►
From YouTube: EOSIO+ Meeting, February 17th 2022 HD 720p
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
B
Yeah
I
read
that
in
chat,
that's
great
great,
to
see
thanks
justin
and
anyone
else
who
was
involved
in
getting
that
together.
A
So
the
enf
signed
the
contract
directly.
That
way
for
payment
is
much
easier
and
then,
instead
of
sending
funds
to
the
foundation
telus
foundation,
that
would
then
fund
it,
which
is
kind
of
an
extra
step.
We
just
removed
one
step.
A
I
think
that
was
great
and
in
the
contract
we
do
state
that
I
guess
the
owner
is
the
enf.
So
this
is
the
one
signing
the
contract,
but
that
justin
is
the
project
lead
essentially.
A
A
And
just
for
for
everybody!
Well,
I
guess
no
I'll
wait
and
I
guess
person
when
you
bring
up
that
item.
I
can
I'll
give
it
like
a
30
second
update
on
it.
C
Yeah
sure,
okay,
then
I
I
propose
we
we
start
off
with
the
meeting
then,
as
you
see
I've,
I've
reorganized
the
report
because
I
was
getting
crazy
with
trying
to
reach
through
all
those
notes
and
and
text
files.
So
so
I
did
what
I
should
have
done
is
kind
of
having
a
little
board
for
us
to
to
easier,
more
easier
track,
the
the
actual
task
that
we're
doing
so
from
from
that
perspective.
So
so
I've
I've
reorganized
all
this
and
tried
to
prioritize
it.
C
So
so
we
have
like
the
the
red
ones,
which
obviously
are
the
the
most
important
parts,
blue
and
green,
and
then
I
tried
to
catch
all
the
things
that
we
had
on
the
board
and
put
it
on
to
the
backlog
at
least,
and
some
at
least
one
one
task
already
is
done
so
so,
but
for
today's
agenda
because
we
are
we're
looking
at
one
hour.
C
So
I
think
what
would
be
good
because
we
we
didn't,
have
the
last
meeting
and
I
think
there
was
some
preparation
done
by
the
core
code
group
and
by
the
by
the
proposal
and
funding
group.
So
may
I
ask
if
if
if
this
one
can
be
presented
today,
are
you
ready?
I
see
that
aaron
is
not
he's
not
in
the
meeting,
so
I
would
oh
you're
here.
Oh
I'm,
sorry
yeah,
sorry
great!
So
so
would
you
be
in
a
position
to
to
kind
of
present
the
results
today?
D
We
have
had
discussions
and
it
seems
like
there
are
no
objections
to
the
direction
we've
kind
of
talked
about.
I'm
we're
fairly
well
aligned,
I
think,
but
I
don't
know
that
there
has
been
a
conclusion.
It
has
just
been
that
there
are
no
objections
to
what
is
being
included.
A
Everybody's,
I
guess
so
everybody's
on
the
same
page.
What
is
that
conclusion
aaron
or
what
is
that
inclusion.
D
The
inclusion
is
kind
of
the
core
building
blocks
of
what
it
takes
to
build
something
with
eos
io,
so
that
will,
like
we've,
primarily
been
talking
about
the
server
software
itself
nodeos
and
the
system
contracts.
D
But
it
should
also
include
the
like
core
sdks,
which
all
chain,
like
chains,
can
extend
these
sdks
to
build
their
own
flavor,
just
like
they
could
with
the
system
contracts.
And
then
it
is
also
things
like
the
api
standards
themselves,
which
api
apis
and
sdks
kind
of
go
hand
in
hand.
So
those
kind
of
four
things
make
up
the
core
building
blocks
of
an
eos
io
deployment.
D
D
Yes,
I
mean
that's
kind
of
a
part
of
doing
core
development,
as
opposed
to
a
topic
of
core
development,
but
I
definitely
think
ci
cd
is
something
that
needs
to
be
considered.
As
this
group
does
quote-unquote
core
development.
C
Is
there
any
kind
of
document
aaron
that
you
kind
of,
because
you
mentioned
in
in
the
other
meeting,
that
there
was
already
kind
of
like
a
document
like
umls
or
whatever?
That
would
outline
what
what
these
components
were
in
more
detail?
Do
you
have
anything
that
you
could
share
with
the
group,
so
we
could
review
it?
D
At
this
point,
I
have
a
fancy:
little
graphic,
yeah
yeah.
I
can
share
the
graphics
that
kind
of
give
a
visual
outline
of
what
we're
thinking.
B
Can
I
can
I
suggest
that
with
each
of
these
groups,
unless,
unless
it's,
unless
there's
some
other
thing,
that
makes
more
sense
for
that
particular
group
that
the
goal
should
be
the
deliverable
should
be
a
concise
description
in
of
of
what
of
what
that
group
will
be
doing,
and
in
positive
and
positive,
mostly
positive
statements.
What
will
be
you
know
the?
What
will
be
the
the
components
or
the
policy
or
the
processes
involved
like
so
for
this
one
it
would
be.
You
know
this
group
is
this.
