Everything EOS Antelope Coalition, 9 Mar 2023

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Antelope Coalition - March 9th, 2023 Meeting | EOS, TELOS, WAX, UX Network

Description

This week the Antelope Coalition discusses the progress made with IBC milestones, P2P optimization, Ram limitation fixes, Instant Finality, wallet SDK, Ledger app support, and more!

00:00:00 Start
00:00:03 Topics and recap
00:00:20 IBC Milestone 7 vote
00:25:22 P2P optimized transaction propagation
00:25:51 RAM limitation fixes
00:26:00 P2P Peer discovery
00:26:11 Instant Finality IBC approvers/champions
00:31:00 Wallet SDK update
00:32:56 Antler CDT
00:33:00 Ledger app support
00:35:36 Coalition cost sharing
00:41:37 End

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://www.eosnetwork.com
https://twitter.com/EosNFoundation
https://www.linkedin.com/company/eos-network-foundation
https://t.me/EOSNetworkFoundation
https://discord.gg/eos-network
info@eosnetwork.com
#EOS #Web3

A

Okay, good afternoon, everyone, uh this is the antelope Coalition meeting. uh We are going to begin our business now. The first order of business will be a vote on the IBC Milestone number. Seven, payment release.

B

So um this is a a milestone for one of the supporting infrastructure pieces. It's called what's called LifeProof DB. uh This has been reviewed uh earlier this week by Jesse and the caliosteen, so a big shout out to uh Jesse and to nutellos calios and delos teams for performing this uh review. uh I believe Jesse. You found everything uh satisfactory and you're actually running it now, so that gives us also another infrastructure provider uh running uh the light proof VB IBC to Observer. So thanks for doing that,.

A

So if no other questions uh Eve, how do you vote.

C

D

I I'm, not sure I, uh who do we have on this call? I sorry, uh my bad I was yes, I vote, CR! Yes, sorry I was double checking which one that was which Milestone that was yes, I'm good. With that okay, uh Lucas.

E

uh That's a yes and Jesse.

A

Yes, okay, I think that the motion passes uh because ux abstains is that correct? This is correct: yeah, okay,.

C

Very good yeah it passes anyway right.

A

um I think we just moved that up over to done or I'm gonna do that, whether that's right or wrong Jeff will inform me later because it just at that point. Someone else is going to work on processing the payment Eve. Is there someone I need to notify, or is there something that Jeff would normally notify to get that payment released.

D

Yeah that was yeah make sure that Jeff knows and then he'll run the process. I think that that's good, because, yes, there's gonna be Adam in there, but there's also John in there there's there's a few people that'll be uh needed in this.

A

Okay, I'm letting him know now all right now. The antelope ibcio portal, uh no data inside here.

D

I can I'll speak to this um and it's quite timing, so we just recorded it at an around the block blog cath this morning and I I mentioned this, but I'd be bringing this up today, uh we've been receiving uh a lot of applications for IBC related uh Grant applications, funding, Etc um and uh some of them have been approved, uh not released yet, but there's one, for example, in the grant framework that I mentioned in the call that'll be released or the the show that we just recorded this one in particular came directly to me, so it didn't go through a grant framework.

D

uh This particular idea uh comes from General Rios, um the the block producer, and they uh we started working with them on a few ideas in the past. Through our grant framework, they were one of the first recipients they worked on uh now, I forget the name. It's irrelevant. We work with them for a while, and we've been trying to get them involved more and more as similar to what we're doing within the Coalition.

D

Finding other partners that can take on workloads uh they looked into uh taking on some of the um work that was an API or no wallet plots of blue paper Aaron's on the call, so I I, don't recall which item there, but ultimately we decided that it was likely not a right fit.

D

We then started looking into could they potentially take on some of that RFP work that we talked about before of drafting rfps, of having people that understand the software stack very well, but also have the technical writing capability to draft rfps um long story short likely, not a right fit there as well.

D

So this ended up with with this particular idea, and so they they've pitched and they've proposed uh something and I'm just gonna try to pull it up, um and basically just just pissed this through telegram right now, and so, if relevant, then I'll post it in the core, but what they were pitching was. Should this go through the grant framework, or should this go through, uh for example, an RFP um for the Coalition?

