►
From YouTube: W39 Softgov WG: Snapshot and re-visiting advice process
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
I
was
hoping
I
could
add
everybody
that
came
to
the
call,
so
maybe
I'll
just
go
ahead
and
set
this
up
and
then
see
what
happens,
how
we
can
use
it,
and
probably
I
can
come
back
to
this
later
and
continue
editing
the
settings.
B
A
C
D
A
A
B
A
E
I
wish
I
was
a
little
more
arrested
after
my
10
days
off,
but
I
didn't
have
a
good
night's
sleep
last
night,
so
I
kind
of
rolled
out
of
bed
really
late
and
so
I'm
just
kind
of
having
a
slow.
D
C
E
Yeah,
I
sometimes
just
pop
in
and
out
you
know
when
I
have
a
moment,
so
I'm
trying
to
get
my
yoga
studio
open.
So
I
kind
of
changed
my
priority
away
from
the
crypto
space
plus
with
the
with
the
hatch
and
everything
feels
like
what
I
have
to
contribute
might
diminish,
because
my
primary
thing
was
about
you
know
contributing
to
the
cultural
build.
So
I
don't
know,
maybe
it
can
continue
with
gravity
or
whatever
you
know
so
anyway,
that's
what's
up
with
me
good
to
see
you
good
people.
A
A
What
was
a
governance
insight
you
had
this
week
so
for
the
crew
that
was
in
paris
like
from
from
paris
and
based
on
the
interactions
we
conversations
we
had
there
and
and
for
who
wasn't
there,
just
like
in
general
in
your
life
in
the
last
week?
Can
you
think
of
something
that
was
insightful
about
governance
and
decision
making.
A
It
was
very
great
to
to
be
so
strong
in
the
cultural
side
and
and
all
of
the
work
we've
been
doing
with
that
and
and
understanding
more
and
more
how
culture
is
important
for
decision
making
and
how
it
has
been
influencing.
A
So
many
of
the
decisions
we've
been
taking
and
even
how
I
think
we
achieved
a
very
sophistic
sophisticated
way
of
collaborating
with
each
other,
because
I
think
even
that
is
a
process
to
be
like
ready
to
collaborate
with
others
in
a
way
that
it's
gonna
flow
and
that
that
we
won't
find
so
many
bumps
in
the
road.
And
there
is
like
basic
things
like
like
listening,
like
understanding,
expertise
of
each
other
and
like
being
like
wanting
to
to
give
constructive
feedback
being
kind.
A
So
it
was
yeah.
Many
of
these
little
things
that
I
think
we've
been
building
slowly
have
been
like
really
impactful
to
to
decision
making
and
to
our
ability
to
make
decisions
together.
B
Yeah,
for
me,
it's
basically
the
the
cultural
aspect
and
that
human
part
of
the
governance
and
decision
making
in
dallas
is
been
really
neglected
so
far.
I
noticed
that
in
the
conferences-
because
sometimes
I
feel
like
many
dolls-
are
worrying
only
about
the
technology
and
how
much
profit
you
want
to
make
and
how
to
centralize,
but
no
don't
actually
care
that
much
about
the
cultural
development
of
of
the
people
inside
the
dao
and-
and
I
think
that
in
that
sense,
that
this
is
really
ahead
and
we
are
early
so
so
yeah.
B
B
C
E
Can
I
show
you
a
graphic
I
made
that
reminds
me
of
libby's
points
and
I
just
want
to
show
this
is
the
governance
thing,
but
but
it's
governance
in
the
sense
of
what
she
was
talking
about,
which
is.
A
A
E
E
E
So
basically
you
know
it
seems
to
me
that
this
graphic
came
out
of
participating
in
the
token
engineering
commons
and
experiencing
this
beautifully
and
then
paying
for
another
crypto
related
course,
where
the
curation
was
amazing
and
worth
the
cost
of
the
thing
and
meeting
all
these
people
and
cross-pollinating
was
was
wonderful,
but
the
moderator
did
everything
she
could
to
not
discuss
her
amazing
curation
and
actively
prevent
all
across
pollination,
and
so
I
recognized
that
there
was
this
kind
of
three
block
thing
and
subsequently
I've
kind
of
added
to
it.
