►
From YouTube: Principles Seminar Session 8: Transparency
Description
In the eighth session of this 12 part series, join status' core contributors as we discuss and debate to which degree we uphold our principles, how we can improve our performance, and what we're adding to our Wall of Shame.
A
B
A
B
A
A
C
A
A
C
I'm
here
excellent,
so
to
me,
if
ever
like
it,
maybe
might
overuse
a
focus,
I,
don't
think
it's
it's
yet
very
clear!
It's
too,
like
how
transparent
we
are
out,
what
we
information,
restore,
how
we
track
or
if
we
track
I,
think
from
yeah
from
the
use
of
states
or
anything
we're
very
actually
transparent.
Funnily
enough
about
what
we're
doing
and
how
we're
doing
it
and
I
mean
that
from
point,
if
you're,
like
opening
up
the
app
I,
think
it's
clear
enough
Forster,
what
we're
doing
yeah
cool.
A
E
A
D
Right
I
mean
I,
think
I
only
work
itself
with
we.
We
do
a
lot
of
things
sort
of
internally,
so
to
speak
and
did
something
we're
actually
not
that
happy
about,
and
we
take
need
to
be
a
bit
more
open
about
about
our
processes
and
making
them
more
transparent
to
the
world
in
order
to
be
to
comply
more
with
the
status
principles.
D
D
For
example,
we
use
a
pivotal
tracker
and
it's
private
with
this
console
are
things
privately
and
you
know
we
take
a
mate
to
do
maybe
to
have
a
more
public
bug
tracker
and
this
guy
could
discuss
things
more
in
public
channels
and
things
like
that.
Yeah
yeah,
but
there's
sort
of
this
ongoing
discussion
in
terms
of
transferring
versus
privacy
on
that,
because
you
know
it's
normal
for
people
that
projects
discussions
about
development.
D
F
A
G
Hi
is
the
idea
that
we
all
suggest
something
around
transparency
from
the
wall
of
shame,
yes,
well,
I
think
mine
would
be
kind
of
sort
of
similar
to
URIs.
That
I
think
there's
like
work,
that
happens.
It
isn't
always
visible
and
I'm.
Always
curious
and
I,
always
wonder
like
what
percentage
of
the
meetings
we
have
result
in
any
kind
of
artifacts
like
written
note
that
people
can
follow
along
with
and
but
that's
also
balanced
and
against.
A
B
Well,
so
we're
talking,
we've
been
having
this
discussion
about.
You
know
what
what
degree
of
information
we're
gonna
disclose
if
we
don't
even
know
what?
What
what
that
is
I
mean
we
need
to
have
some
sort
of
financial
disclosure
policy
and
statement
that
says.
Okay.
This
is
data
that
we
need
to
keep
private.
For
these
reasons,
I
mean
we
did
discuss
this
in
earlier
I
forget
which
one
it
was,
but
we
need
to
have
some
sort
of.
E
B
H
I
quickly,
post
the
comment
so
sorry
that
I
missed
out-
and
could
you
say
it
a
lot
cry
or
shout
out
so
I
so
in
for
finances
to
meet
the
transition
period
to
the
Dow
is
still
unclear,
since
the
salaries
are
still
very
delicate
issue,
I
mean
once
we're
at
the
Dow.
Everything
is
public,
but
I
mean
to
open
it
up
now,
I,
don't
see
the
roadmap
for
the
transition
from
the
state
that
we
are
now
in
to
the
dollar
and
then
also
some
payment.
H
Details
might
also
be
delicate
once
we
are
in
the
Dow
am
I
thinking
about.
If
somebody
has
some
health
issues
and
gets
therefore,
some
payments
for
that
via
the
state.
Somehow
so
probably
nobody
are
only
a
few
people
would
be
open
to
disclose
that,
and
so
that
would
needs
to
be
covered
via
separate
channel
order,
or
maybe
some
somehow
implemented
by
a
very
broad
network.
