►
From YouTube: W10 Labs WG: Report of coordinape and Thomas's overview of the rewards panel from last week.
Description
Week two of the rewards systems series. In this lab we review Nuggans report of coordinape, and we review Thomas's overview of the rewards panel from last week.
🙏 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/
B
A
C
C
C
A
A
I
was
thinking
we
would
use
today
to
do
a
sort
of
parallel
collaborative
literature
review,
so
we
would
spend
a
bit
of
time
at
the
beginning
and
we
can
review
the
notes
that
we
took
last
time
and
we'll
have
spend
a
bit
of
time
together,
considering
all
these
different
directions
that
we
could
go
in
terms
of
understanding
reward
systems
even
like
kind
of
outside
of
crypto.
For
example,
there's
all
sorts
of
like
air
miles
rewards
with
credit
cards.
There's
like
movie
theater
points
reward
systems,
grocery
store,
rewards
reward
systems
in
another
call.
A
Jake
was
just
telling
us
he
he
used
to
do
drilling
in
the
oil
company
and
he
was
saying
that
their
neighbors
drilling
had
a
really
great
point
system
for
their
employees,
where
they
could
get
free
free
stuff
hardware,
like
appliances
and
everything,
there's
tons
of
case
studies
in
the
world
of
reward
systems.
So
I
was
thinking.
Maybe
we
want
to
identify
some
of
those,
even
even
bitcoin
itself
has
a
reward
system
embedded
in
it.
A
I
think
I'll
take
some
time
to
read
this
out
loud
to
start
today's
session,
so
maybe
that'll
take
five
or
ten
minutes
and
then
we'll
do
another
five
or
ten
minutes
altogether.
We'll
try
to
figure
out
as
many
examples
of
reward
systems,
as
we
can
think
of,
and
then
we'll
all
break
off
and
do
some
like
parallel.
What
I
call
like
literature
review.
A
Looks
like
octopus
is
really
active:
okay,
good.
He
linked
to
the
praise
analysis
that
was
done,
an
article
on
the
the
genie
coefficient
and
some
other
metrics
and
thomas
is.
Oh
nice
thomas
has
put
a
summary
of
last
week's
governance
panel,
a
lot
of
info,
and
it's
hard
to
summarize
it
all
it's
on
edit
mode.
So
any
we
can
jump
in
here.
This
looks
pretty
close.
Let's
open
this
up
too
awesome.
A
A
A
C
C
Yes,
since
then
it
seems
to
have
found
a
good
product
market
fit
and
it's
grown
in
the
course
of
last
year
and
well.
I
thought
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
look
into
how
it
works
and
specifically
how
it
is
different
or
similar
to
the
tc's
praise
system
well
about
corinne.
The
two
long
given
read
is
just
coordinators
built
around
circles,
which
is
a
group
of
dark
contributors
who
work
together
and
want
to
distribute
the
funds
in
a
decentralized
way.
C
C
At
the
end,
each
contributor's
received
gift
tokens,
get
transformed
into
get
tokens
which
then
can
be
used
to
claim
a
proportional
part
of
a
lot
of
funds,
unspent
gift
tokens
get
burned
at
the
end
of
the
epoch,
and
you
can
send
gift
to
yourself
just
to
other
people.
There
is
also
the
possibility
to
opt
out
of
receiving
tokens
yourself
for
an
apple,
because
you're
on
vacation
you're
receiving
money
for
somewhere
else,
whatever
reason,
but
still
being
able
to
allow
to
give
to
other
contributors.
C
Apart
from
this
basic
mechanism,
there's
also
two
link
builds
to
help
visualize
the
support.
The
structure
of
the
organization
in
real
time
show
the
payment
data
transparently
and
also
a
discord
notification
bot
which
tells
when
somebody
has
given
how
much
to
whom
tipping
bots
are
being
made
source
rate
integration
that
that
is.
Actually.
That
was
a
mistake
that
should
change
that.
