►
From YouTube: Principles Seminar Session 10: Resourcefulness
Description
In the tenth 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
Welcome
to
the
temp
system
on
resourcefulness,
the
302
principle,
so
we
are
relentless
resourceful
as
we
grow
in
everyday
access
to
capital,
its
obligation
to
token
holders
to
fight
bureaucracy
and
inefficiencies
within
the
organization.
This
means
solving
problems
in
the
most
effective
way
possible
at
lower
economic
costs
in
terms
of
capital,
time
and
resources.
A
B
A
C
Yeah,
probably
I,
guess
you're
on
oversight.
So
you
know,
as
this
hybrid
it's
not
really
clear
to
me
how
we
make
decisions
design,
how
much
money
we
spend
on
people
on
things
on
travel
and
I
know.
That's
partly
because
we
don't
want
to
have
traditional
hierarchical
managers,
but
I,
just
open,
there's
enough
visibility
or
a
collective
oversight
into
how.
How
is
that
mean,
and
that
probably
cuz?
That's
that
we
haven't
granted
tools
today
that
right.
D
A
E
Miss
like
it's
strong
opinions
on
the
direction
we
should
take,
for
example,
for
our
role,
the
NS
usernames
we
I
kinda
note
they
did.
What
is
the
price
we
should
set?
That
is
an
important
decision
and
seems
like
there
is
not
much
people
that
can
take
an
opinion
on
what
should
be
the
price
or
that
can
analyze
that
and
give
them
a
good
answer,
because
some
people
just
think,
oh,
let's
ask
the
maximum
price
or
the
minimum
price,
but
maybe
that
should
be
economic
basic
of
people
decision
yeah.
A
F
Yeah
you're
next,
it's
hard
to
be
resourceful.
If
you
don't
really
know
what
you're
building,
for
example,
if,
if
I'm
gonna
host
a
dinner
party
for
four
people
like
I
I,
can
kind
of
understand,
okay,
well,
I'm
gonna
buy
the
right
portions
and
I
need,
like
you
know,
depending
on
who's,
coming
two
bottles
of
wine
or
eight
bottles
of
wine.
But
for
us
it
feels
like
okay.
Well,
it
could
be
for
four
people
it
could
be
for
two
hundred
and
they
could
be
vegetarians.
They
could
be
like
meat
eaters.
F
Oh,
it
has
to
be
Thai
food.
No,
it's
Chinese!
Actually,
it's
not
a
dinner.
It's
a
cocktail
party
or
whatever
right
so
I
think
that
the
resourcefulness
really
paid
a
place
into
that
and
greater
clarity.
We
have
around
exactly
what
we're
delivering.
We
can
be
a
lot
more
disciplined
about
their
resources
used
to
get
there
I.
E
G
H
A
Oh
I
agree
with
a
lot
of
what's
been
said:
I
put
myself
as
a
no
op
right
now,
but
maybe
change
stay
there
cool
so
just
very
briefly
go
through
some
slides
here.
So
just
in
terms
of
some
background
relentlessly
resourceful,
it
comes
from
this
sort
of
essay
by
a
guy
called
Paul
Graham
who
founded
like
Combinator
in
terms
of
what
makes
good
founders
and
ideas
a
sort
of
the
opposite
of
being
hapless
and
kind
of.
A
There
was
sort
of
a
bull
market
last
year
raised
a
bunch
of
money
in
a
one-time
event,
and
we
had
this
implicit
promise
to
these
20
of
us
and
something
token
holders
which
is
of
the
white
paper
and
it's
sort
of
our
duty
to
them
to
deliver
something.
That's
like
the
white
paper
I
wonder:
do
that:
okay,
whatever
well?
What
sort
of
brokers
Indian
physicists?
Do
you
see
how
can
be
more
effective
in
solemn
promise,
at
low
cost
and
giving
it
a
sort
of
no
traditional
profit
and
loss
and
bottom
line?
A
D
H
H
And
there's
no
there's,
no
there's
no
strong
guiding
beacon
of
this
is
what
I
should
be
doing,
and
these
are
my
success.
Metrics
it's
everyone's
kind
of
left
up
their
own
devices,
and
if
you
have
a
lot
of
ambition
you
can
you
can
spread
yourself
thin
very
quickly
because
there's
no
guiding
like
guiding
beacon
to
push
you
on
the
right
path.
A
I
A
H
Know
like
I,
like
I,
like
the
rest
of
the
principles
and
the
reasons
why
we
chose
it
to
have
an
organization
like
this
and
I.
Think
it's
it's
it's
novel
and
and
worthwhile
to
try
and
figure
this
stuff
out.
It's
just
there
isn't
a
good
model
to
do
this,
because
no
one's
done
it
before
and
so
like
I
can't
point
to
something
because
it
doesn't
exist.