H
A
I
Yeah
I
think
similar
to
JB's
point
I,
think
just
trying
to
understand
what
transparency
really
means
in
the
context
of
incubate
we'd
love
to
be.
We
need
to
build
the
path
as
well
a
roadmap
on
how
to
implement
a
more
transparent
process
when
it
comes
to
the
incubator,
whether
it's
through
the
applications
or
the
evaluation,
and/or
community
involvement
and
what-have-you
yeah.
So
I
think
we
just
need
to
think
about
it
more
and
really
map
something
out,
because
it's
not
clear
to
me
exactly
what
full
transparency
means
in
this
context.
A
J
I'd
say
the
same
thing
there,
but
a
quick
comment
like
in
regards,
if
we
hold
ourselves
relative
to
almost
every
other
company
in
the
entire
world,
we're
ridiculously
transparent,
I'm,
not
saying
it's
a
bad
thing,
I'm
just,
but
if
we
hold
ourselves
to
our
own
standards,
I'm,
not
terribly
sure
what
transparency
exactly
means
and
what
we're
backed.
What
what
specifically
we're
striving
for
outside
of
like
give
all
the
things
to
everybody
in
as
many
ways
possible.
A
K
Yeah
to
kind
of
select
Cory,
said
and
I
think
that
we
are
insanely
transparent
as
well.
I
would
give
us
much
more
credit
than
you
know.
I
think
we're
being
a
little
hard
on
ourselves,
we're
pretty
good
at
being
transparent,
but
also
with
kind
of
what
Kerry
said
where
we
have
like
a
lot
of
channels
and
like
how
decisions
are
being
made
and
who
are
making
those
decisions.
I
think
it's
kind
of
hard
to
see
where
those
ideas
and
thoughts
like
kind
of
all
came
from,
because
it's
just
like
so
much
information.
A
A
L
And
so
I
think
that,
at
least
from
that
from
the
development
perspective,
sometimes
we
are
having
meetings
where
we
make
decisions
or
reach
conclusions
and
I
think
it
is
important
to
polish
this
conclusion
in
public
channels
for
people
to
learn
about
them
and
sharing
this
piece.
Also,
the
knowledge
is
shared
and
not
keep
into
a
few
people.
A
A
There's
a
bit
of
a
problem
in
terms
of
we
have
this
sort
of
in-between,
Dow
and
central
company
model,
and
that
also
means
that
there's
sort
of
some
issues
with
I'll
talk
about
this
later,
but
in
terms
of
principal
agent
problem.
Essentially
so
what
we,
what
what?
What
this
data
is
multi-sig
is
paying
for
exactly,
and
this
is
sort
of
having
a
tenure.
Can
you
model
where?
So,
if
you
get
hired
and
you
work
or
whatever.
B
You
could
add
another
one
for
me.
We,
this
has
now
been
coming
up
with
this.
Most
recent
nightly
release
that
we
had
that
made
it
through.
We
don't
even
have
you
know,
processes
our
testing
processes
or
Quality
Assurance
processes,
our
security
processes,
for
how
we
do
releases
document
in
anywhere.
A
D
I
E
Should
we
look
together
in
the
openness
notes,
maybe
I
think
transparent
and
no
openness
means
kind
of
the
same,
but
not
this
exactly.
They
have
an
intersection
because
the
openness
is
like.
You
are
open
to
the
participation,
but
also
open
in
information
in
transparent.
You,
you
don't
have
to
be
open,
but
you
need
to
be
only
everyone
needs
to
see
every
thing,
the
whys
in
the
house.
M
Yeah
I
mean,
with
regards
to
transparency,
can
Corey's
point
like
ridiculously
transparent
in
terms
for
the
meetings
up
on
YouTube.
All
the
docs
are
super.
You
know
they're
all
up
on
the
website.
