►
Description
Timecodes:
00:00 - Intentions and distractions
08:41 - Changes
15:38 - Praise flow
24:37 - Round of thoughs
🙏 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
Maybe
we'll
we
could
start
with
like
a
super
short
intentions:
distractions
like
a
sentence
each
or
so,
and
then,
if
you
have
something
you
want
to
add
to
the
no.
Let's
take
that
afterwards
adding
to
the
agenda.
A
My
intention
for
further
for
this
call
is
to
sort
of
bring
hear
your
ideas
about
what
is
needed
to
do
with
the
reward
system
and
see,
and
how
would
you
would
like
to
contribute
to
making
that
a
reality
and
the
the
the
proposal
that
libya
make
to
make
sure
that
we
try
to
create
something
in
the
short
to
mid
term
and.
B
Oh
yeah,
my
intentions
are
similar.
I
am
interested
in
just
like
the
discussion
on
on
praise
and
reward
source
credit
and
how
we
integrate
all
of
that
and
and
then
we're
also
trying
to
do
something
similar
forgiveness.
So
I'd
love
it.
If
we
kind
of
like
cross,
mind
meld,
you
know,
and
just
yeah
come
up
with
a
good
system
that
works
for
everybody
and
opposite.
Oh
I'm
not
distracted
I'll,
pass
it
to
olivia.
C
Thanks
super
happy
to
see
this
full
room.
My
intentions
are
just
yet
to
understand
which
path
we're
taking
so
there
are.
There
are
a
few
that
christopher
is
gonna,
explain
a
little
bit,
I
I
think,
and
as
we
move
along
and
and
also
to
see
how
some
of
the
next
steps
we
can
take,
who
is
collaborating
on
what
and
maybe
getting
a
little
timeline
even
together
today.
That
would
be
great
and
I'm
also
not
distracted
and
I'll
pass
to
nagin.
D
Yeah
well
guys
to
be
here,
attentions
just
see.
What's
what's
going
on
and
how
I
can
join
in
which
way
I
can
help
and
kind
of
kind
of
see
where
everything
is
going
and
just
offer.
My
my
help
as
much
as
I
can
and
distractions
none,
but
I
had
I've
been
having
some
internet
issues,
at
least
at
the
beginning
of
the
call
just
didn't
work
that
right
so
maybe
I'll
just
go
out
and
in
some
time
during
the
call
I
don't
know
what's
going
to
happen,
but
yeah
and
I'll
pass
it
to
mateo.
E
Hey
everyone,
so
essentially
my
intentions
come
from
yeah,
maybe
getting
a
better
idea
of
what
we
should
do.
I've
been
down
the
rabbit
hole
of
source
spread
and
what
the
guys
on
one
hive
have
done
with
many
plugins,
so
it
can
get
very
overwhelming.
So
it's
it's
very.
It
should
be
very
nice
to
have
like
a
very
condensed
idea
of
what
we
should
be
doing
and
yeah.
I
think
this
is
perfect
for
that.
We
have
many
great
minds
in
this
collection.
F
Thanks
mateo
intentions
are
to
really
just
listen
and
hear
what
everyone
has
to
say.
I'm
really
excited
to
be
opening
up,
rewards
development
in
the
labs
we
have
about
six
weeks,
slotted
for
that
for
now
and
so
yeah.
I
just
listened
and
synchronized
with
everyone
today
and
I'm
super
distracted
by
this
puppy
over
here.
It's
a
really
energetic
in
the
morning
so
I'll
pass
over
to
johan.
B
B
C
B
A
Okay,
let's
come
back
to
griffin
and
perhaps
mad
manu
would
like
to
step
in.
B
A
B
Intentions,
I
just
want
to
listen
and
see
what
I
can
contribute:
sorry
about
telephone
and
yeah,
I'm
working
on
researching
some
type
of
organization
that
deals
with
the
hololens
hierarchy
and
colonic
network,
so
seeing
if
I
could
do
with
that
and
how
that
ties
into
the
war
system,
distractions,
no
destruction
whatsoever
and
I'll
pass
it
to
chuwi.
G
Thanks
intentions
for
today,
just
get
a
better
or
a
better
sense
of
where
everything
around
reward
system
is
going.
It's.
If,
if
you
haven't
heard,
we've
been
working
a
lot
on
an
comes
dow
proposal,
but
knowing
what
the
base
like
reward
system
is
to
be
and
and
how
it's
gonna
be
configured,
something
that
we're
also
taking
in
in
account.
