►
From YouTube: SourceCred & the CredSperiment with Dandelion Mané
Description
SourceCred is an algorithmic social system for valuing contributions, so that decentralized projects can pay their contributors. Since last June, we've been dogfooding the system and paying all SourceCred contributors according to their cred. This talk will share how the system works, and the results from our "CredSperiment".
Presented by Dandelion Mané (SourceCred).
Originally recorded May 4-6th, 2020 at Ready Layer One.
Want to be a part of the next event?
Follow @ReadyLayerOne https://twitter.com/readylayerone on Twitter for updates!
Sign up to receive e-mail updates: www.readylayer.one
A
Yeah,
so
in
a
minute
before
we
start
I
can
tell
you,
there's
a
lot
Vinson
going
on
in
the
world
of
horse
crap
lately,
especially
on
the
community
side.
It's
been
really
really
really
growing.
We've
been
seeing
a
lot
of
people
starting
to
contribute
their
own
ideas
and
perspectives,
help
making
the
system
clearer.
A
Alright,
let's
get
this
show
on
the
road.
I'll
just
arrange
my
windows
and
person,
so
I'm
dandelion
I'm,
the
TBD
or
temporary,
benevolent
decorative
circuit
I
used
a
them
pronouns,
and
here
I'm,
going
to
give
you
an
overview
of
what's
happening
in
source
cred.
So
start
what
is
source
cred,
it's
a
tool
for
communities
to
measure
and
reward
value
creation.
A
Now,
to
start,
let's
ask
like
why:
why
does
that?
Even
matter,
why
is
this
something
we're
interested
in
so
I'm
gonna
pause
it
to
you
that
we
as
a
world
are
really
bad
at
measuring
value.
If
we
have
a
human
organization,
we've
got
a
lot
of
people
contributing
to
it,
maybe
working
on
a
lot
of
different
projects.
We
have
a
lot
of
difficulty
figuring
out
which
of
those
projects
are
actually
important,
which
of
those
people
are
actually
important
to
the
projects,
and
we
compensate
for
that
in
a
lot
of
bad
ways.
A
We've
got
credentialism,
so
we
judge
people
based
on
their
degrees
or
what
university
they
attended,
because
we
don't
really
feel
like.
We
have
a
good
idea,
good
way
of
figuring
out
whether
they're
gonna
add
value.
So
we
try
to
hope
that
if
they
went
to
a
fancy
school
that
aligned
value,
we
do
weird
stuff.
Like
whiteboard
interviews,
for
you
know,
we
try
to
assess
what
we
pay
this
person,
you
know
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
a
year
based
on
how
well
they
can
solve
like
fake
coding
problems
in
a
45
minute
stress
test.
A
We've
got
lots
of
bureaucracy
to
to
manage
things
and
try
to
like
control.
What
people
are
doing.
You
know
watch
make
sure
that
they're
showing
up
and
sitting
at
their
desk
40
hours
a
week,
because
we
hope
that,
if
they're
sitting
at
their
desk
that
they're
going
to
add
a
lot
of
value,
we
create
a
lot
of
hierarchy.
You
know:
we've
got
a
lot
of
like
Michael
Scott's
from
the
office
whose
job
it
is
to
supposedly
make
sure
other
people
are
on
track
and
adding
value
and
in
particular
in
crypto
communities.
A
We
just
really
need
a
new
way
to
reward
people
and
to
measure
whether
they're,
adding
value,
because
in
the
crypto
community,
you
can't
have
all
this
centralization.
You
can't
have
credentialism
if
you
just
have
people
showing
up
from
the
internet
and
trying
to
get
stuff
done.
That's
why
we're
building
source
cred
now
the
big
question
is
how
to
do
it
now,
really
naive
approach
that
I've
seen
a
couple
people
trying
to
take
is
to
try
to
count
contributions
and
I.
Think,
oh,
you
know.
A
If
we
can
count
how
much
people
are
doing,
then
we'll
know
how
much
value
they
added
and
you
can
see.
That's
not
the
case.
If
you
look
at
this
example,
where
we've
got
Sir
to
form
threads,
the
one
on
the
left
and
I
wish
that
there
was
a
way
for
me
to
make
my
mouse.
