►
Description
In the Stewards Working Group the Community Stewards come together to coordinate workstreams, share experiences and reflect on what is going well and what can be done better in order to achieve the mission of the TEC and best serve our community.
Find us on the #stewards channel on our Discord!
We gather every Wednesday at 7pm CET.
Steward: Tamara
🙏 Thank you for watching! Hit 👍 and subscribe 🚩 to support this work
🌱Join the Community🌱
on Discord https://discord.gg/uM4ZWDjNfK
or say hello on Telegram https://t.me/tecommons
Join the conversation https://forum.tecommons.org/
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/tecmns
Learn more http://tecommons.org/
A
B
A
C
B
Get
money
from
others
like
ibis
working
still
working
for
common
stock,
and
I
also
will
be
getting
some
for
this
to
us.
Some
for
the
reward
system,
blah
blah
blah,
yeah
and.
A
C
B
A
B
A
B
We're
still
working
on
the
like
the
special
projects
are
not
in
there
like.
If
we
need
someone
for
setup
during
analytics
or
not
like
it's
not
included
there,
so
might
be
like
a
little,
but
not
too
much
like
220k,
like
might
be,
like
I
don't
know,
not
20k,
okay,.
A
Okay,
cool
thanks
for
doing
that.
I
I
had
it
wrong
and
I
appreciate
the
correction:
okay,
cool
guess:
what's
on
our
agenda
today,
to
talk
about
the
funding
too,
all
right,
maybe
we
get
started
how
we
usually
get
started
with
our
check-in
and
temperature
check
on
the
community.
A
So,
let's
see
yeah
okay,
I
will
set
a
timer
for
about
a
minute
and
a
half
two
minutes
and
I'll
unmute
when
it's
when
there's
10
seconds
left-
and
maybe
I
will
pass
to
eduardo
to
kick
us
off
today,.
E
Thank
you
tim
simplistic,
so.
E
I,
like
I'm,
just
really
happy
because
of
the
discard
in
general,
so
that's
my
dominant
feeling
at
the
moment
I
felt
the
today's
orientation
called
people
were
a
little
bit
shy,
so
I'm
still
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
break
the
ice
with
people,
so
it
doesn't
get
weird
or
or
strange
and
yeah.
I
think
that's
pretty
much
all
like
I
I
feel
we
are.
E
I
feel
very
good,
very
good
and
I
apologize
just
in
general
because
my
jet
lag.
I
will
be
probably
a
little
bit
not
very
present
today,
so
that's
it
and
I
will
pass
it
on
to.
E
F
Thanks,
I
do
yeah
I'm
here
to
catch
up
after
vacation
and
hear
what's
going
on
in
the
stewards
temperature
check.
I
feel
pretty
good.
I've
had
the
opportunity
to
hang
out
with
a
couple
of
stewards
in
person,
and
I'm,
like
that's
kind
of
make
me
feel-
really
really
excited
about
what
we're
doing
here
and
I'm
going
to
be
shilling
the
tec
tomorrow
in
beta
kia.
So
I'm
really
really
excited
about
that.
But
that's
my
primary
distraction,
probably
for
this
call
and
I
will
give
it
to
livia.
G
Thanks
mitch,
my
temperature
check-
I
think
it's
very
influenced
by
the
research
group
happening
just
because
we're
looking
so
much
in
the
tc
from
like
totally
fresh
lenses
from
a
lot
of
people,
and
that
has
been
interesting.
G
So
I
think
a
few
takeaways
is
that
first
people
feel
super
excited
about
what
we're
doing
here.
Second,
I
think
we
like
overlooked
the
complexity
of
everything,
it's
so
many
topics
and
detailed
information
that
I
think
we
have
a
really
good
awareness,
like
all
the
stewards
and
that's
very
impressive,
and
also
some
reflections
on
our
mission,
like
how
clear
it
is
that
we
are
advancing
the
field
of
token
engineering
and
not
like
the
crypto
economic
space
in
general.
So
that
was
an
easy
confusion
that
people
had
and
yeah
I'll
pass
to.
Nate.
H
Yeah
timber
check
is
good,
I
think
that's.
H
We
have
a
lot
of
new
individuals
who
are
looking
for
things
to
do,
and
you
know
I
I'm
not
sure
if,
from
my
perspective
that
they're
getting
stuff
to
do
so
it'd
be
kind
of
nice
to
see
some
clarity
around
that
outside
of
that.
I
think
everybody's
really
excited
about
the
pram
parties
and
the
upcoming
vote
for
the
for
the
parameters
for
the
commons
upgrade,
and
I'm
excited
about
that
as
well
and
yeah
I'll
pass
it
to
craig.
D
I
Thanks
tom
yeah,
I
am
super
motivated.
I
really
like
the
way
the
graviton
training
ended
yesterday.
There
are
a
lot
of
things
we
still
have
to
do,
but
yeah
we
are.
We
are
eager
to
face
those
challenges
and
I
am
also
really
happy
to
have
mitch
here
in
my
house
and
that
we
will
be
talking
about
the
tc
tomorrow
to
our
local
community,
so
yeah,
that's
great
and
yeah.
That's
my
temperature
check.
I
I
J
Yeah
thanks
tom
thanks
funka
temperature
check.
It's
it's.
I
think
it's
like
kind
of
warm
as
in
like
last
week,
but
still
like
it's
it's
like
I
mean
at
least
in
in
comms.
