►
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/
A
How
do
I
make
decisions
yeah?
I
think
that,
like
what
you're
saying
about
framing
questions
in
certain
ways
is
certainly
helpful,
like
open-ended
questions
are
more
difficult
to
answer.
If
I
have
really
good
background
knowledge
on
something,
then
it's
definitely
easier,
but,
like
a
specific
ask,
is
really
helpful
for
me
to
give
relevant
feedback
rather
than
just
ramble,
so
I
will
pass
to
ante.
B
Thanks,
yes,
I
think
this
is
actually
a
good
example.
B
When
asked
the
the
question
on
the
agenda,
I
thought
about
something
then,
when
you
explain
it
and
say
and
talked
about
like
the
conversation
with
your
friends,
it
sort
of
got,
I
guess
another
meaning
or
like
it
was
pretty
much
almost
like.
Like
another
question.
What
I
was
thinking
at
first
was
maybe
like.
I
was
going
to
say
that
I
don't
know
my
god,
depending
on
what
the
ques
thing
is,
but
what
you
say
yeah,
I
I
tell
you
that
quality
is
pretty
much.
C
Yeah,
I
think
what
I
was
looking
for.
It's
not
like
maybe
my
example
didn't
help
because
it
made
it
too
specific,
but
I
would
love
to
understand
why
each
person
individually
like
since
we're
all
different
from
each
other.
We
approach
information
in
different
ways.
Some
people
are
more
abstract.
Some
people
are
more
direct
like
what
what
helps
you
to
yeah
to
make
this
when
you
need
to
make
a
decision,
how?
What?
What
do
you
need
in
that?
In
that
moment,
do
you
do
you
need
more
time
less
time?
C
Maybe
this
is
too
much
of
a
broad
question.
You
know,
and
it
might
be
like
not
the
best
for
people
who
prefer
to
be
more,
have
more
directed
information.
So
can
I
do
that.
B
Well,
well,
I
have
to
make
a
decision
information
like
if
I
don't
have
enough
information
about
what
does
that
decision
mean
or
like
the
the
impact
of
that
decision,
I
would
rather
done
don't
take
it.
D
E
Yeah,
I
think
this
is
a
really
good
question.
I
think
information
flow
is
definitely
a
big
part
of
it
and
in
its
relation
to
my
confidence,
I
think
confidence
is
really
like
what
me
personally,
if
I'm
not
confident
about
the
outcome
of
the
decision,
is
what
I
intend
I
don't
execute
on
it.
I
just
won't.
E
But
if
it's
difficult
or
if
there's
any
kind
of
challenges
associated
with
finding
that
information,
it
becomes
a
huge
blocker,
mainly
because
I
personally
don't
like
to
I
hate,
producing
something
that
I
think
is
incomplete
and
so
or
making
a
decision
that,
I
think,
will
lead
to.
You
know
more
problems,
and
so
I
think
that
making
sure
that
we're
asking
the
right
questions
is
a
big
part
of
that
as
well,
because
I'll
be
you
know,
if
I'm
making
a
decision
on
something.
E
I'm
like
is
this
the
last
decision
I'll
make
in
regards
to
this
issue,
and
if
not,
then
I
have
to
be
able
to
map
out
all
the
decisions
that
need
to
be
made
in
relation
to
it,
and
so
those
are
all
big
barriers
for
me.
So
clarity
of
the
problem
and
clarity
of
the
solution-
and
so
I
think
that
all
relates
to
information
flow
but
yeah
I'll
pass
it
over
to
teresa.
F
Thank
you,
libby
yeah
for
me.
Normally,
when
I
make
decisions,
I
do
them
like
slowly
like
when
I
just
felt
like
joined
ftc,
you
know
like
then
I
was
like
yeah
just
tasting
it
like
checking
it
around
and
being
around
and
then
when
I
do,
you
know
when
I
join
a
defi
protocol
or
whatever,
like
I,
just
put,
there's
some
some
money.
Then
after
the
month
passing
then
I
might
commit
more
depending
on
my
experience
but
yeah.
Normally.
What
I
like
to
do
is
like
have.
E
F
G
Thank
you
septi.
I
feel
that
awareness
about
the
systems
where
we
are
making
these
decisions
are
a
great
first
step,
at
least
for
me,
because
it
is
easier
to
accept
when
people
motivations
are
different
without
necessarily
like
antagonizing
or
or
having
this
like
failures
of
coordination,
while
doing
so
in
in
the
process
of
taking
a
decision.
So.