D

Realistically, this should be at the Coalition level because it benefits everybody is really for IBC as a whole and it's to really take what's uh no one and his team have done in terms of the uh the portal the ibc.uxnetwork.io and expand on that to have.

D

um You know something less basic, not to say that what what the US team has done is is not good but to really expand on that product and really open that up and so they've got a proposal um for us that I said that we we'd review. Clearly, we had not prioritized this. This is not something we had looked at. um This is not something that was in the pipeline, but I think it was worthwhile bringing here if it's not relevant for the Coalition I'll do I, believe it it.

D

It is, and really that's where the funding should come from, then the guidance to them will be to apply to the grant framework direct directly um I, don't know what the you know, whether that'll pass or not or whatever, because it really is for everybody else.

D

um What I can do because obviously you're all going blind at this I'm somewhat. Blinded this too, this just came I believe it was yesterday the day before I can post what that is in our Channel, and then we can look at whether or not we think um it would be something we're interested in. If it's something we're interested in as a coalition, it doesn't mean that we necessarily assign uh to them or what not.

D

But then maybe we actually write an RFP out for this, um or maybe we just directly assign to them in terms of funding requests. They've got three different project. Scopes and I'll just afford it right now, just so that everybody sees and I have no issues. If this is coasted in any in here, too uh and I've confirmed with them, they're good with that as well.

D

So there's no there's no secrets or anything like that: I just posted in the core chat and now so there's a a list of nine functions or nine features that that portal would Encompass um and um they would basically expand on that. The funding uh requests give or take uh just open that up as well it just so. It positions it for all the features that you see there based on existing public proof servers um that is, the lightest cost, so basically they're leveraging.

D

What, if I'm not mistaking beyond what you already have, because the the proof servers are already there, so they wouldn't be starting from um you know, replaying everything from scratch their give or take approximately asking for fifty three thousand dollars. This is very high level. If we were to go through a a uh an RFP, they would need to do more work into that. Fifty three hundred dollars, plus an ongoing infrastructure management cost of Seventeen hundred dollars per month, so quite minimal in the grand scheme of things.

D

If we were, if they were to take this honest, I.

F

Believe I heard you say fifty three thousand and fifty three hundred about.

D

Fifty three thousand dollars for the development in setup, Seventeen hundred dollars and I'll forward this in the channel too, as well um and Seventeen hundred dollars monthly for the maintenance. Again, this is all they're just approximate what they're doing right now, because they don't even know should they apply for funding through the Coalition or through EOS, directly Grant framework.

D

The second one would be all the features that I've just forwarded, based on setting up maintaining proof infrastructure for all Coalition chains um with partial history since IBC Activation. So they would do that for every chain. They would replay the the or start I guess the proof servers for all four chains that would double the cost of development.

D

So roughly a hundred thousand dollars with a much larger, ongoing infrastructure management, cost of twelve thousand four hundred dollars per month, and then the final option that they're kind of costing out would be including all the features based on setting up and making proof infrastructure for all Coalition chains with full history, filmlock one that would be slightly more expensive at 123 000, with a roughly twenty one thousand dollar ongoing costs. uh So the reason why I'm, bringing this up and obviously to to talk about this is it's being recorded stuff is.

D

Do we want to entertain this? Is this something we want them to go back um towards? Is this something we're even slightly interested in, or should we say we're not interested? Thank you very much and then we'll see whether or not uh any of our respected chains want to pick this up, um uh whether or not they apply for the graph framework for Eos or either of your grand famous or whatever it may be, and basically that's uh that's why I'm bringing up I said I'd, bring it up to everybody, and so now it's it's.

D

B

If I may, um I have a few balance on this, so I think I think uh phase one of what they're proposing or the the smallest uh package that to me looks very reasonable. I think there is there's very uh good value for what we would be pay uh for. uh The other two phases, um I I, think I think they might not be aware of the latest changes that we've made to the uh infrastructure.

B

But at this point essentially like uh yes, you could have the entire history of the chain uh available to prove just about anything um that uh that that ever occurred. But uh I don't know if that is worth the price tag that they were asking in reality. There's uh in the the proof, server we've uh implemented a feature now that allows pruning of data. That's no longer required. uh So there's no, uh it's actually very light.

