►
From YouTube: W2 Reward System: way forward and process modelling
Description
🙏 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
A
A
And
after
that
times,
it's
time
to
sort
of
identify
next
actions
and
try
to
to
put
our
finger
on
identify
different
work
streams.
So
we
can
write
issues
and
we
can
start
doing
to
get
going
more
side
by
side
working
in
parallel
and,
lastly,
about
github
setup,
I
already
set
up
a
zenhub
board,
etc.
So
I'll
we'll
try
to.
A
As
we
go
along,
how
does
that
sound?
Do
anyone
want
to
add
something
to
that
list.
A
A
We
need
to
have
something
online
as
close
to
the
commons
upgrade
as
possible.
It
would
be
a
bad
for
everyone
if
it
would
be
a
prolonged
period
of
time,
after
the
upgrade
without
having
a
working
praise
system.
A
A
You
know
really
be
a
minimum,
viable
product
and
test
the
hypothesis
and
test
the
a
way
forward
and
test
the
core
functionality
of
the
upgraded
prey
system.
So
it
won't
only
include
like
yeah.
You
need
to
be
able
to
import
it
into
the
system.
You
need
to
be
able
to
do
the
quantification
and
and
the
the
the
distribution
and
allocation
afterwards,
but
but
that's
it.
There
doesn't
need
to
be
any
like
fancy
dashboards,
analytics
options
login
with
metamask.
A
A
So
that's
my
idea
to
to
narrow
it
down
to
that
functionality
to
begin
with,
but
but
also
plan,
of
course,
building
building
an
architecture
so
that
we
we
don't
build
for
only
for
the
mvp,
but
we
also
have
we
have
built
a
structure
that
could
fit
in
the
rest
of
the
stuff
quite
easily.
Afterwards,
then,.
A
And
yeah,
so
so,
moving
over
to
the
process
and
architecture
discussion.
First,
I'd
like
to
touch
on
the
topic
of
of
source
cred.
I
have
we
have
been
discussing
back
and
forth
if
it's
a
good
idea
to
to
integrate
with
source
cred,
either
feed
source,
create
data
into
our
system
or
feed
our
system,
our
data
into
source
credit
and
after
investigating
this
further
and
talking
to
a
a
few
people
from
different
communities.
A
I
think
it
it.
It
becomes.
B
A
Yeah,
it
becomes
quite
clear
that,
as
a
source,
credit
is
a
complex
system.
Some
people
perceive
the
the
distribution
as
it
it.
It
takes
a
lot
of
work
to
to
adjust
the
parameters
to
get
the
results.
You
you
want
from
source
cred.
That
is
a
general
conclusion.
A
We
introduce
a
lot
of
complexity
and
there
is
also
a
big
risk
of
being
dependent
on
on
a
third-party
system
so
and
sort
of
the
final
not
nail
in
the
coffin
but
but
yeah.
So
sort
of
was
that
I
I
talked
to
giveth
and
they
were
like
said
that
they
they
have
had
trouble,
adjusting
the
parameters
and
that
they
are
really
happy
with
letting
the
systems
run
run
in
parallel
and
not
integrating
them.
A
And
so
that
is
my
proposal
for
first
going
forward
that
we
let
let
the
source
credit
be
source,
cred
and
let
praise
be
praised
and
not
not
to
try
to
merge
the
two
into
something
something
that
would
become
quite
complex
and
also
quite
fragile.
D
A
E
D
A
And,
and
also
our
our
needs
and
our
knowledge
when
it
comes
to
data
analysis
are
way
bigger
than
than
we
could
possibly
program
a
dashboard
for
so
there
will
be.
We
will
want
to
you
know,
export
to
csv
file,
import
it
to
another
system
to
visualize
it
and
yeah,
and
there
those
two
streams
can
can
meet
if,
if
needed,
we
export
from
both
systems-
and
we
do
our
super
advanced
analysis.
A
It
it
places
more
responsibility
on
on
us
doing
the
you
know,
the
the
token
allocations
and
the
calculations
etc.
