►
From YouTube: Filecoin Plus - July 25 Notary Governance Calls
Description
The fourteenth set of Notary Governance calls of 2023 July 25 to discuss the Filecoin Plus program.
Slides and Links: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1l4KRQqZoQC_7AN4Zwa055ba0fUb_Q4igvvgcfQ6_9Xc/edit#slide=id.g1184233f2bd_0_34
Agenda
Notary
Inactive Notary Removal process
Working Group Updates
Enterprise Fil+
Inactive Notary Removal process
Trust and Transparency
Proposals
DataCap Flow (922)
T&T Working Group (940)
Community Issues / Discussion
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
B
A
What's
going
on
with
that
working
group,
RG
will
walk
through
three
proposals
on
trust
and
transparency
as
far
as
new
proposals
that
go
through
we're
going
to
be
walking
you
through
922
and
the
diligence
reviews
we're
going
to
talk
about
the
modbot
in
slack
and
we're
going
to
save
lots
of
time.
At
the
end
of
this
call
for
discussions
that
may
be
on
your
radar.
So
with
that,
let's
take
a
quick
check
in
today.
Is
the
25th
there's
two
calls.
A
This
first
call
is
a
zero
eight
hundred
Pacific
1500
UTC
next
call
takes
place
at
1800,
Pacific
and
zero
one
hundred
UTC
there's
a
governance
team
to
help
you.
So
if
you
have
any
questions,
we
all
have
kind
of
a
specific
swim
Lane.
We
can
make
sure
that
you
have
the
support
that
you
need
as
you
go
forward.
A
So
with
that
notaries
I'm
going
to
post
the
link
to
airtable
for
SLA
in
chat
feel
free
to
grab
that
and
post
it
in
your
leisure.
What
we
look
at
is
always
is
the
amount
of
activity
that's
being
done
across
the
network
and
then
where
the
notaries
self-report
on
these
hours.
So
we
take
this
into
account
on.
A
Take
this
into
account
on
the
applications
that
are
open.
So
if
you
are
a
notary
in
the
program,
please
give
a
signature
on
that,
so
we
can
kind
of
just
track
and
give
you
credit
for
the
work
that
you're
doing.
If
you're
joining
this
call
as
a
storage
provider
or
somebody
else,
you
could
take
a
look
at
that
and
that's
a
good
way
to
kind
of
like
make
your
presence.
A
A
As
86
notaries
are
onboarded
onto
the
program,
they
come
with
86
different
set
of
needs,
changing
githubs
questions
and
slack
problems
with
token
right,
and
a
lot
of
support
goes
into
making
sure
that
those
other
notaries
are
taken
care
of
without
actually
building
up
the
program.
So
where
we
could
be
focusing
on
tooling
or
we
could
be
focusing
on
diligence,
we
can
be
focusing
on
Enterprise
we're
having
to
double
back
and
take
care
of
a
lot
of
these
notaries.
A
That
aren't
set
up,
so
this
is
a
really
good
issue
to
kind
of
look
at
like
how
can
we
support
the
active
notaries
while
giving
notaries?
That
might
not
be
an
active,
a
way
to
step
back
from
the
program,
so
we
rolled
out
this
timeline
back
in
early
June,
and
we
just
kind
of
announced
this
on
like
hey.
If
this
is
still
something
that
notaries
are
active
in.
This
is
what
we're
looking
for
as
far
as
participation.
So
today
is
the
25th
of
July.
A
So
what
we're
looking
at
now
is
the
removal
of
the
identified
inactive
notaries.
This
isn't
a
comprehensive
list,
but
this
is
kind
of
how
it
started,
and
to
do
that,
we
made
an
issue
630
in
a
discussion
where
we
just
kind
of
spelled
out
if
a
notary
was
selected
to
be
included
in
this
V4
and
they
put
on
their
application
that
they
would
be
like
an
L4
or
an
L5.
A
It
was
very
clear
on
the
expectations
on
what
those
notaries
should
be
contributing
and
then
what
we
did
was
we
just
clearly
looked
at
like
what
were
the
counts
of
GitHub.
What
were
the
counts
of
applications
signed?
What
were
the
diligence?
What
were
the
meetings
and
if
these
numbers
strayed
drastically
from
each
other?
A
Well,
then
we
kind
of
had
a
list
of
notaries
that
signed
up
to
be
very
active,
but
just
for
whatever
reasons,
weren't
able
to
give
their
time
to
the
program
which
is
okay,
and
so
there
was
a
second
issue
that
was
made
by
the
community
and
that
process
was
like
Hey
I've
noticed
this
same
thing.
We
have
inactive
notaries.
A
So,
when
I
look
at
these
leaderboards,
essentially
of
86,
there's
only
38,
so
we're
like
less
than
half
of
the
notaries
that
are
participating,
and
so
we
try
to
make
it
very
specific,
like
not
coming
to
governance,
calls
not
flagging
any
issues
in
the
governance
repo
not
doing
any
diligence,
not
commenting
on
an
issue
not
active
when
we're
reaching
back
and
on
the
last
two
governance
calls
we
asked
for
feedback
like
what
should
the
metric
be?
Should
this
be
every
week
we're
looking
at
this?
A
Should
this
be
every
two
weeks
and
the
feedback
that
you
gave
as
a
community
was
30
days
feels
like
a
good
number.
So
if
a
notary
is
committed
to
like
doing
their
work
within
a
30-day
period,
that's
very
easy
to
like
measure
and
it
takes
into
account
vacation
or
business
needs,
while
still
making
sure
that
the
program
takes
support
So.
A
This
30-day
number
is
what
we've
been
like
looking
at
and
going
through,
and
so
these
were,
the
notaries
that
came
back
is
like
contributing
in
some
way,
but
we
haven't
seen
a
lot
of
activity
in
these
time
periods
going
forward.
So
some
of
these
notaries
were
on
the
multi-sig
like
Akron
to
starboard
and
some
were
not
on
the
multi-sig,
so
some
of
these
notaries
just
never
got
set
up
or
they
didn't
get
their
Ledger
set,
or
there
was
like
a
technical
blocker
that
may
have
prevented
that.
So
any
of
these
notaries.
A
Here
it's
not
like
it's
a
bad
thing.
It's
just
sometimes
in
the
program.
We
might
not
have
the
same
bandwidth
or
time
to
go
forward
on
this,
and
that
makes
complete
sense.
So
we
welcome
these
notaries
to
reapply
in
the
fifth
round
of
election
we'd
love
to
have
you
continue
in
the
program
and
come
back
or
stay
engaged
for
like
comments
and
slack
we'll
let
you
remain
in
those
channels
as
we
go
forward,
but
these
notaries
have
essentially
like
not
signed
a
data
cap
as
we
go
forward
on
that.
A
A
Let
us
know
and
we'll
make
sure
that
we
incorporate
that
into
it,
and
nothing
is
perfect
and
what
I
don't
want
to
do
is
make
sure
that
there
was
a
notary
who
was
like
trying
to
do
this,
trying
to
get
on
board
and
trying
to
go
forward
and
might
be
missing
out.
So
if
you
were
a
notary-
and
your
name
is
on
this
removal
list,
here's
what
I'm
asking
if
this
makes
sense
and
it's
a
good
fit
completely
looking
forward
to
having
you
come
back
to
us
in
the
fifth
round.
A
Thank
you
and
looking
forward
to
it.
If
there
is
a
problem
like
you,
you've
been
signing
into
a
diligence,
but
maybe
there
was
a
problem
with
your
GitHub
not
getting
registered
whatever
it
may
be,
while
an
issue
before
the
end
of
day
tomorrow
and
in
that
issue,
just
essentially
title
it
hey
I'm
appealing.
My
name
is
Kevin
I'm.
This
notary
I'd
like
to
stay
in
the
program
and
then
spell
out
what
you've
been
doing
for
the
last
90
days
that
we
may
have
missed.