The
github
repos
are
really
well
maintained
and
I
think
with
regards
to
yeah
just
to
can't
double
down
on
the
point
of
it's
not
entirely
clear
or
transparent
for
someone
who
wants
to
get
involved
because
there's
so
many
different
avenues
and
summer
stage,
so
they
get
through
to
actually
suss
out.
Okay,
where
could
I
participate
a
where
could
I
be
yep
Ellie.
A
So
a
few
reasons
one
is
in
terms
of
as
well
be
mentioned
of
the
contributors
that
we
are
not
trying
to
be
a
company
we're
trying
to
be
like
sort
of
a
thriving
open-source
product,
and
that
means
that
it
seizes
of
get
this
television
that
we
as
cooking
up.
As
we
know,
there's
this
tribal
knowledge
like.
Oh
it
just
asked
this
person
and
so
on,
but
that
doesn't
sort
of
scale
and
doesn't
work
for
other
contributors.
A
So
we
need
to
be
mindful
of
someone
completely
new
you
being
able
to
participate
and
I
remember
when
I
joined
and
they
I
joined
some
sort
of
chat
channel
and
then
I
had
pounds.
Wood
to
build
for
a
bit
and
I
could
ask
I
was
talking
to
someone
I
forgot,
I
think
was
angry
for
a
bit
and
help
me
out
and
we're
just
having
having
it
be
easy
to
get
started
and
sort
of
having
empathy
for
this
is
a
first
journey
and
and
making
it
easy
for
people
join.
A
That's
one
reason:
another
is
in
terms
of
effective,
actually
raised
a
bunch
of
money
in
ICAO
and
sort
of
certain
promises
made
a
certain
responsibility.
It's
a
little
responsibility.
We
have
to
serve
our
token
holders
in
terms
of
what
we
actually
doing
with
all
these
funds
and
how
we
spending
it
and
so
on,
and
and
finally
also
responsibility
to
our
users
in
terms
of
technical
faults
and
so
on,
because
right
now
people
don't
take
it
serious
enough.
A
And
this
concept
of
symmetry
of
information,
so
I,
say
heuristic,
someone
who
does
no
special
privileges,
we're
sort
of
a
Google
account
or
some
tribal
knowledge
or
whatever
they
should
have
access
to
the
same
information
to
contributors
as
a
scorpy
livers,
and
it's
also
ties
in
to
making
things
I
think
consumable
that
plenty
of
people
mentioned
and
we're
doing
a
better
job
now
than
a
few
months
ago.
But
we
can
still
do
better
in
terms
of
meeting
notes,
also
J,
and
thus
this
is
records
and
so
on.
A
There's
also
this
idea
of
sort
of
a
similar
metric
information
when
it
comes
to
principle
agent
problem
and
in
our
case
it's
a
bit
muddled
because
we
still
still
right
now
we
have
this
sort
of
multi-sig,
which
is
from
this
one
time
event
where
we
had.
We
had
this
ICO
and
there's
multisig,
and
then
this
corporation,
and
this
is
sort
of
sponsoring
people
in
some
way
without
having
this
of
people,
need,
structure
and
so
on,
and
people
are
expected
to
active
status,
best
interest
and
so
on.
A
What
can
be
expected
and
to
what
extent
we
wanted
to
pay
for
time
versus
for
tasks
and
so
on
and
still
no
problem,
but
just
in
terms
of
yeah
thinking
about
this
and
thinking
about
sort
of
being
mindful
what
good
ways
of
addressing
this
problem,
because
it's
it's
it's
much
bigger
in
organization
where
you
don't
have
this
sort
of
strict
hierarchy
in
terms
of
yeah,
he
didn't
actually
being
transparent.
But
what
we're
doing
and
what
this
sort
of
paying.
A
The
principle
for
whether
that's
some
individual
group
individuals
is
some
a
set
of
token
holders
or
sisters
missing.
Or
what
have
you
as
a
specific
example,
so
Nimbus
received
a
theorem
grant
Foundation
grant
not
too
long
ago,
and
that
was
sort
of
based
on
prior
work
and
a
reputation
and
participating
in
these
sort
of
live
calls
and
then
also
expectations
in
terms
of
delivering
certain
things.