J
It's
like
a
storm
is,
is,
is
coming
and
and
just
because
how
constantly
I'm
I'm
looking
for
for
like
new
ways
to
to
organize
and
to
like
cut
her
like
the
the
the
new
contributors
and
and
it's
been
it's
been
interesting,
but,
to
be
honest,
like
I've,
been
I've
been
a
little
bit
nervous
because
of
how
uncertain
it
is
like
in
in
a
way,
but
I'm
just
like
so
motivated
with
everything
that's
going
on
in
other
working
groups
that,
like
it,
doesn't
really
stop
me.
J
So
so
I'm
I'm
excited
for
it
for
all
of
the
progress
in
incomes
I'll
pass
it
to
I'll
pass
it
back
to
you
tim.
I
don't
know
who's
who's
when.
B
D
A
Things
cool,
I
just
want
to
say
you
know,
I'm
glad,
I'm
always
glad
we're
we're,
always
glad
when
people
join
the
stewards
call
and
in
the
beginning
of
the
stewards
call
we
normally
just
do
a
temperature
check
to
see
if
there's
something
that
we
want
to
sort
of
raise
to
the
attention
of
the
stewards,
things
that
are
either
not
going
well,
or
maybe
things
that
are
going
well
and
you
want
to
share
something
you're
excited
about,
and
I'd
like
to
just
offer
everyone
in
the
in
the
call
a
chance
to
voice
their
opinion.
A
A
K
K
There's
folks
that
are
engaged
in
the
tec
on
various
levels,
who
are
also
engaged
in
the
cardano
community.
And
so
it's
been
fun
to
see
that
we've
spun
up
a
small
little
working
group
to
explore
ways
that
we
can
start
to
make
some
connections
here
and
lauren's
going
to
be
doing
a
params
party
for
a
dao,
a
dow.
That's
all
based
on
cardano,
and
so
I'm
excited
to
see
where
this
might
go.
So
yeah
simmering.
A
L
Or
observations
thanks,
I'm
just
kind
of
learning.
M
A
A
Okay,
all
right
I'll,
take
that
as
a
note
and
we'll
keep
going
and
feel
free
to
to
jump
in
if
you
have,
if
you're
having
problems
with
your
audio
okay.
So
if
I
was
going
to
show
up
today
to
just
do
a
small,
not
quite
a
demo,
but
just
like
hey
here-
are
the
new
things
in
our
discord
server.
You
probably
can
see
that
our
discord
server
has
changed.
A
So
there's
just
a
few
things
that
I
wanted
vi
to
point
out.
One
of
the
things
is
there's.
So
most
of
the
channels
are
the
same.
There's
just
a
little
bit
of
clean
headings,
so
we
can
differentiate
between
the
different
categories
a
little
bit
better.
A
There
is
a
new
onboarding
journey,
so
when
you,
when
you
join
the
server
now,
the
verification
process
happens
within
the
discord
server,
it's
no
longer
on
a
different
website,
and
then
you
join
the
server
and
then
there's
a
survey.
That's
automatically
sent
to
all
newcomers
and
then
the
last
thing
is
there's
a
guide.
A
Maybe
I
need
to
share
the
screen.
Actually,
give
me
one
moment:
there's
the
guide
that
I
demoed
in
the
and
the
community
call
anyone
can
come
and
answer
just
ask
some
basic
questions
about
the
tec.
This
thing
here,
dismissed
message
actually
is
quite
important
to
get
rid
of
those
those
messages.
A
Let's
see,
how
is
the
tec
organized,
for
example,
links
to
the
group
website
page
and
tec
calendar,
so
this
guide
is
really
just
the
the
first
version
and
I
would
we
will
be
able
to
expand
on
it
and
make
and
make
it
more
robust.
The
other
thing
I
wanted
to
show
people
was
get
involved
right
now.
A
It
just
has
a
few
call
to
actions,
but
I'd
like
this
to
be
the
channel
where
all
of
us,
in
our
in
all
of
the
the
stewards
of
working
groups,
use
that
channel
to
say,
hey,
I'm
looking
for
people
that
are
creatives
and
if
you,
if
you
you
know,
if
you
are
please
reach
out
to
chewie
in
the
community
in
the
community
communications
working
group,
so
I
think
get
involved
can
be
a
place
where,
where
we're
voicing,
the
working
groups
needs
specifically
around
skill
sets,
and
then
I
also
want
to
say
that
you
can.
A
Let
people
in
your
working
group
know
that
the
description
of
the
channel
also
has
the
agenda
in
it.
So
it's
very
easy
to
find
and
people
don't
need
to
go
to
the
google
calendar
anymore,
and
now
we
just
have
everything
in
the
in
discord
itself
and
then
the
last
thing
is.
I
know
we've
talked
about
it
before,
but
I
also
want
to
give
special
praise
to
zeptimus
who
populated
all
of
the
calendar
events
for
this
week.
So
all
of
the
calendar
events
are
in
here.
It's
really
something.
A
It's
really
neat
actually,
and
you
can
say
which
ones
you're
interested
in,
and
I
think
you
get
a
reminder
before
it
happens.
So
that's
very
neat
too
so
start
using
it.
If
you
have
an
event
that
you
want
to
create,
feel
free
to
create
an
event
as
well
as
put
it
on
the
calendar,
I
think
there
was,
I
think
that
was
about
all
he
was
going
to
cover,
but
yeah.