B
This
group
is
define
is
seeking
to
define
what
the
the
core
code
elements
are,
and
we
have
found
these.
You
know
these
four
code
code,
elephants
and
then
this
one
a
closely
aligned
one
that
should
be
involved.
B
What
the
what
the
organization
will
be,
and
if
we
do
that,
then
we
will
then
we
will
be
able
to
lock
down
certain
things
and
move
on
to
additional
to
additional
additional
practices.
Instead
of
you
know,
we've
in
the
past
there's
been
some
revisiting
of
things
like
like
the
the
branding,
and
I
think
this
will
help
us
because
anytime
somebody
wants
to
revisit
it.
We
can
go
all
right.
Well,
we
have
this
document
we
agreed
to.
It
is
something
changed.
You
know
and
it'll,
just
let
us
keep
making
positive
forward.
D
I
think
that's
a
good
idea
and
I
honestly
hadn't,
given
it
that
deep
of
thought
at
this
point,
so
I
didn't
write
anything.
I
did
a
a
graphical
flow
chart
of
things
which
I
can
share
immediately.
B
B
B
C
Would
you
be
able
to
to
kind
of
drop
this
into
the
telegram
chat?
Then
I
can.
I
can
pull
it
onto
the
board
right
now
and
then
we
could
just
have
a
brief
look
at
it
and
and
then
move
on
to
the
to
the
next
topic
and
and
then
I
I
would
agree
in
saying
that
it
would
be
great
to
have
like
the
a
kind
of
format
that
that
explains
the
different
components
more
and
and
have
as
like
a
scope
of
what
is
included
in
those.
D
D
But
should
be
working
cool
so
with
this
kind
of
diagram
it
is,
it
is
an
eos
io
network,
essentially
with
the
purple
things
being
public
participants,
so
you
have
the
apis,
the
actual
peer-to-peer
networks
and
the
users
and
their
authority
to
sign
transactions.
D
The
green
is
what
I
kicked
the
conversation
off
as
what
I
would
consider
core
development
and
the
yellow
is
external
development
that
happens
either
by
an
independent
chain.
It's
where
you
add
the
flavor
onto
the
system,
contracts
or
deploy
your
own
contracts
and
in
the
case
of
the
one
on
the
bottom,
it's
external
apis
that
are
not
part
of
the
core
code
base,
but
still
service,
multiple
things
for
the
public.
D
B
This
looks
really
good
to
me
and
I
think
in
in
terms
of
of
how
to
you
know,
create
a
document
like
we
were
talking
about
a
second
ago.
I
think
it's
pretty.
You
know
this
gives
a
clean.
You
know
selection,
that
we
could
turn
into
a
list
that
you
know
the
that
would
be
a
bit
better
format
to
go
through
like
linearly,
so
that
we're
so
that
we're
making
sure
we
hit
everything
and
know
what
everything
is.
But
I
mean
I
think.
C
B
D
Awesome,
I
also
have
another
version
of
this
that
I'll
share
in
telegram
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
go
into
the
board,
but
it
will
give
you
a
sense
as
to
how
the
existing
working
groups
that
are
going
on
right
now
fit
into
these
core
or
into
this
diagram.
C
D
D
Same
structure
same
colors
a
little
bit
of
rearrangement,
so
that
way
I
could
fit
bounding
boxes
around
them,
but
kind
of
outlines
what
you
could
anticipate
coming
out
from
this
initial
research
being
done
by
the
working
groups.
B
C
B
Assess
you
know,
I
don't
think
we
in
an
hour
meeting
we
can.
We
can
dive
down
into
that,
but
you
know
that
would
be
the
stage
we
would
get
when
we'd
have
a
document.
I
mean
this
looks
great
to
me
and
I
can't
think
of
anything
that's
missed,
but
I
can't
also,
I
also
can't
definitively
say
there
aren't.
D
Right
yeah,
I
would
invite
you
to
check
it
out
off
of
the
call
and
if
there
are
concerns
for
anybody,
feel
free
to
bring
them
up.
Otherwise,
I
can
try
to
weave
this
into
some
sort
of
document
that
explains
it
in
a
not
flowchart
way.
I
don't
know
when
exactly
but.
F
Discussions
in
that
channel
too,
just
a
quick
clarification-
the
yeah
sdk
part
covers,
I
guess,
like
yesterday,
ocd
and
the
new
environment,
that
fractalisc
is
releasing
right.
D
C
F
The
building
tools
like
yesterday,
ocdt
or
yeah-
I
forgot
how
this
one
is
called,
but.
C
Okay,
that's
great
so
I
put
it
here
so
to
just
just
make
some
thoughts
and
and
place
it
anywhere.
So,
just
for
my
understanding
in
regards
to
the
detail
grade
of
that
final
document,
will
that
basically
list
all
the
different
sdks
and
and
all
the
components,
or
is
that
more
like
a
general
overview?
C
A
Just
to
put
it
back
in
in
the
context
where
this
came
about
right,
so
when
douglas
shared
two
weeks
ago,
the
purpose
document
there
was
a
section
about
a
core
development
and
it
was
brought
up
on
that
call
by
aaron.