H
G
Yeah
also
by
my
experience
in
in
one
hive,
I
know
that
it's
something
that
it's
not
as
easy
as
easy
as
it
seems
at
first
and
it's
super
like
manual
so
yeah,
I'm
glad
to
to
help
and
contribute
in
in.
In
any
way
I
can
distractions.
G
I'm
gonna
be
working
on
a
presentation
that
I'm
gonna
be
doing
later
at
dork,
but
but
I'm
gonna
be
like
going
back
and
forth.
That's
my
only
distraction
and
I'll
pass.
It.
B
B
H
Hi,
so
mainly,
I
came
here
to
see
what's
the
discussion
in
here
and
listening
on.
What's
going
on
with
respect
to
this
proposal,
that
christopher
has,
I
also
had
a
few
ideas
for
the
place
bought
and
how
it's
going
to
be
rebuilt,
a
while
afterwards
like
by
rdf
ubex.
So
that's
something
that
I
would
be
interested
in
listening.
What's
the
roadmap
for
that,
that's
pretty
much
it
I'll
pass
it
to.
B
A
So,
thank
you
again
for
everyone
for
coming
libby
would
would
you
care
to
describe
in
short
what
was
like
the
core
additions
that
you
proposed
in
in
your
proposal?
The
changes
to
the
current
the
current
process.
C
C
So
I
think,
and
the
main
change
would
be
to
diversify
the
the
the
quantifiers
we
have
and
to
make
that
a
little
more
random,
so
we
would
have
let's
say:
10
quantifiers,
instead
of
three
working
on
smaller
pieces
of
data
that
would
be
randomized,
so
there's
not
so
much
relation
between
one
and
another
and
and
multiple
people.
Maybe
two
or
three
people
would
receive
the
same
the
same
data
sheets,
so
we
would
still
have
the
average
that
we
had
in
the
quantification
before,
but
it
would
just
be
more
distributed
and
then
from
there.
C
We
wouldn't
need
to
do
that
together
in
a
council.
We
would
do
that
a
stink
and
when
we
come
together,
it's
just
to
debate
more
like
the
cultural
insights
of
that
praise,
because
what
is
being
praised
offers
such
a
is
such
a
knowledge
base
about
what
the
community
is.
What
is
happening?
C
What
are
the
contributions
being
done,
and
I
think,
as
we
scale
and
as
more
people
join,
is
a
good
like
health
check
to
keep
having
those
meetings,
maybe
a
30
minute
or
an
hour
meeting
instead
of
the
three
to
four
hour
meetings
we
used
to
have
before
so
people
would
do
that
async
and
then
just
make
just
me
for
this,
like
social
analysis
process
and
exchanging
insights
and
seeing
if
something
needs
to
be
tweaked
or
not,
or
how
is
the
data
looking
and
the
idea
that
octopus
suggested
is
that
in
the
end
of
this
two
weeks,
we
would
have
dashboards
where
we
could
run
an
analysis
constantly.
C
So
the
reason
why
the
analysis
took
so
long
when
we
did
for
the
impact
hour
intervention
process
was
because
the
data
was
dirty
and
it
was
a
year
of
data
that
had
to
be
analyzed
instead
of
just
like
two
weeks
of
data.
So
if
we
put
this
into
our
practice,
we
would
always
have
updated
graphs
in
and
ways
to
play
with
in
the
dashboard
and
those
meetings.
The
social
meetings
would
start
informing
us.
What
are
the
best
metrics?
C
We
have
to
analyze
the
data
of
the
community,
so
so,
for
example,
in
that
process
we
use
the
gini
coefficient
as
one
of
the
metrics,
but
then
we
question
like
if
the
junior
coefficient
is
a
good
metric,
because
it's
a
metric
used
for
countries
are
we
like
necessarily
having
to
go
into
that
or
we
can
find
other
metrics
that
are
better
to
give
like
more
specific
information
for
our
organization.
C
So
this
is
a
process
that
will
constantly
have
to
happen
to,
but
the
good
part
is
that
we'll
have
like
a
very
educated
community
around
the
cultural
and
all
types
of
contributions
that
that
happen,
and
then
another
part
of
this
proposal
is
integrating
this
with
source
cred.
So
we
have
source
credit
running
in
the
background
for
a
while,
but
we
haven't
been
rewarding
people
from
the
source
crowd
data
we
have
because
we
didn't
want
to
mess
up
with
praise
before
having
a
deeper
look
into
this.
C
So
source
crowd
is
really
good
for
rewarding
contributions,
and
praise
is
great
for
rewarding
more
subjective
contributions.
So
could
we
drop
some
of
the
things
that
were
being
rewarded
by
praise
into
source
cred?