Here's
a
pointer,
the
one
on
the
left.
A
A
So
in
this
new
example,
we
have
a
graph
where
the
forum
posts
and
the
reply
actually
went
somewhere,
because
that
reply
led
to
a
future
proposal,
because
maybe
this
forum
post
was
discussing
like
and
her
way
to
improve
the
system,
and
this
feature
of
proposal
then
attracted
the
Badger
and
the
Badger
wrote
a
pull
request
which
connected
the
feature
proposal
and
this
pull
request
longer.
The
future
proposal
made
a
future.
It
made
something
that
actually
like
existed
for
this
community
and
so
now.
A
The
way
the
scores
are
work
is
that
it
won't
just
be
based
on
the
raw
activity,
but
it'll
be
based
on
how
that
activity
was
connected
to
work,
the
community,
valued,
and
so
maybe
the
community
says.
Well,
we
really
value
this
feature,
so
we're
going
to
give
it
a
score
of
10
and
then
this
score
propagates
outward
across
these
connections.
So
the
pull
request
gets
a
score
of
5.
A
The
people
writing
useful,
pull
requests
and
the
people
writing,
like
other
otherwise
can't
read
in
the
discussion,
whereas
leave
or
just
engaging
in
flame
wars
over
here
sure
they
made
a
lot
of
activity,
but
it
never
connected
to
something
that
the
community
valued
and
for
that
reason
it
doesn't
earn
any
cred.
For
those
of
you,
RI
all
grew
thickly
minded
you'd
be
interested
to
know.
This
is
actually
using
a
modified
version
of
the
PageRank
algorithm.
So
this
was
an
algorithm,
those
developed
by
Google
for
ranking
web
pages
based
on
the
links
between
pages.
A
But
in
this
case
we
are
ranking
contributions
based
on
the
connections
between
contributions,
so
you
can
think
of
cred
as
a
proof
of
contribution
anything
you
earn
cred
it's
because
you
made
some
contribution
that
the
community
valued
and
it's
community
specific
and
community
controlled.
So
this
isn't
some
global
system
that
source
cred
is
like
putting
turning
on
for
you
and
then
admittance
string
for
you.
It's
just
an
open
source
tool
that
anyone
can
activate
and
anyone
can
configure
for
their
own
community
and
we'll
get
a
bit
into
that
later.
A
It
gets
all
of
its
data
from
plugins.
So
far
we
have
a
github
plug-in
a
discourse
plug-in
a
discord
plug-in
for
chat
and
an
initiatives
plugin
and
the
initiatives.
Plugin
is
particularly
interesting
because
that
one
allows
you,
as
a
community,
to
define
areas
of
work
that
you
thought
were
important.
That
may
or
may
not
actually
be
visible
in
github
or
discourse.
So
going
back
to
this
example
from
this
example
graph
here,
a
lot
of
this
stuff
would
just
come
from
github
or
discourse,
so
maybe
the
forum
posts
were
written
on
discourse.
A
A
A
If
you're
doing,
work
that
you
know
is
important
and
is
know,
is
going
to
be
useful
in
the
long
run,
you
can
really
just
focus
on
doing
the
work
and
knowing
that
over
time,
as
people
start
to
build
on
it,
you'll
then
get
the
cred
that
you've
just
learned
and
it
has
to
be
not
transferable
in
part.
Because
of
this
retroactively,
the
updating
bit,
you
know
it
would
be
weird
if
I
could
send
you
my
hundred
cred
and
then
it
turns
out.
A
We
do
a
weight
change
and
now
I
have
only
70
crowds
like
that's,
not
really
property.
You
want
in
something
you're
transferring
and
conceptually
you
know.
If
you
are
the
author
of
something
you
can't,
you
can't
sell
the
fact
that
you
are
the
author
of
it.
That's
that's
a
direct
relationship
to
you.
It's
not
something
that
you
own
and
finally,
cred
is
quite
sensitive
to
parameter
choices.
So
this
isn't
some
sort
of
magical
algorithm
that
is
going
to
come
and
tell
you
exactly
what
everyone
in
your
community
is
worth.