I
believe
it
was
by
aaron
that
we
should
probably
include
api
sdks
in
there
and
that's
really
where
this
started.
A
So
it's
nice
that
now
we
have
a
graph
and
we
can
actually
lay
it
out
and
visually,
but
just
to
put
it
back
in
context
is
just
to
ensure
that
apis
are
being
captured
there.
That's
what
was
being
proposed.
That's
why
the
subgroup
was
formed
in
the
subgroup.
There
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
resistance
to
having
the
apis
included,
and
so
that's
the
idea
is.
A
Do
we
include
the
api
sdk
side
of
things
in
in
the
development
side
of
things,
and
I'm
not
hearing
any
opposition
to
that,
so
it's
great
to
then
be
able
to
lay
it
out,
but
that's
where
it
started.
It
was
really
all
that
was
because
originally
we
were
only
talking
about
node
os.
A
We
were
talking
about
maybe
system
contracts
like
the
the
system,
contracts
that
we
all
share
and
then
aaron
just
wanted
to
bring
forward
that.
We
should
probably
also
increase
and
aaron
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
that
we
should
also
include
sdks
in
there.
That's
that's
really
where
this
conversation
kicked
off.
Yeah.
C
Yeah,
if
that's,
if
that's
fully
sufficient,
then
then
it's
great,
I
mean
everybody
knows
what
this
includes
in
general.
So
so
from
that
perspective,
we
probably
don't
have
to
outline
it
in
more
detail.
I
just
wanted
to
kind
of
have
an
understanding
of
what
the
detail
grade
of
those
decrements
have
to
be,
because,
obviously,
if,
if
aaron
and
the
team
need
to
list
all
of
them,
then
they
they
probably
have
like
a
couple
of
months
of
work.
A
A
D
And
I
think
the
document
that
we're
talking
about
to
supplement
this
flowchart
could
have
examples
of
each
of
them
like
here
is
we're
talking
about
client,
sdk
and
now
we're
talking
about
eos,
js
and
ual,
like
I
could
list
those
as
examples
in
that
document,
but
going
to
the
comprehensive
level
of
listing
them
all
out
would
take.
D
I
mean
we'd,
be
lifting
parts
out
of
the
working
groups
which
could
be
fine,
but
that
would
take
more
effort.
B
I
think
I
think
what
what's
happening
here
is
that
there's
a
definition
of
the
scope
of
of
what
is
what
do?
Are
we
calling
core
development
is
in
one
in
one
interpretation,
it
would
simply
be
you
know
what
all
it
is
is
eosio
code.
What
weird?
What
what's
happening
here,
I
think
and
and-
and
I
agree
with-
is
that
we
are
saying
okay,
you
know
what
it's
it's,
it's,
not
that
very
narrow
definition.
B
It's
one
bubble
out
one
layer
out
from
that
where,
where
we're
saying
it's
also
the
tools
for
you
know
maintaining
a
you
know,
common
sense
of
tools
for
for
being
able
to
maintain
and-
and
you
know,
develop
things
develop.
You
know
software
that
uses
that
uses
the
the
sorry
the
the
chains
so,
and
I
think
that's
good,
and
I
think
that's
why
the
question
about
where
the
the
ci
cd
is.
Is
you
know
why
we're
trying?
I
mean
where
that
falls?
What
we're
really
doing
is
saying
what?
B
Where
is
our
scope
right?
Where,
where
where
do
we
say?
Okay,
this
is
this?
Is
our
barrier
and
inside
this
we're
going
to
maintain
all
these
things
so
in
in
putting
together
that
document?
If
you
can,
if
you
can
find
a
way,
you
know
to
define
that
so
that
it
would
kind
of
becomes
a
mission
statement
for
for
this
aspect
of
the
of
the
organization.
A
And
where
I
think,
there's
there's
value
as
well
and
kind
of
where
this
stems
off
as
well.
Was
that
arguably
block
one
did
not
include
that
in
what
they
were
supporting
or
maintaining
and
pushing
out,
and
so
they
pushed
out
certain
aspects
and
then
never
maintained
them.
So
what
we
would
be
doing
would
be
improving
the
system
that
we've
had
over
the
last
couple
of
years,
where
sdks,
weren't
necessarily
supported
at
the
highest
level.
A
B
Yeah
and
that's
been,
that
was
a
that
was
very
missing
right.
So
I
think
that,
as
we've
said
before,
the
goal
is
not
to
replicate
anything
that
went
before
it's
just
to
it's
just
to
make
the
best
organization
as
we
define
it.
So
I
would
support
that.
A
B
I
mean
yeah,
it
is
taking
on
more,
but
at
the
same
time
we
have
to
think
about
what
our
real
goal
is,
which
is
to
help
this
help
this
protocol
flourish-
and
you
know
we
have
a
pretty
good,
pretty
good
evidence
that
not
including
these
things,
you
know
in
a
regularly
updated
way
is,
is
not
conducive
to
that.
