►
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
A
A
So
I
just
wanna
everyone
to
put
a
percentage
from
okay
chewy.
We
got
it.
A
I
want
everyone
to
put
a
percentage
from
zero
to
a
hundred
on
how?
How
do
you
think
we
are
on
integrating
this
this
principles
so
zero
for
we
are.
We
have
not
integrated
at
all
and
a
hundred
for
we
are
fully
integrated
with
this,
and
I
think
it's
a
good
check
for
us
to
move
forward
with
the
working
group.
We
are
in
this
like
towards
the
the
closing
of
a
cycle
before
the
hatch,
so
yeah
I'll
give
three
minutes,
and
then
we
can
have
a
quick
round
of
sharing.
A
A
A
It's
just
how
sustainable
we
are
in
relation
to
the
resources
that
we
receive
and
what
we
spend,
but
that
for
multiple
types
of
resources.
So
are
we
sustainable
on
how
we
are
yeah
spending
our
or
using
our
finite
or
our
finite
resources?.
D
I
remember
it
as
like
rules
should
fit
local
circumstances,
I'm
looking
it
up
in
other
lists,
I'm
looking
it
up,
I'm
remembering
it
more
like
that.
You
know
the
the
rules
are
customized
to
the
local
context
and
local
and
the
people
participating
yeah.
Maybe
there
is
a
confusion.
A
With
the
article
jeff
wrote
because
I
think
he
he
shared
in
a
more
digestible
way
and
then
the
way
she
talks
about
in
the
book
is
is
like
how
so
like
the
congruence
between
appropriation
and
provision
talks
about
the
rules
we
have
for
expanding
these
resources
and
the
rules
we
have
for
receiving
these
resources
and
committed.
E
D
A
A
I
think
the
one
that
needs
more
work,
according
with
the
numbers
here
is
number
two
and
I
think,
there's
also
a
an
extra
confusion,
because
a
lot
of
these
resources,
we
still
don't
have
them.
So
it's
a
bit
tricky.
C
I
think
it's
very
subject
and
subjective
because
everyone
can
look
at
the
same
principle
in
a
different
way.
For
example,
I
I
punctuated
very
high
recognitions
of
rights
to
organize
because
it's
like
blockchain,
but
then
somebody
wrote
legal
there
and
I
actually
don't
don't
know
if
I
will
contribute
okay
taking
that
into
the
taking
that
I
don't
know
any
anything
of
laws.
So
I
I
don't
know.
C
A
Yeah
that
that
makes
sense
if
no
one
else
has
something
to
add,
I
would
move
on,
but
but
also
feel
free
to
maybe
a
few
more
seconds.
If
anyone
else
has
something
to
say,
hi
christopher.
H
I
think
it
was
a
great
exercise
and
yeah.
I
think
that
the
overall
balance
is
positive
and
I
think
that
yeah
I
I
would
comment
on
graduated
sanctions
and
I
feel
like
yeah.
We
have
like
a
certain
guideline
of
of
what
actions
we
don't
want
and
yeah
and
some
processes
to
address
them,
but
I
still
like
yeah
feel
that
we
haven't
been
able
to
apply
graduate
extensions
like
at
at
yeah
at
at
a
real
level,
so
yeah.
It's
just.
H
I
think
that
one
we
can
keep
working
on
that.
H
Still
like
needed
them
until
the
moment,
but
yeah
we
we
need
to
keep
working
on
that
sorry.
B
Now
I
was
just
going
to
say,
like
I
agree
with
you
like,
like
the
community
at
the
beginning,
like
it's,
it's
still
very
little
community,
even
if
it's
still
growing
a
lot
and
fast,
but
still
very
small
community,
and
you
know
like
these
conflicts
and
for
these
sanctions
like
even
if
we're
drafting
them,
there's
no
scenario
where
they
happen.
So
no
one
was
sanctioned
at
at
this
moment
and
yeah.