But
I
think
we
should
try
to
keep
it
quite
simple,
at
least
not
more
complicated
than
it
has
been
so
so
far.
We're
not
trying
to
replicate
and
build
an
another
source
credit
a
huge
system,
but
rather
upgrading
our
current
system
and
make
sure
that
it's
stable
and
work
working,
working
well.
A
It
makes
it
a
bit
bit
simpler,
the
the
bots
feed
the
data
into
some
sort
of
of
the
data
store
or
back
end,
where
we
do
an
assignment
and
and
as
assigned
quantifiers
to
to
do
a
manual
quantification
of
the
data
of
the
phrase
data.
A
A
A
The
final
step
of
doing
manual,
manual,
validation
and
with
the
possibility
of
doing
manual,
adjustments
and
additions
and
then
feeding
that
data
into
in
this
case,
as
suggested,
the
the
rewards
dao
that
takes
care
of
the
the
payments
request
funds
from
from
the
tec
and
does
the
payments.
A
Is
something
missing
some
big
component
missing
in
this
process
overview
before
we
start
sort
of
identifying
different
component
error
like
technical
aspects
of
everything.
C
I
do
have
just
a
couple
questions
here,
looking
at
the
system
here
christopher,
so
what
I
understand
is
when
we
wanted
to
redo
this
whole
praise
thing.
There
was
two
issues
that
seemed
really
apparent
to
me:
it's
that
praise
was
wrongly
quantified
and
two
the
process
was
very
manual,
creating
a
lot
of
overhead
for
people
having
quantified
praise.
C
So
to
that
second
point,
it
seems
like
this
process
is
still
very
like
manual
heavy
and
it
seems
like
the
people
who
are
actually
sorting
through
the
praise
will
be
doing
a
lot
of
the
heavy
lifting
and
how
might
this
become
a
problem,
as
the
community
continues
to
rapidly
scale
up.
D
Can
I
just
jump
in
and
and
say
say
something
on
that
I
also
I
have
to
warn
you
at
any
moment.
Amin's
gonna
show
up
and
I
have
to
run
to
another
run
to
the
call
with
him,
but
he
I
I
think
the
big
piece
here
is
that
we're
gonna
praise
is
gonna,
have
smaller
scope.
So,
even
though
we're
not
integrating
source
cred
source
cred
will
take,
we
won't
be
praising
people
for
doing
github
work
and
we
won't
be
praising
people
for
posting
on
the
forums
we're
gonna,
also
integrate
alexandra.
D
I
still
believe
right
right,
christopher,
so
so
that
we
won't
be
praising
people
for
going
to
meetings,
and
we
also
won't
be
praising
people
for
twitter,
hopefully
we'll
find
a
way
to
integrate
a
twitter
bot.
D
So
now
praise
will
become
just
focused
on
qualitative
things,
things
that
we
just
can't
measure
and
really
more
of
like
authentic
gratitude,
and
so
I
think
there
will
be
less
praise
and-
and
it
will
be
of
higher
value,
less
boring
to
quantify
right
and
less
draining
to
quantify
and
it'll
just
be
more
impactful
and
and
unfortunate,
but
unfortunately
there
is
just
no
really
there.
D
D
I
I
wouldn't
say,
jury
duty.
I
would
say
more
like
like,
like
being
paid
to
get
an
update.
You
know
it's
like
the
community
call.
I.
A
Yeah,
and
also
is
an
honorable
thing
to
do-
is
something
that
you
look
forward
to
doing,
because
it
gives
you
insight
in
the
community
sure
the
community
shows
that
they,
they
trust
you
to
take
on
this
important
task,
because
you
have
influence
over
the
the
the
amount
of
rewards.
Someone
is
getting.
E
Yeah
there's
something
ostram
talks
in
the
book.
