgrading
his
would
probably
be
a
faster
and
better
process,
because
then
we'd
have
two
BOTS
going
that
we'd
have
to
upgrade
simultaneously
whenever
something
new
happened
with
the
header
file
or
whenever
you
know
it's
already
grabbing
and
converting
it
to
markdown.
So
most
of
the
works
already
done
on
that
bot
I
see
okay,
yeah.
That
sounds
fair.
It's
putting
it
in
a.
B
D
A
B
A
F
B
F
A
A
Yeah
I
should
have
been
more
specific
on
that,
but
otherwise
yeah
overall,
it's
sounding
like
everyone's
for
this.
If
you
flush
it
out
a
little
bit
more
Sam,
then
we
can
pick
apart.
The
pieces
maybe
set
up
a
different
telegram
group
of
people
who
are
super
interested
in
doing
this,
so
it
can
move
along
faster
than
these
IP
IP
meetings.
E
A
Just
tell
us
when
the
next
steps
done
and
we
can
set
up
another
telegram
room
and
get
some
of
us
who
want
to
be
super
involved
in
any
web
site
meetings
that
would
be
dealing
with
this
cuz.
It
sounds
like
this
would
be.
This
would
flood
into
the
etherium
dot
org
meetings
that
happen
with
part
of
the
community
right
right.
G
A
H
D
So,
just
as
I've
been
thinking
about
things
that
would
be
really
big
value
adds
that
it
could
offer,
in
particular
around
the
EIP
centric
process
and
highlighting
where
things
are
as
far
as
efi
and
sort
of
a
like
something
that
was
has
been
requested
from
the
community
recently
as
a
visual
way
of
seeing
the
e
IPS
going
through
the
process,
and
we
have-we
don't
really
have
a
way
to
do
that.
At
the
moment.
Mm-Hmm.
A
Oh
like
a
little
map
or
something
at
the
top
of
the
EIP
page,
that's
just
like,
like
maybe
even
a
little
animation.
That's
like
SVG,
or
something
like
that.
That
goes
from
draft
and
like
has
an
arrow
pointing
to
the
next
step,
but
that
next
step
is
yellow
or
something
I'm
kind
of
visualizing
it
off
to
write
it
down
and
MS
paint
or
Photoshop,
or
something
the.
D
D
D
B
It's
been
a
few
years,
but
I
would
be
happy
to
take
a
look.
I
mean
that's
part
of
this
investigation.
I
assume,
like
you,
said
it
sounds
better
to
just
kind
of
work
off
the
existing
BOTS,
improve
that
add
functionality
to
copy
over
this
content
to
a
theory
morg.
So
it's
definitely
something
that
I
could
help
look
into
and.
A
A
B
A
B
A
H
That
actually
carry
over
from
the
past
two
meetings
that
we
were
trying
to
come
up
with
the
code
of
conduct
for
general
etherium
platform,
the
gator
or
the
other
telegram
platform.
It
is
just
a
carry
over
and
it
was
initiated
by
channel,
but
I
don't
see
him
again
in
this
meeting.
So
if
anybody
else
has
any
update
on
it
on
like
how
to
proceed
on
that,
we
can
go
ahead,
discuss
it
or
maybe
in
the
next
meeting.
I
will
bring
it
I.
Think
agenda.
D
Mine
is
less
on
doing
a
code
of
conduct
and
the
etherium
in
in
this
like
porting,
over
and
figuring
out
what
ports
over
but
I,
do
think
it
would
be
good
to
have
some
guidelines
written
around
how
github
works.
That
sort
of
doesn't
exactly
work
well
like
there
are
certain
things
that
github
can
do
that.
We've
had
normal.
We've
had
like
a
normal
expectations
around
how
to
manage
those
features,
but
that's
because
it's
github
wasn't
made
to
be:
do
the
EIP
repository
kind
of
work.
D
D
It
would
be
good
that
other
editors,
that
editors,
don't
change.
People's
poll
requests,
don't
like
don't
edit
them
on
behalf
of
other
people
without
permission,
because
technically
you
can
because
usually
you're
in
a
code
environment,
but
this
is
like
a
standards
environment.
So
there
I
think
there
are
certain
things
like
that.
It
would
be
good
to
clarify
I.