A
It
was
a
lot
of
work
that
went
in
by
vi,
ms
gideon,
lbs,
eduardo
and
and
myself,
and
we
would
all
love
feedback
if
you
want
to
share
any
thoughts
or
any
ways
to
improve
it
in
the
communitas
channel.
That
would
be
super
welcome.
A
All
right.
I
just
wanted
to
see
how
we
were
doing
with
our
funding
proposals
zeptimus
fixed,
something
that
I
had
wrong
in
here
today
for
transparency.
I
guess
I'll
start
with,
like
the
stewards
is
like
just
waiting
on
me
to
copy
it
and
paste
it
into
the
forum.
N
I
think
it's
done.
I
I
haven't,
got
too
much
feedback.
A
From
from
the
stewards
yet
so
I
think
it's
in
good
shape.
Where
is
it
even
and
now
my
plan
is
actually
it
was
my
plan
last
week
to
to
put
it
into
the
forum
for
feedback
from
the
community,
and
I
think
I
should
do
that
like
soon,
and
I
apologize
it's
not
that.
H
Yeah
I
wanted
to
to
bring
up
something
that
I
was
looking
at
and
I'm
not
sure
if
I
should
just
wait
for
the
forum
or
if
I
can
bring
it
up
here,.
H
Yeah
also,
my
my
only
when
I
was
looking
at
the
the
budgeting
for
things
I
was
concerned
from
the
perspective
of
the
working
group.
Coordination
leads
the
stewards
they're
getting
paid
out
of
the
stewards
budget,
but
I
know
that
some
of
the
the
working
groups
they
have
allocated
funds
for
the
stewards
within
that
as
well
and
I'm
curious
to
know
how
people
feel
about
that
type
of
kind
of,
I
won't
say
double
tipping.
H
I
mean
like
whether
that
that
funds
for
the
working
groups
could
actually
go
to
paying
more
roles,
rather
than
you
know,
having
stewards
getting
paid
from
both
the
working
groups
themselves
and
the
stewards
working
group.
I
just
want
to
bring
that
up.
I
know
it's
kind
of
a
touchy
subject.
Maybe,
but
I
don't
know,
I
just
want
to
no.
A
About
this,
because
I
I
struggled
so
much
to
figure
out
what
the
right
thing
to
do
was-
and
I
don't
know
that
it's
the
right
thing.
So
I
love
this
feedback
and
I'd
also
love
to
hear
other
opinions.
There's
there's
a
few
things
you
know
I
included
working
group
coordination
leads
because
there
are
people
in
working
groups
that
are
performing
this.
The
role
of
the
working
group
coordination
so
they're
attending
the
sprint
planning
they're
attending
their
retrospective
they're.
A
You
know
they're
they're,
they're,
they're,
coordinating
on
github
or
in
zenhub,
so
I
feel
like
there's
a
role
that
is
part
of
the
transversal
coordination
effort
and
that
it's
not
exclusively
stewards
who
are
who
are
fulfilling
that
role,
and
so
I
wanted
to
acknowledge
that
and
to
make
sure
that
that
and
that
the
expectation
of-
and
I
think
I
have
something
like
you
know
at
least
10
hours,
like
the
expectation
that
it'll
take
at
least
10
hours
and
to
attend
the
the
calls
to
participate
to
know
what's
going
on.
A
And
maybe
let
me
just
take
a
moment
to
sort
of
explain
it
to
you,
then,
because
I
was
looking
at
different
figures
this
this
was
actually
angela
who
it
shows
up
as
anonymous,
but
angela
remarked
that
you
know
she's
seen
die
rights
of
more
than
two
times
these,
even
for
10
hours
a
week,
and
it's
very
true
you
know
and
when
I
crunch
the
numbers,
I
realize
that
you
know.
If
we
look
at
something
on
an
on
an,
I
don't
think
I
did
hourly
but
okay.
A
So
if
you,
if
you
think
it's
you
know,
this
is
like
five
dollars
an
hour
or
three
dollars
an
hour,
and
this
is
17
an
hour
or
11
dollars
an
hour.
So
if
you
sort
of
break
it
down
to
the
expectation
of
work
and
then
like
the
amount
of
that,
the
the
the
this
would
actually
be
for
for
an
hour
of
that
work
that
we're
expecting
these
roles
to
perform.
It's,
I
would
say
it's
it's
a
token,
but
it's
not
generous.
A
You
know
if
that
makes
sense
so,
but
I'd
love
to
can
we
pass
it
around
and
get
some
other
thoughts
and
opinions
about
it
and
I'd
love
that
maybe
we
can
ask
eduardo
your
your
thoughts.
E
Yeah,
I
I
agree
on
nate's
comment.
For
me,
the
the
only
conflict
that
I
see
from
this
double
situation
is
that
we
pass
sleep
also
on
recognizing
contributors
that
contribute
in
two
or
more
down
working
group,
because
if
we
recognize
the
contributions
of
the
stewards
outside
the
scope
of
the
working
group
or
because
of
the
you
know,
contributors
that
are
also
on
more
than
one
working
group
should
be
also
acknowledged.
So
not
by
the
stewards.
E
I
don't
mean
by
stewards,
but
in
general,
like
I
don't
know,
I
felt
that
that's
the
only
slippery
kind
of
part
of
it
is
that
we
give
certain
prevalence
to
swords,
but
not
necessarily
the
same
double
checking
for
other
contributors,
who
may
may
be
doing
also
heavy
lifting.
