►
Description
In their first meeting since the official formation of the #EOSIO+ Coalition, representatives from #EOS, #WAX, #TELOS, and #UX chains discuss a discuss a number of matters including group priorities, media outreach, funding, and more.
Read more here:
EOS, Telos, WAX and UX Network Blockchains Commit $8 Million Annual Funding to Advance and Rebrand Core Development Framework
https://medium.com/eos-network-foundation/eos-telos-wax-and-ux-network-blockchains-commit-8-million-annual-funding-to-advance-and-rebrand-27ac1ef539d9
Everything EOS is the official media channel of the EOS Network Foundation (ENF). The EOS Network Foundation coordinates financial and non-financial support to encourage the growth and development of the EOS Network. We’re harnessing the power of decentralization to chart a coordinated future for the EOS Network as a force for positive global change.
// EOS Network Foundation //
https://eosn.foundation
https://twitter.com/EosNFoundation
https://www.linkedin.com/company/eos-network-foundation
https://t.me/EOSNetworkFoundation
https://discord.gg/eos-network
info@eosn.foundation
#EOS #EOSIO #ENF
A
So
I
I
would
guess,
where
we're
starting,
I
did
check
the
telegram
chat
for
any
more
agenda
items
to
add,
so
I
actually
did
this
and
we'll
start
sharing
my
screen
now.
So
I
I
extracted
from
the
chat
as
far
as
I
could
read
through
it
that
we
had
a
last
comment
from
douglas.
I
think
that
he
proposed
we
have
like
an
update
of
the
committees
and
work
groups.
A
We
do
have
an
item
for
for
this,
for
today
that
we
discussed
last
week
is
reorganization
of
work
groups
because
in
general
we
still
have
the
work
groups
with
the
different
people
in
there
that
are
not
in
this
core
group
anymore.
So
we
probably
want
to
go
through
each
and
every
group
and
decide
who's
gonna
pick
up
those.
If
that
that
hasn't
been
done
inside
the
work
groups
already,
then
I
would
like
to
look
have
a
short
review
of
the
smart
contract
that
gullion
created
for
the
like
voting
and
commenting.
A
If
that's
fine
for
you,
then
we
do
have
the
priority
top
20
item
list.
That
was
mentioned
that
we
should
take
a
pic
on
that
I've
looked
at
the
file
it.
It
actually
looked
nicer
before
because
now
we
have
like,
like
this
ad
hoc
wallet
plus
and
I
do
recall
we
had,
we
had
an
overview
where
the
actual
item
was
was
stated.
A
Oh
yeah
you're
right,
okay,
so
I
I
was
confused
okay,
so
I
guess
this
is
the
top
20
item
list.
We
want
to
discuss
and
prior
to
prioritize
today.
So
so
we
will
have
a
look
at
that.
That's
good,
okay,
then
communication
strategy
and
updates.
I'm
not
sure
if
there
is
anything
I've
seen
all
the
all
the
great
postings
of
the
articles,
and
I
think
virtually
everybody
has
forwarded
that
in
in
the
community.
A
A
Already
done
final
approval,
budgeting
cost
we
in
the
last
meeting
we
had
a
discussion
about
it,
wasn't
so
clear
if
everybody
is
kind
of
agreeing
with
the
cost
split
to
like
a
hundred
percent.
We
know
it's
it's
eight
million,
but
I
I
just
wanted
to
assure
that
everybody's
really
fine
with
the
figures
that
are
there
and
with
the
cost
split.
So
I
assume
it's
just
like
more
more
everybody
nodding
with
the
head
and
then
we're
done,
but
I
just
wanted
to
be
sure
that
we
have
this
then
decide
yes,
sure.
D
Yeah
we
out
we
also
in
that
we
also
have
to
figure
out.
You
know
what
what
are
the
mechanics
right,
just
like
where,
where
what
the
dress
do
we
send
something
to
what
you
know
are
we
going
to
use
firebase
or
something
else
and
those
I
think
we
have
to
do
both
of
those
things
and
and
when
I
mentioned
report,
when
I
mentioned
like
subgroup
reports,
I
also
met,
let's
see,
which
ones
we
can
throw
out
all
together,
which
ones
we
can
consolidate
or
get
other
things
on.
A
Yes,
so
that's
exactly
the
next
one
is
the
the
side
announced
current
funds,
management
system
and
currency.
We
discussed
that
I
posted
some
information
about
firebox.
Let's,
let's
tackle
that
at
the
moment,
we're
in
here
well
initial
prioritization
of
requirements.
I
think
that
is
actually
the
top
20
item
list.
So
I
move
those
together
immediate
next
steps
and
procedures.
That's
also
what
you
mentioned
just
just
now
douglas
and
then
we
did
discuss
about
project
management,
product
owner
roles,
product
manager
and
walk
group
modes.
A
A
But,
but
obviously
it's
great
if
we
have
a
discussion
on
how
the
actual
work
mode
is
going
to
be
okay,
so
going
to
the
in
progress
items,
I
was
hoping
to
have
justin
here.
So
is
there
any
update
on
the
brandon
marketing
group
lately,
so
maybe
eve
or
douglas?
Do
you
have
any
update
that
you
want
to
share
about
this
group.
D
Yeah,
there's
no
update,
there
haven't
been
any
additional
meetings,
and
that
is
that
is
by
plan.
So
we
had.
We
had
a
series
of
meetings
of
in
you
know
in
in-depth,
intense
sort
of
question
and
answer
you
know
sessions
with
all
of
us.
I
think
it
was
aaron,
not
eve
that
was
there
with
us
and
and
so
by
plan.
They
have
gone
away
and
they're
going
there,
they're
they're
crunching
that
information
and
and
doing
their
creative
process.
So
nothing.
D
B
D
B
D
B
The
rest
of
the
group,
because
the
justin
isn't
here,
do
you
know
aaron,
which,
what's
the
name
of
the
group,
I'm
having
a
hard
time
finding
it.
It
is
word
studio
with
an
ex
eosio
rebrand.
I
just
searched
for
rebrand
in
my
channel
list
and
found
it.
So
I
don't
know
if
this
was
given,
because
it's
no
no
it's
april
11th.
B
So
not
last
week
strategy
reports
been
written
and
they
should
be
able
to
share
that
with
before
the
end
of
the
week
messaging
architecture,
they
finished
their
first
pass
and
they're
going
through
the
names
right
now.
They've
gathered
a
long
list
of
over
500
names
and
they
should
be
sending
out
the
short
list
for
cultural
competency.
Surveys,
check,
availability
across
domains,
trademark
socials,
once
that's
in
they're
gonna.
They
should
be
presenting
to
the
group.
B
The
final
three
contenders,
so
that
then
that
group
justin
and
such
can
do
the
internal
voting
alongside
the
reason
reasons
and
advantages
for
each
and
then
design
their
starting
design.
This
week,
they'll
begin
mood
boarding
based
on
the
strategy,
research
and
based
on
the
initial
three
directions,
and
then
they're
gonna
set
up
a
call,
and
that
was
an
update
on,
I
believe,
it's
sunday
or
monday
monday.
B
B
B
B
G
B
A
Awesome
yeah
so
next
item
I
I
did
circulate
the
the
firebox
cost.
We
don't
have
an
nda,
so
I
can
talk
about
it.
Telos
is
paying
like
18k
plus
5k
for
two
workspaces.
We
would
only
need
one
workspace,
because
it's
it's
one
organization.
Basically,
that
has
the
different
permission
rights,
so
the
cost
would
probably
be
around
20k
per
year
for
the
work
group
or
new
business,
since
they
have
like
a
price
increase
since
since
early
this
year,
so
it's
probably
20k
per
year,
and
that
includes
all
the
functionality.
A
A
So
we
are
we're
kind
of
better
testing
this
for
for
them,
but
they
have
the
the
big
exchanges
are
on
there.
So
so
it's
also
possible
to
kind
of
direct
funds
back
and
forth
from
the
exchanges,
if
you,
if
you're
having
like
liquidity
events
where
you
have
to
get
liquidity
from
exchanges
to
this.
So
this
is
all
supported
in
indirect
apis
then
from
the
large
exchanges.
B
I
have
questions
about
fire
block
itself
and
I
guess
the
the
is
the
reason
that
we're
aiming
to
to
leverage
a
system
like
fire
block,
mainly
for
the
off-ramp
of
fiat,
because
I
would
imagine
that
we're
not
going
to
be
on
ramping
fiat
into
our
account.
We
would
be
sending
crypto
into
that
account
as
the
treasury
and
is
the
idea
that
then
we
would
be
leveraging
that
function
to
pay
contractors
potentially
or
whoever,
but
in
fiat,
and
that's
really
why
we're
aiming
to
go
to
the
fire
block.
B
D
So
for
question
one:
yes,
that
is
how
that
is,
how
telos
the
tf
and
the
tcd
use
use
fire
blocks
and
that's
the
problem
with
solves
for
us
for
question.
Two.
That's
a
great
question.
I
don't
know
the
answer
to
that.
I
I
suggested
it
only
because
it
was
a
tool
set
that
we
were
using
and
that
then
we
use
it.
You
know
and
we
do
have
a
you
know.
The
tf
is
a
legal
entity
and
if
we
don't
have
one
that
may
be
a
problem,
I
don't
know.
G
G
That's
another
big
thing
that
it's
just
a
lot
simpler
and
all
the
multi-sig
and
approving
of
transactions
and
executing
them
is
handled
off-chain.
So
the
only
thing
you
end
up
paying
for
is
you
know
whatever
five
dollars
to
transfer
the
usdg,
not
a
hundred
dollars
to
coordinate
the
multi-sig
proposal,
approval
execution
transactions
that
we
want
a.
B
B
For
example,
you
could
have
usdt
on
on
telos,
or
you
could
have
like.
We
could
all
pull
the
funds
and
put
them
on
telos
or
I'll
put
them
on
wax
or
I'll
put
them
on
eos
or
ux
or
whatever.
Is
it
because
we
don't
want
to
rely
on
one
of
our
networks?
And
we
want
to
use
a
third
party
where
we
put
the
funds
well.
G
I
think
eos
is
the
only
one
that
has
first
class
usdt
right
and
then
the
the
places
otherwise
you're,
relying
like
telo,
says
pusdt
through
p
network
right,
but
then
we're
trusting
that
bridge
and
with
all
the
things
that
have
happened
lately.