B

Now uh you don't have to to keep all of that past history and if you, even if you were to keep all of the best history, it's kind of I, don't know I, don't know like how valuable that is uh to me. That would seem a little bit expensive or just a pure infrastructure um infrastructure setup. So I would I would personally be very comfortable with uh the option.

B

One but I think I think we're overpaying for option two and three, uh maybe not in terms of what it would cost them, but more in terms of what benefits it would bring the coalition to support all of this as a public, good, um I think Garrett, it's it's yeah, it's pricey for the very marginal benefit it gives us.

F

Yeah I I think we need what's described.

F

um I have been optimistic that somebody within the analog communities gonna build it I know that you know, like you said, if you've gotten proposals I know, the boy team has plans to build something like this and has a grant on pamilo um I think we need it. I think option. One I totally agree with you. No option one is, is reasonable for all the upfront work um and then you know the monthly cost. I suppose is just for hosting a website and kind of whatever code.

F

It is needed to do the proofs automatically on the target chain, which seems reasonable um I. My only hesitation is, you know, I'd like to see if something like this comes out organically, maybe even through the pomelo work that Floyd's doing it. You know, is it's not something necessarily you need redundancy for. You really just need one that that does it well so another.

D

Text on unemployed by the way, they've also applied through the grant framework uh for what they call Antelope firewall, which is to be deployed on all four chains uh which we've just recently I believe, as in yesterday morning um approved uh level one so underground, framer processed.

D

There are two levels: the first level is more the business, um uh General High, Level type of approval uh within the board, and the second one is the technical that we just approved, I'm, not even sure, if they're aware so they may find out through listening to this call, because it's fresh off the press, we've just approved bonding boy for something what they call Antelope firewall, which is different than this you're right that they did submit for Antelope portal within pomelo.

D

Realistically, though, pomelo does not give you anywhere the level of funding that is being asked here, um even if new new Drew, incredibly well I, believe for this season, because there's a cap on how much matching you can get the maximum you could potentially get is a match of 17K um with no ongoing floss whatever it is, you receive directly so still very different. I, don't believe it's going to be at all the same type of product. We can rely.

D

Obviously, on hello, I mean that's, that's the cost that we bear that that you guys don't bear above your sleeves um I. Don't think we're gonna get the same product I, don't think! That's the same thing at all. That is being proposed.

F

Here, right and I haven't been paid too close attention.

F

I just know that when I talked with them, they described somewhat what this is a portal that does a IBC and it may not even be what they applied for Grants or pomelo, and it's more just a product that they were sharing, that they wanted to build, um and then they had some more um additional pay for functionality that people might want um on top of it so and I I, don't I'm, not disputing that the option A is is a reasonable one, for what we need. I was just pointing out organically.

F

There might be other things that that kind, I've.

D

Personally, funded and donated to the pomelo one, for example: yes, so I think one of them will happen, perhaps organically, like you said either through pomelo with with Boyd um I, don't know whether or not it'll happen as well or as quickly, because, obviously the funding is a key part of that, whereas this I mean. If we were to uh entertain this idea, then it would happen all right. There's no question that it would be a product that we would and after we would have commissioned it essentially yeah but still depends on. Is this important?

D

Is this something that we want? Is this something we want to entertain? I I, don't know.

C

Might might thoughts are in general, I think we should for rfps. We should stick with our our priority, our predetermined priorities. However, this does strike me as something that's an extension of of IBC um and so I would I think it's reasonable to consider it.

C

um uh The piece that I think is most needed is that initial development work I would want to obviously see it's worth looking into what that 53k gets us I also want to better understand what the the 20 000 plus a year in um in maintenance, would would bring us because it potentially that's something that you know those are costs that the chip each chain could bear themselves unless you know, depending on how that's designed so I just want to understand that I think the other things are are really out of scope for anything that we need, um but with the importance of IBC and the the opportunity to to accelerate any part that we can I, think it's I think it's worth.

C

You know looking at a at the preliminary uh uh proposal and and even though it's outside, of what we've previously decided to to work on during this period, and we should look at it, but I think we should look at it. Probably the minimum viable uh amount of scope.