G
If,
if,
if
we
understand
people's
motivations
behind
behind
these
discussions
or
decision-making
processes,
I
feel
it
is
much
much
better
to
empathize
and
we
can
always
have
the
opportunity
to
understand
something
that
we
are
not
seeing,
because
when
we
have
awareness
of
this
system,
we
also
become
aware
of
the
role
and
and
the
intentions
and
motivations
that
drive
us.
And
then
I
feel
it
is
much
a
much
much
easier
starting
point.
If
we
see
our
own
selves
as
part
of
of.
G
Different
combination
of
different
backgrounds
and
decisions
like
if
we
can
empathize
at
that
level-
I
I
I
think
it's
it's
a
much
better
starting
point
for
taking
a
decision
regardless
of
the
outcome
so
yeah
this.
This
is
just
something
that
was,
in
my
mind
and
I'll
pass
it
to
edu.
D
Thank
you.
How
do
I
make
decisions?
D
Is
there
any
context
or
it's
just
in
general,
just
in
general,
just
in
general,
okay,
I
like
to
think
that
I
take
two
type
of
decisions,
one
based
on
emotions,
which
are
usually
decisions
that
are
in
a
positive
side,
and
then
I
take
decisions
extremely
rational
based
on
the
information
that
I
have.
So
it
also
answers
the
second
part
of
the
questions
to
my
emotional
decisions.
D
It
helps
me
to
to
know
if
it's
like
a
safe
emotional
decision
or
it's
not
and
to
my
knowledge
and
then
in
the
ones
that
are
rational
and
I
feel
like
I
need
to
gather
as
much
data
and
I
need
to
read
as
much
data
as
I
can
in
order
to
make
an
assertive
decision,
but
for
me
it
also.
D
It
also
goes
back
to
the
option
of
do
not
make
a
decision
if
you
do
not
feel
comfortable
with
enough.
For
me,
it's
key
like
I
do
not
I
like
to
take
out
the
pressure
of
you
know
deciding
something
and
just
wait
and
just
wait
until
you
actually
feel
comfortable
enough
to
make
that
decision.
Otherwise,
I
feel
it's.
D
It's
not
you
know
if
you
don't
feel
it
then
do
it.
Basically,
so
back
to
you,
libby.
C
Thanks
I'll
pass,
you
juanka.
H
Yeah,
I
always
like
to
to
imagine
multiple
choices
and
like
if
a
if
b
and
c
and
like
best
cases
scenario
like
normal
cases,
scenario
worst
case
scenario
and
also
how
costly
is
each
option,
and
I
feel
that
I
don't
I
like
to
play
safe.
H
I
feel
there
are
different
personalities
and
some
people
like
to
gamble
or
like
like
risky
things
like
winning,
like,
I
don't
know
the
lottery
or
or
or
something
like
that.
I
don't
know.
I
don't
like
anything
of
that.
I
I
so
yeah
I
I
try
to
not
be
too
much
risky
and
I
feel
that's
that's
a
pattern
in
in
my
choice,
making.
H
And
yeah
I'll
pass
to,
I
don't
know
who
hasn't
gone.
C
I
Are
you
there?
No
can
you
yes,
okay,
so
how
do
I
make
decisions?
Well,
it
depends
if
they're
in
my
personal
life
and
my
professional
life,
if
they're
in
my
personal
life,
I'll
just
go
with
whatever
feels
good
for
me
or
what
I
feel
is
gonna
be
like.
I
don't
know
like
how
it
depends
on
how
it
makes
me
feel,
then,
when
it's
related
to
like
my
professional
life,
it
depends
if
it
only
affects
me
and
if
it
only
affects
me
I'll,
go
by
the
question
how
much
I
can
learn
about
this.
I
If
I
find
that
what
I'm
gonna
learn
is
gonna,
be
like
valuable
for
me,
I'm
just
gonna
go
for
it.
If
I'm
not
going
to
learn
enough,
it's
going
to
be
like
oh,
it's
like
I'm
not
going
to
get
into
it,
and
if
it's
diff
like
for
my
clients
or
someone
else,
I
do
do
a
lot
of
research
like
a
lot
of
research.
I
just
like
gather
a
lot
of
information.
I
ask
other
people
who
are
like
involved.
I
C
And
hey
jeremy
we're
doing
we're
having
this
intro
question
of,
how
do
you
make
decision
decisions?
What
helps
you
the
most
to
make
them?
Do
you
want
to
share.
J
What
helps
me
make
decisions
and
how
do
I
make
them?
So
two
things
come
to
mind
like
networking.
Other
people's
brains,
together
with
my
brain,
is
really
helpful.
To
help
me
make
decisions
and
fast
and
loose
would
be
the
other
point.
So
just
just
lead.
