►
From YouTube: EOSIO+ Meeting, February 3rd 2022
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Still,
everybody
found
the
document
that
the
oap
group
has
been
coming
up
last
week
so
and
anyway
I
I
will
just
share
my
my
screen
again
and
we'll
have
a
chance
to
look
at
the
mirror
board
and
we'll
also
have
a
chance
to
look
at
the
document
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
your
comments
about
that.
B
Before
we
start
just
to
confirm
remy,
I
see
just
the
audio
just
connected
so
rami
just
confirm
you
are
recording
yep
confirm
all
right.
Thank
you.
A
Even
if
very
small,
yeah,
okay
good
so
is,
are
there
any
further
comments,
because,
obviously
we
today
we
want
to
look
at
the
proposals
of
the
of
the
work
group
in
regard
of
the
organization
and
of
the
purpose
of
this
group.
So
is
there
anything
else
that
you
would
like
to
add
to
the
agenda
as
as
for
today
that
any
upcoming
topics
that
we
should
discuss
before
or
after
the
the
proposal.
A
Okay,
I
take
this
as
a
no
then
welcome
douglas
thanks.
Everybody
sorry
to
be
late.
B
Sorry
kirsten,
I
was
muted
one
thing:
it
was
just
to
close
the
loop
on
last
week.
We
we
had
agreed
to
reach
out
to
voice
bullish
and
you
two
dot
one.
I
have
not
been
able
to
get
into
contact
with
youtube.one
or
they
haven't
replied,
but
voice
and
bullish
are
on
this
call
and
they're
in
the
recurring
invite
as
of
this
week
so
they're
currently
on
welcome
gentlemen.
E
Can
I
can,
I
briefly
introduce
jocelyn
who's
on
this
call.
Jocelyn
jocelyn
just
joined
good
block,
and
she
is
she
previously.
She
was
a
u.s
marine
mp.
So,
even
though
her
role
here
is
to
take
notes,
you
guys
stay
on
your
best
behavior.
Okay,
thank
you,
justin,
really
glad
you're
here
and
as
a
dedicated
notetaker.
I
think
it's
going
to
be
a
great
a
great
asset.
So
anyway
thanks
everybody
and
that's
that's
who
jocelyn
is.
E
Sorry
back
to
you
back
to
you
kirsten.
A
Yeah,
thank
you
douglas
welcome,
jocelyn.
I
I
didn't
manage
to
get
you
the
access
to
the
mural
board,
jocelyn
I'll,
do
that
after
the
call.
So
you
have
access
to
this
and
can
add
any
nodes
to
here.
A
Okay,
so
then,
I
would
think
the
most
important
part
for
today
before
we
go
through
last
week's
other
discussions
and
decisions
anyway
welcome
to
everybody
else.
What
I
did
with
eve
is,
I
had
a
small
call
with
them
early
this
week
to
kind
of
update
them
on
the
purpose
of
the
group
and
what
has
been
happening
so
so
far.
A
So
if
any
of
the
new
members
would
like
to
have
a
similar
call,
just
getting
like
a
small
update
of
what's
been
happening,
I'm
more
than
happy
to
to
do
this
and
then
go
through
through
the
board
with
you
on
a
different
time,
so
so
just
feel
free
to
contact
me
and
dm
or
or
via
email
I'll,
be
happy
to
do
that.
So
then,
there's
justin
join
in
welcome
justin.
A
Good,
so
we
had
a
a
nice
saturday
meeting
and
had
a
chance
to
go
through
the
document
that
douglas
was
kind
enough
to
prepare
as
a
as
a
main
proposal
for
this
meeting
and
for
the
purpose.
So
we
had
a
pretty
intense
discussion
about
that,
but
in
general
most
of
the
five
people
in
that
small
breakout
group
to
degree
that
this
is
generally
in
line
with.
A
And
what
we
as
participants
and
members
of
the
group
think
would
be
a
valuable
purpose
for
this
entire
group
so
douglas,
because
you
wrote
many
of
those
things
here.
May
I
pass
that
to
you,
so
you
could
guide
us
through
the
key
elements
of
the
purpose.
E
Absolutely
thanks
kirsten.
If,
for
anyone
who
was
on
the
call
last
week,
I
think
these
topics
will
sound
very
familiar.
Oh
thanks
for
zooming
in
so
we.
The
purpose
of
this
document
is
to
understand
what
we
are
really
trying
to
do
here
and
what
our
deliverables
are
and
when
we'll
be
done,
and
if
you
don't
know
what
you're
trying
to
deliver
you
don't
know
when
you've
when
you've
delivered
it.
E
So
the
first
part
is
to
create
a
statement
of
purpose
of
what
we,
what
we
aim
to
do,
what
we,
what
we
think
we
will
do.
E
These
are
all
positive
statements,
so
you
know
it's
not
we're
not
going
to
talk
about
what
we
aren't
going
to
do
and
we're
going
to
and
we're
going
and-
and
this
is
still
you
know-
it's
passed
through
us,
but
it
still
needs
to
go
before
the
whole
group
so
consider
this
a
live
document
that
that
you
know
we
can
add
subtract
edit
whatever
we
need
to
do
with
that
in
mind,
the
the
you
guys
can
all
read
it.
So
I'm
just
gonna,
I'm
just
gonna,
be
brief.
E
Go
through
go
through
it,
I'm
sure
everyone's
laughing
on
mute,
okay,
so
secure.
The
first
thing
we're
supposed
to
do
is
because
secure
absolutely
want
to
secure
the
existing
code
base
right.
There
could
be
any
kind
of
problems
we
need
to
make.
If
something
comes
up,
we
need
to
have.
E
There
needs
to
be
somebody
who
can
respond
to
code
to
code
base
level
issues,
and
so
that's
that's
our
first,
our
first
job
after
that,
the
job
I
believe
is
to
is
to
maintain
and
continue
distribution
of
the
current,
the
current
code
base,
maintaining
it
and
that
flows
into
the
third,
which
is
adding
any
kind
of
new
internal
code
development.
So
that
would
be
that
that
would
be
anything.
E
You
know
that
doesn't
already
exist
and
needs
to
exist,
and
there
would
be
you
know,
discussions
that's
where
we
start
having
to
have
governance
and
whatnot
and
and
ways
to
to
make
decisions
as
a
group,
because
we
will
have
different
priorities
on
some
things.
The
fourth:
we
want
to
be
a
clearinghouse
for
integrating
outside
developer
codes,
so
that
other
developers
feel
welcome
so
that
we're
constantly
on
boarding.
You
know
new
new
talent
and
and
so
that
we
can
and
so
that
we
can
keep
people
from
needing
to
fork
right.
E
The
idea
is
to
have,
in
my
mind,
a
single
code
base
that
is
highly
inclusive
and
highly
responsive
to
the
needs
of
all
the
change
chains,
so
that
those
those
four
sort
of
deal
with
how
we're
going
to
address
code
and
and
beyond
that,
then
we
have
to
figure
out
how
we're
going
to
fund
this
end
of
team.
So
we
have
to
have
a
funding
plan.
E
We
have
some
ideas
about
that,
but
we
need
to
really
drill
down
and
again
each
of
these
could
be
a
group
right,
a
subgroup
within
this
that
works
together
to,
in
parallel
to
expand
our
our
efforts.
So
we
need
number
six
is
we
need
to
develop
a
governance
system
simply
put
we
need
to
be
when
we
have
disagreements
about
how
we're
going
to
fund
things,
what
we're
going
to
do?
What
what's
going
to
take
priority?
We
need
a
way
to
solve
those
and
keep
us
together.
E
So,
let's
move
on
to
the
next
page.
E
Please,
oh
cool,
okay:
seven
we
are
going
to
have
to
figure
out
how
this
entity
does
staffing
right.
Is
it
going
to
be
as
we
discussed
last
week?
Is
it
going
to
be
full-timers?
Is
it
going
to
be
contractors?
Is
it
going
to
be
just
bounties
for
outside
groups?
Is
it
going
to?
Are
we
going
to
start
one
way
and
move
and
and
grow
in
a
different
direction
that
needs
to
be
figured
out?
Oh,
it's
optimal.
E
We
need
to
and
we
want
to
promote
the
eoco
code
base.
Whatever
we
end
up,
calling
it
and
and
and
the
product
to
people,
we
need
somebody
out
there
banging
the
drum
and
saying
hey.
You
know:
where
are
you
seo?
We
are?
We
need
to
be
doing
all
those
promotional,
commod
components
we
need
to
and
we
need
to
establish
the
organization's
branding
by
the
way.
I
want
to
be
clear.
This
is
not
a
chronological
list.
E
This
is
this
is
more
grouped
by
function,
and
so
we've
already
we've
already
begun
that
we
already
have
that
starting
because
that's
going
to
be
a
very
long
process,
we
need
to
form
the
entity.
So
we
want
to
determine
what
you
know.
Should
this
be
an
llc?
Should
it
be
a
dao?
Should
it
be
a
a
c
corp?
Should
it
be
a
you
know,
japanese
kawashiki
guys,
should
it
be?
What
what
should
we
do?
Where
should
this
be
formed?
That
needs
research?
E
Let's
continue,
oh
and
that's,
I
guess
that's
the
final.
I
guess
that
is
the
the
final
of
our
of
our
purposes
right.
The
final
thing
we
need
to
do
is
form
an
entity
decide
what
it
is
and
then
actually
do
it.
H
A
So
what
I
would
like
to
go
into
go
back
into
the
actual
to
the
actual
purpose
document
here
to
the
so
to
the
first
two
pages
that
thank
you
for
guiding
us
through
those
douglas.
A
So
I
would
really
like
to
have
any
kind
of
comments,
caveats,
additional
ideas
or
discussions
or
like
disagreements
that
are
in
this
group
and
and
would
like
to
speak
like
everybody
to
speak
up
and
tell
what
they
think
about
this.
C
I
know
that
it's
grouped
by
functionality,
but
maybe
we
can
just
start
at
a
really
high
level,
trying
to
understand
what
our
road
map
should
actually
be,
because
that'll
kind
of
dictate
the
importance
or
not
importance
of
any
of
these
sections
and
see
whether
there's
stuff
that,
like
we
don't
actually
want
to
do
because,
like
I
think
that
there's
a
lot
of
stuff
in
here,
that's
super
debatable.
Whether
a
working
group
like
this
should
be
doing.
I
I
I
had
a
similar
kind
of
when
I've
read
through
this,
and
maybe
romney
is
what
you're
touching
on
some
of
this,
and
maybe
it's
just
a
language
thing
seems
to
be
tasks
that
the
organization
that
is
created
might
do
like
secure
the
existing
code
base.