That
is
cut,
but
they
are
transitioning
into
a
dowel
and
well
in
the
wrong
words.
Dao
solve
one
half
of
the
problems.
These
frontalized
networks
require
defining
governance.
C
Coordinate
is
a
do
decentralized
operations,
platform
that
aims
to
solve
the
other
half
a
structure
to
make
operational
decisions
within
a
team
of
contributors.
If
a
dao
is
the
decentralized
version
of
a
board
of
directors
plus
shareholders,
a
deal
is
the
decentralized
version
of
the
executive
team
plus
creativity
themselves.
A
A
B
B
Coordinates
is
an
alpha
phase
right
now
and
being
actively
developed
by
approximately
six
people,
it's
being
used
by
urine
git
coin
metacartel
sushi
swap
m
stable,
cool
together
and
dao
house,
amongst
others.
For
now
it
is
closed
source
and
operated
off
chain,
but
they
plan
to
go
open
source
and
fully
on
chain
on
layer,
2,
phantom
arbitram
and
polygon
around
october
2021
and
transition
into
a
dow
for
further
development.
B
Moving
on
to
detailed
overview
of
the
system,
liberally
copied
from
the
docs
coordinates
core
feature
is
the
gift
cycle,
the
gif?
No,
the
gift
circle.
The
gift
circle
allows
a
group
of
dial
contributors
to
decentralize
the
payment
process,
identifying
each
other's
value
to
the
organization
to
create
a
compensation
map.
This
is
done
through
a
process
of
gifting.
B
B
B
They
can
also
add
notes
to
their
allocations
if
they
wish.
So
at
the
end
of
the
epoch,
all
allocated
give
tokens
become
locked
now
called
get
tokens
and
all
unallocated
gift
tokens
are
burned.
Budget
distribution
is
then
formulated
according
to
the
percentage
of
total,
get
tokens
that
each
member
of
the
circles
has
received.
B
B
Each
user
has
a
profile
page
on
which
they
specify
what
they
will
be
working
on
during
the
epoch
of
before
each
of
their
circles,
and
if
they
want
to
be
able
to
receive
payment
yeah
and
if
they
want
to
be
able
to
receive
payment
in
each
circle,
users
can
create
a
short
list
of
team
members
with
which
they
work
closely.
To
facilitate
give
allocation.
B
B
Okay,
the
vouching
process,
originally
circles
were
created
and
maintained
by
an
admin
who
controlled
membership.
The
developers
recently
implemented
a
vouching
process
which
allows
for
growing
circles
in
a
decentralized
way
when
a
circle
is
set
up.
The
creator
can
specify
a
vouching
threshold
and
nomination
period
from
then
on
any
circle
member
can
propose
a
new
member
and
have
other
members
vote
on
their
addition.
B
B
B
B
The
coordinate
team
is
in
the
late
stages
of
forming
a
dow
to
continue
development.
They
also
plan
to
open
source
their
code
and
deploy
it
on
chain
on
ethereum
layer,
2.
right
now,
phantom
polygon
and
arbentrum
are
planned.
Robot
is
october
2021,
but
of
course,
there
may
be
delays
they're
also
integrating
upgrade
wrong.
Don't
are
also
integrating
source
cred
to
allow
prolific
contributors
to
give
more
tokens.
C
B
Part,
yes,
analysis
known
strengths
last
pitfalls.
There
is
some
feedback
in
articles
community
calls
about
the
strengths,
pitfalls
and
possible
adaptions
of
the
system,
so
strengths
feel
good
factor.
Many
coordinate
users
claim
to
value
the
fact
that
they
are
getting
personal
appreciation
and
recognition
more
than
the
actual
monetary
reward.
B
B
B
People
doing
a
lot
of
work
in
low
visibility
areas
with
being
under
rewarded.