C

Those are my general thoughts not having read the whole thing yet.

B

I would also like to just add one thing: um the the first option that we presented uh is there is a big monthly cost. uh The their cost might actually vary uh quite a bit um because essentially, what they're proposing to do is to automatically complete transactions so pay for the verification, bus which are uh the the most expensive uh in terms of network resources, CPU and net.

B

So um so so, essentially, as the usage goes up, so will their bill paying means uh these resources and that that works across the same across all that words there's getting some function uh there, so it might, it might be prudent if we entertain that option to also do a little bit of uh you know like analysis on what these costs would be and uh word that out in the contract, so that there there can be some.

B

You know like uh range or something uh it's just because otherwise, otherwise, if we don't plan for that at some point, they might just be overwhelmed by the Seas and they're going to be like guys. Can't can't do that anymore. It's got sickness too much. uh So it's something that we should. uh We should dig into account.

G

I'm gonna jump in, and it seems like there's consensus around this being a valid idea for what the IBC project needs and from a long-term perspective. I would say it is not.

G

um These operations are things that you're not going to go to a central Hub to do it should be baked into whatever the interface you're using typically, is whether that's the wax Cloud wallet or whether that's the Telos wallet or whatever you're using um that's where this functionality ultimately belongs.

G

It should be a part of the to field when you're sending a transaction, um and that's in what I've been imagining of all of this and I was just talking to Shaq about it yesterday um that will be part of the sdks that you're using to build whatever wallet. It is that the users are using. That's where the IVC transaction and proofs will be facilitated, and it will be just part of the other user interfaces.

G

So I guess, as a point in kind of playing doubles advocate here, is sure having a central Hub that people can go to right now is a great stepping stone but long term. I. Don't see that as the future of IBC transactions in the user experience.

C

Yeah granted and I think that my interest is more in seeing that the software be developed and open sourced so that it can be, it can be applied in multiple places in multiple ways. um I do think, though, that one thing you're talking about is the uh the app the usage of this but I. Think for the auditing of it.

C

For the for the for record keeping and whatnot, there may be a value in having uh a hub for looking at how these monies flow across change without having to go from one block to another, to.

A

Another another, but.

B

C

Had yeah yeah? Well, you have that okay, it's you can't keep up on it. It's just doing so much it's hard to keep up on every last thing, so I.

F

I think we all have that then, and another thing that maybe is missing here um and I know we have it on the agenda to discuss the usdt being added as like a first class but I think we've pretty much well established that that would be the only additional first class that all the four Coalition networks are gonna uh support on the formal name, space and everything in the formal registry that we already have so far right.

F

So um for all of the other tokens that may move around with IBC a community ran registry, uh some sort of support for apps that maybe don't know how to set up the IBC, but would be a great token to be moved around. Our networks um like that that type of thing I think is, is also an important Catalyst towards you know, IBC and and really realizing that the value it can bring us.

F

So um that's and that's not here and I, think that is something that I brought up with Boyd as being kind of a you know, a gap that we're going to have that somebody can tackle. um Of course, there's all the questions of. How do you decide which one's listed which one's not you know.

G

F

Something we don't want to deal with at the network level, um but you know there's a lot of apps. That I'm sure would love to move things around the networks um and have some sort of established process for getting the contracts deployed getting added to some Registries. So it shows up in some UI that users are familiar with using and can Bridge the tokens with. So that's also something whether it's in this one or done organically- that we might want to encourage happening.

C

Yeah the level one, the level one that should occur before we dive too deep into any of this- is to get maybe a bullet list of you know exactly what particular features would be added and and then we can compare those against things like the SDK or like Wharf or like um or or you know where IBC currently stands the development and just like check off the things that are already that we already have like. Let's not buy these things twice right.

D

Then the lit Point list, if I understand correctly, is what I posted in the um in the courtship.

C

Okay, great I I saw it, but um obviously we're doing this meeting so yeah.

D

Yeah yeah I, don't think there was any expectation for us to come to consensus or anything like that was more so should we entertain, should we say sorry, but uh no I mean you think that is what I guess I'm trying to get out of this. What should I go back to them and maybe that you know we need more time to talk about this. Think about this. That's also. Okay,.