I
think
there's
concerns
around
that
risk.
So
that's
where
the
ques.
That's,
why
you
know
having
the
asset
on
its
native
chain,
not
a
pegged
version.
You
know
where
somebody
else
controls
the
reserve.
That
introduces
risk
was
that's
one
aspect
of
it
as
well.
Right.
G
We
at
telos
made
the
deliberate
choice
to
not
store
our
usdt
on
telos,
not
because
we
don't
trust
telos,
but
because
the
bridge
risk
is,
you
know,
does
not
outweigh
the
cost
of
using
gnosis
and
now
with
fire
blocks.
You
know
we
have
a
lot
more
multi-sig
capabilities
and
we
don't
have
to
deal
with.
You
know
we
could
do
as
many
payments
as
we
want.
D
F
D
B
There's
a
problem:
if
we
do
it
on
eos
the
off
ramp,
because
we're
likely
not
going
to
be
well,
I
guess
we
could.
It
depends,
but
the
the
vendors
that
we're
using
likely
won't
accept
usdt
on
eos,
and
so
we
need
to
transfer
it
elsewhere.
Anyways
and
that's
where
I
see
them.
The
advantage
of
the
fire
block.
B
D
But
to
answer
your
specific
question
eve:
I
don't
think
that
we
were
trying
to
solve
for
distrust
within
this
group
against
anyone
else's
chain.
I
think
it
would
just
this
is
a
set
of
tools.
It
has
some
pros
and
cons.
We
also,
you
know
we
all
I'd
be
fine
with.
I
think
I
think
eos
is
a
great
option
because
a
lot
of
the
money
you
know
the
bulk
of
the
money
is
coming
from
eos
anyway,
and
I
don't
I
don't
distrust
any
of
these.
You
know
we
don't
have
to
trust.
D
We
can
put
an
m-sig
on
any
of
these
things,
but
I
need
to
exchange,
but
eos
has
does
like
jesse
message
has
like
one
less
hop
one
less
intermediary
that
we
that
we
would
have
to
worry
about.
Doesn't
you
know
it
doesn't
mean
it
doesn't
have
any,
but
it's
one
less
then,
like
you
know,
if
p
networks,
you
know,
I
went
to
the.
D
D
A
I
think
one
one
thing
about
fireblocks
is
that
it
has
a
very
sophisticated
authorization
model,
so
the
multi-six
can
be
very
complex
if
we
want
them
to
be,
and
also
they
they
have
like
white
listing
and
black
listing
opportunities.
So
you
can
actually
blacklist
specific
addresses
or
whitelist
specific
addresses,
so
you're
sure
that
that
funds
are
not
sent
to
addresses
that
you
haven't
white
listed.
So
it's
it's
an
overall,
very
secure
solution.
The
only
backdraw
I
mentioned
was
it
needs
to
have
one
owner
which
basically
all
telegram
people
agreed
to
that.
A
This
is
not
a
problem
if
enf
would
be
the
owner
and
then
have
the
authorization,
because
the
owner
account
can
still
not
send
funds
if
the
administrators
or
signers
not
agree
to
it.
So
I
think
that
was
the
only
background
in
general.
It
it
has
all
the
functionality
that
we
would
potentially
need
for
a
solution
like
this.
It's
it's
kind
of
it
could
be
kind
of
expensive
if
we're
not
having
many
transactions,
but
if
we're
paying
a
lot
of
contractors
and
development
teams
on
a
monthly
basis,
using
noses
could
probably
be
very
expensive.
A
So
so
this
is
kind
of
the
proposal,
that's
standing
there.
So
if,
if
we
want,
I
can
ask
them,
take
the
task
to
ask
them
and-
and
we
get
a
demo
of
them,
so
you
can
actually
see
what
it
does.
But
it
is
it's
up
to
group
decision.
If
we,
if
we
want
to
take
this
sophisticated
solution
or
or
take
a
homemade
solution,
we
have
anyway.
D
Do
we
know
anything
about
what
additional
services
we
would
get
for
that
healthy
fee
for,
for
example,
reporting
right
it
it
if
it
has
sophisticated
reporting
tools
that
might
save
us
a
job
that
otherwise
you
know
it's
very
onerous
and
that
a
person
would
have
to
do
if
if
they
have
that,
I
don't
know
if
they
do
or
not,
but
some
of
those
some
of
those
things
would
you
know,
might
be
a
good
offset
for
the
cost.
Again
I
have
no,
I
I
got
no
dog
in
this
fight.
D
B
B
B
If
we
don't
choose
the
fire
block
route,
I
would
think
it
would
be
good
for
us
to
say
as
a
policy
going
forward
for
at
least
a
little
period
of
time,
or
so
that
when
we
engage
with
vendors,
we
make
it
a
policy
that
they
have
to
accept
usdt,
because
we
can't
give
them
fiat
or
they're
giving
the
fiat
is
in
one
extra,
hop
or
whatever
so
either
or
I'm
okay
with
either.
That
would
be.
B
G
B
D
The
funds
are
just
going
to
be
sitting,
there
are
what
we've,
what
we
discussed
in
land-
okay,
right
so
and
with
with
update
with
updating
the
each
each
quarter,
we
would
update
the
you
know,
would
re
revisit.
You
know
what
everybody's
value
and
liquidity
are
to
to
make
those
adjustments.
So
that's
that's.
I
think
I
feel
like
that
has
already
been
agreed.
Maybe.
G
If
you
were,
if
you
had,
if
we
had
it
in
usdt
on
eos,
I
mean:
what
does
it
mean
you
do
you
do
a
withdraw,
a
deposit
to
an
exchange
that
supports
usdt
on
eos,
and
then
you
do
a
withdrawal.
I
would
assume
that
exchange
lets
you
withdraw
to
ethereum
as
as
usdt
there,
so
it
would
be
like
two-step
process
to
pay
these.
These
vendors
would
be
the
problem
or
that
the
added
hop.
B
Would
be
through
bitfinex
or
an
exchange
that
supports
and
that's
that's
the
issue
is
that
a
lot
of
people
don't
have
their
big
finex
account,
and
so
they
would
need
a
bitfinex
account
in
order
to
receive
there's
only
two.
I
think
it's
cracking
and
it
shoots
that
coin
accepts
it.
That's
what
I
use
and
it
doesn't,
but
it's.
B
B
Which
the
other,
the
other
possible
solution,
which
is
kind
of
a
hybrid
of
using
fire
block,
is
the
enf's
business
account.
We've
got
a
few.
One
of
them
is
on
bitfinex,
and
so
this
group
would
send
to
the
bitfinex
account
to
pay
the
invoice
because
then
on
bitfinex,
then
you
can
do
the
swap
from
usd
eos
usb
tron
usd
solana
usd
whatever
it
is.
B
D
B
So
all
the
so
actually
yes,
there
is
an
issue
is:
if
we
don't
spend
the
funds,
then
it
would
be
revenue
with
no
expense
by
year
end.
So
that's
why
we
need
to
limit
the
amount
of
funds
that
we
do
send.
So,
let's
say
for
first
quarter,
all
of
you
combined
outside
of
eos
right,
because
we
don't
need
to
account
for
own
funds.
We
we're
not
sending
it
to
ourselves.
So,
let's
say
all
of
you
combined
is
isn't
one
million
dollars.
We
would
need
to
at
least
have
a
million
dollars
worth
of
expenses.
K
I
D
B
Be
the
same
on
fire
blocks,
though,
if
if
enf
is
the
one,
that's
the
account
holder
of
fire
blocks,
that
would
be
the
exact
same
okay,
so
that
that
I
don't
think
is
a
difference.
So
for
me,
the
way
I
see
it
is
25k
we
can
now
people
pay
pay
people
on
fiat,
save
25k
people
need
to
accept
usdt
or
any
other
crypto.
D
B
B
D
Branding
agency
yeah,
I
know
well
that
happens.
Most
of
our
people
are
going
most
of
the
things
we're
going
to
be
working
with.
Are
our
developers
it's
going
to
be
the
bulk
of
everything?
It's
it.
You
know.
The
question
is
how
many
times
a
year
do
we
have
to
do?
We
have
to
figure
out
this
this
fiat
thing.
If
it's
four
times
a
year,
you
know
with
two,
then
what's
not
worth
paying
for
that.
If,
if
you
know
it-
and
I
think
that
they.
D
D
B
B
B
Off
with
this
method
of
of
putting
at
least
the
first
quarter
usd
eos
and
then
once
we
gain
traction
with
this
group
at
some
point,
maybe
we
do
create
a
legal
entity,
but
I
don't
think
it's
that
should
be
the
first
priority
and
then
that
legal
entity
would
now
bear
that
responsibility
and
then
we
would
use
whatever
like.
We
could
actually
create
a
bitfinex
account
with
that
legal
entity
to
be
able
to
have
a
business
account,
and
then
that
becomes
a
non-issue
again
or
fire
block
or
whatever.
At
that
time.
D
That
seems
totally
reasonable
for
q1
for
for
our
rq1
right
for
this
quarter,
because
we
there's
no
real
way
to
assess
the
you
know
which
problems
are
likely
to
come
up,
often
and
which
ones
are
are
unlikely
to,
and
so
without
at
least
a
quarter
or
two
of
experience
with
that
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
make
a
informed
decision,
so
I
would.
I
would
support
that.
I
think
that
the
controls-
you
know
the
mc
controls
I
mean
we
all
know
that
those
are
not
chain.
You
know
that.
B
D
E
Know
pretty
much
so
just
to
confirm
the
kind
of
workflow
there,
at
least
on
our
end.
Let's
say:
let's
say
we
send
you
our
share
as
ux
network
and
usdt
on
ethereum.
We
would
send
it
to
your
let's
say:
bitfinex
corporate
account
eve
for
the
enf
and
then
you
would
essentially
convert
it
to
yes,
usdt
and
you
would
send
it
to
that
joint
account
that
we
would
all
be
signatory.
E
B
E
Have
a
personal
one:
I
have
a
personal
one
that
I've
had
since
2012.
I
think
that's
not
kyc,
so
I'd
like
to
keep
it
that
way.
It's
really
yeah!
That's
fine!
That's
fine!
So!
But
yeah
I
mean
another
problem
to
go
through
the
the
process
of
registering
one
and
ky
seeing
one,
but
I
just
did
it
for
another
of
my
companies
and
it's
gonna
take
at
least
like
a
month.
