►
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/
B
So
welcome
to
a
weekly
rewards
work
group,
sync
for
november
24th.
We
have
quite
a
stacked
agenda
today,
so
so
we'll
dive
right
into
the
status
updates
and
keep
try
to
keep
them
quite
short
and
sweet.
And
then
we
we
do
the
discussions
afterwards.
I
I
collected
a
few
items
below
for
for
the
discussion
items
and
you
can
see
that
there's
quite
a
few.
B
B
B
C
Well,
let
me
share
it
here.
I
put
in
this
doc
to
make
it
easier
to
put
in
the
forum
after,
but
then
I'm
also
putting
here
in
the
notion.
It
just
looks
very
like
just
need
to
make
it
nice
now
but
yeah.
So
we
talked
last
week
about
how
this
is
already
a
working
group,
so
we
just
needed
to
formalize
a
little
bit.
C
So
here
is
our
weekly
meetings
and
discord,
chat
and
all
of
this
so
for
who
doesn't
know
we
do
this
manifestos
to
keep
track
of
all
of
the
working
groups
and
to
make
it
available
on
gitbook
and
and
on
the
website.
So
when
people
join,
they
know
that
there
is
this
stream
of
work
happening
and
they
can
jump
in
and
then
in
the
mission.
Just
the
intention
of
this
working
group
is
to
design
implement,
maintain
and
continuously
improve
the
tc
reward
system.
C
The
quantifications
will
be
performed
there
and
quantified
sets
will
be
analyzed
after
every
quantification
period
and
then
just
a
little
bit
of
like
what
is
this
new
reward
system
that
it's
basically
appraised,
plus
source,
cred
and
and
then
here
I
linked
the
forum
post.
That
mitch
worked
on
with
all
the
step
by
step
of
what
we're
doing
and
the
rules
of
phrasing,
quantification
and
well
yeah.
To
keep
all
of
this
running.
C
We
need
a
technical
team
that
is
working
on
the
development
of
the
dashboard
of
an
identity
solution
and
the
development
of
the
analysis
and
then
the
reward
board,
which
will
be
responsible
for
this.
Following
points
that
we
have
discussed
many
times
already
so
I'll
just
keep
this
and
how
will
the
tc
benefit
from
this
working
group?
So
a
comprehensive
reward
system
provides
insights
on
the
values
being
produced
in
the
community.
C
A
C
Have
their
needs
being
met
and
it's
also
a
court
part
of
token
engineering
and
the
experiments
from
this
process
are
relevant
for
the
field
and
discipline,
since
it's
our
mission
to
advance
it
and
then
success
that
the
dashboard
works
as
expected
that
we
have
engaged
quantifiers,
that
source
pride
and
praise
integrate
well
analysis
are
automated.
The
community
feels
fairly
rewarded
metrics
for
analysis,
provide
good
feedback
about
the
ecosystem,
health.
The
reward
board
is
active
and
attentive
to
what
needs
improvement.
Quantifications
and
distributions
happen
at
a
regular
pace
and
the
failure.
C
C
C
The
first
quantification
will
happen
before
christmas
and
most
of
the
rewards
board
work
is
continues,
so
there's
no
deadline.
Our
working
style
is
that
members
take
responsibility
for
different
issues
and
they
are
available
on
github
as
part
of
the
sprint
planning
process.
Pace
of
work
is
like
weekly.
B
Nice
one
thing,
and
I
I
I
would
propose
that
we
we
do
a
round
of
for
the
coming
coming
week,
allow
for
the
other
work
group
members
to
to
comment
on
this
before
we
make
a
forum
post
or
sort
of
make
it
official,
and
one
thing
we
clearly
need
to
define
is
how
do
the
reward
board
relate
to
the
working
group?
B
Is
the
reward
rewards
board
a
sub
subpart
of
of
the
working
group,
or
is
it
like
separate
somehow,
but
that
we
can
just
maybe
take
that
up
for
discussion
in
in
the
end,
so
that
it's
clearly
defined?
Do
you
have
anything
else
for
for
this
startup.
C
B
Then
the
next
next
work
stream,
the
first
quant
preparations.
I
I
don't
know,
I
don't
think
that
anyone
has
sort
of
assumed
more
responsibility
over
that
one.
So
so
I
don't
have
any
status
update
to
give
about
the
first
quant
preparations
and-
and
I'm
just
saying
that
that
that
is
a
work
stream
that
is
open
for
for
adoption.