A
A
The
way
I
look
at
sort
of
random
Joe
journey
that
this
will
be
able
to
have
some
way
some
in
maybe
it's
a
bug.
They
notice,
maybe
the
interested
in
some
specific
effort,
but
it's
just
sort
of
be
able
to
get
the
clear
overview
very
quickly
about
the
priorities
and
where
they
can
contribute
and
that's
what
joined
some
group
of
people
and
they
can
still
see
well,
here's
what
this
team
or
this
forum
is
working
on
and
here's
how
you
can
contribute
and
as
of
clear
calls
to
action
and
so
on.
A
This
is
sort
of
an
inclusive
inclusivity
activity
if
you
when
it
comes
to
being
transparent
about
shortcomings,
so
this
is
sort
of
old
code
of
hammurabi,
which
is
a
way
of
getting
symmetry,
and
the
way
it
works
is
that,
back
in
the
old
day,
if
you
built
a
house,
you
were
sort
of
you
mean.
You
know
most
about
the
folks
in
that
house.
A
So
if
someone
moves
in
to
the
house
and
and
they
die,
then
you
should
also
be
put
to
death,
and
this
is
obviously
very
gruesome
and
it
doesn't
apply
and
nowadays,
but
it's
still
a
useful
principle
because
assess
builders
of
this
app
and
so
on
and
of
status.
We
know
the
most
about
what
a
fourth
source,
so
we
should
be
extremely
clear
about
funding
them
and
I
talked
about
in
terms
of
security
guarantees
and
and
these
types
of
things,
this
oscillator
sort
of
marketing
proofreading
in
sort
of
process
around
that
and
yeah.
A
In
terms
of
shootin,
F
trade-offs
also
want
to
minimize
it
we're
also
going
to
better,
as
I
think
as
we're
taking
more
principled
approach
development
versus
before
where
it
was
more
haphazard,
but
perhaps
the
one
we
do
issues
of
document
decisions
properly.
That's
an
example:
here
we
have
this.
We
should
probably
move
this
to
dr.
Corey,
but
here
is
we
decided
to
disable
group
chats,
and
here
you
can
see
the
context.
The
context
is
that
we
want
to
launch
a
better.
A
This
decision
is
we
disable
it
and
the
consequences
the
same
book
and
you
can't
chat
in
private
groups.
So
this
is
very
useful
in
terms
of
referring
to
it
later,
and
people
can
get
some
understanding
of
why
things
came
to
be.
What's
going
to
point
some
inspiration,
so
auger
is
now
there's
a
big
play
in
this
space
and
they
have
this
really
neat
thing.
A
They
have
quarterly
reports
where
they
stay,
how
they
spend
the
funds
similar
to
us
and
public
meetings
and
so
on,
and
they
have
a
government
community
model.
Community
governance
model,
which
is
also
transparent,
so
that's
just
some
inspiration
in
terms
of
how
we
can
be
more
transparent
and
is
it
to
me.
Thank
you.
B
All
right
cool,
so
this
is
probably
the
one
place
where
we
have
a
lot
less
to
be
ashamed
about
them
than
anywhere
else
I'd
like
to
so
we
have
these
our
town
hall
meeting,
and
we
now
have
the
the
core
dev
call
and
I've
been
encouraging
other
teams
to
record
their
calls
and
and
and
post
notes.
How
do
you
guys
feel
about
since
now
that
we're
moving
off
of
slack?
B
We
have
a
lot
less
of
this
chattiness
and
we're
we're
dividing
our
start,
our
daily
involvement
with
each
other
in
status
and
then
longer
form
in
in
discuss.
How
do
you
feel
about
expanding
this
form
of
communication?
How,
where
teams
record
their
calls
and
post
them
to
to
discuss
as
a
way
for
us
to
be
more
transparent
inside
of
the
organization
and
and
outside
of
the
organization?
