►
From YouTube: Filecoin Plus - August 22 Notary Governance Call
Description
The sixteenth (2d) Notary Governance call of 2023 August 22 to discuss the Filecoin Plus program. Due to a technical issue, the first call (0800/1500utc) did not record.
Slides and Links: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1GohFTFOMZeJNQSJFKfJqG2_-XpTSH_9nu51l4jHi7SY/edit#slide=id.g1184233f2bd_0_34
Agenda
Notary
Inactive Notaries Update
Update - Bug report (for any technical issues)
Working Group Updates
Enterprise Fil+
948 - MultiSig Notary Update
966 - Quality Deal Making
Trust and Transparency
963 - Qualifications for Notary Removal
Dispute Resolution Update
Proposals
961 - Notary Incentives
774 - Reduction of the Quality Multiplier
Community Discussions
All LDN application presentations are a-sync will be discussed in #fil-plus-application-review SLACK
If you would like to attend these meetings LIVE, the Fil+ Notary Governance calendar is available at: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/u/0/embed?src=c_k1gkfoom17g0j8c6bam6uf43j0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America%2FLos_Angeles
Follow Filecoin!
Website: https://bit.ly/3ndAg44
Twitter: https://bit.ly/3ObND0x
Slack: https://bit.ly/3HKfFy7
Blog: https://bit.ly/3HFZFNv
Reddit: https://bit.ly/39N4Jmv
Telegram: https://bit.ly/3bkP8Ly
Subscribe to our newsletter! https://bit.ly/3Oy8J9j
#filecoin #ipfs #libp2p #web3 #nft
A
Foreign
ly
hellos
welcome
back
to
the
second
notary
governance,
call
of
August
22nd
quick
check
in
on
what
we
have
on
the
agenda.
If
this
is
your
first
time
joining
us,
the
call
is
broken
into
four
parts.
Part
one
is
notary
issues,
so
we'll
be
talking
about
an
update
related
to
the
inactive
notaries.
Second
part
of
the
call
is
working
group
updates
on
the
morning.
Kz
and
RG
joined
us
for
disclosures
and
updates
around
the
Enterprise
field,
plus,
what's
going
on
with
their
multi-sig
update,
as
well
as
the
quality
deal
making.
A
We
have
RG
on
the
call
this
evening
to
walk
us
through
some
of
the
updates
around
the
notary
removal
process
and,
what's
going
on
with
the
dispute
resolution
on
the
morning
call
when
we
moved
into
proposals,
we
had
a
lot
of
discussion
that
was
really
productive
around
the
notary
incentives
for
the
V5.
Should
we
move
forward
with
that,
as
well
as
discussions
on
774.
A
So
with
that,
if
this
is
your
first
time
on
the
call
or
you're
joining,
this
is
the
second
call
of
August
22nd.
If
you
follow
this
link
right
here,
it
will
take
you
to
all
of
these
calendars
and
Google
and
from
there
you
can
join
any
future.
Calls
that
take
place.
I've
also
put
the
deck
that
we're
reviewing
right
now
in
slack,
as
well
as
the
chat.
So
if
you
want
to
grab
any
links
from
this
presentation,
it's
right
there
in
chat
for
you
to
grab
it.
A
The
next
call
is
taking
place
on
5th
September
5th.
If
you
need
support,
you
have
a
governance
team
here
to
help
you,
if
you're,
not
sure
who
to
reach
out
to
you,
can
always
write
it
to
me.
Kevin,
FF
and
I'll
be
happy
to
guide
you
to
the
right,
repo
or
slack
Channel
or
POC,
to
help
you
with
your
issue,
all
right
so
with
that
notaries,
hello,
so
I'm
going
to
post
the
link
to
this
air
table,
as
always
big.
Thank
you
for
signing
this.
A
This
is
tied
to
the
SLA
for
the
applications
in
round
four,
as
well
as
a
really
easy
way
for
notaries
to
kind
of
allocate
where
time
is
being
spent
in
the
program.
Is
it
tooling?
Is
it
applications?
Is
it
anything
taking
place
on
proposal
writing
and
what's
nice
about
this
data?
Is
it
lets
us
know
where
we
should
invest
priorities
for
engineering,
on
support,
to
make
your
lives
easier
and
more
effective
as
you're
allocating
data
cap
to
onboard
the
data?
So
thank
you
for
that.
A
A
If
I
get
a
slack
update
from
you,
I'll
go
ahead
and
fill
this
ticket
out,
but
again
friendly
reminder.