B
If
someone
wants
to
take
wants
to
take
the
lead
on
preparing
for
the
first
quant
and
doing
the
first
quant
to
be
a
little
bit
more
responsible
for
for
that,
with
the
interactions
with
quantifiers
etc.
B
Mean
yeah
I
mean
so
for
for
first
quant,
we
need
to
finalize
source
credit
parameters.
We
need
to
set
up
all
the
systems
so
that
there
are,
we
can
can
so
we
can
perform
the
first
quant,
we
need
to
recruit
fires
and
we
need
to
describe
the
quantifier
role
and
we
need
to
to
do
the
quantification.
B
D
D
Are
going
to
be
using
the
the
phrase
data
right
because
they're
going
to
be
they're
going
to
be
using
the
subjective
data
stream,
whereas
source
credit
is
going
to
be
the
objective
data
stream.
A
B
D
So
sorry,
so
then,
basically
just
organizing
the
first
quant
within
the
reward
system.
That's
already
been
developed
and
set
up
well,
theoretically,.
E
B
F
I
think
I
saw
you
yeah,
I'm
here
cool,
so
the
update
is
like
we
previously
wanted
to
change
the
implementation
to
work
with
their
calendar,
but
then
discord
events
have
been
rolling
around
and
I
think
this
significant
amount
of
interest
in
maintaining
them
weekly,
so
we're
probably
going
to
be
tracking
these,
and
I
think
I'm
hopeful
that
we
have
something
this
week.
That's
actionable.
F
We
also
did
a
test
of
the
meeting
tracker
bot
in
the
last
graviton
training
session,
so
it
it
dragged
all
the
members
of
the
meeting
so
that
went
well.
We
no.
We
just
need
to
link
it
with
this,
like
the
discord
events
and
then
we
need
to
link
it
with
source
crit,
which
is
something
that
I
did
not
look
into
and
there's
some
questions
regarding
the
how
we
va
things
in
source
grid.
For
specifically
for
call
data.
F
Do
we
like
convey
them
based
on
how
much
time
you
spend
in
meetings
or
how
many
meetings
you
attend.
So
that's
a
discussion
where
we
can
bring
up
today.
B
Yeah
yeah.
Well,
let's
say
I
take
that
later.
I
I
noted
that
and
for
the
so
thank
you
for
that
for
the
source
cred
pollenbot
has.
Maybe
you
would
like
to
say
something
about
the
source
cred,
the
pollen
bot
or
I
can
say
something
or
whatever
we
can
say
something
but
has
to.
Would
you
like
to
go.
A
A
That
means
that
we
can
also
you
know
with
it
so
that
it
can
be
suitable
for
you
guys
needs,
and
from
that
I
think
we
can.
Maybe
we
could
just
like
develop
some
resources
into
just
making
it
something
that
is
usable
by
everybody,
but
yeah
an
overview.
A
It
links,
discord,
es
address
discourse
and
github
account
to
a
single
source,
good
identity
by
identity.
I
mean
the
thing
that
meant,
or
that
gets
cred
and
grain
instead
of
just
like
having
some
everything
thrown
around.
I
think
he
also
mentioned
the
idea
of
the
east
address
being
the
sort
of
like
a
foreign
key
between
the
associate
and
the
braze
praised
database,
or
something.
B
The
the
dream
would
be
to
have
an
external
identity
management
system
where
we
could
have
some
sort
of
decentralized
identifier
that
is
not
in
ethereum
address,
but
for
now
we'll
use
the
an
ethereal
matters
because
that's
the
best
we
have
so
thanks
for
that-
and
I'm
super
happy
that
that
you
are
contributing
to
to
this
and
helping
us
to
move
this
forward,
because
that
has
been
a
headache
or
something
that
we
have
been
having
a
headache
about
how
how
will
we
sort
of
administer
the
source
cred
instance
with
all
the
user
information.
B
My
pleasure,
I
can
say
something
about
the
praise
back
end
and,
and
that
is
the
the
things
have
been
moving
a
little
bit
slower
than
usual.
With
the
the
praise
development
back
end,
their
rudolph
has
been
moving
apartments,
etc,
and
but
now
he's
back
up
to
speed
again.
As
far
as
I
know
he
is
so,
we
will
see
more
developments
there
soon.