I
know
that's
an
overview
and
then
down
below
in
the
deliverables,
it's
more
about
creating
the
process
for
doing
some
of
these
things.
I
C
I
think
that
I
think
of
this
group,
as
kind
of
like
a
bootstrap
group
that
should
be
defining
you
know
what's
going
forward
and
how
that
gets
started,
how
that
gets
funded.
You
know,
like
kind
of
like
putting
up
some
structure
and
some
protocols
and
then
handing
off
to-
and
I
don't
think
that
that's
really
shown
in
this
document
like
that
that
concept
of
handoff.
I
E
That's
where
I
was
a
little
confused
too.
This
is
this
is
the
goal
of
this
just
to
clarify,
and
those
are
good
points
it.
No,
this
group
is
not
going
to
be,
you
know,
doing
determining
new
internal
code
development,
it's
not
going
to
be
doing
the
public
maintenance
or
the
securing
the
code
bases,
but
it's
needs
to
form
a
plan
to
on
how
that
we
can
all
agree
with,
at
the
outset,
at
least
to
some
extent
about
how
to
about
how
we
will
do
these
things.
E
I
would
not
I
at
least
in
my
point
of
view.
I
think
it
would
be
the
wrong
way
to
go
to
to
start
off
a
group
and
and
just
hand
off
everything
to
a
group
and
tell
them
to
figure
it
out.
I
think
this
is
the
group
that
that
figures
out
the
initial
sort
of
ground
rules
about
how
we're
going
to
be
operating
so
that
when
we
do
get
into
that
group,
there's
a
there's
a
structure
we
don't
have
to.
E
We
don't
have
to
determine
within
that
group
how
we're
going
to
make
decisions
amongst
ourselves
and
and
who
the
who
the,
where
the
funding
sources
are
going
to
be,
and
things
like
that.
J
Hi
everyone-
this
is
rick
whitner
from
voice
new
member
for
the
group
today.
J
Just
an
initial
reaction
that
I
have-
and
I
haven't-
had
a
chance
to
read
these
documents
because
I
didn't
have
access
to
them
before,
but
I'll
I'll
take
care
of
that,
but
coming
in
new,
it
would
be
helpful
to
have
some
sort
of
context
and
a
vision
of
of
what
you
know
where
the
group
is
coming
from
and
and
what
it's
trying
to
do.
B
Sure
I'll
try
to
do
a
quick
summary,
but
this
is
the
sixth
seventh
call,
so
maybe
rick
one
of
the
things
that
would
be
good
is
for
you
to
catch
up
on
the
other
meetings
that
you
have.
If
you
really
want
more
than
the
quick
summary
that
I'll
give
you,
because
this
group
has
gone
through
this
particular
questions
on
multiple
occasions,
but
the.
B
Is
that
I
guess
the
eosio
community
is
or
has
taken
the
code
and
will
be
responsible
for
the
development
of
code,
as
we've
seen
block
one
over
the
last
year,
pivot
away
from
providing
core
code
support,
that's
in
line
with
what
the
community
needs
and
less
so
what's
in
line
with
what,
let's
say,
for
example,
they're
pivoting
towards
and
so
out
of
the
business
needs
of,
essentially
supporting
our
own
selves.
B
This
group
was
created
to
see
whether
or
not
all
esio
chains,
I
shouldn't
say
all
but
seven
of
them,
anyways
that
are
that
are
quite
prominent
wish
to
come
together
to
formulate
a
way
forward
combined
as
a
community.
What
that
would
look
like,
and
the
document
that
you
see
in
front
of
you
is
the
first
iteration
of
pen
to
paper
on
what
kind
of
shape
or
what
kind
of
purpose
you
know
means
a
very
high
level.
B
What
that
could
look
like
if
you
want
to
go
into
much
greater
detail,
we've
got
about
four
or
five,
or
actually
more
than
that,
maybe
seven
hours
worth
of
video
that
you
can
really
dive
deep
into
if
you,
if
you'd
like
but
we've
had.
I
believe
this
is
called
number
seven
or
eight.
J
Okay,
actually
just
to
clarify
my
comment.
I
was
aware
of
of
that
context
that
you
just
gave
me,
but
thanks
for
the
review
on
it
is
more.
Is
there
any
kind
of
document
that
that
states
what
you
just
kind
of
highlighted,
or
is
there
any
kind
of
intro
that
would
that
would
be
useful
to
put
in
front
of
your
statement
of
purpose
just
to
provide
some
context?
That
was
really
the
gist
of
my
question.
B
We
we
could
expand
on
the
statement
of
purpose
that
that's
a
good
idea.
There
are
no
other
documents
other
than
than
this.
This
is
the
first
time
that
we've
got
a.
I
mean.
We've
got
the
myro
board.
If,
and
maybe
I
believe
it
is
included.
The
link
to
the
my
report
is
included
in
the
in
the
calendar
invitation.
B
Just
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
context
on
how
you
got
onto
this
call
and
as
well
as
mark
woods
last
week
during
the
call
we
talked
about
membership,
and
we
talked
about
the
want
to
move
forward
as
a
group
to
be
very
inclusive
of
those
who
used
the
software
as
well,
and
the
there
were
a
few
applications
or
large
applications
that
were
highlighted
voice
being
one
of
them
bullish
being
one
of
them,
because
if
the
community
is
now
taking
care
of
the
of
the
code
and
those
applications
wanted
to
leverage
off
of
that
code
being
a
part
of
those
discussions
and
being
at
the
table
when
whatever
results
out
of
this
is
defined,
then
having
you
guys
at
the
onset
would
be
beneficial.
A
A
Obviously
there
was
bilateral
communication
between
many
of
the
actors
that
are
here,
because
you
know
each
other
for
a
long
long
time,
but
on
this
kind
of
consolidated
way
and
all
the
chains
talking
to
each
other
in
one
big
round.
It's
probably
the
first
time
in
many
years
that
this
happened.
Obviously
many
of
the
changes
weren't
existing
and
many
years
ago,
but
it
is
the
first
time
that
everybody
joined
together
and
say
we
got
to
do
something.
Let's
talk
and
let's
look
at
some
synergies.
A
So
from
that
perspective,
I
think
it's
very
important
to
have
this
and
the
first
meetings
as
I
recognize
them,
were
more
like
finding
a
way
to
work
together
in
general
and
having
some
some
baselines
of
how
this
could
be
working
out
to
to
give
some
context
on
the
importance
I
just
came
out
of
a
different
call
which,
which
was
on
tell
us
where
we
had
like
one
bp,
mentioning
that,
in
fact
his
feeling
was
that
the
whole
eosio
code
would
be
given
away
to
a
different
entity
and
we
would
lose
control
and
nobody
knows
what's
happening,
and
he
was
kind
of
seeing
that
as
a
very
bad
signal,
because
he
didn't
know
that
this
kind
of
activity
is
currently
ongoing.
A
So
there
I
think
there
is
a
lot
of
fear
and
uncertainty
in
many
of
the
chains
that
operate
on
ersio
and
this.
This
initiative
here
is
very
keen
it's
really
key
for
everybody
to
get
back
security
and
assure
that
their
their
main
code
base
is
being
maintained
and
and
being
developed
for
the
future.
So
so
this
is
what
what
I
can
say
from
a
different
perspective
of
a
bp.
A
That's
been
operating
the
network,
it's
like
there's
so
much
uncertainty,
and
they
will
really
look
forward
to
have
like
the
purpose
of
this
group
and
understand
why
this
is
so
important
and
what
is
going
to
be
done.
So
I
think
this
is
really
important
part
of
of
of
this.
This
whole
group
to
also
be
able
to
kind
of
send
out
these
kind
of
document
and
say
this
is
what
we
are
aiming
to
do.
A
I
see
I
hear
the
comment
in
regards
of
the
road
map
and
generally,
I
think
the
moment
that
we
all
agree
on
the
purpose
and
say
well.
The
purpose,
in
fact,
is
that
we
want
to
maintain
and
distribute
code,
and
we
want
to
have
like
new
internal
code
development
and
not
just
bug,
fixing
and
maintain,
is,
is
gonna
imply
a
possible
roadmap
that
needs
to
come
out
of
the
next
meetings
so
or
smaller
work
groups.
A
So
from
that
perspective,
I
think
it's
key
to
define
that
this
is
the
real
purpose,
and
we
all
agree
that
we
we
should
act
as
as
this
one,
this
document
or
this
this.
These
points
are
stating
it
because
then
we
can
start
to
to
create
the
work
groups
and
on
a
smaller
basis
and
set
up
a
defined
roadmap
and
in
detail
and
and
tell
the
communities
what's
going
to
happen.
So
I
think
this
is
in
fact
the
case
here.
A
A
I
was
being
being
quiet,
so,
let's,
let's
say
proton
so
yeah.
Do
you
have
any
any
thoughts
on
on
this
document
and
the
way
forward.
K
K
I
have
concerns
in
terms
of
this
document
is
like
how
much-
and
this
was
discussed
a
bit
earlier
in
the
call
to
like
how
much
of
an
like
are
we
having
an
overlap
with
other
groups
that
are
working
on
some
of
these
parts
and
like
how
would
that
relationship
work?
K
I
mean,
even
if
you
look
at
some
of
these
points
about
the
code
base,
we
already
have
core
teams
right
so
like
what
sort
of
jurisdiction
even
does
this
group
have
to
control
what
those
groups
are
working
on
or
would
there
be
a
conflict
in
that
jurisdiction
by
trying
to
put
this
as
one
of
the
goals
of
the
group,
let's
say:
secure
the
existing
code
base?
What
happens
if
the
priorities
of
this
group
are
different
from
the
group
actually
working
on
securing
the
code
base.
B
B
K
B
So
no,
no!
Okay!
Let
me
let
me
add
some
context
to
that.
That
is
a
placeholder
in
the
meantime,
so
that
we
have
something
to
work
off
of,
but
the
idea
is
that
is
very
much
a
placeholder
and
that's
transitionary
so
that
we
then
the
idea
is
right
now
the
mandel,
which
is
really
just
mandela
release,
but
the
mandel
release
repo
is
owned
by
the
foundation.
B
The
idea
is
that
that
is
the
first
iteration
placeholder
of
whatever
this
group
would
become,
so
the
enf
would
give
ownership
to
whatever
entity
comes
out
of
this
to
that
entity.
That
would
now
be-
and
this
is
part
of
what
we
need
to
define
that
entity-
is
that
a
dow
who
gets
a
vote?