Do
you
guys,
like
the
idea
of
that,
taking
this
model
that
we
started
with
on
end
and
town
halls
I
like.
E
B
Not
necessarily
our
problem,
the
I
I'm
more
concerned
about
about
people
inside
of
the
organization
being
able
to
keep
up
like
Kerry
is
mentioned.
You
know,
decisions
get
made
and
things
happen
and,
and
we
don't-
we
don't
have
a
way
to
actually
look
at
that
in
my
in
my
feedback
at
the
end
of
the
three
months,
it
came
back
that
somebody
mentioned
that
I
was
making
decisions
that
they
didn't
know
about
and
I
sort
of.
Like
you
know,
hairs
went
up
on
the
back
of
my
neck
and
I
thought.
B
Well,
you
know
I'm
collaborating
with
the
people
that
I'm
collaborating
with
and
we're
informing
people
inside
of
slack
channels
and
there's
plenty
of
conversations
that
I'm
not
party
to
where
decisions
are
made
about
things
that
I'm
not
really
involved
in
but
I'd
like
to
know
about.
So
do
you
guys
think
that
this
this
could
be
a
good
way
for
us
to
stay
more
informed
about
each
other,
that
we
can
click
in
and
and
listen
to
things
if
we
want
to
about
dishes
that
were
interested
in
on
a
team
basis,
so.
B
N
B
I
would
be
I
think
that
would
be
a
step
in
the
right
direction,
but
we're
talking
here,
though,
is
is,
is
is
about
transparency,
so
there's
some
sort
of
you
know:
efficiency
balances
that
we
need
to
trade
offs
that
we
need
to
make,
but
yeah
or
sir,
would
that
would
achieve
more
than
we
have
at
the
moment.
I.
E
Think
we're
having
both
we
worship,
what
we
need,
because
not
everyone
have
the
time
to
watch
how
this
this
these
videos,
and
but
if
you
have
this
nodes,
then
you
can
maybe
have
the
link
of
the
time
that
the
person
mentioned
that
information.
So
you
can
have
what
be
more
productive
to
follow
in
these
decisions.
I,
don't.
I
Know
if
that's
a
useful
way
of
being
transparent.
To
be
honest,
it
just
sounds
like
complete
overkill
and
probably
he's
going
to
appeal
to
a
very,
very
small
number
of
people,
and
it
would
be
probably
a
lot
more
useful
if
there
was
what
actually
recommended,
which
is
like
a
summary
of
each
meeting.
I
feel
like
if
we
do
that,
we're
just
doing
it
for
the
sake
of
being
transparent,
as
opposed
to
really
thinking
about
what
would
be
the
most
efficient
and
best
way
to
go
forward.
Okay,.
B
I
can
I
can
I
can
see.
I
can
see
that
so
maybe
so
we
have
on
our
channels
and
a
hack
MD
document,
some
of
the
some
of
the
teams
that
now
have
team
pages.
Could
we
maybe
think
about
having
team
and
project
pages,
which
then
point
to
conversation
documents
that
are
updated
regularly?
Is
that
something
we
could
think
about
something.
I
J
A
Show
you
guys
what
we
have
in
terms
of
this,
like
you
already
have
this
discoverability
right
consuming?
Would
you
have
this
in
here?
For
example,
you
can
see
quartets
Inc,
they
have
sort
of
their
weekly
meeting
notes
here
and
also
links,
and
so
on.
It's
that
one
example,
a
very
simple
where
you
can
do
it,
but
I
just
want
to
ask
you
a
quick
question
because
it
seemed
like
in
the
beginning
people.
It
wasn't
completely
clear
like
why
don't
transparency
and
so
on,
do
I
try
to
sort
of
give
my
personal
answer.
A
I
N
Yeah
so
I
think
building
on
Ben's
point
I,
think
you
remand
this
earlier
to
in
terms
of
a
trade-off
potentially
between
transparency
versus
privacy.