A
Completely
agree
with
James
and
I
said
I'm
saying
that
if
the
person
who
made
this
part
of
the
agenda
is
referring
to
making
a
code
of
conduct
for
discussing
a
ip's
within
the
repo
I,
think
that
should
be
low
priority
because
most
of
it,
civil
and
most
of
it,
is
outside
of
the
EIP
repo
into
a
theory
of
magicians
where
they
have
their
own
spoken
or
unspoken
code
of
conduct,
and
they
referee
that
so
yeah.
That
should
be
low
priority.
A
H
A
F
I
did
speaking
of
code
of
conduct.
I
did
the
pull
request
to
change
that
status
and
I
had
some
stuff
that
I
had
included
on
the
bottom
in
detailing
some
notes
of
what
I
was
doing,
why
I
was
doing
it
and
whose
approval
I
got
and
everything,
but
but
someone
else
I'm
not
sure
who
accepted
it,
but
they
totally
changed
all
that
and
basically
all
they
did
has
changed
the
status
from
draft
to
abandon.
But
there
was
discussion
going
on
that
it
shouldn't
go
to
abandon,
but
anyway
it
got
accepted
in
that
state.
F
So
that
was
kind
of
confusing
to
me,
because
I
didn't
have
any
control
over
that
they
totally
overrode
my
pull
request
and
just
they
just
basically
just
changed
the
status
but
anyway,
so
I
didn't
know.
If,
if
I
did
it
wrong
or
if
that
person
really
did
the
right
thing
or
what
is
the
process
but
anyway
but
anyway,
so
that's
the
it's
been
accepted
and
the
change
and
the
only
thing
that
changed
is
the
status
changed
from
a
draft
to
abandon
so
I'm,
not
sure
I'm,
kind
of
thinking,
pooja
and
I
were
discussing.
F
It
shouldn't
go
to
abandon
because
that
can
be
resurrected,
but
she
was
saying:
maybe
it
should
go
to
superseded
and
I
did
so,
and
the
original
author
says
yeah,
it
might
be
superseded
by
the
6465
rule,
stuff
and
I.
Try
to
do
some
research
on
that
and
it
looks
like
EW
what
50
might
be
a
superseding
to
that,
but
anyway,
I'm
I'm,
just
kind
of
lost
there.
Yeah.
A
And
I
think
part
of
the
reason
this
is
gonna
be
difficult
at
first
and
we
might
want
to
put
a
pause
on
it.
In
my
opinion,
is
because,
if
we're
redoing
rules
for
EIP
one,
what
we're
gonna
end
up
doing
is
changing
a
lot
of
these
statuses
and
then
going
back
and
having
to
readjust
ax
Phi
or
at
were
sorry
change
the
status
again
once
we
come
up
with
you
know
a
definitive
status
process.
We
have,
you
know
the
ones
we
have
right
now
are
probably
gonna
stay
for.
A
So
I
I
think
that
it
might
be
good
if
until
we
get
like
new
editors
who
are
like
and
there's
like
an
actual
like
onboarding
process
for
editors,
where
that
we
have
like
some
of
the
expected
rules
about
discussing
this
with
people
on
a
PR-
and
we
have
the
new
AIP
one
stuff
that
we
kind
of
wrap
up
on
over
the
next,
hopefully
six
months,
because
I
know
these
things
can
go
slow,
sometimes
I.
We
might
put
this
on
pause,
but
I
want
to
hear
what
you
think.
F
H
A
H
A
Got
it
okay,
yeah,
so
I
guess
the
consensus
here
is
put
those
put
the
clean
up
and
changing
the
state
on
hold
and
focus
on
both
improving
EIP
one
until
we're
satisfied
and
onboarding
new
editors
and
coming
up
with
a
process
that
the
old
editors
agree
upon
Nessa,
not
necessarily,
but
that
would
make
it
easier
because
although
I
I
technically
have
ultimate
authority
from
a
settings
and
github
and
technical
perspective
to
add
editors,
I'd
like
to
have
the
buy-in
from
the
editors
we
currently
have
before
doing
that.
So.
H
Yeah,
that
sounds
like
a
great
idea
so
like
we
should
be,
focusing
as
we
should
be,
focusing
on
idioms
for
the
EAP
one
and
just
on
the
onboarding,
more
AIP
editors.
So
any
further
ideas
on
this
onboarding
process
would
be
great
to
have.
