►
Description
Timecodes:
00:00 - Intro
01:04 - Juan explains what he learned and how to work with that information
07:45 - Round of the highlights of the chapter
19:40 - Natesuits ask for feedback on how to implement social agreements on DAO's
33:34 - Livi asks for the previous 5 conditions to conduce private to community property
35:50 - Juan talks about long term success indicate its not necessarily external regulators
38:00 - Second round of highlights
51:44 - Next chapter leader
53:20 - Raffle
🙏 Thank you for watching! Hit 👍 and subscribe 🚩 to support this work
🌱Join the Community🌱
on Discord https://discord.gg/DDr5kYU
or say hello on Telegram http://t.me/CommonsStack
Join the conversation https://forum.tecommons.org/
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/CommonsStack
Learn more http://tecommons.org/
A
And
maybe
we
can
kick
off
today,
juan
is
leading
us
so
tanner.
I
think
this
is
your
first.
Maybe
this
the
only
one
that
is
your
first
time
here
so
welcome.
Thank
you.
We
are
in
the
third
chapter
today,
we're
gonna
read
half
of
it
and
every
session
one
person,
one
different
person
leads
the
conversation,
so
today
juan
is
leading
it
and
I'll
give
I'll
pass
to
him
to
to
start,
and
just
meanwhile
hi-
and
I
think
maybe.
A
C
Thanks
levi,
hey
everyone,
so
I
just
shared
my
notes
in
the
in
the
channel
so
that
everyone
can
see
at
least
what
I
highlighted
from
the
chapters
and
well.
The
general
idea
of
the
book
that
I
have
had
until
the
moment
is
that
she
is
analyzing
several
cases
and
several
cpr
institutions
for
trying
to
find
some
underlying
principles
that
they
all
share
and
in
this
chapter
number
three.
C
C
C
E
Yeah
definitely
agree
that
contextualizing,
the
different
rules
for
different
cprs
at
a
local
level
is
super
important,
and
that
was
one
of
the
things
that
was
highlighted
also
notice
that
it
was
kind
of
interesting
how,
with
the
various
kind
of
cprs,
there
was
not
only
the
appropriation
of
the
resources
that
was
managed,
but
also
contributions
to
the
environment
right,
so
they
didn't
just
take.
They
also,
you
know,
built
the
roads
or
helped
maintain
infrastructure
or
helped
with
the
labor
around
some
of
the
things.
E
A
Yeah
on
this
point
of
sustainability
and
making
sure
that
everything
goes
back
to
the
system.
Also,
one
of
the
things
I
highlighted
was
that
no
citizen
could
send
more
cows
to
the
alp
than
he
could
feed
during
the
winter,
and
it
feels
so
simple
but
something
I
thought
it's
quite
difficult
in
our
dow
scenarios
to
make
sure
that
we
have
like
the
people
that
are
in
the
system
are
gonna
be
fed
by
those
cows.
D
Yeah
for
me,
what
called
my
attention
can
you
meet
one?
Second,
I
was
then
I
have
a
it's
almost
impossible
to
get
the
operational
rules
right
at
the
first
time.
That's
that's
highlighted
on
the
book,
but
I
I
I
went
ahead
and
I
think
we
are.
I
think
we
are
already
doing
it,
but
things
you.
We
cannot
build
that
perfect
system
in
the
first.
Try,
it's
like
good
to
look
what
others
do
and
then
we
just
copy
and
start
from
a
better
place
than
just
from
scratch.
F
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
caught
my
intention
was
early
on
in
the
chapter
where
she
speaks
about
fugitive
resources,
so
resources
that
are
hard
to
contain
like
groundwater
and
such
and
how
you
know
resource
economic
economists
have
always
solved
that
problem
by
introducing
private
property
because
it
just
now
the
problem
is
solved.
If
somebody
owns
it,
then
they
all
take
care
of
it
and
it
seems
so
logical-
and
I
love
that
you
know
in
this
book.
She
actually
like
that.
F
The
point
is
to
say
that
it
is
actually
it
sounds
logical,
but
it
is
actually
illogical
and
there
are
ways
that
we
can.
We
can
share
these
comments
and
that
the
cases
that
she
use
are
so
have
such
a
long
history.
You
know
the
the
youngest
one
is
100
years
old
and
the
oldest
ones
are
a
thousand
years
old.
So
it's
not
something
new,
that's
being
invented.
F
There
were
certain
processes
that
were
applied,
the
order
and
the
duration,
for
example,
and
then,
as
the
state
would
change
whether
there
was
drought
or
overflow,
they
would
have,
they
would
change
the
process.