There
was
an
example
of
somebody
doing
translations
into
the
language,
and
not
many
community
members
spoke
that
language
and
who
therefore
were
noticed
and
barely
rewarded
to
correct
that
it
took
a
high
status
member
of
the
community
to
signal
boost
their
work
publicly,
so
we
could
get
rewarded
by
everyone
in
the
next
epoch,
the
next
epoch
adoptions.
B
B
Somebody
could
just
tip
the
team
without
having
to
look
up
a
specific
creator.
That
tip
would
increase
this
in
size.
The
table,
the
tip,
would
increase
the
size
of
the
fun
bucket,
which
the
makers
then
divide
themselves
using
a
standard
coordinate
tool
at
the
end
of
the
epoch,
coordinate
as
community
onboarding
mechanisms.
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
A
C
Yeah,
I
I
think
also
the
important
thing
is
that
it's
from
the
bottom
up
way,
so
every
member
who's
working
with
people
just
sees.
Who
am
I
spending
my
time
with
who's,
doing
the
work
I'm
using
and
in
that
way,
kind
of
the
allocation
emerged
from
the
bottom
up
instead
of
having
a
group
say:
okay,
these
five
people
are
getting
this
much.
These
are
getting
this
much
and
so
on.
A
C
A
C
Every
person
just
just
chooses
how
much
to
give
to
to
who
they
want
you
can
you
can't
give
half
a
gift
token.
You
have
to
get
a
whole
number,
but
you
can
give
five
to
one
send
to
someone
else.
You
can
give
several
times
one
for
small
actions
during
the
week,
just
as
you
choose
and
at
the
end
of
the
week
it
all
gets
counted
together.
C
C
A
A
A
Okay,
I'm
just
gonna
quickly,
because
I
missed
it.
I'm
just
gonna
check
out
this.
Oh
yeah,
so
yeah
praise
is
unlimited
and
give
isn't.
Okay,
that
makes
total
sense
and
in
coordinate.
You
don't
need
any
quantifiers,
since
every
user
chooses
how
many
tokens
to
send
they
are
in
a
way
quantifying
the
praise
themselves.
The
system
skips
quantification
by
an
external
team
completely,
which
sounds
nice.
C
I
think
what
what
olivia
said
in
the
meeting
yesterday,
or
was
it
the
day
before
no
yesterday
that
yeah,
that
phrase
is
just
designed
to
to
be
really
open,
so
you
can
just
praise
anybody
who
shows
up
like
if
they're
a
member
of
the
discord
they
can
be
praised
and
coordinate
is
more
like
geo
towards
you
know.
We
have
this
team
of
five
people
and
how
do
we
divide
the
the
funds
amongst
us?
Well,.
B
A
A
Yeah
there's,
I
think,
there's
an
intrinsic
value
in
praise,
even
if
there
were
no
tokens
involved
and
there
were
no
like
quantitative
rewards
involved.
It's
way
more
of
a
cultural
cultural
thing,
because
you
could
still
just
be
praising
everyone.
I
mean
like
at
the
community
call
on
thursdays.
Even
if
we
weren't
making
any
sort
of
tokens
or
anything,
it
would
actually
still
be
a
good
practice
to
have.
A
A
I
praise
this
person
for
this
for
x,
for
y
for
z,
and
so
it
creates
actually
a
richer
data
set
that
can
be
mined
of
like
we,
because
we
now
have
that.
We
have
this
ever
growing
data
set
in
the
tec
of
what
people
appreciate
and
what
people
are
praising
and
why
it
gives
adds
this
language
component
to
it,
whereas
in
coordinate
it
wouldn't
have
that
it's
just
numbers
in
a
system.
It's
it's
a
network.
C
A
C
A
C
A
D
Sure
so
I
I
think,
because
I
try
to
summarize,
like
everything
that's
been
said,
and
it's
like
a
mixture
of
literally
literally
what
they
said
so
how
I
made
the
summary
is
I
took
the
transcript
from
youtube
and
then
amended.
It
try
to
summarize
it
down
and
but
maybe
what's
useful
is
at
the
very
end.