C
Only
so
we
make
it
smaller
the
quantification
process,
even
even
more
and
and
this
praises
that
and
this
contributions
that
are
objective-
can
be
just
like
simply
automated
and
rewarded
by
source
cred,
so
something
that
has
he's
not
here
today,
but
he
was
saying
that
twitter,
for
example,
that
it's
a
very
easy
way
to
it's
a
very
fixed
cluster,
like
all
of
the
interactions
that
people
have
with
twitter.
C
C
So
those
are
some
of
the
things
that
we
are
looking
into,
how
to
separate
more
like
qualitative
from
quantitative
date
for
more,
like
yeah,
objective
data
and
and
then
there's
also
alexandra
that
was
developed
by
johan
and
that
records
time
spent
in
calls.
So
we
also
want
to
integrate
that
into
the
mix,
because
a
lot
of
the
praises
that
we
have
now
come
from
like
praising
people
for
participating
in
meetings,
so
taking
that
out,
will
also
make
a
lot
smaller.
C
The
influx
that
we
have
for
the
quantification
and
then
with
that
we
have
like
many
challenges,
but
we'll
still
figure
it
out
the
best
plug-and-play
of
this
integrations.
But
then
the
idea
is
that
all
of
this
data
would
go
to
the
reward.
Now
it's
a
dow
that
we
already
have
now
that
was
being
used
for
the
testing
we
were
doing
with
source
grant,
so
we
could
just
repurpose
that
down
it
and
it
almost
works
like
a
multi.
C
Seg
they're
are
like
few
people
in
there
that
can
vote,
but
we
have
a
little
process
for
that.
So
all
of
this
data
would
go
to
the
reward
system
dao
and
would
have
to
be
approved
for
being
distributed
to
all
of
the
people
that
contributed,
and
this
distribution
would
happen
using
some
bots
that
we
would
have
to
collect
addresses
from
all
of
the
people
that
participate
in
our
community
and
all
of
this
reward
systems.
A
Thanks
yeah
combining
all
those
data
streams
into
one
process
that
would
allow
us
sort
of
like
one
one
praise
flow
and,
and
one,
and
also
I
I
you
said
that,
but
but
I
want
to
want
to
put
we
stress
that
to
add
the
transparency
at
all
everywhere
in
the
process,
so
that,
for
instance,
if
we,
we
can
vote
on
changing
the
parameters
that
decide
how
much
a
tweet
gets,
etc.
A
But
let
me
show
you
what
and
I
have
tried
to
model
the
the
different
processes
that
we
have
sort
of
identify.
I
have
identified
five
different
processes,
five
different
routes
that
we
could
take,
and
I
do
you
see
my
screen.
A
Yes
and
and
the
yeah,
the
the
the
first
version
is
doing
as
little
as
possible,
and
that
would
be
basically
the
the
same
process
as
we
use
today
which
based
mostly
on
google
sheets,
etc,
but
we
would
also
try
to
bring
in
and
and
also
in
that
scenario.
Maybe
we
would
let
source
cred
run
like
a
completely
separate
stream.
But
the
praise
is
the
happening.
It's
the
discord,
bot
and
the
telegram,
bot
and
and
alexandra.
A
Maybe
we
could
merge
or
all
all
into
one
one
giant
sheet
and
then
we
we
do
our
calculations,
our
analytics
and
and
the
quantifiers.
That
group
of
people
do
some
sort
of
manual,
quant
validation,
with
the
cultural
analysis
that
we
literally
just
described
and
then
feeding
that
data
into
the
the
rewards
dao
that
pays
the
quantifiers
and
the
contributors,
and
maybe
also
this
reward
system
committee,
which
I
don't
I'm
not
certain.
We
need
that
at
all
yeah.
A
A
In
the
the
second
one,
we
are
adding
some
kind
of
product
that
we
could
call
the
phrase
quantifier
or
something,
and
that
is
a
is
a
tool
that
would
make
it
easier
for
us
to
do.
The
manual
pace
quantification,
which
means
that
all
all
the
price
data
goes
into
some
sort
of
back
end
and
and
then
there's
a
step
of
assignment
where
the
the
group
of
quantifiers,
the
different
individuals
in
in
the
quantify
groups,
get
assigned
a
certain
amount
of
praise
data.
A
So
the
data
is
split
among
the
the
the
quantifiers
and
they
do
the
the
quantification
asynchronously
at
their
own
pace
and
then
when
they
are
done
before
a
set
date,
the
data
is
merged
again
into
them
becoming
a
quantified
phrase
data.