So
you
might
have
been
doing
lots
of
diligence
commenting
on
applications.
A
A
If
you
were
one
of
the
notaries
that
might
not
have
set
up
your
registry,
so
whatever
reasons
like
the
registry
and
your
Ledger
were
never
connected
file,
a
bug
report
with
us,
so
I've
filed
some
on
behalf,
but
I
think
what
we're
looking
for
is
like
really
get
this
across
the
finish
line.
So
again,
if
you're
a
notary
on
this
list
and
you're
scheduled
for
removal
and
that
issue
927,
please
fill
out
this
form.
A
That's
when
we
should
see
some
form
of
diligence
coming
from
your
account,
and
this
is
really
needed
as
we
get
these
ldns
as
we
get
these
Enterprise
fill
plus
and
as
we're
seeing
this
like
migration
to
more
and
more
quality
data,
it's
really
important
to
keep
that
pipeline
moving,
so
your
notaries
are
so
valued
as
you
contribute
and
donate
your
time
for
this,
the
expectation
on
that
time.
Commitment
is
30
days.
A
A
The
expectation
is,
please
file
this
bug
report
that
way
we
can
unblock
you
as
you
go
forward
if
you're
doing
the
diligence
as
a
quick
refresh
if
you're
on
this
call
as
a
notary
and
you're
like
hey
I,
don't
really
remember
what
I
should
be
doing
or
I've
changed
out.
My
company
and
I
have
somebody
new
who's
doing
the
review
process
within
our
organization,
whatever
it
may
be,
Bill
put
together
issue
884..
A
It's
got
it
linked
here
in
this
slide
deck
and
he
essentially
spells
out
step
by
step
by
step
how
to
use
the
Tooling
in
the
registry.
So
you
essentially
like
what
do
you
click?
What
will
you
see?
What
do
you
mark
and
what
are
the
steps
to
follow
so
as
a
friendly
reminder,
notaries
884
is
a
great
way
to
just
kind
of
see
what
that
is
and
then
comment
on
84.
A
If
you
have
any
questions
and
we
can
help
you
go
through
that
as
we
go
down
there
is
a
working
group
update
now
that
I
like
to
kind
of
pass
the
floor
over,
but
I
want
to
pause.
Since
we
covered
a
lot
of
information
on
that
and
see
if
anybody
on
the
call
has
any
questions,
discussions
wants
to
kind
of
like
chat
this
through
the
floor
is
yours.
D
I
just
want
to
kind
of
I
guess
this
is
more
of
a
question,
but
just
confirming
an
assumption
here.
So
all
the
notaries
that
were
inactive
I'm,
assuming
that
between
now
and
tomorrow.
Of
course,
they
shouldn't
be
signing
anything
if
they
are
on
the
multi-sync
before
and
if
they
would
like
to
remain
an
active
notary.
D
They
should
file
for
an
appeal,
but
between
now
since
they've
been
since
they've
been
kind
of
flagged
and
until
we
reach
a
resolution,
I
think
it
makes
more
sense
that
they
don't
become
active
or
sign
anything
yeah,
but
that
would
be
I
think
from
a
trust
and
safety
perspective.
I
think
that
would
be
my
recommendation
to
this
community.
But
if
anyone
disagrees,
please
raise
your
hand,
if
not
I,
guess
we'll
just
assume
by
no
dissent
that
that's
what
we're
agreeing
on.
E
A
Thanks
RG
for
that
I
appreciate
it
all
right,
we'll
have
time
at
the
end
of
the
call
sounds
like
if
anybody
has
questions
we'll
Circle
back
so
again,
if
you're
on
that
list-
and
you
want
to
stay
active-
let
us
know
in
that
appeal.
Otherwise,
thank
you.
So
much
for
your
time,
looking
forward
to
having
you
back
in
the
program
and
then
we'll
just
drive
forward
as
we
go
so
with
that
I'm
going
to
turn
the
floor
over
to
KZ
board
Enterprise
field
plus
Casey.
F
Just
just
to
reiterate
this,
this
working
group
is
sort
of
a
spin-off
in
terms
of
managing
pilot
program
that
we
had
towards
private
data
sets
larger
data
sets,
so
we
need
active
participation
and
support
in
this
project.
Looking
for
notaries,
who
all
agreed
when
they
signed
up
to
be
active,
I
know
that
this
is
a
voluntary
role
and
everyone
has
other
lives
and
jobs
and
things
going
on.
But
this
specific
working
group
is
requiring
a
bit
more
focus
and
participation.
So
it's
not
for
everyone.
F
I
didn't
expect
everyone
to
be
able
to
join
and
and
be
involved,
but
we're
looking
for
notaries
who
are
able
to
conduct
due
diligence
and
review
across
all
open
allocations
and
regions,
and
so
Kerry
you
can.
You
can
move
to
the
next
slide,
this
sort
of
leads
into
part
two
of
the
of
the
issue
948,
so
essentially
with
some
notaries
leaving.
We
have
13
notaries,
who
have
been
active
in
the
past
few
months,
some
not
very
active,
some
more
active.
F
F
F
If
you
haven't
already,
some
of
the
active
notaries
have
already
done
this
as
part
of
applications
that
they're
a
part
of
and
yeah
and
there's
some
other
bullets
here
listed
that
I'll,
be
you
know,
reviewing
sort
of
their
activity
as
part
of
expressing
interest
to
me
and
also
any
new
notary
applicants,
I'll
be
asking
them
to
confirm.
You
know
their
review
of
the
operational
guidelines
of
notaries
and
sort
of
consenting
there.
So
the
timeline
here
is,
if
there's
disagreement
with
this
proposal,
that's
fine.
F
You
know
it's
open
in
GitHub
feel
free
to
leave
comments,
but
the
timeline
right
now,
I
would
say
it's
two
weeks.
Anyone
who's
interested,
please
reach
out
to
me
slack
or
within
the
GitHub
proposal
and
at
the
end
of
August
7th,
we'll
review
those
who
are
interested
and
then
look
to
add
a
few
new
notaries
to
the
working
group
by
August
11th.
A
C
F
G
G
D
D
D
G
D
Yeah,
so
let
me
answer
that
question.
So
yeah
can
I
answer
my
question.
Okay,
can
you
answer
your
question
so
you're
so
essentially
and
since
the
since
the
program
started
every
when
a
a
government,
when
someone
is
added
to
the
governance
team
they're
presented
to
the
community,
so
these
people
are
brought
in
to
do
a
specific
job,
so
essentially
the
cup.
The
community
asks
that
hey.
We
need
a
better,
tooling
and
process
for
notaries.
We
need
someone
to
tackle
abuse.
We
need
someone
to
address.
D
You
know,
client,
tooling,
so
the
way
you
know
this
thing
works
is
they
need
to
get
paid
for
it
because
they're
putting
in
their
time
there's
someone
in
the
community
did
not
step
up
to
do
that
job.
So
protocol
Labs
hired
someone
and
paid
them
money
they
were
presented.
You
know
when
I
joined,
for
example,
it
was
like
RG
is
coming
in
to
do
this
and
he's
doing
Conference
Team.
If
someone
disagreed,
they
had
all
the
rights
to
say
that
well,
this
person
should
not
be
on
the
governance
team.
C
G
D
Yeah
and
then
there's
a
reason,
because
we
would
like
to
avoid
noise
if
you
think
that
there
is
something
being
discussed
in
the
channel
that
everyone
should
be
aware
of.
No
one
is
stopping
you
to
take
a
screenshot
and
post
that
publicly.
There
is
a
reason
there's
a
lot
of
like
closed
channels
between
different
people,
because
we
need
to
do
our
day-to-day
jobs.
D
So
not
everything
can
be
public
because
Parkin,
the
Falcon
slack,
is
an
open
Channel
and
it
creates
a
lot
of
like
noise,
which
is
why
we
have
closed
channels
to
up
to
give
updates
to
certain
certain
groups
of
people
so
that
we're
not
spamming
everyone
but
yeah.