That's
my
that's
how
long
it
took
for
the
last
one
so
but
yeah.
I
guess
I
guess
for
now.
B
B
D
Yeah
yeah.
Now
there
is
one
other
question
which
is
we
had
been
talking,
and
this
is
very
minor,
but
we
have
been
talking
about.
You
know
what
is
our
year?
Do
we
have
a
fiscal
year
that
begins
that
begins
april
1st,
or
do
we
have
a?
Are?
We
have
a
financial
calendar
year
and
if
we're
using
an
existing
organizations
we
will
probably
accounts
will
probably
be
forced
into
whatever
that
organization's
financial
calendar
is
these.
Are
these
are
all
very
small
things?
D
I
just
think
we
should
be
aware
they
shouldn't
hit
us
by
its
price.
Later,
I,
I
think,
jesse's
our
official
voter
for
our
official
voter
for
telus,
but
I
I
believe
we
are
all
set
to
to
do
this
once
you
know
within
a
you
know,
day
or
two
when
once
we
know
what
the
mechanical
you
know,
the
mechanics
are
of
payment.
A
B
B
B
D
Yeah,
I
think
those
are
details
that
I
think
we've
cleared
up
the
the
major
structure
and
yes,
there
are
details
that
will
come
up,
but
I
don't
think
we
need
to
discuss
them
any
further
in
this
because
it
seems
like
we're
all
agreed
on
a
way
forward
for
the
next
quarter,
or
so
at
least
so.
I'd
say:
let's
move
on
to
the
next
agenda
item.
B
D
Yeah
yeah,
especially
if
we
compare
that
with
any
other,
you
know
yeah,
let's,
let's
keep
a:
let's
keep
a
ongoing
chain
of
pr
of
progress
communications.
It
will
be.
You
know,
it'll,
build
trust
and
yeah.
Who
is
who
so
lovejoy
are
you?
Are
you
brian?
Are
you
the
the
lead
communications
for
this
group,
or
are
you
just
for
the
enf
or
who
who's
who's,
leading
the
charge
of
that
or
zach,
or
I
guess
who.
O
But
I
think
it
kind
of
falls
on
I
mean
I
I
got
volunteered
for
that
job
last
week
and
I
know
zach
is
probably
gonna
want,
have
a
hand
in
it
and
I'm
not
sure
how
we
coordinate
across
all
the
different
chains
as
part
of
a
conversation
I
wanted
to
have.
But
for
now,
if
people
just
highlight
those
items
that
we
want
to
make
sure
you
know
get
communicated
to
the
public
like
the
transfer
of
funds
item
that'd
be
really
helpful.
O
O
D
I
I
got
that
first,
that
first
you
know
press
release.
You
know
I
kicked
the
kick
that
one
out,
but
my
my
goal
on
that
was
I.
I
don't
think
that
unless
you
tell
me,
I
don't
think
that's
should
be
an
ongoing
process.
I
just
wanted
to
get
that
started
and
I
knew
I
knew
that
starting
is
always
hard,
but
and
so,
unless
you
guys
tell
me,
I'm
not
anticipating
that
I'm
going
to
be
part
of
the
the
communications
team
right.
O
Cool
and
just
so
I'm
clear
for
the
moment,
this
is
going
to
just
be
kind
of
a
decentralized
communications
effort.
I
mean
we,
you
know
we
can
lead
it
for
sure,
but
there's
not
going
to
be
a
central
organization
until
such
time
as
that
legal
entity
is
set
up.
Is
that
the
idea
speaking
like
for
the
group,
what
I'd
imagine.
D
Is
that
communicate
outward
communications
would
be
a
committee
here.
That
is
that,
basically,
you
know
gives
a
short
report
of
what
we're
doing
and-
and
you
know,
and
has
a
clear
point
of
contact
for
when
we
decide
that
something
is
news
worthy
or
you
know
worth
sharing,
and
so,
if
that
you
know
say
for
example,
that's
you
and
we
agree
with
that,
which
seems
great.
You
know,
then
I
think
when
we
have
issues
like
this
and
we
go
hey.
D
We
should
probably
do
this,
then
that
gets
that
gets
on
your
plate
and
you
know,
and
if
there
are
questions
that
people
need
to,
if
we
need
to
have
a
vote
or
anything
that
comes
up,
but
otherwise
it's
just
you
know:
okay,
great,
here's,
here's
the
calendar
for
these
things.
These
are
going
out
and
I
think
if
we
just
everybody,
has
visibility
and
it's
going
well
and
everyone
feels
fairly
represented.
J
Yeah,
so
the
issue
we
have
until
the
branding
is
released.
We
have
this
new
name
is
it
doesn't
make
sense
to
create
like
a
dedicated
eocio
coalition
group,
because
we're
just
continuing
this
eosio
brand,
so
it's
just
a
matter
of
where
updates
would
live,
because
not
every
update
needs
a
big
pr
push
like
we
did
last
week.
B
B
I
think
what
douglas
is
asking
and
that-
and
I
support
as
well
is
like
one
person
needs
to
lead
this
internally,
though
like
somebody's
making
a
draft
somebody's
reaching
out
to
the
three
other
chains
or
four
other
chains,
so
I'm
guessing
that
person
is
part
of
a
chain
reaching
out
to
the
other
chain.
Saying
hey,
are
you
good
with
this?
Do
you
want
to
add
this
I'd
like
to
have
a
quote
whatever?
What
do
you
think,
like
somebody
needs
to
take
on
that
role
and
love
joy?
B
D
O
Yeah,
I'm
good
at
that
and
for
then
helping
helping
me
out
when
we
have
these
meetings.
If
we
could
just
kind
of
highlight
the
items
that
we
kind
of
want
to
focus
on
for
external
communication
versus
what
is
something
that's
still
under
consideration
or
not
yet
ready
for
public
release,
that'd
be
awesome
on
this
mirror
board.
Probably
maybe
I.
J
J
B
B
B
Oh,
you
can
have
the
tbl
it's
it's
we're
talking
about
1.7
million
dollars
or
something
like
that
and
then
the
next
one
that
I
foresee
would
be
the
name
which
would
come
out
roughly
in
a
month
so
two
weeks,
two
weeks.
So
if
we
can
get
out
of
cadence
of
roughly
every
two
weeks
and
stick
to
it,
I
think
that
could
be
pretty
positive
and
then
anything
else
in
between
ad
hoc
as
well.
If
we
really
want
to,
but
at
least
something
more
formal
like
this,
every
two
weeks,
that'd
be
pretty
cool.
Two.
D
Weeks
is
fine,
nothing
we're
going
to
be
doing
is
so
is
so
important,
most
likely
that
it
can't
wait.
You
know
a
week
and
and
if
we
bring
out
some
news,
even
small,
on
a
pattern
of
every
two
weeks,
then
we
establish
a
release
pattern
that
people
can
you
know
we
really?
We
we
release
what
we
have
every
two
weeks.
Here's
what
we've
done!
You
know
there
should
be
none
of
this.
There
really
gives
us
a
goal
of
not
having
any
empty
releases.
D
B
D
Do
I
would
say,
let's
just
do
stuff,
let's
start
putting
some
checks
in
some
boxes
and
then
and
then
you
know,
you
know
two
days
before
the
the
two
week
thing
you
know,
because
it
doesn't
have
to
go
on
our
wires
or
anything.
Then
we
then
we,
you
know
we
just
report
what
we
do.
You
know.
That's,
that's
fine.
If
we
have
some
really
major
things
like
we
release
the
roadmap,
that
is
probably
you
know.
Yeah,
that's
sponge
worthy.
D
I
think
we
should
pick
whatever
like
the
fir.
The
from
one
to
two
doesn't
have
to
be
exactly
two
weeks.
We
should
pick
what
is
a
good.
You
know
if,
if
we
say
hey,
we
want
we
did
this
on
this
day
of
the
week,
but
we
with
going
forward.
We
want
to
do
it
on
this
day
of
week.
Let's
make
that
adjustment
now
and
then
sustain
and
then
sustain
two
week
pattern
from
there.
D
Saying
is:
let's:
let's:
we've
given
these
guys
responsibility,
they
have
knowledge
of
this.
Let's
let
them
discuss
now.
It's
there.
It's
there
in
their
wheelhouse,
it's
in
their
responsibility
area.
Let's
let
them
decide
what
the
right
day
of
the
week
is
using
their
knowledge
and
and
not
push
anything
on
it
just
because,
just
because
there
might
be
three
extra
days,
you
know
if
we
decide
that
you
know
monday
or
tuesday
or
wednesday
is
better.
I
think,
generally
friday
is
considered
the
the
day
you
release
news
that
you
don't
want
people
actually
all
right.
D
Let's,
let's
put
it
in
there,
bob.
Let's
pop
the
ball
in
the
court,
they
can
come
back
to
us.
It
doesn't
have
to
wait
a
week.
You
guys
could
come
back
to
us
in
a
few
in
a
day
or
two
after
you've
discussed
and
propose
it
and
then
we'll
and
then
we'll
know
going
forward
that
it's
going
to
be
tuesdays
or
wednesdays
or
whatever.
Is
that
reasonable
to
everybody?.
J
Yeah,
we'll
figure
it
out
and
we
just
need
to
consider.
We
always
have
a
little
bit
of
a
lead
time
from
the
time
everyone
in
the
group
approves
it.
We
need
typically
24
hours
to
get
our
translations
done.
It's
just
something
that
we
do
with
enf
as
we
always
publish
in
the
asian
languages
also
because
our
the
majority
of
our
community
is
not
speaking,
english.
D
Fair
yeah,
like
give
us
all
those
when
you
guys
report
back,
give
us
all
that
information.
Like
the
the
you
know,
the
release
will
come
out
here.
Therefore,
the
therefore
the
you
know
the
the
the
pub
you
know
the
the
press
date
for
for
any
information
to
be
in.
It
must
be
this.
You
know
just
give
us
a
schedule
and
then
we'll
start
working
on
being
on
that
schedule.
D
D
A
J
Actually,
there
hasn't
been
a
public
call
yet,
but
yeah
we'll
create
a
playlist,
so
even
when
romney
was
hosting
them,
I
was.
I
have
a
playlist
on
our
channel
that
posted
them,
we'll
just
continue
that
until
we
have
the
branding
once
we
have
the
branding,
I
think
at
that
time
we
would
create
a
new
youtube
channel,
a
new
twitter
things
like
that,
but
for
right
now
all
of
that
would
be
on
our
eos
youtube
channel
and
most
crazy
people
watching
it
aren't
average.