A
Rather
it's
a
tool
that
your
community
is
going
to
be
configuring
and
choosing
how
to
configure
it.
Choosing
what
things
get
valued
and
choosing
how
cred
flows
on
the
graph
is
up
to
your
community
and
it
will
be
a
political
process
now
we
said
we
wanted
to
both
measure
and
reward
value.
The
measurement
angle
is
taken
care
of
by
cred,
but
to
reward
we
needed
another
tool
because,
as
I
mentioned,
the
cred
is
not
transferable,
but
ultimately
we
want
things
that
are
transferable.
A
A
Supporting
the
project
and
much
like
red
grain
is
totally
project
specific,
so
soar
spreads.
Grain
would
be
a
totally
different
token
from
like
maker,
Dow
grain
or
metagame
grain,
or
any
other
community
screen
and
the
real
kick
of
grain.
The
real
thing
that
makes
it's
interesting
is
that
it
enables
boosting.
So
let
me
explain
what
boosting
means.
A
Boosting
will
allow
you
to
change
that
situation
to
get
things
unstuck.
Let's
imagine
that
we've
got
this
owl,
who
has
a
lot
of
grandmas,
then
watching
the
situation
and
the
owl
spends
grain
to
create
a
boost
for
the
now.
The
way
boosting
works
is
you
spend
grain
to
create
new
cred
and
in
this
case,
we've
created
cred
on
the
future
proposal.
So
now
this
is.
This.
Is
the
owl
putting
their
skin
in
the
game
to
say?
A
Yes,
I
believe
this
feature
is
important
and
I'm
willing
to
kind
of
spend
my
spare
resources
in
order
to
make
sure
we
incentivize
it,
and
so
now
the
feature
proposal
is
worth
five
cred.
You
know
some
of
that
flows
to
the
reply
in
the
forum
post
and
because
the
feature
proposal
is
now
worth
cred.
The
badger
can
feel
more
confident
knowing
that
if
the
badger
works
on
this,
the
badger
will
get
rewarded
with
cred,
because
there's
already
cred
on
this
feature
proposal.
A
So
now
we've
got
the
situation
immediately
before
kind
of
where
the
features
just
been
built
and
now
the
features
built-
let's
say
indie
that
turns
out
to
be
very
useful
to
the
community.
So
it
gets
this
big
score
of
10
cred
and
now.
One
thing
we
note
is
that
you
know
everyone's
got
a
lot
of
cred
the
butterfly
the
turtle,
the
Badger
all
actually
have
more
cred
than
they
would
have
before
the
boost.
A
But
the
interesting
thing
is
that
the
owl
has
also
gotten
cred,
because
the
owl
boosted
a
feature
proposal
that
wound
up
receiving
a
lot
more
cred
than
just
what
it
got
from
the
Owls
boost
and
so
boosting
actually
entitles
you
to
receive
a
fraction
of
the
cred
that
the
things
that
you
boost
go
on
to
her
and
because
the
Owls
made
a
good
boost.
You
know
they
spent
some
grain,
but
they
got
cred
and
that
cred
is
going
to
cause
them
to
get
more
grain.
A
So
it's
kind
of
a
positive
feedback
cycle
where,
if
you're
good
at
boosting,
then
you're
going
to
wind
up
with
more
resources.
So
we
can
see
the
properties
are
boosting
here,
one.
It
changes
the
incentives
in
the
project.
It
allows
you
to
kind
of
unilaterally
say
like
I
think
this
feature
is
important.
I
think
that,
like
pull
request
is
important.
I
really
want
this
bug.
Fish
I
really
want
this
norm
upheld
and
it
will
incentivize
other
people
to
work
with
you
and
accomplishing
that,
and
it
does
that
in
a
decentralized
way.
A
You
don't
need
to
ask
anyone
for
permission.
You
don't
need
to
persuade
a
manager,
you
don't
even
need
to
get
people
to
go
on
a
vote.
If
you've
got
the
grain,
then
you
can
boost
something
and
then
effective,
boosters
are
going
to
earn
cred
and
that
credit
is
going
to
give
them
more
grain
and
that
will
enable
them
to
get
more
boosts.