So
the
process
itself
was
adaptable
to
the
conditions
of
the
environment,
so
it
was
super,
agile
and
very
flexible,
and
that
was
something
else
that
is
just
sort
of
shaping
my
way
of
thinking.
You
know
those
those
two
ideas
really
stuck
with
me
and
I
continue
to
come
back
and
chew
on
them.
C
C
D
B
So
one
could
just
like
come
from
the
outside,
say:
hey,
you
know,
if
you
do
this
like
this,
and
that
like
that,
you
can
increase
your
yield
by
this
percentage.
But
then
this
would
itself
mean
a
lot
of
different
factors
to
that
would
need
to
be
readjusted
for
the
new
model
and
it
kind
of
reminded
me
of
this
like
again
the
unquantifiable
aspect
of
a
system
where
you
know
you
design
a
system
and
efficiency
is
one
aspect,
but
the
fact
that
you
feel
the
power
sovereignty
of
owning
it.
B
A
G
That
she
said
that
these
these,
like
studies,
are
from
things
that
are
more
than
a
hundred
years
old,
and
I
wonder
many
times
that
there
was
no
internet
and
not
many
things
that
there
is
today
that
maybe
a
hundred
years-
I
don't
know
maybe
20
years
ago,
was
like
five
years
nowadays
or
or
like.
I
don't
know
how
to
take
into
account
those
those
time
frames
but
yeah.
It's
still
like
the
the
best
they
had
when
they
made
the
book.
I.
C
Guess
other
thing
that
I
have
be
been
reflectioning
is
about
the
the
importance
of
social
agreements
and
how
sometimes
we
underestimate
them,
because
with
social
agreements
is
that
all
civilizations
have
have
arisen.
So
why
can't
we
have
social
agreements
in
the
in
a
decentralized
world
and
another
case
that
is
not
on
the
book,
but
that
I
have
been
relating
to.
I
mean
while
I'll
read
this
is
in
here
in
colombia,
in
in
the
indigenous
people,
why
you
they
have
their
own
legislative
system.
C
C
Those
agreements
have
like
the
legit
legitimacy
of
their
own
internal
law.
So
what
I
think,
and
what
I
reflect
is
that
the
most
important
thing
is
and-
and-
and
I
think
of
this
also
after
hearing
septimus
in
the
last
call-
is
to
have
clear
rules
and
boundaries,
because
when
people
accept
the
the
rules
and
boundaries,
then
the
social
acceptance
of
of
of
these
rules
like
give
them
the
legitimacy
to
to
be
enforced.
C
I
am
going
to
search
a
link
of
the
parabreos,
so
you
can
like
read
a
lot
of
a
little
bit
of
it
and
it's
very
interesting
because
these
indigenous
people,
they
have
lived
in
this
place
even
before
the
spanish
came
and
they
they
were
leaving
and
they
live.
Here.
After,
like
the
state
of
colombia
arrives
and,
as
is
said
in
the
paragraph,
they
they
have
the
their
only
legitimacy
and
they
stand
for
their
rights
so
that
the
their
own
legislative
system
is.
H
Respected
so
one
of
the
just
response:
do
you
want
about
the
social
agreements
is
one
of
the
things
I
had
a
big
hard
time
grappling
with
was,
in
fact,
the
social
agreements
that
they
had,
and
I
think
one
of
the
examples
was
in
japan,
where
you
know
they
had
the
monitoring
system,
where
you'd
have
basically
a
citizen's
arrest
where
they
would.
You
know,
you
know,
punish
somebody
who
is
illegally
harvesting
the
commons
land,
and
if
you
were
caught
doing
it,
they
would
confiscate
the
harvest
on
behalf
of
the
village.
H
They
would
take
your
equipment
and
force
you
to
come
back
and
purchase
it
from
the
village
to
get
your
your
horses
or
your
carriage
back,
whatever
it
was,
and
these
social
agreements
it
fascinates
me
because
they
they
set
the
foundation
for
like
kind
of
the
legal
jurisprudence
that
occurred
later
on
and
the
basis
of
law.
That
became
what
those
comments
were
and
how
difficult
it
must
have
been
to
have
that
type
of
mindset
and
that
cultural
attitude
that
these
are
the
social
agreements
we
have.
Today.
H
How
do
you
have
this
mindset
where
we're
shifting
from
everything
is
kind
of
privatized,
but
we
want
to
kind
of
isolate
and
separate
this
commons
area
or
this
public
sector
and
say
hey.
We
need
to
treat
this
differently
from
a
social
point
of
view
and
are
having
our
social
agreements
and
do
things
of
that
nature.