You
know
like
different
ver,
you
know
versions
of
the
cdt
and
things
like
that.
B
There's
there's
been
a
lot
of
problems
and
I
think
if
we,
if
we
bring
that
in
it,
helps
us
in
the
overall
mission
of
making
sure
that
this
is
user-friendly,
developer-friendly
stuff
and
then
there's
not
some
big
questions
about
you
know
when,
when
the
the
external
you
know,
components
that
are
necessary,
but
not
at
the
very
center
of
the
of
the
the
project
are
going
to
be
maintained.
Otherwise,.
E
There's
also
without
that,
there's
also
like
more
who's.
Maintaining
these
there's
also
features
that,
like
kind
of
where
there's
dependencies
and
they
have
to
release
and
lock,
step
and
track,
which
version
is
compatible
with
which
version
right
like
so
to
not
include
these,
would
mean
there's
a
bunch
of
coordination
and
yeah.
You.
B
B
With
with
the
with
the
compiler
right
so
yeah,
I
think
that
I
agree
jesse.
C
So
so
concluding
this
is
that
in
general
we
all
agree
that
making
this
full
documentation
is
probably
far
too
much
work.
So
the
focus
of
the
of
the
target
document
is
to
to
back
up
our
mission
statement
and
support
the
part,
the
purpose
of
the
working
group
and
define
exactly
what
we're
doing,
and
this
can
be
more
general
than
outlining
each
and
every
single
like
screw
and
and
not
in
in
the
protocol.
C
So
so
I
think,
if
we
kind
of
take
this
as
a
guideline
for
you
aaron,
I
think
it
should
be
possible
kind
of
to
find
find
like
a
middle
way
in
documenting
this,
as
opposed
to
write
a
full
documentation.
B
Yep
yeah
and
then
for
other
groups.
Looking
at
this
and
creating
their
own
document,
I
think
that's
a
probably
a
good,
a
a
good
direction
as
well,
not
to
necessarily
be
exhaustive
in
every
type
of
thing
that
could
be
listed,
but
but
helping
giving
us
enough
information.
The
people
who
weren't
in
those
discussions
to
to
understand
what
was
accomplished
there
and
and
and
agreed
to
I
don't.
I
don't
think
we
have
to.
We
have
to
enumerate
every
possible
every
possible.
You
know
api
and
everything.
We
just
need
a
good
definition.
I
Yeah,
this
is
rick
from
voice,
just
a
comment
that
I'd
add
to
is
you
know
that
this
document
scopes
what's
going
to
be
in
in
core
and
and
should
give
people
a
way
of
contributing
to
that
so.
I
There
needs
to
be
a
process
for
establishing
what
the
preferred
or
recommended
apis
libraries,
components
and
so
on
are
whether
they're
implemented
and
provided
by
a
core
team
or
whether
they're
contributed
elsewhere,
because
things
will
flourish
a
lot
more.
If
people
know
where
to
go
to
get
the
standard
versions
of
things
and
they
can
delineate
between
what
is
standard
and
what
is
not.
I
And
what
is
opportunity
for
contribution
the
thing
that
will
really
kill
things
is
when
you
don't
know
where
to
go,
and
you
waste
a
lot
of
time
going
and
picking
up
what
turns
out
to
be
the
wrong
thing.
B
Mean
that's
a
great
comment.
I
think
that
the
the
what
we've
laid
out
in
the
in
the
other
document
is
that
maintaining
maintaining
you
know,
repositories
of
of
binaries
and
and
and
selected
version
and
official
versions
is
one
is
within
the
scope
of
what
this
the
group
we're
trying
to
make
is
going
to
do
right.
So
it
would
be.
B
You
know
it
would
be
responsible
for
making
sure
that
there
is
a
single
core,
eosio
or
whatever
it's
to
be
called
a
set
of
code
and
that
the
people
will
know
what's
official
versus
something
else
by
because
it
will
exist
in
that
code,
and
we
will
be.
We
will
also.
We
will
have
regular
communications
about
roadmap
and
status,
and
things
like
that
more
than
there
were.
You
know
in
previously,
especially
on
the
forward
looking
pieces.
B
So
so,
if
they're,
if
we're
expecting
a
update,
you
know
a
big
update
to
an
sdk
or
something
people
will
know
about
that
in
advance
that
it's
that
it's
you
know
expected
in
the
next
in
the
next
release,
so
that
I
think
that
all
that
works
together
to
make
sure
that
there's
a
cohesive
set
of
of
d
of
core
core
development
and
documents
and
whatnot
that
are
that
are
seen
as
official.
C
Yeah,
okay,
so
so
I
I
put
this
in
here
as
far
as
the
comment,
thank
you
very
much
rick
on.
If
we
can
take
this
as
a
guide
and
say
well,
we
outline
in
the
document
how
this
these
things
should
be
stored
in
in
the
future,
so
they're
easily
accessible,
and
there
is
this
differentiation
between
core
and
external
while
we're
doing
the
definition
of
core.
