►
From YouTube: Principles Seminar Session 9: Continuance
Description
In the ninth 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.
B
All
right
welcome
Irwin
to
the
ninth
session
of
our
principal
Senn
on
this
one
is
some
continuous
before
going
further.
Some
talk
briefly
about
the
plan.
So
today
we
have
a
continuous
resourcefulness
and
then,
at
the
end
of
it,
we'll
also
have
20
minutes,
while
we
collectively
sort
of
work
to
flesh
out
our
wool
of
shame
and
at
the
idea
with
that
is
sort
of
right.
B
Now
we
have
done
this
amazing,
brainstorming
and
so
on,
but
we
want
to
have
it
a
bit
more
detailed
and
sort
of
understandable
and
clear,
and
then
we
can
use
this
for
voting
in
Prague.
But
I'll
talk
more
about
that
last
20
minutes
and
then
tomorrow
we
have
Liberty
and
so
final
wrap-up
and
reflection
and
so
on,
and
then
we're
going
to
have
an
anonymous
chat
and
idea
is
that
everyone
is
the
status
they
can
participate.
They
can
either
use
the
anonymous
user
or
generate
like
a
new
user
and
just
talk
anything
ready
to
principles.
C
B
B
As
here
document
and
then
we
have
sort
of
these
subsections
and
we
want
to
make
them
sort
of
more
detailed,
so
the
idea
is
essentially
that
for
people
who
want
to
because
of
stay
off
the
call
or
stay
at
the
end
and
then
sort
of
just
help,
fill
this
out
and
ask
questions
and
make
sure
that
they
sort
of
proper
and
then
we'll
sort
of
slip
swap
all
right.
So
it's
getting
to
continuous.
B
E
Yeah
yeah
I
think
again
less
of
a
Wall
of
shame,
but
more
for
just
status
to
be
a
going
forward,
especially
for
things
like
updating
and
creating
new
content
on
studio.
I
think
the
design
that
we
want
there
is
to
have
two
community
contributors
sort
of
create
to
it
and
create
the
right
incentives,
and
things
like
that,
so
that
so
that
you
know
the
core
team
of
like
the
static
studio,
is
not
needed
to
continue
to
upgrade
and
maintain
that.
E
F
B
H
I
agree
with
Akshay's
point
I
think
like
from
an
incubator
spective.
It
would
be
nice
to
be
able
to
have
a
little
bit
more
two-way
dialogue.
We
don't
have
that
resource
right
now
and
I
think
we
desperately
need
that
to
try
and
find
projects
in
the
ecosystem.
So
it's
very
much
of
one-way
outreach
on
our
part.
There's
no
two-way
dialogue
and
I.
Think
it's
much
listening
from
marketing
in
general.
B
C
B
A
Yes,
I
think
I,
don't
know
if
this
is
a
lot
of
shame
item
or
maybe
just
a
question
or
a
thinking
out
loud,
but
I
feel
that
when
we
hire
people,
it's
very
much
like
in
this
kind
of
like
old,
employee
model
and
I,
think
that
maybe
doesn't
lead
itself
well
to
like.
Then
imagining
yourself
like
working
yourself
out
of
the
system
or
making
your
role
in
your
input
such
that
there
can
be
continuance
and
it
could
carry
on
without
you
and
I.
A
J
C
J
B
B
B
I
just
want
to
show
this
one
example.
This
is
an
illustration.
Barry
made
this
for
eNOS
terms
of
measuring
utility,
and
this
is
sort
of
one
model,
but
good
ideas,
and
you
can
look
it
later.
Good
ideas
that
you
can
serve
drawing
sort
of
way
is
potentially
of
measuring
the
value
of
a
crypto
asset,
and
then
you
can
sort
of
play
on
with
assumptions
and
and
then
maybe
come
out
with
something
recent
water,
and
that
would
be
one
example
if
we
can
get
this
more
rigorous
in
terms
of
having
alternative
to
appeal.
B
Now,
just
some
questions
sort
of
see
the
conversation,
so
the
people
here
believe
innocent
tea,
and
why
or
why
not?
To
what
extent
do
we
rely
on
algorithm
versus
sort
of
more
proper
marketing?
We
can-
and
this
also
touches
on
on
ideas
around
public
goods
like
funding
of
public
goods,
and
this
is
a
radical
markets
and
drones
contracts
and
so
on.