So
I
just
wonder
if
anybody
had
any
thoughts
on
that.
E
E
If
you're
operating
at
a
local
level,
you
can
have
human-centric
agreements
that
are
based
on
you
know
social
norms
and
social
agreements
right.
It's
local,
it's
humans,
engaging
on
a
global
level,
especially
with
blockchains
a
it's
just
a
free-for-all,
but
b.
You
also
have
humans
and
machines,
interacting
and
so
social
agreements
don't
work
when
you
have
machines
on
the
network
that
don't
understand
what
humans
are
right.
So
in
order
to
have
social
agreements
in
a
you
know,
digital
space,
or
especially
with
daos.
E
You
have
to
have
some
sort
of
local
context
under
which
you
operate,
which
requires
some
sort
of
permissioned
gateway,
oftentimes.
Like
token
permission
chats
or
you
know,
systems
that
only
allow
like
dow
members
or
token
holders
to
operate
within
that
context,
then,
once
you
have
that
permissioned
barrier,
you
can
create
a
localized
context
and
in
that
local
context
a
community
can
have
its
own
social
norms,
social
agreements
etc,
but
it
has
to
first
create
that
bubble
or
that
permissioned
layer
before
you
can
kind
of
get
into
that.
A
E
Yeah,
if
you
have
a
system,
that's
permissionless
that
anyone
can
operate
in
then.
Essentially,
you
fall
to
the
lowest
common
denominator
of
trust,
which
is
zero,
because
anyone
any
address
anyone
can
can
operate
on
it.
So
there's
no
trust
like
on
the
internet.
Everything
is
just
a
click
away
right,
so
every
single
computer
is
networked.
Unless
you
have
a
firewall,
they
are
all
right
next
to
each
other.
So
it's
imagine
like
an
infinite
dimensional
space,
where
you
are
like
literally
shoulder
to
shoulder
with
everyone
in
the
world.
E
That's
the
internet
firewalls
create
a
separation
between
that.
So
then
it's
like
okay!
Well,
then,
there's
us
in
this
little
bubble
and
then
we
we
can
interact
so
human
thinking,
often
we
think
of
social
context.
We
all
get
in
a
room,
we
hang
out,
etc
on
the
internet
in
a
digital
space.
Everything
is
like
very,
very
close
unless
you
create
those
barriers,
create
those
rooms
create
that
separation.
So
if
you
want
to
have
something
that
operates
in
a
way,
that's
more
human-centric.
E
You
have
to
create
a
space
for
that,
because,
in
a
digital
space,
the
the
internet
and
blockchain
stuff
were
created
for
machines,
they're
created
for
servers
and
addresses
that
are
all
just
right
next
to
each
other.
So
it's
like
anything
you
share
on
the
internet
is
like
sharing
with
literally
everyone
in
the
world
which
falls
the
lowest
common
denominator
of
whoever
wants
to
do
whatever,
with
that
information
or
data,
or
resource
or
etc.
C
A
For
example,
we
open
the
hatch
parameters,
like
all
the
parameters
that
off
the
dao
for
the
community
to
give
inputs
on,
because
it's
very
important
for
everyone
to
know
like
what
is
that
is
making
the
machine
operate.
What
are
going
to
be
these
rules
and
boundaries,
and
also
there
is
a
huge
culture
of
trust
that
I
think
it
does
create
a
natural
boundary
of.
A
I
think,
if
everyone
has
a
good
relationship
with
each
other,
and
these
relationships
are
being
strengthened
with
time
and
people
when
they
enter,
they
sense
the
culture
that
already
exists.
This
feeling
of
the
culture
is
already
a
boundary
on
itself
that,
if
you're
not
resonant
with
the
culture
that
it's
being
built,
it's
gonna
be
a
little
bit
harder
for
you
to
integrate,
but
that
bubble
is
welcoming.
So
it's
open,
but
it's
dense
in
a
sense.
E
Yeah,
I
think
that's
a
really
good
point
that
you
can
have
boundaries
that
are
both
soft,
like
on
the
human
and
cultural
level,
as
well
as
hard
on
the
contract
level.
Like
do
you
have
a
token,
can
you
participate,
etc?
I
think
yeah,
it's
really
cool.
You
guys
are
doing
the
combination
of
both,
because
both
are
really
important.
H
So
so,
just
to
clarify
you're
trying
to
embed
that
type
of
cultural
expectations
and
those
social
agreements
within
the
the
first
amount
of
hatchers.