That
is,
when
you
give
someone
the
opportunity
to
monitor
others
from
a
place
of
like
insights
of
the
system
like
if
you
frame
monitoring
as
a
gift
of
information
like
you're,
seeing
what's
happening,
but
you're
gonna
be
like
in
an
an
insider
into
it.
E
E
I
like
super
plus
one
to
everything,
griff
said
and
just
to
add,
first,
that
there
is
a
way
to
integrate
twitter
to
a
source.
Crowd
has
was
sharing
that
maybe
christopher
has
more
information
and
also
we
were
talking
today
christopher
and
I
about
how
to
make
this
process
even
more
simple
and
effective
of
the
quantification.
E
So
something
that
we
used
to
do
was
to
have
like
random
numbers
that
each
person
could
pick
if
they
were
like
using
from
one
to
a
hundred
or
for
one
to
from
one
to
zero
to
five
to
quantify
things.
But
then
christopher
suggested
that
we
would
had.
We
would
have
something
like
a
fibonacci
sequence,
for
example,
that
you
have
numbers
that
are
predetermined
and
that
they
get
higher
in
almost
in
an
exponential
exponential
way.
So
you
have
like
1
3,
5,
10
80.
I
don't
know,
I'm
butchering
the
numbers,
but
something
like
that.
E
So
people
wouldn't
have
to
think
about
how
much
they
are
giving
to
things.
It
would
become
much
more
automated
in
their
way
of
valuing
things,
and
it
would
be
much
more
clear
what
is
a
contribution
that
receives
an
80
versus
one
that
receives
50
versus
one
that
receives
a
one,
and
we
would
start
having
this
understanding
of
what
are
the
base
layer
contributions
and
and
how
they
interact
with
each
other
and
also
that
would
be
subjective
to
the
whole
data
set.
This
person
is
looking
at
and
not
as
a
predetermined
value,
so
it
wouldn't
be.
E
E
They
would
be
valuing,
like
oh
someone
being
very
helpful
or
a
person
listening
to
something
else
or
someone
providing
care
work,
and
these
things
are
very
hard
to
put
in
a
category,
but
they
at
each
person
would
create
their
subjective
value
of
how
to
measure
these
types
of
contributions
looking
at
the
whole
data
set.
So
maybe,
in
that
data
set,
there
is
like
really
high
subjective
contributions
versus
something
very
small
and
they
would
create
their
own
sense
of
like
what
is
more
valuable.
E
D
B
Okay,
I
have
two
questions
actually
with
regard
to
twitter.
I'm
not
sure
if,
like
integrating
source
cred
into
twitter
would
be
favorable.
I
think
that
can
have
a
lot
of
ill
effects
because,
like
automatic
thoughts
on
twitter
to
like
say,
our
reports
that
someone
did
of
our
tweets
would
be
like
somewhat
easier.
I'm
not
sure
how
we
account
for
that.
B
B
If
that
might
be
interesting-
and
the
second
question
I
had
is
like
source
script
for
github
also
has
a
few
issues.
I
think
it
weighs
each
pull
request,
equivalently,
which
I
think,
like
incentivize
people,
to
split
up
their
pull
requests
into
multiple
versions.
A
For
for
the
github
in
source
credit,
I
would
say
for
the
praise
project
that
is
sort
of
out
of
scope.
We
we
know
that
that
we,
we
cannot
include
it
here
and
yeah.
I
also
heard
that
the
source
code
has
some
issues
and
if
those
issues
are
are
large
enough,
that
we
wouldn't
want
to
use
source
cred
for
github
at
all,
then
we
we
have
a
a
problem
or
we
have
a
leak.
A
We
have
people
contributing
value
in
a
system
that
we
are
not
tracking
and
how
do
we
solve
that
either
by
living
with
the
yeah,
the
source,
cred
kinks,
or
try
to
also
track
github
issues
in
in
praise,
which
I
don't
spontaneously
think
would
be
the
right
way.
So
I
have
no
straight
answers
to
that.
Basically,.