B
I
think
we
will
be
able
to
show
something
soon,
demo,
something
and
I'll
move
over
to
the
praise
front-end,
and
I
would
like
to
introduce
you
to
all
to
to
nebs
who
has
recently
joined
the
team
to
help
us
out
with
the
front-end
development,
welcome
nabs.
A
Yeah,
yes,
so
I
started
maybe
two
days
ago
so
christopher
introduced
me
to
the
project
and
I
started
with
quantifier
pool
removal
of
users
and
that
was
finished
today.
A
We
need
mock-up
data
because
we
don't
have
back-end
for
that
and
after
that
I
will
start
with
the
screen
with
where
you
can
see
me
praise
for
praises
for
a
that
one.
B
Yeah,
hopefully
we
will
get
into
a
better
flow
now
with
where,
with
the
back
end
and
front
end,
can
co
develop
sort
of
hand
in
hand
and
then
we'll
be
finished
quite
soon,
because
it's
not
not
much
left
actually
for
with
the
price
system
yeah,
and
then
we
have
the
final
work
stream,
which
is
allocation,
distribution
and
analysis
and
I'll
hand.
Over
to
ms.
G
Thanks
christopher
and
happy
wednesday,
everybody
so
on
the
update
side,
we
have
a
jupiter
notebook.
That's
been
spun
up.
Noggins
really
put
a
lot
of
work
into
to
getting
a
couple
pieces
of
that
together,
it's
been
really
really
awesome.
So,
alongside
of
the
jupiter
notebook
being
spun
up,
they
had
actually
created
a
generator
as
well
to
mimic
large
data
sets
that
we
would
see
in
the
jupiter
notebook.
So
it's
given
us
a
way
to
have
some
variability
and
some
analysis
that
can
be
conducted.
G
We're
currently
just
exploring
a
little
bit
more
of
the
design
aspects
of
the
jupiter
notebook
and
getting
those
pieces
in
place
and
then
just
to
be
mindful
of
time,
because
I
know
we
have
quite
a
few
updates
today.
We
have
three
questions
that
I
can
bring
to
the
channel
christopher.
If
that
makes
sense,
and
then
I
can
work
async
from
here,
you
know
around
those
pieces.
B
Yeah,
that
concludes
the
status
updates
and
just
let's
dive
into
the
discussions
I
I
thought
it
would
be
wise
to
discuss
the
roadmap,
because
christmas
is
moving
ever
closer
and
we
have
an
idea
about
doing
the
first
quant
before
quiz
christmas
and
then
so
then
we
need
to
make
a
trial
run
and
have
time
to
do
that
before
christmas.
So
my
I
I
my
proposals
are
that
we
we
use
these
not
necessarily
these
times
but
but
wednesday
seems
like
a.
B
A
good
day
to
do
the
trial
runs
and
the
quants,
the
most
of
the
quant
will
be
done,
asynchronously,
but
but
we'll
need
to
discuss
it
and
gather
up
people
and
introduce
them
and
whatever.
So
it's.
Let's
set
two
dates.
B
Basically,
and
I
propose
that
we
set
the
dates
of
a
december
8th
and
and
for
the
trial
run
and
december
22nd
for
the
first
quant,
and
that
means
that
if
we
missed
that
december
8th
date,
we
have
we
have
another
another
week
to
fail
and
and
get
back
on,
track
before
december
22nd.
Basically,
how
does
that
sound.
B
A
B
I
hope
that
we
will
be
done
with
the
the
prey
system
by
then
ruloff
says
it
should
be
possible.
Nebs
looks
confident,
I
think
so
we'll
see
we'll
aim
for
that
at
least,
and
what
the
trial
run.
What
that
entails,
we'll
have
to
discuss
more
in
in
detail
and
the
preparations
up
to
that
yeah,
and
then
there
was
a
issues
for
for
the
rewards,
workgroup
startup,
I
didn't
know
leave
it
that
you
had
finished
the
the
manifesto
and
and
also
writing
the
roadmap.
B
C
I
just
wanted
to
tell
nabs
and
hass,
and
also
ms,
I
think,
you're
not
in
that
list
that
you
joined
after
we
did
that
first,
like
roll
the
distribution.
So
if
you
could
add
your
names
there,
that
would
be
great
your
names
and
like
what
you're
working
with.
F
B
Okay
now
see
you
added
that
this,
oh
my
god,
I
did
that,
so
what
other
issues
are
there
for
for
the
rewards?
The
work
group
startup,
the.
