►
Description
TheSoftgov Working Group researches and applies best practices for governance, social collaboration and contribution rewards while implementing Ostrom’s 8 principles for governing the commons in its foundation.
We gather every Tuesday at 7pm CET.
Steward: Liviade
🙏 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/
C
Dang
I
hate
going
first,
I
think
a
great
memory
is.
C
My
little
nephew,
who
is
very
young,
but
he
his
first
words,
are
oh
no,
and
so
he
just
walks
up
to
people
and
says:
oh
no,
and
it's
just
absolutely
hilarious
and
so
yeah.
I
think
that
was
the
highlight
of
the
week,
but
I'll
pass
it
to
mitch.
D
Best
memory
this
week
was
going
back
to
visit
the
permaculture
farm
that
I
was
at
last
winter
and
seeing
how
big
the
plants
are
now
and
that
they're
yielding
fruit,
and
they
built
all
this
crazy
structures
on
it.
And
I
was
like
whoa.
You
know,
like
kind
of
that,
like
realization
that
time
moves
on
even
when
you're
no
longer
there,
and
that
was
actually
really
really
cool
to
have
this
week
and
I'll
pass
it
to
tam.
E
There's
so
many
that
come
to
mind
but,
like
the
biggest
surprise,
best
memory,
was
that
my
daughters,
love
seaweed
and
we'll
just
eat
layer
like
sheets
and
sheets
and
sheets
of
the
seaweed
and
like
their
favorite.
Snack
now
is
white,
rice
and
just
a
sheet
of
seaweed,
and
I
had
no
idea
their
whole
lives.
I
had
no
idea
so
it
was
like
such
a
cool
surprise
to
find
out
and
I'll
pass
to
it's
optimus.
F
H
H
Actually,
I
just
wrote
it
to
tam,
because
tim
mentioned
that
one
of
her
kids
is
like
one
one
meter
32
already
or
something,
and
this
brought
back
a
memory
about
me.
Listening
to
the
doctor
says
like
oh,
you
are
like
150
already
I
was
like
yeah
like
and
like
all
of
my
family
is
like.
Oh
my
god,
like
150
already
and
yeah
like
it.
It
was
a
happy
memory.
So
thanks
for
sharing
that
time,
I'll
pass
it
back
to
you
libby,
because
I
don't
know
who
went
already.
I
Yeah,
I
think
it
was
today
because,
as
I
told
you
before,
like
I
got
injured
like
20
days
ago
and
today,
I
started
working
again
and
yeah
that
that's
really
good
so
yeah.
That's
that's
really
good
and
I'll
pass
to
mitch.
J
Yeah
for
me,
cece
one
of
my
best
friend
reached
out
to
me
after
several
years
and
we
reconnected,
and
that
was
it
was
awesome,
so
that
and
I
can
relate
with
nate,
because
I
also
have
a
little
nephew
and
they're
they're
they're
the
best
like
yeah,
it's
it's
better
than
playstation
5
for
sure
playing
with
them.
So
I'll
back
back
to
you
baby.
That's
it.
K
Honestly,
my
best
best
memory
this
week
was
probably
going
to
mitch's
house,
seeing
being
some
of
the
first
persons
to
see
his
new
place,
and
it
happened
to
be
canadian
thanksgiving
and
mitch
happens
to
be
a
professional
chef
so
like
he
made
a
roast
and
it
just
it
just
like
all
of
a
sudden.
It
became
a
thing
we
we
put
on
a
fireplace
like
we
put
the
fireplace
on
youtube.
We
like
had
it
going
and
we
were
we.
I
think
we
were.
K
What
were
we
doing
and
we
were
oh,
we
did
the
initial
buy
curve,
that's
what
we
did.
We
went
there
to
do.
The
initial
buy
math
you
know
and
then,
and
then
we
had
canadian
thanksgiving,
it
was
fantastic,
and
what
about
you
eduardo.
B
A
He
suddenly
discovered
imessage
calling,
so
he
suddenly
started
calling
me
with
no
warning
at
any
given
moment
and
or
he
sends
me
invitations
to
play
chess
virtual
chess
because
he
likes
to
play
chess.
So
suddenly
you
get
an
invitation
of
a
seven-year-old
say,
saying:
hey
I
wanna
play
chess
and
the
second
happiest
memory
actually
is
now
just
like.