B
What's
a
good
alternative
to
it,
and
what
sort
of
how
can
make
it
crystal
clear
in
terms
of
what
it
means
to
be
breaking
them
and
we'll
be
around
Pablo
and
also
at
what
scale
do
we
want
to
do
it?
Do
we
do
that
status
as
a
whole,
or
is
this
or
in
terms
of
specific
business
units
within
status
and
so
on?
So
that's
it
for
me
with
that
I
leave
over
to
Michael.
Thank
you.
B
J
J
C
Okay,
thanks
Carrie
yeah
I
was
I
was
just
chatting
away
like
loving
the
sound
of
my
laugh
as
usual.
Two
two
issues
I'd
like
to
start
with
belief
in
in
SMT
on
two
sides:
it's
not
really
clear
for
me
how
the
net,
how
the
network
perpetuate
perpetuates
itself
is
one
side,
and
then
the
second
side
is
is
actually
to
do
with
funding.
C
But
I'm
also
I'm
thinking
about
in
terms
of
I
mean
we
have
a.
We
have
a
release
schedule
for
tokens
right
and
we've
only
released
a
certain
amount
of
them
to
the
market
or
sold
them
into
the
market
with
the
with
the
ICO
there's
additional
tokens
that
can
be
sold
into
the
market
or
do
I
do
I
understand
that
improperly.
C
Right
well,
I
mean
there's,
there's,
there's
a
large
amount
of
tokens
which
which
status
still
holds.
We
didn't
sell
all
of
the
status
tokens.
Well,
they
sort
of
sold
a
portion
of
them
to
the
market,
so
isn't
that
a
possibility
for
additional
funding
in
the
future,
as
and
as
the
network
scales
up
and,
as
the
token
has,
has
more
value
and
this
whole
this
whole
economy
takes
off
or
do
I
understand
that
falsely.
B
I
think
a
large
portion
of
the
funds
are
earmarked
for
sort
of
us
acquisition,
but
it's
a
good
question
and
maybe
something
we
should
bring
up
with
finance
and
founders
and
so
on.
I
still
think
that,
even
if
you
use
that
you
just
punting
the
problem
right
because
you're
just
saying
well,
there's
more
money,
we
have
a
big
purse
of
money
and
there's
actually
more
money
in
this
purse,
but
it
doesn't
actually
solve
the
cause
of
self-sustainability
problem.
I.
Think
well,.
C
D
C
K
K
Yeah
yeah
what
we
have
access
now,
it's
the
is
the
amount
of
far
we
rise
in
the
ICO.
So
this
is
this
is
available
now,
but
in
future
then
this
other
part
will
be
available.
But
it's
not
it's
not
yet
to
find
out
if
it's
going
to
be
used,
so
maybe
we're
never
going
to
use
it.
So
it's
still
up
to
our
decisions
and.
C
J
C
D
You
need
to
first
establish
what
type
of
an
organization
status
is
and
I
know.
We
say
it's
gonna
be
a
doubt,
but
you
really
need
to
I
think
you
need
to
really
clarify
what
that
is
because
I
mean
there's
really.
We
don't
really
know
what
it
what
a
down
might
look
like,
but
to
bring
it
back
to
two
types
of
organizations
that
exist
today
that
are
sort
of
have
different
funding
mechanisms.
D
There's
businesses
right,
where
they're,
basically
about
the
bottom
line,
they're
trying
to
achieve
a
profit,
and
then
it's
like
non-for-profits,
where
they
actually
I've
actually
heard
this
quote
from
people
who
work
in
that
world.
If
nonprofits
say
that
well,
the
nice
thing
about
a
business
is
they
have
the
discipline
of
the
bottom
line
and
the
nonprofit's
their
goals
are
more
or
less
fixed
to
that,
and
then
they
also
have
an
alternative
funding
source
right.
They're
not
mean
based
on
profits.
They're
sustains
based
on
funders.
D
C
So
it's
unclear
for
me,
where,
where
is
there
anywhere?
Actually
an
income
stream
supposed
to
be
for
status?
What
this
stat
is
supposed
to
be
charging
for,
that
that
can
never
be
an
income
stream
for
it.
What
if
I
missed
you
know?
Why
are
we
even
talking
about
income
stream?