E
A
B
For
the
rewards
that
the
workgroup
startup
some
other
stuff
needs
to
be
done,
we
need
to
add
workgroup
information
to
gitbook
once
the
roadmap
is
and
the
manifesto
is
set
posted
the
forum
and
some
there's
some
discord
administration
that
maybe
someone
could
take
on
setting
up
a
voice
channel
for
for
this.
So
we
don't
use
the
community
hall
always,
and
we
also
need
to
create
a
logo
and
add
it
to
the
home
page.
E
I
don't
have
permissions
to
do
that,
but
I
do
want
to
say,
and
I'm
not
going
to
make
a
logo,
but
I
do
want
to
say
that
I
posted
the
logo,
a
logo
for
the
pollen
bot,
potentially
that
we
could
use
in
rewards.
I
think
last
week
or
the
week
before
so
I
just
say
you
know
you
can
browse
that
if
you
like.
D
Great
question
general
magic
is
like
a
group
of
developers,
designers
and
writers,
that
just
kind
of
like
do
projects
within
within
the
blockchain
for
good
space.
D
E
D
Yeah
yeah.
A
I
could
take
in
coordinating
the
logo
part
I've
been
in
touch
with
rodri
and
and
marco
a
lot
for
contributions
that
broderick
has
been
doing
to
the
tc.
So
I
mean
we
already
have
that
communication
channel,
so
I
might
as
well
bring
it
up
and
and
follow
up
on
that.
B
Yeah,
maybe
that's
it,
and
because
the
the
git
book
stuff
has
to
wait
and
the
forum
post
has
to
wait
before
we
nail
down
the
the
final
version
of
the
manifesto
and
the
multi-sig
needs
to
be
taken
care
of,
and
that
is
part
of
the
reward
board
startup
sort
of-
and
I
don't
know
how
we
move
forward
with
that.
Maybe
we
should
take
that
discussion
now.
What
is
the
reward
board?
Is
there
a
reward
board
or
is
the
is
the
working
group
the
reward
board
open?
I
open
the
floor
to
opinions.
D
Yeah
there
is
a,
I
thought
it
was
pretty
clear
in
the
list,
but
maybe
not,
but
like
really.
What
we
should
be
doing
is
thinking
about
like
who's,
going
to
look
at
these
things
before
they
go
out.
So
you
have
the
objective
streams
and
the
subjective
streams
and
they
come
together
at
the
end
and
you've
got
the
work
of
the
quantifiers,
the
worker
source
grid
and
people
in
there
who
are
going
to
be
stamping
the
distributions
before
they
go
out
and
then
also
like
doing
the
analysis
and
hopefully
like
tweaking
parameters
over
time.
B
Yeah,
I
think
the
responsibilities
are
quite
clear,
but
the
question
being,
while
you
were
on
vacation,
we
had
the
discussion
that
how
and
where
would
we
place
the
the
the
reward
board
in
the
the
tc
organization
and
and
the
organizational
unit
that
we
have,
that
everyone
is.
B
Everyone
knows
about
is
the
working
group
so
that
that
is
by
making
the
board
into
a
working
group
that
makes
it
part
of
the
the
structure
we
already
have.
It
would
place
the
requirements
for
transparency
and
reporting,
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
that
all
the
stuff
that
we
are
used
to
that.
That
was
the
discussion
we
had
and
then
I've
noticed.
B
So
my
my
initial
belief
was
that
we
decided
that
we,
let's
make
the
reward
board
into
a
working
group,
basically,
and
then
I'm
starting
noticing
that
we
still
refer
to
the
the
working
group
and
and
the
the
board
has
two
separate
things
and
if
they
are,
I
would
like
to
to
know
what
what
are
the
benefits
of
that
and
how?
Where
and
how
is
the
the
board
being
placed
in
the
whole
overall
tec
structure?
D
Yeah,
like
I
don't
think
everybody
that's
working
on
the
reward
system
is
going
to
be
on
the
reward
board
because
of
first
of
all,
you
have
to
be
interested
in
doing
that
stuff,
like
the
the
analytics,
the
tweaking,
like
kind
of
the
more
just
like
slow
processing
of
information
and
like
the
people
who
are
doing
all
the
back
end
and
the
front
end,
and
the
system
design
like
those
developer
resources
like
might
move
on
to
something
else.
Once
we
built
the
system,
but
then
the
people
who
remain
behind
that
want
to
do
this.