A
We
take
that
quantified,
praise
data
and
we
merge
it
with
a
stream
coming
from
source,
cred
and
alexandra
and
again
end
up
with
a
gigantic
spreadsheet
and
and
the
rest
of
the
process
is
the
the
same.
A
The
third
option
would
be
to
feed
source
credit
data
into
our
phrase,
quantifier
sort
of
combining
more
stuff.
So
we
we
still
have
the
the
the
price.
As
usual,
we
bring
in
alexandra
the
meeting
data
into
our
database
as
well,
but
we
also
export
source
credit
data
in
into
our
database
and
and
then
the
most
most
of
the
flow
is
the
same.
A
Where
yeah
the
quantifiers
do
the
manual
quantifications,
the
the
pre-quantified
data,
has
sort
of
a
bypasses
that
system,
because
the
source
credit
data
doesn't
need
to
be
quantified,
but
then
we
we
also
instead
of
relying
on
spreadsheets.
We
we
build,
add
the
functionality
for
doing
the
allocation
and
the
validation
into
this
backend,
this
server
system.
A
A
After
the
the,
the
allocations
have
been
been
calculated
and
do
like
a
validation
and
check
all
the
numbers
and
they
have
the
ability
to
do
manual,
adjustments
etc
and
down
below
here,
I
I
added
what
could
be
the
the
the
different
dashboards
you
you
access.
You
have
some
sort
of
data
dashboard
where
you
can
control
the
data
in
the
system.
You
have
an
admin
dashboard
where
you
can
add
and
remove
quantifiers,
maybe
based
on
on
votes
that
we
do
in
the
dao.
A
You
have
the
quantification
dashboard
where,
where
individual
quantifies
they
they
perform
their
quant
work.
Then
again
the
data
dashboard
and
you
have
some
sort
of
analytics
dashboard
that
could
be
also
outside
of
the
system
completely
with
the
ability
to
export
the
data
to
do
more,
the
deep
analysis,
etc,
and
then
the
validation
dashboard.
Where
you
do
these
manual
adjustments,
if
you
need
and
and
export
to
the
dial
and
then
the
rest
of
the
process
is
the
same.
A
A
A
So
if
we
just
manage
to
produce
a
a
high
quality
graph
of
of
our
praise
and
and
our
contributions
with
weights
connected
to
it,
then
then
we
can
let
source
credit.
Do
the
do
the
calculations
and
and
come
up
with
the
the
cred
and
the
grain,
and
and
but
here
in
this
scenario,
there's
a
step
here
where
we
need
to
sort
of
translate
grain
into
tec.
A
And
I
I
don't
know
if
that
is
something
source
credit
can
do,
that
it
can.
Instead
of
calculating
grain,
it
could
calculate
whichever
token
but
greatness,
as
far
as
I
know
is
off
chain.
A
A
Like
I
said,
my
intention
is
for
us
to
sort
of
have
a
fee
get
a
feeling
of
which
way
we
would
like
to
go
and
ideally
get
a
sense
of
who
who
would
like
to
contribute
to
this
becoming
a
reality
and
in
the
best
of
worlds,
decide
that
you
know
this.
This
is
a
working
group
these.
A
These
are
the
people
that
would
like
to
join
and
in
in
probably
not
today
establish
also
some
sort
of
roadmap
or
timeline,
but
I'll
I'll,
open
I'll,
open
the
floor
completely
to
you
for
a
few
minutes,
and
what
are
your?
What
thoughts
pop
up.
E
Maybe
I
want
to
add
the
fourth
option,
the
visibility
of
doing
that
one
gets
a
little
bit
more
complicated
because
we
would
be
depending
on
source,
credit
team
to
add
a
new
plugin
and
for
all
of
the
sources
that
they
are
not
currently
integrating.
E
E
I'm
not
sure
coming
from
what
I've
seen,
I
think
it's
possible,
but
maybe
someone
from
source
credit
is
the
ideal
person
to
do
it,
because
it's
it's
a
mess,
so
I'm
not
sure,
for
example,
doing
twitter
and
alexandria
to
to
feed
our
source
cred.
I'm
not
sure
if
that's
easy
to
do.
A
D
If
I
can
add
something
to
what
matteo
said
because,
like
we
were
talking
about
that
christopher
in
the
in
the
labs
channel
about
this
team
that
was
supposedly
integrating
source
credit
with
coordinate
yeah,
I've
looked
a
bit
into
that
talk
to
the
guys.
It
was
the
guys
at
meta
factory
and
they
aren't
actually
doing
that
they're
using
both.