It's
kind
of
like
a
new
thing
to
me
to
be
honest,
yeah.
D
I,
don't
think
we're
talking
about
income
stream
per
se,
we're
just
talking
about
sustainability
and
an
income
stream
like
for
a
business.
That's
how
a
business
can
sustain
itself
for
nonprofits,
it's
not
necessarily
an
income
stream.
It's
donate
a
stream
of
donations
over
time
and
so
I
guess.
That's
why
I
kind
of
comes
back
to
what
is
status.
You
know
what
kind
of
what
what
is
it
going
to
be
and
what
is
the
sustainability
mechanism?
It
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
be
an
income
stream,
so.
K
Status
lease
is
not
a
charity,
it's
actually
a
network,
and
we
are
most.
We
look
like
a
charity
because
we
are
making
this
public
good,
but
the
actual
thing
is
that
we
are
network
in
this.
Continuing
C
model
probably
will
be
reached
by
the
network
or
through
the
volunteer
donation
or
truth
some
embedded
fee
in
this
net
that
it
could
be
the
in
direction.
They
choose,
for
example,
open
bounty.
C
Okay,
well,
isn't
it
isn't
it
clear
that
there's
always
the
possibility
to
sell
tokens,
isn't
about
the
continuance
model
in
terms
of
financing?
Is
that
the
token
has
value
and
and
for
people
and
and
that's
why
there's
a
vesting
schedule,
because
we
anticipate
that
to
be
happening
at
a
certain
period
of
time
or
am
I
really
naive
to
be
thinking
that
I'm.
K
B
So
add
one
way
of
thinking
about
this,
like
if
you
take
something
like
u.s.,
United
States
right
to
any
country,
so
you
have
a
dollar
and
you
have
a
government
and
you
have
an
economy
with
business
and
so
on,
and
you
don't
get
rich
by
the
government's
or
printing
money.
That's
not
how
a
country
gets
rich
right,
it's
because
of
the
activity
economic
activity
in
there
and
then
the
government,
so
they
have
some
kind
of
tax
system,
which
is
this
fee
base
of
provide
certain
essential
public
goods
functions.
B
But
what
actually
creates
the
value
in
N
is
of
self-sustaining
economy.
It's
that
activity
that
goes
on
it
and
that's
it
:
in
terms
of
in
network,
and
that's
why
I'm
so
very
well.
We
can
just
sort
of
give
out
Morrison
T,
whatever
cuz,
that's,
not
actually
solving
their
problem.
The
core
problem
is
make
it.
B
C
B
Emitted
to
me
like,
if
you're
going
back,
you
forget
about
money
in
currency
and
all
these
things
like
if
there's
Network
and
there's
value
in
attendance
of
these
people
who
participate
in
it
and
and
they
like
it,
just
think
of
an
economy.
If
you
want
something
done,
you
sort
of
put
up
like
a
bounty
for
something
and
then
someone
does
it
and,
and
you
get
this
service,
you
get
a
private
group,
that's
wherever
and
then
the
people
who
benefit
from
that
they
pay
for
it.
B
Then
the
people
who
can
implement
it
they
get
paid
and
then
sort
of
ask
the
collection
of
all
these
sort
of
things
that
we
provided
for
users
that
the
network
as
a
whole
gets
richer.
It's
more
its
mood,
these
sanitizes,
more
peer-to-peer
and
I.
Think
it's.
It's
not
a
good
idea
to
to
think
of
it
in
terms
of
this
sort
of
central
S&T
multi
sake.
And
what
can
we
do?
Can
we
do
things
with
luck,
trade,
or
can
we
okay
well
money,
whatever
I,
don't
yeah
so.
C
K
F
So
focus
on
the
others.
We've
got
that
node
up
and
running.
So
if
you
installed
app
nodes
right
now,
motion
itself
is
frankly
this
ability,
but
you
can
get
status
node
up
and
running
at
a
click
of
a
button.
If
you
can
get
to
that
point,
doing
some
kind
of
incentive
mechanic
to
host
the
status
node,
it
is
yeah,
it's
very
much
a
non-trivial
thing,
but
the
guys
who
are
looking
at
that
is
Adam
and
Dimitri
from
the
in
fira
team.
C
H
I
think
it
probably
a
lot
of
it
is-
is
still
being
worked
through,
but
I
think
a
lot
of
it
is
gonna.