So
I
think
that's
a
very
good
comment
and
valuable.
D
D
C
Okay,
great
so
then,
next
point
on
the
agenda
was
the
proposal
for
funding
and
budgets.
These
has
the
team
been
able
to
get
this
together
and,
and
is
there
something
that
you
can
share
with
the
group
today.
A
Yes
to
both,
so
the
ux
team
has,
I
guess,
prepared
documents
for
this
and
they've
shared
and
we've
gone
some
back
and
forth.
So
we've
been
meeting
once
a
week
over
the
last
month
or
so
to
go
over
their
proposal,
which
would
then
be
proposed
to
the
rest
of
the
group
we've.
I
guess,
included
a
few
other
variables
in
the
last
week
and
I
I
would
be
comfortable
at
this
point
to
share
something.
The
second
part
of
your
question
is:
will
we
be
sharing
it
today?
The
answer
is
no.
A
So
this
essentially
this
proposal
is,
is
intellectual
property
by
the
ux
team
and
and
noam
is
here
on
the
call,
so
he
can
chime
in
as
well,
but
what
they
would
prefer
doing
is
holding
a
call
in
private
in
camera,
so
non-recorded
to
share
this
information
with
the
with
the
others
before
sharing
it
publicly
right,
because,
essentially.
C
A
Time
to
share,
I
believe
it
is
ready
to
share,
but
we
wouldn't
be
doing
so
in
this
call
today,
right
if
that's
okay,.
F
For
everyone
else,
what
I
would
suggest
is,
I
can
make
a
poll
in
the
telegram
group
and
suggest
a
few
time
slots
where
we
could
schedule
that
other
call,
like
I
said
like
before
we
want
before
we
share
it
with
the
general
public,
I'd
like
to
gather
a
bit
more
feedback
from
you
guys
and
also
engage
your
level
of
interest
in
participating,
and
once
we
get
the
feel
for
that,
then
we
can
have
a
formal
presentation
for
everyone
else
that
is
on
this
call
the
yes,
I
o
plus
call
but
wouldn't
be
able
to
make
it
to
that
other
call,
and
at
that
point
we'll
be
going
for
affordable
sharing
it
with
the
public
as
well.
F
So
if
that's
okay
eve,
I
suggest
we
we
do
that
just
make.
That
poll
suggest
a
few
time
slots
and
try
to
find
a
better
time
for
the.
A
Most
people
yeah
and
just
to
put
it
in
context,
so
I
I
support
that
approach.
To
put
it
in
context.
This
work
had
been
started
by
the
uax
team.
A
Well
before
this
yasayo
plus
group
began,
and
so
this
is,
this
is
actually
intellectual
property
that
they
had
and
that
they
were
going
to
release
by
themselves,
and
I
saw
that
there
was
a
potential
overlap
with
what
we
were
doing
that
could
align
the
financial
incentives
between
the
different
chains
and
that
it
it
could
be
used
as
even
if
the
model
itself
or
the
proposal
itself
isn't
used.
As
is
that
some
of
the
information
that's
contained
within
could
be
used
for
the
purpose
of
determining.
A
If
we
were
to
proceed
in
this
group
and
we
were
to
have
a
shared
treasury
kind
of
what
would
be
the
ratios
between
everybody
who
would
be
sharing
what
or
or
or
providing
what,
and
so
there
was
good
overlap
there.
So
I
think,
even
if
we
ultimately
don't
accept
the
proposal,
as
is
that
the
information
is
quite
valuable,
but
that's
the
context
as
to
why
would
not
be
shared
publicly
at
first.
This
is
something
that
they've
been
working
on
for
quite
some
time
well
before
this
came
about,
is
that
is
that
also
accurate?
A
No
I'm
just
couldn't
say
that
I
said
it
better.
So
thanks.
F
D
A
C
I
personally
think
that
that
it's
fine,
because
as
it
it
is
el
of
them
and
has
been
worked
on
for
a
longer
time,
it's
good.
If
we
share
it
in
a
smaller
group,
I
mean
it's.
It
is
good
that
it's
being
shared
in
a
smaller
group,
so
we
have
access
to
this
and
can
discuss
this
and
can
decide
if
we're
gonna
use
it.
C
It's
it's
in
any
any
way,
far
better
than
one
of
our
meetings,
where
I
personally
mentioned
a
name
that
we
discussed
in
in
a
private
group
which
then
wasn't
private
anymore.
So
so,
and
please
don't
say
the
name
today
is
I'm
I'm
counting.
I
don't
I'm
not
going
to
yo
you're,
of
course,.
A
C
A
Already
so
the
so.
A
To
present
so
this
is,
I
mean
the
what
nomen
and
darren
will
be
presenting.
It's
essentially
a
white
paper.
There's
there's
algorithms,
there's
mathematical
formulas
behind
it.
It's
it's
substantive.
It's
it's!
It's
a
few
documents
with
a
lot
of
content
behind
it.
It's
not
just
a
not
just
a
one-pager
with
bullet
points.
