►
From YouTube: W70 Softgov WG: Mutual monitoring and accountability
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/
B
I
like
what
we
were
talking
yesterday
living
about
the
and
then
you
make
the
pollen
destroyers.
Maybe
like
we
could
say
what
do
we
think
you
know
regarding
like,
for
example,
like
okay,
the
question
was
like
you
know
how
to
how
the
project
should
share,
updates
and
make
this
information
transparent.
B
B
Maybe
I
would
love
you
know
three
minutes,
mindful
meditation.
I
also
have
those.
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
Okay,
so
jumping
into
accountability
for
conviction,
voting
proposals
yeah
so
like
we,
I
I
posted
in
the
in
the
stewards,
chat
a
little
poll
here.
Can
you
see
my
telegram
screen.
B
A
A
C
A
A
Ivy
thinks
we
should
make
a
channel
on
discord
where
we
can
paint
project
owners
and
ask
questions
and
almost
everyone
that
voted
thought
we
could.
Incentivize
updates
should
be
shared
in
the
forum,
so
it
sounds
like.
Maybe
we
could
have
something
being
announced
in
the
community
call.
A
Maybe
use
maybe
use
the
space
we
use
for
the
spotlight
to
have
like
it's
either
a
spotlight
or
a
little
sharing
of
the
progress
like
if
a
project
has
delivered
in
that
week,
then
they
could
share
about.
How
was
that
for
them
like?
How
was
the
delivery?
Do
they
have
any
challenges?
Is
there?
A
C
B
Who,
like
advance
in
the
world
like
they
share
their
progress?
So
what?
If,
instead
of
you
know
like
having
every
time
all
the
working
groups
sharing,
maybe
like
sometimes
working
groups,
are
just
shame,
because
they're
feeling
that
being
first
like
to
share,
because
it's
like
the
weekly
thing
and
then
maybe
it's
not
so
much
to
share
like
it
happens
with
a
lot
of
working
groups
like
legal
transparency,
sometimes
in
general.
B
It's,
I
think,
that's
happening
and
maybe
like.
We
could
also
create
space
like
you
know,
treat
projects
as
working
groups
and
then
people
who
want
to
share
like
maybe
they
can.
We
could
have
like
this
culture
of
like
okay
people
sign
up
like
for
sharing
this
week,
and
then
it
would
create
like
people
who
really
wants
to
share,
go,
and
then
you
know
if,
if
we
feel
like
there's
many
people
wanting
to
share
like
we
could
even
also
say
okay
make
like
okay,
we
only
have
one
hour.
C
C
So
I
I
think
you
know
this
to
me.
This
is
a
major
problem
with
the
conviction
voting
that
we
have
implemented
just
because
the
accountability
component.
A
C
You
know
we
have
that
that
proposal
right
now
for
zargum,
and
I
can't
remember
the
name
of
it
in
source
or
something
like
that-
some
open
source
library
of
some
sort
and
for
me,
like
projects
like
that,
it's
just
you
know
outside
of
being
vouched
for
by
trusted
community
members,
there's
little
accountability
towards
like
them,
giving
us
any
updates
and
most
of
the
time
you
know
if
if
they
decide
that
they
want
to
do
their
entire
funding,
all
in
one
go.
That's
I.
C
I
see
that
as
being
very
dangerous
and
so
like,
I
think,
there's
a
you
know,
there's
a
potential
for
people
to
scam
and
there's
a
potential
for
us
to
not
be
able
to
control
whether
or
not
we
can
pull
down
a
proposal
or
not
by
community
vote
or
through
our
covenant
and
in
terms
of
just
like
giving
up
like
we're,
not
worried
about
that
right
now,
but
I
do
see
it
being
a
problem
in
the
future,
especially-
and
I
just
don't
think
we're
talking
enough
about
it.
C
I
don't
know
in
terms
of
accountability,
I
think
there
should
be
a
process
that
proposal
proposals
that
go
into
the
cv
should
not
only
be
posted
on
the
forum,
but
there
should
be
some
kind
of
vetting
process
for
the
people
who
are
proposing
it
and
who
are
receiving
the
funds
but
yeah.
I
I
just
I
see,
there's
a
lot
of
issues
around
accountability
and
I'm
not
sure
exactly
how
to
approach
it,
but
I
think
most
of
it
should
be
done
beforehand
rather
than
post.