B
I
also
like
we
need
to
keep
working
on
it,
but
at
the
same
time,
the
time
when
they
come
up,
we
will,
you
know,
like
I
feel
like
the
best
way
to
learn,
is
by
doing
it.
So
when
some
conflicts
came
then
we
will,
I
mean,
let's
I
mean
we
have
to
prepare
or
the
best
we
can,
but
sometimes
the
until
it
happens.
It's
when
you
start
learning
an
angry
with
one.
A
A
We
had
62
unique
voters.
This
is
amazing.
This
is
incredible
that
62
people
voted
for
this
and
a
sum
of
voting
power
of
163
000,
no
16
million
three.
I
don't
even
know
how
to
read
this
number.
It's
a
big
one,
okay,
so
so
cool.
We
have
the
results
and
next
steps
from
here.
Do
you
want
to
speak
a
little
bit
about
it?
Griff.
I
Yeah
sure,
well,
the
next
steps
are
we
promote
it.
We
and
I
mean
sam-
is
actually
the
best
one
to
talk
about
it.
He's
he's
gonna
deploy
the
dow
with
paulo.
I
think,
tomorrow
morning,
right
soon,
why
are
you
doing
it
tonight.
C
I
Yeah
so
we'll
on
thursday,
we'll
have
a
demo
and
we'll
show
everyone.
Everyone
has
a
bunch
of
tea
dye
and
they're
in
their
x-style
wallet.
So
everyone
has
was
sent
a
million
a
million
dollars.
We
sent
you
all
a
million
dollars,
a
million
died
to
play
with
congrats.
I
think
I
think
it's
and
yeah
you
can
buy
into
the
hatch
and
we
can
have
the
experience
and
we
can
mint
impact
hours
and
we
can
see
how
it
all
plays
out.
A
Yes,
exciting
good
job,
everyone
cool
so
next
step
in
the
agenda
today
is
just
quick
updates
on
source
cred
and
what
are
the
next
steps
we
need
to
have
with
this
yeah
thanks
thanks
sam
for
the
updates,
so
yeah
we
sam
and
I
had
a
call-
and
he
explained
me
what
are
the
choices
we
have
and
how
can
we
move
on
from
here?
So
we
have
a
more
automated
choice
of
okay.
So
first
is
choices
between
what
dows
are
we
gonna
use
to
manage
source
cred?
A
A
That
sam
doesn't
recommend.
So
much
because
is
is
too
much
power
to
the
algorithms
and
the
second
option.
That
is
pollen
that
it's
what
one
hive
uses
and
it
requires
a
little
bit
of
a
manual
work.
A
But
it's
interesting
because
there
is
the
possibility
of
a
subjective
step
also
on
how
we're
looking
into
source
cred,
and
it's
a
little
bit
safer.
A
If
someone
is
trying
to
game
the
system-
and
there
is
that
human
layer
to
check
that
everything
is
happening
correctly,
so
one
thing
I
thought
is
that
the
manual
version
could
give
us
room
to
distribute
praise
as
well
and
that
solves
the
problem.
We
had
on
understanding
how
we
were
gonna
continue
to
distribute
praise,
and
if
we
choose
this,
it
would
be
like
a
a
quite
a
good
solution
for
how
we
move
forward
with
rewards
for
contributions
for
more
subjective
contributions
and
the
ones
that
doesn't
don't
involve
a
proposal.
A
So
I
just
wanted
to
have
a
quick
sense
making
on
this.
If
anyone
has
objections,
especially
matteo
and
santine,
have
been
involved
since
the
very
beginning,
if
there's
any
objections
that
we
use,
something
like
pollen
and
and
if
there
is
any
problems
on
integrating
impact,
our
distribution
to
it.
J
I
don't
see
any
problem.
I
took
a
look
through.
The
colonies
comes
actually
yesterday
following
the
same
recommendation,
and
I
love
that.
I
think
that
it's
going
to
make
a
great
impact
on
how
we
do
things
and
I'm
also
very
excited
about
the
agent
service
that
aragonese
opened,
which
would
allow
us
to
sign
transactions.