E
So
across
the
top
you
know
this.
We
we
started
off,
I
think
in
token
engineering
commons,
with
a
kind
of
an
outline
about
what
we
were
going
to
do
and
then
we
promoted
it
and
then
the
the
the
key
things
for
me
here
are
the
the
the
two
things
in
the
middle
between
moderation
and
curation
in
between
moderation
and
cross
pollination.
You
need
all
of
these
things,
but
it
is
the
sort
of
the
core
group
that
gets
together
and
holds
this
unique.
E
You
know
point
of
view
or
mission
and
contextualizes
things
and
and
provides
education,
and
so
I've
kind
of
broken
it
up
into
these
sections,
and
I
think
we
just
do
this
really
really
well.
You
know-
and
I
don't
know
that
I
would
have
been
able
to
understand
how
this
worked
unless
I
hadn't
been
participating
for
a
long
time
with
you
guys.
E
So
I
think
it's
wrong
to
say
that
these
are
the
little
things
I
I
think
they're
foundational
things
oftentimes
when
we're
talking
about
borrow
dynamics
or
something
people
always
sort
of
talk
about
how
beige
is
somehow
inferior
to
purple
or
purple's
inferior
to
you
know,
red
or
whatever.
So
once
you
get
up
into
these
second
tier
things,
everyone's
sometimes
tempted
to
be
very
sort
of
hierarchical
about
this.
E
But
the
beautiful
thing
is
is
that
the
behavior
of
our
group
seems
to
create
safety
and
engagement
for
me
not
as
much
engagement
as
I
would
like,
because
some
of
this
is
just
too
technical
for
me,
but
these
are
the
things
I've
learned
from
you
guys
and
I
think
that's
all
down
to
the
folks
who
really
participated
in
the
governance
and
gravity
side
of
the
picture.
So
this
was
the
thing
that
I
produced
in
the
last
week.
That's
the
kind
of
final
thing
for
that,
so
I've
been
finding
it
very.
D
E
This
week
and
presenting
in
a
lot
of
different
places
and
and
so
yeah
anyway,
I
just
thought
I'd
show
that
to
you.
I
hope,
because
it
was
directly
relevant
to
what
libby
said.
A
E
Because
I
actually,
I
actually
recognized
that
that
that
actually
goes
directly
to
you.
I
recognize
that
there
was
a
kind
of
awareness
of
the
need
for
that
here
that
kind
of
permeated
through
the
groups.
You
know-
and
I
think
that
that's
to
some
degree,
you
know
your
influence
or
whoever
else
you
know
might
have
had
this
consciousness
from
theater
or
you
know
anyway,
there's
just
a
there's,
a
kind
of
improv
nature
to
this
thing.
E
That
is,
I
think,
the
thing
that
people
don't
think
about
very
much
in
terms
of
what
it's
like
to
participate
in
a
in
a
group.
That's
actually
building
something
brand
new.
It's
the
entire
thing
is
improv
right
in
many
ways,
so
you
have
to
have
that
as
an
essential
element
and
why
it
is
so
foundational.
So.
A
E
Well-
and
this
kind
of
show
like
for
me,
what
I
wanted
to
do
is
an
inventory
of
a
healthy.
Oh,
my
goodness,
I'm
sorry,
I
had
some
kombucha
and
it
just
came
up
so
yeah.
I've
people
were
talking
about
in
another
group
that
I
participated
in
about
how
it
was
almost
like
a
cellular
feeling.
You
know
where
you'd
have
certain
people.
You
know
the
mitochondria
is
the
powerhouse
of
the
cell.