D
We
have
been
talking
with
sam
regarding
the
unbreakables
bows
project,
we're
we're
working
on
and
is
that
we
could
make
an
independent
contractor
agreement
for
the
people
who
leads
the
proposals
that
passes
on
conviction,
voting
and
that
somehow,
if
there
is
approved
for
a
violation
of
that
independent
agreement
contract
there
yeah
there
could
be
a
stop
of
the
flow
of
the
funds
or.
D
Yeah
or
or
only
paying,
a
collateral
to
for
determination
of
the
contract
but
yeah.
For
that
the
then
the
the
funds
wouldn't
need
to
go
directly
to
the
multisig,
but
they
will
be
distributed
within
a
flow
to
the
multisig.
According
to
the
configuration
of
the
contract.
A
Yeah,
that's
one
idea:
the
the
accountability
in
daos
is
a
is
a
major
piece
of
tooling
that
is
missing,
and
it's
not
only
in
the
tc
it's
in
every
doubt,
and
it's
for
a
long
time.
There
is
like
awareness
that
this
is
a
that
this
is
a
problem
and
I
think
the
best
solutions
so
far
to
deal
with
it
are
cultural.
A
I
like
how
can
we
promote
some
type
of
yeah
cycle
where
people
feel
like
sharing
the
results
is
part
of
the
process
and
and
that's
why
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
think
of
some
processes
we
can
implement,
and
I
think
ideas
like
that.
One
yeah
that
sounds
great
to
have
some
type
of
like
fluid
funds,
delivery
and
not
like
delivering
funds
all
at
once.
There
are
many
trials
with
escrow
mechanisms
too.
I
know
that
giveth
wanted
to
be
a
piece
in
that
direction.
A
Sometime
like
to
be
integrated,
so
projects
could
have
milestones
instead
of
being
the
whole
project,
but
then
kind
of
we're
understanding
to
how
to
submit
smaller
proposals.
So
this
is
also
part
of
the
solution,
but
that
would
be
cool
to
continue
to
hear
updates
on
that,
and
I'm
sure
sam
is,
is
already
like
thinking
of
how
to
implement
that
in
conviction.
Voting
right
one
or
on
this
voting.
Is
it
the
name
of
the
new
one.
D
Yeah,
I
can
share
my
screen
for
a
moment,
and
this
is
the
independent
contractor
agreement,
so
we're
this
we're
still
working
on
this.
But
the
idea
is
that
we
can
have
like
the
theory
matters
of
the
client
and
of
the
involved
parties,
and
then
we
can
produce
like
yeah
a
document
where
only
with
a
collateral.
D
It
can
be
terminated
or
raised
to
a
dispute,
because
if,
if
one
places
the
collateral
and
the
another
and
the
other
doesn't
place
the
collateral,
then
the
the
contract
can
be
ended
by
only
one
party.
But
if
the
other
party
matches
the
collateral,
then
it
goes
to
an
arbitration
process.
B
Yeah,
like
you
were
saying
like
okay,
this
past,
like
it's,
how
I
see
it
is
like
okay
gravity
makes
the
proposal
and
then
you
have
like,
like
I'm
the
treasurer
of
gravity,
so
you
and
you
are
like
the
coordination
and
then,
let's
say
you're,
paying
me
a
salary
for
doing
this
job.
So
then
we
have
about
between
me
and
you,
but
between
you
and
the
tc
hope
put
the
dc.
B
You
know
like
because
when
it's
between
you
and
me,
it's
is
simple,
because
it's
my
address
and
you're
others.
But
then,
when
is
the
tc
like
iphone
idea?
How
hold
the
tc
will
be
giving
funds
periodically
instead
of
all
together
and
then
someone
managing
it?
I
know
sami
is
working
also
in
osmotic
funding,
but
it's
not
developed
yet.
So
I
have
no
idea.
D
Yeah,
I
I.
I
also
think
that
we're
still
working
on
this,
but
as
I
understand
it,
can
be
also
done
with
a
super
fluid
flow.
So
yeah.
We
are
still
working
on
this.
It's
very
early,
but
that's
our
our
intention
to
be
able
to
have
some
binding
document
for
between
the
dows
and
the
people
that
the
dao's
fund
through
conviction,
voting.
C
So
my
only
problem
with
that
is
that
you
know
two
things
that
it
it
does
is
that
it
it
discourages
people
projects
that
may
further
te,
but
do
not
have
initial
capital
to
provide
for
collateral,
and
the
second
thing
is
that
you
know
you
still
like.