C
Okay,
then
then
great
to
get
you
on
then
it
would
be
great
if
you
could
use
telegram
to
coordinate
that
meeting.
If
you
need
any
help.
Just
let
me
know
please
all
right
thanks
excellent,
so
we've
got
this
then.
In
regards
of
the
comments
to
and
enrichment
of
the
oap
document,
I
have
seen
various
comments
from
rami,
which
most
of
them
I
pulled
over
into
the
document.
I
have
to
be
honest.
C
I
didn't
find
a
way
to
kind
of
accept
the
changes
in
google
docs,
so
I
I
had
to
put
it
into
a
word
document
again.
Sorry
for
that,
and
I
put
it
into
the
mirror
board.
I
I
will
share
the
word
document
in
telegram
later
so,
but
generally
most
of
the
comments
that
that
rami
made,
I
thought
they
were
one
reflecting
everything
we
discussed
and
and
two
I
personally
would
say
they.
C
They
did
improve
the
document
to
a
large
extent,
so
so
I've
basically
pulled
them
into
inter
here
into
this
working
document,
but
I
will
share
the
the
word
document
in
on
telegram,
so
you
all
have
access
to
this
apart
from
rami.
I've.
Seen
no
further
comments,
so
is
there
anybody
that
that
would
would
ask
for
more
time
to
to
comment
or
add
something
to
that
document?
C
Obviously,
except
those
parts
where
we
have
working
groups
still
still
on,
but
is
there
anybody
that
still
wants
to
look
at
that?
Or
can
we
basically
agree
on
this
document
next
week
when
you
had
a
chance
to
look
at
it?
C
G
C
Yes,
except
obviously
those
components
where
we
have
like
the
funding
proposal
that
needs
to
needs
to
be
added
and
the
the
core
core
discussions,
but
I
think
with
some
amendments
based
on
the
documents
that
have
been
provided
by
aaron
and
and
the
work
group,
I
think
we
we
could
vote
on.
Most
of
it,
we
haven't
discussed
the
the
further
set
up
of
of
like
resources,
so
I
would
say
we
we
vote
for
part
one
which
is
the
the
overall
statement
of
purpose
next
week.
C
A
Yeah,
no,
I
can
no.
Actually
the
30
second
comment
was
the
branding,
but
we
could,
but
we
can
move
to
the
legal
entity
group
because
I
was
I
I've
been
in
that
group
there's
nothing
to
report
today
or
to
present
today.
A
Sorry
in
order
to
report
today,
though,
eden
on
eos
commissioned
a
legal
opinion
letter
from
a
canadian
law
firm
that
presented
them
with
a
few
options
of
what
setting
up
an
entity
could
look
like
and
the
advantages
the
pros,
the
cons,
etc,
and
I've
been
in
communication
with
with
aaron
to
try
and
secure
that
document,
so
that
that
would
be
the
document
that
we
would
make
public
to
this
group.
A
That
would
inform
here
are
various
options
that
we
have
so
that
we
can
decide
to
proceed
with
a
recommendation
so
that
we
can
decide
to
proceed
with
with
one
of
them.
That's
the
current
approach.
Otherwise
the
group
has
not
really
come
up
with
anything
outside
of
the
standard.
I
guess
options
out
there.
A
C
A
So
well
yeah
prior
to
sharing,
I
guess
in
the
next
call
or
depending
on
when
we
can
see
when
we
can
obtain
that
document.
So
this
is
the
enf
that
that
essentially
commissioned
this
or
eden
that
commissioned
it,
but
enf
that
paid
for
it.
So
we
just
need
to
circle
back
to
make
sure
that
we
can
actually
make
it
public
because
it's
a
legal
opinion,
but
it
shouldn't
be
an
issue
prior
to
presenting
it.
A
I
would
like
to
share
it
with
the
people
in
the
group,
so
right
now
in
the
legal
group
there's
proton
representation
as
well
as
fio
theo
representation,
and
so
there's
three
people
there's
arena
and
david
as
well
as
myself,
so
I'd
wanna
arenas
are
I
r,
I
n
a
I
r,
I
n
a
I
believe,
she's
she's
cfo
at
middle
pay
and
then
there's
david
gold
from
theo
yeah.
A
I
just
want
to
share
it
with
them,
spur
any
conversation
there
and
then,
if
all
is
good,
we
should
be
able
to
present
either
next
week
or
the
following
week.
C
Okay,
excellent
great
so
so
we
have
proton
sorted
out
rami.
Did
you
have
a
chance
to
validate
this
for
ultra
because.
C
A
Essentially,
nobody
so
far
has
given
any
preference.
So
that's
kind
of
the
challenge
with
this
file
is.
Nobody
particularly
cares
at
this
point.
H
A
Of
course,
yeah
so
good
that
you
bring
those
two
up,
so
those
are
two
of
the
options
and
the
four
options.
So
there's
there's
two
different
components:
one
is
what
type
of
entity
and
the
other
one
is.
Where
should
that
entity
be
registered
so
in
terms
of
types
of
entity?
A
I
have
a
particular
bias.