If
you
disagree
with
that
you're,
more
than
welcome
to
make
a
proposal-
or
you
know-
request
not
not
even
make
a
proposal
that
you
know
we
should
not
have
any
closed
channels
about
for
any
notaries
and
I'm
sure
everyone
here
would.
G
D
D
G
F
A
A
Good
questions
on
your
side,
David
I'm,
going
to
give
you
a
link,
just
as
you
get
started
to
like
jump
start
I
know,
there's
like
a
lot
of
GitHub.
If
you
follow
that
link,
that's
that
911,
and
that
was
that
first
proposal
from
the
community
on
like.
Can
we
look
at
this
removal
of
notaries?
So
if
you
take
that,
if
you
do
make
a
new
GitHub
issue,
that's
a
great
starting
place,
you
can
look
forward
then.
Also,
if
you
take
a
look
on
the
past,
call
decks
as
far
as
like
hey.
A
D
Thanks
Gary
for
that,
so
I
think
in
terms
of
specific
issues
we
had
just
had
the
TNT
working
group
call
right
before
this
I
think
so
these
are
I
just
wanted
to
take
some
time
to
share
one
of
my
top
priorities.
Currently
I
just
want
to
mention
one
issue,
which
was
the
issue
regarding
removal
of
Norris,
given
that
there
is
an
active
discussion
there,
even
though
you
know
the
proposed
timeline,
we've
reached
the
timeline,
but
we
don't
have
a
conclusion
there.
D
So
what
I'll
be
doing
as
a
driver
of
the
working
group
is
I'll,
be
posting
a
new,
a
separate
issue
against
each
of
the
notaries
listed
on
that
on
that
issue
and
I'll
be
providing
my
evidence.
Others
are
welcome
to
you
know.
You
know,
agree
with
that
or
disagree,
but
essentially
I
think
what
we're
a
suggestion
I
received
is
that
doing
that
in
in
a
group
manner
owner
is
in
conducive
and
I've
taken
that
suggestion
so
I'll
be
doing
that.
D
Just
to
reiterate,
I
think
my
job
here
is
to
drive
conversations
Implement
process
I'm,
not
essentially
the
judge.
It's
been
a
it's
been
I.
Think
a
lot
of
people
are
expecting
that
I
make
the
call
on
you
know:
data
cab,
removal
or
you
know,
removing
notaries.
I
don't
have
that
power
or
that
ability.
So
I
know
it's
frustrating
for
people,
but
I'm
just
kind
of
retrading.
D
That
I've
also
received
a
lot
of
like
DMS
asking
for
different
kind
of
favors,
but
I've
chosen
to
ignore
them
and
I
the
reason
I'm
sharing
it
here
is.
If
you
are,
you
know
in
that
boat
or
you
haven't
heard
from
me,
I,
you
won't
be
hearing
from
me
moving
forward
as
well,
so
yeah,
I,
think
and
then
the
last
point
is
given
that
we
missed
a
few
TNT
working
group
calls
because
I
was
at
the
network.
Growth
Meetup,
as
well
as
at
espa
I'll,
be
hosting
a
one-hour
block.
D
D
Call
that
will
be
up
this
afternoon
and
you
can
submit
I
think
essentially
I'm
looking
at
like
five
just
I
think
we'll
have
time
to
discuss
five
or
six
issues
giving
each
each
stakeholder
who
against
who
an
issue
is
open
about
eight
to
ten
minutes,
so
I
think
the
best
way
to
do
really.
This
is
it'll,
be
first
come
first
serve,
so
whatever
issues
are
kind
of
submitted
on
that.
You
know
template
we'll,
discuss
those
in
that
hour.
D
I've
actually
chosen
not
to
discuss
these
issues
on
a
call,
because
it
results
in
kind
of
what
just
happened
between
me
and
David.
So
I
think.
But
you
know
I'm
still
gonna
move
ahead
and
like
do
that,
experiment
so
yeah.
If
you
are
an
active
client
or
a
notary
who
has
a
dispute
open?
Please
use
that
template
to
submit
the
issue
and
we'll
discuss
that
on
Friday.
So
that's
where
we
are
at
and
yeah.
The
last
thing
I
want
to
point
out
is
my
top.
D
Priority
is
to
kind
of
Implement
a
framework
and
a
process
to
decentralize
like
outcome.
How
we
decide
on
disputes
I
think
it's
there's
been
a
lot
of
people,
who've
been
so
many
disputes.
I.
Think
we've
made
some
some
creative
improvements
on
how
people
kind
of
flag
disputes
in
this
community
I
think
the
next
step
is
to
figure
out
a
way
in
which
we
get
people
to
agree,
so
that
is
to
experiment
with
voting
mechanisms
as
well
as
different
processes.
A
A
A
And
then
they'll
come
online,
maybe
once
or
never
and
then
in
that
process,
there's
a
lot
of
upkeep
so
like
I,
could
tell
you
from
someone.
That's
like
running
support
and
comms
there's
a
lot
of
like
diligence.
Reports
polls
that
we
have
to
do
and
then
part
of
the
notary
is
like
a
reputational
score
that
can
then
be
leveraged
into
other
systems.
So
it
doesn't
really
feel
like
it's
an
applicable
like
30
days
versus
going
forward
versus.
Why
did
it
not
happen?
A
We
talked
about
this
on
the
call
starting
in
May,
so
we
had
May,
June
and
now
July
for
like
kind
of
this
turnaround
and
talking
about
it,
so
anybody
who
is
being
removed
due
to
the
inactivity,
like
you
haven't,
done
really
a
lot
in
that
time
frame.
This
is
a
good
opportunity
to
kind
of
like
re-pivot
we're
going
to
have
elections
coming
up
in
that
next
round
of
Elections.
You
can
really
spell
out
like
hey.
It
was
a
fourth
round.
Notary
I
was
removed
for
inactivity,
but
in
that
process
I
learned
X,
Y
and
Z.
A
A
F
Sure
I
just
wanted
to
give
a
quick
update
here.
This
was
oh,
so
that
was
presented
last
call
922.
This
proposal
had
overwhelming
positive
support
in
the
comments
on
GitHub
and
it's
implemented
starting
late
last
week,
essentially
were
looking
at
all
new
open
data
set
applications
asking
clients
to
provide
more
details
up
front
before
the
application
is
triggered,
essentially,
focus
on.
You
know
more
information
as
around
the
data
provider
and
the
esps
that
they're
working
with
to
confirm
they're
meeting
the
fill
plus
guidelines.
F
This
is
more
of
an
update
for
notaries.
I
sent
a
note
to
the
notaries
in
the
notary
Channel
as
well
as
you
can
read
the
details
on
this
discussion
topic
here,
but
notaries
are
expected
to
follow
the
guidelines
from
conducting
our
due
diligence.
Essentially,
you
know
making
sure
that
the
applicants
are
meeting
the
fill
plus
guidelines
of
distributed
storage
amongst
SPS
and
a
clear
plan
that
they
have
so
just
wanted
to
make
everyone
aware
that
this
is
this
has
started.
If
anyone
ever
has
any
questions
obviously
feel
free
to
reach
out.
That's
it
thanks.
F
A
D
Sure
so
I
think
the
there's
two
points
here.
One
is
that
this
is
a
proposal.
I
came
up
with,
you
know:
I
wrote
it
down.
It
took
me
about
two
three
four
hours
to
do.
Some
thinking
and
write
it
down.
I
cannot
single-handedly.
You
know,
come
up
with
like
the
best
process
ever
I
think
I've
gotten
a
lot
of
good
feedback
in
this
issue,
and
that's
exactly
my
intention.
D
My
intention
is
not
to
stream
roll
this
and
just
to
address
the
other
part
where
a
lot
of
people
were
calling
out
that
you
know
the
reason
we
started
an
election.