E
You
know
or
there's
other
people
doing
different
things
as
a
kind
of
cellular
organism,
and
I
wanted
to
roughly
sort
of
document
that
in
some
kind
of
process
that
that
would
make
sense,
because
it's
we're
not
just
participating
for
no
reason.
We
we
got
to
go
across
this
thing
and
then
we've
got
to
come
back.
You
know
with
something
which
is
then
the
next
level
of
curation,
and
so
on
you
know
so
yeah.
E
A
I
think
the
decisions
that
were
made
of
chain
and
in
a
process
where
the
community
is
slowly
scaling,
getting
bigger,
more
people
are
participating.
A
It's
very
delicate,
the
decisions
that
were
made
and
how
we
continue
to
integrate
that
in
the
in
the
bigger
picture.
So
we
were
making
a
transition
from
off
chain
to
on
chain,
especially
with
the
with
the
hatch
dashboard,
because
some
of
the
decisions
there
are
the
decisions
of
the
hatch
and
this
is
it
like
they're
there.
E
Here
yeah,
I
got
it,
I
just
it's:
it's
been
a
bit
since
I've
been
in
here.
I
apologize
plus
I'm
running
windows,
11,
so
clicking
on
things.
Is
it's
a
little
funky.
A
Yeah
no
problem
so
just
to
take
a
look
at
them
and
see
if
there's
anything
that
like
jumps
to
the
eye
or
if
there's
something
that
you
think
we
already
don't
that
that
we
have
already
upgraded
it,
maybe
not
through
a
voting,
but
that
we
already
have
different
practices.
E
E
Well,
just
because
he
asked
me
last
night
about
we
went
over
some
things
in
terms
of
he.
He
was
just
noticing.
Some
of
these
same
things
too,
like
I
think
his
he's
kind
of
developing
a
framework
for
potentially
improving
this
exact
thing
that
we're
talking
about
in
terms
of
you
know
how
to
make
decisions
better
and
so
he's,
I
think,
proposing
a
working
group.
E
You
know,
I
think,
he's
our
conversation
last
night
was
very
generative
for
him,
so
he's
going
to
probably
go
back
and
revise
that,
but
I
was
going
over
that
sheet
that
I
just
showed
with
you
you
guys,
as
well
as
the
kinefrin
framework,
which
I
don't
know
if
you
guys
have
looked
into
it
all,
but
it
is
a
nice
way
to
when
we
talk
about
restructuring
advice
process.
E
You
know
connection
is
a
really
beautiful
way
to
there's
you
can
you
can
find
a
narrative
inside
of
that,
and
so
there's
some
really
interesting
things
that
you
can
kind
of
get
to
around
that
stuff.
So
I
didn't
know
you
know
if
that's
yeah.
A
A
A
Cool,
so
can
we
take
like
maybe
three
or
five
minutes
to
take
a
look
at
this
list
and
see
if
there's
anything
here,
that
we
want
to
discuss
or
that
we
want
to
look
into
or
something
that
feels
like.
We
already
have
an
updated
decision
that
we
need
to
add
here
or
yeah
anything
you
guys
want
to
want
to
discuss
from
from
what
is
here
already
and
then
we
also
have
to
add
a
few
of
the
last
ones
that
were
like
the
hatch
params
proposal.
A
C
A
D
A
The
practices
of
having
a
manifesto-
and
it
was
much
like
much
of
the
alignment
and
the
decisions
were
coming
during
the
calls.
So
I
think
it
didn't
fly
so
much
to
have
them
submitting
proposals
for
all
of
it.
But
it's
gonna
be
a
different
story
when
the
dow
is
up,
because
that
will
need
to
happen
like
the
proposals
will
need
to
exist
for
the
funding
to
to
happen.
So
I
think
that
will
come
back
in
a
form
or
another.
D
I
can
I
interrupt
yeah,
I
you
muted,
so
the
zepty
told
me
that
you
guys
are
having
a
question
about
members
and
admins
on
snapshot,
and
I
asked
my
friend
willie.
Well,
you
met
willy.