I
think
they
had
the
the
plan
to
kind
of
mix
it,
but
it
seems
to
be
more
complicated
than
they
thought
so
for
now,
they're
going
with
both
things
in
parallel.
D
A
Yeah,
that
seems
like
a
super
super
important
thing,
to
assess
the
feasibility
of
of
doing
that.
I'm
talking
with
has
have
you
spoken
to
him.
Some
of
you
have
maybe
on
monday.
I
think
I
think
he
has
some
some
some
deeper
insight
into
source,
cred
and
but
maybe
we'll
have
to
reach
out
to
their
team
as
well.
C
I
think
from
from
those
options,
my
favorite
is
the
third,
where
we
build
where
we
build
more
like
a
price
product
and
then
all
of
the
data
we
have
is
being
fed
into
this
dashboard
and-
and
we
have
the
possibility
of
performing
all
of
these
things
in
the
dashboard,
and
we
don't
have
the
spreadsheets
anymore.
C
I
think
I
was
talking
to
them
about
maybe
coordinate
being
useful
for
like
working
groups
if
they
wanted
to
delegate
work
within
with
the
re
with
the
funds
that
they
captured
from
the
dao,
for
example,
that
it
could
be
more
like
a
local
solution.
But
I
really
like
the
idea
of
developing
praise
into
something
that
other
teams
can
use
and
and
also
continuing
the
the
culture
like,
I
feel,
like
praise,
was
really
a
big
part
of
the
culture
on
just
how
people.
C
I
think,
nagin
wrote
something
interesting
in
his
report
that
praise
is
freely
given
like
there
is
no
cap
on
how
much
praise
you
can
give
and
I
think
that's
an
interesting
flow
for
everyone.
That's
joining
like
no
cap
and
gratitude.
A
Yeah,
that's
it.
A
It
is
really
tempting
to
see
develop
the
praise
into
like
a
standalone
system
that
could
be
used
by
other
communities
as
well
as
well
and
but
there
then,
maybe
the
ambition
shouldn't
be
at
all
to
brings
the
source
credit
data
into
that
system,
but
instead
let
source
crate,
be
one
one
separate
stream
on
the
side
and
then
and
and
sort
of
live
with,
that
we
have
the
prey
system,
which
also
includes
alexandra
the
meetings
and
then
source
credit
is
a
separate
thing,
but
it
also,
of
course,
would
be
really
nice
to
have
this
combined
analysis
of
all
all
the
work
that
has
been
done,
whether
it
be
in
in
source,
credit
or
the
price
or
system
or.
D
Yes,
the
only
thing
I
I
about
these
proposals
that
I
think
is
I'm
not
like
I
personally,
would
prefer
a
system
that
is
that
doesn't
rely
that
the
less
possible
on
just
personal
quantify
like
on
a
small
group
of
quantifiers,
because
I
I'm
not
sure
how
good
something
that
I
can
scale-
and
you
know
here.
It
works
because
we're
an
awesome
community
with
we
have
a
strong
cultural
alignment,
cultural
build,
which
kind
of
makes
it
very
safe.
D
But
if
you're
going
to,
if
you
want
to
make
a
product
that
everybody
can
use,
building
something
that
relies
on
a
small
group
of
people
to
kind
of
have
that
much
control
about
the
over
the
payroll
can
be
risky.
D
But
I
I
think
that
doing
something
with
the
praise.
I,
like
I
wrote
in
the
report,
and
I
think
it's
something
an
important
point-
that
having
unlimited
praise
is
something
good
and
something
special
that
that
I
think
is
yeah
it's
important
also
to
to
how
this
has
worked
the
whole
time.
D
On
that
point,
I
I
would
like
to
add
that
the
guys
at
because
I
I'm
a
bit
in
that-
has
placed
because
I've
been
reading
up
on
that
the
guys
at
coordinate
are
planning
to
go
open
source
like
in
a
month
or
two
and
are
generally
very
open
to
to
collaborations
and
stuff.
So
I
think
if
we
have
feedback,
we
can
bring
it
to
them.
I
think
we
could
probably
fork
something
they
do
and
kind
of
use
all
the
backwork,
because
they
have
a
lot
of
data
visibility,
visualization
stuff
and
all
that.
D
A
Yeah,
because
what
one
real
strength
they
have
is
that
you,
if
you,
when
the
members
of
a
group
they
they
give
to
each
other,
that
they
all
know
each
other,
that
they
know
why
the
work,
the
the
that
the
others
in
the
group
is
is,
is
good
work
or
not,
but
when
using
the
prey
system
and
the
community
grows,
and
people
will
not
know
each
other
by
first
name
or
they
don't
recognize.