You
know,
alongside
I'm
out
I'm,
going
to
be
out
of
office
for
the
next
two
weeks,
and
that
was
like
that
was
essentially
taking
like
a
like
a
Forward
Thinking
step.
D
I
think
the
the
biggest
two
point
that
I've
received
so
far
is
not
really
shouldn't.
Be
part
of
this
proposed
committee.
I
think
I've
heard
a
lot
of
good
arguments.
Why
that
shouldn't
be
the
case.
I've
also
heard
a
good
argument
saying
that
there
should
be
essentially
kind
of
a
group
of
people
who
are
always
on
standby,
and
so
we,
you
know
randomly
select
a
group
whenever
we
we
would
like
some
like.
We
would
like
input
on.
You
know
on
a
specific
dispute.
D
D
I.
Think
enough,
like
you
know,
an
upward
and
a
downvote
is
sure
you
know.
If
that's
one
way
to
do
it,
and
we
can
like
this
downward
can
mean
that
sure
we
don't
want
a
committee,
but
that
does
not
I
think
if,
if
that
is
an
indication
that
the
community
does
not
want
a
decentralized
manner,
a
decentralized
process
to
address
disputes,
and
they
would
continue
to
have
me
as
the
judge
of
each
dispute-
that's
you
know,
that's
the
only
alternative
that
I
see
when
people
download
an
issue
like
this,
so
yeah.
D
If
you
know
if
and
by
the
next
week,
we
see
a
lot
more
downwards
than
any
kind
of
you
know.
Uploads
I
will
consider
that
the
community
does
not
want
a
committee
and
I
will
continue
to
do.
What
I
do
today
is
I
will
continue
to
provide
my
recommendation.
As
you
know,
I
did
on
a
bunch
of
issues,
but
what
will
happen
and
I'm
just
being
very
honest
here-
is
either
there'll?
D
Be
no
action
taken
or
we'll
just
you
know
be
in
this
clog
Forever
Until
We
have
a
trustless
notary,
so
my
point
here
to
to
the
whole
Community
is
I'm
trying
to
pitch
an
idea
to
address
a
decentralized
way
to
address
open
disputes.
A
committee
is
one
idea
among
thousands
or
millions
of
ideas
that
exists
out
there.
If
you
have
a
better
mechanism,
you
know
or
a
better
way
to
do
with
this
in
the
web
3
manner.
Please
please,
please
propose
it.
D
A
G
G
G
G
D
I
think
I
just
addressed
this
earlier
in
the
call,
but
you
might
have
missed
it,
so
they
were
both
open
at
the
same
time,
got
it
open
at
the
same
time,
yeah
I.
Think
if
you
look
at
the
the
yes
they
open
at
the
same
time,
the
reason
I
opened
the
process
at
the
same
time
is
I
was
expecting.
I
was
not
expecting
that
people
will
agree.
I
was
expecting
that
whatever
form
of
committee
or
whatever
form
of
you,
know
like
organization
that
people
come
up
with,
we
can
have
a
process.
D
But
of
course
you
know,
this
is
all
based
on
feedback.
The
feedback
you
know,
as
you've
pointed
out
in
the
chat,
is
that
people
don't
like
this,
so
we
will
not
be
moving
forward
with
it,
but
all
I'm
encouraging
is
people
to
just
present
more
ideas,
because
you
know
I
only
have
you
know
a
single
brain
so
yeah
so
I'm.
Just
addressing
that
point,
yeah.
A
Good
stuff,
thanks
for
that,
and
then
Lisa
I
saw
your
line
on
mute.
There
was
anything
that
you
wanted
to
add
by
all
means.
Let
us
know
otherwise
we'll
happily
come
back
this
one's
mine
just
as
a
quick
friendly
check-in.
So
we
have
a
lot
of
great
conversations
that
take
place
in
slack
it's
one
of
the
good
communication
tools,
but
obviously
there's
some
downsides
to
slack
one.
The
messages
aren't
retrievable.
After
a
certain
amount
of
time.
Two,
it's
really
difficult
to
link
someone's
slack
ID
to
their
GitHub.
A
So
if
you
wanted
to
tag
somebody
in
an
issue,
it
gets
a
little
bit
squirrely,
so
the
foundation
put
together,
what's
called
modbot,
doesn't
really
impact
you.
This
is
just
like
an
essay,
so
you
can
kind
of
see
this
coming
and
what
this
does
is
essentially
like
tells
us
the
history
of
a
slack
account.
So
if
we
see
someone
posting
like
the
slack
moderation
that
might
use
like
violations
with
the
code
of
conduct,
it
might
have
curse
words.
There's
a
myriad
of
reasons.
This
will
like.
Let
us
see.
Okay,
was
this
slack
handle?
A
It
was
this
email
that
set
it
up,
and
it's
just
meant
to
make
that
communication
tool
a
little
bit
better,
so
we're
still
kind
of
testing
this
getting
ready
to
roll
it
out.
But
this
will
kind
of
have
a
moderation
tool
in
the
future,
where
just
like,
GitHub
or
any
other
issues,
then
notaries
can
say
like
hey.
This
is
a
violation
of
the
code
of
conduct
without
having
to
wait
for
like
myself
or
somebody
else
from
the
foundation
to
come
through
there
and
remove
that
harmful
content.
A
So
you
won't
see
anything
change,
we're
just
working
on
this
on
the
back
end
for
you
to
make
that
just
a
little
bit
easier
to
use
with
this
I
want
to
say
a
real
special
thanks
to
Charles.
So
Phil
Swan's
been
an
active
notary
for
goodness
two
years,
lots
of
really
amazing
contributions
to
the
program
they're
going
to
be
stepping
back
for
a
while
and
really
focusing
on
their
work
in
the
ecosystem.
So
they
had
dm'd
us
about
this
a
couple
weeks
ago.
We
thank
them
very
much
for.
A
Think
they
posted
in
the
slack
Channel
and
made
this
issue
as
well,
but
Charles
if
you're
watching
this
we're
looking
forward
to
seeing
your
contributions.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
time.
Your
effort
and
everything
that
you've
done
really
look
forward
to
one
day.
You
know
time
bandwidth
changes,
please
reapply
we'd,
always
love
to.
Have
you
back?
Thank
you
again
for
that
and
with
that
we
have
around
14
minutes
left.
So
we
had
a
lot
of
conversations.
H
Yeah
I
got
a
specific
email
a
week
ago
from
an
LDN
applicants
who
basically
tried
to
Blackmail
me
to
prove
his
LDN,
so
I
posted
in
there.
What
should
be
the
path
forward
with
this?
Is
this
a
violation
of
the
code
of
conduct
or
shoot?
This
ldm
permanently
be
closed
or
what
would
be
the
best
path
forward?.
A
D
Yeah
so
I
think
one
end
did
flag
this
before
again.
I
I
think
my
recommendation
would
be
we
close
this
LDN
and
you
know
Blacklist
the
client,
but
of
course
I.
Don't
have
a
final
say
so
I
think
I
would
love
to
open
this
up
for
discussion
right
here.
I
see
there
are
50
people
on
this
call
so
I'm,
assuming
that
that
should
be
decentralized
enough
to
come
to
a
decision.
A
Can
I
ask
a
favor
review
I'm
screen
sharing
this
call.
It
makes
it
really
hard
to
pull
up
a
link
and
put
it
in
chat.
Can
you
please,
post
that
if
you
filed
an
issue
or
proposal
post
that
proposal
in
chat
that
way,
we
could
comment
on
this
now
and
then
I'll
flag,
this
in
the
field
plus
Channel
as
well,
so
it
has
an
additional
follow-up.
I
also
mirror
what
RG
is
saying
this.
This
whole
network
design
is
to
bring
you
know,
quality
data
onto
the
program,
and
then
it's
mutually
beneficial
for
everybody.