He
he
set
up
a
snapshot
for
giveth
and
set
up
a
very
detailed
snapshot.
I
think
for
fox
tokens
as
well,
but
members
have
their
proposals
highlighted
basically
when
they
make
a
proposal.
D
A
D
A
Okay,
so
I'll
start
with
two
words:
if
you
can
send
me,
your
address
that'll
be
called
sure
I
already
have
mateo
and
zaptimus,
but
maybe
I'll
off-board
you
matteo.
B
A
Okay,
so
for
this,
just
if
you
want
to
catch
up
griff
now
we
are
in
this.
A
I
figured
it's
a
good
time
now
for
us
to
look
at
this
list
of
decisions
that
we
have
made
in
the
forum
so
far
since
the
beginning,
the
ones
from
the
ones
from
token
log
need
to
be
added
here
still.
A
But
since
we
are
like
reaching
the
commons
upgrade-
and
I
think
that
was
a
mistake-
that
we
didn't
revisit
all
of
those
decisions
before
configuring,
the
hatch
and
then
it
was
what
it
was.
And
now
we
can
look
at
them,
we
can
see.
Is
there
something
totally
out
of
date?
Is
there
something
something
that
was
updated
just
by
status
quo
without
any
other
proposal,
and
is
there
something
here
that
is
missing?
So
just
taking
a
brief
look,
the
link
is
in
the.
A
A
F
The
pre-hatch
impact
hour
distribution
analysis
decision
is
not
there,
was
it
done
elsewhere
or
why.
A
Yeah,
the
ones
from
token
log
weren't
added
here
yet
so
the
last
mvv
patch
params
and
impact
our.
A
A
A
Cool
yeah-
that
was
the
next
topic
in
the
agenda
that
I
wanted
to
go
through
that
process
with
everyone.
That
is
in
the
call
just
to
show
the
rationale
of
how
we
got
where
we
got
and
then
give
us
an.
C
E
So,
in
my
way
of
thinking
mean
I
maybe
I'm
beating
a
dead
horse
here,
but
in
my
way
of
thinking
I.
E
I
would
like
to
know
for
a
given
given
thing
that
I'm
asking
about,
if
my,
if
you
guys,
can
see
my
screen,
if,
if
what
I'm
asking
about,
is
a
like
a
fire
that
I
have
to
put
out.
D
E
It's
a
thing
we're
experimenting
on.
If
it's
a
thing,
that's
just
the
realm
of
the
expert
you
know
like
griff
has
obvious.
You
know,
expertise
in
in
dealing
with
not
only
communities
but
also
you
know,
large
communities
like
ethereum
and.
D
E
E
Part
of
the
reason
why
they
fall
off
the
cliff
is
because,
because
our
processes
have
not
included
them
or
they've,
they've
erroneously
categorized,
something
as
clear
known
and
familiar
when
in
fact,
it's
complicated
or
complex
or
chaotic
anything.
That's
that's
sort
of
assumed
as
a
simple
automatable,
something
that
actually
belongs
in
any
of
the
other
three
quadrants
or
in
the
middle,
where
the
confused
guy
is
spinning
around,
which
is
where
I
spend
most
of
my
time
in
cryptocurrency
spaces.
E
D
E
Mode,
sorry,
let
me
I
did
not
share
my
full
screen.
What
I
did
was
shared
my
individual
thing.
So
let
me
do
that
again.
E
So
I
know
this
seems
a
little
chaotic,
but
the
you
see
here
in
terms
of
action
mode,
the
action
mode
are
the
things
in
red
here.
So
the
realm
of
the
expert
is
number
one.
You
have
to
sense.
The
problem
number
two:
you
have
to
analyze
the
problem
number
three.
You
have
to
respond
to
the
problem.
What
I've
noticed
is
because
we're
iterating
so
quickly
that
a
lot
of
what
we're
doing
is
in
the
complex
thing,
where
we
have
to
probe
and
figure
out.