D
I
think,
like
I'm,
going
to
feel
like
I'm
always
saying
the
same,
but
maybe
for
that
case,
if
we
see
that
source
red
doesn't
really
track
the
work
of
this
github
work
of
small
teams,
which
are
already
kind
of
close
or
kind
of
clear,
maybe
substitute
substituting
the
coordinate
could
be
an
option
because
it
kind
of
gives
the
team
the
choice
to
see
okay,
this
pull
request
was
big.
This
was
smaller
and
kind
of
sorted
out
amongst
the
team
themselves,
which
could
be
an
idea
just
yeah.
A
A
It's
some
icing
on
the
cake,
but
but
it's
not
the
main
source
of
income
for
no
one,
and
then
then,
if,
if
people
do
substantial
work
in
more
fixed
work
group
settings,
then
they
probably
should
that
work
group
should
have
more
like
a
fixed
budget
or
if
they
do
outside
research
work,
then
they
maybe
should
do
a
a
grant
that
that
we
can
decide
on
with
the
conviction
voting,
so
they
have
a
secured
budget,
etc.
A
A
And,
and
for
your
your
first
question,
where
will
be
about
well
so
sorry,
I
I'm
not.
I
forgot
that
one.
It
was
about
source
credit
as
well.
No,
no
yeah,
I
and
I
spoke
to
has,
and
there
is
no
twitter
integration
for
source
cred
there.
Well,
I
think
there
was
one
in
the
works
or,
but
there
is
no
nothing
ready
to
be
used.
A
So
so
yes,
I
I
I
share
your
assessment
that
integrated
either
integrating
it
to
discord
using
that
as
an
interface
for
for
moving
data
into
to
praise
or
or
somehow
writing
a
something
that
interfaces
directly
with
with
our
api
and
feed
feed
it
into
the
face
api.
That
would
be
more
simple.
B
Yeah
so
there's
twitter
analytics.
There
are
some
tools
for
twitter
analytics
where,
like
you,
could
get
some
like
interaction
percentage.
It's
like
a
monthly
thing
where
you
could
get
to
know
like
who
interacted
with
your
account
more
a
few
websites
do
this,
but
the
one
that
I
know
is
called
orbit.
B
A
And
we
we
discussed
the
if,
if
this
cord
is
a,
is
a
good
interface
for
feeding
the
system
with
with
phrase
data
and
my
idea
about
what
that
was,
it's
it's.
A
I
I
like
the
idea
idea
of
of
being
able
to
do
a
loose
coupling
of
data
so
sort
of
not
having
to
go
through
a
strict
api
to
get
data
into
the
system.
I
I
don't
know
if
that
is
possible,
if
we,
if
so,
we're
placing
the
workload
on
ourselves
instead
of
placing
the
workload
on
on
on
bot
developers.
A
So
if,
if
there
is
a
bot
that
feeds
interesting
data
in
into
discourse
discord,
then
we
could
adjust
our
apprais
bot
or
appraise
bot
listener
to
listen
for
that
data
and
take
care
of
it.
So
we
wouldn't
have
to.
We
wouldn't
have
to
convince
that
bot
developer
to
do
any
changes
at
all.
Basically
I
don't
know
if
that
is
technically
possible.
B
We
could
we
could
open
up
our
the
whatever
listener
we
make
to
other
bots,
but
another
approach
that
we
can
look
at
is
like.
If
we're
making
a
dedicated
back-end
for
this,
you
could
have
a
microservice
architecture
like
our
bots
are
actually
not
actual
discord.
Bot
the
listener
is
an
http
server,
so
discord
made
this
new
thing
available
called
interactions
where,
like
you,
could
use
a
slash
command
in
the
server
and
that
requests
your
bot.
So
that's
an
http
request
instead
of
or
bought
listing
for
messages.
A
Yeah
that
that,
because
that
that
places,
zero
work,
effort
on
on
the
bot
developers
and
and
our
we
take
responsibility
for
for
picking
up
the
information
we
need
instead.
But
I
guess
that
that
is
a
bit
later
decision.