Go
back
to
changing
up
our
marketing
model
a
little
bit.
We
are
working
through
what
it
does.
An
open-source
marketing
plan
look
like
and
so
I
think
that
that
will
be
much
more
community
focused
and
community
base
and
much
more
around
kind
of
going
back
to
old,
school,
more
grassroots
marketing
techniques.
But
we
will
need
a
channel,
but
will
need
a
few
things.
H
Will
we
will
need
a
channel
to
allow
people
to
it
to
have
input,
so
we
do
have
a
two-way
dialogue
outside
of
probably
our
normal
social
channels
and
then
I
think
we'll
also
need
the
ability
to
as
we
engage
with
communities,
and
we
try
and
get
this
kind
of
these
kinds
of
grassroots
conversations
happening.
We'll
need
to
be
able
to
identify
people
within
the
community
that
can
sort
of
become
leaders
in
their
own
right
within
their
community
to
kind
of
perpetuate
the
messaging.
H
So,
like
continuance
from
that
perspective,
where
we
need
we're,
gonna
need
to
find
community
members
that
are
not
core
contributors,
but
that
believe
in
status
believe
in
web
3,
whatever
whatever
their
their
motivation
is,
whether
it's
you
know
the
product
or
the
ideology
that
can
kind
of
recruit.
That's
probably
a
horrible
word
you
use
but
recruit
and
get
people
on
board
that
can
then
contribute
and
then
continues
kind
of
that.
You
know
that
cycle
I,
don't
think
we
have
mechanism
for
that
now.
H
I
think
advocacy
will
be
huge
for
enabling
that
but
I
think
in
general,
like
from
incubate
marketing,
whatever
I
think
I
think
that
we
don't
have
any
kind
of
solution
for
that
kind
of
two-way
communication
and
that's
sort
of
empowering
our
community
I
think
that's
what's
missing
and
they
think
from
like
who
statuses
as
a
brand
I.
Think
part
of
empowering
people
is
a
part
of
that
message
and
I
just
feel
like
we're
not
currently
necessarily
doing
that.
H
C
So
am
I
under
the
understanding
that
the
the
Ambassador
Program
portal
that
that
Shawn
was
having
the
agency
is
working
on
with
the
agency
to
develop
that
that
was
part
of
our
two-way
dialogue
with
leader
board
and
tasks
and
and
onboarding
and
and
things
are
you
saying
that
that's
not
adequate,
that
we
need
something
additional
to
that?
No.
H
I
think
that
that
will
definitely
be
adequate.
I
think
that
but
I
do
think
that
maybe
there's
people
that
have
already
been
on
board
that
might
be
further
along
or
they
might
be
existing
users,
or
they
might
already
be
sort
of
more
that
the
Evangelist
level,
but
not
an
ambassador
level.
If
that
makes
sense,
since
I.
B
C
H
Finding
it's
finding
those
people
as
well.
No
I
think
that
what
Shawn
is
building
out
and
Shotton
team
I
think
that
that's
absolutely
the
first
step
in
the
right
direction,
but
I
think
it's
sort
of.
How
do
we,
like
from
an
incubator
spective?
How
do
we
tap
into
the
entrepreneurs
and
the
startups
that
have
been
in
the
space
for
a
while
that?
Maybe
you
aren't
going
to
go
through
that,
which
is
the
channel
I?
Ask.
H
So
an
incubating
the
advocacy
program
which
is
nice,
so
we
do
have
some
tasks
that
we're
contributing
with
the
goal
of
sort
of
pulling
those
projects
out
of
the
community
and
getting
people
to
volunteer
projects
that
might
be
perfect
for
incubate
or
ideas
or
weighing
in
so
I.
Think
that
that's
absolutely
a
great
start
and
I
think
picking
incubate
to
be
part
of
that
pilot
program
was
smart
and
so
I
think
well.
I
think
this
is
kind
of
a
learn
as
we
go
thing,
but
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
we're
there
yet
and
I.
H
Guess
that's
what
I
meant
by
by
two-way
dialogue.
It
would
be
nice
to
be
able
to
say:
okay,
here's
this
open-source
marketing
plan
and
you
know,
let's
just
go
and
execute
it
and
I.