J
So
I
think
that
can
make
it
even
more
decentralized
because
the
decision
or
the
problem
problem
that
we
were
seeing
was
using
a
multi
that
the
committee
was
being
responsible
of.
So
I
think
that
adult
in
aragon,
like
this,
would
solve
the
problem
in
the
most
amazing
way.
So
I
I
don't
have
any
any
opposition
from
that.
I
like
it.
I
don't
understand
if
you
have
something
to
offer.
K
I
I
like
I
like.
Actually
the
poland
solution
is
the
dao
solution.
The
only
only
it's
not
an
issue,
but
it's
something
we
have
to
keep
in
mind
is
that
since
it's
a
manual
boarding,
sometimes
it
takes
longer,
it's
not
an
automatic
thing,
so
people
who's
waiting
for
the
distribution
sometimes
get
a
little
anxious,
or
at
least
I
remember
some
people
getting
a
little
anxious
in
one
hive,
because
things
were
not
being
distributed
because
boats
were
needed
to
to
actually
run
the
distribution.
So
it's
the
only
thing
that
we
have
to
keep
in
mind.
K
I
And
there
there's
some
good
cultural
strategy
to
to
overcome
mitigate
these
issues
like
in
the
common
swarm.
We
just
vote
and
call
every
you
know
and
or
like
have
a
gathering
and
be
like.
Oh
yeah,
guess
what
agenda
topic
every
time
we
vote,
so
that
you
know
it
always,
there's
always
people
to
just
vote
when
we
have
the
decision.
Basically
sorted
and
nate
asked
if
it
would
be
commons
upgradeable,
I
would
say
not
really,
because
this
dow
will
not
hold
friends.
I
E
A
Yeah
exactly
would
be
funded
by
conviction,
voting
and
then
and
then
this
proposal
would
be
basically
to
say
yes
to
the
distribution.
A
So
one
proposal
would
have
multiple
addresses
that
are
receiving
rewards
from
source
cred,
and
then
it
would
just
be
about
yeah
approving
this
proposal
to
send
out
the
the
rewards
to
this
address.
C
B
C
J
J
Yesterday-
and
I
really
like
it,
so
I
want
to
make
a
like
a
test
with
disperse,
because,
similarly,
you
can
time
the
the
dispersed
transaction
using
frame
that
will
only
be
enabled
after
the
voting
proposal
happened.
So
that's
like
the
coolest
thing
I
could.
I
could
see
like
you
know
you,
you
said
the
proposal
would
be:
let's
distribute
a
ten
thousand
died
to
these
addresses
and
then
we
go
to
this
person.
J
J
A
Yeah,
that's
perfect
thanks
mateo
and
then
yeah
just
the
two
other
questions
that
we
have
now
is
who
will
have
voting
power
in
this
dow?
A
I
Just
to
make
things
easy
when
you
guys
are
doing
the
dao
like
just.
I
A
Cool
austin
yeah.
We
can
continue
to
chat
about
this
in
the
source,
cred
chat
and
make
a
proposal
and
move
from
here.
That's
great
that
there
is
like
a
rough
consensus
on
using
pollen
and
we'll
have
to
decide
a
cute
name
for
it,
and
then
we
can
move
forward
with
next
steps
and
I'll
pass
to
use
a
sentence.
Just
leave,
maybe
he's
just
refreshing
for
connection.
B
We
were
having
internet
issues-
I
don't
know
if
you
guys
hear
me
well,
but.
A
A
A
Sam,
so
just
just
for
yeah
as
an
intro,
for
I
don't
know
if
everybody
knows
about
celeste,
but
it's.
C
I
I
also
was
saying
that
it
could
be
rewarded
in
some
way,
maybe
in
impact
hours
or
in
other
ways,
because
it's
it's
kind
of
it
can
be
it's
something
that
it's
all
weeks
or
every
two
weeks,
and
it
can
take
some
time.