I
mean
I
just
set
up
the
the
the
enf
as
a
not-for-profit
non-soliciting
corporation
in
canada,
so
I'm
well
aware
of
how
that
works,
and
essentially
what
we're
trying
to
create
here
with
eosioplus
seems
like
it
would
be
a
right
fit,
but
that
that
also
has
some
disadvantages
and
so
it'll
be
interesting.
What
david
and
irina
think,
but
they
didn't
really
have
any
input
on
that,
because
nobody
other
than
if
you've
had
experience
with
a
particular
type
of
entity
in
a
particular
jurisdiction.
A
A
What
do
you
think?
Do
you
believe
that
you'd
be
able
to
at
least
share
that
doc?
I
mean
you
can
share
me.
The
document
essentially
paid
for
it
so
right
right,
but
but
I
would
still
want
to
get
your
because
it's
it
was
commissioned
by
eden.
So
I
would
want
the
the
six
chief
delegates
to
be
okay
with
sharing
it
with
us,
and
I
think.
D
We
had
a
conversation
about
it
last
week
and
we,
the
group
itself,
seems
absolutely
willing
to
share
it's
just
a
matter
of
making
sure
that
it
was
there,
isn't
anything
that
shouldn't
be
shared,
because
that
wasn't
what
the
purpose
of
it
being
written
was.
So
I
think
it's
more
just
double.
Checking
that,
like
okay
law
firm,
if
we're
going
to
make
this
a
little
bit
more
public,
do
we
need
to
remove
anything?
Are
there
like.
A
I
don't
know
just
double
checking.
Is
that
something
you
think
is
realistic
for
you
to
be
able
to
get
the
ask
in
even
just
send
off
a
quick
email
today
or
tomorrow
they
give
you
the
okay
and
we
would
be
in
a
position
to
be.
I
would
be
in
a
position
to
be
able
to
propose
present
next
week,
or
is
that
not
realistic?
D
C
That's
good,
okay,
so
and
for
the
proposal
and
funding
budgets,
we
should
aim
to
have
the
meeting
the
the
internal
meeting
in
the
following
week,
if
that's
possible,
because
that's
obviously
a
key
component
here.
So
so
I
I
also
put
that
for
next
week,
knowing
that
we're
not
having
an
official
meeting
next
week
on
thursday,
but
try
to
fit
this
in
in
between.
A
The
potential
that
one
is
quite
heavy,
I
think
that
people
will
will
need
some
time
to
digest
and
then
the
chains
will
need
to
go
back
to
their
respective
communities.
A
Okay,
I
guess
we
would
be
able
to
potentially
present
it,
but
I'm
not
sure
it's
quite
heavy
okay,
then
then
I'll
move
it
to
this.
Definitely
no
decision
would
be
made
in.
I
would
think
that
to
make
a
decision
on
this
is
going
to
take
a
while.
C
Okay,
excellent,
then
I
moved
the
brand
contract
signature
already
to
the
right
to
done.
You
wanted
to
have
your
30
seconds
eve.
A
A
So
that
everybody
knows
the
contract
was,
it
is
a
total
of
120
000,
60
000
to
be
paid
up
front,
hopefully
it'll
be
paid
today
and
then
sixty
thousand
dollars
to
be
paid
upon
completion,
so
that
takes
up
120
out
of
the
250
000
that
we
had
allocated
for
this
group.
So
just
so
that
everybody's
aware
and
the
completion
time
is
12
weeks
from
beginning
of
of
start,
assuming
that
they
haven't
started,
and
they
just
start
today.
That
means
they.
A
If
you
want
to
put
a
due
date
on
the
branding
because
I
saw
it
was
in,
there
was
a
due
date
like
february
24th
in
here
somewhere.
The
due
date
would
fall
roughly
may
12th
so
beginning
of
may
for
having,
I
guess
it
finished
now.
I
would
imagine
that,
prior
to
that,
justin
will
be
able
to
share
certain
things.
He'll
be
able
to
make
a
decision.
He'll
he'll
have
he'll,
be
empowered
to
be
able
to
see
the
different
options,
but
by
may
12th
give
or
take.
A
C
Yeah,
so
assuming,
though,
that
the
work,
the
the
smaller
work
group
here,
will
obviously
meet
earlier
to
to
discuss
the
proposals
and
and
and
and
see
the
first
drafts
and
that
that
are
going
on,
and
this
is
by
any
means.
A
C
Exactly
so
so
this
this
will
be
the
first
time
we
we're
going
to
show
it
in
this
big
meeting
is
obviously
when
it's
done
and
decided
and
and
then
we
might
have
like
an
unofficial
meeting
or
non-public
meeting
with
all
all
voting
participants
to
do
the
voting
before
we
presented
in
this
bigger
meeting.
C
Okay,
so
then,
to
just
to
the
backlog,
we
have
six
minutes
to
the
backlog.
Rick,
I'm
terribly
sorry.
We
missed
each
other
I'll,
come
back
to
you
tomorrow
morning
and
and
propose
some
some
dates.