But
that's
the
only
thing
that
crossed
my
mind
regarding
that,
and
I
think
what
is
key
is
to
clarify
why
the
stores
are
receiving,
even
if
it's
a
small
income
and
just
explainly
through
it
in
the
into
the
community.
E
A
H
So
I
guess
the
idea
is
that
you
know
if
we're
making
sure
that
stewards
are
compensated
properly
through
the
stewards
working
group.
I
guess
the
question
is:
should
stewards
also
be
being
paid
out
of
their
working
group
budget
as
well,
or
should
that
those
funds
be
used
for
other
roles
and
making
sure
that
every
stewards
are
solely
paid
out
of
this?
This
steward's
budget,
oh.
H
A
E
Yeah,
for
me,
there
is
a
there
is
also
this
section
of,
for
example,
the
council.
We
have
the
council
topic
and
if
I'm
not
an
expert
on
the
council-
and
it
falls
outside
the
scope
of
my
working
group,
I
have
to
actually
make
some
research
make
some
understanding
to
give
a
proper
opinion
and
so
on.
So
I
think
I
understand
the
aspect
of
recognizing
a
small
amount,
a
male
small
amount
of
recognition
to
outside
the
scope
of
the
working
group.
E
My
concern
is
not
about
that
necessarily
it's
about
how
it
will
be
seen
outside
that
only
we
are
paying
this
attention
only
to
stewards,
so
just
like
a
boundary
or
like
a
system
in
place
that
we
have
working
groups
also
recognize
that
there
could
be
people
who
are
contributing
more
than
one
working
group
and
that
you
know
they
should
be
recognized
so
yeah.
Sorry,
I'm
not
making
maybe
much
sense.
Sorry.
A
Yeah
yeah
my
gut
also
says
that
each
working
group
should
decide
how
to
compensate
the
people
in
that
working
group,
including
the
stewards
and
that
you
know
these.
These
compensation
should
be
our
proposals
and
the
names
are
named
in
the
proposals
and
there's
transparency,
and
you
know-
and
I
feel
like.
A
I
don't
think
that
we
should
dictate
how
any
contributor
is
compensated
by
the
by
the
working
groups.
It
really
should
be
the
decision
of
each
working
group
and
that's
why
the
stewards
com
compensation
is
so
low.
Actually,
it's
intentionally
very
low
because
it
means
to
represent
just
the
responsibilities
of
being
a
steward
and
not
the
other
responsibilities
that
that
person
takes
on.
G
I
don't
know
if
I
yeah,
I
don't
know
if
I
agree
with
that,
that
the
stewards
compensation
is
purposely
low
because
of
all
the
other
things
they
will
be
doing
bad
analogy,
but
it
reminds
me
of
like
american
restaurants,
relying
on
tips
and
like
not
paying
contributors,
how
the
work
that
they
are
already
providing,
and
maybe
there
is
a
boundary
that
is
interesting
on
what
nate
said
of
like.
G
I
I
think
that
a
good
thing
that
we
have
had
until
this
point
is
that
all
the
stewards
receive
more
or
less
the
same
amount.
So
I
think
that
we
should
also
agree
on
some
numbers
that
we
can
share
between
all
working
groups
to
say
like
okay.
This
is
going
to
be
the
range
and
the
the
the
amount
of
compensation.
M
If,
if
I
could
suggest
sometimes
as
an
alternative
standards,
just
having
a
bit
of
data,
transparency
like
a
table
where
they
can
be
seen
can
be
a
bit
more
flexible
like
not
trying
to
improve
some
baseline.
But
simply
then
people
can
decide,
and
if
there
is
good
communication
good
conflict
resolution,
it
kind
of
takes
care
of
itself.
J
I
have
some
ideas.
I
don't
know
if
they
are
good
ideas,
so
I'll
verify
them.
Hopefully
they
they
won't
sound
so
dumb,
but
like
in
in
a
way.
I
feel
that
this
this
originally
was
a
thought
in
incomes
that
had
a
very
like
a
clear
change
back
when
the
idea
was
to
have
like
core
functions
that
could
be
in
a
way
like
scaled
to
individual
project
management
was
supposed
to
be
like
complementary.
J
So
right
now,
I'm
thinking
that
this
is
a
very
similar
situation
with
the
steward
role,
because
if
someone
is
a
steward,
it
means
that
they
are
already
like
con
contributing
in
to
a
working
group
in
some
way.
So
I
I
feel
that,
if,
if
like
a
steward,
the
stewardship
role
would
be
like
an
like
an
additional
role
on
top
of
something
else.
J
J
If
there
was
a
like
a
decent
base,
salary
in
in
the
restaurant
and
then
from
there
on,
you
can
optionally
gratify,
the
the
the
waiter
or
the
waitress,
without
you
know,
being
in
that
position
of
of
oh,
I
have
to
tip
because
this
is
what
they
rely
on.
J
So
if
there
is
like
some
kind
of
track
kept
in
a
way
about
each
stew
earth
what
their
functions
are
and
and
and
how
the
how
their
working
group
funds
is
moving,
I
I
feel
that
it
could
be
a
a
good
compliment
as
mitch
said
it
sometimes
it
it
won't
match.
J
Which
brings
me
like
to
to
the
to
the
to
a
more
general
question
right
like
if,
if
I'm,
if
I'm
going
into
meetings
and
I'm
stewarding
contributors,
would
that
fall
under
the
stewards
working
group
or
would
that
be
like
our
own,
like
budget?