So
you
can
kind
of
think
of
this
as
a
way
of
implementing
decentralized
management
within
a
community.
A
Now,
it's
all
really
good
to
kind
of
invent
these
theoretical
crypto
economic
systems
and
in
my
mind
you
don't
really
know
whether
it's
going
to
work
at
all
or
just
fall
apart
in
the
face
of
real
behavior
and
real
incentives
until
you've
dog
through
it.
So
for
the
past
eight
months
or
so,
we've
been
dog
fooding
sore
scrub
in
a
process
called
the
creds
battement.
So
this
is
what
source
credits
actual
cred
looks
like
you
can
see.
A
So
here's
the
grain
balances
now
and
you
can
see-
we've
actually
distributed
about
four
hundred
thousand
dollars
worth
of
grain
over
the
eight
months
and
let's
take
a
look
at
a
lessons
learned.
So
the
first
I
was
really
concerned
about
gaming
and
when
we
started
the
credit
Spearmint,
we
actually
started
it
really
cautiously.
We
started
by
putting
out
only
like
five
hundred
dollars.
A
week
because
I
thought
well,
people
will
trolls
from
the
FN
just
show
up
and
start
spamming
the
forum's
like
source
cred.
A
You
know
we
want
to
be
very
robust
to
gaming
in
the
long
term,
but
the
short
term.
It's
still
very
much
an
alpha
quality
system
with
a
lot
of
rough
edges,
but
I
was
pleased
to
see
in
practice.
There
really
wasn't
any
gaming
and
I
think
this
really
speaks
to
the
power
of
communities.
Source
credit
is
a
community
where
people
who
are
involved
in
it
are
really
engaged
with
the
project
with
each
other,
and
nobody
wants
to
be
cheating
or
screwing
over
the
people
in
their
community
and
I
know.
This
will
become
harder.
A
A
They
know
that
they'll
wind
up
getting
rewarded
in
the
long
term
weight
changes.
Those
can
be
politically
complicated,
going
back
a
slide.
This
is
the
the
weight
configuration
page
for
our
source,
cred
instance,
and,
as
you
can
see,
there's
just
a
lot
of
dials
here.
There's,
for
example,
these
node
weights
determine
how
you
cred
gets
created
based
on
activity
in
the
project.
So
right
now
we
are
still
minting
cred,
for
example,
on
every
pull
request
and
every
review,
and
then
these
edge
weights
determine
how
cred
flows
between
different
actions
and
a
couple
times.
A
But
you
know
it
is
important
that
people
see
a
way
to
get
paid
and
in
fact,
for
the
most
part,
people
actually
haven't
been
redeeming
their
tokens
for
dollars.
So,
even
though
we've
issued
the
$400,000
worth
of
tokens,
I
think
we've
only
redeemed,
like
$15,000
worth
of
them
kind
of
finally
a
bit
of
a
roadmap
right
now
we
are
working
on
a
beta
release.
A
One
thing
we've
seen
with
this
cred
spearmint
is
that
there
are
a
lot
of
other
projects
that
want
to
try
using
source
cred
for
themselves,
and
you
know
want
to
try,
through
these
distributing
tokens
to
their
communities
using
source,
cred
and
that's
kind
of
hampered
right
now,
because
it
still
is
alpha
quality
software,
it's
lacking
documentation.
It's
got
a
lot
of
rough
edges
and
weird
command
line
scripts.
A
A
First
and
foremost
after
that,
we're
gonna
add
in
a
couple
more
key
features
that
we
see
and
we
need
to
get
the
system
to
be
really
like
complete,
like
adding
a
revamped
UI
and
a
creditor
and
implementing
boosting,
because
right
now
boosting
is
still
like
the
feature
we're
most
excited
about,
but
we
haven't
actually
gotten
around
to
putting
it
in
yet,
if
you'd
like
to
get
involved,
I
encourage
you
to
drop
by
our
discord.
Channel
and
in
particular,
we've
got
a
community
call.
Every
Tuesday
at
11
a.m.
Pacific
and
you're.
A
So
welcome
to
come
to
our
community
calls
we're
super
friendly.