Who
gets
a
say?
What's
the
proportionality
which
chains
etc?
That
would
be
that
entity
and
they
would
just
go
off
of
the
the
current.
B
K
B
The
idea
behind
it
or
the
vision
behind
it
is
that,
instead
of
having
one
team
or
one
entity
that
controls
the
code
as
we've
been
used
to
over
the
last
couple
of
years,
the
idea
would
be
something
similar
more
similar
to
ethereum,
where
you've
got
multiple
core
developer
teams
that
are
being
contracted
by
whatever
this
entity
becomes
to
fulfill
particular
functions
so
that
we
would
be
able
to
be
redundant
and
so
that
we'd
be
able
to
move
with
more
frequent
and
more
consistent,
iterations
or
upgrades,
and
that
we
would
know
through
this
exercise
through
whatever
this
becomes.
B
This
is
just
the
you
know,
the
people
that
are
showing
up
right
now,
which
is
probably
not
going
to
be
what
this
becomes
at
some
point
this
this
ideally,
would
become
an
entity.
That's
part
of
what's
laid
out
in
the
purpose,
whatever
that
entity
becomes
and
whoever's
at
that
table
and
whatever
representation
that
may
be,
would
then
be
the
one
supervising,
and
this
would
be-
I
guess,
number
three-
the
internal
code
development
to
determine.
Where
do
we
go
next
all
right?
B
Next,
in
the
next
three
months,
we
get
london
upgrade
the
three
months
after
that
we
get
the
barcelona
upgrade
whatever
it
is.
What
that
looks
like
how
all
of
the
chains
that
are
participants
in
this
group
agree
to
that
and
where
they
want
to
go,
and
they
say
yes,
let's
work
on
something
that
that
is
throughout.
That's
not
our
flavor
of
the
chain,
but
let's
say
we
all
want
three
second
or
we
all
want
sub.
Second
finality
great.
B
Let's
add
that
in
the
pipeline
that's
gonna,
be
the
barcelona
upgrade
that's
in
six
months
and
then
all
right,
we
all
want
another
function,
feature
some
synchronous
calls
great,
that's
gonna,
be
the
you
know.
Whatever
the
moscow
update,
that's
going
to
be
in
q4,
or
something
like
that,
so
this
group
would
be
responsible
for
figuring
out
what
goes
in
there,
laying
out
that
road
map
contracting
and
or
interacting
with
multiple
core
developer
teams,
potentially
dance
team
being
one
of
them.
B
But
maybe
proton
is
like
we've
got
a
core
developer
team
and
we
want
to
be
contracted
for
a
particular
function,
because
we
can
take
care
of
that.
The
rest
of
the
group
agrees
so,
basically
all
how
all
of
that
would
come
together.
That
is
the
general
intent
of
this
group
and
that's
what
we're
trying
and
that's
what
I
think
douglas
successfully
laid
out
in
this
general
document
very
high
level
document,
and
it's
not
that
this
group
would
be
doing
that.
B
E
You've
got
to
start
somewhere
a
little.
K
L
Did
we
already
address
terence,
but
he
mentioned
in
in
the
telegram
chat,
which
I
think
is
what
I
I
thought:
that's
what
the
head
you
were
asking
about
now.
I
think
you
were
unclear
about
this
actual
other
piece
of
mandel
but
to
aaron's
question.
There
are
decisions
that
potentially
this
new
group
would
make
about
the
base
layer
that
can
make
or
break
the
efforts
of
the
api
or
other
working
groups
right.
L
So
in
this
document
I
think
what
aaron
was
saying
and
tell
me
to
shut
up
if
you
already
talked
about
it
before
I
got
here.
But
what
aaron
was
saying
is
that
this
group
needs
to
have
some
charter
to
coordinate
and-
and
you
know,
have
a
good
decision-making
process
with
you
know
the
wallet
group
and
the
sdk
group,
and
things
like
that.
So
we
don't
change
something.
The
base
player
that
breaks
down.
B
A
M
I
suppose
it
depends
on
what
you
consider
the
core
code
base,
since
that's
just
the
broad
term
that
we're
using
and
the
reason
I
brought
it
up
in
chat-
is
just
because
the
supplemental
core
code
base-
I
guess,
is
what
I'll
call
it
has
long
kind
of
been
neglected
and
it
needs
to
be
considered
when
we're
dealing
with
the
core
code
base
in
a
lot
of
ways.
I
could
give
examples,
but
it
we
need,
like
let's
say
we're
doing.
M
Contract
pays
is
something
that's
getting
implemented
into
the
core
contracts.
It's
not.
It
is
kind
of
flavor,
but
it's
not
because
it
might
require
consensus,
changes
or
something.
I
don't
know
I'm
out
of
my
league
when
I'm
talking
about
that
side,
but
to
actually
make
use
of
something
like
that
requires
coordinated
development
of
the
sdks
and
potentially
improvements
to
the
apis.
M
In
order
for
networks
to
be
able
to
take
care
of
that,
and
if
it's
not
taken
care
of
at
a
high
level,
then
each
network
is
going
to
be
left
to
fend
for
themselves
in
the
development
of
these
things
and
it
just
kind
of
is
a
mess.
So
that's
why?
I
brought
it
up
and
I
think
that
our
definition
of
a
core
code
base
needs
to
expand
and
like
umbrella
over
all
of
the
apis
and
sdks.
M
B
Down
to
I'm
trying
to
find
which
number
it
is
well,
I
guess
six:
where
did
the
marketing
go
or
not
the
marketing,
but
the
the
communications
internal.
E
L
M
L
B
This
charter
so
number
six
addresses
that,
to
a
certain
extent,
which
would
be
the
I
guess,
the
governing
side
of
things
to
determine
whether
or
not
we
proceed
with
things
and
how
that
happens,
but
then
feeding
that
information
to
that
governance
body.
For
specifically,
let's
say
what
we're
talking
about
the
way
that
I
envisioned
it
would
be
captured
in
our
recruiting
proposal.
Initial
key
positions,
communications,
coordination,
marketing,
so
e.
B
Getting
a
bit
easier,
yeah,
it's
the
last
page
and
it's
the
coordination
and
communications
function
that
we
tried
to
capture,
which
would
be
the
communications
internal,
sorry
d,
which
would
be
internal
to
so
so
in
this
body.
The
way
that
it's
being
presented
there
would
be
permanent
staff,
there'd
be
people
that
we
that
that
would
be,
let's
say,
administrative
staff
for
this
particular
entity.
B
One
of
those
key
positions
that
we
highlighted
was
that
somebody
would
be
responsible
to
talk
to
all
of
these
internal
stakeholders
so
that
when
something
is
presented
and
something
is
being
considered,
the
feedback
process
with
those
relevant
stakeholders,
as
you
mentioned-
aaron
we're
envisioning
that
happening
like
that
is
something
that
we've
highlighted.
Yes,
whether
or
not
we
want
to
highlight
it
even
further.
We
we
did
talk
about
that
specifically.
B
So
what
you
see
on
the
screen
d
and
e,
one
of
the
proposals
is
actually
to
elevate
that
as
their
own
clauses,
essentially
they
were
put
back
in,
but
that
function
has
been
thought
of.
Yes,
that
would
be
key
to
this
process
for
sure.
M
I
guess
it's
not
as
much
communication
as
it's
actual
coordination
just
like
it
would
be
coordination
of
the
core
code
development,
the
sdks
are
core
code
and
if
we're
talking
about
eosio
as
a
product
like
nodeos
as
it
stands
alone
is
not
a
full
product,
it's
it's
one
part
of
what
makes
up
a
product.
So
if
eos
io
is
being
marketed
as
a
product,
then
the
entire
suite
end
to
end
needs
to
be
considered.
In
that
thing
I
mean
we
could
talk
about
communication,
but
who
are
they
communicating
to
like.
E
Me
I
have
for
myself.
I
have
a
very
broad
definition
of
what
the
core
code
base
is.
It
already
does
it
already
does.
Can
you
know
include
apis
and
whatnot
and-
and
I
would
argue
some-
there
are
certain
key
functionalities
and
tooling
that
would
that
would
you
know
at
least
be
considered
for
funding
and
development
in
here,
but
but
yeah
we're
not.
I
mean,
I
think
it
would
be
very
counterproductive
to
to
draw
a
strict
line
around
nodeos
and
say
that's
what
we're
doing
you
know.
L
End
of
our
responsibility,
if
you
take
examples
right,
if
we
analyze
things
like
block
one,
maintain
nodeos
and
eos
js,
pretty
well
as
like
the
product,
so
to
speak,
that
the
java
sdk,
I
personally
had
experience
where
they've
added
they've
added
features
that
didn't
get
put
into
the
java
sdk
and
made
it
basically
incompatible,
although
it
was
part
of
their
offering.
If
you
look
at
like
github,
you
know
java
was
an
sdk
that
they
delivered,
but
they
didn't.
L
They
didn't
even
internally,
coordinate
well
enough
to
to
maintain
functionality
for
that
java
piece
so
for,
if
we
think
about
where
we
want
to
go
with
things,
I
think
what
aaron
maybe
was
alluding
to.
We
want
it
to
be
better.
We
want
more
tools
to
be
available
right
there.
What
we
had
before
well,
we
recognized,
maybe
was
poorly
coordinated
with
the
java
example-
was
also
not
very
comprehensive.
L
So
if
we
want
to
have
a
good
product
with
a
nice
set
of
tools
and
sleep
that
people
want
to
use,
then
there's
going
to
be
more
things
to
coordinate
beyond
just
nodeos
and
cosjs.
I
guess
the
cdt
falls
into
that
category
too,
but
so
it's
the
things
that
need
coordination
are
going
to
become
a
bigger
list
and,
and
they
can
break
each
other,
they
will
break
each
other.
There
isn't
not
just
you
know,
notifying,
but
collaboration
on
the
changes.
O
L
E
Absolutely
absolutely
I
mean
the
job
that
the
goal
here
from
in
my
mind
is
not
to
replicate
how
block
one
developed
eosio
it's
to
decide
how
we
as
users
want
us
want
to
do
that.
That's
why
there's
this?
That's?
Why
there's
a
statement
of
purpose
so
that
we
can
get
together
and
say,
here's
what
we're
doing
here's,
what
we
think
it
should
be,
and
I
think
that
I
think
it
definitely
makes
sense
to
have
to
include
in
here
if
it
needs
to
be.