C

I I think a good act. Next actions I think it. First of all, it's great that you brought this up I'm glad you did I, think it's interesting to hear about and I think that the the next action step now that you've posted that would be for anyone, but particularly Guillaume and uh and and uh Aaron to go through and say. You know you.

D

All know him: what do we know what they're all there as far as I can tell sorry Yelm seemed to be aware of this, because that's how the message starts. So, okay- maybe maybe more Aaron in this case.

C

I guess I'd just like to understand how these these, where this overlapsing things we already have where it provides new and unique um functionality.

D

So shall we just let this uh sit them for a period of time and see if and and maybe touch upon this subject keep it for next week and see if there's any movement, would that be acceptable to all.

E

C

Yeah, we could even conclude it as a minor as a minor topic on the Monday meeting. If we need to dive any deeper than this.

D

uh uh In in terms of Monday, uh basically um Jesse what you're bringing up but I'm bringing up before you ask me again, the question of usdt uh IBC I did not get a chance um to get the information that I was looking to get to be able to answer today, uh but I should have what I'm looking for to bring up uh next Monday during our Monday call.

D

Speaking of Monday, that was good. I! Won't ask you again. uh No it's okay! You should ask me again: I'm just preempting, you asking me this once I mean on this call.

D

I'll ask you again after sounds good I I do have information for you. It just I need to round up a little bit more before I'm unready to actually present all right. This.

A

Okay, so we we are done with this item for this week and we will revisit it again next week. I'll leave it on the agenda. uh So do we want to go through the uh in progress items one by one and get status.

A

That, normally, what we do during the call.

A

P2P optimized transaction propagation looks like looks like we voted on this, so I'm, not sure why this is still in progress. It just means that it's.

D

um So this is just Jeff is keeping it for if ever there's any updates to give uh in regards to oci and and what they've been working on slash the.

D

But if you're not aware of the progress, then I guess we can skip this item right.

A

uh Ram limitation fixes bark is not on the call and I'm also not aware of any updates to this one. So uh we can skip that P2P peer discovery that that is actually the udon team. I think the optimized transaction is the right. So I do not have an update on this uh instant finality. Ibc approvers, Champions definition status report stand up. uh This is Old Well. It has Kirsten's name on it. uh We really go through these items, so maybe this came up again last week. These.

B

Are just uh typically updates on the the progress and everything? That's that at least that's how we've been been uh essentially like going.

A

About it later looks like January 19th was the last update any update, uh yo yeah.

B

I mean I I, don't know if Jeff has been uh writing down notes, because all of these updates typically are also um uh shared in the cards that uh Adam's compiling on a on a weekly basis. So, uh as we stand right now, there's a few more Milestones that are essentially pending review, uh so we have for um for IBC. We have the monitoring tools, so that's ready uh for solo review.

B

uh I believe that uh Adam and I will have another call today uh towards the end of the day or maybe tomorrow and uh I I was suggesting that he would do the review, because it's a pretty easy one. It's very objective and it's kind of okay, compare what the API says and compare what blocks uh says and you can see it live, make sure the tally matches.

B

So that's what we discussed as their review process for uh Milestone number five, which is lightering tools, then uh on IBC we also have I, honestly I think we also have two Milestones. Sorry, uh there's one more on IBC that we're also very close from finishing, which is Milestone number eight. um So.

D

uh In general, as long as it's technically accurate, yep.

B

Oh sorry, yeah and I was gonna, say. uh Milestone number eight is almost done as well. uh I believe we should be written for review next week uh and then we also have two more Milestones on the instantane album side that are uh also uh one is spending review from Eric and the other one should also be um uh completed very shortly, so uh so yeah at this point.

B

At this point we have like, like yeah like four or five Milestones, with our all those data just need there to be reviewed or to be yeah to just like. Like you know, the work needs to be done so I guess that's my plate. Thank.

D

You uh and just on that it kind of um we touched upon this during the review meeting last Monday. It was one of the items uh that you had brought up Yelm in terms of uh when we do assign work. How do we ensure that the items are done and right now, there's clearly some pain points there uh Bart's not here, but we do have a proposal um on how to address that um in the future. That is, is quite standard in the industry.