E
I
have
a
question
about
that
part
where
he
says
autoquint
like.
E
Order,
quentin,
wouldn't
wouldn't
all
of
the
praise
things
just
be
manual
quant
and
then
anything
coming
from
alexandra
and
source
cred.
That
would
have
an
autoquon.
A
A
E
Yeah,
maybe
that
is
another
layer
which
is
this
other
system
that
is
source
cred
in
alexandria.
So
there
is
like
the
praise
layer
and
the
source
credit
layer
in
the
alexandria
layer,
and
then
they
will.
These
layers
will
only
meet
in
the
rewards
dao
or
in
the
dashboard
for
analysis.
If
we
want
to
put
them
together
right.
A
A
But
more
like
that,
the
the
the
manual
the
price
data
goes
in
here.
C
A
B
I
had
a
question
related
to
this
from
like
the
first
discussion
we
had,
I
thought
autocornt
was
also
supposed
to
be.
It
was
supposed
to
be
a
data
management
application.
Where,
like
we
make
the
ball,
we
somehow
train
the
bot
to
automatically
quantify
all
the
pace.
I
thought
that
was
the
purpose.
That's
not
the
purpose.
So,
okay.
B
Well,
I
I
thought
this.
This
was
supposed
to
be
like
we're.
Gonna,
take
all
the
past
corn
data
loaded
up
into
this,
maybe
train
a
model
so
that
it
can
automatically
assign
cone
and
it
can
automatically
quantify
place
for
all
of
the
place.
And
then
we
like
compare
both
of
these
places
or
something
like
that.
That's
what
I
thought
initially,
I
guess
it
was
wrong.
There.
A
Sorry,
I
I
wasn't
understanding
everything
of
that.
Actually,
I
think.
B
No,
no,
no,
that's
not
what
I
mean.
I
thought
the
auto
quantifier
was
like
supposed
to
be
a
side
experiment
where
we
like
take
the
past
cone
data
and
trader
model
to
automatically
quantify
the
price,
and
we
have
manual,
and
we
like,
compare
both
of
those
data
and
select
and
like
try
to
somehow
estimate
like
if
our
auto
quantifier
is
working
and
in
future.
If
you
can
just
use
the
auto
quantifier
or
something
like
that,.
D
People
have
to
register,
or
do
some
kind
of
thing
like
you
know
like
to
make
sure
like
not
some
bots
are
joining
over
calls
and
getting
praise
to
sending
it.
Some
random
addresses
like,
and
maybe
we
don't
have
to
be
so
strict
like
the
trusted,
but
maybe
have
some
kind
of
process
to
avoid
bots
and
multi-accounts
and
stuff
like
that,
especially
if
it's
going
to
be
autonomous.
A
Yeah
now
that
definitely
needs
some
some
investigation
and
we
have
have
to
have
some
some
kind
of
good
architecture
or
how
do
we
bring
in
the
data
into
the
system
that
is
not
going
to
be
manually
quantified?
A
But
I
guess
that
that
that's
a
something
to
dig
around
more
in
the
further
like
the
the
coming
week
or
so,
and
my
hope
were
that
we
could
start
identifying
like
the
different
work
streams
and
maybe
assign
people
on
working
on
those
and
the
olivia.
I
think
this
this
first
question
goes
out
to
you
or
everyone
basically
can
we
do?
A
The
first
thing
we
need
is:
we
need
some
some
requirements,
let's
see
so
I
I
started
one
epic
called
the
phrase
mvp
specs
and
I
think
we
need
some
choice
of
backend
architecture,
choice
of
front-end
architecture.
We
need
some
start
specifying
the
the
api.
How
do
we
feed
data
into
the
system?
A
We
need
the
process,
the
price
process
description
and
I
would
say
that
that's
a
more
a
verbal
description
of
the
the
diagram
that
I
I've
drawn,
but
that
describes
more
in
detail
what
happens
at
each
step?
For
instance,
how
do
the
quantifiers
get
chosen?