If
you're
a
notary,
you
encounter
anything
technical
as
always
feel
free
to
ping
me
and
I'll
help
you
one
on
one
or
you
could
fill
this
bug
report
out
yourself
and
it
will
file
a
ticket
for
that
going
forward
check
in
on
the
inactive
notaries.
So
thanks
for
the
notaries
that
got
reached
out
to
and
filed
this
petition
application
inside
of
GitHub.
A
The
purpose
of
this
is
not
to
remove
notaries
that
wish
to
remain
active
or
still
have
contributions
to
be
made,
but
to
kind
of
clear
off
notaries
that
have
had
zero
engagement
over
the
past
period
going
forward.
So
two
calls
ago
we
announced
the
list
after
some
research
and
Communications
on
the
last
call,
we
said
hey.
This
is
the
list.
This
is
the
way
to
do
it.
We
gave
you
guys
one
more
cycle,
so
the
list
that
we
have
on
the
screen
share
right
there
on
the
left.
A
Those
are
all
of
the
notaries
that
we
have
had
zero
communication
with
no
slack
comms.
No
emails,
no
GitHub
answers,
no
attendance
on
the
governance.
Calls
and
they've
just
had
zero
contact
with
the
program
for
months
now,
so
the
qualification
for
the
proposals
on
the
right
is
those
are
the
notaries
that
said:
hey
I
might
have
dropped
off
for
X,
Y
and
Z
reason.
I'd
still
like
to
remain
active.
Here's
my
submission
for
transparency
for
the
community,
and
so
each
one
of
these
applications.
Rg
went
to
through
and
just
left
a
comment.
A
A
But
it's
pretty
straightforward,
so
the
next
part
is
working
group
from
KZ
he's
not
on
the
call
right
now,
so
I'll
do
my
best
to
kind
of
fill
in
and
speak
on
behalf
of,
what's
going
on
with
this
working
group.
So
with
that,
essentially,
what
Enterprise
fill
plus
is
working
on
right
now
is
two
things
so
as
they're
onboarding,
this
really
large
data
set
from
Enterprises.
A
What
they're
trying
to
implement
is
a
kyc
KYB
process,
and
so
the
names
that
you
see
listed
on
there
are
notaries
that
wish
to
remain
in
this
working
group
and
have
completed
that
kyc
step.
Casey
got
feedback
offline
from
other
notaries
that
reached
out
and
said:
hey.
We
liked
this,
but
what
kind
of
information
is
collective
in
this
kyc
KYB
check?
Is
it
made
public
and
will
people
be
able
to
see
all
of
my
information?
The
answer
to
that
question
is
no,
so
the
toggle
service
that
used
is
private.
A
It's
not
made
available,
it's
not
published
outsourced
and
the
goal
of
that
toggle
is
to
link
a
real
life
human
to
the
organization
that
will
be
signing
on
those
applications.
So
they're
still
looking
for
members
to
participate
in
this
working
group,
they've
had
to
remove
some
inactive
notaries
themselves.
These
are
notaries
that
didn't
come
to
meetings
didn't
review.
Data
sets
weren't
really
participating
on
it.
A
So
if
you
are
Keen,
if
you
are
a
notary
and
you
want
to
get
involved
in
that
Enterprise
fill
plus
today
is
August
22nd
here
in
the
states
the
deadline
is
going
to
be
Friday
the
25th,
so
you
have
three
days
and
just
reach
out.
There's
an
issue.
948
you'll
see
it
in
this
dot.
Links
just
go
ahead
and
follow
the
steps
in
that
issue,
and
you
can
get
dialed
into
the
Enterprise
field
plus
working
group.
A
B
A
That
is
such
a
great
question,
I'm,
not
sure,
but
what
I
can
do
is
this
I
can
run
down
an
answer
for
you,
so
Casey's,
probably
fast
asleep,
with
his
time
zone
that
he's
in
I'll
send
him
a
note
on
slack
as
soon
as
we
get
off
this
call
and
I'll
see
if
we
can
get
you
an
answer
by
the
time
he
wakes
up
in
the
morning.
Would
that
work
for
you.
A
So
the
second
thing
that
Casey
is
working
on
with
the
Enterprise
field
plus
is
issue
966.,
and
this
ties
back
to
kind
of
the
heart
of
a
lot
of
discussions
that
are
taking
place
is
what
is
quality
deal
making.
So
this
conversation
started
out
with
a
proposal
922
and
really
what
they're
looking
for
is.
What
does
poor
distribution
look
like
for
a
storage
provider
and
do
we
have
any
samples
to
kind
of
tie
that
back?