E
You
know,
made
more
specific
and
and
you're
bringing
up
great
points
that
it
should
be
what
we
mean
when
we
say
code
base
and
and
how
far
we
extend
beyond
the
beyond
simply
you
know
the
the
very
core
products
to
things
like
like
absolutely
necessary
support
systems
like
like
hyperion,
and
I
would
definitely
like
to
see
more
follow
through
on.
You
know,
on
the
things
that
we
do
and
having
longer
plans,
because
you
know
that
was.
E
That
was
my
concerns
with
how
block
one
operated
the
organization
is
that
there
wasn't
there
weren't
road
maps
and
publicly
available
so
and
there
weren't
and-
and
there
was
not
a
lot
of
information
communication
about
which
products
would
have,
would
continue
to
have
a
life
and
which
products
wouldn't
and
it
just
made
it
very
hard
to
develop.
So
the
goal
is
yes
to
communicate
but
and
also
coordinate,
and-
and
you
know,
let's,
let's
do
it.
Let's
do
it
the
way.
E
Let's
take
everything
we've
learned
about
in
the
last
few
years
about
what
we
wish
would
be
better
and
let's
apply
that.
Q
This
document
looks
great,
actually,
I
think
it
makes
sense.
I
guess
my
concern
is
that
you
know
kudos
for
everyone
to
come
together,
making
it
work
across.
So
many
different
groups
is
going
to
be
a
challenge,
because
each
group
has
different
goals
and
and
problems
they're
running
into
even
operationally
day-to-day,
so
prioritization.
Q
B
I
also
just
want
to
note
that
justin
added
in
the
chat
that
there
are
three
other
things
that
he'd
like
to
earmark
that
block
one
provides,
but
that
are
not
covered
in
this
document.
B
N
You
know
I
have
a
question
related
to
community,
as
it
relates
to
kind
of
the
branding
of
what
we're
building
here
and
maybe
maybe
ease
you
can
comment
on
this
from
an
eos
foundation
network
perspective.
So
I
think
a
lot
of
the
larger
projects
out
there.
They
have
a
thriving
community
because
they
have
token
holders
right.
People
are
going
to
be
excited
about
eos
network
foundation
because
they
hold
eos,
for
example
this.
I
I
think
there
is
no
plan
for
this
entity
to
have
any
token
right,
and
so
I'm
I'm
thinking.
Q
B
B
Oh
really,
that
will
be
a
that
will
be
something
that
likely
the
ux
group
will
present
next
week,
because
we
did
talk
about
how
aligning
economic
incentives
could
occur
through
liquidity,
pools
and
or
some
type
of
lp
token,
and
the
ux
team
has
been
working
on
something
that
they'd
like
to
present,
and
this
would
flow
into
and
potentially
lay
part
of
the
foundation
for.
How
do
we
determine
the
membership
costs
for
the
chain
so
that
how
do
we
split
the
funds?
Essentially,
how
do
we
figure
out?
Who
pays
what
they're.
N
Everything
like
that,
because
we
do-
and
we
mentioned
this
on
a
previous
call-
we
do
have
people
say.
Why
are
you
still
on
your
cio
based
code
base?
You
should
move
to
our
fancy
new
chain
and
we'll
give
you
a
big
grant
whatever
whatever,
and
so
I
think
the
community
side
of
what
we're
doing
is
important,
as
it
relates
to
kind
of
like
other
projects
out
there.
N
There's
a
there's,
a
there's,
a
group
that
helps
facilitate
the
vision
of
the
code
base
and
everything
else
related
to
it
and
they're
generally
really
connected
to
the
token
there's
a
thinking
of
like.
If
that
group
does
a
good
job,
then
the
token
is
gonna
do
well
or
something
like
that.
So
building
a
community
around
this
without
a
token
would
be
interesting.
So
I
I'm
interested
to
hear
how
that
goes.
It's
interesting.
I
like
the
idea.
C
So
there's
also
the
future
go
for
it.
Basically,
over
the
last
few
years,
we've
seen
a
bunch
of
new
projects
launched
on
eosio,
which
I
think
is
really
interesting,
and
I
think
that
when
we
think
about
eosio
as
a
product,
it's
not
just
a
protocol
and
we're.
This
is
a
continuation
of
us
discussing
satellite
pieces
of
software
that
make
the
eosio
use
case
much
more
valuable.
C
And
if
we're
talking
about
helping
to
decide
what
we
want
to
build
in
the
future,
then
we're
actually
talking
about
the
potential
for
new
projects
to
launch
new
networks
that
are
based
on
new
sio.
And
I
think
that
that's
that's
part
of,
like
the
larger
conversation
that
we're
having.
B
Fully
agree-
and
we
did
mention-
and
we
did
place
a
lot
of
consideration
on
saturday
when
we
met
to
talk
about
what
we
want
to
what
we're.
What
we're
hoping
to
build
here
is
something
that
would
be
inclusive
so
that
others
in
the
future
could
join,
should
they
wish
to
join.
We
also.
We
also
started
with
the
premise
that
there
are
some
groups
here
not
want
to
join
at
first
or
they
may
not
see
the
benefit
of
joining
whatever.
B
It
is
results
of
this
at
first,
but
that
we
would
want
to
ensure
that,
should
they
see
a
value
in
the
future
that
we
would
position
this
group
and
the
statement
of
purpose
and
everything,
so
they
would
be
welcoming
of
people
with
open
arms
so
that
this
could
grow
so
that
other
people
should
they
see
the
benefit
that
we
would
have
a
means
for
new
members
to
join
and
the
way
that
we
talked
about.
B
I'm
not
sure
if
it's
in
this
document,
but
I
did
see
it
in
in
the
channel-
was
defining
what
would
membership
look
like
and
at
a
high
level
right
now.
Very
undefined
would
be
something
like
different
tiers
where
you
can
have
people
who
join,
observe,
don't
talk,
people
or
applications
or
networks
who
join,
observe,
talk,
don't
vote,
and
then
organizations
that
join,
observe,
talk
and
vote
and
what
that
different
level
of
membership
would
look
like
and
how
entities
or
individuals
or
applications
may
want
to.
B
You
know,
shift
their
membership
levels.
Should
it
have
benefit
to
them
at
a
given
time.
But
the
idea
very
much
of
what
you
just
mentioned
of
being
very
accepting
that,
ideally,
this
would
grow
and
more
networks
would
be
created
and
more
people
would
see
a
value
in
using
the
eos,
io
or
fuckforce
software.
A
B
E
That's
that's
very
true
yeah,
so
I
I
call
I
use
that
on
a
call,
internal
call
with
a
lot
of
people
on
this
group
and
forgot
that
one
of
the
developers
moms
was
in
the
room
and
we'd
introduced.
You
know
one
of
the
team
members
moms
was
there
and
I
had
to
explain
what
what
that
meant
and
dig
myself
out
of
that.
So.
B
If
I'm
understanding
correctly
one
of
the
things
that
would
be
missing-
and
I
believe
that
would
address
some
of
the
concerns
that
were
brought
up
would
be
to
expand
the
definition
of
what
core
code
would
mean
correct
include,
for
example,
apis,
sdks,
etc.
Basically,
anything,
I
think,
stan
the
way
that
he
put.
It
was
anything
that
is
in
a
way
common
to
everybody,
correct
if
we
expanded
that
definition
here
in
number
three.
Would
that
somewhat
address
the
the
issues.
O
Actually
anything
that
is
shareable
between
yes,
like
telus,
now,
is
working
on
their
own
blog
explorer,
which
will
be
open
source
that
is
shareable
resource
and
other
blockchains
might
jump
in
and
adopt
it
and
start
contributing.
Then
it
just
basically
belongs
to
this
group,
as
well
as
a
governance
body
and.
B
I
see
that
there
might
be
some
like
it
will
be
hard
to
a
certain
extent
to
make
it
gray
or
it's
not
going
to
be
black
or
white,
there's
going
to
be
some
grey,
but
that
will
be
tricky
I
think,
to
define
or
to
put
because
that's.
B
B
I
just
want
to
caution
that
at
some
point,
the
laundry
list
of
potential
products
that
are
found
throughout
that
at
some
point
we
need
to
make
a
line
in
the
sand,
would
not
be
probably
scalable
and
or
very
functional
to
include
anything
and
everything
at
some
point.
We're
going
to
have
to
make
a
line
somewhere,
yeah
absolutely.
E
I
think
this
this
document
envisions
a
way
different
ways
that
they
that
this
could
be
done
right.
So
there
are,
there
are
people
who
are
tasked
with
interacting
with
dapps,
and
that
would
include
tools
right
and
then
there's
and
then
we
could
certainly
have
a
process
and
should
have
a
stated
process
for
how
we
consider
bringing
in
some
other
some
other
tool
whatever
that
may
be
as
considered
part
of
our
domain
right,
and
I
think
we
should
just
make
sure
we
have
a
process
for
that.
E
Things
will
fall
on
one
side
of
the
line
or
the
other,
and
ultimately
you
know
we
can
just
make
it
a
governance
decision
whether
whether
product
x
is
is
used
by
all
of
us
or
or
not
wanted.
You
know,
that's
we're
not
trying
to
figure
everything
out
here,
we're
going
to
fig
trying
to
figure
out
how
we're
going
to
figure
everything
out
well,.
K
L
A
big
difference,
though,
in
terms
of
what
you
just
described
and
what
so
there's
there's
a
circle
that
includes
the
software
like
node
os
and
the
base
layer
that
this
group
will
decide
the
roadmap
for
the
features
that
get
funded
and
built,
and
then
there's
these
other
tools,
hyperion
an
open
block
explorer
you
could
put
anchor
in
the
same
category
based
on
the
same
criteria.
Everybody
uses
it.
It's
public,
good,
it's
open
source,
but
we
don't
decide
the
roadmap.
L
We
hope
that
you
know
greenmass
makes
good
decisions
and
rio
makes
good
decisions
and
telos
makes
good
decisions
about
what
they
prioritize
for
those
tools
that
they
are
hoping
everybody
adopts,
but
the
roadmap
and
who
funds
them
is
very
different
between
the
two.
So
there's
one
that
needs
informed
and
coordinated.
There's
one!
That's
you
know
decided
on
a
roadmap
and
prioritized
by
this
group.
O
Right
so
well,
we
stick
on
on
anyway,
the
core
products
that
were
developed
by
block
one
right
like
the
the
norios,
the
integration,
libraries
and
compiler.
Although
we
have
already,
this
fractality
group
is
already
building
their
own
compiler
for
smart
contracts,
which
is
not
backwards
compatible,
but
it's
bringing
new
features.
So
is
it
an
essential
part
of
of
protocol
or
not
it's
it's
not
clear.
Yet,
there's
no
muscle
mass
adoption.