You
can't
see
me,
but
I'm
leaning
in
with
my
big
belly
right,
just
lean
into
that
gut
factor
and
go
where
it
says
anybody
else.
K
K
It
wasn't
until
lately
that
I've
been
looking
into
decision
theory,
because
I
realized
I
didn't
have
like
a
framework
for
for
making
good
like
rational
decisions
and,
like
I'm
very
stimulation
oriented
and
that
clouds
my
judgment.
K
So
I
started
to
make
decisions
by
like
listing
the
possible
alternatives
and
like
identifying
like
the
outcomes
that
each
would
have
and
then
listing
the
payoff
that
that
one
would
have.
I
also
like
looking
into
what
other
people
have
done
before
me.
That
might
be
have
more
experience
than
me.
So
I
like
emulating
what
others
have
done
before
me,
but
yeah,
I'm
actually
working
on
a
forum
called
to
like
provide
a
framework
to
enable
rational
organizational
decision
making
but
yeah.
K
In
terms
of
of
what
I
do
it's,
I
yeah
what
I
mentioned,
and
I
think
I
was
the
last
one
so
I'll
pass
it
back
to
you.
C
Yeah,
oh
there's
so
much
here.
I
love
it.
I
think
there's
a
whole
I'll
look
back
into
those
notes
after
and
see
what
we
can
take
from
here,
but
it's
it's
great
to
learn
more
about
you
guys,
thank
you,
and
so
we
have.
J
C
C
So
in
the
last
or
sprint
retrospective
juan
was
talking
about
the
services
that
gravity
is
providing
and
and
how
it's
connected
to
other
communities.
Other
dows-
and
it
just
rang
this
bell
of
like
oh,
maybe
it's
important
for
us
to
look
at
the
boundaries
of
how
tc
working
groups
or
working
groups
that
are
taking
its
own
shape
into
dows.
C
C
And
I'll
just
read
it
quick
and
then
you
can
share
your
thoughts.
I
also
like
to
hear
from
chewie
that
has
been
doing
a
great
work
with
the
team
and
the
comms
group
that
it's
also
taking
like
a
shape
of
its
own
and
and
hear
from
other
working
groups
if
there
are
similar
challenges
and
how
can
we
approach
this?
So
that's
what
you
wrote,
one
that
we
want
working
groups
offering
services
and
we
also
want
some
tc
exclusive
service.
C
C
H
Revenue
streams
for
the
tc
and
also
yeah,
and
also
services
as
revenue
streams
for
the
working
groups
so
like.
How
can
we
offer
like
services
within
the
working
groups
that
then
can
connect
with
tec
services
as
reward
making
activities
for
the
dc?
Maybe
for
our
pool
or
for
yeah
or
or
I
don't
know
we
we,
we
still
don't
have
that
much
services.
H
But
I
know
that
that's
something
that
that
we
can
provide,
and
I
think
that
we
have
some
really
good
services
around
the
cultural
build
and
around
some
two
links
and
also
some
design
frameworks
like
the
bonding
curve
and
stuff
like
that,
and
I
think
that
we
can
help
other
dows
to
implement
that
bonding
curve,
their
bonding
curve
or
their
cultural
build
through
the
experience
that
we
have
here.
But
it's
also
something
that
okay,
it's
the
common
stack
framework.
H
E
H
Me
it's
it's
very
important
and
interesting
to
have
this
this
conversation
with,
because
it's
a
lot
of
doubt
and
also
yeah.
H
I
think
that
for
my
ideal
and
my
propositive
and
my
proposition,
my
proposal
would
be
that
each
dow,
like
a
working
group,
can
offer
yeah
specialized
services
and
then
connect
to
to
to
the
other
services
that
offered
the
tc
or
or
the
other
working
groups
like,
for
example,
maybe
there's
a
community
that
can
have
a
conflict
and
then
they
are
saying
that
their
conflict
is
related
to
a
lack
of
visibility
or
participation
in
social
or
in
communications.
H
So
maybe
we
can
say
like
okay,
then
we
can
connect
you
to
the
com,
comms
teams,
and
that
way
we
can
like
yeah
like
redirect
from
one
project
to
another.
So
it's
just
it's
just
my
idea.
E
So,
if
you
don't
mind,
I
would
like
to
comment
on
this
real
quickly,
so
I
I've
put
a
lot
of
thought
into
this
idea
of
dial
services
or
service
dows.
If
you
will
and
there's,
I
think
it's
amazing
that
you
know
this
can
be
a
very
important
avenue
for
revenue
revenue
generation.