D
B
And
we
also
have
said
in
in
the
reward
system
process
post.
We
have
said
that
that
the
the
the
reward
board
actually
has
the
responsibility
to
tweak
the
actual
distribution
as
a
final
thing.
So
we
are
planning
for
that
in
the
the
jupiter
notebook
to
to
give
them
that
that
power.
H
H
What
about
keeping
it
dowy
like
we
were
doing
at
the
first
time
like
mateo,
was
creating
those
tea
drops
and
then,
instead
of
having
a
multi-seat,
you
have
a
dao
where
you
need
a
certain
amount
of
people
to
vote,
and
you
know
you
don't
need
everyone
to
vote,
but
the
you.
C
Yeah
we'll
have
the
both
things.
The
the
dow
will
always
distribute
the
rewards,
and
then
the
multi-sig
will
only
be
used
to
make
proposals
to
the
comments.
So
whenever
the
reward
system
runs
out
the
funds,
the
proposal
is
made
to
the
tc
to
get
funds,
for
I
don't
know,
maybe
three
months
of
rewards
or
something,
but
because
we
want
to
distribute
this
funds
in
tc
tokens
and
not
in
wrap
text
die
and
what
we
receive
from
the
dow
is
going
to
be
reptex
die.
B
Must
say
I
I'm
not
I'm
a
little
unsure
what
is
the
need
of
for
having
the
rewards
working
group
if
there's
also
the
separate
reward
board,
because
the
the
the
the
project
of
building
the
project
of
upgrading
the
reward
system?
That
is
a
time
limited
project
that
that
ends
soon,
hopefully,
and
and
what
what
is
left
when,
when
like,
like.
B
You
like
you
described
when,
maybe
me
or
maybe,
the
the
developers
have
left
and-
and
we
are
left
with
a
functioning
reward
system-
isn't
that
what
we
are
left
with
is
only
the
responsibilities
of
the
reward
board.
C
B
Yeah,
so
my
initial
idea
was
that
to
make
it
simple
call
it
the
reward
board,
but
but
call
it.
I.
I
think
that
writer's
suggestion
was
really
great,
calling
it
the
reward
board
working
group
like
it
is
a
working
group,
but
it
has
a
special
permissions
so
so,
for
instance,
how
you
become
a
member
and
how
you
the
onboarding
and
off-boarding,
especially
it
has
access
to
the
multi-sig
etc,
but
it
still
is
also
packaged
as
a
working
group
for
it
to
fit
into
the
the
structure
of
the
rest
of
the
rest
of
this
everything.
B
My
only
interest
is:
is
that
it
that
the
the
whatever
structure
we
set
up
is
is,
is
sort
of
clear
and
and
makes
sense
if
we,
if
we
create
a
working
group
that,
in
the
end,
won't
have
anything
to
do
because
there's
also
a
separate
entity
called
the
reward
board.
That
does
the
actual
work,
then
that
it
seems
like
we
should
just
let
go
of
the
idea
of
creating
the
work
group.
D
B
Now
that
that's
what
I
mean,
let's,
let's
treat
it
as
the
the
reward
board
we
have
always
talked
about,
but
but.
B
And
I
think
the
active
development,
the
stuff
we
are
doing
now,
so
the
the
upgrade
project
it
doesn't
need
to
be
described
in
the
manifesto.
That
is
because
this
it's
we're,
hopefully
in
at
the
end
of
that
project
and
then
when,
when
there's
time
to
make,
do
new
development.
That
is
a
new
situation.
C
I
think
it's
very
simple
that
we
have
the
streams
that
are
creating
the
product
and
then
making
it
function
and
then,
after
just
maintaining
the
the
process,
so
the
development
now
of
the
product
is
part
of
the
working
group.
But
is
it
a
task
that
will
end
just
like
all
the
working
groups
have
like
streams
that
strains
of
work
that
end
are
completed,
and
then
there
are
other
things
that
are
coming.
B
Yes,
let's,
let's
move
on,
if
we
have
some
sort
of
general
consensus
on
on
this
sort
of
vaguely
at
least.
B
Someone
still
has
to
take
on
the
the
task
of
figuring
out.
If
we
want,
we
are
going
to
set
up
a
multi-sig.
What
needs
to
be
done
there?
I,
I
don't
have
any
insight
in
how
that
works.
Actually,.
A
Why
don't
we
use
the
same
aragon
dao
to
save
the
funds?