I
put
like
some
chat
questions
and
maybe
the
panel
questions.
D
A
Okay,
let's
do
this
in
a
distributed
sense.
Then.
Can
everyone
open
up
this
document,
so
I
have
linked
it
in
the
agenda
and
the
agenda
is
always
pinned
and
you
can
also
just
find
this
from
thomas
in
the
labs
channel.
So
let's
go
through
each
panel
question
one
by
one
and
everyone
just
pick
a
someone's
response
and
read
through
it
in
your
head
and
then
we'll
have
a
quick
discussion
on
that
panel
question.
A
A
Okay,
the
governor's
research
group
hosted
on
the
10th
of
september
panel
session
on
the
reward
systems
we
collated
some
summarized
and
and
collated
the
research
notes
that
arose
in
this
discussion.
You
can
find
the
recording
here
and
the
raw
chat
reference
here
cool,
so
a
lot
of
challenges
arise.
When
we
attempt
to
quantify
things,
how
can
we
transfer
subjective
data
to
objective
data?
How
do
we
find
the
right
metrics
for
the
things
that
we're
measuring
and
can
those
metrics
tell
us
something
about
the
health
of
the
ecosystem
so
panel
question?
A
A
Okay,
so
everyone
just
pick
one
of
these
answers,
maybe
randomly
maybe
maybe
not
randomly
pick
and
answer
a
response
from
someone
read
through
it
and
try
to
highlight
something
that
you
think
is
significant
and
feel
free
to
edit
it
as
you
go.
If
you
can,
if
there's
some
grammar
or
context
or
misspelling
or
sentences
can
be
improved,
a
little
bit
feel
free
to
edit
it
so
we'll
take
we'll
take
like
three
minutes
on
this
one.
D
D
B
A
A
A
Okay,
guys,
so
you
can
keep
keep
going
a
little
bit,
but
I'm
going
to
read
out
mine,
so
I
jumped
on
to
zach
and
the
very
opening
of
it
kind
of
describes
what
he
sees
as
the
biggest
challenge,
which
he
says
is
unpredictability
of
people.
So
it
sounds
like
what
what
maybe
has
happened
in
his
experience
is,
like
you,
desert
design,
a
reward
system
with
the
intention
of
getting
people
to
achieve
a
certain
task
or
behave
a
certain
way
and
the
results
are
not
what
were
expected.
A
So
it's
unpredictable
results
and
people
are
unpredictable,
so
I
think
that's
important
to
consider
and-
and
it
would
be
nice
to
see
the
case,
studies
of
actually
the
different
praise
systems
and
what
has
unfolded
or
the
different
reward
systems.
So
you
know
what
was
unexpected
about
using
praise,
what
was
unexpected
about
using
coordinate
and
etc,
etc.
A
And
the
inter-subjectivity,
so
people
having
different
perspectives
on
a
topic.
This
is
the
part
where
I
think
the
qualitative
aspect
is
really
useful,
because
numbers
and
quantitative
results
do
not
have
any
subjectivity.
They
are
just
numbers
they're
the
same
to
everyone,
but
in
result,
in
reality,
they're
they're,
reflecting
different
opinions
of
different
people,
and
so
that
leads
to
the
last
thing
I
bolded
or
this
in
this
paragraph,
which
is
aligning
opinions.
A
So
this
seems
like
this
makes
me
think
that
a
lot
of
work
maybe
has
to
be
done
outside
of
the
reward
system.
Like
you
know,
it
doesn't
matter
what
reward
system
you
have,
but
in
order
for
it
to
be
successful,
you
probably
have
to
take
time
to
have
people
align
on
their
opinions
and
be
on
the
same
page
and
share
their
perspectives
and
their
values
and
come
to
alignment.
D
D
Or
like
what?
What
makes
up
the
truth,
he
says
that
the
consensus
is
like
reaching
consensus
of
how
value
should
be
distributed
and
how
much
each
person
should
get
as
easy
as
small
groups,
but
it
starts
to
play
on
larger
ones.