Yet
right,
we
don't
have
any
production,
great
products
which
are
using
this
new
sdk,
but
it's
also
becoming
the
important
part.
B
B
Subtracting
later
on
will
be
a
little
bit
harder,
and
so
I
think
the
idea
would
be
to
find
what
the
minimal
threshold
is
for
us
to
proceed
with
what
we
believe
should
be
included.
That
is
non-arguable.
We
all
agree
with
that,
and
should
we
wish
to
add
on
afterwards.
Part
of
this
process
would
also
include
that
governance
of
what
gets
added
and
what
ends
up
being
funded
by
this
entity.
We
also
need
to
think
very
realistically
the
more
we
add
there
are
costs
of
that.
B
So
it's
very
easy
to
say:
well,
let's
all
use
this.
Let's
all
add
that
somebody's
going
to
need
to
pay
for
all
of
this,
and
we
still
haven't
figured
out
that
part
of
who
contributes
what
how
much
the
more
we
add
up.
The
onset
means
that
the
starting
potential
initial
budget
outlook
is
greater,
which
may
actually
shut
some
people.
Out
of
this
being
less
attractive,
so
I
just
want
to
caution
that
starting
smaller
working
upwards
is
probably
better
than
trying
to
get
the
cadillac
right
away
and
we
never
even
get
the
catalog.
O
B
B
That
perhaps
the
sdks
apis
would
fall
under
that
which
doesn't
currently
fall.
Underneath
I'm
just
saying
caution
that
we
don't
try
to
do
everything
because
ultimately
we're
gonna
not
do
anything
if
we
just
start
off
with
that,
let's
get
some
traction,
let's
start
with
something
that
we
all
agree
on.
That
is
good.
That
is
arguably
better
than
what
we
have
right
now
and
then
let's
build
some
track
record
and
grow
from
there.
O
Initial
list
of
such
software
packages,
it's
pretty
easy
to
define
just
looking
at
github
of
block
one,
because
there's
there's,
like
maybe
half
of
repositories
haven't
been
updated
for
a
year
or
more.
We
just
skip
them
and
we
take
the
ones
that
are
actually
actively
used
and
updated
in
the
past
half
a
year
and.
O
E
There's
not
much
more
we're
getting
very
granular
here
and
the
idea
is
to
stay
high
level
and
what
I
would
suggest
is.
We
definitely
want
everyone's
comments
on
all
these
things.
We
want
to
keep
it
a
high
level
if
you
are
interested
in
contributing
to
the
decisions.
If
you
have
ideas
about
how
to
move,
you
know
how
to
move
forward.
Then
then
it's
you
would
be
an
ideal
person
to
be
to
join
the
group
of
people
who
are
going
to
you
know
the
the
subgroups
of
breakouts
to
to
work
together.
E
O
Yeah,
that
is
fine.
No
I'm
just
talking
about
the
approach
right.
How
to
define
this
circle
of
responsibility,
for
this
group
just
take
the
essential
products
from
block
one
github
and
that's
it,
and
that
will
give
you
the
list
to
start
with.
B
I
believe
that
aaron
and
maybe
rami,
has
been
trying
to
talk
for
a
while.
I
just
keep
seeing
the
mu
my
mute
and
on
you.
M
B
M
I
think
what
you're
saying
is
right,
but
I
that
would
be
a
good
starting
point
and
with
the
papers
that
are
coming
out
from
the
working
groups
on
the
eo
side
right
now,
there's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
things
in
those
that
will
fall
under
this
purview
potentially,
and
they
are
those
core
sdks
yeah.
That
was
the
gist
of
it.
So.
N
N
You
know
specifically
for
that,
but
the
tight
communication
between
decisions
made
here
decisions
made
with
the
other
groups
and
making
sure
that
that
wallet
group
has
a
team
that
can
communicate
effectively
to
all
those
wallets,
and
I
would
say
in
addition
to
that,
the
exchanges
is
a
big
part
as
well
make
sure
the
exchanges
are
up
to
date
with
you
know,
hard
forks
and
things
of
that
nature.
Would
that
be
specific
to
each
we're
just
going
to
keep
that
on
each
chain,
because
there's
no
actual
chain
being
run
by
this?
N
Are
we
going
to
be
part
of
those
conversations
as
well
to
say,
hey,
you
can
make
that
decision,
but
did
you
know
that,
for
example,
finance
isn't
running
a
full
node
history,
whatever
whatever?
Whatever
you
know
and
and
those
like
tight
relationships
to
the
exchanges?
Is
that
something
that
we're
going
to
keep
on
the
edges
or
we're
going
to
start
taking
some
role
as
the
owners
of
the
code
base?
Here.
B
It's
a
good
question.
I
mean
it's
a
good
question,
syed
kind
of
broached
that
when
he
talked
about
jurisdictions
before
the
intent
of
this,
or
the
way
that
I
see
this
anyways
is
not
for
this
group
to
then
go
and
mingle
in
the
affairs
of
each
chain
and
to
tell
each
chain
what
you
can
or
cannot
do.
Each
chain
is
its
own
business,
it's
its
own
community,
so
whatever
it
is,
we
come
out
with.
B
This
should
be
what
is
the
underlying
foundation
and
or
underlying
a
glue
that
binds
everybody
together
when
you're
now
talking
about
the
individual
chain
that
may
go
through
hard,
forks
or
may
have
you
know
particular
relationships?
I
think
that
that
becomes
you're
starting
to
muddy
the
water,
where,
where
that's
more
chain
specific
but
again
maybe
you'd
have
a
more
concrete
example
of
what
you'd
mean
by
an
exchange
wanting
to
speak
to
this
group.
About
your
particular
token
and
your
particular
history,
like
that
at
some
point
becomes,
I
think,
muddied
for
me.
N
Yeah,
that
makes
sense,
I
think,
I'm
thinking
about.
For
example,
you
know
if,
if
it
exchange
or
or
wallet,
I
think
it
works
for
both
anyone.
That's
you
know
in
the
eos
io
family.
If
you
want
to
call
it
that
you
know
is
thinking
about.
Oh
hey,
I
just
heard
there's
this
new
release,
for
you
know
eos
or
the
eos
io,
you
know
and
and
just
clarity,
so
there's
not
confusion
about.
How
does
that
impact?
You
know,
maybe
I'm
running
two
or
three
chains
that
are
native.
N
You
know
like
I
just
just
got
off
a
conversation
with
someone
the
american
crypto
fed
they're
doing
an
eos.
I
o
based
thing,
and
I
just
heard
from
them
that
it's
currently
native
you
know
they
don't
have
it
up
and
running
yet
so
they're
not
part
of
this
call,
but
eventually
it
would
make
sense
for
them.
It's
very
vanilla.
I
think
it's
a
private
chain
and
those
would
be
examples
where
an
upgrade
to
the
core
code
base
might
immediately
equate
to
yeah.
That's
our
code
base
too
go
ahead
and
upgrade,
and
so
I'm
just.
N
It's
not
that
we're
telling
people
what
to
do
we're
just
facilitating
communication
that
we
haven't
had
before
block
one
never
did
that
the
chains
don't
really
haven't
really
had
a
way
to
do
that,
and
I
think
this
group
could
really
serve
the
whole
community
by
doing
that,
saying,
hey
we
happen
to
know
something
about
something
you
should
know
too,
oh
cool.
Thank
you.
That's
really
important.
That
kind
of
a
deal.
B
So
in
the
job
descriptions
below
we
do
have
a
position
in
there
for
that
that
it
that's
the
external
communications,
essentially
kind
of
fulfilling
the
role
of
selling
the
product
itself
and
we're
talking
to
stakeholders
about
the
product
itself.
What
we
don't
have,
control
over
and
what's
been
apparent
over
the
last
couple
of
years,
is
that
each
chain
updates
at
different
times,
and
so,
even
if
this
group
outputs
a
new
version
of
force,
it
doesn't
mean
that
each
chain
is
updating.
B
Each
individual
chain
is
going
to
update
at
the
same
time,
every
chain
has
their
own
update
processes
and
different
timelines
and
such
so
that
may
or
may
not
impact
that.
Obviously
it
does.
It
will
impact
when
that
becomes
relevant
to
the
exchange
in
in
that
scenario,
so
there's
still
very
much
responsibility
on
each
product.
Each
chain
to
you
know,
do
that
communication.
So
if
that's
not
been
happening,
that's
something
that
maybe
the
change
should
consider
that
they
should
build
those
relationships.
B
But
yes,
this
this
group,
where
this
entity
would
essentially
be
responsible
for
the
software,
the
essential
software
stack
running
behind
it
and
and
and
everything
associated
to
it.
So
they
would
also,
as
its
mandate,
want
to
sell
that
product
and
encourage
people
to
use
this
software
stack
right,
and
so
there
would
be
communications
there.
I
just
want
to
be
careful
that
this
group
is
not
going
to
go
and
coordinate
when,
for
example,
fio
is
doing
its
upgrade
and
so
tell
the
exchange.
The
fire
is
going
to
be
doing
its
upgrade
in
seven
months,
while
maybe.
N
Yes,
of
course,
et
cetera,
no,
of
course,
of
course,
no,
I
just
again,
I'm
just
trying
to
think
through
the
consistency
of
what
I've
seen
is
kind
of
a
missing
piece
within
what
people
consider
like,
for
example,
if
you
were
to
think
of
the
ethereum
ecosystem,
you
know
there's
this,
you
know,
consensus
is
the
generic
example.
People
use
where
they
kind
of
know,
what's
going
on
in
the
ecosystem,
because
they're
a
big
major
player
in
it.
N
It's
this
idea
that
this
this
group
eosio
plus,
knows
what's
going
on
on
the
different
change,
knows
what
level
of
you
know.
So,
if
there's
a
question
saying
hey
so
and
actually
in
the
distinction,
I
like
how
you're
talking
about
in
terms
of
selling
the
product,
but
I
guess
what
I'm
more
talking
about
is
an
account
manager
and
again
not
specifically
to
the
individual
chains.
Of
course,
each
individual
chain
has
their
own
relationships,
their
own
account
management
and
all
that
stuff.
N
It's
just
more
of
an
account
manager
connected
to
the
largest
projects
that
that
impact
our
reputation
and
things
of
that
nature.
Just
someone
who's
aware
of
okay!
That's
where
that
chain
is.
That's
those
are
the
major
exchanges,
while
it's
products
and
services
on
that
chain
and
and
what
level
are
they
at
in
terms
of
the
decisions
we're
making?