A
H
A
A
H
A
All
right,
I'm
gonna
put
this
in
Chad
just
so.
If
anybody
wants
to
take
a
look
and
then
I'll
put
this
on
the
radar
for
the
the
trust
and
transparency
teams
and
the
clear
violation
that
we
could
take
a
look
here
and
find
that
comment,
I
appreciate
you
sharing
that
and
we'll
take
the
time
to
go
through
there
with
you.
A
I
D
D
So
if
you
know
there
is
a
an
issue
that
is
very
contentious,
it
will
be
open
for
about
two
weeks
before
you
know
we
can
like
give
out
a
decision
again
if
everyone
anyone
thinks
that
we
should
close
an
issue
in
less
than
two
weeks,
more
than
happy
to
take
that
recommendation
as
well.
But
that's
kind
of
you
know
the
just
so
that
everyone
knows
that's
the
that's
kind
of
the
the
model
that
I'm
going
to
that
I'm
like
that
I
operate
in
so,
and.
D
I
I
J
I
I
K
Yeah
thanks
for
pause,
I
just
want
I,
guess
a
quick
question.
There's
a
so.
It
still
has
some
issues
still
open
and
everything
going
going
going
on
about
to
discuss
and
what's
the
final
conclusion
of
the
the
issues
just
like
nicer
fall,
which
I
I
think
it
still
have
some
controversy
to
discuss.
So
what
is
there
any
clear
dates
to
to
get
the
the
final
conclusion
conclusion
to
close
the
the
issue
so.
D
The
issue
will
remain
open
unless
I
think
we
have
a
majority
that
that
says
that
you
know
we
should
close
this
issue.
I
think
I
haven't
seen.
I
haven't
seen
like
one
side
of
the
of
the
the
balance
so
to
say
heavy
enough
I'm
following
the
discussion
but
yeah
I.
If
you
believe
that
you
know
we
should
close
this
issue,
and
there
are
strong
reasons
that
this
is
harming
then
doing
more
good
I
think
you
should,
and
that's
the
beautiful
part
of
this
thing
right.
D
D
So
I
think
in
the
past
we
did
pass
a
we
passed
a
and
the
the
community
passed
an
issue
or,
like
you
know,
and
I,
was
driving
it
saying
that
any
dispute
in
the
dispute
resolution
tracker
those
not
original
pause.
But
given
that
this
is
correct
dispute
resolution
tracker,
it's
a
separate
issue
and
it
was
created
by
me
I
I.
Don't
think
we
are
able
to
enforce
pause
of
signing
but
again,
I,
think
yeah.
D
So
I
think
the
pausing
of
signing
will
be
pretty
contentious,
but
that
is
all
to
say
if
you
think
that
we
should
like
pass
signing
for
all
of
these
notice
currently
under
dispute.
Yeah
I
would
just
encourage
you
to
open
an
issue
but
yeah
I.
Think
that's.
Where
kind
of
the
Precedence
that
we're
building
on.
H
G
E
G
I
I'll
respond
to
that
which
is
based
on
what
I'm,
seeing
the
the
when
you
when
it
was
when
the
notary
program
was
first
opened.
It
was
anybody
can
be
a
notary
as
long
as
you
participate
in
the
program
and
with
time
as
we've
iterated
we're
introducing
further
constraints
on
who
can
participate
in
the
ecosystem,
and
so
that
is
that
is
the
issue
that
I
have
is
that
we've
moved
from
a
relatively
open
model
to
a
model
now,
which
you
know
being
inactive,
is
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
wrong
with
being
inactive.
G
That
might
be
folks
just
choosing
not
to
engage
given
all
the
controversy,
which
is
the
feedback
that
I've
received
from
other
notaries
and
ultimately,
why
you
know
we're
not
signing
ldns
today
because
there's
just
too
much
controversy,
but
we
certainly
don't
want
to
be
removed
from
the
multi-sig
right.
I
mean
there's
just
because
we
don't
want
to
engage
in
in
what
is
controversial
behavior
on
the
network,
so
I
think
that's
the
the
issue
that
we
have
to
deal
with
is
yeah.
H
H
No,
no,
no!
It's
it's!
No!
It's
not
just
not
civil,
but
anyway,
no
three
signed
on
for
a
certain
level
of
participation
and
when
they
don't
comply
to
that
level.
Yeah
I
think
they're
not
just
not
fit
so
yeah.
If
you
sign
for
level
four
that
you
that
you
sign
on
applications
and
participate
in
calls,
etc,
etc,
and
you
don't
show
up
yeah,
then
you,
then
you
simply
have
to
go
I.
Think!
That's!
Not
that's!
Not
a
discussion!
A
J
Yeah
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
philosophically
I
agree
with
where
David's
coming
from
David
I
think
that
in
general
we
should
be
concerned
about
centralization
towards
the
world
where
that's
not
the
case,
I,
don't
think
this
particular
issue
moves
the
needle
substantially
in
One,
Direction
or
another.
The
definition
of
an
inactive
notary
has
very
little
to
do
with
just
whether
or
not
they're
participating
on
the
multi-sig.
J
If
you
take
a
look
at
how
that's
been
defined,
it's
like
repeated
things
in
slack,
it's
attempts
to
communicate
from
clients
it's
trying
to
get
them
to
engage
in
a
variety
of
different
formats.
Whether
that's
in
governance
calls
githubs
surveys,
we
send
out
via
email
and
not
just
multi-sig
performance
and
so
I
agree.
J
There
might
be
a
lot
that
don't
want
to
sign
because
it's
turbulent
times
and
that's
totally
reasonable,
but
it's
not
an
excuse
to
just
ignore
everything
when
you're
a
part
of
a
body,
that's
trying
to
do
their
best
work
for
the
network,
and
so
this
is
more
of
actually
a
an
attempt
to
minimize
the
surface
from
decision
makers
that
are
not
actively
engaged
in
the
surface.
As
we
move
through
these
more
turbulent
times
to
hopefully
get
to
a
better,
more
democratized,
decentralized
future
foreign.
A
A
A
Hey
everyone
welcome
to
the
second
notary
governance
call
of
July
25th.
Let's
take
a
look
at
the
agenda,
so
we
did
this
call
in
the
morning
and
we
spent
a
lot
of
the
time
on
sections
one
and
discussion
at
four.
So
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
what
is
the
inactive
notary
removal
process
look
like
how
was
the
documentation
done
on
this
and
then
notaries
that
are
remaining?
What
are
we
looking
for
as
far
as
diligence
goes
and
notaries
that
might
be
going
to
inactive?
A
A
If
you
need
backup
support
or
help
everyone
here
has
a
little
bit
of
a
role
and
a
way
to
support
you
and
what
you
need
as
you
go
forward,
if
you're
not
sure
who
to
reach
out
to
you
can
always
ping
me
and
I
can
help
route
you
to
the
best
point
of
contact
or
help
get
you
connected
with
someone
that
can
help
you
all
right
with
that.
Let's
take
a
look
so
notaries
on
the
call,
thanks
for
being
here,
I
appreciate
your
time,
I'm
going
to
post
the
SLA
link
here
in
slack.
A
So
if
you
want
to
grab
that,
you
can
go
ahead
and
sign
up
again,
we've
kind
of
stressed
this
in
the
past.
What's
really
nice
about
this
airtable
form
is
notaries
that
come
to
these
calls.
You
give
us
feedback
about
where
your
time
is
going.
What
tooling
is
working?
What
tooling
is
not
working-
and
this
goes
a
long
way
on
like
where
we're
investing
resources
and
trying
to
make
sure
that
this
program
scales
in
a
way
that
saves
you
the
most
amount
of
time
as
you
go
down.
A
If
you
are
not
a
notary
and
you're
on.
This
call
highly
recommend
you
sign
in.