Just
ask
you
to
bring
a
question
you
can
ask
and
you'll
even
get
credit
for
attending
or
community
calls,
because
we
really
value
having
people
involved
in
growing.
Our
community
and
I
will
wrap
up
the
presentation
on
this
really
cool
piece
of
art.
Another
thing
I
really
appreciate
about
the
source
credit
community
is
that
we've
got
some
talented
artists
and
another
thing:
that's
cool
is
that
making
art
also
earns
cred.
A
So
with
that
I'll
just
take
questions
and
discuss
the
free
to
ask
anything,
and
you
can
ask
in
the
chat
I'm,
not
sure
if
there's
actually
a
way
for
you
to
ask
verbally,
but
if
there
is
I'm
happy
to
enable
that
too
okay
James
Young
is
asking
in
the
chat
who
decides
how
the
way
to
get
readjusted.
That's
a
great
question,
a
really
important
one
right
now.
A
The
answer
is
basically
me:
I'm,
the
temporary
benevolent
dictator
of
source
cred
and
the
key,
a
key
responsibility
of
being
the
temporary
benevolent
dictator,
is
having
the
final
say
on
what
the
weights
are
going
to
be.
That
said,
we've
used
really
a
consensus,
driven
approach
and
source
cred
where
someone
who's
gotten
to
made
a
proposal.
Often
me
saying:
hey:
I
think
the
weights
are
a
little
bit
out
of
whack.
For
these
reasons,
here's
a
proposed
change
to
it
and
then
I
take
into
account
people's
feedback
and
I
ultimately
make
the
decision.
A
In
the
long
run,
I
really
don't
want
to
be
the
benevolent
dictator
for
very
long,
hence
temporary
in
TBD
I.
Think
it's
important,
though
right
now,
while
the
system
is
so
immature
because
we
don't
committing
to
the
wrong
governance
structure,
early
in
could
be
a
big
mistake.
I
know
a
couple
other
communities
that
are
using
source
credit.
A
That
again,
for
example,
is
planning
to
start
from
the
beginning,
with
more
of
like
a
Council
of
Elders
kind
of
model,
making
the
choices
about
how
cred
will
work
or
what
the
parameters
will
be
in
the
long
term,
I'd
like
to
build
credit
of
governance
mechanisms
so,
for
example,
and
actually
I
could
pull
up.
Another
I
gave
another
presentation
just
a
couple
days
ago
to
governance
community.
You
have
source
credit,
and
here
we
have
some
governance
ideas,
so
we
could
have.
A
We
could
have
cred
weighted
voting
where
you
think
the
normal
problem
with
voting
on
the
Internet
is
the
civil
problem
where
people
can
just
make
fake
accounts
and
then
game
the
vote.
This
is
how
you
get
boaty.
Mcboatface
people
can
just
spam
accounts,
so
you
can
just
spread
weighted
voting
where
your
your
voting
power
is
going
to
be
weighted
by
the
amount
of
credit
you
have.
A
It's
kind
of
like
token
weighted
voting,
but
token
weighted
voting
tends
to
be
just
an
oligarchy,
and
cred
weighted
voting
would
be
more
like
a
duoc
recei,
where
the
people
actually
did
stuff
sigh.
If
you're
concerned
about,
like
the
concentrated
power
of
a
credit,
you
can
mitigate
that
through
applying
different
functions
to
the
voting
power.
So
you
can
maybe
say
everyone
votes
with
the
square
root
of
their
cred,
and
that
would
that
would
mitigate
the
oligarchy
a
little
bit.
A
We
could
also
have
stuff
like
boost
conviction
voting,
because
the
nice
thing
about
boosting
is
you
have
to
get
skin
in
the
game
for
the
thing
that
you're
advocating,
because
you
actually
burn
your
grain
for
a
share
of
the
credit
it
earns.
So
you
could
think
about
cases
where
we
use
that
approach
for
voting
where
people
have
to
kind
of
burn
their
grain
to
boost
a
particular
policy
and
then,
if
the
policy
is
selected
and
is
a
success
than
they
earn
credit
for
having
like
made
a
good
decision.
A
A
Chad
asks:
are
we
planning
to
offer
consulting
for
organizations
who
want
to
implement
source
credit?