F
F
C
I
think
that
the
most
important
thing
to
discuss
is
regarding
the
covenant
I
already
was
talking
about
about
it
with
levy
giving
some
examples
on
covenants
by
different
people.
For
example,
we
have
the
covenant
of
agave
the
covenant
of
one
hive
and
giveth,
and
it
could
be
an
extension
of
the
the
mission,
vision
and
values
it
was
already
rated,
but
in
to
extending
it
into
what
is
acceptable
and
what
is
not
acceptable
for
the
people
of
the
com
of
the
community,
and
it
could
be.
C
It
is
something
that
it's
look,
for
example,
doesn't
give
a
lot
of.
F
E
C
C
A
Yeah
before
before,
we
jump
fully
into
the
covenant
I
just
wanted
to
give
like.
We
still
have
to
decide
if,
if
we
are
using
celeste
or
not
as
a
community-
and
I
just
wanted
this
call
to
be
a
little
bit
more
informative
on
like
what
are
the
pros
and
cons
that
could
represent
for
us
to
use
celeste,
especially
when
it
comes
to
like
introducing
a
token
to
the
community
that
is,
and
some
of
the
other
things
we
talked
about
yeah.
How?
How
would
it
be
important
to
frame
this
proposal.
C
You're
right,
I
I
thought
that
we
were
already
in
the
part
of
the
covenant,
but
yes,
this
is
about
that.
It
needs
to
be
done.
It
was
my
homework
for
the
weekend
and
I
I
don't
have
it
yet.
C
The
idea
is
to
to
create
a
forum
post
with
with
this
vote
and
also
explaining
what
what
does
it
imply
if,
if
we
can
discuss
it
now,
I
think
that
it's
also
very
good
the
different
things
that
the
different
implications
that
it
has
the
new
token.
It
only
needs
to
be
used
in
case
that
we
really
use
celeste,
because
the
collateral
that
we
can
most
of
the
time
we
work
with
collateral
that
is
defined
with
dec,
but
when
the
the
dispute
is
rise
to
celeste,
it
needs
honey.
C
I
I
So,
no
matter
what
we're
using
disputable
voting
in
disputable,
the
technocracy,
sorry
just
it
is
the
right,
that's
the
active
development
and
that's
where
the
safest
code
is
to
you.
So,
but
the
who
settled
dispute
is
the
question
in
and
if
we,
if
we
choose
to
settle
this,
a
dispute
would
be
anytime.
Someone
makes
proposal
if
that
proposal
will
still,
I
think,
we'll
still
need
covenant,
whether
we,
whether
we
choose
to
use
the
last
or
not,
because
the
whole
point
of
the
component
is
not
to
work
with
this
external
court.
I
I
I
We
could
use
a
similar
mechanism
that
would
be
like
it
would
have
to
be
basically
a
fork
of
celeste
smart
contract
that
a
multi-stick
just
owns
instead
of
using
a
decentralized
group
of
jurors,
we
could
use
a
group
of
people
like
this
that
are
trusted
in
the
community.
To
you
know,
decide
whether
or
not
proposals
should
be
challenges
accepted.
I
I
C
A
I
think
some
interesting
points
to
add
on
like
why
it
would
be
cool
to
use
the
last
or
why
wouldn't?
I
think
it
would
be
cool
to
use
the
last
first,
because
one
hive
has
been
a
friend
for
a
long
time
of
our
community
and
most
of
the
all
the
technical
build
has
been
happening
in
partnership
with
one
hive.
They
funded
a
lot
of
what
we've
been
using
and
funded
the
work
of
thomas
form
to
happen.
A
So
I
think
it's
interesting
that
they
have
a
very
dedicated
group
of
developers
working
on
celeste
and
working
on
future
developments
of
it.
That
might
not
be
just
the
the
disputable
voting
or
market
we
would
have
to
be
kind
of
on
our
own.
Regarding
yeah
developments
on
the
contract
and
and
then
another
interesting
thing
that
sam
was
telling
me
about
is
those
jurors
would
be
external
to
the
community,
so
they
wouldn't
be
directly
involved
and
they
are
randomly
elected.