D
Would
you
mind
reaching
out
to
rami
and
and
or
or
whoever
may
have
it
and
getting
that
the
the
the
last
public
meeting
posted?
Because
I
have
I
don't
know
about
you,
but
I've
had
some
questions.
People
just
like
to
just
like
to
see
it
and
it
was
pretty.
You
know
it's
a
pretty
big
big
one
and
we
should
be
sharing
that.
But
it's
not
yet
available.
J
A
Awesome
thanks.
I
I
put
the
the
item
for
the
youtube
channel
into
the
backlog
post
post
branding,
so
so
we
have
it
in
in
there
and
can
pick
it
up
later,
then
so,
but
usually
the
existing
playlist
and
for
now
so
next
item
was
jeff,
wanted
to
lead
the
refinement
of
high
priority
items
where
you
wanted
to
to
add.
Like
a
two
to
three
line,
explanation
top
level,
explanation
to
all
the
items
would
you
give
us
a
short
update
on
that?
Please.
L
Yeah,
absolutely
in
fact,
so
earlier
this
week
a
couple
of
us
met
and
and
started.
We
just
grabbed
the
top
priorities
and
and
started
to
create
an
executive
summary
on
it,
and
it
was
interesting
because,
even
in
the
discussion
of
that
limited
group,
it
came
out
that
maybe
priorities
would
be
shifting
if
we
spent
a
little
more
time
trying
to
think
about
what
these
individual
titles
mean,
which
is
good.
That's
that's
the
intent
of
us
doing
this.
L
If
you
can
imagine
us
driving
towards
a
fully
fleshed
rfp
that
we
want
to
put
out
for
people
to
bid
on
that
means
we're
going
to
have
to
keep
iterating
on
something
and
every
time
we
iterate,
we
get
this
wide
vague
definition,
slightly
pulled
in
a
little
bit
more
until
we
get
to
the
point
where
we
have.
What
this
group
feels
like
are
real
requirements
that
we
could
ask.
E
L
L
New
items
will
come
up
so
to
keep
it
simple,
but
at
the
same
time
we
want
to
keep
work
moving
on
things
that
we
feel,
like
everybody
said,
was
top
priority.
We
looked
at
just
the
top
ones,
I
think
top
four
to
six
on
that
top
20
list
and
here's
an
example
of
the
one
that
popped
up
to
the
top
fast
finality.
L
You
can
see.
It's
got
the
code
reference
back
to
the
spreadsheet
here,
the
objective.
This
is
really
to
be
a
one
or
two
sentence,
description
of
what
we're
trying
to
achieve,
and
we
kind
of
had
a
good
discussion
about
this,
because
we
don't
want
to
describe
at
this
point
the
things
we
think
need
to
be
built.
We
first
need
to
make
sure
we're
aligned
on
what
it
is,
we're
trying
to
achieve
and
make
better
or
improve,
and
so
that's
what
the
objective
is
here
and
then
right
after
that
we
talked
about.
L
Do
we
have
any
sort
of
proof
that
we
made
something
better?
The
other
thing
that
identifying
metrics
at
this
point
in
the
game
helps
with
is
it
also
focuses
everybody
on
all
right.
This
is
the
target,
so
we
might
talk
qualitatively
about
well.
We
want
to
make
this
good,
this
more
efficient
and
so
forth,
but
if
we
have
an
objective
that
we
all
agree
to
that
is
defined
by
a
metric,
it
makes
it
crystal
clear.
L
The
other
thing
that
a
metric
does
final
thing
is
that
if
we
identify
it
now
as
opposed
to
later,
then
we
can
also
step
back
and
say:
do
we
even
have
the
capability
to
measure
this
right
now
or
as
part
of
this
project?
Do
we
also
need
to
build
some
lightweight
tooling,
to
start
capturing
data
and
get
a
baseline
of
where
we're
at?
I
think
in
a
lot
of
cases,
we
already
have
the
information,
there's
a
lot
of
great
tools
and
monitoring
and
metrics
out
there,
but
we
might
stumble
across
something
that
we
think.
L
We
don't
wanna,
replicate
what's
in
the
blue
papers,
okay,
so
some
of
these,
what
we
wanna
do
is
start
off
by
saying.
Details
of
this
can
be
found
in
this
blue
paper
in
this
section
and
so
forth,
because
we
don't
want
to
redo
work
here,
but
for
some
of
the
ad
hoc
ones,
particularly,
we
do
need
to
spend
a
little
bit
of
time
describing
what
it
is
in
more
detail
and
the
final
part
of
this
section
is
describing
the
high
level
deliverables.
L
You
know
high
level.
I
want
to
emphasize
that
that
we
think
need
to
be
addressed
on
this,
and
we
don't
want
to
forget
about
things
that
are
not
just
code.
What
I
mean
by
that
is
some
things
like
faster
finality.
Well,
if
that
gets
implemented,
it's
buried
into
the
technology
and
it
just
people
will
start
getting
the
benefits.
L
But
if
it's
a
something
like,
for
example,
a
security
library,
that's
you
know
set
out
there.
We
need
to
also
provide,
as
a
deliverable,
some
sort
of
instructions
to
future
developers
on
how
to
effectively
use
that
library,
or
else
all
we're
doing,
is
putting
code
out
there.
And
you
know
a
small
group
will
be
able
to
use
it,
but
not
the
larger
group,
and
so
this
is
one
I
guess
dome.
You
did
this
and
you
also
did
another
one.
L
M
So
to
your
point
on
the
kpis,
it's
kind
of
clear
that
you
know
when
we're
saying
faster
finality.
If
we
know
that
we're
saying
that
again,
we
should
have
a
percentage
consistently
measured
at
a
maximum
of
six
blocks
behind.
Is
that
95
percent
of
the
time
75
percent
of
the
time
reduction
in
number
of
detected
micro
forces,
these
kpis
aren't
measurable.
M
Yet
and
that's
why
you're
saying
you
need
some
tools
so
like
because
the
first
part
of
this
project
seems
to
be
implement
some
instrumentation
to
get
some
known
numbers
on
the
averages,
or
you
know
median
whatever
performance
of
the
network
and
then
say
we're
going
to
reduce
this
by
x,
because
otherwise
it's
it's
very,
it's
still
very
qualitative.
This
is
great,
and
one
other
thing
I
have
is
all
of
the
ad
hocs
were
literally
one
to
three
words.
You
know
maybe
two
to
four
words
of
their
description.
Right
and
people
were
voting
on
stuff.
M
We
think
we
probably
got
five
of
the
ad
hoc
into
the
top
20,
but
this
reason
this
paper,
so
value
valuable,
is
that
we
didn't
have
a
blue
paper
to
reference
for
any
of
the
ad
hocs.
So
these
are
the
first
time
we're
putting
anything
down
and
my
suggestion
would
be
is
we
should
prioritize
getting
the
all
at
all
the
ad
hocs
written
out
first
and
and
if
we
need
you
know
to
get
some
of
the
engineers
on
board
with
that
like
get,
you
know,
matt
and
arie
and
bucky
in
there.
M
I
think
you
know
we
can
probably
even
learn
a
little
bit
of
kevin
hefner
happy
to
to
to
do
that,
because
I
think
this
is
really
important,
especially
with
these
ad
hocs.
We
need
this
page
because
we
have
nothing
to
show
for
an
rfp
or
anything.
So
I
think
this
is
great
just
the
idea
of
tightening
it
down
a
little
bit,
which
means
maybe
the
first
section
of
this.
This
whole
release
is
to
get
the
kpis
tight
enough,
that
you
know
that
you've
now
hit
the
mark
with
the
faster
finality.
E
I
think
all
very
good
points
the
for
the
faster
finality.
I
added
the
the
last
paragraph
that
the
details,
section
kind
of
just-
describes
quickly
the
need
to
build
some
sort
of
mechanisms
to
track
these.
I
guess
like
kpis
now
and
in
the
future.
I
know
some
of
that
work
has
already
been
done
up
to
a
certain
point.
I
I
think
I
think
the
fuse
or
like
the
the
team
behind
the
fuse,
had
a
a
tracker
for
micro,
forks
and
the
depth
of
reorganizations
and
chains.
E
So
there
might
be
something
we
can
build
on,
that's
already
more
or
less
available.
But
yes,
absolutely.
This
is
this
is
kind
of
first
draft
and
hopefully
we
can.
We
can
improve
over
this
and
repeat
the
process
for
all
the
other.
I
guess
like
priorities,
starting
with
the
haddocks
one
that
I
think
should
should
be
done.
First,
like
you
said
like
we,
we
voted
on
them,
but
I
don't
think
people
gave
too
much
thought
about
what
they
actually
meant.
M
The
details
is
good,
I
mean,
I
think,
if
this
one
had,
you
know,
maybe
I'm
being
too
specific,
but
had
a
section
called
deliverables,
because
the
first
part
of
this
project
I'd
make
that
last
paragraph
where
you're
talking
about
the
instrumentation
of
tooling
I'd,
make
that
the
first
deliverable,
like
your
first,
you
know
milestone
where
you'll
get
paid.
Is
you
deliver
these
tools
and
you
can
demonstrate
that
you're?
M
You
know
the
75th,
percentile
or
85th
percentile
of
you
know
six
blocks
or
whatever
you
know
that
you
want
to
look
at
that,
but
I
do
think
that
the
monitoring
tools
you
know
this
project,
in
my
opinion,
is
two
projects,
bundled
together
with
the
first
deliverable
being
those
monitoring
tools
that
enables
the
deliver
the
delivery
of
the
second
part
of
the
project,
which
is
the
fastest
modality.
And
so
that's
the
way
people
are
going
to
bid
on
it.
E
One
thing
that
came
out
also
from
that
previous
meeting
is
that
some
of
these-
I
guess
like
features
or
priorities,
are
somewhat
related
and
it
would
make
sense
to
probably
have
a
steering
committee
that
would,
you
know
like
be
created
for
these
groups
of
features
that
we're
trying
to
develop
because
they
will
not
necessarily
overlap,
but
they
will
definitely
connect
between
each
other.
So
it
makes
sense
to
to
have
the
same
people
that
are
going
to
be.