J
So
if
there's
a
transparent
way
in
which
we
can
like
check,
if,
if
every,
if
every
steward
is
like
doing
enough
enough
work
in
in
their
working
groups
and
after
that,
they
get
they
can
get
like
complimented
by
by
like
a
base
fee,
it
makes
sense,
but
I,
but
I
also
feel
that
it's
much
to
track,
which
adds
like
a
layer
of
difficulty
to
the
stewards
working
group.
These
are
some
thoughts,
but
in
in
ideas
but
yeah.
I
I
hopefully
that
those
were
clear
enough.
A
Yeah,
it
was
super
clear
and
I
wanna
I
wanna
just
respond
to
that,
because
it's
really
important
what
you're
saying
is
sort
of
like
having
this
transparency
is
something
that
I
thought
was
really
important
too.
But
how
to
do
that
right.
Some
of
the
ideas
were
like,
oh,
maybe,
every
week
that
every
month,
the
the
stewards
vote
on
other
stewards-
or
you
know
we
use
some
system
like
that,
like
I
think
it's
coordinate
that
uses
that
that
was
one
of
the
inspiration.
A
So
that
was
one
road
I
went
down
and
then
I
looked
at
what
deep
work
is
doing
and
I
thought
deep
work
is
you
know
basically,
and
maybe
some
other
some
other
dows
as
well
like
dydx,
I
think,
is
doing
this
on
the
forum.
A
There's
some
communities
that
are
doing
this
on
the
forum
and
I
thought
well,
you
know
the
stewards,
so
we
we
know
that
the
stewards
when
you're
nominated
a
steward
you
will
have
to
maybe
I
can
go
back
to
this
you'll
have
to
you
know,
have
a
a
period
every
six
months,
where
you
post
on
the
forum
that
you're
still
committed
to
being
active
and
present
servant
leader
in
the
know.
You
know
so
you're
you're
recommitting
to
your
to
the
steward
role,
every
six
months
or
automatically
off-board
it.
A
Actually,
if
that
doesn't
happen,
then
there's
a
sort
of
automatic
off-boarding
that
we're
gonna
start
now
and
that
the
same
thing
will
sort
of
the
same
kind
of
thing
will
hold
for
the
idea
of
the
compensation
that
people
will
receive,
which
would
be
if
I
can
find
where
I
put
it
here.
So
the
idea
is
that
during
the
first
week
of
the
month,
the
the
stewards
who
feel
like
they
have
been
active
and
present
servant
leaders
in
the
know
would
share
on
the
stewards
channel
that
they
are
what
they're
requesting.
A
So
it's
the
stipend
right.
Everyone
will
request
the
same
thing
if
someone's
acting
as
a
steward
and
a
working
group
coordination
lead,
because
there
are
additional
work
for
that.
Then
they
request
the
combination
of
these
two
they're
cumulative,
not
separate,
and
then
the
the
that
the
I
don't
know.
I
don't
think
it
needs
to
be
so
detailed
or
so
granular
as
every
single
github
issue
that
they
did.
D
A
Just
the
basic
role,
the
basic
service
that
they
provided
to
the
tec
and
then,
if
there's
no
objection,
then
the
transfers
will
just
happen
and
it's
sort
of
administrative.
So
that's
where
I
was
hoping
to
have
the
transparency
be
available,
at
least
within
the
stewards
working
group.
I
don't
think
it's
necessary.
A
I
didn't
think
it
was
necessary
to
do
something
like
post
it
on
the
forum
every
month
I
felt
like
it
would
just
detract
from
our
forum
rather
than
add
to
our
forum,
whether,
whereas
I
thought
anyone
in
our
community
is
able
to
look
at
the
stewards
channel
and,
most
importantly,
it's
on
the
steward's
attention
and
then
for
the
idea
of
tipping.
I
really
don't
look
at
this
as
tipping
it's
not
as
if
we're
not
giving
stewards
anything,
but
then,
if
they
perform
well,
we
tip
them.
So
I
don't
see
that
analogy
working
at
all.
G
Just
one
thing
on
that,
I
think
that
the
it
gets
tricky
when
being
a
steward
is
already
a
compilation
of
multiple
roles,
because
when
we
say
someone
being
in
the
know,
what
does
that
mean
practically
like
attending
multiple
meetings
going
collaborating
with
different
working
groups?
I
think
that
can
be
the
fuzzy
line
of
like.
Are
you
contributing
with
multiple
working
groups
or
you're
just
being
a
steward
and
doing
your
role.
G
So
if
the
steward's
role
was
very
well
compensated,
but
then
all
of
this
aside,
like
participating
in
the
community
in
general,
would
be
just
all
included
kind
of
thing.
A
H
I
mean
I
I'll,
I
will
just
say
that,
like
if
we
were
to
use
for,
for
example,
chewy's
proposal
sixteen
dollars.
Sixteen
die
an
hour
for
our
19
diet,
an
hour
for
16
hours
a
week,
he's
looking
at
like
double
double
what
he
gets
paid
as
a
steward
two
to
two
and
a
half
times
what
he
gets
paid
as
a
steward
on
a
monthly
basis.