If
you
apply
in
the
future
or
something
comes
up
and
you
like
have
a
question,
it's
a
really
effective
way
to
kind
of
show
participation
in
the
program
and
kind
of
making
your
voice
heard
aside
from
GitHub.
So
the
link
is
right
there
in
chat,
it's
right
here
in
the
slide
deck,
if
you're
looking
as
well
all
right
so
maybe
about
in
late
may,
we
had
this
issue
got
filed
and
this
was
issue
920.
A
If
we
have
an
active
notaries
in
the
program,
maybe
something's
changed
in
their
business
model.
Maybe
they're
not
in
a
good
place
to
do
this
right
now,
no
harm,
no
foul.
Let's
take
a
look,
so
what
we
did
over
that
time
frame
over
the
last
few
calls
is
we
pulled
in
like
Hey
we're
going
to
announce
this?
We
talked
about
this
on
June
6th,
then
on
June
14th,
we
shared
everyone's
metrics
in
slack.
How
many
calls
you've
been
on
how
many
applications
you've
signed?
We
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that
was
accurate
and
clearly
represented.
A
Thank
you.
We
fixed
all
those
numbers
and
we
made
a
public
repo
where
we
said
hey.
This
is
all
the
data
that
we
have,
and
this
is
what's
coming,
so
this
has
kind
of
been
like
in
the
works
for
probably
the
last
eight
weeks,
maybe
10
as
far
as
like.
How
are
we
supporting
the
notaries
that
are
in
the
program
and
how
are
we
making
sure
that
the
notaries
that
are
on
the
multi-sig
that
are
responsible
for
the
applicants
have
the
tools
that
they
need?
A
So
when
we
had
this
issue,
we
broke
it
down
by
the
slas
when
we
had
the
applications
for
the
fourth
round
of
a
notary.
This
took
place
around
you
know,
November
of
2022.
I,
think
we
had
over
like
a
hundred
applications
and
what
we
did
is
we
looked
at
the
scoring
Benchmark
and
we
scored
the
applications
based
off
like
reputation,
time
and
program,
and
one
of
those
fields
was
the
slas
and
where
notaries
would
say,
like.
A
If
we
have
a
notary
that
said
that
they
would
be
participating,
that
they
would
be
active
on
the
leaderboard
that
they
would
be
coming
and
making
their
voice
heard
on
the
governance
side
of
things
and
we're
not
seeing
that
they
might
be
taking
a
spot
from
somebody
that
could
be
doing
those
things
or
an
applicant.
Who
could
be
so
when
we
put
all
this
out
there,
we
kind
of
spelled
this
out
on
issue
630
and
904,
and
what
this
broke
down
to
was
like.
A
When,
when
we
look
at
the
removal
of
the
notaries,
it
was
not
attending
the
calls
or
very
sporadically
attending
the
calls,
not
reviewing
applications
or
doing
diligence
or
not
signing.
So
on
the
last
call,
we
talked
about
what's
a
good
time
frame,
not
just
doing
this
every
year,
but
doing
this
you
know.
Is
it
two
weeks?
Is
it
one
week
what's
a
realistic
timeline
for
a
notary
to
participate
in
this
program,
because
it's
volunteer
we're
all
working
to
make
this
better
as
we
give
our
time?
A
So
there
was
a
new
application
that
was
filed
around
June
and
that
was
9
11..
This
also
came
from
the
community
and
they
were
saying
look
I'm,
noticing
that
there's
only
30
notaries
out
of
86.
I'm
having
trouble
getting
a
hold
of
people.
We
need
to
have
some
type
of
proposal
where
we
have.
We
reduce
these
amount
of
notaries
that
just
aren't
in
the
program
but
are
remaining
on
the
system.
A
So
these
were
the
notaries
that
had
signed
up
that
had
the
lowest
participation
if
any,
with
zero
signatures
or
very
limited
participation
on
these
governance
calls,
and
so
what
we're
encouraging,
then,
is
these
notaries
will
be
removed
from
the
multi-sig
but
highly
encouraged.
If
they
wish
to
remain
in
the
program,
will
let
them
stay
on
the
GitHub,
we'll?
Let
them
stay
in
the
slack
channels.
They
can
still
comment.
They
can
still
come
to
these
calls.
They
could
still
sign
in
what
we're
doing
is
we're
just
removing
them
from
the
multi-sig.
A
So
that
way,
when
data
applicants
come
to
fill
Plus
or
they
come
to
the
filecoin
ecosystem
and
they're
matched
with
the
notary,
we
know
that
the
notaries
that
they're
matched
with
are
going
to
be
active
in
responding
in
a
matter
of
days
versus
months
and
months
and
months
where
they
might
get.
You
know
sidetracked
on
this
one.
So
if
you
are
a
notary
on
this
list,
I
highly
encourage
you
if
you're
on
this
call
now.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
your
participation
in
the
program.
Thank
you
for
being
a
part
of
web3.
A
Thank
you
for
signing
up
and
taking
all
the
time.
It's
not
a
cheap
lift
to
be
in
this
program.
It's
a
labor
of
love
and
I
appreciate
that
so
much
if
you
would
like
to
come
back
in
the
next
election
love
to
have
you.
So
if
you
want
to
feel
free
to
put
that
in
there
and
come
back
if
there
are
any
notaries
on
here
and
they're
like
Hey,
Kevin,
I,
I
missed
this
or
something
happened
or
you're
missing
some
data.
A
Please
please
I'd
love
to
be
corrected,
so
if,
for
example,
you
look
in
the
issues-
and
we
say
that
hey,
we
don't
have
any
signing
data
on
you
for
the
last
six
months
and
that's
wrong.
Please
let
me
know
just
file
an
issue
and
please
do
so
before
the
end
of
day
tomorrow.
So,
if
you're
on
the
call
now,
please
do
it
if
you're
watching
this,
when
this
goes
on
YouTube
in
a
few
hours.
A
Please
take
the
time
to
do
it
and
just
say:
like
hey,
I'm,
appealing
I
signed
25
applications,
somehow
you
don't
have
a
record
on
them
and
be
very
specific.
Like
hey
I
signed
these
application
on
these
dates.
These
are
the
links
and,
if
there's
anything,
that's
variance
on
the
data
that
we've
shared
in
those
issues.
Please
let
me
know
if
it's
it's
a
fit
like,
we
just
haven't
seen
you
in
a
while.
Obviously
things
change.
We
hope
that
you
come
back.
A
We'd
love
to
have
you
and
we'll
get
you
back
on
in
the
next
election
with
that
for
notaries
that
are
staying.
One
of
the
things
we're
looking
at
is
rather
than
doing
this
every
six
months
and
then
kind
of
making
sure
that
the
system
is
healthy
and
that
it
has
notaries
that
are
going
to
respond
to
applicants
on
the
last
call.
A
A
We're
going
to
look
at
this
like
on
a
rolling
30-day
period
like
if
we
don't
see
any
activity,
I'll,
probably
reach
out
in
a
very
friendly
way
like
hey,
is
everything
okay
is:
are
you
still
in
the
program
and
you
might
write
back
yeah
really
busy
with
work
or
yeah
I'm
on
vacation
or
whatever
it
may
be,
and
that
way
we're
just
kind
of
keeping
up.
This
is
also
a
benefit
of
having
a
smaller
notary
pool.
When
you
start
to
message
and
bulk
on
slack
with,
you
know,
86
different
notaries.
A
It
gets
really
hard
to
manage
that
workload
as
we
take
a
look
at
this
with
30
notaries
produced.
It
makes
it
a
lot
of
easier
to
kind
of
like
keep
that
up.
So
the
expectation
going
forward
is
like
we're,
seeing
those
SLA
levels
participating
and
we're
kind
of
getting
this
activity
on
the
month,
so
that
applications
are
moving
forward
if,
for
any
reason,
you're
blocked
because
of
a
technical
issue.