So
let's
say,
for
example,
let's
say
a
massive
brand
is
using
something
that
really
that
is
on
eosio
they're
massive.
You
know
multi-billion
dollar
company
or
something
like
that,
then
obviously,
they're
gonna
have
a
lot
of
weight.
N
The
decisions
made
here
might
impact
a
major
brand
like
that
and
just
making
sure
that
there's
some
kind
of
awareness
from
an
account
management
perspective
they're
part
of
the
eosio
family,
even
if
their
personal
relationship
is
with
a
specific
chain.
So
I
don't
know
if
that
makes
sense,
but
it's
more
kind
of
this
yeah
account
management
and
selling
of
the
product
together.
B
One
that's
where
maybe
membership
for
this
particular
group
would
would
also
help
solve
that
right.
That's
why
we
decided
last
week
to
reach
out
to
bullish
and
voice
examples.
Yep
great
examples.
O
I
think
it
just
comes
naturally.
As
soon
as
we
have
the
government's
body
and
structure
it
comes
to
selling
the
product,
I
I
think
it
will
come
naturally,
and
there
will
be
demand
for
such
positions
such
a
job
within
within
this
group,
to
actually
to
be
the
product
owner
and
and
basically
spoke
for
all
kind
of
commercial
requests
and
support,
and
that
that
that's
what
we
tried
to
do
together
with
block
one
when
they
had
this
enterprise
group,
we
tried
to
basically
offer
block
one.
O
This
kind
of
sales
sales
partnership
that
we
as
block
producers
and
consultancy
teams
would
sell
their
products
to
the
end.
Customers
that
didn't
pan
out,
but
that
this
idea
is
is
never
is
not
going
away
right
and
we
are
building
this
kind
of
fundament.
For
for
for
this
to
to
happen,.
B
So,
just
to
add
to
that,
for
those
who
have
noticed,
ted
cahall
is
on
the
call
ted
k
hall
has
joined
the
enf
and
is
now
working
with
us.
And
so
when
we
talk
about
io
for
business
and
and
what
you
just
mentioned,
stand
essentially
ted
was
leading
that.
B
Way
sometimes-
and
I
think,
we're
going
to
see
a
little
bit
more
expansion.
Obviously
you
know
because
we're
part
of
the
crew,
but
in
the
core
plus
blue
paper,
there's
a
large
section
on
yasaio
for
business
and
essentially
what
we're
talking
about
what
you
were
talking
about:
luke,
etc.
That
is
found
as
one
of
the
items
that
is
brought
up
in
four
plus,
for
example,
and
what
aaron
was
talking
about
earlier
with
sdks
and
jesse,
was
talking
about
that's
found
in
the
api
plus
blue
paper,
which
is
now
a
draft
and
being
reviewed.
O
The
other
topic
that
luke
mentioned
the
business
aspects
and
business
impact
of
system
upgrades
that's
what
I've
spent
like
20
last
24
hours,
discussing
it
with
multiple
teams.
So
we
are
planning
the
eos
upgrade
it's
planned
quite
optimistically
for
mid-may,
but
basically
nobody
thought
before
yesterday
about
business
impacts
and
business
aspects
of
of
this
upgrade.
So
we
are
starting
to
work
on
that
and,
and
we
are
at
least
shaping
out
the
ideas
and
and
demands
and
what
is
needed
in
terms
of
organizing
organizations.
O
I
mean
to
just
to
coordinate
all
this
upgrade
between
businesses
and
support
them
in
this
process.
So
we'll
have
a
lot
of
experience
once
once
this
process
is
through
the
the
consensus
consensus
upgrade
on
use
will
have
plenty
of
experience
to
share
with
other
networks.
B
So
part
of
the
idea
behind
that,
so
I
will
I
will
say
I
disagree-
that
the
business,
the
side
of
things
wasn't
thought
of
that
was
kind
of
the
whole
point.
What
you
just
mentioned
is
very
accurate,
very
real,
and
I
think,
will
be
relevant,
for
everybody
is
that
right
now,
with
the
consensus
upgrade
upcoming
on
eos
part
of
the
idea
is
that
we
don't
necessarily
need
to
there's
no
technical
need
to
go
through
this
upgrade.
B
We
could,
if
we
really
wanted
to
do
absolutely
nothing
to
the
code
base
for
an
extra
year,
whatever
it'd
be
fine.
There's
no
there's
no
dire
need
for
this
to
happen
in
april
or
in
may,
or
in
june,
or
whatever,
there's
nothing
right.
Now,
that's
necessarily
pressing
from
that
point
of
view.
What
is
pressing,
however,
is
at
some
point.
B
We
would
have
systems
in
place
that
we
would
have
practiced
when
it
wasn't
necessarily
required
when
we
could
make
mistakes
when
there
was
no
time
pressures.
So
the
idea
is
at
some
point,
my
vision.
Ideally,
this
group
comes
out
with
upgrades
every
quarter
and
that
the
exchanges,
the
businesses
all
the
applications
they
now
have
the
staff
they
now
have
the
need
they
out
and
they
now
have
the
reason
why
they
would
want
to
do
this
and
it
becomes
more
frequent.
So
as
it
becomes
more
frequent,
it
becomes
easier.
B
They've
got
their
processes
in
place,
we
enable,
and
we
empower
them
with
the
the
experience
and
the
processes
that
we
learn.
So
even
when
there's
a
new
player
that
comes
in
we've
got
documentation,
we've
got
the
channels
we've
got.
We've
got
everything
in
place
so
that
we
can
help
them
do
that
in
order
to
move
there
to
a
time
where
we
can
do
this
quite
frequently
as
we
see
in
other
other
chains.
B
In
a
way,
the
mandel
release
is,
to
a
certain
extent,
a
practice
run
under
control,
cert
control
circumstances,
which
will
also
enable
us-
and
I
was
just
on
a
call
with
before-
to
determine
what
goes
in,
and
why
should
we
do
that
and
what
should
be
like
what
should
be
included
and
what
who
should
be
talked
to?
And
how
should
we
position
it?
Who
are
the
different
players,
etc?
B
This
is
what
we're
going
through
right
now,
it's
kind
of
a
test
run,
because
we
have
not
done
that
in
a
very
long
time
and
we
haven't
had
systems
or
processes
in
place
in
order
to
do
this
effectively
frequently
and
one
of
the
main
selling
features
of
eos
io
is
that
it
can,
if
it
wants
to
update,
frequently
quite
smoothly
from
a
technical
point
of
view,
as
long
as
we
figure
out
the
processes
for
the
businesses
and
basically
the
external
stakeholders,
if
we
can
make
that
optimized,
then
eosio
has
a
software
stack
could
be
one
of
those
softwares
where
you
continuously
get
updates.
A
Okay,
so
the
the
the
keyword
that
I
just
took
with
me
is
consensus,
upgrade
so
how
about
a
consensus
upgrade
for
this
meeting
so
from
what
I've
been
hearing
so
far,
we're
actually
not
in
disagreement
with
most
of
the
points.
A
Unless
somebody
speaks
up
now
and
says,
no,
no,
you
misunderstood
me,
but
from
from
what
I
heard
so
far,
I
don't
see
any
disagreement
with
this
purpose
document
in
general,
except
that
we
need
to
iron
out
some
some
of
the
definitions
and
add
some
some
further
discussions
to
it.
But
in
general
I
would
tend
to
say
that
there
is
overall
agreement
to
what
is
written
here.
A
So
yeah
now
I'm
wondering
because
I've
seen
various
people
dropping
off
the
call
so.
A
Would
it
make
sense
to
to
define
like
people
out
of
this
group,
to
to
definitely
look
at
some
of
the
discussion
points
that
we
have
in
smaller
groups?
So
maybe
my
proposal
would
be
to
have.
I
don't
know
if
jesse
is
still
there,
I'm
just
looking
no
yeah
he's
there
so
probably
to
have
like
jesse
and
aaron
and
two
other
people
to
look
at
the
definition
of
what
is
internal
code
development
and
what
is
the
definition
of
of
the
core
code
base.
A
So
we
can
further
define
that
and
we
could
work
with
iterations
here
and
say
well
from
the
first
iteration
or
standpoint
we
will
take
whatever
is
essential
from
block
one
components
and
then
the
next
iteration
is
we
add
this
and
that
and
then,
at
the
end
of
the
day
we
add
everything
that
is
the
the
final
definition
of
core
code
base.
Would
that
make
sense
for
you.
L
I
think
people
that
have
a
good
perspective
on
the
current
working
groups
and
kind
of
like
some
of
those
pieces
like
aaron
yeah,
the
most
just
to
say
like
yeah.
Let's
not
try
to
claim
something
that
is
being
worked
on
or
or
maybe
there's
some
place
that
has
a
gap
that
we
think
somebody's
got
that
they
don't.
You
know,
there's
not
a
lot
of
things
here.
Like
stan,
said.
M
M
I
mean
I've
been
really
deep
into
the
writing
of
these
papers
for
months
now
and
trying
to
describe
this
problem,
so
I
think
I
have.
I
could
probably
pluck
something
out
of
one
of
the
papers
at
this
point
that
describes
adequately
what
we
try
to
be
covering.
So
absolutely
I'd
be
happy
to
be
a
part
of
those
discussions.
E
And
can
I
make
something
you
said
there
reminded
me:
I
I
think
that
with
a
lot
of
these
group
subgroups,
if
there's
a
lot
of
ways
to
do
them,
but
what
I
found
efficient
in
this
one
was
was
to
have
somebody
come
in
with
something
and
then
you
talk,
and
then
that
gives
you
something
to
talk
about
what's
right
and
wrong
and
fits
and
doesn't
fit
as
opposed
to
a
blank
page.
E
M
M
A
M
O
A
Yeah,
but
I
think
that
that
will
be
good,
because
from
my
perspective,
this
was
the
longest
discussion
we
had
is:
do
we
maintain
this,
and
if
we
maintain
it,
what
will
it
be
and
what
will
it
not
be?
So
I
think
this
is
the
key
component
for
this
one
here
to
get
this
done,
because
then
we
have
the
additional
discussions
of
like
integrating
our
site
developer
code.
I
personally
think
and
would
recommend
we.
A
We
kind
of
leave
it
at
this
more
like
very
broad
description
and
not
try
to
dig
deeper
into
that,
because
that's
gonna
kind
of
kind
of
move
focus
from
from
what
is
what
is
needs
to
be
done
in
the
first
instance
and
that's
from
my
perspective,
the
and
and
support
of
the
internal
code
development
and
the
the
existing
law
that
we
have
in
the
course
to
to
assure
that,
the
the
change
operational.