D

We just didn't do it um ourselves when, when we proposes that actually puts all the burden on in this case, you guys, when you're submitting the proposal to actually indicate how you're going to close that loop on if the Milestones are done, where so that the people reviewing essentially are not doing anything, because the tool that you're, providing or whatever it is you're doing, gives that yay or nay, um but that was already baked in which then means that there's typically a higher cost on your end, so that would be factored in when you make your pitch in the beginning, but that there's no question you're, not really.

D

You know delaying on anybody. uh You're you're, not relying on anybody on the other end, because you're, providing the proof that that Milestone is done is technically accurate. Etc, because that was part of that is part of the. You know what you're going to build to Showcase, that that thing is actually uh delivered. Yeah.

B

No I agree, and uh in retrospect I would then well spend more time in 4k.

D

On this, that would happen right, yeah, the other. The other suggestion is typically, we would break that down into smaller pieces, um but in our case that's not really realistic right. So going back for an RFP, every two months is not really realistic due to the the administrative burden of of doing self, even just writing the RFP itself.

D

So we are threading in that kind of dual world of we don't want to create too much administrative burden, but we also want to address obviously that the current pain points that we're seeing um and we're not just seeing with with IPC we're also seeing, for example, with with Wharf.

D

um But there are, you know there are ways to overcome this and it should be prioritized, and we've got some really good ideas that that part, as um part, has really got good ideas for this.

D

And all that to say in the future, ideally we won't need to do this anymore. It'll be pretty simple.

A

Okay, uh wallet, SDK, approvers, Champions definition status report stand up. um This is probably you Aaron yep.

G

uh We had our call again yesterday, uh since even then the anchor plugin is uh released and it's first state. So that's now in a functional State, um there's a clios wallet plug-in now uh we have started showing off some of the designs on yesterday's call which are starting to be implemented. uh Hopefully we'll have those available soon.

G

um We are closing in on the next two Milestones that are both related to the session kit. It's in a very functional State, although the design is like I, said still heavily undergoing construction um and we're starting to seek projects to actually do Integrations with it as kind of a stepping stone for other applications.

G

uh I earlier this week started the first one and it was the open block explorer that Telos has been working on so there's a pull request out there now on that project, that I did that uh pulls ual out and puts Wharf in and creates that base level functionality. uh So that way, you know, projects who want to make this leap won't be starting from scratch, um and we talked about this a little bit and the reasoning behind it and everything on the call yesterday as well.

G

So we're seeking projects, it's a really good, uh it's a way for us to dog food, the project and make sure it works in things that are not our own, so so yeah, that's where we're at things are moving along. Well, hopefully, the scorecard will start reflecting this soon and uh we'll start seeing apps in the wild in the very near future.

A

Excellent, thank you.

A

uh uh Antler CT, don't have any updates on that The Ledger app. um We have another call um with them coming up. We now have an internal product manager, uh Brian Hazard, assigned to doing this. So the in addition to Adam as a project manager, Brian Hazard, is now the product manager working with Eric bassmore again.

A

One of the issues is Passmore is on the west coast and uh Thomas Julian who's, the product guy from Ledger, is in France and getting a time that works for both of them is is tricky, um so we're trying to figure out how to bridge that. But uh it's now been uh handed off at a deeper level that that Brian could probably manage it better than I was doing.

A

um We have continued to make progress, but uh no concrete update of yes. We know how to split the app into the head app and the Dale app um we I did get him to say he was going to work on his test net. This Thomas Julian said this and make a Antelope entry that has a EOS Dash, wax p dash, Telos Dash I'm, not sure. If it's ux, is it uxp the ticker symbol for ux? Yes, utx, sorry, so he said yeah. Let me he said that looks kind of ugly.

A

Let me see if it fits into our tools and all that, so he was going to test that because it would make it where uh searching would work better um when people are trying to pull it up in the app Marketplace and all that stuff. So we're we're we're trying every angle you know we're we're looking at.