E
For
the,
however,
there
is
a
huge
vulnerability
that
I
have
concerns
about
with
service
dials,
and
that
involves
like
how
do
we
keep
the
service
dials
aligned
with
the
mission
of
the
tec,
for
example,
if
you
were
to
take
comsdal
and
there's
start
to
produce
communication
services
for
token
engineering
projects
that
further
the
mission
of
the
tec
and
all
of
a
sudden
you,
you
know
they're
doing
a
really
good
job
they're
making
money.
But
then
d5
protocol
comes
over
and
says:
hey.
E
We
want
you
to
do
services
for
us
and
all
of
a
sudden,
you
know
you're,
making
a
lot
more
money,
providing
d5
services
for
that
and
chewy,
and
the
people
he's
able
to
expand
his
squad
and
all
of
a
sudden
you're
getting
a
bunch
of
d5
people
in
there
now
the
priorities
have
changed.
E
The
culture
has
changed
and
your
token
engineering
is
kind
of
on
the
back
end
of
things,
and
so
you
have
this
risk
of
like
it's
kind
of
similar
to
like
the
susie
schwab,
vampire
attack
where
you
can
come
in
and
basically
use
the
startup
capital
that
coms
team
and
the
human
capital
that
they've
created
around
this
service
and
apply
it
for
a
different
mission,
and
so
there's
nothing
there
to
keep
the
te
service
styles
in
alignment
with
the
mission
of
the
tec
and
that's
a
huge
concern
for
me
and
that's
just
kind
of
a
macro
perspective
of
something
that
I
get
worried
about.
E
So
for
me
it's
about
value
value
alignment.
How
do
we
keep
these
te
services
aligned
with
the
mission
of
the
the
organization
of
the
commons?
And
so
I
just
wanted
to
comment
on
that
before
we
get
into
it.
C
G
Yes,
libby.
I've
also
been
putting
a
lot
of
thought
into
this.
I
don't
have
any
specific
conclusions,
but
I've
been
trying
to
just
apply
some
of
the
observations
that
we've
had
at
comms
like
right.
Now,
I'm
very
excited
around
the
t
academy
team
work
because
they
are
bringing
a
lot
of
attention
to
the
t
fundamentals
course.
G
So
I
feel,
let's
say
that's
on
one
side
and
then
on
the
other
side,
we
have
all
of
these
people
coming
into
the
tec,
but
just
like
playing
requesting
token
engineering
services.
There's
this
idea
of
the
tec
being
like
a
raid
guild
for
tokenomics.
G
It's
a
romantic
idea,
it's
it's!
I
like
it,
but
but
we're
not
there
yet
right.
So
I
feel
that
it's
it's
a
very
interesting
like
point
of
balance,
where
we
see
the
t
academy
team
working
on
one
side
of
some
on
something
that
can
have
a
potential
effect
on
this
other
issue
that
we're
having
so
I'm
starting
to
stay
in
in
in
and
ask
myself
like.
G
How
can
we
approach
most
of
these
issues
through
communications
like
how
can
we
make
like
these
beds
or
or
or
or
have
these
like
seats
that
are
gonna,
be
solving
problems
that
we
don't
know
that
they're
here
yet
right?
So
I've
been
contemplating
this
from
from
from
from
this
perspective,
also,
while
grief
was
in
mexico
city,
I
talked
to
him
a
lot
just
reflecting
on
on
on
on
the
teams
on
the
on
the
wider
purpose
that
they
have.
G
This
is
why
a
lot
of
changes
around
the
the
the
animation
and
video
production
team
started
happening,
because
we
we
we
said
like
hey
like
I
mean
this-
can
of
course
help
advance
token
engineering,
but
maybe
not
at
this
point,
because
most
of
the
supporting
most
of
the
supporting
like
educational
material,
that
we
need
like
how
are
we
gonna
be
doing
supporting
material
for
stuff
that
isn't
ready
yet
so,
from
a
perspective
from
from
a
service
down
perspective,
I,
like
I,
I
talked
to-
I
talked
to
the
team
and
we
were
like
hey
like
we
might
do
better
like
somewhere
else
right
like
we
need
the
reward
system,
quantification
process
tutorial,
but
other
than
that
I
mean.
G
Of
course,
we
could
put
together
a
bunch
of
stuff
for
t
academy
courses
for
the
dashboard
for
so
many
stuff
that
that
we
have
developed,
but
nothing
is
written
in
stone
yet
so
I
feel
that
could
be
like
an
interesting
case
to
to
just
to
discuss,
because
what
happens
if
this
team
finds
better
sources
of
revenue
in
other
doubts,
right,
like
I
mean
the
tc,
has
been
putting
a
lot
of
effort
and
stewarding
capabilities
into
putting
these
teams
together
and
in
in
how
can
we
like
it?