A
A
So
what
they're
doing
is,
if
you
have
any
input
on
this
one
or
if
you
have
any
proposal
comments
that
you'd
like
to
leave
they're
asking
for
like
measurable
tools
that
can
be
used
to
look
at
these,
and
so
this
could
be
like
CID
sharing
requirements,
minor
ID
verifications.
What
exactly
are
tooling
needs
that
can
solve
this
as
we
start
to
look
at
investments
in
the
tooling
to
make
this
easier
for
you
going
forward.
A
So
again,
if
you
have
thoughts
on
tooling
needs
or
if
you
have
thoughts
on
like
organizations
that
you'd
like
to
submit
for
review
for
tooling
that's
what
KZ
is
looking
for
in
this
application.
So
you
can
see
this
in
922,
it's
linked
in
the
deck
and
that's
going
to
be
the
best
place
for
you
to
go.
Look
at
it
as
you
go.
A
C
So
you
can
go
in
detail
on
the
notary,
governance,
repo
and
look
at
the
issue,
but
some
of
the
things
that
the
main
three
things
that
were
proposed
are
on
the
on
the
on
the
left
and
some
of
the
learnings
are
listed
on
the
right
side.
So
I
think
this
summarizing
it.
There
were
requests
to
update
the
dispute
tracker
in
the
in
its
current
form.
A
lot
of
people
are
using
the
dispute
tracker
to
obstruct
ldns
or
people.
C
We
need
to
think
about
automation
because
the
open
question
Still
Remains,
that
who
is
who
will
be
the
one
you
know
to
looking
after
the
non-compliance
as
such
and
so
I
think
those
are
all
good
points
for
me
to
think
about.
The
next
iteration
for
this
and
yeah
I'll
be
kind
of
like
starting
a
discussion
and
proposing
some
of
the
next
steps
on
this
issue.
C
A
A
All
right,
all
right,
we'll
have
plenty
of
time
at
the
end
of
the
call.
If
anything
comes
to
mind.
Moving
on,
there
are
two
issues
for
topics
of
discussion,
and
these
led
to
some
really
good
conversations
in
the
morning.
So
maybe
I
kick
off
I'll
hand
it
over
to
RG,
and
we
have
some
of
the
same
folks
that
were
here
in
the
morning.
He
wanted
to
follow
up
with
additional
thoughts,
love
to
hear
it.
So
essentially
what
this
application
proposal
is
doing
is
it's
saying?
A
How
can
we
look
at
the
incentive
structure
for
notaries
going
forward
for
those
of
you
that
have
been
here
for
a
while?
You
know
the
notary
started
out
in
the
tens
teens.
They
went
up
to
the
20s,
the
50s
and
now
hovering
around
the
80s
mark.
So
as
we
have
these
notaries
that
are
contributing
their
time,
they're
making
sure
that
the
data
is
onboarding,
how
do
we
compensate
them
for
that
and
where
does
that
compensation
come
from?
C
Yeah
thanks
Terry,
so
yeah.
This
is
still
very
much
in
the
discussion
stage.
I
think
I've
presented
some
of
my
own
ideas
in
this
discussion.
I
think
some
of
the
things
that
we
that
have
been
discussed
in
this
specific
discussion
topic,
as
well
as
some
of
the
things
that
have
been
just
been
brought
up
in
774.
C
The
two
overarching
themes
that
we're
seeing
is
working
towards
trustlessness
having
less
human
notaries
and
more
automated
notaries
like
glyph
today,
and
so
for
me,
the
ideal
Next
Step
would
be
to
like
propose
that
pathway
in
the
upcoming
election
process.
So
what
that
might
look
like
is
we
keep
the
current
system
in
its
form
but
significantly
reduce
it,
and
it
just
becomes
one
of
the
many
ways
in
which
someone
can
get
data
cap
so
tomorrow.
C
C
If
you
have
other
specific
ideas
in
terms
of
how
do
we
incentivize
notaries,
please
share
them
in
this
discussion
and
as
well
as
as
well
as
you
know,
some
of
the
ways
in
which
you
think
that
we
can
compensate
notaries.
So
there's
some
I
think
there's
some
specific
notaries.
Who've
proposed
some
numbers
in
terms
of
you
know
what
the
composition
might
look
like.
A
A
E
And
we
see
it's
a
challenge,
so
I
noticed
in
the
screenshot,
Ajay
and
I
know
that
there
was
some
spicy
discussion
about
this
about
the
idea
that
SPS
and
clients
should
not
be
no.
There
is
I,
do
want
to
just
sort
of
talk
about
that.