Just
don't
think
we
have
the
tools
necessarily
I,
think
also
again,
marketing
focus,
I,
think
marketing
and
I
don't
know
if
a
lot
of
people
actually
understand
or
appreciate
kind
of
our
pain
in
this
is
it.
H
Marketing
is
very
much
tethered
to
old-world
tools,
so
we
don't
have
the
ability
to
work
with
marketing
tools
that
are
open-source
so,
for
example,
channels
to
drive
massive
property
and
channels
to
reach
people
that
we
need
to
reach
they're
very
much
centralized.
So
you
know
in
the
marketing
space
Twitter
is
still
you
know,
King
and
and
and
similar
types.
A
C
Me,
let
me
bring
somebody
else
in
this
conversation
Kim.
Thank
you
for
the
for
those
excellent
points.
Actually,
you
know
you're
in
a
similar
position
with
with
Studio.
Do
you
have
I
would
assume
that
you
agree
with
with
a
lot
of
things
that
Kim
have
to
say:
do
you
have
something
additional
to
to
bring
into
that
in
terms
their
mining
program
and
and
and
how
do
we
use
the
models
that
that
we
have?
We've
got
each
prize
each
report
things
like
that?
What
what
do
you
think
we're
missing?
Well,.
E
We
can
easily
get
that
contribution
of
SNT
tokens
in
terms
of
value
to
come
from
people
like
you
know.
You
know,
groups
that
want
to
hire
qualified
devs
that
are
using
status
to
do,
and
this
is
not
a
model
that
is.
You
know
it's
laid
out
in
great
detail
in
the
document
in
terms
of
exactly
how
the
token
would
work
and
the
token
incentive
model
would
work
who
using
SMT
as
the
token,
but
it's
not
in
it's,
not
anything
revolutionary.
E
That
I've
come
up
with,
in
the
sense
that
there
are
plenty
of
sustainable
content,
contribution,
token
based
models
that
exist
out
there
in
the
education
space,
but
also
in
parallel
spaces
like
publishing,
etc.
So
I
guess
I'm
from
my
point
of
view.
Why
would
we
not
do
that
and
just
use
the
S&T
token
to
create
those
incentives?
And
so
that's
one?
The
second
thing
is
I
think
to
Kim's
point
about
just
how
do
we
get
more
people
to
contribute,
I?
E
C
Over
a
little
bit
difference
of
a
discussion
than
it
is
from
continuance,
I'd
like
to
bring
Sonia
into
the
conversation
and
talk
about
our
centralized
company
structure
without
open
governance.
Where
do
we
stand
legally
with
with
how
it
is
that
we've
presented
ourselves?
Are
we
potentially
shooting
ourselves
in
the
foot
and
with
continuance
as
a
value
with
with
where
we're
at
right
now?
Well,.
I
But
then
you
know
everybody's
actually,
for
the
purposes
of
talking
sale
had
to
incorporate
because
it
was
impossible
actually,
and
it
would
be
illegal
from
the
investor
position
that
you
are
altering
tokens
without
being
incorporated.
So
this
was
some
kind
of
starting
position
that
and,
as
you
know,
status
has
two
companies
I
mean
three,
mostly
for
the
purposes
of
balancing
and
him
having
legal
framework
for
service
agreement
and
for
employment
agreements,
also
for
any
kind
of
contracting
with
other
participants
in
the
ecosystem.
I
C
So
I'd
like
to
yeah
I
right,
yeah,
second
question
on
that
so
I
guess
it's
pretty
clear
that
the
reality
of
us
having
some
sort
of
entity,
the
Dow
as
an
entity
is
is,
is
not
only
far
off
but
might
not
ever
happen.
Jarrod
has
mentioned
to
me
the
concept
of
saying
that
statuses
Network,
the
Dow
of
status
essentially
ends
up
becoming
a
number
of
the
sum
total
of
all
of
the
individual
peer-to-peer
contracts
that
it
is
that
we
do
with
each
other.
C
I
The
concept
of
definitely
but
the
thing
is
actually
the
practicalities,
because
it's
not
about
calling
it
down
or
you
know
it's
about
that
you're
actually
doing
all
the
things
that
would
actually
represent
it
and
the
baltics
is
voting
systems
and
all
the
functionality
for
smart
contracts,
and
this
actually
it
will
create
Dao
itself.