I
think
that's
the
safest
option
and
easier
instead
of
noses.
What
do
you
say.
A
B
A
Yes,
you
are
a
one,
we
would
use
aragon,
I
forgot
the
name
but
the
agent,
sorry,
the
aragon,
agent,
yeah
and.
H
A
F
D
When
the
vote
is
created
and
then
if
it
if
it
gets
outside
of
the
price
slip
which
between
when
the
vote
is
created
and
when
it's
executed,
that's
the
problem
with
the
multi-sig
as
well
is
like.
If
the
price
slippage
moves
out
of
bounds,
when
it
actually
wants
to
execute,
then
it
then
the
transaction
fails.
B
D
Of
the
stuff,
with
aragon,
daos
and
evm,
crisper
and
stuff,
so
it's
cool.
B
B
Yeah
and
for
the
first
quant
now
another
first
quant
prepare
preparations
and
execution.
We
we
touched
on
it
a
little
bit
before.
I
think
I
made
a
few
issues
about
that.
B
B
Yep
it
takes
silence
as
the
yes,
yes
thanks
and
then
we're
going
to
to
perform
the
the
the
quantification
trial
run
where
we
use
the
last
the
past
month
worth
of
data
for
both
both
source
credit
and
and
praise
and
evaluate
that
trial
run
and
adjust
the
parameters
after
that.
B
So
maybe
we'll
the
the
forum
post
will
happen
after
the
trial
run,
because
then
we
can
tweak
the
parameters
and
see
what
worked
and
didn't
work,
but
we
also
need
to
recruit
quantifiers
for
for
the
first
quant
and
and
we
are
planning
not
to
make
the
first
one
not
not
as
not
so
big
and
mitch.
You
haven't
heard
that
since
you,
you
were
gone
last
week
that
we
we
discussed
that
there's
like
6
000,
praise
currently
unquantified
and
if
all
praises
are
going
to
be
quantified
by
three
people.
B
B
Yes,
okay!
So
so
we'll
start
with
just
like
two
weeks
or
one
month,
the
worst
of
data
for
for
the
first
quant,
which
means
that
we
don't
have
to
recruit
as
many
quantifiers
as
well.
So
I
think
the
we
can
more
more,
like
handpick
those
quantifiers
for
the
first
quant
to
make
sure
that
it's
the
people
that
have
opinions
about
how
and
why
we
quantifying
and
can
help
us
to
to
tweak
the
parameters
if
needed.
B
And
we
also
discussed
last
week
that
we
need
a
forum
post
describing
the
quantifier
role
in
a
little
bit
more
more
detail,
and
it's
not
about
the
rules
for
quantification.
It's
like
like
level.
You
said
it's
that
there
are
clues
to
to
what
this
forum
post
should
in,
including
in
both
the
reward
system,
process,
post
and
and
the
quantification
rules
for
quantification
post
and
then
adding
some
some
more
information
about.
I
guess
the
quantification
process
could
be
a
good
thing
like
this
is
how
it
where
it
works.
D
B
H
B
Maybe
this
wasn't
as
much
a
discussion
point
but
more
like
going
through
what
are
the
the
the
things
that
we
need
to
do
before
the
first
quant?
So
if
I,
if
I
have
missed
something,
please
just
inspired.
D
C
B
Yeah,
maybe
we
can
leave
the
the
first
quant
preparations
there
if
we
don't
have
to
bring
up
anything
else,
because
we
still
have
10
minutes
and
two
areas
to
cover.
B
So,
let's
move
on
to
the
source,
cred,
the
source,
credit
meeting
tracker
bought
via
rv,
and
we
we
discussed
this
today.
How
do
we?
How
do
we
reward
meeting
attendance?
B
Currently
we
are
when
we
are
praising
you,
you
get
a
set
amount
for
attending
a
meeting,
no
matter
what-
and
the
question
here
was
like-
is
that
the
way
we
would
like
to
continue
doing
it
or
would
we
you
know,
do
we
reward
total
amount
of
time
spent
in
meetings
or
number
of
meetings
attended?
By?
Did
I
get
this
right
or
is
there?
F
Yeah,
we
could
also
do
things
like
that
if
they
are
interesting
in
doing
it
but
yeah,
I
think
the
initial
distribution
is
like
either
it's
ours
spending
meeting
or
is
it
just
the
act
of
attending
the
meeting.
E
We
might
not
have
the
hi
everyone.