E
E
So
my
point
about
that
is
is
what
I
would
want
to
do
is
I
would
want
to
first
sense,
make
around
connection
as
a
sense-making
framework
right.
So
I
would
want
to
sense,
make
a
round
which
one
of
these
four
things
am
I
dealing
with
first
and
then
sort
of
ask
appropriately
for
advice
process
with
respect
to
the
the
correct
way
of
doing
something.
So
if
it's
a
simple
thing,
I
might
be
able
to
automate
this
right
and
to
say,
then
you
know
sense,
category
rise
and
respond,
okay.
Well,
we
know
all
about
that.
E
Something
do
that
right,
but
so
that's
my
point
is
that
what
I
would
want
is
to
to
sort
of
insert
some
sense
making
around
what
type
of
problem
it
is
before.
We
then
go
into
advice
process
toward
people.
Do
you
know
what
I
mean,
and
so
do
we
do
that?
E
No
that's
a
this
is
a
a
decision
making
framework
called
connection.
There's
a
great
video
on
connection
and
agile,
which
talks
about
management
comes
out
of
the
the
complex
and
the
complicated
you
know.
So,
since
we're
sort
of
creating
something
most
of
what
we're
going
to
be
doing
is
going
to
be
at
the
complica,
complicated
and
complex
level
right
and
there's
other
there's
other
narrative
things
that
you
can
figure
out
so
here.
E
Let
me
let
me
share
my
screen
again
I'll
show
you
kind
of
what
I'm
talking
about
see
narratives
really
help
in,
in
my
view,
right
so
just
like
when
you're
and
and
mono
we
did
this
last
night,
but
I'm
kind
of
doing
it
again.
E
But
the
the
point
is
is
that
there
are
some
things
for
which
you
already
have
a
framework,
so
the
framework
is
preceding
the
data,
that
is
to
say
there
are
certain
known
things
and
so
framework
preceding
the
data
is
really
the
the
realm
of
the
clear
you
know
and
to
a
lesser
extent
the
complicated,
because
the
people
who
live
in
the
complicated
are
the
ones
who
walked
up
this
educational
ladder.
E
Here
with
the
big
bag
of
goodies
and
made
it
clear
known
and
familiar
to
everyone
else,
but
the
point
is:
is
that
for
for
us
when
we're
creating
a
new
thing,
we
have
a
whole
bunch
of
data,
we're
trying
to
create
a
framework
around
it,
which
means
we're
going
from
the
the
confused
chaotic
and
we're
working
clockwise
around
this
thing
right
and
then,
on
the
other
hand,
when
we
do
understand
something
about
it,
then
we're
gonna
start
with
the
clear
and
then
we're
gonna
work
backward
or
we're.
E
Gonna
drag
people
backward
around
this
thing
to
educate
them
about
the
the
underlying
parts
of
what
they
initially
thought
was
clear.
But
then
you
know
to
kind
of
go
back
down
this
ladder
and
and
work
in
the
other
direction.
So
the
connection
framework
actually
kind
of
has
some
other
narrative
things
about
it.
That
you
can
you
can
kind
of
work
with
to
to
sort
that
out.
So
sorry
about
that,
if
you.
E
A
E
Yeah,
I
have
been
sharing
some
of
this
in
the
past,
but
if
we're
revisiting,
do
you
know
what
I
mean
it
just
would
make
sense
to
me
to
determine
what
kind
of
problem
we're
having
first
do
you
know
what
I
mean
before
I
I
consider
who
is
it
that
I'm
going
to
ask
about
it?
It's
really
all
I'm
suggesting
in
terms
of
advice,
process.
A
Yeah,
I
think
that's
similar
to
what
we
were
chatting
right
zaptimus.
A
A
Yeah,
I
think
that
the
the
thought
process
that
was
that
was
interesting.
That
is,
okay.
We
have
what
what
do
we
need
to
decide?
We
need
to
decide
who
is
going
to
be
responsible
for
credential
management
and
then
who
is
currently
being
affected
by
credential
management?