Not,
if
not
in
this
meeting
that
maybe
in
next
meeting,
we
would
like
to
discuss
something
and
on
priority
yeah.
A
Set
up
an
assessed
state
of
priorities,
for
you
means
set
up
a
state
of
priorities
for
each
thing.
We're
doing
yeah
and
also
some
of
them
are
gonna
require
an
order
like
most
things,
in
my
opinion,
are
on
hold
until
AIP
one
gets
edited
and
the
reason
I'm
saying
that
is
like,
for
instance,
the
EIP
bot.
It's
gonna
have
to
have
new
features
based
on
feedback
from
e-I
p1
and
the
changing
and
cleanup
VIPs.
A
It's
gonna
have
to
wait
until
a
IP
one,
and
the
role
of
editors
is
something
that
is
any
IP
one
and
will
want
to
change
before
we
bring
on
new
editors.
So
I
think
if
we
spend
the
next
month
or
two
months,
focusing
on
e
IP
one
and
also
getting
a
clearer
understanding
of
how
we
can
approve
those
PRS
that
we're
going
to
talk
about
in
a
few
addenda
items
from
now.
I
think
that
would
be
valuable
sounds.
D
So
if
we
have
the
first
step,
be
a
everything
that's
older
than
six
months
that
hasn't
been
touched,
it's
moved
to
inactive
than
anyone
that
cares
about
their
status
can
say:
oh
well
actually,
and
then
it
makes
room
for
people
to
interact
with
the
process
and
and
have
that,
be
a
standard
moving
forward.
Where,
if
something
doesn't
happen
on
any
IP
for
six
months,
it
gets
moved
to
inactive
that
isn't
a
value
judgment.
It's
a
it's
a
part
of
the
process
and
it
can
always
be
moved
to
wherever
else
it
ends
up
going.
D
A
And
we
can
change
the
IP
one.
Incrementally
that's
another
thing
to
kind
of
discuss
if
we
need
an
big
pr2
overhaul,
a
lot
of
aspects,
a
bunch
of
PRS
to
overhaul
various
aspects
or
a
combination.
But
I
agree
with
you
that
this
change
can
be
put
in
and
then
whoever
wants
to
get
used
to
the
bot.
This
can
be
their
first
task
to
be
able
to
get
the
bot
to
make
everything
inactive
or
something
like
that.
Yep
in.
A
We
could
do
a,
we
could
do
a
github
or
what's
a
call,
not
get
going.
E
A
Coin
grant
specifically
for
this
EIP
initiative:
let's
add
that
to
the
agenda
for
next
time,
cuz
I
need
to
flesh
out
that
idea
in
my
head,
but
whoever's
taking
notes.
Let's
add
that
to
the
agenda
next
time
and
yeah-
that's
kind
of
it
for
me.
As
far
as
those
thoughts
who
has
comments,
it
might
be
good.
A
It
sounds
like
James
talked
to
them
and
if
they
like
it,
then
we
need
to
have
it.
At
least
you
know
at
least
a
three
week
discussion
on
the
PR
about
it
and
try
to
advertise
it
on
Twitter
and
read
it,
but
that's
that's
more
for
procedural
stuff
like
it's,
probably
gonna
get
approved,
but
it
would
be
unwise
for
us
to
just
assume
that
we
should
go
in
and
improve
it
without
a
last
call
phase
and
without
a
few
other
things.
A
F
H
I
I
may
have
a
question
over
here,
maybe
to
to
James
like
we
are
stopping
the
cleanup
process
for
now.
In
the
cleaner
process,
we
were
initially
considering
the
EAP
that
has
changed.
The
first
attacked
like
from
WIP
to
draft,
or
at
least
they
are
in
draft
so
when
this
board
is
going
to
change
them
to
all
inactive.
H
D
The
next
step
I
would
for
that
I
would
say,
is
when
we
do
it.
We
have
a
reach
out
to
here.
If
you
have,
if
you
have
any
thoughts
or
want
to
talk
about
any
IP
that
you
bring
so
that
anyone
who
says
oh
hey
I,
want
to
X,
then
they
know
exactly
where
to
go
to
so
as
and
then
have
that
be
sounds
like
like
some
people
on
the
other
side
of
that
to
be
there
to
help
them
do
whatever
it
is
that
they
want
to
do
with
their
IP.