Listening
to
all
of
you
talking
your
happy
moments,
it's
quite
a
nice
mood
so
back
to
you,
lee.
B
I
think
my
happiest
memory
this
week
was
during
a
call
that
I
got
distracted
for
except
a
second
looked
on
my
phone,
and
it
was
a
friend
birthday
that
I
didn't
talk
in
a
long
time
in
egypt
and
he
said,
oh,
we
did
dima
and
his
other
friend
sent
you
the
video
we
made
for
you
and
I
was
like
no
and
then
I
talked
to
her
and
she
sent
me
this
video.
They
both
had
made
for
me
like
a
day
that
they
met
randomly.
B
C
C
C
I
from
what
I
understand
it's
on
their
end,
unless
there's
something
wrong
with
the
pull
requests
we
initially
did,
but
I'd
have
to
review
that
again
so
yeah
last
time
I
talked
to
them.
They
were
working
on
their
end
and
I
haven't
heard
anything
back
yet,
so
I
will
keep
engaging
with
them
and
keep
it
keep
this
up.
Third,
updated.
B
C
Oh
yeah,
definitely
so
the
idea
with
boardroom
is
that
you
can
track
all
of
your
proposals
via
snapshot
or
whatever
kind
of
governance
framework
that
you
would
like
to
use.
And
then
you
can
even
track
the
multisig
if
you
want
to
allocate
funds
for
a
treasury
of
any
kind,
and
you
can
have
ceramic
and
the
multi-safe
protocol
to
to
manage
those
funds,
and
so
it's
all
in
one
place
and
you
can
kind
of
just
walk
through
boardroom
and
if
you
look
at
any
projects-
and
we
can
include
our
discourse
forum.
C
A
B
A
Yes,
I
added
the
links
to
there,
so
everyone
can
take
a
look
at
a
look
at
it.
I
don't
know
if
you
can
accept
the
the
edits
there
you
go
so
if
you
click
on
it
yeah,
so
I
basically
took
the
feedback
that
was
provided.
A
I
changed
most
of
the
questions
to
a
phrase
rather
than
a
question
and
also
added
the
steps,
as
you
mentioned,
leave
it
at
the
beginning,
so
people
can
have
quite
a
clear
understanding
of
which
are
the
steps
I
added
the
first
step.
They
took
a
look
at
the
manual
of
group
practices,
it's
a
suggestion.
It
could
be
changed
and
then
advice
process
and
then
the
type
of
proposal
that
you
are
voting
on.
A
Basically
the
rest,
I
change
the
name
and
I'll
change
the
tone
a
little
bit
of
share
with
us
to
be
a
little
more.
You
know
welcoming,
rather
than
just
give
me
your
title,
give
me
your
you
know
it's
a
little
bit
too
like
harsh
and
then
down
below.
I
kept
two
questions.
A
One
is:
how
will
you
use
the
funds
received
because
I
didn't
know
how
to
phrase
that
one
into
another
way,
that
is
not
a
question
and
the
other
one,
which
is:
how
can
the
proposal
guarantee
results?
This
is
the
two
questions
I
left
asked
questions
and
the
rest.
I
also
changed.
What
had
mentioned
needed
is
a
strong
word,
so
yeah
I
incorporate
the
feedback
was
provided
during
the
last
call
and
on
the
notes,
are
you
right?
A
I
didn't
check
the
notes
just
in
case
people
want
to
contrast
the
notes
with
what
was
changed
and
I
added
durga's
feedback
at
the
end.
If
anyone
else
wants
what
any
other
feedback
can
provide
it
there,
I
didn't
understand
very
well
this
process
of
him,
so
I
didn't
touch
much
of
it
but
yeah.
This
is
the
template.
I
think
it's
quite
clear
I
probably
will
need
or
someone
else
will
need
to
rephrase
the
beginning
part
if
they
think
it's
not
appropriate,
but
yeah.
A
I
think
it's
very
clear
could
be
improved,
of
course.
So
that's
that's
a
change.
B
No
that's
great,
I
think
next
steps
would
be
then
up
updating
the
the
form.
A
Yeah
and
seeing
how
we
can
add
this
to
a
snapshot
and
so
on,
and
if
someone
wants
to
do
a
grammar
checking
just
in
case,
I
missed
out
some
grammar
things
as
I
used
to
so
that
will
be
also
good.