I
think
an
escrow
system
might
work
really
well
and
then
just
you
know,
we
we
guarantee
the
funding
from
conviction,
voting
to
go
to
an
escrow
contract,
and
then
it
just
releases
funds
based
on
milestone,
achievements
that
we
set
out
beforehand,
but
outside
of
that,
like
I
I
just.
C
I
think
we
I
think
just
incrementalism
is
the
best
way
to
go.
I
I
hate
seeing
huge
projects
and
like
even
with
the
the
dow
proposal
inverter
it
kind
of.
I
don't.
I
don't
want
to
be
the
one
to
say
this,
but
it's
like
you
know,
you've
already
built
the
thing
why?
Why
are
we
funding
it?
You
know
like
it's
one
of
those
things
like
I
just
I.
I
want
to
reward
that.
That's
great.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
those
people
are
compensated,
but
it's
also
like
I
don't
know.
A
Welcome
hi.
Well,
thank
you.
Sorry,
I'm
late!
Oh
no
problem,
yeah
we're
just
talking
about
accountability
solutions,
and
I
just
have
one
comment.
I
think
that's
a
dangerous
mentality
like
in
my
opinion
of
I
think
I
think
we
should
definitely
reward
work
that
has
been
done
already.
I
think
that's
like
the
space
is
moving
so
much
in
that
direction
and
and
that's
kind
of
what
kills
public
goods
or
open
source
stuff.
You
know
if,
like
oh,
this
has
already
been
built.
Why
should
we
pay
for
it?
A
It's
like,
but
we're
all
using
it,
and
it's
benefiting
everybody,
so
I
think
yeah
I
don't
know.
I
think
it's
important
to
be
able
to
reward
the
things
that
happened
already
and
that
was
part
of
zargham's
proposal
as
well.
The
one
that
you
mentioned
like
rewarding
work
that
has
been
benefiting
token
engineering
for
a
long
time
already.
C
Yeah,
I
I
just
I'm
afraid
that
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
stuff
that
has
already
been
built
for
for
token
engineering
and
if
we
continue
to
do
that,
it
is
not
a
sustainable
model
for
us
to
be
funding
those
types
of
projects
all
the
time,
because
you
know
if
it's
just
the
dow
proposal
inverter,
then
why
not?
You
know
other
projects
that
have
been
doing
really
great
things
around
the
space
as
well
and,
like
I
don't
mind
them
getting
funded.
C
But
if
I
look
at
the
entire
thing
that
proposal
voters
getting
funding
from
like
10
other
places,
and
it's
like
okay.
Well,
what's
you
know?
C
A
Yeah
feel
free
to,
like
I
don't
know,
amplify
that
thought
too.
I
think
it's
important
to
have
discussions,
but
coming
back
to
something
we
can
do
now
and
and
yeah
I.
I
also
think
that
it's
somehow
harmful
to
ask
for
high
collaterals
from
projects
that
might
not
have
the
funding,
and
I
think
I
think
there
are
cultural
solutions
we
can
implement.
That
would
be
like
satisfying
in
a
in
a
good
level
or
in
a
substantial
level
before
we
have
better
technical
solutions.
C
I
think
a
good
step
would
have
a
dedicated
small
group
of
people
who
are
in
charge
of
kind
of
engaging
with
proposal
winners.
If
you
will
people
who
get
funding
to
have
somebody
from
the
tec
actively
participating
on
their
team
working
with
them
and
saying.
Okay,
here
are
the
updates
that
I've
seen
because
they
people
can
just
give
updates
and
there's.
A
But
if
a
person
passed
the
proposal,
they're
technically
from
the
tc
right,
I
don't
want.
I
don't
want
us
to
keep
like
to
gate
the
community
to
only
the
people
who
are
very
active
and
calls
and
stuff.
I
think
if
someone
submitted
a
proposal
and
they're
working
on
something
that
passed,
they
are
from
the
tc,
but
I
get
what
you
mean
that
maybe
we
need
someone
in
a
more
admin
position
to
look
at
the
proposals
and
see
how
is
the
progress
I
started
to
do
that
today.
A
I
talked
to
sam
who
passed
the
first
proposal
and
I
think
so
there's
something
in
the
forum
that
is
and
the
proposals.
How
will
you
share
progress,
and
I
think
this
is
a
an
important
piece
like
first
we're
giving
the
freedom
to
projects
to
understand
what
is
the
best
way.