H
That's
what
I'm
referring
to?
Is
it
something
that
is
playing
any
significant
rule
here,
because
I'm
asking
this
question
because
I
may
have
been
the
one
of
the
editors
who's
EIP?
Is
there
not?
A
teacher
sodium
may
have
been
one
of
the
authors
who
CIP
is
there.
It
is
inactive
for
past
six
month
and
I'm
kind
of
lost
like
where
to
move
it.
It
was
I
I
submitted
the
PR.
There
was
some
discussion
going
on
and
I
have
to
flash
it
more
and
then
move
it
to
draft.
A
Generally,
right
now
the
bots,
if
you're
you
can
try
to
merge,
wait,
let
me
look
and
see
there.
The
bot
should
do
something
automatically
I'm
not
familiar
enough
with
the
bot.
No,
but
I
know
drafts
get
automatically
added
as
a
draft,
but
are
you
trying
to
get
it
to
accepted
no.
H
H
H
H
D
Just
to
give
my
thoughts
on
I
created
that
the
channel
as
a
kind
of
a
test
to
see
what
happened.
The
hope
was
that
if
we
get
all
of
the
PR
drafts
to
into
one
place,
then
the
IP
editors
would
have
an
easy
way
of
finding
it.
I
don't
know.
If
anyone
here
knows
this,
maybe
I
should
give
background
on
the
time
grew.
My
announcement
group
I
mean
so.
H
So
do
you
want
to
you
know
publicize
this,
so
people
if
they
want
to
get
their
draft
to
be.
You
know,
I
mean,
of
course
it
is
in
the
oil
called
F
meeting,
so
people
would
know
about
it,
but
is
it?
Is
it
something
that
you
are
looking
forward
to
getting
it
publicized
or
is
it
something
that
needs
to
be
not
very
open
to
public?
What
is
the
idea
there
publicized.
D
Okay,
if
someone
wants
their
IP
did
their
polar
press
to
be
put
there
I'd
be
happy
to
help
get
it
to
their.
The
idea
was
to
collect
all
of
the
drafts,
all
of
the
requests
for
merge
of
drafts
into
one
place
so
that
they
don't
get
lost
in
all
the
other
places
where
they
are
because
right
now,
it's
kind
of
hard
for
ap
editors
to
find
them.
D
A
H
Can
be
EAP
gator
discussion,
one
of
somebody
they
suggested
that
they
are
not
willing
to
accept
I
mean
not
willing
to
some
day.
They
think
it
is
not
right
to
be
updated
to
e
IP
one
because
they
seems
it
seems
to
be
more
of
you
know.
Informational
and
I
do
agree
to
it
like
metal,
2,
3
3
is
kind
of
a
template
that
is
provided
for
all
the
upgrade
meta
going
forward
from
Istanbul,
and
before
that
we
did
not
have
this
kind
of
template
again.
H
The
two
three
seven
eight,
that
is
e
IP
for
EFI
they'll,
that
lists
all
the
EIP
that
has
been
eligible
for
inclusion.
So
we
think
that
it
is
something
that
should
not
be
labeled
as
meta
EEP,
because
meta
makes
it
mandatory
to
be
followed
and
we
cannot
just
kept
it
and
informational
just
make
it
optional
there.
So
efi
is
good
for
the
quarry
IPS
that
it
that
we
are
following
right
now,
but
EAP
2,
3
3.
We
are
trying
to
follow,
but
I
think
it's
more
I
mean
my
my
thought.
H
A
H
D
A
D
A
D
A
It
yes,
so
I
think
I.
Think
you're
I
need
to
think
about
it
more,
but
initially
I
agree
with
you
that
having
definitions,
especially
for
what
some
terminology
means,
should
be
any
IP
one
if
it's
very
important
like
hard
fork,
slash
network
upgrade,
and
so
yes,
but
then
the
template
itself,
because
it's
a
little
bulky
might
need
to
stay
in
233
and
then
we
can
just
say:
go
to
233
to
see
the
template
or
whatever
yep.
A
The
next
time
just
says
next
steps,
and
we
already
talked
about
that
a
little
bit
for
the
Sam's.
Next
steps
are
to
make
it
a
little
more
make
the
plans
a
little
more
formal,
get
more
information
on
it
and
then
talk
to
us
in
telegram
and
make
another
telegram
channel,
probably
for
people
who
really
want
to
help
potentially
make
a
get
coin.