Looking.
A
And
then
the
other
update,
I
have
loganka
the
other
that
I
have
it's
in
the
terms
and
condition
that
goes
to
the
dec
when
someone
joins
the
server
is
the
other
document
in.
B
A
Basically
I
in
this
one
I
leave
it
mostly
intact.
There
are
a
few
things.
I
changed
a
little
bit
of
the
tone.
Also
the
fact
that
in
the
first
one
there
is
a
description
on
your
left
on
on
that
menu.
So
I,
when
the
one
that
says
one
is
the
proposed
changed.
No,
that
one's
not
for
this.
This
up.
A
Just
this
part,
and
then
I
toned
down
a
little
bit
because
it
sounded
a
little
bit
harsh
and
then
I
added
the
covenant
link
as
the
last
option,
because
there
was
a
repetition
on
the
rules
and
then
the
number
fifth
I
added
something
that
was
provided
by
aloe
issues,
also
and
lb,
which
is
inclusivity
and
respect
towards
everyone's
identity,
because
sometimes
we
overlook
that
a
little
bit.
A
So
I
think
that
it's
not
only
about
insulting
or
deregulatory
or
trolling,
but
also
to
respect
people's
decision
to
names
and
identity,
and
then
the
seventh,
which
is
by
accepting
the
rules
of
these
participants,
agrees
to
stick
with
covenant.
We
encourage
you
to
take
a
look
at
it
and
make
yourself
familiar
with
other
communities
agreements
not
mentioned
in
these
rules,
because
this
one
was
not.
This
was
not
included
on
the
first
draft
of
these
terms
and
agreement.
A
Yeah,
that's
pretty
much.
I
think
the
rest
is
quite
clear
and
it
works.
That's
that's
for
another
section
of
the
journey,
so
yeah,
that's
my
two
updates
on
this
document.
B
B
So
so
the
idea
is
that
the
advice
process
has
this
three
steps,
depending
on
what
type
of
decision
you
want
to
make,
so
it
can
be
a
small
impact
decision
and
then
you
just
ask
advice
peer
to
peer
still
following
this
need
of
finding
experts
and
people
who
will
be
affected
by
this
decision
and
then,
if
it's
a
medium
impact
decision,
it
should
go
to
the
working
group
for
advice,
so
it
can
be
either
in
a
call
or
in
the
chat
or
yeah
more
directed
to
this
focused
group
and
large
impact
when
it's
something
when
something
will
likely
affect
the
whole
community,
then
it's
posted
on
the
forum
for
advice,
process
and
and
it's
a
place
that
it's
visible
for
the
whole
community.
B
So
the
idea
is
that
most
of
the
small
and
medium
decisions
don't
need
to
be
voted
on.
They
will
likely
be
decided
in
this
first
step.
They
won't
need
another
process
after
and
for
large
impact
decisions
that
this
would
be
the
first
step
for
for
either
a
funding
proposal.
So
it
needs
to
be
posted
in
the
forum
and
then
he
goes.
B
The
link
of
the
forum
goes
to
conviction
voting
and
if
it's
a
technical
proposal,
applications
that
need
to
be
installed
or
bugs
that
need
to
be
fixed
or
things
that
need
to
be
modified
within
the
doubt,
then
he
goes
to
tao
voting
and
he
also
passes
through
this
first
step.
B
So
the
link
of
the
forum
will
come
to
the
tao
voting
and
if
it's
a
a
large
impact
cultural
decision,
it
would
come
from
the
advice
process
to
snapshot
and
one
of
those
voting
types
would
be
selected
and
then,
for
here
we'll
have
a
little
infographic
too,
to
explain
what
is
each
type
of
those
voting's
most
recommended
for,
and
then
we
were
investigating.
B
Thinking
like
thinking
of
okay
community
signal
could
be
very
important
for
tao
voting
kind
of,
like
we
did
the
75
percent,
because
when
it
comes
to
tao
voting,
it's
a
lot
of
people
that
need
to
vote.
There
is
like
a
higher
fee
involved
to
propose
some
propose
something,
so
this
step
from
here
to
here
can
be
like
can
happen
sometimes,
but
it's
not
mandatory.
D
B
Votes,
yeah,
you're
right.
We
don't
have
that
information.