Dog
will
never
be
something
at
least
I,
don't
see
that
it
will
happen
in
and
in
a
decade.
Maybe
it
will
be
recognized
because
I
see
that
some
kind
of
structures
of
libertarians
are.
I
Is
far
future
for
now,
what
we
can
do
is
implementation
of
all
the
values
that
Dow
actually
has,
and
then
we
call
each
other,
you
know
and
then
actually
the
structure
completely
has
to
change,
because
you
cannot
be
at
the
same
time
corporation,
which
practically
has
employees
as
such
then,
and
it's
centralized
the
firmware.
Actually,
the
sources
are
coming.
You
know
for
contributions.
Now,
it's
now.
It's
completely
functioning
as
a
corporation
cool.
C
So
then,
that
leads
us
on
to
the
combination
of
two
points
that
are
in
the
Wall
of
shame,
notes
for
this
session,
the
reliance
on
core
contributors
and
lack
of
other
contributors
and
then
hiring
people
in
an
old
employee
model
which
doesn't
lend
itself
to
working
on
replacing
yourself
kind
of
a
mindset
with
no
succession
plan
I'd
like
to
open
up
those
two
points.
Another
round
for
further
discussion
for
somebody
that
hasn't
just
talked
yet
would
be
nice,
who
wants
to
raise
their
hand
on
that?
On
that
that
point,
Danny.
G
I
mean
I,
think
I.
Think
today,
like
we've
really
been
about
pragmatism.
So
in
lieu
of
you
know,
hundreds
of
community
members
working
for
us
we've
had
to
go
out
and
hire
people
in
this
kind
of
traditional
model,
partly
because
most
of
us
or
many
of
us
came
from
traditional.
What
also
that's
slightly
default
in
lieu
of
progress,
but
you
default
to
what
you
know,
bests
and
I
think
for
many
people.
The
goal
like
what
we
know
best
is
traditional
hiring
models,
traditional
interviews
and
bringing
people
on
pause
and
I.
C
Core,
so
so,
Barry
and
Graham,
both
of
you
guys.
How
do
you
see
this
developing?
What
what
is
it
that
we're
missing?
Actually
and
I?
Don't
want
to
talk
about
the
so
so
they
did
the
advocacy
program
or
for
the
marketing
standpoint
or
communication
standpoint.
What
are
we
missing
in
what
we
are
today?
That
is
not
bringing
more
contributors
to
us.
C
Let's
talk
about
it
contributed
the
codebase
I
mean
we're
pretty
hot
project.
It's
far,
in
my
opinion,
what
oh
I
don't
know
other
people
seeing
us
is
hot
and
pretty
contributing.
Is
it
just
too
hard
the
codebase
or
is
it
too
hard?
Is
our
communications
to
fractured
from
your
point
of
view
as
a
developer,
I.
D
C
D
Necessarily
true
with
with
other
with
other
projects,
I
think
other
you
could.
You
could
build
things
that
are
just
in
more
generic
languages
like
we
there's.
Definitely
I
don't
want
to
get
too
deep
in
the
weeds,
but
there's
definitely
some
like
more
obscure,
tooling
and
and
even
languages
used
in
things
like
status,
desktop.
That
I
think
are
just
required
more
specialized
knowledge,
then
I
like
like
okay,
we'll
get
a
little
deep
in
the
weeds,
but
I
try
to
keep
it
on
the
surface.
D
I'm,
not
just
like
a
plain
vanilla,
JavaScript
implementation
of
the
status
client,
I.
Think
if
that
existed,
you
would
see
a
lot
of
developers
just
hacking
on
it,
just
kind
of
building
the
features
they
want
to
see
and
we
might
start
to
see
more
Forks
emerge
of
status.
Clients
like
status,
that's
up,
I
think
it's
like
closure
script
with
react
native
with
QT
and
there's
like
a
bunch
of
like
specialized
things
that
just
require
maybe
a
significant
investment
of
time
just
to
get
started,
and
so
you
say.
C
D
B
Would
push
back
a
bit
on
it
being
technical
difficulties,
I
think
as
an
organization
a
lot
of
it
Drive
years
of
skepticism
and
it's
more
cultural.
Anything
I
am
not
convinced
that
majority
people
think
it's
a
valuable
thing.