If
everybody
agrees
to
that.
J
So
if
you
have
room
on
that
breakout
group
for
one
more,
I
wouldn't
mind
joining
that.
You
know
when,
when
voice
was
part
of
block
one,
we
had
a
number
of
requirements
for
enhancements
to
functionality
from
an
application
standpoint-
and
I
mean
it
was
part
of
their
core
code
that
they
were
supporting
so
at
least
be
interested
in
seeing
if
there's
something
that
I
could
offer.
M
From
our
perspective-
and
I
guess
speaking
of
which
I
think
you
and
I
will
probably
have
conversations
with
some
of
the
stuff-
that's
coming
out
of
these
working
groups
as
well
at
some
point-
yes,
I
expect
so
that's
probably
true
of
many
of
you
on
this
call
too.
A
Right
so
so
we
have
this
part.
I
think
that's
going
to
clear
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
the
caveats
that
we
had.
So
I
think
everybody
here
is
is
agreeing
that
securing
the
existing
code
pays
is
obviously
the
key
purpose
of
this
group.
So
if,
if
anybody
has
like
any
issues
with
this,
how
this
is
formulated,
please
speak
up,
and
then
I
would
like
to
give
you
the
task
to
actually
propose
like
a
different
different
wording
for
this.
That
matches
your
requirement
a
little
bit
better.
A
Okay,
so
nobody's
there,
so
we
have
the
public
code,
maintenance
and
distribution.
That's
in
general.
Also,
I
think
in
agreement
rami.
A
C
C
I
have
to
go
through
the
paper
in
detail.
A
Okay,
I
know
that
that
you
have
a
lot
of
things
on
your
table,
so
would
do
you
think
you
you
would
be
able
to
because
you.
A
Okay,
so
great
so
because
you
have
some
very
valid
points,
and
I
I
will
personally
like
to
assure
that
those
are
also
matched
inside
that
document,
so
that'd
be
great
okay,
so
then
funding
and
entity
I
think
eve's.
A
We
we
have
this
proposal
from
wax
that
could
be
could
be
on
the
agenda
for
next
week.
Is
that
right.
B
No
it's
from
ux,
so
the
ux
team-
I
don't
know
if
you
know
miss
it
yeah
still
here
they
likely
will
be
proposing
something
next
week
that
could
be
used
as
a
as
a
base.
That
would
likely
help
at
least
set
parameters
around
or
start
discussion,
as
douglas
mentioned,
to
have
something
to
review
and
to
look
at.
B
No,
that
will
be
so
right
now.
It's
still
a
draft
there
they've
been
drafting
it.
There's
been
some
back
and
forth.
Proton
marshall
has
also
been
invited
in
there
so
likely
by
next
week.
I
guess
marshall
proton
would
have
seen
it
as
well
as
eos
the
same
as
I've
seen.
A
A
Okay,
so
then,
then,
I
think
that's
fine
if
we
have
those
three
chains
taking
that
responsibility
and
bringing
that
up
next
week.
So
so
we
have
a
proposal
that
we
we
can
look
at
for
the
governance
system,
obviously
to
those
that
haven't
been
there
the
last
times
we
basically
agreed
on
a
one-world
von
chain
agreement
for
now
to
to
be
in
a
position
to
do
any
decisions.
A
So
from
that
perspective
this
obviously
needs
to
be
worked
on,
and
the
question
is:
is
there?
Is
there
anybody
that
feels
that
you
would
like
to
get
more
detailed
into
the
governance
system
and
make
proposal
here.
B
What
I
imagine
is
that
when
the
proposal
for
the
I
guess
financial
side
of
things
is
output,
that
that
will
likely
serve
as
a
base
for
the
governance
side
of
things
in
terms
of
having
a
starting
point
but
compressed
when
you
see
it,
I
think
it
will
give
a
better
idea
of
what
I'm
talking
about,
but
the
idea
is
that
it
would
be
likely
similar
ratios
but
compressed
so
there's
less
so
everything
is,
is
falling
within
a
tighter
range,
let's
say:
okay,
so
yeah.
So
we
we
had
again.
B
B
A
A
We
did
touch
organization,
staffing
and
there's
been
an
initial
proposal.
We
will
be
jumping
there
in
a
second,
so
so
we
can
discuss
that
further,
because
obviously
that's
also
having
budget
implications.
A
So
we
look
at
that,
then
I
do
think
we
have
a
general
agreement
on
like
seeing
the
eosio
code
base
as
a
product
and
also
see
a
requirement
to
promote
this
and
communicate
this.
So
as
luke
pointed
out.
Obviously
it
is.
It
would
be
good
to
have
kind
of
account
management
structure.
O
A
Support
organization
that
is
in
a
position
to
support
larger
organizations
or
larger
larger
exchange
exchanges
like
binance
in
case
there
are
any
overarching,
eosio
discussions.
So
I
think
that's
that's
a
very
valid
point
and
we
we
can
further
detail
that,
but
the
general
role
of
having
this
kind
of
function
or
a
purpose.
I
think
everybody
here
is
also
in
agreement.
A
Yeah
then
establish
organization
branding.
We
already
have
the
mandate
to
justin
to
select
the
brand
agency
justin
as
side
note.
Do
you
have
any
update
on
the
branding
agencies.
H
Yeah
so
I'll
just
give
a
quick
summary,
so
we've
looked
for
or
we
reached
out
to
four
different
firms:
rn01
one
called
weird
studio,
pentagram
and
under
design.
Two
of
those
firms
couldn't
provide
a
tender
just
because
they
had
too
much
work
already.
Unfortunately,
we
did
get
a
proposal
back
from
r101
and
also
weird
weird
studio
spelled
like
w
y
r
d.
So
that's
why
I'm
mispronouncing
it
anyway.
H
So
I'm
looking
over
these
two
proposals
right
now,
they're
quite
similar
in
a
lot
of
areas
like
pricing,
to
be
honest,
like
in
terms
of
capabilities
very
similar
as
well.
You
know,
one
is
a
large
studio
in
rn01
and
weird
studio
is
smaller.
So
that's
a
consideration,
but
you
know
we
could
probably
go
with
either
of
these
firms
and
they
would
do
a
good
job,
hopefully
so
yeah,
I'm
putting
together
sort
of
a
just
a
quick
report.
H
B
Yeah
I'll
I'll
make
your
job
either
easier
or
more
difficult.
It
depends
the
enf
has
decided
not
to
pursue
working
with
r01
as
of
march.
B
Okay,
as
you
may,
the
quality
of
the
work
that
they've
done
has
been
really
good.
Where
we
are
not
satisfied
with
is
the
speed
at
which
they've
been
deploying
some
of
our
milestones
and
our
deliverables.
H
Okay,
yeah
that
definitely,
I
guess,
makes
it
a
little
easier
just
because
we
have
such
a
tight
time
frame,
I
think
wit,
word
would
maybe
be
better
and
their
understanding
of
eosio
is
quite
good
because
orlando,
the
founder
of
this
new
studio,
he's
worked
at
amazix
and
he's
part
being
part
of
the
ecosystem.
So
I
imagine
there's
going
to
be
some
speed
advantages
there,
so
that.
H
Okay,
that
makes
sense
yeah
cool-
I
guess
we'll
probably
be
going
with
wyrd
studio.
I
was
sort
of
leaning
there,
mainly
because
just
how
involved
in
the
eosio
ecosystem,
they
are,
and
they're
still
of
a
very
high
professional
caliber
to
so
yeah.
I
guess
that
would
be
the
decision.
Then,
if
you
guys
are
comfortable
with
that
and
I'll
provide
a
report.
O
They've
done
a
tremendous
job
on
on
core
plus
finishing
the
product
right,
so
editing
wording
the
whole
thing
and
then
outlining
the
whole
document
structure
and
they
also
applied
their
design
which
which
we
didn't
take
into
the
final.
But
at
least
yeah.
R
Okay,
so
what's
what's
the
price
tag
on
that
justin,
so
the
initial
component.
H
H
All
right
I'll
post,
my
report
in
the
in
the
group
in
the
next
hour.
A
Okay,
then,
from
the
entity
which
is
obviously
10,
we
had
them
some
discussions.
There
is,
do
you
need
some
more
input
on
that
or
some
some
assistance
in
founding
this
or
getting
some
more
details
about
that.
B
Well,
definitely,
I
mean,
I
think,
that
that's
not
a
decision
that
we
would
take.
That
would
be
the
group.
Do
you
I
mean:
does
the
group
want
to
form
a
dao
in
wyoming?
Does
the
group
want
to
form
a
not-for-profit
in
ireland
that
would
be
more
than
yeah?
I
I
that
should
not
meet
for
me
for
me
to
decide
that
the
enf
is
a
not-for-profit
non-soliciting
corporation,
that
is
in
canada,
and
so
I'm
obviously
very
familiar
with
that.
B
B
We
also
looked
at
some
that
are
seen
as
somewhat
kind
of
gold
standard
of
entities
like
in
ireland,
but
they
have
requirements
such
as
having
people
live
there,
and
so
those
are
considered
very
sensitive
to
to
take
into
account,
and
ultimately
we
did
decide
to
go
with
the
not-for-profit,
not
soliciting
corporation
in
canada,
because
it
made
sense
for
us,
but
it
may
not
make
sense
for
this
group.
I
I
have
no
idea.
I
would
hope
that
somebody
else
would
want
to
provide
input
on
this.
B
E
I
I
feel
like
if
I
feel
like
what
we
need
for
number
10
is
the
same
as
we
need
for
number
eight
and
nine
and
seven
and
the
others
is
a
subgroup
that
puts
together
a
list
of
what
what
are
the,
what
are
the
needs,
what
what
decisions
are
going
to
go
into
the
the
choice
of
what?
What
kind
you
know
the
recommendations
and
then
and
a
process,
and
so
they
can
so
ideally
that
group
would
come
back
to
us
with
a
with
a
list
of
considerations
that
they
were.
E
You
know
that
they
were
going
to
you
know,
and
maybe
even
ranked
and
things
like
that
this
group
could
could
agree,
disagree.
You
know
edit
and
then
once
those
were
set,
then
the
the
group
could
go
back
again
and
and
look
at
what
types
of
entities
best
define
you
know
and
jurisdictions
best
fit
the
needs.
You
know
as
as
illuminate
as
as
enumerated.
So
that's
that's.
E
B
So,
yes,
I
I'm
echoing
what
you're
saying
the
way
that
the
quiz
question
was
positioned.
I
thought
kirsten
was
asking
me
for
me
to
just
do
it,
and
so
I'm
saying
no.