G
It
comes
back
to
the
same
example
that
nate
was
mentioning
like
d5
protocols
that
have
resources
so
yeah
it's
I
I
I
wanted
to
just
like
openly
said
what
I've
been
thinking
about
and
what
I've
been
learning
during
these
past
weeks.
G
F
I
also
want
to
share
for
me
this
you
know:
what's
important
is
like
the
money
those
services
take
from
the
tc.
This
money
gets
back
to
the
tc.
Somehow,
like
you
know,
if
you
are
taking
money
from
gravity
for
the
tc
funding,
it's
because
you're
I
mean
it
can
be
anything
like
you
know
you
can
consider
gravity
at
the
public
good.
F
So
you
know
that
can
be
one
source
of
value
you're
in
to
the
tc,
but
maybe
with
companies
more
clearly,
what
nick
was
saying
like
you
know:
it
comes
as
money
from
the
tc,
then
as
long
as
the
with
the
money
they
ask,
they
are
doing
what
they
say
they
are
going
to
do
for
the
tc.
In
my
opinion,
that's
that's
enough
and
if
in
the
future
like
at
fa,
tells
them
to
do
some
work
and
they
pay
more
like.
F
C
F
No,
not
money
as
money
but,
for
example,
interference.
If
I'm
thinking,
okay,
I
ask
this
money,
I'm
going
to
build
an
update
on
all
these
youtube
videos,
so
you
know
be
a
comfortable
with
what
you're
saying
you're
going
to
do
on
the
whole
this,
who
is
the
tc
being
benefiting
from
this
proposal
and
as
long
as
you
are
com,
you
know
you
are
aligned
with
what
you
were
saying
there
for
me,
it's
enough
and
then
whatever
you
do,
after
with
other
sources
with
other
people,
I
think
it's
up
to
the
freedom
of
everyone.
A
G
So
I'm
really
really
sorry
jeremy.
I
just
wanted
to
throw
in
something
in
there
that
I
also
didn't
want
to
left
behind.
I
I
feel
that
also
like
the
the
way
you're
thinking
about
it.
Septi
also
can
answer
to
different
kinds
of
like
models,
because,
for
example,
the
example
that
I
said
with
the
team
fundamentals
course
and
how
the
t
academy
team
is
putting
a
lot
of
effort
behind
it.
G
I
feel
is
going
to
directly
or
maybe
indirectly
benefit
the
tc,
because
that
course
is
going
to
bring
in
a
lot
of
token
engineering
talent
in
the
next
few
months.
So
if
we
have
more
team,
if,
if
we
have
more
members
in
the
tec,
I
feel
that's
a
very
like
direct
form
of
of
adding
value.
G
If
we,
if
we
have
more
token
engineering
capabilities
that
adds
value
but
like
what
up
what
I
really
had
a
lot
of
trouble
to
wrap
my
head
around
and-
and
it's
like
like
for
the
animation
team
it's
like,
but
why?
How
are
we
doing
this
like?
Are
we
paying
these
animators
full
time
and
then
offering
services?
But
those
services
are
going
to
be
benefiting
the
common
pool
directly,
so
I
was
trying
to
like
to
find
a
way,
but
but
then
I
said
like
no,
I
mean
it
like.
G
It
made
me
uncomfortable
how
similar
it
is
to
traditional
systems
into
traditional,
like
ad
agencies.
It's
like
yeah,
I
own
your
hours.
I
own
your
your
your
amount
of
work
and
I
also
own
all
of
the
revenue.
So
that's
that's
also
something
that
that
I
kind
of
had
conflict
on
and
and
and
yeah
like.
I,
I
just
wanted
to
mention
it
because
you
you,
you
said
this
part
about
like
people
having
this
optional.
G
This
option
to
you
know
whatever
funds
they
get
back,
donate
it
voluntarily
to
the
common
pool
or
keep
them
so
yeah.
I
feel
that
it's
just
like,
like
shaky
grounds
for
me,
because
I
feel
that
we
start
meditating
more
around,
like
already
broken
systems,
instead
of
coming
up
with
a
better
idea.
E
I
think
if
you
force
people
to
pay
your
dow
with
tec
tokens,
I
think
that
can
be
a
solution
for
that
problem.
So
anybody
who
wants
to
have
your
services
must
purchase
tec
from
the
bonding
curve
and
pay
you
through.
That.
J
Brilliant,
I
think
that's
that's
a
great
solution
so
to
maybe
weave
things
a
couple
things
together.