H
For
that
working
group
and-
and
the
thing
is,
is
that
chewie
himself
can
you
know
has
has
the
ability
to
negotiate
with
his
working
group
depending
on
how
much
work
he
performs
on
raising
that
number
or
lowering
that
number
as
he
sees
fit
and
that
group
sees
fit,
which
is
fine,
there's
nothing
wrong
with
that,
but
the
I
guess
I
guess
my
thing
is:
is
that
when
you
put
that
discretion
on
the
individual
to
control
that,
then
you
have
you
open
up?
H
You
open
up
the
opportunity
for
kind
of
manipulation
and
things
of
that
nature.
Where
is,
if
you
have
stewards
taken
care
of
straight
from
the
stewards
pool
and
and
people
you
know,
stewards
who
have
their
dedicated
working
group
can
get
paid
more
and
they
should
get
paid
more,
but
they
should
be
compensated
from
one
place
and
it's
a
little
bit
more
transparent.
It's
a
little
bit
more
open.
H
There's
no
room
for
ambiguity
in
terms
of
like
what
they
provide
their
job
is
to
make
sure
that
the
their
particular
working
group
is
on
path
and
guiding
towards
that
particular.
Whatever
their
goals
are.
I
I
just
think
that
separating
the
two
it
gets
complicated
and
it
it
comes,
gets
to
a
point
where
you
know
yeah
you
can.
H
I
don't
know
like
like.
If,
if,
if
I
wanted
to,
I
could
try
to
string
up
a
working
group
and
see
if
anybody
wants
to
do
it,
and
I
could
basically
double
my
money
whether
we
need
that
working
group
or
not
that's
what
that's
up
to
the
community
to
decide,
but
I
can
probably
make
a
justification
for
several
different
types
of
working
groups
right
now,
and
so
I
I
just
get
curious
about
that
aspect
of
it
and
I
do
think
it's
it.
It
holds
merit
for
further
conversation.
B
Yeah
I
mean
I,
I
kinda
agree
with
both
opinions,
like
you
know
like
when,
for
example
like,
as
mitch
was
saying
like,
if
you
have,
okay
storage
get
the
same
all
of
them.
That
was
something
I
was
talking
with
sam
with
the
price
market
on
like
okay,
you
wouldn't
want
to
be
on
the
top,
but
you
want
to
do
as
little
effort
just
to
be
on
the
top,
and
then
you
don't
care
like
I.
B
I
really
think,
like
the
you
know
like
you,
should
get
paid
for
what
you
do
and
then
yeah
another
thing
like
it's
like
that:
it's
it
depends
on
us,
but
actually
like
how
detailed
we
want
to
be
on
the
transparency
audit
like
how
do
we
want
to?
I
don't
know,
rank
people
see
how
much
they
get.
I
mean
all
that
information
is
in
the
blockchain,
so
we
can.
We
could
gather
that
and
see
like
you
know
how
much
everyone
is
getting
paid
from.
B
Tc
make
a
run
like
it's
up
to
you
us
how
much
transparent
we
want
to
be
and
what
what
else
and
yeah
like
also
some
like,
for
example,
when
I'm
when
I
was
doing
the
transparency
proposal,
I'm
just
putting
the
work
down
there,
like
you
know
like
get
the
recordings
get
the
documentation
set
up,
do
not
like
nothing
related
to
stores,
because
I
was
already
seeing
that
proposal.
So
I
for
me
it
didn't
make
as
natural
like
it
doesn't
make
sense
to
get
paid
from
two
resources
from
the
same
work
and
yeah.
B
For
me,
the
important
thing
is
like
we
be
transparent,
I
mean
the
transparency
audit
is
planned
to
be
ready
three
months
after
lunch,
so
maybe
like
the
first
three
months.
I
don't
know
yeah
but
yeah.
That's
what
I
I
can
update.
A
Okay,
tricky
I
mean
maybe
it
sounds
like
we
just
do
an
informal
vote
in
the
stewards
channel
and
see
if
we
want
to
pivot
to
a
completely
different
direction.
I
feel
some
resistance
to
taking
the
agency
away
from
working
groups.
A
I
feel
a
strong
resistance
to
that.
Actually,
so
I
don't
know
I
I
think
we
can
still
have
a
vote
and
have
a
discourse
about
it
to
see
if
we
want
to
change
direction,
but
I
am
yeah.
I
think
that
each
working
group
should
decide
how
to
compensate
any
any
contributor,
even
the
stewards,
it
would
feel
weird
if
maybe
they
couldn't
do,
that.
G
B
I
mean,
in
my
opinion,
like
conviction,
voting
how
it
works,
like
you
know,
like
the
the
less
money
you
have
in
the
com
and
the
pool
the
harder
it
is
to
get
proposals.
So
you
know
like
the
the
own
market
is
going
to
say
like
maybe,
oh,
if
they
commit
like
we
have
20
working
groups,
but
then
we
can
only
fund
five.
B
Then
you
know
the
token
holders
are
going
to
vote
for
those
five
and
the
other
15
are
just
going
to
disappear
because
that's
whole
market
wars
right-
and
I
think
we
shouldn't
fear
that,
like
it's,
it's
okay,
like
no,
our
resources
are
limited,
so
we
are
going
to
fund
whatever.
We
think
it's
good
to
find.
F
I
yeah
I
hear
like
setting
boundaries
and
I
think
of
just
like
saying
that
we
need
more
rules
and
to
maybe
talk
to
nate's
point
it's
like
yeah.
Maybe
you
could
spin
up
a
working
group
if
you
wanted,
but
then
the
other
part
is
that
you
have
to
convince
people
to
pay
you
and
that's
the
other
end
of
it's
like
well.