It's
own
gorilla,
Network
in
terms
of
Navajo
contributors
to
very
few
people
on
the
development
side
were
actively
focused
on
that
and
the
same
thing
with
ideas
around
our
and
so
on.
B
D
We
do,
if
you
look
at
good
coin,
there's
there's
one
we're
actually
doing
it
right
now,
with
the
I
mean,
with
what
we're
doing
with
story
books
and
building
out
components,
we're
doing
like
a
small
small
test
that
we
started
on
Friday
and
we
created
a
bounty
for
oh
one
of
these
UI
components
and
actually,
just
a
few
minutes
ago,
I
saw
an
email
from
the
contributor
who
says
he's
working
on
it
and
will
be
opening
up
a
pull
request
later
today.
But
for
that
again
we
use
something
like
okay.
D
Well
can
also
step
back
I'm,
just
gonna
leave
it
with
this
question,
for
you
who
do
you
think
a
well
and
contributors
are
different
characters
right
there,
people
there's
developers,
but
there
could
be
other
type
of
people's
development
people
developing,
but
just
speaking
of
developers,
when
you
think
of
an
external
contributor
and
they're
a
developer
who
do
you?
What
do
you
think
they
are
like
in
their
life?
They
probably
have
another
job,
and
this
is
something
they
might
be
doing
in
their
spare
time.
D
C
They're
not
I
mean
they're
the
same
people
that
are
contributing
to
any
other
open-source
project
project
and
there
are
people
that
just
you
know,
instead
of
working
two
jobs,
they
you
know
they
work
one
for
money
and
they
contribute
to
an
open-source
project.
So
you
know
the
question
is:
maybe
we
should
ask
ourselves
not
further
now
in
the
conversation,
because
we
need
to
wrap
this
up.
What
is
it
that
we're
doing
wrong?
The
people
aren't
contributing
to
it
yet
to
it
to
us
as
much
as
they
should,
and
the
answers
are
to
fear.
C
K
We
should
notice
that
there
is
not
a
lot
of
people
using
stages
right
now,
so
so
this
would
be.
We
have
a
lot
of
users.
Let's
say
a
company
that
wants
to
run
the
app
they
might
invest
in
stages,
choose
to
develop
something
they
need
because
of
the
users.
Basically,
so
the
more
users
you
have,
the
more
incentive
you
have
chilled
to
actually
developed
stages.
Just.
L
Just
just
to
take
on
that
to
add
to
what
people
have
said,
I
think
there
are
like
two
things
that
can
really
help
status,
go
to
the
next
level
and
help
with
continuance
and
all
of
these
things.
The
first
is
like
what
are
we
doing
it
all
for
like
there's
there's
so
many
companies
in
the
in
this
space,
and
so
many
tech
companies
in
general,
it'd
be
greatest
that
has
stood
out
in
terms
of
like
a
mission
statement,
kind
of
what
grassroots
is
doing
now.
L
That
could
really
help
distinguish
us
and
the
second
one
is
impact
of
the
mission
and,
like
a
point,
was
this
race:
we
don't
really
have
any
users
and
so
the
even.
If
we
had
a
refined
mission,
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
have
much
impact
and
I
think
that
it's
a
it's
it's
very
positive.
If
we
are
able
to
increase
our
footprint
both
through
marketing
but
also
through
people
using
the
app,
then
our
footprint
grows,
and
we
can
have
a
big
impact
in
in
fulfilling
our
mission,
as
well
as
attracting
interest
uses
like
whatever
cool.
H
Know
think
of
that
every
100
percent,
Chad
and
I
just
would
probably
leave
my
parting
thought
is
I.
Think
it's
twofold
for
continuance.
We
need
the
developers
obviously
to
attract
coders
to
build
the
product,
because
the
product
will
inspire
users,
but
I
think
we
also
need
to
have
a
plan
going
forward
for
how
to
attract
users,
because
right
now,
a
lot
of
what
we're
doing
is
talking
to
ourselves.
H
C
All
right
so,
let's
wrap
it
up
and
let's
see
in
terms
of
time,
what
do
we
have
here?
So,
let's
see
you
guys
back
here
in
five
minutes
the
next
the
next
session
will
be
shorter,
because
we're
gonna
use
the
last
20
minutes
to
work
on
the
Wallace.
Shame
proposal
for
Prague
so
see
you
guys
in
five
minutes.