E
I
guess,
expecting
these
requirements
to
to
to
be
working
on
related
and
close
features
that,
like
as
a
group,
rather
than
giving
them
to
different
people,
to
look
at
so
kind
of
part
of
the
same
thing,
I
guess
same
same
general
idea.
If
we're.
If
we're
going
to
be
as
we
kind
of
build
these
requirements,
we
may
find
that
it
may
make
sense
to
group
them
together
and
make
an
rfp
for
multiple
features
at
once
or
break
them
down
and
kind
of
separate.
E
L
The
you
know
we
have
really
a
series
of
programs
already
defined
right,
audit
plus
wallet.
Plus
you
know,
recovery
plus
I
mean
those
are
really
focused
around
the
the
groupings
of
benefits
that
we
want,
and
while
those
groups,
you
know
kind
of,
are
spinning
before
they
spin
down
from
the
blue
papers,
I
mean
you
might
have
a
core
of
people
that
then
could
pull
in
the
appropriate.
You
know
additional
help
if
they
have
extra
questions.
The
problem
is.
M
Wasn't
a
group
there
was
no
ad
hoc
blue
paper,
and
this.
This
is
the
area
that
I
think
were
the
most
that
were
a
little.
You
know
most
not
as
strong,
not
as
as
crisp
and
right
and
a
bunch
of
these
tend
to
be
scalability
and
performance,
and
I
just
wouldn't
want
to
see
that
kind
of
tossed
into
the
core
plus
group.
I
feel
that
that
might
not
know
it's.
K
B
It's
also
the
the
other
groups
have
sunsetted
already,
so
their
their
contract
has
expired.
Their
functionality
has
has
ended
to
the
stage.
So
if
we
were
to
reignite
that
which
is
possible
for
items
that
fell
under
their
purview,
that
would
be
something
new
to
add
to
the
plate.
It
would
they've
they
worked
more
than
what
they
got
paid
for
at
this
point
for
sure,
yeah.
M
We
need
a
fifth
group,
though
we
need
a
group.
Maybe
it's
called
performance
and
scalability,
and
maybe
you
know
maybe
we
have
you
know
our
egg
or
matt
or
bucky,
and
you
know
some
people
from
the
other
chains
kind
of
coalesce
around
that
and
take
a
lot
of
these
ad
hocs
together,
because
this
is
going
to
be
where
it's
going
to
be
really
tough.
To
put
these
rfps
out,
we,
this
is
fantastic.
M
C
I
second
that
idea,
so
the
fact
that
we
don't
have
like
the
the
all
these
scalability
items
were
thrown
into
like
this
other
bucket
means
that
you
know
they
came
in
probably
late.
You
know
most
chains,
don't
necessarily
care
for
most
of
these
right
now,
but
we
do
so.
I
mean
if
you
need
someone
to
kind
of
organize
and
and
lead
writing
out
these
for,
for,
like
scalability
plus
group
and
and
have
a
blue
paper
for
that,
then
you
know
we
can.
L
So
let
me
throw
another
framework
thought
out,
though,
because
I
I
didn't
mean
to
distract
on
the
fact
that
we
were
missing
a
specific
group.
Yes,
I
I
agree,
and
we
might
even
find,
with
the
amount
of
ad
hocs
that
there's
another
group
that
we're
not
thinking
about
right
now
that
makes
sense
to
coalesce
and
own.
L
L
M
M
We're
asked,
I
agree
with
you,
we're
asking
them
to
go
above
and
beyond
where
they
ended
with
their
blue
paper.
So
these
might
be
some
smaller
amount
of
of
compensation
to
get
them
to
help
us
run
through
this
rfp
process
where
jeff
and
I
and
some
program
management
people
will
kind
of
turn
the
cranks
and
mold
it
out.
But
we
need
kind
of
the
original
authors
and
I
think
it
would
be
good
if
we
at
least
formed
a
scalability
plus
group.
K
B
Yeah
and
if,
if
we
wanted
to
go
back
to
the
old
group,
the
the
sorry,
the
original
authors
of
the
first
original
blue
papers,
that
I
would
say
first
as
a
group
here,
we
should
determine
whether
or
not
are
we
like
the
top
20
that
we've
laid
out.
Are
we
going
to
address
all
of
those?
Are
we
actually
going
to
fund
all
those
items?
M
But
no,
we
would
do
it.
Sequentially
we'd
start
with
the
first
five
or
six
that
we
know
we
could
probably
get
in
flight
in
parallel.
Maybe
we
can't
get
all
six
in
parallel,
but
we'd
start
out
and
we'd
say
okay,
so
one
of
these
is
core.
One
of
these
is
audit.
I
don't
have
the
list
in
front
of
me,
you
know,
and
we
would
start
then
saying
how
do
we
engage
them
out
of
you
know,
just
the
goodness
of
their
hearts.
M
Should
there
be
some
compensation
to
them,
I'm
sure
for
coming
back
in
and
working
with
jeff
and
I
and
whoever
else
wants
to
volunteer
while
we
crank
through
this
and
write
out
in
our
p,
that
will
then
return
to
this
group
to
review
okay,
here's
the
rfp
we're
about
to
put
out
for
bid
because
we
have
a
pretty
good
framework.
Jeff's
got
a
pretty
good
framework
already
built,
but
we
need
you
know.
M
D
Can
I
make
a
suggestion?
I
guess
I
can
so
try
and
stop
me.
I
think
that
what
has
worked
well
with
me
in
the
past
in
other
projects,
is
that
the
we
have
a
phase
you
know
as
appropriate.
We
have
a
phase
zero
on
on
any
projects
we
want
to
bring
to
rfp
and
that
phase
zero
is
is
where
we
for
a
much
smaller
fee,
basically
approve
any
groups.
We
might
you
know
who
might
be
worthwhile
having
that
input.
D
You
know
that
might
be
everyone
we
we
think
is
going
to
bid,
or
that
might
be
a
small
subsection.
Whatever
it's
on
it's
our
decision
and
have
them
and
have
phase
zero,
be
you
know,
specking
out
the
actual,
the
actual
the
deliverable
that
would
be.
That
would
be
bid
on,
and
that
would
be
a
chance
to
bring
in
this.
D
D
L
The
one
thing
that
challenged
that
is,
that,
right
now
the
people
riding
the
rfp
are
wearing
the
hat
of.
We
are
the
customer
as
the
community
here
and
it's
and
there
is
in
an
rfp
process.
There's
a
right
there's
a
section
where
people
who
want
to
bid
have
a
chance
to
review
it
and
come
back
with
questions.
It's
not
like
they
just
like
throw
a
number
out,
and
we
need
to
build
that
in
as
well.
L
D
Yeah,
I
wasn't
proposing
it
as
a
panacea.
I
was
saying
it's
a
it's
something
that
done
in
the
past.
Sometimes
it
works.
I
think
ultimately,
what
we
want
to
get
to
is
have
somebody
on
staff
writing
the
business
requirements.
Writing
very
specific
rfps.
You
know,
as
essentially
a
full-time
job.
I
just
think
we're
trying
to
figure
out
something
to
you
know
a
transitionary
measure
to
get
there.
M
So
douglas,
I
agree
with
you
and
I
think
that's
something
that
jeff
and
I
are
happy
to
kind
of
take
on
and
the
the
question
I
have
is
just
a
little
bit
more.
We
the
people
that
are
part
of
the
the
consortium.
Now
that
are
the
these
four
chains.
I
can
see
them
saying
like
we're,
going
to
contribute,
we're
going
to
join
and
we're
not
going
to
need
to
be
compensated
because
we're
the
direct
beneficiaries
and
we're
driving
this,
but
occasionally
like.
Let's
just
pick
something
out
of
audit,
so
we
decide
hey.
M
We
want
to
get
the
rfp
for
the
for
the
wallet
plus
one
of
the
wallet
plus
items
and
we're
getting
ready
to
kind
of
put
that
out
now
we
could
just
say:
look
we're
going
to
give
it
to
aaron's
team,
but
let's
say
we
were
going
to
put
it
out
for
an
rfp
process.
We
might
say
erwin.
We
want
your
help
in
having
and
writing
this,
but
aaron's,
not
part
of
the
consortium.
Right
he's
not
one
of
the
direct
beneficiaries
of
this.
D
I
think
what
what
you
described
would
be
a
perfect
such
it
would
be.
The
situation
that
a
phase,
zero
type
you
know
spec
phase
would
be
would
be
appropriate
in.
I
think,
personally,
I
I
there's
a
part
of
me
that
says:
let's
just
do
the
first
five,
let's
figure
this
out,
let's
just
let's
learn
by
doing
and
learn
through
action,
and
because
we
don't
know
what
we
don't
know.
M
L
M
Oh
you
would
you
want
to
see
one
of
the
other
ones
which
is
fine?
I
was
curious
to
see
the
other
ad
hoc,
because
those
are
the
ones
that
we
start
with
ground.
Zero
right
we
had
synchronous
calls
was
the
only
description
we
had
right
that
people
voted
that
highly
and
and
it's
you
know
it's.
This
is
good.
We
have
a
better.
You
know.
L
M
The
good
news
is
this
is
the
most
description
before
we
had
a
two-word
description.
Now
we
have
a
one-page
description.
This
is
far
better,
so
you
know
we'll
and
we'll
just
iterate
and
improve
continually,
and
if
this
is
where
we
probably
especially
for
these
ad
hocs,
if
lucas
and
guillaume
would
be
willing
to,
you
know
meet,
and
I
don't
know
the
time
zones
and
everything,
maybe
they're,
okay,
you
know
a
couple
times
a
week,
or
at
least
once
a
week,
jeff
and
I'll
join
we'll
try
to
just
crank
out
all
of
the
ad
hocs.
M
C
C
C
M
A
commitment
and
get
find
out
who's
in
it.
There's
nine
of
these
that
we
need
to
read,
I
mean
right
and
so
nine
out
of
the
20
are
ad
hoc.
So
we
have
nothing
on
those
so
now
that
you've
all
committed.
Thank
you
so
much
lucas
and
guillaume.
You
know
I
don't
know
if
jesse
wants
to
join
or
anyone
else,
you
guys
lucas
and
gum.
If
you
have
others,
you
feel
are
good.
M
D
B
Because
that's
going
to
take
quite
some
time
before
we
go
through
the
whole
list,
essentially
of
the
ad
hoc
items,
would
we
be
able
to
put
some
weight
on
the
ones
that
we
have
prioritized
that
are?