A
bit
is
this
because
you
like
who,
who
are
you
looking
for
in
an
in
a
notary?
I?
Guess,
that's
a
that's.
A
more
positive
version
that
question
and
I
just
want
to
underline.
You've
said
that
this
is
your
personal
opinion,
so.
C
I
think
I
think
diff,
like
I
think
separating
like
you
know,
proving
that
someone
is
not
an
SP
or
like
a
DP
or
a
client
and
they're
applying
on
another
is
super
difficult
right.
So,
ideally,
which
is
why
I
think
the
idea
of
like
applying
for
having
more
glyph
like
notaries,
makes
much
more
sense.
So
tomorrow,
like
that
idea,
has
kind
of
come
up.
C
You
know,
as
from
this
discussion,
so,
like
you
know,
as
this
discussion
has
progressed
so
in
that
case,
I
think
it
would
make
sense
so
like
if
there's
an
SP
that
develops
a
front-end
tool
like
glyph
and
is
very
clear
about
what
their
standard
for
due
diligence
is.
So
an
example
would
be
that
they
would
say
hey
we
will
support
our
tool,
would
support
clients
who
need
more
than
one
pip
right
and
then
they
need
to
meet
a
threshold
of
a
certain
retrievability.
C
Certain
you
know
deal
distribution
and
you
know
I
think
we
can
learn
from
what
we've
learned
so
far,
but
yeah
think
that
was
kind
of
the
thinking
behind
this
I
think
my
opinion
has
sort
of
changed
since
I
started
this
discussion
because
I've
been
kind
of
you
know,
the
more
I'm
talking
I've
been
talking
to
people
I'm.
Learning
that
like
making
the
separation
is
super
difficult.
C
There
is
a
strong
incentive
to
abuse
and
so
I
think
we
should
design
for
systems
where
the
majority
are
not
existing
SPS
or
data
preparers.
So
far
from
what
I've
learned
you
know,
even
before
the
time
I
was
here,
I
think
that
was
the
case,
because
this
ecosystem
and
the
program
was
so
small
but
I
believe
that
now
we
might,
you
know
it
might
have
reached
again.
E
Big
Data
exchange
was
another
good
example
of
this
Estuary,
where,
like
there's
an
established,
quick,
there's
like
large
data
on
mass,
but
there
are
many
many
clients
and
there's
sort
of
a
process,
and
for
that
so
in
that
kind
of
case
I
think
it's
less
than
being
notaries.
More
like
we
establish
a
process
to
give
a
grant
of
data
cap
exactly
to
to
an
intermediary
like
that
right.
Exactly.
C
So
yeah
the
idea
would
be
having
multiple,
multiple
multi-sigs,
so
I
think
the
idea
of
you
know
we,
when
you
say
a
different
program
to
me.
That's
just
you
know
a
different
multi-seg.
Today
we
have
two,
we
have
evil
plus
and
the
main
one
and
I.
My
own
belief
is
that
I
think
a
lot
of
challenges
arise
because
you
know
everyone
is
dependent
on
either
or
I.
C
Think
tomorrow
might
at
least
my
ideal
situation
would
be
if
we
can
create,
let's
say
between
12
to
15
multi-6
in
the
upcoming
round
of
election,
and
one
of
those
multisex
will
be
kind
of
you
know
the
design
will
be
in
the
current
state
and
for
the
rest
of
it.
Let's
say:
big
data
exchange
is
one,
so
they
apply
for
a
certain
a
certain
amount
of
beta
cap,
and
then
we
based
on
the
systems
and
tools
that
we're
designing
we
can
track.
C
Sorry,
not
not
the
next
charge
to
get
like
a
refill
of
data
cap.
That
was,
you
know
given
to
them,
so
I
think
we're.
On
the
same
page.
There,
crazy,
Carrie
and
I
are
working
on
a
proposal
that
we
hope
to
kind
of
release
in
the
next
two
weeks.
Once
we,
you
know
it's
a
more
detailed
proposal
in
this
line
of
thinking,
but
I
I
would
also
love
to
hear
if
there
are
people
who
might
think
that
having
multiple
multi-cigs
might
not
be
a
good
idea.
C
F
Then
for
the
first
group
they
are
in
Gnostic
when
they
get
a
data
cap.
Can
we
just
do
something
like
a
just
taking
a
page
out
of
a
big
data
exchange
right,
but
kind
of
just
go
into
like
automatic
system
where
it
goes
to
an
auction
house
or
or
any
any
kind
of
mechanism
such
that
the
distribution
of
the
data
cap
is
sort
of
randomized
or
competed
on.