J
So
there
is
a
seems
to
be
some
awareness
that
there
is
a
a
wide
sort
of
opportunity,
space
in
terms
of
the
cultural
fit
and
the
work
that
might
approach
these
service
dows
and
whether
or
not
that
work
is
highly
represents
and
reflects
the
values
in
the
tec.
It's
sort
of
a
a
field
of
tension
to
be
sort
of
explored,
and
I
really
like
this
idea
about
having
them
pay
via
tec
tokens.
J
The
first
time
right
we're
not
going
to
have
the
most
ideal
form,
but
as
long
as
we
continue
to
explore
it
with
some
degree
of
sensitivity
about
what
the
the
possible
pitfalls
are-
and
you
know,
keep
our
eyes
wide
open
and
our
head
on
the
swivel
about
what
the
pitfalls
we
discover
as
we're
doing
it.
You
know
we'll
just
learn
our
way
through
it
more
or
less
anybody
else.
D
Yeah
yeah,
I
think
there
is
yeah.
I
think
there
is
no
denial
that
there
is
value
on
any
service
that
we
can
provide.
As
an
opposite,
I
mean
we
label
ourselves
an
open
source
space
and
so
on.
So
for
me
there
is
no
denial
on
this.
My
main
concern
is
sustainability
of
these
services
and-
and
I
I
don't
mean
this-
to
offend
anyone,
but
I
see
I,
I
think,
and
my
lack
of
knowledge
this
also.
D
I
have
to
know
that,
on
my
lack
of
knowledge,
I
feel
like
sometimes
we
lack
proper
planning
or
like
a
horizon
or
like
a
or
like
you
know,
what
is
it?
What
is
what
is
the
deliverables?
What
will
be
the
time
frame
frame?
This
will
be
happening
because
otherwise
I
feel
like.
In
the
meantime,
we
have
been
speaking
about
pain
for
for
x
or
y
in
the
future,
but
I
don't
see
any
kind
of
and
again
this
is
my
lack
of
my
lack
of
knowledge,
but
I
don't
see
any
indicators
any
like
hey.
D
I
will
probably
I
will
try
to
aim
to
two
thous
in
in
two
months.
You
know,
or
I
will
aim
to
to
provide
this
service
to
four
or
five
one.
I
don't
know
so.
I
I
see
I
see
there
is
no
strategy
for
these
services.
I
don't
see
the
alignment
between
these
services.
D
I
don't
see
how
we
can
you
know
if,
for
example-
and
this
is
again
my
lack
of
knowledge-
so
please
correct
me:
if
I'm
wrong,
like,
for
example,
if
gravity
is
going
to
go
to
xdao,
is
there
already
a
plan
in
places
to
also
suggest
hey?
We
also
have
a
console,
so
you
know
like
have
this
kind
of
360
degrees
approach
to
the
services
with
dc,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day
it
all
comes
from
the
same
space.
It
all
comes
from
the
same
pool.
D
Therefore
I
will
imply
that
there
should
be
a
strategy
of
how
we
tackle
this
and
along
the
strategy,
a
time
frame
where
we
don't
keep
draining
the
pool
without
any
sustainability.
D
Just
on
the
promise
that
there
will
be
a
future
return
of
that,
because
I
feel
it's
it's
nice
to
know
that
there
will
be
a
feature
return,
but
also
we
need
certain
benchmarks
in
order
to
be
accountable.
So
that's
it
back
to
you
lee.
H
Other
thing
that
I
was
thinking
was
like
a
project
that
become
a
dao
and
maybe
have
a
gardens
they
may
and
create
their
own
token.
They
can
have
like
a
percentage
of
of
their
token
linked
to
the
tc
and
in
a
liquidity
pool
and
and
that
way,
if
the
projects
goes
well,
then
the
tc
benefits
from
it
too,
and
yeah
can
be
done
with,
with
a
percentage
of
maybe
the
funds
that
the
project
has.
At
that
moment,.
B
B
If
we
consider
working
groups
as
like
having
like
providing
their
own
set
of
services,
then
it's
like.
Oh,
what's
then,
the
service
of
the
tec,
because,
like
everything
that
happens
on
tc
is
throughout
working
groups
and
if
working
groups
have
their
services
t,
the
tc
doesn't
have
a
service.
You
know
so,
and
so
I
think
it's
yeah.
E
Sorry,
I
just
want
to
say
that
I
think
that's
the
beautiful,
beautiful
part
of
this
type
of
model
is
having
service.
That's
like,
I
think,
if
you
ignore
the
idea
that
the
tec
is
an
organization
for
just
a
second
and
just
think
of
it
as
an
economy,
and
you
have
these
service
dials
out
there
with
the
mission
of
advancing
token
engineering,
not
for
the
service
of
some
type
of
central
organization
like
the
tec,
but
for
token
engineering
as
a
cause.