We
generally
have
a
good
idea
of
a
good
sense
of
what
they
are,
which
would
be
faster
finality
in
this
case
is
the
highest
rated
one.
I
would
say:
let's
try
to
get
that
rfp
in
shape,
to
be
able
to
actually
put
it
out
for
tender
within.
Let's
say
the
next
two
weeks.
Would
that
be
reasonable?
B
L
M
L
M
Think
you
just
let's
get
the
shell
agreed
to
and
I
think
what
you're
going
to
see
is
once
we
start
to
go
really
heads
down
into
even
one
of
these
it's
going
to
take
longer
than
you
might
expect
to
get
it
ready
to
go
out
as
an
rfp
and-
and
you
know
so
like
I
think
these
short
one
pagers
are
super
valuable
and
we
should
get.
I
think
I
like
what
eve's
saying:
don't
do
all
nine
of
the
ad
hocs.
M
Do
the
do
do
a
top-down
process,
because
we're
gonna,
if
we're
gonna,
do
them
in
this
order?
That's
the
order.
They
should
be
done
and
I
think
we're
gonna
be
we're
gonna
clog
the
drain.
If
we
get
six
or
seven
deep,
even
I
think
they
were
five
deep
already
and
then
we
want
to
go
even
deeper
with
those
six
or
seven
douglas
had
his
hand
up,
but
I'll
shut
up.
Now.
D
I
want
to
share
what
I
do
in
my
organization,
good
block,
because
it
works
very
effectively,
and
I
think
that
I
it
would
work
effectively
here,
because
I
see
that
we're
still
being
a
little
more
cautious
with
everybody
than
is
probably
that
we
need
to
be,
and
then
is
time
effective.
So
I
at
goodblock,
everyone
knows
what
the
priorities
are.
D
We
have
stand-ups
we
have,
but
everyone
has
enormous
entrepreneurial
autonomy
to
move
in
the
direction,
because
we
have
an
amazing
group
of
people
and
they
know,
and
as
they
know
what
we're
doing,
then
they
don't,
then
they
can
go
out
and
and
do
their
part
without
always
having
to
check
back
they
they
have
their.
You
know.
Sometimes
they
need
it
and
they
can
make
those
decisions.
I
think
that
would
work
extremely
well
here
as
well.
D
I
think
we've
got
a
brain
trust
of
very
smart,
effective
people
here
and
I
think
we're
we're
kind
of
we're
kind
of
trying
to
work
them
into
a
into
a
process
that
doesn't
leverage
all
their
experience.
Business
acumen
and
everything
else
what
I
would
say
and
I
what
I
would
propose
as
a
way
as
a
way
forward
here
is
we
put
together.
We
put
together
groups
to
work
on
things
we
have,
they
have
a
lead
and
that
lead
collects
whatever
input
he
needs
from
anyone,
including
his
team
and
or
and
at
that
point
it's
go.
D
Do
your
go
to
your
job?
Just
do
it
right?
If
we're,
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
be
able
to
get.
You
know
daily
stand-ups
on
this
stuff
and-
and
I
don't
think
we're
I
think,
we're
going
to
fall
into
this
weekly
thing,
which
is
fine,
but
this
week
this
weekly
meeting
works.
If
we
have
people
who
are
coming
in
and
saying,
I
knew
what
my
job
was
this
week
and
here's
what
I
did
you
know:
here's
how
we
did
it
together
and
it's
it
has
to
me.
D
You
know
it
has
to
like
that's
yeah.
So
that's
you
know,
maybe
that's
what
what
kirsten
should
be
doing.
I
would
say
with
any
of
these
things:
if
you're,
if
you're
you
know
brandon,
if
you're
handling
comms,
I
don't
need
to
know
what
you
do
right
unless,
unless
it
is
a
whole,
unless
you
have
questions
for
me
or
unless
you
know
it
hugely
up,
which
I
don't
think
is
going
to
happen
because
you
know
your
job,
you
know
jeff
and
ted.
If
you
guys
say:
okay,
we're
going
to
decide
what
business
to
do.
D
You
know
what
business
stuff
was
going
to
be
done
here.
Let's
not,
I
don't
need
to
know
whether
you
think
it's
more
offense
more
effective
to
do
to
to
just
do
a
type
4
or
to
combine
things
or
to
do
all
of
them.
However,
you
do
it,
you
do
it
and
you
tell
us
what
you
did,
because
you
know
what
you're
doing,
and
I
think
that
we're
just
being
we're
just
doing
too
much,
I'm
going
to
stop
talking
thanks
guys
for
listening.
I.
A
Yeah,
I
just
fired
myself
by
sharing
my
screen,
but
in
fact,
as
I
shared
my
screen
as
you
all
saw-
and
if
you
didn't
see
it,
you
probably
see
it
on
the
video.
My
my
comment
was
to
to
jesse
that
my
feeling
is
that
you
guys
actually
don't
need
me
anymore,
because
oh
yeah,
it's
not
it's.
It's
such
a
great
dynamic
that
I
see
here
in
this
in
those
last
two
meetings.
A
But
with
this,
this
kind
of
working
mode
that
we're
in
here
is
so
exciting,
because
I
can
see
that
there
are
so
much
things
there
and
people
are
really
doing
doing
something
now
and
bringing
bringing
ideas
and
bringing
formats
and
and
and
work
on
the
topics
which
is
awesome
to
see.
So
so
that's
really
that's
why
I
kind
of
mentioned
this
to
jesse,
because
I
I
think
it's
it's
all
on
a
very,
very
good
way.
Right
now
and
and
that's
very
very
nice
to
see
so
just
wanted
to
say
that.
D
But
kirsten
if
we
move
to
the
model
that
I
suggest,
which
I
I
deeply
hope
we
try.
I
think
we
need
you
even
more
because
because
everyone's
gonna
be
focused
on
their
own
stuff,
we're
gonna
be
asking
less
input
right.
One
of
the
advantages
of
this
model
is
that
we
don't
constantly
have
to
get
input.
We
have
people
who
are
responsible
in
areas
and
and
say
this
is
how
we're
doing
it.
D
C
I
second
that
I
mean
this
is
how
we
run
all
our
teams.
Each
team
is
like
a
small
mini
startup
and
they
have
operational
mandate
to
just
deliver
and
we
self-correct
as
we
go
right.
So
we
could
take
that
approach
for
each
of
these
working
groups
and
then
use
this
time
to
kind
of
correct
as
we
go
without
trying
to
come
up
with.
Like
a
you
know,
operational
framework
and
standards
and
templates
for
everybody
right.
The
only
thing.
L
Is
that
we
should
be
communicating
our
individual
wins
and
challenges
in
a
consistent
manner,
or
else
people
will
spend
more
time
trying
to
figure
out
what's
going
on
with
teams
they're
not
in,
and
so
it's
not
neces.
I
don't
I'm
not
talking
about
anything
like
heavyset,
but
you
know
if
we
have
like
the
scalability
group,
if
lucas
is,
for
example,
leading
that
we
don't
want
to
know
the
minutia
of
that,
we
really
only
want
to
know
what
are
you
accomplishing?
L
G
D
I
just
try.
I
listen
and-
and
I
know
that
that
was
probably
a
necessity
in
the
old
group,
but
it's
not
anymore.
We've
committed
we're
here,
we're
doing
things
to
my
view.
The
pace
is
too
slow
because
we're
do
we're
being
too
all
being
too
polite
and
what
we
should
do
is
say:
we've
got
a
great
team
here
of
people.
D
I
know
we're
all
on
different
chains,
but
in
this
we're
very
much
aligned
and
frankly,
I
think
that,
as
we
start
working
together,
there's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
unexpected
serendipitous
vet
benefits
that
come
out
of
this
of
us
actually
working
together.
Not
just
on
this.
It's
not
a
requirement,
but
I
just
predict
it'll
happen.
I
trust
you
guys.
I
don't
need
to
it.
D
Doesn't
there
doesn't
have
to
be
a
teles
representative
representative
on
a
group
to
get
done
and
and
and
let's
just
let's
just
remember-
that
that
all
of
us
know
what
we're
doing
everyone
else
here
knows
what
we're
doing
and-
and
I
you
know
I'd
rather
just
not
hear
about
it
until
you
need
my
input
and
I
on
every
single
thing.
You
know,
and
I
just
you
mean
you
guys
know
what
you're
doing
you
guys
have.
G
I
don't
disagree
with
what
you're
saying
douglas,
but
I
wanted
to
jump
on
in
the
context
of
the
shell
of
an
rfp
in
two
weeks,
without
even
having
the
faster
finality,
or
maybe
if
we
were
really
bold,
the
top
four
filled
out
in
the
shell.
That
does
feel
I
mean
I'd
love
to
see
that
rfp,
like
you've,
said,
go
out
in
two
weeks,
and
I
know
people
are
eager
to
work
on
it
and
people
are
queued
up
to
start
working
or
bidding
on
work.
So
I'd
like
to
move
faster
in
that
context,.
M
So
we're
referring
to
a
template,
the
template
makes
it
so
each
rfp
isn't
like
hand
written
from
scratch.
It
has
all
the
sections
and
it
has
the
contact
here
and
the
blah
blah
blah,
and
so
we
have
already
started
and
having
relatively
good
shape
an
rfp
template
right
now
it
might
not
be
branded
correctly.
It
might,
we
might
decide
hey.
This
section
is
superfluous.
We
should
remove
it
or
whatever
and
then
the
hard
work
is
getting
the
contents
of
faster
finality
to
be
deep
enough
and
exacting
enough
to
fit
into
that
template
into
that.
Shell.
M
That's
why
I
call
it
a
shell
template's,
a
better
word
and
then
it
would
be
reviewed,
but
what
we're
saying
and
again
not
to
offend
anyone
here,
if
you
don't
want
to
see
it,
we
won't
bother
you
with
the
details,
but
we
think
we
could
show
you
the
template
of
what
the
rfps
will
look
like,
probably
next
week
or
in
two
weeks
for
certain,
but
if
no
one
wants
to
be
bothered
with
that.
It's
just
that.
That's
this!
That
is
the
format
that
every
rfp
will
start
to
go
out
the
door
in.
B
As
that
pilot,
so
I
would
say
that's
the
finality
as
the
pilot
and,
if
you
can,
on
the
28th,
so
in
two
weeks,
showcase
and
essentially
you're
gonna
do
both
you're
going
to
showcase
what
the
template
looks
like
by
showcasing
what
the
faster
finality
filled
out
in
that
template
would
look
like
and
if,
on
the
28th,
it's
not
finalized.