A
So
they
wouldn't
be
directly
involved
with
all
of
the
things
that
we
have
going
on
and
they
would
have
basically
the
proposal
and
this
covenant
to
yeah,
to
judge
if
that
proposal
is
aligned
to
that
covenant.
A
So
that
would
put
a
lot
and
proof
how
how
we
describe
our
mission,
vision
and
values,
and
luckily
we
have
a
good
start
for
that.
But
we
will
really
have
to
look
into
like
language
and
how
we
use
language
and
how
arbitrary,
open
or
ambiguous
that
language
is.
So
it
is
an
interesting
process
that
can
work
really
well
and
then
the
cons
of
it
could
be
something
that
astrums
bring
up
as
a
as
a
risk
of
having
people
that
are
external
to
the
organization
making
decisions
about
the
organization
so
yeah.
A
So
this
is
just
something
to
be
mindful
of,
but
we
could
decide
to
work
very
carefully
on
this
covenant
and
then
have
that
as
the
ground
that
we
choose
to
stand
on,
how
we
portray
ourselves
to
the
external
world,
and
that
would
make
us
be
much
more
eloquent
about
our
mission.
What
is
also
a
good
point,
so
there
are
these
things
to
look
into.
I
H
I
want
to
say
that
I
think
that
gravity
can
work
in
tandem
with
celesti
and
that
it
can
be
like
a
previous
step
before
like
going
to
the
boating,
and
I
think
that,
having
that
external
community
like
providing
that
service
could
be
also
good.
Looking
for
the
eight
principle
of
nested
enterprises
that
yeah
we
are
working
together
and
at
the
same
time
that
as
onehive,
can
provide
us
celeste
to
tc.
H
We
are
talking
that
the
tc
can
also
provide
gravity
to
one
height.
So
it's
like
this
coordination
and
down
to
that
relationship
that
we
want
to
build.
I
think
that
it
it
it
it's
in
the
right
path
that
that
we're
talking
about,
and
I
think
it
can
be
be
a
win-win
for
both
communities.
C
Regarding
the
the
australian
principles,
I
don't
see
that
as
having
well
at
the
very
beginning.
I
also
was
concerned
with
having
a
government,
something
that
is
governing
the
community,
the
communities
from
from
a
centralized
point.
C
Don't
misunderstand
me:
if
it,
if
they,
if
celeste
was
able
to
rule
the
different
communities,
it
would
be
like
the
the
rule
of
the
the
ring
of
which
is
one
one
chord
to
rule
them
all
in
which
you
have
people
who
is
able
to
block
any
any
proposal
that
that
passes
to
any
of
the
gardens
or
or
now
in
any
of
the
commons.
But
I
don't
think
that
this
is
the
case.
C
I
think
I
I
see
this
as
a
decentralized
legal
system
in
which
you
don't
allow
the
the
majority
of
token
holders
to
break
the
rules
that
we're
giving
were
given
at
the
beginning
of
the
of
the
dao,
which
I
think
that
it's
pretty
good.
It's
like
a
legal
system
that
is
not,
it
is
maintaining
the
the
agreements
that
the
community
had.
C
This
kind
of
it
should
not
be
something
that
makes
us
it's.
It's,
not
a
law.
On
top
of
us,
it's
the
law
that
we
give
to
ourselves.
H
I
have
one
question,
and
can
we
like
start
in
one
way
and
then
like
if
we
feel
that
maybe
in
some
years
like
we
think
that
it
could
be
good
to
use
or
to
have
like
our
own
tokens?
For
that
can
we
do
that?
I
mean
because
yeah,
I
think
that
we
can
start
as
as
it
is,
and
and
yeah,
and
see
the
the
needs
that
are
presented.
C
Yes,
we
can
upgrade
any
part
of
the
dao
with
the
majority
and
that
we
decide
in
the
second
part
of
the
parameter
boat.