Yet
I
just
that's
a
total
assumption
of
mine,
but
I
do
imagine
that
that
will
be
the
case
because
it's
very
dangerous
like
to
have
an
instance
that
has
so
much
power
and
that
it's
very
easy
to
pass
any
proposal
there.
So
yeah.
D
I
would
imagine
it's
also
nuanced,
because
not
everyone's
going
to
understand,
what's
going
on,
they'll,
be
like
guys,
we
need
to
change
the
the
conviction
threshold
from
x
percent
to
other,
and
you
know
90
percent
of
the
people
out.
There
probably
won't
care-
or
maybe
they
won't
understand,
but
there's
going
to
be
that,
like
dialed
in
group,
who's
going
to
know
exactly
why
this
needs
to
happen
and
they're
going
to
be
the
ones
that
are
voting
on
it.
D
B
Yeah,
just
I
think
the
case
would
be
just
for
proposals
that
are
a
little
bit
controversial
and
then,
if
we
don't
want
to
take
the
risk
to
post
on
cow
voting,
it
would
be
even
a
higher
risk.
If
it's
not
like
a
really
big
threshold
to
pass
something,
then
it
would
be
nice
to
have
a
community
signal.
First.
B
D
In
gardens
which
we'll
be
using
for
requesting
funds
and
for
making
these
downloading
changes,
I
think
you
actually
need
a
forum
post
attached
to
any
proposal.
D
B
Other
use
cases
for
each
one
of
this.
Well,
I
think
they're
sort
of
like
we,
the
funding
proposals,
was.
B
K
B
No,
I
just
wanted
to
like
for
the
scope
of
a
guide
that
we
are
presenting.
I
think
we
are
not
exploring
all
of
the
possibilities
of
all
the
tools.
I
think
it's
mostly
like
how
how
it
should
be
used,
how
how
our
process
works,
and
if
we
have
token
log
for
signaling
propose,
I
mean
snapshot
for
signaling.
B
Then
I
think
we
wouldn't
need
to
put
there
on
conviction
voting
same
as
when
we
have
token
log
here
we
could
do
the
runoff
on
token
log,
but
I
think
putting
on
snapshot
would
make
more
sense,
so
it
might
be
confusing
to
add
functionalities
that
we
don't
want
to
see
happening.
D
K
D
Want
to
go
back
to
that
point
that
I
pinged
you
about
grif,
though
so
then
tell
voting
so
that
those
meta
governance
parameters
are
going
to
be
handled
through
gardens
in
the
decision
votes.
I
think
they're
called
on
the
ui,
but
then
what
about
things
that
aren't
related
to
the
common
pool
so
like
changing
the
abc
parameters.
K
Yeah,
those
would
be
the
the
way
it's
structured
is
it's
all
one
aragon,
dow
system
so,
and
the
dow
voting
is
god
mode,
so
it
has
permissions
on
top
of
the
augmented
bonding
curve.
It
has
permissions
on
top
of
conviction
voting.
It
has
permissions
on
top
of
all
of
these
things,
so
we'll
set
it
up.
So
you
need
to
change
any
of
the
parameters
down
voting's
away.
D
So
then,
will
the
interface
be
gardens
or
will
it
be
aragon.
B
K
There
is
no
ui,
I
I
believe
we
there's
no
ui
for
either
of
them
like
like
for
it
being
through
gardens
or
it
being
through
us
right
now.
It's
command
line
for
downloading,
so
we're
gonna
launch
without
a
a
very
good
user
interface,
and
you
could
probably
we
can
use
evm
crispr
to
do
it,
but
it
is
going
to
be
a
technocracy
controlled
option.
Unfortunately,.
D
K
The
the
the
dow
voting
is
there
right,
but
and
the
smart
contracts
are
great
but
there's
no
front
end.
There's
no
ui.
There's
no,
like
point
click,
make
a
proposal.
So
if
we
it'll
all
be
through
one
like
what
how
we
build
that
front
end,
maybe
we'll
build
the
front
end.
However,
we
want
like
because
it
doesn't
exist
and
we
have
to
once
we
get
to
launch.
Then
we
can
start
debating
these
things
with
one
hive
like
do
you
want
us
to
do
it?
Should
we
do
you
want
to
do
it?