He
also
mentions
that
there's
like
to
scale
this
intercept
takes
activity.
So
what
means
by
this
is
like,
like
the
opinions,
suppose,
each
individual
contributor
of
how
much
problems
each
everyone
else
should
get
off.
This
contributor
group
like
to
scale
this
like
this
in
the
subject.
C
D
The
inner
circle,
which
then
creates
like
this
subjective,
subjective
opinion
and
amman,
believes
that
the
pushing
these
decisions
to
the
edges
and
quantifying
them
and
then
lifting
them
out
again
with
running
algorithms,
allows
us
maybe
to
generalize
patterns
that
just
start
to
explore
more
to
like
which
winners
allow
like
analyzing.
These
puzzles,
maybe
would
allow
us
to
look
at
different
communities
and
maybe
also
transfer.
A
Awesome
thanks
for
that,
there's
probably
lots
of
other
good
points
that
people
have
found.
Let's,
let's
move
on
to
the
next
one,
so
question
two
was:
do
you
think
there
is
a
way
to
move
away
from
manipulative
nature
of
the
systems
balancing
intrinsic
versus
extrinsic
motivation?
This
is
really
a
cool
question
so
not
like
pulling.
You
know
not
like
a
carrot
on
a
stick,
but
rather
enabling
the
intrinsic
motivations
that
people
have
to
to
drive
them.
B
B
With
a
way
of
staking
one's
own
tokens
into
like
hey,
I'm
gonna
get
this
project
done
by
next
week
and
say
I
hit
mine
cool.
I
get
the
stuff
rewarded,
say:
there's
someone
else
who
didn't
hit
their
deadline,
then
what
happens
is
that
person
that
person's
stake
would
go
to
me
if
someone
who
did
their
work
or
vice
versa?
If
I
miss
my
deadline-
and
I
put
my
stake
in-
I
get
a
little
bit
less,
but
some
of
it
would
get
burned
and
rewarded
as
a
bonus
to
people
who
got
their
work
done.
B
A
A
If
everyone
on
your
team
knows
that
it's
like
a
hyper
elite
high
performance
team,
then
you're
going
to
be
able
to
count
on
every
single
person
on
that
team
and
you're
going
to
have
to
have
your
expectations
that
you
know
are
going
to
be
met
and
and
there's
probably
some
people
that
would
be
into
that.
On
the
other
end
of
the
spectrum,
there's
probably
some
organizations
in
fact
more.
This
would
be
a
lot
more
common
in
dallas,
where
it's
really
like
participation
is,
is
appreciated.
A
A
D
Just
out
on,
because
I'm
not
sure
if
I
represented
it
fairly,
maybe
with
my
my
summary-
maybe
I
messed
up
there,
but
from
what
I
remember
at
least
from
the
callers
it
was
about
setting
your
own
goal,
though
you
kind
of
say,
okay
to
the
community.
I
wanted
to
explain
that
and
I'm
gonna
do
it
by
then
and
then
and
to
kind
of
show
that
I'm
really
gonna
do
this.
D
I'm
gonna
stake
on
myself
thing
and
I'm
gonna
say
x
amount
of
tokens
right
and
then,
if
you
achieve
it,
you
get
like
the
reward
that
was
specified
and
obviously
you
saved
that
and
if
not,
then
your
state
gets
burned
and
distributed
to
other
other
people.
But
I
feel
like
by
saying
like
making
it
a
voluntary
action
by
someone
going
in
and
saying.
Oh,
look
I'm
going
to
do
this.
D
If
this
is
how
serious
I
am
about
it,
I'm
not
sure
if
the
if
it
necessarily
fosters
production
because
you
setting
the
goal
so
it's
like-
I
don't
know
like
but
yeah,
just
as
a
nuance,
because
I
honestly
don't
want
to
misrepresent
anyone
like
it's
really
scary.