B
I
mean
that's
fair
but
like
maybe
on
the
sense
of
sustainability
or
accountability
like
we
have
to.
I
think,
that's
fair,
that
we
sort
of
you
know
we
don't
have
to
call
tec
or
an
organization.
It
can
be
a
community
as
well,
but
if
there's
not
like
a
full
circle
around,
you
know,
let's
say
the
funds,
for
example
like
if
the
tc
is
a
community,
it's
a
this
is
an
economy
and
any
working
group
can
go
ahead.
Ask
for
money
and
then,
like
the
return,
isn't
necessarily
clear
or,
for
example,
all
working
groups.
B
I
guess
they
benefit
from
the
the
structure
and
from
the
work
that
other
working
groups
put.
I
don't
think
it's
necessarily
fair
that
we
separate
the
services
of
working
groups
from
the
from
the
economy
itself.
B
C
If
working
groups
have,
if
working
groups
have
a
purpose
that
is
aligned
with
the
purpose
of
of
the
commons,
then
then
this
is
beneficial
for
everyone.
But
then
the
purpose
of
this
call
now
is
to
understand
what
is
the
boundary
of
that.
So
when
does
a
working
group
stops
being
aligned
with
the
mission
of
the
tec
because
of
some
services
that
they're
providing
to
have
a
self-sustainability
to
have
sustainability
like
we
want?
C
D
D
Before
if
we
pass
it
to
craig,
I
want
to
comment
on
this
that
you
mentioned
about
regarding
the
boundaries
and
when
a
working
group
I
feel
like
this
is
why
it's
necessarily
to
have
boundaries
in
the
form
of
data
for
us
to
understand.
D
You
know
if,
after
three
months
of
receiving
funds
from
the
dec,
you
can,
you
know-
and
I
see
in
the
data
that
you
present
as
a
audit
or
whatever
you
wanna
call
it.
D
If
that
is
not
I'm
not
gonna
say
even,
but
it's
not
sustainable
like
you,
can
see
it
with
a
proper
audit,
basically
how
your
funds
were
spent
and
if
you
spend
more
time
helping
other
spaces
rather
than
helping
the
dec,
then
that's
where
I
see
that's
a
clear
boundary
of
hey.
D
This
is
not
right,
so,
unless,
of
course,
the
time
spent
has
been
even
or
that
or
the
amount
of
funds
or
the
justification
of
the
time
spent
in
other
providing
these
services,
it's
justified
with
also
data,
but
I
think
there
should
be
that
those
boundaries
for
me
should
be
based
on
on
things
that
we
can
see
and
attest.
Not
only
on
you
know
the
facts
or
promises
that
it
will
bring.
C
I
think
I
think
what
chewie
said
is
very
on
point
of
like
understanding
what
types
of
proposals
can
be
aligned
with
the
mission
of
the
tec
and
then
seeing
what
types
of
things
might
not
be
aligned
right
now
and
and
could
receive
funding
from
other
sources
and
then,
whenever
that
converges
back
to
the
tc
that
can
be
brought
back
in,
but
like
understanding
that,
like
having
that
clarity
and
also
to
something
you
brought
up
before
one
of
the
separation
between
common
stack
services
and
and
what
the
tc
has
developed,
I
think
most
of
the
things
we
created
for
the
cultural
build
would
would
fall
under
the
common
stack
patterns,
so
the
cultural
build,
for
example,
like
providing
some
type
of
assistance
or
support
to
other
projects
related
to
the
cultural
build.
C
I
think
this
is
out
of
scope
of
the
tc,
because
I
don't
see
how
this
would
be
advancing
the
field
of
token
engineering
or
it's
the
same
as
like.
We
used
to
say
this
a
lot
when
trying
to
understand
and
explain
the
mission
of
the
tc
that
we
want
to
create
best
practices
for
token
engineering,
but
not
to
create
token
engineering
models
for
projects
that
want
to
have
a
token.
C
E
I
guess
I
guess
the
question
that
I
want
people
to
think
about
for,
for
this
is
just
the
alignment,
one,
the
value
alignment,
one
because
you
know
I
I
think
it's
a
very
good
idea
that
these
working
group
and
these
style
services
become
sustainable
and
if
that
means
going
around
and
offering
services
to
other
people,
that's
fine.
But
how
do
we
keep
them
aligned
with
advancing
the
field
of
token
engineering?
C
Well,
but
maybe
then
just
other
comms
groups
would
would
emerge.
You
know,
I
don't
think
it's
necessarily
a
problem.