They
can
share
progress
and
maybe
we
can
also-
maybe
we
can
add
to
this
template
something
like
it
would
be
great
to
have
it
shared
in
the
in
the
community
call
or
like
I
don't
know.
A
Maybe
we
can
add
something
here,
but
then
based
on
what
they
write
of
how
their
they
want
to
share
progress.
We
can
talk
to
them
so
so
here
he
wrote
then
here
right
when
all
nfts
are
shipped
in
the
same
forum
post
and
it's
been
like
a
month
more
or
less
or
to
almost
two
months,
and
then
I
messaged
him,
and
he
said
that
next
week,
all
of
them
are
probably
gonna,
be
shipped
and
he's
gonna
update.
Here
I
think
just
having
like
some
quick.
I
agree
with
that.
A
B
Like
to
comment
on
on
this,
I
think,
as
you
know,
asking
people
for
updates.
It's
dangerous,
like
you
know,
when
I
was
creating
the
the
transparency
or
you
know
I
was,
I
think,
also
chatting
a
lot
with
sam
and
he
was
always
telling
like
it's
important.
Like
you
know,
transparency
doesn't
become.
You
know
this.
B
You
know
like
like
the
law.
Oh
you,
you
know.
Yes,
no,
you
pass,
you
don't
pass!
You
did
this
wrong.
You
need
to
do
it
better.
It's
better
like
to
promote
like
since
we're
doing
since
the
beginning
for
monitoring-
and
I
really
like,
like
sharing
progress
in
the
forum
and
they
could,
you
know,
keep
sharing
progress
and
then
so
people
can
see
what
the
progress
is,
and
then
you
know
if
sam,
for
example,
this
doesn't
share
updates
on
the
forum
high
chances
like
next
time
he
make
a
proposal.
B
B
So
he's
like
somehow
force
it
like
to
you
know
like
in
the
like
people
is
putting
their
reputation
as
they
when
they're
asking
for
money,
and
I
think
that's
one
you
know
like
we
should
we
should.
I
really
like
the
idea
of
what
you
were
suggesting,
leaving
off
keep
promoting
this.
So
people
is
sharing
progress
and
actually,
like
the
people
who
already
asked
to
ask
for
money,
it's
the
progress
is
being
shared
and
the
working
groups
are
also
sharing
in
the
like.
Some
are
doing
different,
like
some
working
groups
are
using
the
word.
B
Some
working
groups
are
sharing
in
the
forum,
some
others
are
using
some
discord,
chats
that
that's
that's
actually
somehow
happening.
I
I
think
like
what
we
need
to
do
is
just
keep
promoting
it
and
make
it
more.
B
C
We
should
have
accounting
standards
like
like.
There's
no
way
for
me
to
understand,
like
you
know,
even
with
the
the
retroactive
approach
of
like
funding
the
dow
proposal,
inverter
there's
no
way
to
account
for
the
money
that
we're
giving
them
is
actually
going
to.
You
know
to
individuals
for
x
amount
of
dollars
for
x
amount
of
dollars,
there's
no
way
to
value
the
contributions
that
they
give
like.
C
We
do
with
like
praise
or
something
like
it's
just
here's
an
arbitrary
amount
of
money,
and
maybe
you
have
some
loose
form
of
accounting
of
where
that
money
is
going
to,
but
there's
nothing
detailed,
and
I
think
that
that
is
problematic.
I
think
we
should
definitely
have
accounting
standards
where
we
say
if
we're
giving
you
30
000,
I
wanted
to
see
how
exactly
you
plan
on
spending
that
30
000
and
that
should
not
be.
You
know
a
question
it
shouldn't
just
be
like
hey.
I
just
won
50
000,
because
that's
what
I
value
it
at.
E
Yes,
I'm
a
little
bit
confused.
For
example,
when
you
propose
a
proposal
and
then
it's
getting
proves,
do
you
get
paid
immediately
or
after
you
deliver
the
work.
A
E
Oh,
I
understand
I
have
another
question
so
like
what
up
what
I'm
understanding
till
this
point,
there
is
no
like
centralized.
E
A
Well,
I
think
it's
a
collection
of
well,
it's
like
a
collective
effort.
I've
been
yeah.
I've
been
thinking
about
this.
I
think
escrow
is
something
important
for
for
a
long
time
and
I
feel
like
we
don't
have
like
the
best
tools
in
dallas
yet
for
this,
so
I
think
he
has
to
come
from
a
cultural
standpoint.