K
Maybe
it's
a
combined
proposal
and
then
there'll
be
a
design
process
and
all
that
but
or
maybe
one
hive
already
has
a
design
for
it
and
they're
going
to
do
it
and
we
I
just
don't.
We
don't
know
because
they
basically
said
not
on
the
roadmap
anytime
soon.
K
Yeah,
the
the
current
the
current
vehicle
is:
ask
the
technocracy
if
you
want
to
make
a
change
and
they'll
do
they'll
make
it
like.
So
it'd
probably
be
like
making
a
snapshot,
vote
or
something
in
the
meantime
and
then
like
and
then,
but
before
you
make
the
snapshot
vote,
you
better
find
someone
who
can
actually
do
it,
which
would
be
someone
from
one
hive
or
sem
or
like,
or
you
find
me,
and
then
I
go
talk
to
them,
because
I
can't
do
it.
B
Okay,
so
maybe
just
for
the
infographic,
I
can
put
something
like
the
commons
forum
team.
B
K
B
B
I
think
I
said
this
and
some
call
I
don't
remember,
which
one
but
tim
shared
the
document
from
claros
that
had
a
really
good
point
on
how
the
decision
making
process
is
the
most
important
information
for
a
covenant
and
having
that
outlined.
B
It's
very
useful
for
when
people
were
contesting
decisions
to
see
like
what
is
the
process
that
this
took,
how
many
people
supported
along
the
way.
So,
as
we
are
finishing,
the
real
structure
of
the
decision
making
process
now
that,
if
does
everybody
agree
that
what
I
just
showed
feels
like
a
good
a
good
decision
making
process.
B
Cool,
so
that
will
go
to
the
covenant.
It's
updating
a
little
bit
the
old
decision-making
process
that
is
in
the
covenant
now
and
since
we
were
still
working
on
it,
that
was
kind
of
blocked,
but
then
it
will
move
forward
now
that
we
have
that
sorted
and
and
then
another
topic
that
is
in
softgov
was
the
numbers
for
the
reward
system.
So
how
we're
discussing
this
in
the
reward
system
call?
B
But
I
think
it's
worth
bringing
it
here
too,
since
we
have
time
how
much
we're
gonna
request
for
the
initial
buy-in
and
mitch-
and
I
were
having
a
chat
about.
D
Yeah
because
I'm
kind
of
working
in
tandem
with
the
the
buy-in
proposal,
so
a
lot
of
it
depends
on
that
and
so
realistically
we're
looking
at
about
250
000
x
die
to
take
from
the
hatch
funds
and
use
it
to
buy
tec
at
the
deployment
of
the
augmented
running
curve.
D
And
so
ideally
we
could
fund
the
rewards
system
for
six
months.
You
know
let
it
get
started,
let
it
figure
itself
out
adjust
any
kinks
before
it
can
start
independently,
making
funding
requests
from
the
tec
treasury.
D
So
I
throw
out
some
ballpark
numbers
if
we're
looking
at
anywhere
from,
like
seven
five
to
eight
thousand
x
die
per
quant,
which
is
every
two
weeks
that
would
result
in
90
000
x,
die,
which
was
about
30.
I
think
of
what
the
buying
amount
would
be
right,
so
nine
thirty
percent
of
that
250
k,
which
I
think
livy
if
you
calculated
that,
based
on
our
last
average,
came
down
to
about
five
x,
die
per
impact
hour.
B
E
D
D
To
consider
that
we
won't
be
using
impact
hours
as
a
unit
of
measurement
it'll,
be
you
know
how
they're
quantified
and
then
that
final
total
amount
will
be
given
to
them
every
two
weeks,
so
we
won't
be
using
that
unit
of
measurement
as
like
as
impact
hours
of
like
an
hourly
rate.
I
guess
you
could
say
it's
like
we've
quantified
your
contributions
for
this
two-week
period,
and
this
is
the
amount
based
on
source,
cred
and
praise.
B
D
D
Yeah
but
anyway,
even
moving
past
that
conversation,
even
if
we
double
that
you
know,
that's
that's
way
too
much
that
we
can
realistically
give
like
that.
I
showed
you
there.
It
was
like
over
70
percent
of
the
buying
amount.
If
we
double
that
you
know,
and
so
I
don't
think,
given
the
amount
of
hatch
funds
raised,
that
we
can
go
too
crazy
with
this
amount
and
further
to
my
point
that,
since
this
is
still
in
the
pilot
period,
we
probably
shouldn't
be
pushing
out
massive
amounts
of
funds
anyway,
into
the
reward
system.