Are
the
people
that
have
been
using
platforms
that
need
credentials,
so
the
people
that
have
been
using
these
platforms
are
like.
A
Comms
has
twitter
and
medium
and
etc,
and
then
there
is
github
that
has
credentials
that
is
used
by
common
swarm
and
params,
and
then
there
is
the
github,
the
git
book
that
is
comms
and
softgov
and
and
then
transparency
kind
of
overlooks
them
there's
twitter.
So
when
we
start
identifying
what
what
are
the
tools
or
who
is
like
currently
attached
to
the
decision
to
be
made,
these
are
probably
the
people
that
need
to
be
consulted,
because
I
think
it's
very
easy
for
us
to
think
like.
A
A
Who
is
going
to
be
directly
affected,
probably
going
to
make
the
advice
process
much
easier,
because
then
zaptimize
could
talk
with
like
the
leads
of
each
one
of
those
working
groups
that
are
or
the
people
that
have
been
working
with
this
credentials
and
these
platforms,
and
that
would
have
given
us
a
much
more
clear
input.
A
A
A
Yeah,
I
think
tagging
in
the
forum
is
a
good
one,
but
then
sometimes
people
don't
see
it
or
don't
respond.
So
maybe
also
like
bringing
up
to
a
call
is
also
interesting
and
then
this
process
for
the
person
who's.
Looking
for
the
decision
and
advice
process
is
a
little
bit
time
consuming,
but
I
think
it's
worth
it
to
get
the
right
signals
at
first.
E
Interrupting
I
was
just
saying
that
part
of
the
reason
why
I
talked
about
this
earlier,
I
think
part
of
the
reason
why
we
do
a
pretty
good
job
of
it
anyway,
is
because
we
we
actually
do
do
the
rule
of
mega
thing
pretty
well
and
that's
what
I
was
showing
in
my
little
graphic,
because
we
are
all
culturally
we're,
so
we're
sort
of
almost
take
for
granted
how
how
well
we
both
account
for
signal
and
allow
for
noise
and-
and
we
seem
extremely
good
at
being
able
to
pull
signal
out
of
noise.
E
If
you
know
what
I'm
saying
so,
I
think
in
some
ways
the
fact
that
we
are,
we
culturally
are
kind
of
there.
It's
almost
prevented
us
from
creating
the
these
formal
processes
to
handle
some
of
these
things,
so
I
think
it's
quite
beautiful
in
a
way,
but
then
you
know
we
end
up
here
in
some
other
ways,.
F
Okay,
is
there
anything
you
guys
want
to
add.
F
Me
well
for
a
week,
or
so
now,
I've
been
working
on
a
proposal
for
a
working
group
that
I
call
a
deliberation
working
group,
and
I
mean
it's
it's
very
closely
linked
to
what
you
do
here
in
softcup
levy.
F
But
the
idea
is
to
use
the
idea
is
to
use
argumentation
theory
and
and
the
argumentation
schemes
and
to
sort
of
like
visualize
the
premises,
some
of
the
implicit
in
the
proposals
and
so
that
people
can
understand
better,
not
only
what
they're
trying
to
say,
but
how
that
affects
other
people.
So
the
the
purpose
of
of
the
working
group,
though
I
envision
it,
is
to
build
tools
and
resources
for
people
to
make
sense
of
their
own
and
and
other
people's
proposals
right
and
it
it's
really
it's
it's.
F
It's
like
an
optimal
decision,
support
system
for
for
proposal,
deliberation
through
like
argument,
evaluation
and
evidence
and
and
and
debate-
and
I
talked
about
about
this
with
durgarz
yesterday
and
I'm
still
because
it
it
really
combines.
During
the
last
decade,
there
has
been
like
a
huge
amount
of
of
literature
on
combining
argumentation
theory
and
argumentation,
artificial
intelligence,
and
it's
mostly
being
used
like
for
legal
and
you
know,
for
courts
and
and
for
those
types
of
like
lawsuits
and
those
type
of
disputes,
but
really
it's
it.