Okay,.
D
I
think
I
can
point
to
to
something:
I
can
point
to
cooperatives
and
in
Brazil
that
are
essentially,
you
know,
employee
and
participant
owned
businesses,
which
I
think
that
that
status
is
a
corporation
could
easily
become.
If
we,
if
we
chose
to
go
that
way
and
and
that
that
can
also
be
a
learning
process
for
us
and
getting
getting
to
a
dowel.
C
Just
to
jump
in
I
agree
with
Cory,
like
I
feel
like
there's,
there's
really
good
examples
of
remote
organizations
that
work
well
of
leaderless
and
permissionless
organizations
that
work
well,
but
there
isn't
a
good
example
of
an
organization
that
is
both
of
remote
and
decentralized
and
doesn't
have
managers
or
leaders.
Well,
you
know,
if
you
look
at
the
big
examples
they
have
one
of
those
aspects,
so
I
don't
feel
like
there's
a
good,
a
good
thing
that
we
can
just
copy
your
seat
direction
from.
We
have
to
build
it
ourselves.
Well,.
D
H
A
One
one
way
of
thinking
about
this
there's
a
lens
that
might
be
interesting
to
entertain.
So
let's
say
that
none
of
us
had
any
kind
of
salaries.
It
was
a
completely
voluntary
open
source
product.
Then,
would
it
actually
matter
if
somewhere,
less
productive
and
some
people
li-like
people
worked
on
different
directions
and
so
on
like?
Would
that
actually
be
a
problem
in
the
sort
of
ultimate
commissioners
no
compensation
model,
and
then,
if
there
wouldn't
be
a
problem,
then
the
question
is:
how
do
you?
A
D
Hasn't
status,
pretty
much
said
it
doesn't
matter
right,
you
guys
can
do
whatever
it
is
that
you
want
to
do,
and
this
is
part
of
what
it
is
that
you
do.
Isn't
that,
like
sort
of
like
actively
encouraged,
are
we
making
a
mistake
and
holding
ourselves
to
a
different
standard
because
people
are
being
compensated?
Should
we
maybe
just
leave
that
behind
and
say,
okay,
we're
just
doing
what
we
would
all
I
mean
pretty
much
everybody
here
is.
Is
he
also
would
also
be
here
without
money
if
they
had
their
own
money.
I
Can
I
offer
a
better
suggestion
regarding
the
I
mean
to
Corey's
point
with
regards
to
you
keen
kind
of
stretched
like
this
too
many
opportunities
arise
at
once
and
just
working
on
too
many
of
them.
I
guess
a
rule.
Let's
call
it
like.
Maybe
an
ore
of
coal
contributors
can
only
work
on
one
swarm,
one
team.
At
a
time
that
way
you
can
guarantee
in
someone's
100%
dedication
to
you
to
whatever
swarm
they're
working
on,
but
yet
they
still
have
the
freedom
to
to
leave
and
go
into
a
different
project.
D
Yeah
we're
all
its
classic
startup
territory,
we're
all
wearing
multiple
hats.
You
know,
there's
everybody
that
I
know
in
the
organization
is
doing
things
and
are
not
really
like
their
core
competency
or
that
are
part
of
their
skillset
from
from
different
parts
of
their
lives.
There's
in
that
classic
classic
startup
structure.
H
Well,
I,
don't
think,
there's
gonna
be
a
resolving
to
it
start.
It's
I
think
we're
placing
some
of
these
principles
ahead
of
others
in
the
sense
that,
like
yeah,
we
can
say
we're
gonna
be
as
efficient
as
we
can,
but
not
at
the
cost
of
the
other
principles
and
in
order
to
be
truly
decentralized
and
truly
transparent
and
ultimate
private
like
if
we're
and
if
we're
gonna,
uphold
those
other
principles,
then
we
have
to
suffer
at
the
cost
of
efficiency
and
I.
H
Don't
think,
there's
any
way
of
getting
around
that
we
can
create
the
most
efficient
systems
based
on
this
principle
set
that
that
needs
to
be
well
known
and
we're
gonna
we're
gonna
suffer
a
lot
of
like
additionally
think
think
about
slack
slack
was
efficient.
It
may
have
not
been
free
and
useful
sorry,
free
and
efficient
in
terms
of
like
how
much
it
cost
all
of
us
to
have
it,
but
it
was
very
easy
to
communicate
and
we
gave
that
up
on
the
on
that
on
the
on
our
principle
set
that.
H
D
I'm
this
seminar
discussion
is
part
of
that
of
us
doing
these.
These
balancing
all
right.
Do
you
guys
all
feel
that
we're
being
resourceful
with
our
use
of
time
in
doing
this
this
this
last
two
weeks
because
Oscar
had
mentioned,
you
know
it's
how
many,
how
many
work
hours
it
is
for
the
combination
of
people
that
are
that
are
contributing
to
this?