I
know
that
there
was
some
notaries
that
never
got
them
in
multi-sig
for
whatever
issue
with
their
Ledger,
and
we
haven't
been
able
to
correct
that.
A
For
you,
please,
let
me
know:
I'll
help
you
file
a
bug
issue
or
here's
the
link
right
on
this
slide.
If
you're,
seeing
this
and
you're
coming
just
file,
this
bug
report-
and
we
will
have
a
third
party
contractor-
take
a
look
help
reach
out.
All
we
need
is
like
your
console
logs
and
just
tell
us
what's
going
on
and
that
way
we
can
help
troubleshoot
and
unblock
you.
A
So
if
you
are
a
notary
and
you
have
any
technical
issues
that
are
blocking
you
from
doing
this,
please
please
let
us
know
and
we'll
help
you
if
you
don't
know
how
to
get
this
shoot
me
a
DM
or
tag
me
into
the
plus
Channel
and
I'll
be
happy
to
back
you
up.
However,
I
can
to
help,
and
then
notaries
that
are,
you
know
actively
signing
actively
reviewing.
A
A
So
from
the
time
you
go
into
registry
to
when
you
look
at
GitHub
and
if
you
click
on
any
of
these
buttons,
you
can
specify
what
level
of
diligence
you
feel
comfortable
with.
So
if
you
look
in
an
application-
and
it
doesn't
pass
your
test
as
a
fiduciary
of
the
program,
you
can
mark
that
right
in
the
registry,
and
not
only
does
that
applicant
know
what
to
do
to
improve
to
come
back
and
get
that
block
reward.
A
It's
also
a
way
for
you
to
show
hey,
I'm
participating,
hey
I'm,
looking
at
these
applications,
hey
I'm,
helping
to
onboard
data
onto
the
ecosystem.
So
if
you
have
any
questions,
884
is
a
really
good
resource
for,
like
what
buttons
do.
I
click.
What
workflows
do
I
follow
and
as
a
friendly
reminder
on
that.
A
So
if
you
are
on
this
call
and
you're
part
of
this
working
group,
what
they've
been
seeing
is
very
similar
things
where
they'll
have
a
huge
application,
it's
waiting
for
signatures
and
they
haven't
been
able
to
get
a
hold
of
notaries
or
those
notaries
have
come
back
and
say
like
hey.
This
isn't
a
good
fit
I,
don't
want
to
be
in
the
program,
so
they
flagged.
The
notaries
that
have
been
an
active
and
not
participating
so
essentially
have
signed
up
for
this
extracurricular
working
group,
but
have
not
been
signing,
have
not
been
coming
to.
A
Meetings
have
not
been
participating.
So
when
that
happens,
it's
really
tricky
for
some
of
these
ldns
or
these
large
Enterprise
applications
to
move
forward.
While
finding
this
active
group
of
notaries,
so
they're
doing
something
very
similar
to
the
general
notary
is
they're
saying:
look,
we
have
these
notaries
that
are
inactive.
A
It's
okay,
please
come
back
when
it's
a
good
fit
we'll
have
this
conversation
but
they're
also
taking
these
notaries
off
The
rosters,
so
that
if
there
is
an
active
notary
that
active
notary
can
get
in
contact
with
the
applicant
a
lot
sooner,
if
you're
on
this
list
and
you're
enjoying
this
working
group,
but
maybe
there
was
something
that
came
up
or
a
family
change.
Kz
is
the
best
point
of
contact.
A
So
if
you
message
him
in
the
working
group
Channel
or
on
slack
he'll
talk
with
you
I
think
that
he
said
that
they're
looking
at
their
removal
date
in
about
two
weeks,
so
this
isn't
happening
tomorrow
and
again.
This
is
only
impacting
for
that.
Extracurricular
trust.
Excuse
me,
Enterprise
field
plus
working
group.
If
you
have
any
questions,
Casey
is
the
point
of
contact
on
that.
A
So
with
that
kind
of
clearing
out
a
garden
any
of
those
notaries
that
might
not
be
willing
to
kind
of
step
into
it
or
don't
have
the
bandwidth
right
now
in
Q3,
there's
a
call
for
any
notaries
that
are
newer
to
the
program
or
that
might
want
to
get
involved.
Casey
is
actively
soliciting
anybody
who
wants
to
join
the
Enterprise
field
plus
and
what's
nice
about
this-
is
he
spelled
out
the
issue?
A
So
if
you
have
this
slide
deck
in
chat
or
hearing
the
link
in
the
YouTube
video,
they
need
about
15
or
20
active
notaries,
and
the
reason
for
this
is
as
these
signatures
are
required,
these
applicants
they
need
to
have
somebody
that
they
can
reach
out
to
so.
The
ideal
goal
is
that
when
there's
a
notary
who's
tapped
is
like
a
fiduciary
review,
we
know
that
we're
going
to
get
a
reply
versus
just
going
to
voicemail
and
not
hearing
back
for
weeks
or
months.
A
So
if
you
were
Keen
to
join
this,
he
kind
of
spells
out
the
requirements
at
the
bottom
of
the
slide.
But
you
have
to
be
an
active
V4
notary
that
you
have
to
complete
a
kyc
check
and
that
if
you're
an
applicant,
you
have
to
understand
the
guidelines
like
what
is
good
data.
What
is
bad
data?
What
does
diligence
look
like
and
if
you're
looking
to
take
that
on,
if
you're
a
notary
in
SLI,
4
or
5,
this
is
a
great
chance
to
get
into
it.
So
once
again,.
A
If
you
want
to
join
that
working
group,
RG
shared
a
little
bit
on
what's
going
on
with
trust
and
transparency.
So
this
morning
they
had
a
call
and
I
think
that
was
right
before
the
governance
and
RG
kind
of
spelled
out
like
what
are
his
priorities.
And
what
is
he
looking
at
from
this
trust
side
of
the
Phil
plus
program?
A
So
what
he's
doing
is
looking
at
like
having
a
voting
mechanism
so
that
it's
very
decentralized
with
disputes
I
think
one
of
the
issues
that
he's
trying
to
raise
is
he
doesn't
want
to
be
the
Arbiter
or
seen
as
the
operator
of
like
what
is
a
dispute
and
how
does
that
get
solved
more
of
a
facilitator.
So
if
this
comes
up,
how
can
RG
support
both
parties
so
that
it's
flushed
out
in
a
respectful
and
professional
manner
and
that
it's
addressed
in
like
an
ecosystem
type
way
or
it's
transparent
and
open?
A
So
RG
is
really
trying
to
work
in
that
model
where
he
is
just
facilitating
and
not
making
these
calls
and
then
making
sure
that
the
community
is
aware
of
that
and
respects
that
and
then
is
also
tracking
that
the
second
thing
is:
how
can
we
accelerate
the
data
cap
removals
so
once
an
an
applicant
was
found
to
have
fraud?
How
do
we
take
that
data
cap
back
and
how
do
we
work
with
that
tooling
that
Phil
and
Simon
have
been
doing
then?
The
third
is
just
Implement
I.
Think
you
want
to
distress
that
I.
A
Think
that's
why
you
put
it
in
bold.
Is
that
RG
is
not
the
decision
maker
in
these
trust
and
transparency.
Conversations
he's
more
again,
I'm
just
going
to
use
that
word
facilitator,
making
sure
that
it's
moving
forward,
that
it
has
a
point
of
contact
that
if
there
was
a
block
or
anything
that
comes
up,
he
can
help.
Do
that
so
I,
don't
know
where
that
comes
from
is
the
email,
but
if
there
was
an
issue
with
disputes
or
anything's
coming
up,
it's
not
like
RG
can
unblock
you.
A
All
right
last
is
just
a
couple
of
quick
issues.