How
do
the?
What
do
we
call
them?
A
How
do
the
reward
system
committee
get
chosen
so
describing
the
the
the
whole
process
from
start
to
finish,
like
yeah
and
and
then
the
reward
system
committee
posts
a
proposal
to
the
tec
request
funds
blah
blah
blah
that
kind
of
description
we
need?
We
absolutely
need
the
rules
of
praise
and
quantification,
and
that
has
a
levy
agreed
to
take
on
the
lead
for
for
that
to
define
what
do
we?
What
do
we
praise?
How
do
we
praise
and
and
how,
how
much?
How
should
we
quantify
it?
A
The
theoretical
rules
are
around
the
the
quantification
process
so
that
we
that
we
need
to
encode
in
in
code.
A
E
Yeah
we
could
try
to
take
a
week
and
and
see
what
we
can
get
started
with
and
experiment
with
that
we
could
use
like.
If
this
is
the
first
thing
we
do
we
could
use,
we
could
even
start
experimenting
in
the
practice
now
like
trying
to
see
how
people
start
praising
with
this
new
guidelines
and
what
works
and
what
doesn't
what
feels
like
unnatural.
B
Directly
from
discord
into
the
ledger
into
source:
congratulations!
So
that's
something
we
could
do
and
like.
We
could
have
the
same
thing
on
twitter,
but
we
need
to
like
maybe
change
our
own
source
code
instance.
I
don't
know
how
how
much
they
have
modified
their
instincts.
D
Doesn't
every
common
stack
member
have
to
give
an
address,
so
I
think
we
actually
have
a
data
set
with
with
all
the
tec
holders
and
an
address
that
links
them
to
to
them.
E
C
No,
I
just
I
just
said
it's
not
guaranteed
you
know
and
probably
going
forward.
Fewer
and
fewer
people
will
be
part
of
the
common
stack
that
are
in
here
yeah.
I
wonder
so.
I
hear
that
there's
two
different
places
that
we
need
to
get
this
praise
and
one
is
from
discord
still
and
one
is
from
twitter
and.
C
B
I
have
a
few
thoughts
about
the
including
process.
I
think
there's
already
two
onboarding
processes
that
they're
working
on.
So
I
think
maybe
it
would
be
better
to
like
make
this
an
opt-in
people
like
use
a
command
or
something
to
initiate
the
process,
and
they
could
just
set
up
their
data,
their
data
into
the
source
code.
I
think
we
could
link
telegram
and
discord
box
to
backing
yeah.
I
think.
C
B
One
of
them
is
like
is
from
the
onboarding
working
group,
which
is
like
on
boards,
people
into
the
t-shirt
like
to
see
explanations
about
that
and
collect
some
data
like
why
they
joined,
and
studies
like
that
and
another
one
that
we
were
working
for
is
a
captcha
gate
so,
like
I'm,
not
sure
if
we
like
spin
up
a
third
on
boarding
process
like
people
might
not
see
that,
so
we
could
make
a
command
or
something
we
make.
A
channel
called
set
up
your
details
or
something
like
that.
B
The
way
other
like
one
hive
and
methodium
have-
and
we
could
like
people,
could
use
a
command
or
something
in
there
and
have
that
and
for
twitter
we
can
have
a
dm
bot
for
that
same
thing.
E
Would
it
be
possible
with
that
to
have
some
type
of
checkboxes,
for
example,
a
brief
explanation
of
the
reward
systems
and
what
are
the
layers
that
we
use?
So
if
you
agree
to
participate
in
praise,
you
can
check
this
box
in
alexandra.
You
can
check
this
box
in
source
cred.
You
can
check
this
box
and
then
give
the
address,
and
would
it
be
able
that
from
this
bot
that
the
address
information
goes
only
to
the
boxes
that
people
checked.
B
This
the
latter
can
product
for
the
former.