A
So
that's
why
I
feel
like
it's
important
to
talk
about
it
in
softgov,
but
also
transparency
is
involved,
unlike
how
to
you
know,
make
sure
that
progress
is
being
shared,
very
importantly,
and
also
combinators
to
work
with
the
with
the
people
and
the
the
proposal.
So
I
think
there
are
many
working
groups
involved.
No,
that's.
E
Great
do
think
that
something
like
I
agree
with
nate.
I
do
think
there
needs
to
be
like
a
parameter,
especially,
I
would
think
those
that
will
be
like
very
important
for
the
transparency
we
were
because,
if
you're,
if
it's
a
public,
it's
money
from
the
tech
and
it's
work-
that's
gonna
be
done
for
the
tech
for
tech.
E
B
I
just
wanted
to
say,
like
actually
we're
planning
to
launch
an
audit
on
april,
that
is
monitoring
like
the
first
three
months
of
the
year
and
we
plan
to
do
like
one
every
three
months,
so
we
have
four
in
the
year
and
yeah.
The
idea
is,
like
you
know,
having
all
all
these
projects
and
say
what
what
they
built
and
everything.
But
the
thing
is
what
I'm
struggling
right
now
is
like,
because
at
the
beginning
we
were
making
it
like
very
subjective,
which
I
didn't
like
it
at
all.
B
But
you
know
like
what
I'm
you
know
what
what
is
my
personal,
like
insecurity
right
now
is
like
what,
if
someone
doesn't
share
feedback,
should
I
you
know
making
doubt
I
don't
know
any
feedback
or,
but
then
this
is
also
feeling
wrong
like
I
me
not
knowing
that
you
know
the
feedback
doesn't
mean
like
it's
not
being
done
or
whatever
right,
so
we
should
have
some
standards
and
I
really
really
like
when
they
were
saying
having
some
standards
and
then
the
transparency
would
only
be
saying.
B
Okay,
according
to
this
standards,
this
is
what's
happening
and
then
it's
it
feels
more
just
an
administrative
work,
not
so
much
like
authority.
So
maybe
we
could
yeah.
A
That
is
not
if
they
deliver
something
that
it.
That
was
not
what
they
expected
like.
They
set
their
own
metrics
kind
of
thing,
so
we
don't
have
to
judge,
because
the
problem
with
escrow
or
with
any
type
of
accountability
mechanism
is
like
who
can
say
that
what
was
delivered
was
successful
or
not.
That's
always
the
the
challenging
part.
C
Yeah
and
with
like
numb
focus
in
particular
like
it's,
it's
just
that
they
state
that
the
funds
will
be
used
at
their
discretion
and
like
and
then
from
what
I
get
their
grant-making
body,
doing
the
exact
same
thing
that
we're
doing
for
token
engineering
and
so
we're
we're
sending
funds
to
another
grant
making
body
to
give
out
great
our
money
to
people
without
our
oversight.
You
know
I'm
saying
like
it's
the
same.
C
So
in
the
in
the
num
focus
proposal
on
the
forum,
it
says
you
know
we're
going
to
use
this
at
our
discretion
and,
like
their
purpose,
is
to
to
use
the
funds
that
are
given
by
the
gec
to
for
their
grants
program
for
rewarding
contributions
to
tes
in
the
web3
ecosystem.
C
So
I
I
just
really
don't
understand
that
to
be
honest
with
you
and
so,
and
then
the
fact
that
we're
sending
funds
there's
no
way
to
evaluate
the
metrics
that
they
have,
because
they
don't
have
any
metrics,
because
they're
based
basically
their
their
whole
purpose,
is
just
this
use
that
money
to
send
out
for
grants.
A
That
could
be
a
good
comment
to
to
put
in
here,
like,
I
think,
all
of
this,
all
of
these
thoughts
should
be
shared
in
the
proposal,
so
so
there
is
a
chance
for
the
project
to
like
the
proposal
to
explain
to
clarify
like
this
debate.
We
should
we
could
engage
with
the
proposals.
More
did
you
feel
any.
Was
there
any
reason
why
you
didn't
feel
that
you
could
make
a
comment
there.
C
No,
I
just
you
know
it's
one
of
those
things
where
it.
You
know
it's
got
trent
and
zarghum
and
griff,
and
so
like.