Who,
who
is
this
and
and
it
after
a
while?
I
guess
it
will
become
difficult
to
assess.
Is
this?
A
Was
this
a
valuable
contribution
or
not,
for
the
quantifiers
to
make
that
assessment,
and
also
one
possible
problem?
Is
that,
for
instance,
when
there
comes
that,
you
suggested
that
that
comes
down
what
happens
when,
when
we
have
more
like
formal
working
groups
having
maybe
their
own
budgets
etc,
but
we
have
only.
We
have
one
big
prey
system.
How
would
the
the
tokens
be
allocated?
A
It
becomes
quite
quite
complex,
especially
if
for
for
something
like
the
comms
dao,
where
we
have
also
a
lot
of
contributors
that
are
outside
of
the
comms
now
doing
comms
work.
So
you
have,
you
know
we
want
to
give
tokens
to
people
retweeting
and
sort
of
doing
comms
work,
but
they
are
not
part
of
the
group
and
the
group
has
a
budget,
but
we
have
only
yeah.
A
It's
not
it's
complex.
H
One
thing
that
I'd
like
to
say
is:
like
the
conversation
around
having
a
back-end,
I
think
ideapbx
was
like
initially
made
the
play
spot
was
talking
about.
I
think
they've
started
working
on
making
a
back-end
api
for
the
entire
part.
H
So
if
they're
working
on
that,
I
think
we
could
maybe
communicate
this
with
them
and
to
get
we
could
collaborate
with
them
to
like
change
the
entire
play
system
into
something
that's
back-end
based
and
then
because,
since
if
it's
an
api,
we
could
do
stuff
like
get
get
data
from
alexander
to
there
or
get
data
from
other
parts
into
that
back
in
and
then
we
could
do
whatever
we
want
with
the
data
stored
over
there.
H
So
if
they're
working
on
it,
we
could
maybe
communicate
with
them,
especially
with
regard
to
what
we
want
to
change
in
the
system,
because
a
lot
of
the
things
we
are
talking
about
are
similar
to
what
they
are.
What
are
what
the
changes
they
were
suggesting?
They
were
also
making
a
dashboard,
I
think
for
players.
F
Hey
bye,
bye
v.
Thank
you
for
that.
That's
really
interesting!
So
I'm
trying
to
you
know,
I
guess
my
intention
that
I
didn't
mention
through
this,
or
maybe
I
did,
but
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
what
structure
and
form
the
labs
are
going
to
take
as
we
focus
on
this
topic.
So
I'm
thinking
so
far,
I'm
seeing
that
there's
two
channels:
there's
systems,
development,
implementation,
deployment
and
there's
research
on
sort
of
pure
praise
concepts.
F
What
are
what
are
the
patterns?
What
are
the?
How
can
we
generalize
praise?
How
do
we
like
measure
the
system?
Almost
like
metametrics,
like
how
do
we?
How
do
we
measure
the
different
praise,
implement
or
rewards
implementations
and
associate
that
with
the
values
of
our
community,
so
that's
sort
of
on
the
research
end
and
then
there's
the
sys
systems,
implementation,
which
is
just
actually
wiring
everything
up
together
and
christopher?
F
Thank
you
for
the
presentations
awesome
and
the
mirror
boards
for
such
so
precise,
which
is
really
useful,
but
I'm
thinking
like
the
tec
labs.
We
have
a
pool
of
talent
of
programmers
of
you
know,
mathematicians
whatever
it
may
be,
I'm
thinking
it
might
be
appropriate
as
we
go
through
this
sort
of
six-week
process
to
just
have
two
parallel
channels
that
go
through
the
labs.
F
Maybe
we
divide
people
up
into
like
a
research
section
and
a
systems,
implementation
section
and
I
feel
like
that,
could
work
really
well
and
but
the
thing
I
would
want
to
bring
to
the
community
here
is
saying:
okay.
Well,
let's
get
lots
of
bodies
out.
You
know
if
we
could
have
20
or
30
people
coming
out
to
the
labs
and
have
that
split
into
two
groups,
focusing
on
research
and
focusing
on
systems
implementation.
F
I
think
we
could
make
really
good
progress
if
that's
possible,
for
example
vivei
v,
if
the
team
you
mentioned
would
want
to
come
out
to
the
labs,
then
that
that
would
create
that
sort
of
perfect
environment.