B
Yeah,
so
this
was
the
combo
we
were
having
earlier,
and
I
think
we
got
to
this
like
a
good,
absolute
temporary
solution
of
understanding
that
this
isn't
a
phase
of
experiment,
the
reward
systems
and
that
working
groups
will
be
requesting
funding
too
in
this
transition
period.
So
it's
okay
for
us
to
look
at
a
six
month
period
with
a
lower
amount
than
we
wish.
B
It
was
the
reality
for
the
reward
systems,
just
as
our
economy
is
getting
stronger
and
we
are
not
like
using
so
much
funds
on
something
that
is
still
in
a
phase
of
like
in
a
test
phase,
basically,
but
that
the
idea
is
to
have
a
more
fair
distribution
later
for
reward
systems,
and
then
I
think
we
will
be
like
well
informed
by
the
research
group
and
that
will
help
a
lot
on
deciding
what
is
the
price
we
should
be
looking
at
and
because
we'll
have
like
information
about
many
other
projects.
B
I
think
that
will
help
and
then
just
the
reference
point
aloisius
shared
was
that
in
source
cred
they
were
giving
one
cred
like
one
crowd,
was
one
die,
so
people
were
receiving
large
amounts
per
month
and
then
they
they
got
into
a
phase
of
financial
scarcity
and
had
to
lower
that
amount.
B
B
Yeah
exactly
so
that
those
are
all
of
the
challenges
that
we're
facing
it's
like:
how
can
we
make
the
systems
be
sustainable?
How
can
we
make
our
economy
in
general
be
sustainable,
we're
still
figuring
that
out
yeah,
but
hopefully
later
we
could
increase
the
fact.
D
Yeah,
I
I
want
to
segue
this
into
the
buy-in
proposal,
but
I
would
the
best
way
I
can
think
of
is
making
the
reward
system
relative
to
the
amount
of
income
that
the
common
pool
is
receiving,
because
then
you're
kind
of
aligning
that
incentives
of
like
the
contributors
are
helping
to
add
value
to
the
tec
or
acquire
more
funding
and
that
results
in
more
funds
being
able
to
be
allocated
to
contributors.
So
it's
like
that
feedback
loop.
D
C
Allocations,
yeah,
and
so
that
would
that
would
require
the
rewards
group
to
actually
monitor
how
much
activity
is
going
on
with
the
abc
and
how
much
funds
are
actually
entering
to
the
common
pool
and
stuff
right.
C
D
D
So
we're
just
wrapping
up
this
buy-in
proposal
and
we're
trying
to
figure
out
who
should
be
on
this.
Well,
let
me
get
it.
Let
me
get
the
acronym
out:
we've
we've
defined
a
token
holding
group
and
basically
yeah
laser
tag.
I'm
trying
to
find
the
full
thing
here:
liquidity
and
strategic
employment
request,
token
allocation
group
or
laser
tag
for
short,
so
they're
gonna
be
the
ones
who
are
holding
the
funds
from
two
different
from
the
buy-in
that
isn't
going
to
the
reward
system
for
strategic
partnerships
and
secondary
market
liquidity.
F
Yeah
for
me,
what
I
wanted
to
say
is
like
it
doesn't
have
to
be.
You
know,
like
random
numbers
we
choose
between
this
group
like
it
feels
very
awkward
like
I
feel
we
should
have
like
a
system
like
I
know
like
griff
is
suggesting
this
to
us.
That's
one
thing
like
or
then
we
could
say
like.
Okay,
these
top
holders
are
not
like
have
something
like
like
half
a
story
like
that's
why
these
people
is
here
not
like.
Oh
it's
just
us,
because
we
decided
this
way.
It
feels
awkward
just
that.
D
Yeah-
and
I
think
it's
really
important
since
it's
a
multi-sig
and
somebody
actually
needs
to
show
up
to
push
the
button.
People
who
aren't
active
in
these
conversations
and
aren't
showing
up
to
meetings.
Can
they
be
counted
on
to
follow
proposals
and
push
the
button
to
execute
transactions
when
we
need
them
to.