That's
fine,
but
that's
what
we
should
aim
for.
In
my
opinion,.
K
M
That
might
mean
we'd
be
prioritized.
Writing
that
again,
I'm
going
into
details
here
writing
that
rfp
versus
going
deeper
into
the
stack.
So
we
have
eight
things
that
could
work
in
parallel
or
something
because
we'll
probably
need
guillaume
and
lucas
to
be
able
to
really
drill
into
that
level
and
we'll
how
many
know
how
many,
how
many
hours
a
week
we're
going
to
get
at
both
of
them
to
be
able
to
get
that
level
of
detail
into
it.
M
G
I
I'd
I'd
be
in
support
of
getting
one
out
the
door
learn
from
the
process.
I
don't
want
to
say
that
we're
going
to
finish
the
process
of
completing
the
development
work
before
we
started
the
next
thing.
They
should
all
be
kind
of
carried
forward
like
dominoes,
but
we
don't
necessarily
have
to
have
a
batch,
especially,
I
think
fast
finality
is
a
clear
number
one.
It's
a
good
exercise
to
to
go
through
and
the
others
can
follow
shortly.
Thereafter.
G
We
already
have
four
of
them
now,
with
a
little
more
color
that
we
did
this
week,
we
could
we
could
keep
doing
as
we
as
we
learned.
This
worked
for
faster
finality.
We
could
start
doing
those
things
with
the
other
top
four
top
eight.
You
know
the
second
set
of
four
can
follow
the
first
four
I
I'd
be
in
favor
of
faster
finality
being
the
pilot
for
the
whole
process.
G
A
Okay,
so
that
sounds
great
sounds
great,
so
I
already
put
this
in
here
and
say:
create
faster
finality
rfp
document
for
review
in
work
group.
That's
for
april
28th.
That's
gonna
be
two
weeks
so
for
the
first
review
and
I
put
in
ted
and
jeff
as
you
proposed
you
would
you
would
do
that
if
you
want
to
kind
of
push
this
to
me
for
for
a
kind
of
review
and
and
some
some
thoughts
I'll
be
happy
to
do
that.
A
So
so
that
that's
awesome,
then
then
we
push
this
over
there
and
I
also
put
in
create
scalability
plus
blue
paper,
which
I
took
that
lucas.
You
would
take
the
lead
on
that
one
if
I
understood
that
correctly
and
do
your
own
slash,
ux
up
to
the
end,
to
be
part
with
that.
So
that's
awesome,
so
I
I
put
in
there's
april
21st.
Obviously
that's
not
not
a
reasonable
timeline.
Do
you
have
a
timeline
when
you
would
expect
to
have
like
a
very
first
draft
to
to
share.
B
B
C
D
A
M
It
delay
it
put
a
future
yeah
because
you
want
to
finish
all
20
of
these
you're
just
going
to
pause.
It
just
pause
it
until
you
get
the
rp
out
and
then
we
pick
this
back
up
and
go
a
little
further
get
the
second
one
I
mean
we
may
find
that
we,
if
we
I
o
block
on
the
rfp,
we
go.
We
start
working
on
this
a
little
bit
more
back
and
forth
right,
but
let's
not
put
a
date
that
makes
it
where
we're
you
know
we're
conflicting
with
each
other
this.
A
What
I
would
propose,
though,
because
that
it's
obviously
a
very
it's
an
a
four
page
or
letter
letter
form
yeah
wherever
you
you
look
at
it,
so
so
it's
a
one
pager
and
obviously,
if
we,
if
we
would
have
like
the
first
three
sentences
for
all
the
top
20
items,
I
think
that
would
be
good,
because
it
would
also
be
an
item
for
the
media
release
where
we
could
say
well.
These
are
actually
the
top
20
items
we
look
at
and
these
are
like
the
executive
summaries
for
those.
A
M
Yeah
I
mean
you're
going
to
need
the
I
mean
we
can
get
part
of
it.
What
lucas
is
going
to
be
leading
we'll
give
you
nine
of
those
right
because
he's
writing
the
blue
paper
for
scalability
plus,
so
that's
nine
of
the
20.
we
have.
You
know
we
have
seven
of
those
two
of
those
done
so
seven
of
those
remain
plus
others.
M
K
B
B
We
have
five.
So
then,
maybe
maybe
just
the
five
then
and
then
to
add
to
that
as
well.
Aaron
from
gramos
is
currently
filling
out
the
grant
framework
application
using
the
sdk
as
his
example.
Theoretically,
the
sdk
rfp
will
be
complete
even
before
the
faster
finality
one.
That
could
also
be
another
pilot
that
we
could
that
we
could
actually
bring
to
decision
to
this
group
before
the
fafsa.
B
M
Are
you
saying
then
take
what
aaron
is
doing
in
the
grant
application?
Because
that's
what
he's
writing
right
now
he's
writing
the
grant
application
transform
that
into
an
rfp.
So
we
have
an
example
in
the
rfp,
because
it's
it'll
be
much
of
the
same
type
of
information
and
use
that,
instead
of
faster
finality
for
our
first.
B
Time
saying
you
could
probably
get
both
out
in
two
weeks
because
they're
different
people
they're
different
teams
you're,
but
because
it
wouldn't
be
you
it
would
be.
It
wouldn't
be
the
same
people
that
are
doing
faster
finality
and
you
could
actually
present
both
of
them
up
for
decision,
or
at
least
one
of
them
up
for
decision.
M
Would
work
and
the
trouble
is
you're
they're
funneling
all
through
jeff,
and
I
right
so
either
aaron
would
write
the
rfp
we'd.
Give
him
the
shell,
the
template
and
say
here,
stick
all
your
stuff
in
here
as
well,
and
aaron's
already
still
working
on
just
doing
the
grant
application
while
well
jeff,
and
I
kind
of
tried
to
work
on
or
you
know
we
could
split.
I
could
try
to
take
aaron's
piece
and
jeff
could
try
to
take
faster
finality
and
get
those.
L
Of
the
differences
is
that
a
grant
is
your
as
the
grant
writer
you
are.
Writing
it
in
context
of
hey.
This
is
my
skills
and
my
vision,
so
I
am
going
to
define
the
requirements
around
that.
So
you
are
granting
me
the
money,
whereas
the
rfp
is
taking
the
opposite
direction,
we're
trying
to
say
as
the
community
we
don't
care
about.
L
B
K
K
B
I
M
B
M
B
B
Yeah
I'd
like
to
see
how
they
compare
and
it
sounds
like,
there's
a
lot
of
overlap
between
it.
I
mean
basically,
I'm
kind
of
writing
the
same
thing,
three
different
ways
and
so
like
there
was
the
blue
paper.
Another
was
the
grant
example
and
then
there's
this
rfp
example.
So
it's
just
wrapping
my
head
around
all
these
different
hats.
B
L
One
other
thing,
and
this
my
opinion
is
that
in
a
normal
rfp
process,
the
really
complicated
part
we
need
to
work
out
is
the
bidding
and
selection
process,
and
in
this,
like
example,
for
a
grant,
you
already
know
who's
selected,
because
it's
the
person
who's
submitting
it
in
an
rfp.
You
know
you
got
to
make
sure
that
there's
really
good
equity,
particularly
in
a
community
like
ours,
because
we're
going
to
pick
a
winner
and
we
don't
want.
B
B
I
will
say
that
the
blue
papers
are
probably
closer
to
what
the
rfp
is,
because
we
wrote
the
blue
papers
and
tried
to
take
ourselves
out
of
it
as
much
as
possible.
So
I
think
the
struggle
is
actually
writing
the
grant
proposal,
because
I'm
having
to
introduce
the
stuff
that
we
didn't
include
in
the
blue
papers.
So
that's
why
I'm?
G
B
G
A
C
A
B
D
Inherent
to
the
process
of
having
of
of
hiring
experts
and
letting
them
and
not
micromanaging
them,
and
not,
and
not
you
know
and
trusting
their
expertise
is
letting
them
set
reasonable
deadlines,
and-
and
I
think
I
I
eve
you
and
I
are
very
much
aligned
in
wanting
to
get
things
done
faster
rather
than
slower,
but
but
he's
our
expert,
and
he
knows
what
his
life
schedule
is
like.
He
knows
what
a
lot
of
things
are
like
he's,
going
to
be
the
fastest
one
to
do
it
for
us
anyway.
D
B
Right,
I
also
think
there's
some
value
in
having
the
same
project
in
a
blue
paper
and
a
grant
example,
and
in
an
rfp
example
like
it's
gonna,
provide,
hopefully
a
way
that
you
can
look
at
the
three
different
ways.
The
same
idea
is
presented
to
get
ideas
on
how
for
other
people,
to
be
able
to
apply
for
these
various
things
or
to
write
these
other
things.
B
I
mentioned
the
other
day
that
he
had
reached
out
or
sorry
rami
had
reached
out
by
email
to
dan
myself
and
he
had
included
david,
the
the
co-ceo
of
ultra
on
the
email
indicating
that
ultra
was
willing
to
or
that
a
priority
or
the
top
priority
of
ultra
was
to
get
faster
finality
and
he
was
reaching
out
to
dan
to
find
out
whether
or
not
that
was
still
something
on
the
plate
and
whatever,
and
that
they
would
be
willing
to
financially
compensate
for
that.
Two
questions.
B
Dan,
never
replied
to
the
email.
Does
anybody
else
know
if,
as
far
as
you
know,
whether
or
not
dan
and
his
team
are
still
putting
that
on
the
table,
question
one?
I
guess
dan
is
gone
now,
so
it's
it's
unfortunate,
but
you
might
know
lucas
stanton
mentioned
that
he
had
worked
with
stephen
watanabe
to
get
the
architectural
kind
of
blueprint
of
faster
finality
out.
Do
you
know
if
they
actually
worked
on
that
together?
B
If
he
has
access
to
that,
maybe
you
can
reach
out
to
stan
find
out,
and
then
the
second
question
was:
did
ultra
reach
out
to
any
anybody
else
on
this,
or
did
they
just
reach
out
to
me,
because
when
I
replied
they
never
reached
out
again
or
they
never
replied?
I
guess
just
so
that
we're
all
on
the
same
page
and
then
that
leads
to
the
should
ultra
wish
to
financially
contribute
to
this.