You
know
schedules
are
different
for
everyone,
so
if
that's
not
possible,
then
maybe
the
systems
implementation
team
would
be
able
to
meet
the
development
team
that
you
just
mentioned
in
some
other
setting,
but
yeah
I'm
gonna,
I'm
kind
of
putting
that
out
there
for
everyone
in
the
call
here
about
structuring
the
labs.
In
that
sense,.
H
A
Yeah,
I
guess
that
there's
like
a
quite
pressing
need
of
having
having
something
workable,
online,
quite
close
to
the
to
the
commons,
upgrade
because
after
that,
people
you
know
leave
like
you
described
the
the
the
the
longer.
We
wait,
the
the
the
the
bigger
the
the
backlog
of
a
praise
we
have
to
to
sort
of
churn
through
and
and
the
higher
the
risk
that
we
will
end
up
in
another
praise.
Magedon,
because
you
know
we
have
thousands
of
praise
that
yeah.
All
of
a
sudden.
A
So
what
I'm
saying
is:
how
do
we
make
sure
to
get
something
up
and
running
quite
soon,
but
also
bring
in
you
know
the
all
the
insight
from
from
the
labs.
F
That's
that's
one
option,
maybe
I'll
see
what
griff
thinks
about
that.
The
other
option
is
kind
of
what
I
said
before,
where
we
have
two
channels
in
the
pec
labs,
where
we
have
like
a
research
focus
group
and
we
have
a
systems,
implementation,
focus
group
and
then
just
to
fully
brainstorm
like
there
would
be
another
way
to
shift
this
where,
because,
like
you
said,
we
want
to
have
this
all
tuned
up
for
the
comments
upgrade.
F
So
maybe
research
initiatives
go
on
hold
and
we'd
go
like
all
in
on.
You
know:
infrastructure
development
and
systems
development,
but
I
would
definitely
would
like
christopher
yourself
to
like
join
the
labs.
F
You're
you've
got
this
design
aspect
and
definitely
looking
to
different
community
members
for
leadership
in
this
you
know,
because,
because
I
can,
I
can
attract
developers
just
through
what
I
do,
but
when
it
comes
to
the
systems
architecting
and
any
just
a
little
bit
of
organizational
management,
definitely
would
lean
out
to
the
community
for
help
on
those
aspects.
A
Yeah
cool
now
I
think
the
task
force
idea
is
sounds
great,
that
or
rather
that
is
how
how
I
have
seen
it
thought
about
it,
going
forward
that
we
try
to
establish
a
working
group
that,
with
the
focus
of
getting
something
up
and
running,
not
as
soon
as
possible,
but
almost
as
soon
as
possible,
but
also
to
taking
height
for
for
doing
a
a
decent
software
engineering.
A
So
so,
with
the
knowledge
of
that,
new
insights
will
come
from
labs
later
on.
So
we
will
need
and
want
to
continue
to
develop
this
thing.
So
we
don't
just
do
a
hack
like
100
a
hack
just
now,
but
also
start
something
that
we
would.
F
Like
to
continue
building
incredible
to
me,
yeah
a
dedicated
task
force
for
software
engineering
and
then
the
labs
can
be
like
exploring
the
surface
area
of
possibilities
and
sort
of
doing
research
and
mining.
Looking
at
all
the
different
reward
systems
and
aggregating
like
insights
that
can
be
fed
to
the
software
engineering
team.
B
A
A
So
then,
maybe
we
have
only
like
10
minutes
left.
Maybe
we
should
should
approach
that,
subject
of
who
who
would
like
to
to
join
this.
This
task
force
of
reward
system
ninjas.
D
Well,
I
definitely
volunteer
I'd
love
to
do
it
and
yeah
and
just
to
get
back
to
what
you
said,
I
think
it's
important
to
get
something
up
and
running,
of
course,
but
I
I
think
we
can
also,
if
you
approach
it
in
a
way
like
we
are
building,
we
are
iterating,
weekly
or
every
two
weeks.
I
think
that
gives
us
also
a
lot
of
slack
from
the
like.
If
we're
actively
making
changes
that
we
don't,
we
don't
have
to
have
something
completely
finished
from
the
beginning.
I
think
we
can.
D
I
think
it's
acceptable
to
have
like
okay,
we
have
you
said
you
have
source
credit
running,
just
we're
going
to
use
source
rate
and
you're
going
to
use
alexia,
because
we
can
put
it
in
in
a
week
or
two
and
for
the
rest,
we
still
use
the
old
price
system
and
you
kind
of
swap
the
parts
out
as
we
go
yeah.
I
think
that
is
definitely
a
possibility,
even
if
we
arrive
at
the
final
version
in
I
don't
know
two
months.
I
don't
know.