Grant.
Once
that's
more
formalized
in
the
next
meeting,
we
can
talk
about
specific
steps
like
they
get
coin,
grant
and
stuff
like
that,
and
then.
A
H
E
That's
a
good
way
to
identify
problems
to
start
solving
them.
I
think
a
good
idea
would
beat
six
than
that
two
more
stakeholders
and
a
easy,
quick
way
to
do
that
is
with
the
simple
survey.
So
I
was
suggesting
that
we
create
a
Google
form
and
send
it
out
to
cordobes
IP
editors
and
past
authors.
It's
just
to
get
a
general
feel
for
what
the
state
is
currently
for
the
IP
process
and
things
that
can
be
improved
on
problems
that
resolves.
E
My
suggestion
would
be
just
two
questions:
what
are
your
current
frustrations
with
the
EPI
process
and
ordering
fears
with
the
OB
process?
That
would
be
a
good
indicator.
What
could
be
solved.
A
It
sounds
good
to
me:
I,
don't
see
a
downside,
we
might
want
to
add.
Do
you
want
to
be
involved
in
the
EIP
improvement
process?
Group
and
I
I
would
like
to
get
background
information
for
each
person
that
is
submitting
a
survey
and
I
don't
mean
like
super
extensive.
What
I
mean
is
like
what
role
are
you
in
the
community,
which
would
be
e,
IP,
editor,
I,
P,
writer,
community
member
Kaur,
dev
ERC
writer
and
then
reference
if
they
have
written
an
EIP?
A
What's
an
example
of
an
EIP,
they've
written
and
then
a
name
and
the
reason
for
that
would
be
to
rank
so
like
we
would
be,
and
so
someone
who's
never
interacted
with
the
EIP
process.
We
want
to
take
their
opinions
lighter
than
someone
who
has
I
think
but
I'm
I'll
defer
to
Edison
on
that,
because
I
think
you
have
more
experience
on
that.
I.
E
D
H
A
A
A
A
D
A
H
A
question
here:
I'm
like
well
creating
this
agenda
item
I
was
trying
to
gather
information
and
the
topic
that
was
under
discussion
in
some
of
the
other
forums.
So
is
it
something
that
we
should
be
continuing
in
future?
Or
is
it
something
that
can
be
drawn
because
I
thought
that
this
is
some
improvement
suggested
to
EIP
one,
and
we
may
give
it
a
look
of
an
like?
The
group
may
give
it
a
look
and
discuss
something
about
something
good,
that
we
should
become
Denis
or
we
can
just
skip
this.
One
I
think.
A
H
I
I
A
A
Guess
but
I
don't
see
them
as
like:
I
saw
them
as
synonyms
okay,
because,
like
it
always
in
my
opinion,
on
a
technical
level
anytime,
the
network
upgrades
there
is
always
a
hard
fork
because
there
is
always
a
split
in
the
network.
Even
if
it's
for
a
second
and
there's
already,
there's
always
at
least
one
block
mind
on
the
other
chain,
and
so
that
means
the
other
chain
continued
on
for
X
amount
of
time.
I
D
I
think
we
lose
I
was
on
this.
I
was
on
your
side
of
of
technically
it
is
a
hard
fork,
but
I
came
over
to
Tim
side
and
the
way
of
always
calling
it
upgrades
and
the
reason
part
of
the
reasoning
that
got
me
was
that
there's
a
while
there's
a
technical
definition
of
hard
fork.
There's
a
community
expectation
and
I
see
it
all
the
time
that
a
hard
fork
means
there's
a
net.
D
A
Think
the
definition
is
changing
over
time.
I
need
to
look
into
and
convince
myself
if
that
change
is
here
not
yet
yeah,
but
yeah
great
points,
I'll
personally,
think
about
it
more
other
thoughts.
I
A
H
D
D
D
Of
contents,
and
that's
it
it's
the
table
of
contacts
and
I
added
the
stuff
from
the
hard
fork,
meta
EIP
about
hard,
Forks
and
I
up
great
and
I
changed
the
vented
network
upgrades.
So
some
of
those
could
be
split
out
which
has
been
on
my
to-do
list.
Just
like
the
general
path.