These
are
very,
very
influential
people
who
are
vouching
for
this
type
of
project,
but
it
just
it
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense
to
me
and
so
having
those
types
of
comments
in
there
while
okay
it
just
I
don't
wanna.
A
Yeah,
I
feel
very
sad
that
this
happens
like
I
wish.
I
understand,
of
course,
there's
all
this
social
dynamic,
but
I
wish
we
could
not
feel
that
way.
You
know
like
if,
if
it
was
another
person
proposing
this-
and
you
had
a
question,
you
would
probably
ask
and
maybe
like
what
is
that
we
need
to
do
to
make
this
space
more
welcoming.
I
think
it's
a
lot
of
what
we
were
talking
last
week,
and
this
would
this
type
of
thing
is
what
makes
us
be
a
dao.
F
All
of
these
left
me
like
wondering
about
reputation
like
nate's
comment
and
also
said
this
comment.
It's
like
how
do
we
deal
with
reputation?
F
You
know
like,
for
example,
septi's
comment
was
about
like
okay,
if
sam
put
up
a
proposal
and
then
he
didn't
deliver
the
next
proposal
wouldn't
pass
because
he
you
know
he
just
matched
his
reputation
but
then
like.
How
do
we
learn
or
how
do
we
prevent
reputation
from
getting
in
the
way?
It's
like
the
amount
of
money
in
the
common
pool?
It's
it's.
You
know
we
don't
we
don't
have
an
infinite
source
of
money
so,
like
everyone
with
enough
reputation,
could
put
up
a
proposal
and
then
don't
deliver
and
like
okay
cool.
F
The
next
proposal
will
not
pass,
but
we
won't
have
any
money
in
anyways
and
then
it's
sort
of
like
it's.
F
I'm
I'm
like
thinking
how
to
connect
that
with
nate's
comment
of
like
feeling
intimidated,
basically
because
of
reputation,
I
think,
to
some
extent,
and
that's
probably
more
on
the
culture
side,
which
is
something
like
to
be
worked
on
like
how
do
we?
How
do
we
mitigate
these
kinds
of
reputation
based
dynamics?
F
So
people
feel
more
comfortable,
and
so
we
don't.
We
don't
necessarily
pass
proposals
based
on
reputation
because,
like
it's,
I
don't
know
it's
complicated
because
you
know
reputation
gives
us
the
certainty
that
they
are
probably
going
to
deliver.
F
But
it's
like
you
know,
depending
on
them.
A
Yeah,
I
think
the
way
to
we
can
never.
We
can
never
extinguish
social
capital.
I
mean
it's
just
something
that
you
know
like.
You
will
take
millennia
to
create
more
like
more
distributed
dynamics
in
this
sense,
but
what
we
can
do
is
create
spaces
where
we
feel
like
we
can
engage,
and
I
think
again
is
this
approach
of
like
we
are
all
sharing
the
same
space.
A
How
can
we
feel
more
empowered
to
use
our
voices
and-
and
I
think
the
more
multiple
people
engage,
the
more
this
power
starts
to
get
diluted
and
the
more
people
feel
like
we
have
agency
to
do
something
they're
passionate
about
more.
They
will
shine
on
on
their
thing
and
and
different
levels
of
social
capital
will
raise
and
fall
and
have
more
of
a
you
know
of
a
flow
within
the
whole
community.
A
A
Does
anyone
has
any
other
comments
on
this
topic.
E
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
the
other
day
in
a
group
for
her
doll
they
gave
some
grand
did
nothing
grants.
They
get
some
like
travel
benefits
and
all
of
that
for
people
who
went
to
denver
for
it
to
ath
denver
and
then
they
required
to
give
like
a
feedback
of
like
the
whole
trip
and
everything.
E
And
then
they
sent
their
message
that
the
people
that
didn't
deliver
that
feedback
they
wouldn't
be
like
considered
for
next
trips,
and
I
was
like
well
that's
a
little
bit
harsh
but
like
that's,
that's
like
well,
not
it's,
not
harsh,
because
like
you're
supposed
to
deliver,
but
like
I
don't
know,
if
that's
like
something
that
could
be
incorporated,
I'm
not
sure
if
you
said
that's
the
way
it
works.
For
example
like
when
you
don't
deliver
what
you
propose
for.
Is
there
a
way
for
you
to
like
not
be
able
to
propose
again.