I
mean
there
is
going
to
be
a
common
upgrade
parameter
vote
in
which
we
will
decide
which
is
going
to
be
the
the
quorum
for
the
final
voting,
and
the
only
thing
that
it
could
happen
is
that
if
we
want
to
change.
C
The
dao
and
it
is
going
to
pass,
but
there
is
a
dispute,
and
somebody
says
it
is
not
respecting
the
original
agreement.
Then
the
this
tao
of
immigration
will
be
prevented.
If
that's
the
case,
so
this
is
very.
There
is
a
case
in
which
it
could
happen.
That
is
very
bad
and-
and
I
can
explain
it
is
called
the
51
attack.
Imagine
that
there
is
a
there
is
a
super
required
of
50
like
in
any
simple
majority
thing
in
which
the
vote
is.
C
So
basically,
what
it
makes
is
from
a
perspective
of
people
who
just
want
their
number
go
up
just
about
yes,
because
this
is
the
the
way
in
which
this
is
the
rational
way
to
go.
If
you
only
look
at
the
numbers,
because
if
you
don't,
if
you
don't
know,
the
majority
of
the
people
probably
is
going
to
vote
yes
and
then
you
will
lose
all
the
all
the
money
that
you
have
in
the
dow,
because
you
will
be
in
a
doubt
that
is
empty.
C
So
at
least
for
preserving
your
participation
in
the
new
dao.
You
should
vote
yes.
So
in
order
to
prevent
this
attack,
it
is
where
celeste
goes.
You
can
and
responding
to
the
question.
Yes
in
the
future,
we
can
migrate
to
a
new
dao,
but
in
the
in
terms
that
are
good
for
the
community
and
respecting
the
minorities
of
the.
Although
it's
a
way
not
the
not
the
minorities,
but
the
the
agreements
that
we
had
in
the
in
the
old
days.
C
A
I
think
it
was
good
sam
to
wait
until
we
had
all
of
this
yeah
conversation.
Yeah.
A
Before
the
proposal,
so
it's
gonna
be
easier
now
to
to
shape
it.
A
And
I'm
here,
if
you
want
help
to
do
it,
maybe
you're
super
busy,
and
I
can
try
to
put
something
together
and
we
can
go
back
and
forth
or
if
you
want
to
put
just
a
draft.
I
can
also
help
to
finalize
it.
C
C
C
They
are
not
going
to
vote
according
to
what
they
believe,
but
according
to
what
they
think
that
the
other
will
will
vote.
So
at
the
end,
the
clear
discussion
is
the
better.
So
if
we
have
a
covenant
that
is
similar
to
one
hive,
then
it
is
more
like
okay,
anything
can
pass,
except
if
it's
something
very
bad,
for
I
don't
know
people
or
it
doesn't
make
the
because,
on
the
on
the
comment
of
one
hype,
the
mission
of
one
hive
is
like:
we
want
a
better
future,
more
fair
and
an
open
future.
A
Yeah
so
once
the
let's
try
putting
the
proposal
out
this
week
and
and
then
on
the
next
call,
we
can
have
in
a
participatory
session
to
put
up
what
are
the
most
important
points
we
need
to
have,
and
I
think
the
boundaries
and
our
understanding
of
boundaries
will
come
in
place
to
to
talk
about
that.
So
I
think
it's
also
really
interesting
for
all
everything
we've
been
discussing
during
the
cultural
build.
That's
going
to
be
like
a
good
wrapping
up
of
how
we
see
the
tc
and
yeah.
C
C
A
Yes,
yes,
sounds
amazing,
cool.
Thank
you
so
much
for
all
the
explanation,
and
and
let's
continue
to
work
on
that,
if
anyone
has
questions
along
the
week,
just
ping
us
and
last
thing,
I
wanted
to
show
this.
This
governance
workshop
we're
having
tomorrow,
jess
jeff
lorenzo
and
I
are
giving
this
workshop
at
near
near
protocol
and
madaga
having
it
on
on
governance.
A
It's
in
the
morning,
12
yeah
10
am
to
12
est.