So
an
example
could
be
salaries
and
things
like
that.
But
there
are
other
areas
where
I
think
transparency
as
a
topic
also
needs
to
be
balanced
with
or
somehow
can
compromise
other
things
so,
for
example,
transparency
versus
strategic
advantage,
transparency
versus
competitiveness,
transparency
versus
those
are
not
as
important
but
transparency
versus,
for
example,
negotiating
power
right.
N
A
D
B
This
some
yourself
I
guess
what
it
is
that
we're
talking
about
is
just
like.
What's
specific,
why
do
we
specifically
want
to
be
transparent
and
I?
Possibly
one
would
like
to
have
token
holders
to
to
have
as
much
information
as
possible
about
us
as
they've
invested
their
money
in
it
and
we'd
like
to
have
potential
community
members
have
as
much
information
about
us
as
possible
and
there
internally
different
groups
and
teams
and
and
initiatives
projects
that
are
working
together
should
have
as
much
information
as
possible.
N
I
think
it's
really
good
that
you're,
starting
with
the
goal
of
you
know.
Why
do
we
want
to
be
transparent?
Because
if
you
start
with
the
goal,
there
can
be
five
different
ways
to
achieve
that
goal
and
one
might
be
better
than
the
other
and
radical
full
transparency
by
sharing
everything
and
the
sort
of
like
the
barrage
and
the
volume
of
it
may
not
necessarily
be
the
best
way
to
get
to
the
same
goal.
That's
all
I'm,
saying
yeah.
A
N
So
I
think
absolutely
and
I
think
and
I
think
that
goes
a
little
bit
to
what
you
me
was
saying
as
well,
which
is
what
are
we
trying
to
be
transparent
about?
Are
we
trying
to
be
transparent
about
the
the
the?
What
and
you
know,
that's
the
means
you're
saying
or
is
it
also
the
how
but
I
guess
what
I'm
saying
is?
N
Do
people
need
to
know
every
step
in
the
process
and
every
word
and
every
sentence
and
every
I
guess
even
even
every
step
in
the
process,
because
we
could
arrive
at
a
conclusion
or
you
know
a
decision
after
illuminating
50
different
things
in
the
conversation,
but
if
a
listener
has
five
hours
of
listening
to
do
to
understand
what
the
conclusion
was,
they
might
not
listen
to
the
full
five
hours.
They
might
listen
to
the
first
hour
and
have
a
completely
different
interpretation
or
take
away
just
because
they
didn't
listen
through
to
the
end
right.
N
B
A
Also
push
back
a
bit
on
that
sort
of
mental
model.
We
definitely
own
it.
It's
not
it's
not
that
every
piece
of
information
is
useful,
but
you
don't
necessarily
know
what
piece
of
information
and
to
me,
the
part
of
that
mental
model
is
that
we
are
doing
your
work
and
other
people
are
consuming
it
and
that's
not
really
what
I
think
we
should
be
pushing
forward.
A
B
Yeah
good
issue
example
of
that
is
just
yesterday,
Bruno
suggesting
a
collaborative
format
for
for
blog
posts.
It's
on
discuss
and
then
me
coming
up
and
talking
about
permission,
permission
lessness
with
with
our
status
I
mean
we
do
have.
We
do
have
successive
rings
of
trust
inside
of
the
organization
and
and
also
outwards
towards
our
community
and
how
those
and
how
we
participate
with
each
other,
no
I
think
yeah.
N
So
I
mean
I,
think
I.
Think
the
what
part
of
you
know
what
and
why
I
think.
Even
why
is
important
right.
So
why
are
we
doing
something
that
we're
doing
in
order
for
people
to
understand
what
the
purpose,
the
strategy,
the
goal,
the
vision,
the
mission
or
whatever
every
single
project
that
we're
doing
is
before
talking
about
what
the
decisions
around
it
were,
that
I
think
I'm
completely
in
line
with
I
mean
that's
why
it's
Studios
strategy
and
roadmap
is
is
all
publicly
available,
but
I
guess
all
I'm
saying
is
starting
with
you.