F
J
There's
also
a
point
that
I
I
think
I
brought
up
with
utam
in
our
call,
and
it's
about
the
the
huge
difference
between
rewarding
work
with
our
governance,
token
and
funding
proposals
with
rap
textile.
So
when
it
comes
to
like
boundaries,
I
personally
think
that
this
actually
is
good,
because
there
are
less
boundaries
that
we
are.
J
I
mean.
I
feel
that
if,
if
we're,
if
we
were
giving
out
our
governance
token,
boundaries
would
be
more
necessary
because
of
the
process
of
how
we
take
decisions.
However,
the
reward
system
heavily
depends
on
on
community
recognizement,
so
I
feel
that
by
itself,
like
it's
gonna,
be
like
its
own,
like
metric.
Let's
say
for
for
contributors
to
get
tec
tokens
versus
requesting
funding
or
getting
compensated
for
something
for
like
a
a
bounty
or
like
project
management,
which
is
going
to
happen
in
in
wrap
text
day.
G
Yeah,
I
I
think
so
yeah
that
makes
a
lot
of
sense,
actually
that
it
will
have
this
being
regulated
by,
like
the
people
who
have
voting
power
are
going
to
be
the
people
that
are
being
rewarded
for
their
work.
That
is
validated
by
the
community
like
whoever
is
dishing
praise
and
then
work
for
the
projects
will
come
from
yeah
from
the
grants
and
yeah.
That's
fair
with
both
mitch
and
zaphtman
said
that,
like
it
will
be
a
self-regulating
thing
and
we
don't
need
to
put
anything
explicitly
there.
A
H
I
I
guess
my
big
problem
is:
is
the
vehicles
for
challenging
that
type
of
decision
making
like
if,
if
chewie
right
now
wanted
to
say
I
want
to
be
paid
70
an
hour
and
he
put
that
into
the
budget?
It's
not
like
you
know.
People
are
going
to
want
to
stay
away
from
funding
the
communications
working
group,
but
it's
also
like
what
power
does
a
contributor
have
to
say
within
the
that
that
that
calms
down
to
say
hey,
I
don't
think
you
should
have
it,
but.
A
B
A
That
proposals
would
have
to
pass.
Maybe
he's
worth
seventy
dollars
an
hour.
Maybe
we
all
agree,
you
know
it
would
be
500
an
hour
if
it
was
somebody
else
right
like
of
the
same
caliber
so
like.
Maybe
maybe
we
can
like
if
the
community
passes
that,
then
then
we
agree
that
that's
the
value
for
his
role,
that
income
comes.
H
Okay,
I
you
know,
I
I'm
just
saying
that
right
now,
the
stewards
control
the
initial
state
of
how
this
is
how
this
payment
type
system
works
and
so
that
initial
state
is
going
to
be
very,
very
hard
to
change
once
it
gets
started.
H
How
much
is
somebody
getting
paid
and
like
whether
or
not
this
proposal
should
be,
and
then
once
that
happens,
it
blocks
all
progress
within
the
dow
itself
and
the
communications
budget,
because
everything
is
held
up
by
that
single
issue,
and
so
that
that's,
my
only
concern
is
that
that
we
politicize
the
the
the
payment
of
stewards
where
we
can
just
say
hey.
This
is
a
flat
rate.
G
O
I
have
a
small
opinion
about
this,
like
I
actually
would
like
to
put
the
thing
that
nate
is
suggesting
to
them.
This
product
could
be
somehow
make
this
something.
That's
two,
okay,
like
the
stewards
group,
decides
how
much
gets
paid
and
they're
the
ones
managing
the
funds,
but
the
actual
working
group
that
the
steward
is
working
for,
gets
some
say
in
saying
how
like
how
much
would
they
say
that
their
steward
has
like
worked
and
like
you
know
how
much
they
feel
like
they
should
pay
their
steward,
something
other
sort.
F
What
we
just
to
add
on
to
your
idea,
by
what
we
started
doing
and
giveth,
is
that
when
we
want
to
do
payments
between
working
groups,
all
the
participants
decide
what
percent
each
contributor
should
get,
and
then
we
take
an
average
of
that.
F
A
There
are
some
really
interesting
models.
Giveth
was
one
that
I
looked
at,
coordinate
where
everyone
gets
a
certain
amount
and
you
give
to
another
person
in
the
working
group
based
on
how
you
know
like
so.
The
group
just
tries
to
decide
how
much
people
have
worked
in
the
working
group
by
each
having
an
allocation
other
than
give
to
people,
so
each
person
decides
some
percentage
of
distribution.
A
I
moved
away
from
those
models
intentionally
and
my
my
intention
was
to
keep
it
as
simple
as
possible
and
not
to
make
it
more
complicated
though
I
think
in
the
future.
Those
models
are
probably
a
direction
we
may
want
to
move
in.
B
You
get
like
100
time
maximum
and
if
you
work
more
than
okay,
you
get
the
max
pay,
but
you
know
and
yeah
I
don't
know
that
could
also
solve
the
problem
of
you
know
gamifying
on
the
proposals
and
then
it's
more
easy
to
be
transparent,
how
the
stores
are
getting
and
also
you
are
rewarding
each
store
accordingly
to
their
work.