Rick
had
to
drop,
oh
yeah,
I
think
20
minutes
or
so.
C
Okay,
so
yeah,
so
I
still
have
this
open
topic.
Then
governance
model.
We
discussed
that
this
obviously
is
waiting
for
the
budget
discussions
then
rami
added-
and
there
was
also
were
also
comments-
is
like
development
of
initial
road
map
and
adoption
of
the
existing
usa
or
mandela
roadmap.
Probably
if
there
is
one
this
might
move
together
with
with
the
blue
paper,
so
so
I
would
probably
move
it
down
here.
C
Then
douglas
you
wanted
to
forward
legal
contact
data
to
the
legal
entity
group.
I
just
wanted
to
check
that
that
you
had
a
chance
to
do
that.
C
You
had
your
legal
autonomy
that
you
wanted
to
forward.
Oh.
B
Just
oh
just
yeah,
the
okay,
I
see
just
the
contact
for
the
yes.
I
will
do
that
excellent,
so
I
may
have
already
done
it
I'll
check,
but
if
not
I'll
do
it
excellent.
C
Rami,
did
you
have
any
luck
with
the
mythical
games?
Did
they
come
back
to
you.
C
Okay,
so
then
I
keep
it
in
the
backlog,
so
setup,
jira,
github
integration-
we
haven't
started
this.
I
think
it's
not
yet
the
time
to
do
it.
So
I
I
still
keep
it
in
the
backlog.
C
We
have
done
definition
of
roles
and
hiring
process
for
those
recommendations
or
that
initial
proposal,
that's
in
in
the
document,
so
we
obviously
do
this
at
a
later
stage.
Workgroup
alignment
wallet
sdk.
I
think
I
I
would
like
to
put
this
on
the
agenda
for
next
week,
so
we
can
kind
of
start
the
discussions.
If
there's
no
objections
to
this.
C
A
The
reason
why
I
was
asking
it
because
I
would
imagine
that
that's
referring
to
a
lot
of
the
work
that
will
likely
be
found
in
the
wallet
plus
blue
paper,
the
one
plus
blue
paper
tentatively
and
we're
far
out,
but
will
be
coming
out
on
or
around
march
10th,
which
is
in
three
weeks
from
today,
so
it
might
be
too
early
if,
if
again
randy,
I
guess
rand
is
not
here.
Aaron
is
here.
A
D
It's
all
of
the
papers,
at
least
that's
my
assumption,
and
that
day
next
week
on,
the
24th
is
when
api
plus
will
likely
come
out,
so
our
meeting
will
probably
be
even
before
that's
released.
I
assume
so.
A
A
A
One
no,
the
api
plus
api
plus,
is
let's
say
you
can
write
february
25th.
A
And
tentatively,
the
wallet
plus
is,
let's
say,
tentative
march
10th
on
or
around
that
date.
It's
I
mean
we're
three
weeks
ahead,
but
yeah,
so
api
plus
currently
is
in
translation.
So
the
pending
is
the
translation
and
every
paper
is
very
different,
so
we're
going
off
of
rest
at
the
rough
estimates
of
what
we've
gone
through
with
core
plus
and
audit
plus
but
they're
all
very
different.
Okay.
So
that's
why
I
say
tentatively.
C
Okay,
great
good,
then
I'll
I'll
I'll
keep
this
here
until
we
have
those
blue
papers
distributed
and
and
then
this
will
might
clear
a
lot
of
things
anyway,
we
had
a
comment
on
communication
strategy
and
updates.
This
is
gen
so
like
how
the
work
group
would
communicate
any
updates
into
the
community,
so
obviously,
that's
far
far
in
the
future
than
a
budget
assignment
initial,
that's
obviously
that
belongs
to
the
the
rest
of
the
budget.
C
So
if
we
have
like
120k
spent,
we
have
like
130k,
probably
minus
the
the
cost
that
was
assigned
to
the
eden
legal
checks
for
the
answer.
No,
the
even
legal.
A
Checks
will
be
outside
of
the
scope.
So
don't
worry
about
that
part
that
is
in
so
so
that
everybody
else
knows
the
approach
of
the
enf
just
taking
on
the
cost
itself
or
whatever
we
do
if
there's
anything
similar
going
forward.
It's
quite
easy.
So
I'm
comfortable
that
with
that,
if
that's
how
the
the
current
group
wants
to
go,
I
realize
that
that
might
not
be
possible
because
some
of
the
costs
might
not
be
a
direct
cost.
But
if
that's
the
case,
that's
good
for
now.
C
Okay,
good,
so
that's
then
the
backlog
is
there
anything
that
that
you
would
like
to
add
to
next
week's
agenda.
In
addition
to
those
topics
that
that
belong,
there.
C
Right
then,
if
that's
not
the
case,
then
it's
exactly
nine.
This
is
great,
I'm
german,
so
so
we
got
it
in
time.
So
if
there's
no
additional
comment,
it's
great.
We,
we
had
a
good
meeting
today
and
hope
you
all
stay
healthy
and
safe.