N
Someone's
point
about.
One
of
the
goals
is
to
give
token
holders
the
maximum
amount
of
information
in
order
to
make
decisions
about
whatever
that
might
be
X,
because
the
whole
tokens,
starting
with
something
like
that,
will
help
us
also
parse
like
what
what
what
kinds
of
information
are
important
to
provide
right.
So
the
what
why
the
key
decisions,
but
is
it
really
important
to
provide
information
around
I?
Don't
know
the
50
things
that
were
left
on
the
cutting
floor,
cool.
B
J
Something
that's
that's
slightly
different
yeah
real,
quick,
please
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
this
I,
don't
know
how
status
makes
money
or
the
runway
associated
with
how,
with
the
funds
that
we
have
and
I
can't
as
a
core
contributor
I,
don't
understand
what
the
future
of
the
company
is
financially
and
I.
Think
that's
something
we
should
probably
have
at
some
point
so
that
investors,
who
would
maybe
like
to
purchase
that'ss
tokens
and
invest
in
the
company.
J
B
So
I
think
that
there's
gonna
be
a
lot
of
stuff
happening
in
Prague.
I
know
that
I
know
that
the
founders
are
thinking
about
these
things
and
are
gonna,
be
making
presentations
and
and
raising
these
issues.
So
I'd
like
to
ask:
where
are
where
are
gaps?
Do
we
have
any
gaps
in
our
efforts
referring
to
slide
7
from
from
Oscar's
presentation.
B
B
E
Think
that's
that's
a
great
use
case
for
the
transparency
because,
having
this
dis,
transparent
discussions,
open
the
discussion
to
other
people
that
want
to
join
us
with
collaborations
so
I
think
pair.
Perhaps
we
need
a
new
platform
to
making
the
scows
to
me.
Maybe
later
exports
them
in
a
more
efficient
way,
maybe
linked
the
notes.
Today,
whatever
people
were
was
talking
to.
B
B
B
N
So
sorry,
this
is
I
didn't
add
to
the
wall
of
fame,
but
maybe
this
is
something
that
is
worth
mentioning
and
it's
not
related
to
recording.
The
meetings
is
I
think
that
someone
raised
this
question
about
financial
transparency
or
sort
of
runway
I'm
not
advocating
for
necessarily
making
that
kind
of
information
public
public,
because
I
think
that
does
in
depending
on
the
granularity
that
we
share
it
with
I.
Think
sharing
it
publicly
might
encroach
on
other
things
like
privacy
and
salaries,
and
things
like
that.
N
There
is
an
anonymous
forum
to
submit,
in
fact,
the
town
halls
that
we
had
that
were
entirely
this
format,
where
anonymous
questions
were
submitted
from
across
the
mesh,
and
every
question
that
was
submitted
had
to
be
answered
by
quote-unquote
management,
which
is
you
know,
one
human
being
at
consensus,
but
the
point
being
that
the
entire
town
hall
was
uncensored
and
every
single
question
had
to
be
addressed
and
questions
ranged
from
runway
to,
for
example,
you
know
the
price
of
heaters
thanking
for
this
period.
What
does
that
mean
for
our
hiring
numbers?
What
does
that
mean?
N
You
know
what
does
it
mean
in
terms
of
strategically
entering
different
markets?
Which
market
is
more
important,
etc
or
even
about
culture
of
the
org
etc,
but
I
I,
guess
what
I'm
proposing
is
that
it
might
be
helpful
to
have
a
forum
at
least
internally,
first
amongst
core
contributors,
where
people
can
anonymously
ask
questions
that
are
not
filtered,
that
elitism
of
the
core
leadership.
B
A
Whereas
if
you
look
at
something
like
Linux
or
so,
you
don't
necessarily
have
that
and
you
and
sort
of
forced
to
be
transparent
by
default,
because
people
are
not
even
using
the
same
Google
instance.