Within
the
bonding
curve
saying
you
know
these
people
who
are
initially
starting
this
have
a
vested
interest
and
from
this
small
group,
we're
going
to
take
create
a
culture
that
we
want.
That
is
designed
for
this
system
and
then
hopefully
it
perpetuates
with
every
new
member
joining.
Is
that
right.
I
I
Take
that
group
and
say:
hey,
let's
go
on
get
coin
and
fund
a
bunch
of
grants
right,
it's
just
going
to
be
like
a
challenge
there,
but
you
start
with
a
bunch
if
you
start
with
some
cultural
rules
that
are
that
are
like
tuned
for
the
for
the
direction
you
want
to
go,
then
it
will
diverge,
but
not
as
much.
You
know
as
it
won't
it's
not
like
it's
just
starting
from
some
random
starting
point.
I
I
I
Absolutely
that's
actually
what
the
goal
is
to
have
a
a
multi-game
scenario
so
that
we
can,
you
know,
start
loss
of
commons
with
this
trusted
seed
so
that
we
have
this
trusted
seed
with
the
common
stack,
where
anyone
with
a
c
stack
token
is
actually
not
only
part
of
this
curated
list
of
people
who
have
like
donated
in
some
way
have
been
altruistic
in
some
way
and
it's
by
either
donating
their
time
or
their
funds,
or
also
they've
been
like.
You
know.
I
We
literally
go
and
look
at
everyone
who
applies
and
make
sure
they
don't
have
a
green
frog
on
their
twitter
handle.
You
know
it's
like
it's
just
like
we
check
everybody
out
and
then
on
top
of
that
they're
also
become
part
of
a
legal
association,
so
that
they're
also
protected
to
start
these
to
initial,
a
swiss
association
that
protects
them,
that
the
terms
are
written
just
to
protect
them
for
launching
these
bonding
curves,
which
you
know
it
could
be
a
security
or
whatever.
I
I
But
juan
carlos
is
really
handling
the
graduated
sanctions
things
you
know
it's
like
there's
also
going
to
be
levels
where
most
of
the
sanctions
don't
involve.
Taking
away
some
stack
tokens,
that's
pretty
like
ultimate
like
sanction
would
be
probably
a
warning:
hey
dude
turn
off
the
box,
or
we
will
take
away
your
token.
C
System
where
she
like
points,
what
she
calls
the
the
the
principles
of
the
design,
the
design
principle,
and
I
think
it
it.
It's
been
a
really
good
practice
for
the
tec,
to
try
to
to
focus
and
to
have
a
development
on
each
one
of
these
points
because
yeah,
I
think
we
we
are
trying
to
create
a
a
common
pool
resource.
C
A
B
B
B
Before
yes,
so
it
is
63
base63
one,
the
value
of
production
per
unit
of
land
is
low
to
the
frequency
or
dependability
of
use
or
yield
is
low.
Three,
the
possibility
of
improvement
or
intensification
is
low.
Four,
a
large
territory
is
needed
for
effective
use,
and
five,
relatively
large
groups
are
required
for
capital
investment
activities.
B
B
One
of
the
research
that
I
was
really
interested
in
was
comparing
the
development
policies
of
india
and
china
and,
as
you
know,
like
china
has
been
communist
country
since
now,
and
india
has
been
mostly
a
market
economy
so
and
they
they
were
both
really
poor.
In
the
beginnings
right
and
in
that,
when
you
come
to
1970s,
the
whole
globalization
starts
and
china
drives
all
this
like
investment
inflow
and
the
question
is:
why
doesn't
it
go
to
other
countries?
B
B
B
B
Then
you
go
to
commons,
where
the
people
mobilize
the
surplus
labor
power
by
themselves,
which
then
removes
this
kind
of
extreme
violence
sites
from
the
picture,
but
you
still
have
retained
this
positive
and
actually
really
interesting
strategy
for
developing
your
infrastructure,
which
then
benefits
you
economically
in
the
future
and
reading.
This
was
really
interesting
because
I've
seen
this
case
like
for
the
first
time
as
where
the
state
is
not
emote.
F
I
think
that's
so
fascinating.
I
I
really
like
that.
You
shared
that
with
us.
I
think
that's
an
example
of
like
long-term
rewards
that
maybe
you
know
the
people
of
china
who
are
who
are
dedicating
that
labor
weren't,
aware
of
or
maybe
they
would
also
have
had
some
shorter
term
rewards
as
well
in
in
the
book.
There's
a
part
where
she
talks
about
a
village
in
japan
and
similar
concept
that
there
would
be.