E
C
F
C
F
G
F
A
Tv
Tam.
Thank
you.
That's
a
good
point
and
I'm
happy
that
Simon's
gonna
follow
up
with
you.
If
you
need
anything
else
or
want
to
share
love
to
see
any
updates
that
you
have
for
everybody
on
the
call.
We
had
a
lot
of
conversation
about
this
on
the
morning
when
I
linked
the
video
I
highly
recommend
you
check
it
out
lots
of
great
points,
I'm
going
to
do
my
best
to
summarize,
but
if
anybody
who's
on
the
call
now
is
here
in
the
morning
and
wants
to
jump
on,
I'd
love
love
the
input.
A
One
of
the
questions
that
came
out
that
really
resonated
with
me
afterwards
was
the
data
cap,
removal
and
really
one
of
the
flags
was
look
we've
known
as
a
community
or
governance
that
this
is
something
that
we'd
like
to
get
ahead
of
for
quite
a
while
now.
So
why
are
we
prioritizing
this
and
if
there's
no
hard
reasons,
let's
prioritize
this,
so
there's
action
right
now
to
have
a
community-led
proposal
that
talks
about
the
steps
for
removing
datacap
after
it's
been
distributed,
and
some
of
that
conversation
on
the
morning
the
big
highlights
were
well.
A
Where
do
you
start
well,
one
easy
way
is
to
go
back
to
closed,
really
old
applications
that
never
allocated
that
data
cap
and
then
the
second
question
was:
do
you
just
turn
off
the
data
cap
or
do
you
have
some
kind
of
a
warning?
So
if
somebody
thought
that
they
had
data
cap
for
months
and
months
and
months
ago,
does
it
seem
right
just
to
revoke
it?
Then?
A
The
third
point
was:
should
there
be
a
timeline
on
that
data
cap
so
after
you've
earned
and
awarded
that,
should
you
keep
it
forever
or
should
you
keep
it
for
a
finite
period
of
time,
so
that
proposal
that
will
be
filed
is
a
lot
of
great
conversations
that
are
going
to
come
from
that
morning.
Call
really
around
that
fact
of
like
how
does
that
tooling
work,
so
I'm
going
to
pause,
and
if
anybody
has
any
thoughts
or
anything
else,
they
want
to
add
love
to
get
that
love
to
get
your
input.
A
Love
to
get
it
online,
then,
if
anything
comes
to
mind,
just
let
us
know
as
we
go
through
it,
the
other
issue,
that's
open
that
I
highly
recommend
everyone
checks
out
if
you
haven't
done
so
already,
is
a
really
well
written
proposal
from
the
community
just
talking
about
what
is
filecoin
plus,
how
does
it
play
into
the
ecosystem
of
filecoin
and
what
makes
sense?
What
have
we
outgrown?
A
What
does
the
future
look
like,
and
what
should
we
be
talking
about
as
a
community
and
really
that
conversation
revolves
around
the
quality
multiplier
and
how
that
incentive
really
works
or
might
not
work
for
the
fill
plus
ecosystem?
So
if
you
haven't
had
a
chance
to
look
at
774,
it
is
it's
a
read.
It's
a
big
read
and
the
reason
why
it's
a
big
read
is
a
lot
of
people
have
a
lot
of
thoughts
and
they've
taken
the
time
to
really
put
those
thoughts
down
on
that.
A
So,
if
you
haven't
checked
out
774,
you
kind
of
owe
it
to
yourself.
If
you
haven't
done
so
and
really
jump
in
it's
really
nice
too,
from
the
standpoint
of
getting
that
conversation
out
of
slack,
where
it's
really
hard
to
answer
questions
and
have
a
back
and
forth
and
into
GitHub
where
everything
can
be
threaded
and
everything
can
be
answered
and
it
can
be
jumped
back
and
forth
without
a
linear
timeline.
So
thank
you
again
for
those
of
you
that
kick
this
off
and
really
have
like
a
really
established
conversation.
A
Right
well,
we're
going
to
call
it
halfway,
but
if
there's
anything
that
comes
up
by
all
means
looking
forward
to
answering,
it
just
show
a
hand
and
we'll
stop.
Otherwise.
Thank
you
so
much
for
coming
to
the
second
call
on
August
22nd
I'll
post,
the
link
to
this
in
slack,
as
well
as
on
the
GitHub
issue,
it'll
be
on
YouTube.
If
you
want
to
check
out
the
earlier
call,
thank
you
again,
we'll
see
you
guys
on
September
5th
cheers
everyone
foreign.