We
might
not
have
the
technology
for
this
at
this
time,
but
I
it's
a
personal
peeve
of
mine
to
reward
people
for
their
activity
or
quantity
of
time
in
a
meeting,
because
I
don't
think
that
that's
representative
of
their
contribution-
and
I
also
see
it
being
I've-
seen
people
just
like-
go
to
lots
and
lots
of
meetings
to
kind
of
just
like
rack
up
cred
or
tokens,
and
I
I
can.
E
I
don't
want
to
encourage
that
behavior
and
I
also
don't
want
to
encourage
a
lot
of
talking
when
maybe
we
don't
want
the
same
people
talking
a
lot.
I
just
see
a
lot
of
there's
a
lot
more
nuance
to
contributions
live
in
a
meeting
and
I
would
hate
to
incentivize
that
generally
across
the
board-
and
I.
D
Think
I
think
of
a
really
good
point,
and
what
the
nice
thing
is
that
we
can.
We
can
choose
how
much
we
value
meeting
attendance,
how
it
is
relative
to
other
types
of
work
right.
D
F
I
think
there
was
a
discussion
some
time
ago
about
incentive
like
telling
the
community
that
we
should
like
praise
people
for
contributions
made
in
a
call,
and
I
think
that's
what
is
like,
where
we
give
people
value
for
the
contributions
they
make
in
a
call
and
source
grid.
What
we're
going
to
use
for
script
for
is
basically
just
a
check
mark
that
you
attended
to
call
and
you
like,
just
active
in
the
community
and
just
I
think,
that's
like
just
to
incentivize
people
by
showing
them
yet
yeah.
F
A
F
E
Right,
I
just
wanted
to
catch
up.
I
think
I
heard
this
earlier,
but
it
might
have
escaped
me
that
we
are
talking
about
using
the
source
credit
meeting
bot
for
this
and
so
just
to
clarify
we're
talking
about
having
a
weight
or
a
parameter.
That's
equal
for
all
parties
in
the
call.
Is
that
what
I'm
hearing
okay
do?
We
all
already
know
how
the
bot
currently
works,
or,
if
not,
can
I
give
a
small
summary.
B
E
I
have
to
you
know:
modif
it.
It
takes
me
a
while
to
metabolize
that
it's
going
to
be
different,
that
I'm
used
to
it,
and
here
I
am
also
working
with
some
of
his
bugs
as
we
speak.
So,
okay
thanks,
I
feel
caught
up.
A
I
wanna:
could
I
jump
in
and
add
something
here.
I
think
too.
We
could
think
about
how
to
filter
just
meeting
attendance.
For
instance,
you
could
easily
build
a
formula,
that's
something
like
you
know.
It's
I
don't
know
0.1
per
meeting
attended,
but
with
a
total
cap
of
0.5,
so
you
can't
attend
a
thousand
meetings
and
game.
The
system
like
it
would
be
really
easy
to
build
those
functions
in
since
we're
automating
more
of
it
and
you
could
filter
it
that
way.
If
that's
something
the
community
thought
was
a
good
catch.
E
E
I
also
feels
kind
of
I
don't
know
culturally
or
socially
regulating
like
if,
if
the
incentive
for
someone
going
to
lots
of
meetings
is
just
to
get
cred
and
that
they
kind
of
get
permission
like
that,
doesn't
have
to
be
your
only
incentive,
maybe
you'll,
search
for
others.
I
don't
know
it
just
has
implications
I
really
like,
because
there's
so
many
time
zones
and
people
try
to
make
a
lot
of
meetings.
Sometimes
it's
maybe
not
always
good.
This
is
a
little
weird.
E
E
So,
like
that's,
admitted
also,
but
I
don't
know
I
maybe
I'm
not
being
very
clear,
but
I
really
like
that,
like
kind
of
de-incentivization,
I
wouldn't
want
it
to
just
be
too
stringent.
I
guess
because
there
is
a
lot
of
value
in
people
being
synchronous,
and
it
is
still
feels
very
rare
in,
like
the
general
like
token
culture,
web
3
culture,
so
yeah.
B
I
have
no
idea
if
that
is
doable
from
with
within
the
source
crit
if
we
could
put
a
cap
on
on
something.
But
let's
investigate
that
further
further.
I
think
because
now
we
have
five
minutes
left
and
we
need
to
move
on
to
allocations
distribution
analysis
that
would
like
to
bring
up
questions.