I
would
like
other
people
to
participate
in
this
discussion
and
I'll
gladly
be
in
that
group
as
well,
but
it
would
be
good
if
other
people
also.
E
Said
absolutely
in
the
subgroup
meeting
you
you
did
you
mentioned
you
had
some
resources
to
share,
so
I
understand
why
why
it
might
have
been
on
kirsten's
list
like
that,
but
I
think
you
know
the
time
for
that
will
be
later
right,
and
but
we
really
need
to
get
some
people
in
on
it.
I
I
would
not.
I
would
you
know,
there's
a
lot
of
groups
that
you
want
to
be
a
part
of
because
for
good
reasons,
and
I
think
that
this
might
be
one
of
them
as
well.
B
O
Hotels
foundation
should
be
in
there
because
it
is
now
the
legal
entity
that
is
providing
the
accounts
right,
accounting.
E
I
don't
think
they
need
to,
but
the
fact
that
they've
gone
through
they've
gone
like
you,
like
they've
gone
through
the
process
of
of
creating
everything.
B
E
D
B
H
B
B
K
Yeah,
I'm
not
sure
I
don't
think
I
can.
I
can
volunteer
him
into
the
group
right
I
mean
we
could
try
asking.
A
B
B
This
ultra
is
also
quite
the
big
machine
to
a
certain
extent,
so
I
wouldn't
when
we're
talking.
C
O
This
could
be
something
to
explore.
It's
public
good
organization
right
so
and
non
non-profit
seems
to
be
the
right
thing
to
do
and
yeah
we
don't
have
any
other.
A
So
I
think
it's
about
involving
on
the
chains
into
that
discussion
that
that
makes
it
beneficial.
So
I
think
I
would
really
appreciate
if
you
ask
the
question:
if
they
say
no,
I
don't
want
to
then
obviously
we
can.
We
will
look
for
other
people
that
are
happy
to
join
in
and
and
be
part
of
that
process.
So
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
to
involve
them.
From
my
personal
perspective,.
E
Can
I
I
would
echo
that
and
say
I
think,
that
the
process
of
participating
in
these
in
one
or
more
of
these
subgroups
will
make
a
person
or
group
much
more
appreciative
or
or
have
a
greater
understanding
for
all
the
the
work
products
of
all
the
others
right.
E
If
you're,
if
you're
not
taking
place
at
a
sub
you're,
not
working
on
this
in
a
group,
then
you're,
then
it's
easy
to
to
undervalue
the
work
that
other
people
are
doing
and
if
you're
doing
it
yourself
you
you
know
you
you
see,
you
see
that
it
is
a
process
and
things
do
have
to
you
know
things
do
come
up.
E
If
you,
if
groups,
that
don't
participate
in
that
are
going
to
feel
less
ownership
in
the
end
and
it's
it's
not
as
it
will
not
be
as
successful
in
my
in
my
estimate,
so
I'd
encourage
everybody
to
participate
on
a
few
of
these
things.
It'll
go
better
and
your
and
your
needs
will
be
addressed
at
an
earlier
stage.
B
Eric
is
that
something
that
maybe
theo
would
like
to
help,
and
I
apologize
if
it's
fio
I've
heard
it
both
ways.
Is
that
something
that
you
would
like
to
help
with
yeah?
No,
we
say.
I
Theo,
but
either
way
it
works.
You
know,
I
think
why
probably
a
lot
of
these
guys
aren't
answering
to
well
it's
not
in
my
wheelhouse,
but
I'll
reach
out,
like
david
gold,
obviously
might
be
able
to
has
a
lot
of
experience
with
this.
So
let
me
see
if
he
can
do
it
I'll,
just
reach
out
to
him
and
see
luke,
maybe
somewhat
as
well,
though
I
know
he's
pulled
in
a
lot
of
directions
right
now,
so
I
will.
A
That's
awesome
great,
thank
you
for
that
good.
So
I've
been
recently
approached
by
somebody
that
said,
estonia
might
be
an
interesting
comp
country
to
do
something
like
this,
and
I
know
that
they
just.
G
O
So
european
union
that
they
have
pretty
similar
to
the
whole
european
union-
it's
not
so
much
different,
but
they
have
electronic
government
in
the
country.
But
I
think
this
this
point
in
turn
is
actually
probably
too
early
to
discuss.
Maybe
in
in
a
few
weeks
or
a
couple
of
months,
we'll
have
a
process
and
and.
E
E
Part
yeah
figuring
out
what
you're
doing
is
the
hard
part
and
yeah,
and-
and
I
would
rather
you
know
if
if
it
doesn't
take
very
long
fantastic,
but
it
may
take
a
very
long
time
and
you
know
if
we
can
get
a
subgroup
together
to
to
work
on
these
things,
then
you
know,
then
we
can.
We
can
knock
these
down.
I
the
way
I
see
this
honestly
is
and
there's
a
there's
deliverables
here
that
are
mentioned.
E
I
actually
see
that
we
could
like
there's
one
view
of
this,
that
we're
gonna
just
talk
and
talk
and
talk,
talk
forever
and
everyone's
gonna.
You
know
and
then
and
I'm
concerned
that
in
that
model
we
don't
actually
accomplish
very
much
very
quickly
and
I
think
the
other
way
to
do
it
is
to
roll
up
our
sleeves
divide.
You
know
do
what
the
the
first
group
did,
which
is
say:
okay,
these
are
the
things
we're
doing.
E
It
suggests
these
deliverables
and
then
some
of
these
deliverables
might
not
be
that
hard,
and
some
of
these
deliverables
might
be
very
time
consuming
and
very
hard
or
not
hard
in
time,
but
still
time
consuming
whatever
they
are.
But
some
of
these
things
can
be
accomplished
and
we
can
accomplish
these,
and
you
know
we
can
put
a
big
check
box
next
to
them
and
and
get
these
things
checked
off
and
and
actually
move
forward
and
actually
have
a
mindset
where
we're
trying
to
finish
this.
E
E
I
would
like
it
to
end
soon
and
well
so
and
the
way
we
do
that
is
we
as
people
step
up
and
tackle
the
tasks
that
we
need
to,
that
we
need
to
address
and
then
get
them
done
and
get,
and
you
know-
and
it
is
achievable
in
a
shorter
time
frame
than
I
think
people
here
are
thinking
if
we
work
together
and
if
people
pull
their
load.
B
A
Yeah,
nothing
more
to
add
to
that.
I
think
that's
the
key
and
yeah
and
I'm
looking
at
the
the
clock.
It's
already
seven
minutes
to
ten
my
time
in
the
evening.
So
I
think.
A
We
we
did
have
some
some
progress.
I
personally
didn't
expect
us
to
like
everybody
nodding
ahead
and
say:
yeah,
that's
it.
Let's
go
fire.
I
think
we.
We
have
some
tasks
for
the
next
for
the
next
week,
which
would
be
great
if
we
have
finished
those
those
breakout
groups
by
next
week
and
can
then
report
back
please
all
I
will
circulate
the
the
the
document
link
again
on
discord
too
and
telegram
for
those
that
are
new
to
the
group.
Just
please
reach
out
to
us.
A
Then
please
this
is
the
google
docs,
so
please
feel
free
to
go
in
there
at
commons,
and
I
I
will
update
the
document
tomorrow
with
with
some
of
the
comments
that
we
made
and
then
please
feel
free
to
add
comments
or
any
up
any
updates
that
that
you
feel
belong
there
and
for
the
next
meeting.
Obviously
we
will
kind
of
try
to
to
agree
on
those
points
and
then
also
look
at
the
staffing
proposal.
B
Just
to
I
guess
to
to
clarify
when
you
mentioned
that
the
the
groups
will
go
off,
it
doesn't
mean
that
the
groove
comes
back
next
week
and
it
has
something
to
present.
It
is
possible
that
one
of
those
groups
comes
back
next
week
and
says:
listen
we're
still
work
on
it.
We
don't
have
anything
to
present,
that's
okay!
It's
the
exercise
of
having
people
think
about
this
outside
of
these
meetings,
whether
or
not
they,
whether
or
not
they
come
up
with
something
within
you
know
a
week
or
two,
that's
less
relevant.
B
That
that's
good,
can
we
somebody
just
let
somebody's
just
joined?
Do
you
know
who
that
is.
F
K
B
E
And
there's
no
fixed,
no
there's
no
fixed
number
of
participants
on
any
of
these
things.
I
think
four
is
a
kind
of
a
minimum
type
of
quorum.
We
might
want,
but
you
know,
I
think,
if
you
know
people
in
the
community
whether
or
not
they're
here
I
think
we
should
we
should
go.
We
should
seek
out
expertise
in
these
areas
where
we
know
of
it.
O
E
We
have
we
have
somebody
if,
if
you
guys
do
lean
towards
estonia,
I
wouldn't
do
it
now.
But
if
you,
if
that
organization
leans
toward
estonia,
we
have
some
we're
working
with
estonians
and
we
have
one
who's:
a
project
manager
in
the
telus
core
devs.
Who
could
you
know,
I
think
it's
you
know
like
just
in
the
same
way
if
we
were
leaning,
if
we
were
thinking
about
ireland,
maybe
we
and
and
the
only
the
only
problem
is
that
we
have
to
have
some
people
living
there.
A
O
I
Just
david
got
back
to
me:
actually
he
said
he
could.
Probably
he
can
he's
willing
to
help
out
it's
david
gold
on
that
one.
So
he
said
if
the
group's
goals
are
valuable.
I
didn't
know
what
to
tell
him
on
that,
but
we'll
just
go
with
him.
A
Yeah,
but
taking
your
comment
eve,
let
me
ask
aaron
plus
plus
breakout:
do
you
think
you
can
come
up
with
with
something
until
next
week
for
the
code
core
code
base
definition.
S
P
A
In
there
that's
being
looked
at
yeah,
that's
that's
awesome,
so
so
we
probably
have
that
we
have
for
the
next
week.
We
have
the
proposal
for
the
funding
which
is
great,
and
then
we
we
take
on
any
comments
that
might
have
been
there.
I've
already
received
an
email
also
for
like
a
short
onboarding
call,
so
I
will
also
do
that
and
then
then
we
go
from
there.
A
E
Thank
you
so
much.
I
gotta
say
it's
just
your
skill
at
keeping
track
of
everybody's
of
everybody's
opinions
as
we
go
along
and
again
like
I've
said
before
synthesizing
those
opinions
and
and
bringing
people
together.
I
think
it's
a
very
rare
talent
and
I'm
I'm
really
happy
that
you're
in
that
that
role
for
for
our
group.