F
The
participants
would
share
the
labor
in
a
specific
way,
and
you
know
the
the
way
that
they
would
share.
The
labor
was
very
prescribed,
you
know
one
adult
from
each
family
and
you
know
how
they
would
be
placed
on
the
fields
and
the
direction
that
they
would
cut
the
I
don't
remember
what
it
was,
but
the
grass
and
then
I
I
really
thought
the
the
sort
of
the
ending
of
this.
F
It's
a
quote
by
mckean,
where
they
talk
about
all
of
the
the
grass
would
then
be
bundled
into
different
sections
and
each
of
the
kumi.
This
was
the
the
household.
The
group
would
then
be
assigned
one
of
the
batches
by
lottery,
and
I
thought
oh,
it's
a
lot
like
when,
when
you
have
children
and
you
have
to
cut
a
cake
and
you
you
know
one
of
the
one
child
cuts
the
cake
and
the
other
one
picks.
F
B
B
In
in
in
common
management,
and
especially
in
this
book,
it
comes
repetitively
over
and
over
again,
as
randomness
is
sort
of
justice.
You
know
like
randomness,
based
on
like
equal
exposure
to
that
randomness
and
the
risk
or
like
the
expectation
that
comes
as
a
result
of
that
random
choice
is
embraced
by
you
know
people
all
over
the
world
as
the
best
mechanism
to
basically
like
allocate
tasks,
and
I
think
it's
also
interesting.
A
We've
been
like
working
with
of
what
is
to
not
waste
and
in
a
in
a
dow
scenario
like
how
much
is
how
can
we
start
valuing
work
and
in
the
sense
of
enough
and
what
is
not
waste
and
how
like
what
we
are
proposing
is
also
having
thoughts
being
put
into
the
system.
The
regeneration
of
the
system
as
a
whole.
H
I
think
there
was
another
one
with
the
the
village
the
way
they
differ
differentiate,
the
actual
appropriators
in
which
they
would
allocate
certain
resources
not
based
on
the
individuals,
but
rather
the
villages
themselves,
and
so
they
group
these
small
villages
together
and
say:
hey.
You
can
only
have
this
much
and
this
much
and
this
much
and
if
one
individual
got
over
their
limits,
guess
what
the
entire
village
is.
Now
you
know
punished
for
it,
and
so
you
kind
of
have
this
like
social
check
on
each
other.
When
it
comes
to
appropriating.
C
Each
of
the
example
is
very
different
and
addresses
the
problem
in
a
different
way,
but
it
more
or
less
like
solves
the
problem.
So
for
me,
it's
like
really
clear
that
there
is
no
like
perfect
system.
We
can
see
that
in
each
of
the
cases
she
mentions
that
there
are
problems,
ones
say
that
the
monitors
are
bribed
and
the
other
one
says
that
the
the
decisions
came
come
from
a
tribunal.
C
So
it's
like
different
ways
to
address
the
same,
so
it
it
leaves
us
the
question
on
on.
How
are
we
going
to
try
to
manage
the
same
and
what?
What
are
the
the
the
yeah,
the
the
procedures
that
we
are
going
to
to
promote
so
so
yeah?
For,
for
me,
it's
really
interesting
to
be
reading
this
book
and
I
find
the
the
examples
very
interesting,
but
what
I
highlight
from
them,
it's
like
the
difference
between
each
one
of
them.
C
They
they
are,
even
though
the
two
firsts
are
for
for
access
of
land
and
mountain
and
the
rest
are
for
access
of
water.
They
just
like
address
the
same
thing
with
different
procedures
and
yeah.
I
think
that's
like
the
the
message
that
I
get
from
reading
the
book
that
there's
no
like
a
definitive
system.
It's
just
like
we
have
to
be
resilient.
C
Have
the
capacity
to
adapt,
have
the
capacity
to
respond
to
our
needs
that
when
there
is
a
lot
of
water,
everyone
can
get
water,
but
when
there
is
drought
that
we
can
like
take
measures,
measurements
that
don't
affect
everyone
so
yeah.
I
I
think
it's
like
a
a
very
dynamic
system
and
I
yeah
I
highlight
that.
A
B
B
C
F
A
A
We're
getting
to
the
time
to
raffle
that
sweet
pen
that
you
provided
to
us,
so
I'm
gonna
give
numbers
to
each
one
of
you.
Please
remember
your
number
and
then
I'll
shuffle
here.
So
at
the
number
one
grip
number
two
one
number
three
late
number:
four
neuron
5
76,
tam,
7,
tonga,
8,
fred,
9,
matteo
10,
zap,
11,
parata,
12.,.