A
E
And
how
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
him
and
how
it's
not
like
it's,
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
the
context
and
how
would
people
like
know
you
didn't
deliver
because,
like
the
the
way
you
like
that
accountability
is
like
delivered
in
different
ways
so
like,
as
you
said,
there's
not
like
a
track
of.
If
you
did
what
you
said,
you're
gonna,
do
god
or
esther.
B
I
mean
that's
what
I
I
wanted
to
see
here
also
for
everything
we
saw
of
like
who
would
be
the
future
like
you
know
like
if
we
have
like
a
structure
you
know
like,
and
then
we
say
like
okay,
we,
like
the
the
project
should
like
I
also
mentioned
it,
was
suggesting
like
having
how
to
be
accountable,
and
then
we
have
this
metrics
and
then
on
transparency.
B
We
could
say
like
okay
in
this
part,
this
is
no
sharing
in
the
forum,
yes
showing
the
progress
and
and
then
we
put
it
there
and
then
it's
up
to
the
community
to
monitor
because
they
you
know,
they
should
comment
on
that
and
then
and
transparency
like
what
is
very
easy
for
us.
Is,
you
know,
work
with
the
numbers
and
say
this
work,
ask
this
amount
of
money
and
then
also
in
dune
like
not
so
much
for
projects,
but
for
working
groups
like
we
have.
B
We
are
monitoring
the
multi
six.
So
if
you
go
to
the
that,
I
could
also
share.
I
think
it's
just
give
me
one.
Second.
B
And
you
can
even
is
it
sharing
that
theory?
You
can
even
come
here
and
then
you
say
transparency
and
then
you
see,
like
you,
know,
transparency.
Okay,
they
receive
this
amount
of
funds,
then
they
distribute
this
amount
of
funds
and
then
on
transparency,
where
all
these
funds
are
on
the
on
the
proposal.
So
everyone
knows
which
who
is
receiving
those
files,
and
then
we
can
also
get
to
the
transaction
link
here.
If
someone
needs
it,
but
it's
yeah.
It's
so
like
the
numbers
is
pretty
simple.
B
Like
the
hard
part
is
like
you
know,
when
people
need
to
comment
and
it
worked
for
yeah
for
all
the
multi-sites
of
the
working
groups,
community,
even
laser
tag
I
mean
they
didn't,
do
much
yet
just
received
some
funds,
but
yeah,
I'm
struggling
actually
with
this
second
part
like
the
numbers
is
also
up,
and
it's
it's
it's
good,
but
then
the
you
know.
B
B
We're
creating
a
new
power
structure
which
doesn't
feel
it's
according
to
our
values,
so
yeah
right
now,
I'm
just
struggling
with
that.
C
I'm
sorry
I
and
so
like,
even
even
with
the
the
past
proposal
like
it,
the
the
the
num
focus
was
able
to
pass
with
just
nine
supporters,
and
three
of
them
are
part
of
the
num
focus,
foundation
or
advisors
to
the
nun
focus
foundation,
and
this
is
this.
Is
this
is
another
thing
where
I
just
I
I
just
don't.
C
I
there
wasn't
even
enough
time
for
anybody
to
react
to
to
this
type
of
thing,
and
maybe
it's
because
of
the
parameters
of
the
conviction.
Voting
are
not
ideal
in
in
this
type
of
scenario,
to
allow
enough
time
for
people
to
really
evaluate,
because,
honestly,
I
I
didn't
know
it
passed,
I
just
realized
it
when
you
said
it
and
now
looking
at
it
and
because
I
just
remember
it
coming
up,
I
don't
know
a
week
ago.
A
C
So
to
me,
yeah,
okay,
I
will
make
a
post
and
leave
it
be,
but
I
I
will
say
that,
even
if
we
do
have
problems
with
accountability,
we
don't
really
have
any
actions
to
take,
because
we
don't
have
any
type
of
tiered
graduating
sanctions
to
implement
on
people
who
don't
follow
through
or
don't
have
to
meet
the
milestones
that
we
we
set
out.
B
I
was
just
going
to
say
like
yeah,
sometimes
it's
hard
to
apply,
I
mean
right
now,
like
tokens
are
vested.
It's
is
more
visible,
but
it's
hard.
You
know
if
you,
if
your
intention
is
to
you
know,
born
talking
to
stuff,
it's
almost
impossible,
because
if
even
you,
when
you
make
the
proposal,
then
people
just
swap
the
tokens
to
another
wallet
or
to
sell
them,
and
then
I
always
also
wanted
to
say,
like
conviction.