You
know
I,
think
it's
it's
possible.
We
do
that
I.
Suppose
we're
kind
of
doing
that
already
there's
one
very,
very
high
profile
web
3
project,
that's
planning
to
you,
turn
on
source
cred
in
the
coming
months
and
they're,
giving
us
a
development
grants
to
kind
of
support
them
in
using
in
kind
of
maintaining
a
very
nice
horse
red
instance.
A
So
yeah
I
would
say
right
now
we
don't
have
it
set
up
as
a
super
formal
thing,
then
something
something
we
do
also
note
that
there's
no
source
cred
is
not
a
company,
it's
not
a
startup,
it's
an
open
source
project,
and
so
just
don't
expect
it
to
be
governed
as
they
you
know,
as
as
if
it
were
startup,
and
there
are
no
there,
no
shareholders
or
investors
in
SourceFed,
yep
Chad
people
from
the
source.
Credit
community
could
definitely
ask
act
as
consultants
and
we
we
actually
have
a
you
know.
A
I
guess
the
word
consulting
him.
You
maybe
think
it
was
like,
like
a
for-profit
like
financial
sponsorship
thing,
we
do
have
this
like
concept
of
partners,
so
there
are
a
couple
projects
such
as
metagame
that
we
consider
partners-
and
we
are
like
you
know-
we've
got
got
ambassadors,
helping
them
maintain
their
innocence.
A
Okay,
Hammad
asks
what's
my
10-year
vision
for
source
cred,
what
a
great
question
and
it
kind
of
actually
kind
of
rips
off
what
Alex
Nisbet
just
asked
as
well.
Okay,
10-year
vision
for
source
cred
I
think
that
open
source
is
really
like.
What
we're
seeing
an
open
source
so
far
is
like
the
very
bleeding
edge
of
a
really
big
paradigm
shift.
I
think
that
as
the
world
is
shifting
towards
manipulating
information
as
being
the
fundamental
like
driver
value
creation,
open
source
is
just
a
dramatically
better
economic
paradigm.
A
In
the
same
way,
you
know
we
had
reset
feudal,
aristocracy
and
feudal
aristocracy.
Basically,
you've
got
your
noblemen
and
they're.
These,
like
warrior
classes
and
becoming
a
warrior,
requires
a
lot
of
investment
and
learning
to
shoot,
bows
or
being
trained
as
a
knight
or
such.
So,
there's
there's
a
lot
of
work
that
goes
into
being
a
nobleman
and
a
warrior
and
your
political
structures
room
by
GU
controls,
land
and
the
land
matters,
because
you
need
it
to
grow
food
and
that's
what
most
of
the
economy
is.
It's
people
growing
food
and
the
Circa
Industrial
Revolution.
A
And
so
the
technological
change
in
the
Industrial
Revolution
actually
led
to
a
really
new
economic
paradigm
and
it
led
to
new
political
paradigm
and
I
think
that
we
are
going
to
be
seeing
a
new
economic
and
political
paradigm.
That's
going
to
come
out
of
having
an
information
rather
than
an
industrial
economy
and
I
think
what
we
see
of
open
source
is
the
very
beginning
of
that.
But
it's
sort
of
is
it's
just
getting
started
because
it
doesn't
have
incentives
that
work.
It
doesn't
have
structures
for
really
like
organizing
resources
and
deploying
them
effectively.
A
I
think
that
source
cred
in
the
ten-year
scope
is
going
to
enable
some
really
big
things
because
going
to
enable
sort
of
open
source
organizations
that
are
doing
way
more
than
shipping
code.
And
if
you
look
at,
for
example,
today's
institutions,
they
tend
to
be
really
hierarchical,
really
bloated,
really
top
down
and
really
unresponsive
to
the
needs
of
regular
people
who
are
getting
involved
in
them
and,
if
you
think
back
to
boosting
and
how
ok.
A
This
is
a
really
decentralized
mechanism
whereby
anyone
in
the
community
anyone
who's
like
the
participant
in
the
system,
can
start
to
change
the
incentives
of
the
institution
and
they
don't
change
the
incentives.