They
have
drawn
the
Melson
and
so
own
lives,
and
so
on
and
just
in
terms
of
the
starting
point.
I
think
that
has
an
impact
in
terms
how
you
think
about
going
forward
and
I
would
like
us
to
be
maybe
be
even
more
segregated
and
more
decentralized
and
not
using
the
same
systems,
and
so
on
can.
A
I
mean
for
one
thing
like
we
have
our
own
Google
accounts
right,
which
means
that
we
all
had
the
same
permissions.
So
people
don't
think
twice
about
sharing
some
document.
It
acquires
permissions
because
it's
assumed
that
everyone's
gonna
look
at
it
have
same
permissions
because
they
all
status
employees.
But
if
you,
if
you're
doing
a
proposal,
that's
a
no-go.
You
can't
do
that
right
because
it's
gonna
look
at
it.
You
have
to
work
at
Red
Hat.
A
If
you
like,
it's
just
a
nonsensical
thing
to
do,
but
instead
is
it's
not
pill
battle,
because
it's
not
the
nonsensical
to
think
you,
because
we
should
share
the
same
systems.
We
previously
a
slack
and
Google
and
so
on
and
I
think
that
sort
of
different
starting
point
and
that's
why
it's
partly
not
filled
out
I,
would
say
from
where
I'm
standing.
B
I
Feel
like
the
process
towards
radical
transparency
is
not
something
that
happens
overnight
and
that
it
should
be.
We
should
be
tactful
in
our
approach
and
it
should
be
step
by
step
and
I
think
it
means
that
tomorrow
we
wake
up
because
we're
not
a
Dahlia
and
because
we're
not
a
doll.
We
need
to
ensure
that
you
know
we.
We
make
gradual
steps
towards
becoming
a
Down
that
includes
putting
in
those
building
blocks
of
transparency
along
the
way,
as
opposed
to
one
day.
Waking
up
and
saying:
okay,
everything's,
transparent
everything
should
be
recorded.
I
B
Lots
of
an
exciting
experiment-
I,
really
love
being
part
of
it
and
I,
really
enjoy
these
conversations
with
you
I
think
that
we
accomplished
a
lot.
Do
we
have
any
action
points
that
we'd
like
to
put
on
our
notes,
Oscar
or
anybody
specifically,
that's
something
we
should
try
and
try
and
include
in
these
conversations
as
action
points.
C
That
just
won't
for
me,
so
we
have
a
paper,
looks
cool
coming
up
and
I'll.
Make
sure
that
we
talk
about
kind
of
a
financial
transparency
point
because
that's
been
raised
a
few
times
and
we've
thought
about
ourselves.
So
maybe
the
action
is
to
kind
of
come
back
to
the
group.
Talk
about
how
much
financial
transparency
we
can.
We
can
have,
and
my.
B
J
Mean
breaking
whisper
is
an
attempt
to
be
more
transparent
about
what
the
limits
of
whisper
is.
So
there's
not
necessarily
a
need
for
an
action
item,
but
then
just
I
guess
an
overall
note
that
we
are
working
on
things
like
that
and
that-
and
it's
just
a
matter
of
time
to
get
there,
because
it's
not
something
you
can
just
figure
out
in
a
week,
especially
if
you
have
a
lot
of
other
duties
across
the
company.
A
No
I
agree.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
everyone
for
participating
and
yeah
I
think
there's
a
participation
was
was
quite
well
like.
Oh,
it
was
better
than
my
previous
lessons,
I
think,
with
one
famous
zone,
so
it's
really
good
to
hear
a
girl's
perspective.
Yeah
awesome!
Thank
you,
everyone
and
see
you
tomorrow
for
resourcefulness
and
continuance
and
we'll
probably
do
sort
of
full
of
shame
stuff
for
some
other
principals
as
well.
If
people
read
thank.