So
if
that
is
okay,
we'll
stop
that
conversation
for
now
and
come
back
to.
E
It
have
a
quick
source,
cred
question,
which
is.
E
Do
we
have
it
was
an
idea
and
I'm
just
going
to
throw
it
out
there
and
see
if
it
fits
talked
about
or
not
having
praise
giver,
be.
The
role
that
is
that
like
receiving
cred
for
meetings,
is
predicated
on
that's
an
idea.
There
could
be
a
new
role
created,
but
often
you
can
regulate
if
somebody
is
just
in
like
so.
If
a
spammer
came
in
and
just
started
like
coming
to
all
the
meetings
we
never
saw
their
face,
they
could
get
lots
of.
E
D
D
F
If
you
want,
you
can
make
the
meeting
tracker
board
just
track
meeting
timings
for
anyone
who's
who
just
has
the
price
gravel
rock.
So
that's
something
that's
doable,
but
I
think
we
should
move
along
and
discuss
this
asynchronously
on
in
the
next
call.
B
Thanks,
ms,
you
have
the
floor.
B
G
Yeah
so
specifically
around
the
quantifiers,
so
I'll
bring
the
other
two
questions
into
the
channel
and
then
for
the
last
one.
The
question
essentially
is:
do
we
split
the
reward
equally
as
a
fixed
sum,
or
do
we
award
an
amount
per
praise
quantified
so,
for
instance,
people
who
quant
members
with
lots
of
praise?
Would
they
get
more.
B
G
So
I
guess
from
there
if,
if
it
is
unequally
distributed,
I
think
is
the
question
right
just
in
case
it
doesn't
equally
distribute
out
and
I'm
just
interpreting.
I
think
we're
nugget
noggin
really
had
the
background
on
this
question
more
than
I
do,
but
he
wanted
me
to
open
it
up
here.
H
Contributing
like
the
the
you
know
like
the
quantifiers,
should
like
like
if
the
same
way
it
was
before
like
at
the
beginning,
if,
like
there's
only
10
people
working
on
the
tc,
then
of
course
it's
less
hours
and
like
the
idea
is
like
okay.
How
much
work
was
done
this
period
of
time,
these
two
weeks
or
this
month
whatever
and
then,
depending
on
the
results
you
had
this
month,
then
you
decide
the
budget
for
for
what's
been
done
and
then
yeah
and
then
you
distribute,
but
accordingly
to
what
you
achieve.
B
Yeah
and-
and
here
the
question
also
is,
if,
if
one
quantifier
quantifies
20
more
than
another,
should
that
quantifier
get
more
of
of
the
quantifier
pot
of
rewards
for
that
work?
If
one
quantifier
were
to
quantify
like
10
times
more,
I
I
think
we
would
say
that
it's
obviously
that
maybe
that
person
should
get
rewarded
more,
but
I
guess
the
the
difference
hopefully
will
be
like
plus
minus
10
20
30
at
tops.
H
B
But
since
since
it's
based
on
one
quantifier,
we'll
always
quantify
all
the
praise
for
one
for
one
user,
if
that
rule
didn't
exist,
then
of
course
all
the
quantifiers
would
would
be
assigned
the
same
amount
of
praise.
But
if
you
imagine
a
situation
where,
where
only
two
users
have
been
praised
for
a
period
and
one
one
user
have
received
a
hundred
praise
and
the
other
user
have
received
10
10
praise,
then
one
quantifier
would
do
a
lot
of
work
and
another
quantifier
would
do
less
work.
G
B
But
technically
it's
it's
not
complicated
to
when
we
export
the
information
just
to
count
how
how
many,
how
many
praise
each
quantifier
has
quantified
and
distribute
accordingly.
G
It
is
a
super,
interesting
question
too,
because
when
you
think
about
statistically,
if,
if
the
length
of
things
being
quantified
versus
the
amount
of
people
that
you're
quantifying,
somebody
could
be
quantifying
a
lot
of
people
with
maybe
one
or
two
praises,
for
example,
in
each
one.
And
then
one
person
could
be
wanting
two
people
with,
like
hundreds.
C
So
I
don't
think
the
metric
of
like
how
many
people
are
quantifying
is
the
right
one
to
do,
and
maybe,
if
we
had
an
at
like
a
slippage
limit,
you
know
like
if
in
between
this
and
this
number,
it's
okay,
that
everyone
receives
the
same.