F
F
This
thing,
like
I
feel
you
know
like
if
you
are
a
store
like
all
the
stuff,
should
be
ready
to
press
the
bottom
and
for
me
actually,
what
is
more
important
is
like
because
when
this
work,
group
working,
groupies
or
multi-site
or
whatever
they
are
doing
proposals
to
do
whatever
with
this
money,
it's
more
likely
like
people
from
the
community
is
going
to
vote
them
just
because
it's
them
right
and
that
you
know
and
and
yeah
that
makes
like
if
someone
from
outside
is
making
proposals
like
if
it's
going
to
be
very
hard
for
them
to
make
it
passive.
C
So
my
only
response
to
that
zepdy
would
be
that.
I
think
the
threshold
is
something
that
is
very,
very
important
to
consider,
and
so
we
have
what
up
to
14
to
stewards
right
now,
and
so,
if
we
had
all
of
them
on
just
as
a
uniform
policy,
then
the
threshold
would
have
to
be.
You
know
if
we
did
five,
we
we
opened
the
door,
for
you
know
dissenting
opinions
that
aren't
kind
of
you
know.
All
you
need
is
is
several
people
to
go
against
it.
D
Good
yeah
anyway,
the
structure
that
we've
we've
kind
of
done.
This
is
that
any
transaction
or
avenue
we
choose
to
go
through
has
to
be
approved
by
the
community.
So
there's
going
to
be
some
sort
of
soft
consensus
or
on-chain
thing
that
the
community
can
vote
on,
and
the
multi-sig
is
basically
just
pushing
the
button,
so
it
shouldn't
be
like
dissenting
opinions.
It
should
be
a
clear
voice
from
the
community,
and
this
multisig
is
just
you
know,
executing
it.
B
Maybe
a
good
compromise
for
what
zaptim
is
saying
is
that
half
of
the
stewards
would
be
in
the
committee
and
the
other
and
the
other
half
not
so,
considering
that
the
stewards
have
a
good
amount
of
voting
power.
If
that
half
of
of
the
stewards
decides
something
that
the
community
or
other
stewards
don't
agree
with,
there
is
kind
of
like
a
presence
and
enough
voting
power
to
block
that
from
happening.
E
It's
probably
worth
mentioning
that
the
the
board
is
the
executors
of
the
of
the
community
vote,
so
they
wouldn't
block
a
community
vote
if
the
community
voted-
and
it
was
a
really
dumb
thing
to
do.
This
board
would
either
raise
a
celeste
issue
or
just
execute
the
thing,
but
they
wouldn't
really
have
a
chance
to
to
block
it
or
to
say
it's,
not
a
power
position.
It's
more
a
you
know
like
a
civil
servant,
the
the
people
that
are
executing
the
will
of
the
community.
E
So-
and
I
I
I
echo
what
mitch
said
about
there
needing
to
be
people
who
are
the
active
people
like
the
most
active,
so
that
when
there
is
time
to
execute
a
decision
by
the
community,
there
are
people
that
are
easy
to
get
a
hold
of,
and
not
people
that
then
you
sort
of
have
to
wait
for
24
hours
or
48
hours
to
get
a
hold
of
them,
and
then
to
that,
and
then
you
have
to
explain.
You
know
like
these.
E
These
things
should
be
time
could
should
be
a
consideration,
and
then
I
think
the
other
thing
that
I'd
like
to
raise
as
well-
and
this
is,
I
think,
where
zep-
and
I
don't
exactly
see
eye
to
eye-
is
that
my
feeling
is
that
it
would
be
great
if
the
people
that
were
the
multisig
holders
for
this
particular
project
were
people
really
concerned
with
this
particular
project
so
that
they
actually
really
had
expertise.
Experience,
interest,
internal
motivation
on
the
the
subject
that
these
funds
would
be
used
for,
rather
than
just
anyone,
so
I
feel
yeah.
E
Okay,
I'm
glad
I'm
seeing
nodding,
because
I
feel
pretty
strongly
about
that.
I
think
that
the
people
in
the
rewards
board
should
be
expert
with
rewards
and
should
be
very
concerned
with
rewards,
and
I
think
that
the
people
that
are
helping
execute
these
should
be
really
concerned
with
how
these
funds
are
spent
and
should
be
yeah.
She
should
have
some.
E
K
They
have,
but
that's,
but
that's
the
thing
is
that
this
group
isn't
making
the
decisions
they're
executing
the
decisions
that
are
made
by
the
community.