Actually,
to
summarize
this
yeah,
yes,
so.
A
That's
a
good
point
so
and
it
kind
of
ties
into
what
we
heard
zach,
I
think
say
in
the
first
case,
in
that
unexpected
results
right
so
and
this
had,
this
is
famous
for
all
sorts
of
systems.
Design
is
where
you
and
you
engineer
it
for
one
thing
and
you
get
the
complete
opposite
result.
So,
if
you're
right,
if
people
are
defining
their
own
tasks
and
then
getting
paid,
if
they
fulfill
them,
then
maybe
people
can
start
defining
really
small
and
simple
tasks.
A
C
C
What
about
the
good
thing
he
does
and
every
reward
system
is
going
to
be
a
game
of
scoping
and
actually
to
something,
and
then
he
says
that
it's
important
to
design
the
scope
in
a
way
that
is
clear
to
everyone
exactly
what
they
are
measuring
and
rewarding,
because
it's
an
abstraction
of
of
real
life.
Actually
it's
something
different
so
by
you
have
to
define
it
very
clearly,
so
every
participant
choose
to
play
or
not
to
play.
A
A
So
you
know
you
can't
just
throw
you,
have
a
group
of
people
and
throw
a
reward
system
at
them
and
expect
to
get
the
results
that
you
want.
Definitely
you
need
this
sort
of
alignment,
cultural
alignment
and
the
scope
of
like
what
do
we
want.
Oh
yeah,
I
remember
in
the
panel
someone
said
like:
isn't
there
a
risk
of
creating
self-fulfilling
prophecies
and
griff
was
like?
Well,
that's
the
whole
point.
B
B
At
the
bottom
here
and
natalya
was
saying,
the
importance
of
cultures
within
systems
and
culture
being
supportive
of
humans
actually
discovering
what
they
want.
So
the
idea
that
a
lot
of
times
communities
don't
know
what
they
want
at
first
and
we
have
to
be
flexible
and
transparent
about
how
that
might
change.
As
we
learn
about
what
incentivizes
us.
A
A
I
mean
we
build
the
reward
system
because
we
want
to
we
scope,
it
like
griff,
said,
and
we
want
to
achieve
some
goals
and
the
whole
system
starts
moving
and
people
start
acting
and
rewards
start
being
distributed,
but
I
think
it's
important
to
have
the
transparency
and
to
come
back
and
to
come
back
to
the
realignment
to.
I
just
see
it
as
like
a
vector
in
a
in
a
space.
A
You
know
very
map
sort
of
mathematical
concept
or
like
a
rocket
ship
right,
you're
trying
to
land
on
the
moon
and
at
every
point
in
time
you
have
some
sort
of
trajectory
on
that
ship
and
you
might
have
to
readjust
it.
You
might
have
to
tweak
your
map
a
little
bit.
You
might
have
to
correct
your
systems
a
little
bit
in
order
to
keep
moving
towards
the
moon
and
there
might
be
pit
stops
along
the
way.
A
Guys,
I
recommend
everyone
to
just
continue.
It's
kind
of
like
homework
for
the
week
go
through
this
doc
and
pick
out
a
few
more
paragraphs
that
you
want
to
read
through
and
add
some
comments
and
fix
up,
and
if
we
all
do
just
a
couple
paragraphs
then
probably
we'll
make
through
the
whole
doc-
and
I
think
next
week
now
that
we'll
all
be
having
a
kind
of
foundation.
Understanding
of
what's
on
people's
minds
in
the
world
of
rewards.
A
I
think
we'll
open
up
a
mirror
board
and
just
like
brainstorm
and
mind
map
a
lot
of
these
concepts,
and
then
we
can
start
to
see
all
the
concepts
and
how
we
want
to
map
them,
and
so
what?
What
would
the
optimal
reward
system
be?
Or
what
are
some
sort
of
design
challenges
that
we
can
start
to
sketch
out
that
we
can
work
on
through
the
labs
and
through
these
research
groups,.