We
should
have
in
the
back
of
our
mind:
how
do
we?
B
B
B
With
that
was-
or
I
guess,
the
potential
concern
that
I
have
is,
I
believe
that
dan
is
actually
has
pulled
away.
His
his
offer
of
working
on
faster
finale
synchronous
calls.
What
I
don't
know
is
whether
or
not
the
work
that
he
had
done
over
the
last
couple
of
months
and
building
that
architecture.
If
he's
withholding
that
information
or
if
he's
willing
to
give
and
or
be
compensated
for
that
information,
and
if
stan
has
access
to
it,
then
maybe
there's
no
need
to
compensate
or
maybe
there's
a
different
route
to
take.
E
B
A
A
Thanks
and
then
I
I'll
take
a
look
at
it
and
then
see
how
how
we
can
facilitate
that
in
in
this
kind
of
work
mode.
Yeah,
absolutely
thank
you,
okay
and
then
brandon.
You
wanted
to
take
the
task
to
kind
of
identify
group
faces,
as
we
called
it
in
the
last
call
that
would
represent
kind
of
groups
in
joint
interviews
or
podcasts
or
streams
or
whatever
that
might
be.
Have
you
been
able
to
kind
of
figure
out
something
there.
O
D
J
Okay,
great
yeah
I'll,
I
think
the
best
medium
for
this
will
be
twitter
spaces
and
we
could
do
an
eosio
coalition
panel.
I
think,
would
be
a
good
first
starting
point
invite
all
of
our
communities
to
it,
but
I
could
I
could
coordinate
that
with
brandon
offline.
I
don't
know
when,
when
it
would
be
good
timing.
D
I
think
yeah,
that's
great.
I
think
we
should
also.
We
should
all
there's
there's
things
like
there's
eos
channel,
you
know
eos
or
eosio
channels
that
it
would
be
really.
I
think
they
would
be
hungry
for
this
kind
of
information,
and
I
think
if
we
just
propose
it,
they'll
be
able
to
roll
with
us.
It'd
be
nice
to
see
at
least
one.
You
know
good
podcast
having
you
know
a
representative
each
chain
there
slapping
each
other
on
the
back
a
little
bit.
J
Yeah
right
now,
there's
not
too
many
high
traffic
high
view
podcasts
on
the
eos,
eco
or
eos.
I
don't
know
what
everyone
else
has
wax.
Probably
has
the
the
best
influencers
at
this
point,
but
helios
would
be
an
option
we
could
host
it
on
our
channel,
but
that
that's
why
I
think
spaces
is
good
because
we're
starting
to
play
around
with
it.
We
have
a
virtual
event
next
week
and
it's
just
that's
where
the
majority
of
I
mean
it's
crypto
twitter.
For
a
reason.
D
Great
you
guys
are
leading
this,
so
whatever
you,
so
I
trust
whatever
you
think
you
know
the
area
whatever
you,
whatever
you
think
it's
is
the
best
way
to
go.
Let's
set
it
up,
but
I
I
my
the
only
input
I
had
is
I'm
I'm
happy
to
do
that
on
the
pillow
side
and
and
and
that
I
think
we
should.
I
think
this
is
a
step
that
should
happen
sooner
rather
than
later.
Just
because
it's
it's
it's
gonna
get
this
stuff
across.
However,
you
guys
think
is
the
best.
H
J
Other
content
will
be
once
we
decide
when
we
want
to
do
a
public
call
and
invite
the
other
esio
chains.
I
mean
it's
not
the
same
as
doing
like
a
podcast
or
anything,
but
it
would
be
an
opportunity
for
all
of
this
group
to
kind
of
speak
up
about
what
everyone's
been
working
on
and
sharing
it
with
other
eosio
chains
and
also
the
community
all
of
our
individual
communities.
By
extension,
once
we
upload
that
to
youtube
and
wherever
else.
B
A
That
wasn't
that
wasn't
part
of
of
today's
agenda.
In
total,
we,
when
I
meant
work
groups,
I
meant
the
like
legal
leadership,
resource
governance
and
so
on
so
updated,
basically
update
the
comment
he's
there,
but
oh
yeah,
here,
reorganization,
work
groups
and
schedule
you're
right,
you're,
actually
right.
B
So
what
I
meant-
I
guess
in
my
original
message,
that
the
posted
was-
and
I
think
it
was
the
third
thing
administratively.
I
think
we
should
be
doing
the
basics
like
setting
up
weekly
meetings,
internal
and
external
internal.
I
meant
this
group
external,
I
meant
the
larger
group
of
people
who
did
not
initially
join
the
the
coalition.
B
I
think
that
we
should
continue
having
those
calls,
if
not
weekly,
then
at
least
bi-weekly,
where
we
update
what
this
group
has
done
to
the
larger
group,
hear
any
feedback
and
basically
continue
that
cadence
that
we
had
set
to
to
to
continue
down.
I
guess
what
we
had
originally
created,
which
was
inclusivity
to
everybody,
regardless
of
whether
or
not
they
were
paying
members
or
not.
B
B
But
that
way
we
ensure
that
they
keep
getting
the
information
and
that
we
keep
including
them
and
because
there's
also
like
we
mentioned
earlier
in
this
call,
this
one's
being
recorded,
are
we
making
it
public?
I
also
like
the
idea
that
we
were
making
the
other
ones
public.
A
few
people
watched
it's
not
so
much
for
the
viewership,
but
when
people
did
ask
like
hey
what's
going
on
at
least
we
could
always
point
to
look.
It
is
available.
Everybody
can
do.
B
B
And-
and
really
I
guess
it
if
it
does
become
that
the
other
non-coalition
members
start
impeding
the
progress
of
this
group
by
either
interjecting
too
much
or
talking
too
much
or
slowing
down
progress.
We
can
then
deal
with
it
at
that
time.
Where
we
ask
people
to
either.
Please
refrain
and
or
you
know,
if
you,
if
actually
you've,
got
a
lot
of
concerns.
You
you're
you're,
slowing
down
the
progress.
You
got
two
choices.
A
E
B
Having
the
so,
we
used
to
host
the
calls
every
thursday
at
this
time
with
the
larger
group.
Now
that
there's
four
chains
that
have
essentially
become
paid
members,
we've
now
stopped
the
other
calls
what
I'm
suggesting
is.
We
should
continue
the
other
calls,
because
we
know
that
this
time
slot
works
for
everybody,
because
it
worked
for
everybody
before.
I
think
that
a
quick
fix
could
be
one
week
is
just
this
close
group
the
following
week.
It's
the
open
group.
The
next
week
is
the
close
group.
B
E
E
B
G
A
A
A
B
J
So
we
talked
about
the
blog
updates
would
be
a
cadence
of
every
other
week.
Maybe
we
could
alternate
so
one
week.
It's
the
public,
video
and
then
the
following
week.
We
just
kind
of
if
we're
given
high
level
summaries
in
the
public
call
every
other
week.
Then
the
following
week
we
just
kind
of
release
text
version
of
that
blog
format,
plus
any
little
things
we
come
up
with,
and
then
we
could
have
that
would
give
us
content
every
week.
It
would
just
be
a
different
format.
J
B
J
J
J
Yeah,
it's
more
so
that
the
video
just
isn't
extra
work.
The
video
is
just
uploading
to
youtube,
giving
it
a
title
and
a
thumbnail
yeah
they're,
both
still
every
two
weeks.
Just
they
alternate
that
way,
yeah
otherwise
we're
over
aggressive
in
a
single
week,
because
if
we
don't
alternate
weeks,
then
it's
just
gonna
be
two
pieces
of
content
in
a
single
week.
J
A
B
As
usual,
just
one
of
them
happens
to
have
more
people,
and
the
other
and,
and
it
is
recording,
is,
is
published
and
the
other
one
isn't
that's
my
opinion.
I
I
don't
think
that
we
should
like
at
the
agenda
for
this
one
is.
We
can
talk
about
money
and
the
other
one.
We
can't
talk
about
money
because
either
way
we're
gonna
be
publishing
everything.
A
Makes
sense
yeah,
I
would
probably
I'm
just
trying
to
be
protective
in
this
perspective,
so
so
you're
right.
So
so
this
the
same
scope
except
we
would
probably
give
like
a
short
status
update
to
the
people
that
join
in
that
you
that
were
not
on
the
other
call.
So
that's
another
good
question
should.
B
We
should
we
give
a
summary
of
what
we
talked
about
last
week
at
the
beginning
of
the
one:
that's
open
if
we
can
keep
it
like
five
minutes
sure.
But
if
we're
going
to
take
half
an
hour,
I
would
say
that
that's
eating
too
much
of
the
time,
because
because
we
wouldn't
need
to
rehash
what
we
talked
about
last
time.
So
next.
B
M
K
M
E
G
B
J
B
It
does
I
I
mean
we
have
to
update
our
constituents
anyways
and
we're
going
to
be
publishing
everything
anyways,
not
necessarily
the
call
itself,
but
like
the
information,
the
content
itself
is
going
to
go
out
publicly.
So
I
have
no
issues
with
that
yeah.
I
think
I
think
we're
doing
it
we're
doing
up
till
now.
We
were
doing
it
for
last
three
months.
There's
I
I
I
didn't
now
become
more
liberal
in
this
call
and
more
vocal
than
I
was
in
the
other
three
months.
So
no
difference
because.
J
J
B
J
O
B
B
This
is
good,
I'm
actually
very,
very
happy
with
this
decision
that
everybody
is
is
in
agreement
with
this.
I
think
it's
gonna
be
really
really
nice
signal
to
the
rest
of
the
group
that,
right
after
we
form
the
coalition
one
of
the
first
things
we
decide
is
actually
like.
No
we're
not
going
off
in
our
little
corner,
we're
we're
letting
everybody
in
from
the
get-go,
because
that
was
the
vision
that
was
the
mission
and
we're
sticking
to
that
right
from
the
beginning.
J
L
L
B
J
A
B
J
Yeah,
I
really
like
this
too,
because
ideally,
as
far
as
comms
we'll
get
community
members
eventually
that
are
ambitious
enough
to
start
picking
up
on
things
like
this
and
maybe
they'll
cover
the
calls
or
whatever
and
it
kind
of
takes
some
of
the
burden
off
of
us.
And
we
can
just
kind
of
add
the
icing
on
the
top.
But
it
would
be
nice
to
see
independent
coverage
of
this
very
cool.