I
I
also
see
a
good
point
of
nate's
idea
and
is
that
maybe
if
there
is
a
new
working
group
that
is
going
to
be
created,
maybe
it
just
needs
the
steward,
like
the
steroid,
is
creating
the
working
group
so
that
there's
no
need
to
pass
a
proposal
just
for
one
person
and
if
we
have
like
the
steward
spot,
we
could
add
one
steward
that
that
then,
after
in
some
months,
can
actually
submit
a
proposal.
A
All
right,
so
I
love
this.
I
think
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
really
good
ideas
in
here,
but
they
need
to
be
flushed
out
a
little
bit
and
maybe,
if
anyone
unless
there's
an
objection,
maybe
I
will
post
this
to
the
forum.
With
the
caveat
that
we've
discussed
this
in
the
stewards
council,
I
mean
the
stewards
group
and
there's
some
divergence
of
thoughts
and
opinions
and
ideas
and
anyone
can
propose
an
alternative.
A
That's
that's
more
fleshed
out.
Perhaps
does
that
sound
like
a
good
way
forward?
A
A
A
A
J
It's
my
priority
right
now.
I
I
got
distracted
last
week
because
params
parties
and
just
a
a
bunch
of
stuff
going
on,
but
since
most
of
the
new
contributors
are
in
the
americas,
I'm
starting
to
schedule
some
of
those
calls
for
the
afternoon,
so
that
I
can
prioritize
the
funding
proposal
for
this.
I'm
really
really
sorry
on
how
delayed
it
has
been,
but
yeah,
but
we've
learned
a
lot
along
the
process,
so
hopefully
it'll
be
in
a
full,
comprehensible
shape.
A
A
So
if
we
can
encourage
the
people
that
we
know
that
the
hatcheries
that
we
know
to
participate
in
the
debates
to
be
informed
so
that
they
can
vote
by
next
tuesday,
that
would
be
that's
awesome.
That
would
be
great.
I
There's
another
things
that
I
want
to
say
and
now
that
the
working
groups
are
going
to
be
able
to
to
include
in
their
structure
new
contributors
or
all
contributors
that
were
not
in
the
structure.
I
Maybe
there
are
some
contributors
that
are
going
to
be
rewarded
in
several
of
the
working
groups,
so
it
would
be
good
to
have
like,
like
a
clear
list
of
like
okay
durga
das
is
going
to
work
in
gravity.
So,
like
is
durga,
does
going
to
work
and
be
paid
from
gravity,
or
is
he
going
to
be
also
contributing
to
comms
or
yeah
to
to
have
like
a
clear
list
to
not
double
reward?
The
same
contributor.
A
F
A
A
I
freelanced
for
many
years
and
I
had
many
different
clients
and
I
did
different
projects
for
different
clients
and
they
all
paid
me
because
I
provided
services
to
you
know
I
completed
different
deliverables
right,
so
I
kind
of
feel
like
if
you're
delivering
something
for
multiple
working
groups.
Of
course,
you
should
be
getting
value
from
for
those
pieces
of
work
from
all
the
working
groups
that
you're
contributing
to.
H
But
I
would
say
that,
strictly
from
a
a
role
like
a
like,
that
system
is
strictly
a
bounty
system
and
that's
not
what
we're
setting
up
we're
setting
up
these
static
roles
where
they're
getting
paid
monthly
of
I'm
this
position
and
like
because
there's
no
other
there's
a
lot
of
people
who
who
contribute
to
these
working
groups
that
aren't
going
to
contribute
are
rewarded
for
that.
Because
it's
not
aesthetic.
H
H
H
H
Okay,
so
if,
if
durgados
is
in
this
role
in
this
role
in
this
role,
he's
got
three
different
that
he's
playing
in
that
he
is
static
and
he's
remaining
there,
and
that
means
other
people
are
contributors
who
have
no
upward
mobility
towards
those
rules.
And
so
my
my
big
concern
is
that,
if
we're
not
doing
a
full
on
bounty
format,
then
then
this
type
of
system
is
not
conducive
to
any
type
of
openness
for
new
contributors
to
actually
have
a
meaningful
part
in
whether
the
working
groups
are
the
dials
itself.
A
A
few
things
the
change
month,
the
budget
can
so
the
the
budgets
are
for
a
month
or
for
three
months,
depending
really
on
what
conviction.
Voting
is
going
to
favor,
and
I
would
expect
that
the
roles
could
change
month
to
month
and
the
contributors
can
change
month
to
month,
or
you
know,
if
we're
doing
this
quarterly
in
terms
of
budgeting,
I
I
don't
see
it
it's
so
fixed
and
immutable
like
or
like
unchangeable.
A
O
If
there's
a
concern
about
static
rules
too
many
starting
rules
held
by
one
person,
we
can
have
like
a
very
rough,
simple
rule.
Like
you
know,
if
someone's
maintaining
four
static
roles,
it's
probably
advice
that
they
like
start
leaving
roles
in
like
say
a
quarter
or
so
so
that
there's
room
for
more
contributors
which.
B
Like
if
I'm
doing
recordings-
and
I'm
doing
it
well,
why
you
know
like,
I
think,
like
the
reason
like
I
get
removed
is
because
I
live
or
because
someone
do
it
better
or
cheaper
than
me,
and
they
mean
then
they
propose.
You
know
like
I
feel
like
it
should
be
competing
the
whole
time.
I
know
like
it's,
not
the
culture
we
have,
but
I
feel
like
the
market
should
decide
who
gets
what.