First
is
just
data
cap
flow
for
922,
so
this
proposal
got
written
about
maybe
three
weeks
ago,
two
weeks
ago,
one
week,
oh
my
gosh,
it's
one
week
ago,
I
feel
like
I'm
aging
right
before
my
eyes,
and
what
this
is
essentially
saying
is
that
notaries
are
expected
to
follow
these
guidelines
for
diligence
and
then
just
checking
in
on
what
that
flow
is.
A
So
if
you
look
at
issue
922,
it's
essentially
like
how
does
data
move
through
the
network
and
then
how
does
that
kyc
process
play
into
it?
So
this
is
kind
of
checking
in
on
that
and
making
sure
that
this
proposal
is
like
cleared
with
the
network
cleared
with
you
that
everyone
has
thoughts,
has
a
chance
to
look
at
this
vote
kind
of
make
their
voice
heard.
So
if
you
haven't
checked
out
922,
it's
a
quick
read,
maybe
five,
ten
minutes.
A
If
you
have
thoughts
or
feedback,
please
leave
it
with
an
emoji
or
just
actually
commenting
on
the
issue.
It
goes
a
long
way
and
then
for
the
trust
and
transparency
side
they're,
looking
at
having
a
more
open
election
for
like
who's
joining
that
trust
and
transparency.
So
again,
I
think
when
RG
was
stressing
those
three
points.
It
was
that
the
trust
and
transparency
is
not
an
RG.
A
Rg
is
just
a
servant
of
that
working
group
that
that
working
group
is
really
comprised
of
notaries,
community
members,
storage
providers
and
then
RG
is
kind
of
facilitating
that
role
as
it
goes
forward.
So
if
you
would
like
to
be
involved
in
that
trust
and
transparency,
if
you
have
thoughts
on
like
ways
to
make
this
open
and
better-
and
you
might
want
to
get
into
that
dispute
resolution
process,
this
is
a
great
opportunity,
so
they
spelled
it
issue
in
940
and
941.
A
This
is
just
putting
this
out
there,
so
you're
aware
to
kind
of
take
a
look
at
it
and
then.
Lastly,
this
comes
from
me.
It's
one
thing
that
I've
been
noticing
with
slack,
is
trying
to
keep
the
comms
really
civil
and
moving
forward.
Obviously,
there's
going
to
be
Discord
in
a
network,
obviously
we're
going
to
have
different
opinions
as
we
move
towards
like
web
3
as
a
whole.
Obviously,
as
this
program
evolves
and
develops,
there's
going
to
be
different
ways
that
we
communicate
love.
It
support
it.
A
What
we
don't
support
is
any
kind
of
violations
to
the
code
of
conduct.
You
know
name
calling
or
something
very
specific
or
threats
or
blackmailing,
so
we're
working
with
these
moderation
tools
that
run
in
slack
and
essentially
what
they
can
do
is
they
can
like
moderate
content.
They
can
identify
like
patterns
of
behavior
and
then
link
that
back
to
slack
accounts.
A
This
just
trying
to
let
you
know
we're
really
working
to
make
sure
that
that
is
a
safe
and
usable
system
in
Slack
to
kind
of
share
ideas,
move
between
GitHub
and
these
calls
so
no
action,
but
you
might
see
that
develop
and
then
lastly,
just
a
big
thank
you.
So
those
of
you
that
have
known
Charles
he's
been
with
the
program
for.
A
Two
two
and
a
half
years
he's
going
to
be
stepping
back
and
he's
kind
of
stepping
away
from
the
notary
program
and
that's
completely
normal,
doesn't
have
the
bandwidth
and
he's
going
to
kind
of
focus
on
more
ecosystem
projects.
So
I
just
wanted
to
take
a
moment
to
thank
Charles.
We
really
appreciated
your
time.
Your
input,
your
effort,
if
you
ever
want
to
come
back
looking
forward
to
having
you
in
the
next
election
and
wish
you
only
success
and
Good
Vibes
as
you
go
forward
on
that.
Thank
you.
A
Yeah
really
good
question,
so
I
think
that
the
outcome
was
that
there
was
no
outcome.
There's
two
essential
issues
that
are
going
on.
Simultaneous
one
is
the
removal
of
inactive
notaries.
That
should
be
very
apolitical,
like
love
to
have
notaries
in
the
program.
If
it
wasn't
a
good
fit
love
to
have
them
come
back.
The
second
was
there
is
some
dispute,
that's
with
like
fraud,
waste
and
abuse
that
the
trust
and
transparency
is
working
on.
A
That
came
up
a
little
bit
in
the
first
call,
but
it
wasn't
really
addressed
as
far
as
what's
going
to
happen
and
RG
is
going
to
have
dedicated
time
on
the
next
working
group
call
to
kind
of
get
into
that
issue
of
like
the
proposal
for
removing
notaries
that
were
like
bound
to
have
abuse.
Was
there
a
specific
application
or
a
specific
notary
group
that
you'd
like
to
dive
into
I'll,
be
happy
to
pull
up
anything?
You
need.
L
A
A
Oh
I
see
it
didn't
move
forward,
I,
don't
think
it
was
meant
to
move
forward.
Let
me
pull
it
up
here
to
stab
it
on
the
screen,
as
we
talk
yeah.
So
essentially,
if
you
look
at
the
timelines
they're
having
like
a
voting
period
up
until
August
1st
so
like
for
another
six
days
on,
if
this
is
a
good
idea
like
does
this
make
sense
to
move
forward-
and
this
was
a
lot
of
the
discussion
in
the
morning-
call
where
people
said:
hey
I,
don't
think
that
this
is
a
good
idea.
A
How
are
we
looking
at
this
and
then
to
kind
of
paraphrase
and
definitely
watch
the
video?
So
you
get
your
own
unique
perspective,
but
it
was
when
we
look
at
these
GitHub
issues
and
you
see
that
there's
like
10
thumbs
down.
Does
that
mean
that
it
represents
like
the
notary
and
ecosystem
for
fill
Plus,
or
does
the
fact
that
it
not
have
more
thumbs
up
that?
It
goes
positive
and
you
know
that's
such
a
good,
takeaway
and
I
think
that
that
conversation
moved
into
slack.
So
to
kind
of
give
you
a
roundabout
answer.
A
L
A
M
C
A
Yeah,
that's
such
a
good
point
and
if
I'm
hearing
you
correctly
and
saying
this
back,
to
make
sure
that
I
am
and
I
can
bubble
this
up,
it's
that
as
a
notary.
What
is
the
incentive
to
participate
in
the
program?
You
know
if
it's?
Obviously,
if
it's
fraud,
then
it's
like
to
bring
on
your
own
data
and
give
it
to
your
own
storage
centers.
If
it's
to
make
sure
that
the
program
grows
and
that
your
investment
in
the
file
coin
ecosystem
grows
with
it,
then
it
aligns.
A
Does
it
align
with
like
a
small
monetary
value
to
cover
it?
I
think
that
these
are
really
good
questions
and
really
where
the
program
is
looking
to
address
these
in,
like
the
second
part
of
the
year
with
the
roadmap,
I,
don't
have
an
answer,
but
I
know
that
this
is
coming
and
I
will
put
this
on
the
agenda
for
the
next
call
Mark,
so
that
we
can
get
some
more
information
and
I'd
really
love
to
hear
feedback
from
notaries,
on
the
call
or
in
slack
or
in
GitHub,
on
your
thoughts
on
ways
to
I.
A
M
A
A
Well
with
that
is
always
genuine.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
being
on
this
call,
thank
you
for
being
in
the
program.
Thank
you
for
being
Ford
adopters
on
web3
really
happy
to
have
you.
If
there's
anything
you
need,
please
let
me
know,
and
a
lot
of
these
conversations
are
going
to
be
taking
place
in
slack
and
GitHub,
so
we'll
make
sure
that
I'm
bubbling
up
those
links,
so
you
don't
have
to
just
go
sift
through
lots
of
them,
but
please
check
out
940
and
there's
a
lot
of
conversations
taking
place
on
that.
If.