It
doesn't
make
sense
to
make
any
IP
to
make
up
some
of
these
changes
or
I
would
say
we
shouldn't
do
that.
But
then
what
do
we
do?
I
think.
A
It
would
be
nice
if,
oh
it's
already,
it's
already,
okay,
nevermind
I,
see
there's
a
description
in
the
conversation,
a
section
for
the
EIP
centric
model.
The
thing
I
would
have
taken
with
is
this
the
EIP
centric
model
is
that
well?
Is
that
well-defined?
Yet
because
have
we
even
gone
through
it
once
technically,
the.
A
E
A
A
H
Something
here
to
say
that
I
discussed
in
one
of
the
meeting,
so
that
was
related
to
this
IP
centric
model
itself.
My
I
was
trying
to
encourage
people
here
to
add
this
process,
because
this
e
IP
centric
model
is
the
model
that
we
are
going
to
do
for
Berlin
I'm,
not
sure
if
we
are
going
to
continue
or
do
a
change
because
for
forests
and
bulb
I
did
something
something
else,
and
it
is
highly
probable
that
we
should
come
up
with
some
some
new
or
be
better
alternative
for
taking
this
upgrade
forward.
H
So
my
suggestion
here
was
to
add
a
motivation
section
in
the
metal
AP
of
upgrade,
and
in
that
we
explain
the
process
that
is
being
followed
for
that
particular
approved,
upgrade
because
etherium
is
you
know
it's
something
one
of
a
one
of
a
kind.
We
keep
on
experimenting
and
every
time
going
back
to
EA,
p1
and
changing
may
not
be
a
good
idea,
but
what
we
can
do
to
give
this
constant
information
to
make
this
constant
information
available
to
community?
Is
we
keep
it
adding
on
the
meta?
A
H
The
Jim
James
yep
PR
already
proposes
something
in
which
they
are
categorizing
all
the
upgrades
that
has
been
done
in
aetherium
so
far,
so
I'm
assuming
I
mean
I,
think
I
saw
I'm,
not
very
sure
of
it,
but
I
saw
that
they
are
also
gonna,
add
meta.
If
for
the
Berlin
that
is
coming
up
and
in
that
meta,
EEP
of
Berlin,
we
just
mentioned
the
number
of
meta.
If
they're
saying
that
for
Berlin
we
are
gonna
refer
this,
my
type
that
will
list
all
the
e
IPS
that
will
go
into
the
upgrade.
H
D
I
so
I
know
we're
going
a
little
bit
over
time.
Also
I'll
try
to
keep
this,
so
there
is
a.
There
is
a
reason
to
not
have
things
be
sorry
I'm,
taking
care
of
my
nephews
at
the
moment
when,
as
you,
nice,
yeah
they're
super
cute,
the
reason
I
don't
want
to
necessarily
have
a
IPS
that
have
part
of
this.
D
The
history
of
things
is
because
there
is
a
certain
loyalty
to
the
process
that
happens,
and
I
saw
this
in
the
et
Cie
repos
around
the
EC
IPs,
where
there
was
a
lot
of
discussion
about
whether
or
not
something
should
happen,
but
a
lot
of
the
people
had
strong
feelings
because
of
the
process
and
not
actually
from
a
looking
critically
like
they
were.
They
were
so
strong
on
the
idea
of
immune
ability
that
they
didn't
have
a
critical
discussion
about
the
topic
at
hand.
D
C
D
H
H
To
matter
you
have
to
keep
this
information
contained
somewhere,
because
I
think
that
the
information
about
the
schedule,
based
upgrade
that
we
did
for
Istanbul
is
lost,
it's
very
difficult
to
find
it
anywhere.
It's
not
mentioned
in
the
meta
EEP
of
the
upgrade
or
neither
in
the
EAP
one,
and
if
we
keep
on
changing,
we
are
never
going
to
get
the
history
of
that
I.
A
Let's
discuss
it
again
and
and
the
EIP,
and
maybe
on
the
meeting
later
too,
with
that,
let's
end
the
meeting,
because
we're
already
over
time
and
thanks
everyone
for
coming,
we
will
meet
again
in
two
weeks
and
less
yeah
wait.
What's
that
day,
the
25th
the
end
of
things
going
on,
then
that
I
know
of
because
all
the
conferences
are
canceled
forever.