Are
we
being
resourceful
in
doing
this
exercise?
I?
Think.
H
So
I
think
people
are
being
heard
and
even
even
if
people
aren't
speaking
up
there,
they're
rallying
behind
the
people
who
are
and
because
of
that
they're
feel
like
they're.
Their
voices
are
heard
too
and
I
and
that's
a
it's
a
it's
a
I,
think
it's
a
big
thing
and
there's
not
a
lot
of
opportunity
in
organization
like
this
for
that
to
happen,
and
so
things
like
this,
who
then
lead
to
really
really
really
quality
discussions
in
Prague
when
we're
all
together,
and
so
when
we're
in
Prague
and
we're
all
together.
H
D
D
F
A
What
so
one
way
of
tracing
is
full
of
shame,
depending
on
your
you,
like
sticks
or
carrots,
but
you
can
also
see
it
as
a
book
of
opportunity,
so
people
prefer
that
that
would
be
another
way
of
thinking
about
it.
As
for
how
to
do
it,
my
ID
I
don't
know
what
people's
thoughts
are,
but
we
could
have
these
sort
of
longer
system
like
seminars,
as
well
as
our
collective
brains
and
so
on,
gets
upgraded.
A
We
could
do
it,
maybe
totally
or
half
year
or
whatever,
but
then
maybe
there's
there's
room
also
for
having
it
more
regular
follow-up.
So,
for
example,
when
it
comes
to
transparency
or
inclusivity,
and
so
on,
it's
often
maybe
it's
not
the
most
first
sort
of
job
or
responsibility
so
on,
so
we
so
miss
opportunities
to
to
improve
on
a
weekly
basis.
So
maybe
that
could
be
something
I,
don't
know
what
the
structure
of
that
would
look
like,
but
having
some
some
format
or
you
could
have
these
types
of
discussions
so.
A
Right
cool,
so
so
just
some
background
see,
can
you
guys
him
see
my
screen?
Yes,
yes,
yeah
awesome.
So
so
this
is
document
right
and
essentially
what
we
did
back
in
Basel
is
that
we
had
people
because
of
complicated
stuff
as
before,
but
then
we
entered
this
live
round
where
people
could
say
like
well.
These
are
actually
the
same
thing
and
here
are
some
more
details.
I,
don't
understand
what
this
one
is
and
so
on,
and
then
we
voted
on
them.
A
So
it's
a
great
opportunity
for
us
to
vote
on
this
in
person
with
a
wider
group
of
coca,
tribulus
and
community
members
in
Prague.
But
in
order
for
that
are
voting
to
be
meaningful,
it's
not
to
know
afters
I've
just
have
this
brainstorm
kind
of
list
and
that
we
hear
right
now.
So
what
I
was
thinking
is
that
we
have
these
sort
of
sections
that
we've
come
up
with.
A
We
have
openness
and
inclusivity,
and
so
on,
and
my
thinking
is
that
we
have
a
set
of
people
like
maybe
two
three
people
personal
section,
and
then
we
sort
of
take
5-10
minutes
because
I'll
rewrite
these
and
add
some
clarity.
As
an
example
of
this,
you
have
this
sort
of.
You
have
some
sort
of
brief
title.
It's
like
actually
a
problem.
It's
clear
what
success
looks
like
it's
understandable.
It
doesn't
sort
of
conflict
with
other
ones.
Maybe
it
violates
multiple
principles.
It
maybe
some
details
and
we
could
time
boxset
and
we
can.
We
can
rotate.
A
So
each
sort
of
person
touches
multiple
sections
and
what
we
can
get
from.
That,
then,
is
that
we
can
have
sort
of
this
detail
thing
and
do
some
kinda
presentation,
a
Prague
and
I'm
vote
for
it,
and
just
an
example:
I
pulled
out
the
top
ten
principles
before
from
muscle
and-
and
you
can
sort
of
imagine
visualizing
is
this-
you
don't
have
to
go
overboard
like
this,
but
but
just
in
terms
of
how
we
can
sort
of
think
about
this
and
make
this
more
accessible
to
people.
A
D
A
F
E
A
A
I
A
D
A
A
D
H
D
A
So,
first
for
continuous,
we
need
to
move
over
over
deaths
of
documents.
Pretenders
of
add
some
more
colors
is
an
example
template
here,
just
in
terms
of
adding
a
bit
more
details
on
it
and
making
clear
so
what
success
might
look
like
and
so
on,
and
it
can
just
be
a
draft
right.
We're
not
gonna
get
this.
This
sort
of
roughly
get
started
on
this,
and
so
people
can
understand
what
what
these
items
mean.