I
think
we
can
do
that
in
discord,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
you
can
implement
that
in
telegram
so
discard
instead
of
checkboxes,
we
could
do
like
react
with
a
check
mark
emoji
or
their
new
api
has
buttons
too.
But
that
depends
on
like
what
choices
we
make
with
respect
to
our
bot
and
how
we
make
it
for
telegram.
I'm
not
sure
if
there's
a
way
to
make
checkboxes,
but
maybe
you
could
have
something
like
type.
B
Yes,
no
or
I
think
we
could
make
images
on
that.
I'm
doing
I
know
I
haven't
worked
a
lot
with
telegram
cps.
I
don't
know
if
you
could
make
a
checkbox
system
there.
A
B
B
So
for
for
the
discord
we
could
do
like
we
could
set
up.
One
channel
called
something
like
set
set
your
address,
or
something
and
the
like.
Whatever
onboarding
message
gets
said
to
them,
has
the
text
like
folks
opting
into
place
go
to
this
channel
and
type
this
command,
or
something
like
that?
I
think
most
other
does
do
that.
B
A
Did
we
did?
Did
we
agree
that
that
one
week
was
enough
to
try
to
tangle
out
the
the
all
the
requirements,
not
all
the
requirements,
but
get
get
started
and
get
a
get
that
going
or
do
we
need
two
weeks
yeah?
We
should
be.
E
D
A
A
So
when
it
comes
to
the
the
rules
of
praise,
should
we
plan
that
for
for
next
week,
sort
of
a
dry
run
of
maybe
or
maybe
that
is
a
session
in
itself?
We
would
like
to
do
a
dry
run
with
some
some
test
phrase
data
and
like
if
we
were
to
use
these
rules
of
praise,
how
how
would
a
an
actual
quantification
look
just
in
theory
and
just
now
now
we
process,
20
praised
items
and
and
have
a
discussion
about
it.
A
A
A
For
next
week,
then,
thus,
I
feel
like
taking
on
wireframes
and
process
description
or
feels
like.
A
C
A
Yes,
okay
in
in
text
form-
I
guess
where
do
everyone
prefer
to
if
we
try
to
work
together,
do
we
work
in
google
docs,
or
would
we
rather
do?
C
B
I
could
help
with
that,
but
there's
a
question
I
have
related
to
that
is
who
would
be
working
on
this?
Is
our
dfpbx
was
like
working
on
the
bracebot
in
general?
Do
making
it
or
would
we
be
making
our
own
applications,
because,
if
they're
making
it
they're
going
to
be
making
it
in
java
with
spring
boot?
I
can't
help
with
that,
but
if
you're
making
our
own
api,
then
I
could
help
with
that.
B
A
A
But
he's
really
eager
to
to
to
do
the
back
end,
which
is,
of
course,
is
speaks
for.
Let
him
letting
him
have
a
stab
at
it.
Who
else
has
capacity
to
do
nagano
or.
D
B
A
Because
I
I
yeah,
I
don't
have
anything
against
java
and
it
seems
like
spring-
is
a
really
super
well
established
framework.
It
has
been
around
since
2003
something
so
it's
a
and
that
seems
to
me
like
a
good,
a
wise
choice
if
we
were
to
go
with
the
web
2
architecture
to
choose
something
that
is
really
reliable
has
been
around
long.
So
we
don't.
You
know,
end
up
using
some
cool
new
technology
and
getting
stuck
because
of
that.
A
But
defining
the
api
is
is
not
necessarily
the
same
thing
as
the
doing
the
back
end
work.
You
know
the
the
the
api
needs
to
be
defined
in
more
on
the
theoretical
level.
You
know
the
the
rules
of
praise
and
quantification
that
those
have
to
be
somewhat
encoded
in
the
the
api
or
not
necessarily
all
of
them,
but
some
of
them.
I.
B
A
A
Maybe
we
have
a
hole
there
or
do
do?
Do
we
have
someone.
C
I
think,
maybe
once
some
of
this
stuff
slows
down
on
this
config
dashboard,
you
have
some
more
front-end
developers.