A

Can we make it where it has just the small head app and the one shared body app and also how to get the overall Antelope app, which is the same binary, sorry um just uh to where it fits into the wrap Marketplace because of the token thing so um we're we're working on all of those in parallel um and uh and hopefully we'll know more after we have this next call with Thomas he he went dark for a little while and it turned out he was on um vacation, which is odd because it's not August in France.

A

Yet that was a joke. um So uh that looks like the entire agenda for today that I can see unless anyone else has any other action items.

E

Yes, vacation and Friends.

E

A

Gonna shut up Douglas did you have something.

C

I I was just going to uh ask if there's anything that we should uh say briefly about what what our meeting Monday was about just to generate, give people a general characterization of it. um Yeah.

D

I think that's a good idea. Yeah we went ad boxing uh um whatever ring and and we dished it out for an hour, it was uh not only did uh go for it. Douglas. Sorry, no.

C

No, no please, but uh but um uh I I would just lead all that off by saying uh it grew out of discussions. We'd had previously about um the deceptively simple topic of how do we all share cost and what what came out of that was. We do need ways to make make sure that um there's a long-term sustainability amongst the Coalition so that everybody feels like they are getting something that's worth what they're putting in um and uh Lucas. uh Thank you.

C

You took that on to to lead that, and he did a great job deleting that meeting uh and facilitating that uh I felt like I was at a corporate retreat and we were, you know, filling out the Whiteboard.

C

um What each each chain listed the things that they thought would be good to uh to continue doing. Well, we should perhaps consider start doing and what we could and what maybe anything we were doing that we should stop. There was I, don't think anyone had anything of all the chains had anything we should stop. uh We talked about a lot of stuff. We don't need to go into it, but I think it was very good.

C

um There were two things that came out of it um that we, we thought were worth putting some time into over the next um month or quarter or whatever. um That's that's an overview of what happened. Lucas. Do you wanna? You wanna, give us any additional um things that you thought were important.

E

Yeah I'm actually going to. Let me see if I can find this so document that we're looking at all together a couple of action items that came out of it. So um I think we prioritized.

E

um You know, discussion on Technical, Community, Development and uh um you know working as a analog group together, so Jesse and I were gonna. Have that discussion uh to kick it off and then also in the same vein, I guess we we prioritized um working together as a coalition to have a um coordinated.

E

You know, marketing effort for the antelope chain and and all the Coalition initiatives, um so we're gonna have bad discussion kick off also and then um and then the third one was a discussion of of this uh a Supra token and anselor BC uh concept which which we we are also going to kick off. So so that's that's kind of that's kind of the next three action items that came out of this discussion that we're gonna tackle over the next quarter.

C

Yep- and we also uh we- we already jumped into it, because everybody found a time to get together on another uh around the block, call which went great today and that will be coming out um soon. We're gonna do those monthly, so I think that is at least a small step towards um more. uh You know, unified uh uh uh Communications um and by the way, it's awesome guys. You guys are so awesome thanks for doing that. That's really cool.

E

Oh man you're, so awesome.

C

No you're awesome.

D

But you guys don't get to see is that Now list every time we've recorded. One of those is good after we start, but for that first intro we do redo the intro life fives and dimes every single dive and it's hilarious. It makes me laugh every time, though yeah it's awesome. Well,.

C

I, just kind of need to get a little momentum. You know I uh and I worked. I did those corporate videos for Microsoft and Amazon and stuff like that, so long that it's just like you know, I have no problem. You should really restart a good time. Man.

G

I know what that's what I'm thinking it's like super real, okay,.

C

Okay, that will be fun yeah at the end of the year, we'll we'll end of the year uh uh episode, we'll we'll do a little blooper reel that that's for sure.

D

And I guess on that topic, not at bloopers but of the meeting that we held. We also agreed that we're going to be holding that type of meeting that type of discussion on a recurring basis too.

D

um So we're already meeting on the Monday, so every I guess three or four Mondays will be um this call either a quarterly or monthly, where we go back or reassess what we've been doing, as as we just did in the format that that we just did, which I think is really great.

C

Awesome well, I feel like that, covers it and um great meeting guys.

A

Well, there's no other items. um Thank you all very much and we'll talk on Monday. Then.

C

A

Everybody doing my.

C

Best here, you're doing great.