B
Voting
is
a
very
great
tool
for
you
know
pretty
small
communities
like
when
they
scale
because
conviction
voting
needs
like
the
reputation
thing
when
it
scales
and
it's
not
missing
it.
It
was
vitally
talking
about
the
conviction,
voting.
It's
it's
good
for
low
communities,
but
it's
not
something
like
you
can
have.
You
know
like
estate
running
with
conviction,
voting
because
there's
so
many
flaws.
A
A
So
I
think
that
would
address
what
you
were
talking
about,
zap
that,
like
how
can
we
keep
people
accountable
on
their
own
terms,
so
if
they,
if
they
have
a
metric,
that
they
can
self-assess
and
that
we
can
all
assess
and
then
when
they
share
about
the
project
they
are
talking
from
this
place
and
then,
when
we're
voting
on
the
project,
we
can
also
analyze
that
metric.
Like
can
I-
and
this
can
be
a
point
for
people
to
make
comments
like?
A
Can
I
actually
see
that
this
was
successful
based
on
this
metric,
that
they
are
proposing
and
then
working
on
graduated
sanctions?
I
think
that's
a
good
idea.
Nate
we're
gonna
have
to
update
the
covenant
soon.
So
we
can
include
something
like
that.
Think
of
it's
good,
that
all
of
these
things
are
coming
up
now,
because
it's
kind
of
new
like
how.
A
What
would
be
some
type
of
social
impact
that
that
could
be
a
sanction
for
people
not
delivering
on
proposals?
I
don't
think
it
can
be
anything
related
to
funds,
because
we
won't
have
access
to
the
funds
like
yeah
we're
we're
giving
a
grant
it's
it's
more
of
a
social
impact.
After
than
anything
else,.
E
That's
something
I
don't
remember
who
said
it,
but
I
think
it's
very
important
and
it's
that
part
of,
like
the
community,
like
going
to
see
the
proposal,
as
you
were
saying,
actually
that
are
going
to
see
the
proposal
and
saying
oh
like
how's,
this
going,
I
like.
E
I
don't,
I
know
that's,
like
kind
of
that
could
be
seen
as
not
adequate,
because
you're
like
enforcing
like
your
own
thoughts
to
like
the
work
someone
else
do
is
doing,
but
I
do
think
it's
valuable
to
like
enforce
it
not
enforce
like
obligation,
but
like
enforce
like
to
like
propose
a
community
like
hey.
You
should
like
be
going
to
the
forum
like
seeing
what
people
are
doing
and
just
like
asking
them.
E
How
is
it
going
and
all
of
that
just
like
us,
as
calls
for
a
norm
not
like
imposing
yourself,
I'm
not
sure
if
I
I
delivered
my
point
correctly.
A
Yeah,
I
think
it
has
to
do
with
what
septimus
was
saying
of
like
you're
in
two
sides
of
this
spectrum,
like
he
thinks
we
shouldn't
be,
that
is
dangerous
to
enforce
in
that
way,
and
you
think
it's
important
to
enforce
in
that
way.
A
I
think
I
I
take
a
middle
ground
of
like,
like
you
said,
like
you
said,
zap,
that,
for
example
with
if
sam
didn't
deliver,
he
would
just
lose
reputation,
but
then
I
think
when
we
come
from
a
caring
space
in
the
community
like
if
I
care
about
sam,
I
don't
want
him
to
lose
his
reputation.
You
know.
So
how
can
I
just
like
give
a
reminder
or
ask?
A
A
B
Yeah,
I
was
just
going
to
say
like
sometimes
it's
you
know
when
because,
for
example,
if
it's
sam
making
the
proposal
of
course
like
for
me,
it's
easy
to
asam,
like
you
did
this,
maybe
it'd
be
nice
to
check
out
with
the
tc.
Because
remember
like
I
mean
you
did
the
job
but
yeah
just
check
out
with
the
community.
B
You
know
it's
it's
easier,
but
then,
when
it's
with
someone
that
you
don't
have,
you
know
like
if
you
know
sarah
might
never
speak
to
sagram,
so
I
wouldn't
feel
comfortable
reaching
him
on
a
dm,
even
even
in
a
lovely
way,
because
it
could
be
felt
like
you
know,
like
I'm
asking
for
updates,
and
why
should
I
ask
for
updates?
You
know
it's
like
yeah
like
when
you
know
the
people,
it's
simple,
but
when
you
don't
it's
harder.