By
voting
to
replace
the
Board
of
Directors
over
two
years.
They
change
the
incentives
by
directly
saying
hey.
This
is
the
really
particular
thing
I
care
about
and
I
want
the
organization
if
I'm
responsible,
responsive
to
it.
So
what
I
would
hope
is
that
source
current
starts
to
enable
ways
for
like
meet
us.
A
Alex
asked
about
how
this
might
be
used
beyond
software,
for
example,
podcasters
trying
to
engage
their
audiences
I
think
that
there's
almost
certainly
tons
of
applications
there
to
be
honest,
I
kind
of
live
in
like
these
two
worlds
and
thinking
about
source
cred.
One
is
the
really
long
term
of
like.
What's
this
big
vision
but
like
scratching
turn
open
source
economy,
switching
through
massively
more
responsive
institutions
and
then
in
the
short
term,
I'm
really
focused
on?
How
can
we
deploy
this
like?
A
How
can
we
grow
this
project
on
a
month-to-month
basis,
because
I
see
a
lot
of
really
big
long-term
visions
fail
to
be
able
to
do
incremental
execution
in
the
short
term
and
that
prevents
them
from
realizing
their
dreams.
I
think
that
in
the
medium
term,
this
sort
of
like
middle
future,
where
we're
like
building
out
to
the
next
realm
of
things,
I,
do
think.
For
example,
source
credit
could
be
really
useful
for
science,
because
it's
really
natural
to
think
about
scientific
sites
Asians
as
a
contribution
graph,
but
I
think
it
will.
A
James
asked
is
there
other
doctor
code
and
how
to
build
plugins
we
do
have.
We
are
working
pretty
actively
on
our
Docs,
but
we're
mostly
targeting
those
Docs
for
people
who
want
to
use
source
code
as
it
exists
right
now.
So
we
have
not
yet
put
a
lot
of
effort
into
documenting
how
to
extend
source
code
adding
plugins.
A
We'd
be
super
happy
to
like
brainstorm
with
you,
whatever
plugin
you
want
to,
you
want
to
build
and
Chad
yeah
I
think
that's
a
as
far
as
having
a
source
credit
consultant
that
helps
the
training
team
on
how
to
use.
First,
cred
and
how
to
how
to
set
it
up,
implement
the
set
up
and
check
back
every
couple
weeks
to
tweak
things.
Yeah
I
think
it's
a
great
idea.
I
think
you
should.
Maybe
that
would
be
maybe
Popeye
or
discourse
or
discord
and
like
socialize.
A
That
idea
maybe
come
to
the
community
call
because
I
think
that's
a
good
vision
for
how
source
code
consultants
could
work
and
we're
definitely
going
to
be.
We
definitely
are
setting
up
these
source
credit
deployments
for
other
projects.
Yes,
I'll
be
said,
it
could
connect
to
the
source
code,
Ambassador
Program,
so
yeah,
that's
good
yeah.
That
seems
like
so
kind
of
thing.
A
We
should
do
I
also
see
I,
see,
people
are
coming
up
in
the
moderation,
channel
and
I'm,
not
sure
the
moderation
panel
actually
means
I'm,
not
sure
if
you're
asking
for
the
ability
to
like
speak.
If
you
were
I'd,
be
happy
to
give
it
to
you.
If
I
can
figure
out
how
to
do
it,
I
clicked
the
little
like
plus
button
when
I
saw
people
show
up
in
the
moderation
channel
that
I'm
not
sure.
If
that
I'm
not
really
sure
what
effect
I've
had
yeah
well,
I
can
get
any
case.
A
Team
people,
yeah
I,
don't
think
it
worked
because
every
time
that
happened
a
couple
times
and
every
time
I
clicked
the
green
plus,
which
I
assumed
would
approve
it,
but
they
never
appeared
on
stage
so
I
think
that
might
have
not
been
working
but
hey
kiss.
Thank
you
all
for
coming
to
my
presentation,
hope
you
enjoyed
it
and
I
would
love
to
see
you
dropping
by
the
source,
credit
discord
and
coming
to
the
source
community
call
tomorrow
morning,
at
11:00,
Pacific.