If,
like
the
con,
the
the
team,
the
coms
team,
became
something
bigger
and
it's
I
don't
know
it
was
incubated
in
the
tc
and
had,
and
it
was
so
valuable
for
the
tc
for
a
long
time,
and
then
it
has
a
different
route
that
it
eventually
takes.
C
I
think
we
we've
been
creating
enough
material
for
things
to
emerge
and
if
gravity
becomes
like
too
big
and
starts
to
get
many
other
projects
and
then
tc
needs
are
left
behind.
Maybe
there
could
be
like
other
things
that
emerge
and-
and
I
think
there
is
space
for
this
malleability
for
this,
like
emergence,
if
we
always
commit
to
being
aligned
with
with
the
tc
mission,
because
then
you
will
feel
very
resilient
and
strong
this
base
and
and
things
will
be
able
to
move
more.
I
think.
B
I
think
I've
changed
my
mind.
I
guess
like.
Instead
of
thinking
about
the
relationships
of
of
the
working
groups
with
the
tc,
we
could
think
of
the
relationships
of
the
individuals
with
the
tc.
Like
me,
as
an
individual,
I
have
the
agency
to
come
to
the
tc
and
you
know
help
out
and
I'm
growing
with
the
tc,
but
I
might
not
go
back
like
I
might
go
to
a
project
and
never
go
back
to
the
tc
or
like
I'm,
simultaneously
contributing
to
multiple
dials.
B
But
what
matters
is
the
time
I
spent
with
the
tec
is
the
time
spent
with
aligned
with
the
mission
right,
and
so
I
think
those
same
concepts
could
apply
to
a
working
group.
The
working
group
is
a
set
of
people,
but
we
can
consider
them
almost
like
individuals.
They
have
the
agency
to
come.
They
ask
for
funding
if,
like
the
time
and
resources
they
waste
in
exchange
of
defunding
is
reasonable.
They,
you
know
they
did
the
job
and
they
can
live
in
whatever.
I
think.
H
H
You
know
we
are
working
on
this
of
unbreakable,
vows
and
sam
is
thinking
about
how
to
get
this
value
aligned
from
the
people
that
get
funds
from
a
conviction
voting.
So
maybe
it
can
be
done.
I
don't
know
throughout
through
a
collateral
and
that
that
would
be
interesting
like
the
moment
that
you
are
not
value
aligned,
there
can
be
a
lateral
removed
and.
H
H
Yeah,
the
other
thing
that
I
wanted
to
say
was
yeah
related
to
to
ostrom,
like
the
eighth
principle
is
nested
enterprises.
H
So
that's
like
what
I
am
having
like
in
my
mind,
every
time
that
I'm
talking
I
am
having
like
nested
enterprises,
how
can
the
working
groups
be
its
own
enterprise
but
at
the
same
time
like
coordinate
and
relate
with
bigger
enterprises
with
other
dows,
with
with
other
dows
inside
of
the
tc
with
and
within
the
tc?
So
it's
just
yeah.
That's
what
I
am
always
thinking
that
it's
the
the
scenario.
C
Yeah-
and
this
doesn't
need
to
be
in
like
the
nested
enterprise-
doesn't
need
to
be
fully
nested
with
within
the
tc
boundaries.
It
can
be
part
of
the
same
ecosystem
or
it
can
be
overlapping
in
some
places
and
not
in
others,
and
it
can
be
like
coexisting
with
other
similar
organizations
that
have
a
shared
purpose.
I
think
this
can
work
in
multiple
levels
and
I
feel
like
helping
other
communities
to
achieve
their
purpose.
C
It's
not
necessarily
connected
with
advancing
token
engineering,
because
their
purpose
is
not
advancing
token
engineering,
maybe
if
it
was
a
community
that
was
that
its
purpose
was
to
also
advance
token
engineering
or
that
it
had
to
do
with
outcomes
related
with
token
engineering.
It
could
be
more
in
scope
in
my
opinion,
but
I
feel
like
it's
not
necessarily
because
it's
helping
a
community
that
it
would
be
in
scope
of
advancing
token
engineering,
but
this
is
also
and
and
for
for
having
vows
or
agreements.
C
C
H
Yeah,
I
think
that
it
would
be
something
like
that.
The
funds,
even
though
that
are
passed
for
a
proposal
they
are
held
by
a
contract
that
distributes
them
through
kpis
and
and
or
and
if
the
kpis
are
not
or
if
the
agreement
is
not
fulfilled,
then
the
people
who
sent
the
money
into
the
contract
can
place
a
collateral
and
we
withdraw
some
of
the
money
that
was
given
before
the
next
execution
of
a
proposal.