B
A
A
And
I
think
I've
got
the
sense
that
rudolph
would
like
to
be
a
part
of
this
as
well.
Rdf
bbx.
B
A
Yeah,
now
that
you're
in
and
and
libby
you
you,
you
cannot
avoid
it.
I
think.
C
Yeah,
I
would
love
I
like
what
what
ygg
said
about
separating
the
topics
a
little
bit,
and
I
think
there
are
some
of
them
that
don't
need
any
type
of
dab
work
that
we
could
work
on
them
already
like
looking
into
some
metrics
that
we
can
start
with
and
and
some
of
the
like
quantification
process,
how
to
distribute
that
do
we
need
a
proposal
for
this
role
like
things
like
that
that
can
happen
without
the
technical
part,
we
can
start
working
on
them.
F
E
Yeah,
I
also
volunteer,
of
course,
I've
been
working
on
this
with
the
soft
glove
team,
alongside
with
with
santi
and
levy,
and
I'm
loving
it.
So
I
wanna
do
it
as
well.
I
wanted
to
mention,
as
an
extra
point,
that
maybe
we
should
also
focus
for
the
long
term
into
the
how
this
could
be
adaptable
for
different
dos.
A
Yeah
definitely,
and
so
so,
let's
make
it
more
modular
and
transparent
and
adaptable
sort
of
without
investing
too
much
work
in
making
a
super
architecture.
F
Research
and
development.
A
Yeah
and
like
you
said
I
I
will
probably
or
I
will
try
to
join
the
the
labs
that
that
that
work
stream,
so
so
I
I
have
constant,
you
know,
have
a
see
what
you
are
doing
there
and
can
bring
that
information
into
the
work
group
awesome.
F
They
are
9,
00
am
pst
6
pm
central
european
on
friday.
F
A
C
Would
you
have
the,
would
you
like
to
join
as
well
or
you're
with
limited
availability
now.
H
I
would
like
to
join,
I'm
not
sure
like
which
part
would
I
help
been.
I
think
I
could
help
with
the
back
in
or
the
bot
part,
but
not
over.
The
data
part.
A
It
could
be
a
separate
part
and
also
the
sort
of
the
decision-making
process
around
it.
How
do
you?
How
do
we
vote
for
for
parameters
etc,
which
is
more
not
not
so
much
coding,
but
but
instead
of
describing
that
process
and
making
sure
that
it's
in
in
place.
E
A
Next
steps,
I'd
say:
assessing
the
feasibility
of
doing
feeding
data
into
source.
Credit
is
one
super
important
thing,
and
then
I
I'd
say
it's.
The
next
step
would
be
to
to
have
like
a
a
book
and
another
meeting.
Basically
for
for
the
work
group
and
and
go
into
more
more
detail
and
decide
on
which
which
process
we
we
would
like
to
choose
and
or
maybe
we
have
already
decided
to
scrap
the
the
attempts
of
feeding
data
into
source
cred.
What
what
is
the
general
sense.
B
C
A
Yeah,
but
would
someone
like
to
take
on
that
queering
checking
with
the
source
cred
how
difficult
it
is.
D
A
I
can
bring
it
up
with
with
hass
that
I'm
meeting
on
monday
and
I
I'll
take
that.
A
If
possible,
I
would
like
to
try
to
to
do
meetings
in
the
euro
at
a
time
zone,
but
I
think
most
of
us
actually
are
ygg
you.
You
are
not
in
europe
but
and
mateo.
You
are
also
not
but
like
early
afternoon
city
where,
which
time
zone
are
you
in.
E
Colombian
time
does
emt
minus
five
and
lauren
is
costa
rican
time.
So
it's
like
seven
hours
before
yours
also.
A
Yeah
but
there's
a
that's
a
time
like
it's
three,
like
three
p.m:
cet
does
that
work
for
you?
What's
that's
early
morning,
like
eight
eight
or
nine,
at
your
place,.
B
A
Yeah,
so
let's
I
will
give
that
a
try
invite
for
for
a
time
that
is
at
3
am
maybe
we
should
just
set
a
date
right
now.
Actually
it's.
F
Yeah,
if
it's
so
for
me
and
johan,
we're
on
the
west
coast.
So
if
it's
this
time
or
later,
I
think
that's
doable
but
so
like
this
was
seven
am
for
me,
which
I'm
not
sure
what
time
it
was.
Maybe
four
four
pm
or
five
pm.
A
Yeah
no,
but
let's
do
4
p.m.
Then
then
you
can
can
join
getting
up
at
6
is,
I
know,
that's
too
early
7
is.