So
it's
not
it's
more
about
they're,
the
ones
who
could
like
if
the
community
all
of
a
sudden
says
hey,
we
should
burn
all
this
money
or,
and
but
it's,
but
it's
not
really
the
community.
It
was
a
fraud
vote
or
something
you
know
like
these
are
the
extreme
cases
where
maybe
they
would
want
to
consider
like
not
pushing
the
button.
K
If,
if
there
was
some
kind
of
weird
like
slide
over
christmas,
there
was
a
small
vote,
barely
got
quorum
and
somebody
bought
a
bunch
of
tokens.
You
know
like
that
kind
of
thing,
but
otherwise
this
group
doesn't
make
decisions
they're
just
there
to
make
sure
that
the
decisions
are
executed
to
follow
the
lead,
because
they're,
probably
the
ones
that
will
also
be
helping
to
propose
the
decisions,
if
they're
the
ones
that
are
like
they
care.
You
know
and
they're
the
ones
like
making
the
deals
and
the
ones
doing
all
these
things.
K
All
they
do
is
push
the
button.
After
a
vote.
F
D
They
can
like
they're
gonna,
probably
be
the
people
who
are
the
most
dialed
in
with
this
stuff
and
we'll
have
probably
the
most
insightful
proposals,
because
they've
been
tasked
with
like
being
laser,
focused
on
this
stuff.
But
anybody
can
come
in
and
make
a
proposal
and
if
it
gains
enough
traction
whether
or
not
the
people
on
the
multisig
disagree
or
agree,
they're
going
to
have
to
execute
the
will
of
the
community.
E
It
absolutely
absolutely
they
they
absolutely
don't
have
to
there's
no
requirement
of
them
to
do
any
proposing.
Also,
I
would,
I
would
say,
there's
like
don't
underestimate
the
persuasiveness
of
a
really
good
proposal
like
if
there's
a
really
strong,
well
thought
through
well
like
strong
proposal
by
the
community.
It
should,
of
course
go
through.
You
know
it's
not.
I
don't
think
that
there's
any
jeopardy
here
to
a
good
proposal
going
through,
because
the
the
multi-stakeholders
are
people
that
care
about
this
project,
specifically.
B
Yeah,
I
agree
with
that
and
just
one
last
question
I
guess
is
that
celeste
wouldn't
be
involved
in
any
of
that
right.
You
said
previously
tim,
because
this
wouldn't
this
would
be
a
multi-sig.
E
B
D
B
J
E
C
C
But
they
naturally
have
authority
with
the
discretion
of
pressing
that
button
and
so
like
like
as
much
as
we
want
to
ignore
it
like
that,
that's
just
the
reality
of
it
and
I
don't
know
I.
I
think
that
if
we
accept
the
human
component
and
just
say,
hey,
we've
built
trust
with
this
group
of
people
and
we
trust
them
that
they,
you
know,
I
don't
know.
K
I
I
think,
that's
only
in
extreme
search
situations,
if
it's
actually
a
everyone
in
the
community
wants
to
provide
liquidity
to
agave
and
every,
but
then,
like
everyone
on
the
board
is
like
akavi
such
a
low
market
cap
coin.
This
is
a
good
idea,
dude
they
they
should
still
execute
it.
You
know,
because
it's
not
an
unreasonable
thing.
If
it's
hey
burn
this
money,
that's
unreasonable,
like
that's!
When
we
need
someone,
that's
when
we
need
the
board
to
stand
up.
You
know
so
laser.
A
K
B
That's
what
it
would
be
really
cool
to
have
a
flagging
system
on
snapshot.
I
looked
so
much
for
it
and
I
don't
think
it
exists,
but
something
where
we
could
like.
Maybe
we
draw
the
line
of
like
if
a
proposal
has,
I
don't
know
enough
flaggings
that
is
considered
dangerous.
Then
there
is
a
then
this
committee
is
allowed
to
not
execute
if
it
passes
or
something
like
that.
D
I
see
that
we're
at
the
top
of
the
hour.
This
is
really
great
feedback
and
I'm
gonna
finish
this
proposal
and
it
will
be
on
the
forum
today
and
it
will
be
ready
for
more
advice.
So
I'm
looking
forward
to
more
comments
on
there.