A
A
And
the
the
dry
run
will
do
together
with
the
hopefully,
then.
A
B
I
had
a
question
regarding
to
comedies:
is
this
supposed
to
be
only
for
the
tec
or
like?
Would
this
also
be
used
by
the
common
stack
or
spike
effect,
or
something
like
if
we're
doing
that,
we
might
need
to
change
how
our
back-end
works
and
account
for
different
groups.
A
I
I'd
say
one
one
instance:
one
installation
equals
one
community
to
make
it
simple
the
the
same
way
as
the
discourse
works
hosting
for
for
one
instance,
hosting
for
doing
for
many
communities
becomes
way
more
complex
and
also
places
a
you
know.
Responsibility
of
doing
the
hosting
on
some
poor
bastard.
A
So
so
I
ideally
in
in
in
the
end
when
we
have
released
like
a
version,
one
of
this
open
source
thing
that
it
will
be.
You
know
like
a
a
docker
container,
basically
containing
most
of
the
stuff,
which
would
allow
for
first
simple
installation
by
giveth
or
or
a
common
stack.
A
A
A
Undecided,
how
does
that
work
that
is
up
in.
A
D
I
think,
with
this
with
this
new
scope
that
we're
kind
of
searching
or
finding,
I
think
this
would
will
be
something
interesting
to
do
for
the
stewards
like
because
since
they
are
kind
of
more
in
there,
they
kind
of
get
more
information
out
of
knowing
what
is
being
done
and
and
how
the
data
looks
like
they're
going
to
get
important
insights,
which
kind
of
will
help
them.
I
think
so.
Maybe
that
might
be
start.
C
Yeah,
I
was
thinking
kind
of
like
a
celeste
system,
so
you
have
a
pool
of
quantifiers
that
get
randomly
pulled
for
each
cycle
and
then
they
they
get
rewarded
like.
So
they
sign
up
to
become
a
juror
or
a
keeper,
and
then
they
get
called
for
for
quantify
duty.
They
get
paid
to
do
it
and
then
everyone
kind
of
you
know
does
their
part
in
quantifying
praise.
C
E
Think
we
thought
about
that
initially
noggin
to
have
mostly
like
the
stewards
being
there,
but
then
I
feel
like
what
what
griff
was
talking
about
before,
like
this
offering
a
learning
process
for
for
people
to
see
what's
happening
in
the
community.
It's
also
a
great
thing
for
newcomers.
Somehow
like
in
the
comments
stack,
we
started
to
do
that
to
onboard
new
contributors
like
come
quantify
praise,
so
you
understand
what's
happening.
D
A
So
you
could
just
squeeze
in
it
two
small
things
before
we
finish
up
and
that
that
that's
two
two
principles
which
I
would
propose
that
we
let
we
let
us
be
guided
by
when
designing
the
specs,
and
that
is
when
it
comes
to
the
data
we
store,
that
we
try
to
have
immutable
data
as
far
as
possible.
So
now
no
overwriting
of
data
in
the
database.
A
Basically,
we
always
have
a
version.
History
like
we
treat
our
data
as
if
it
would
have
been
a
ledger,
and
that's
mostly
for
for
for
transparency
and
trace
traceability,
so
that
at
all
times
we
can
move
backwards
in
times
and
see
who
did
what
at
which
time,
and
also
that
that
we
think
that
community
involvement,
as
at
as
many
points
as
possible,
we
may
we
want
to
build
a
configurable
system.
A
If
there
is
a
parameter,
then
there
should
be
an
option
for
for
the
community
to
decide
on
that
parameter
and
it
we
should.
It
should
be
possible
for
us
to
to
connect
the
use
of
that
parameter
with
the
with
that
vote
and
with
that
quantity
quantification
that
that
praised
rounds
you
can
see
for
during
this
praise
round.
These
were
the
parameters
that
were
used
and,
and
those
parameters
were
were
voted
in
by
the
community
using
on
this
vote.