F
It's
it's
more
than
just
inductive
and
and
deductive
reasoning.
It's
for,
like
the
feasible
arguments
or
like
arguments
of
the
type
that
come
about
in
the
proposals
and
I'm
trying
to
make
it
so
that
it's
not
so
formal,
as
you
know,
the
how
it
is
with
argumentation,
but
it's
a
way
for
us
to
visualize
everything
in
the
proposal.
The
way.
The
way
I
see
it
is
okay
me
as
or
the
working
group
would
function,
okay,
people
that
are
ideally
when
they
want
to
propose
something
when
they're
building
their
proposal.
F
I
approach
them
and
I
I
try
to
do
some
sense,
making
around
what
they're
trying
to
get
at
what
the
course
of
action
would
be.
Ideally
if
their
proposal
gets
voted
and
I
try
to
just
work
with
them
in
terms
of
the
consequences.
F
What
the
consequences
of
of
that
proposal
would
be
and
try
to
map
the
argument
and
and
like
the
the
the
very
granular
parts
of
of
like
the
rhetoric
or
the
the
communication
of
it
like
that
would
be
the
the
purpose
of
the
group
and
and
yeah
it
gets
mathematical
in.
F
In
that
the
way
it's
been
approached
or
the
way
they're
combining
it
it's
they
take,
they
use
set
theory
or
they
take
like
like
a
finite
set
of
arguments
and
kind
of
you
draw
like
vectors
like
attacking
the
premises
of
of
the
arguments
or
trying
like
disputing
them,
and
and
so
that's
where
you
know
it,
it
gets
into
symbols
and
terminology.
That
is
very,
you
know,
mathematical
e,
and
that's
what
I'm
trying
to,
because
I
don't
want
it
to
be
siloed
and
I
don't
want
to
be
like.
F
Oh
the
people
who
deliberate
know
and-
and
I
don't
want
to
be
like-
I
don't
want
people
to
just
delegate
the
decision
making
to
us,
but
I
really
want
to.
I
don't
want
the
the
what
happened
with
the
impact
distribution
to
ever
happen.
Again,
that's
kind
of
like
what
inspired
me
researching
and
seeing
how
how
this
could
come
about
again,
I'm
still
working
on
them,
seeing
how
the
artificial
intelligence
part
gets
integrated
and
not
to
make
it
complex.
F
I
spoke
with
durga
yesterday
and
we're
trying
to
make
this
clear,
but
I
mean
this
is
a
good
working
europe
to
be
discussing
it
because
I
don't
know.
Maybe
it's
like
an
appendix
of
soft
gov
or
like
its
own
thing.
You
know
it's
very
specialized
in
the
argumentation
and
and
the
claims
and
disputing
it
and
the
schemes
and
visualizing
it
like
it
there's
enough
content
for
it
to
be
in
and
of
itself.
F
But
honestly,
it's
it's
like
in
a
way,
it's
like
too
much
power
to
to
the
ones
who
work
in
the
deliberation
who
know
the
inner
workings,
and
I
don't
want
like
it.
I
don't
want.
I
mean
it
could
get
it's
tricky.
F
You
know
having
having
you
know
how
you
know
what
I
mean
like
having
a
specialized
people
who
know
these
the
way
arguments
go,
and
but
I
really
think
that
there
needs
to
be
some
like
considerate
effort
into
increasing
the
the
way
we
debate
on
the
proposals
and
the
way
we
explicitly.
F
You
know
talk
about
our
points
of
view
and
examine
what
the
consequences
are
and
and
if,
if
our
reasoning
can
go
from
one
to
four,
if
we
put
it
on
diagrams
and
we
try
to
use
ai
as
an
aid,
but
not
as
delegating
decision
making.
That's
definitely
not
what
I
want.
I
don't
want
a
robot
making
decisions,
yeah.
F
A
Yeah,
that's
really
that's
really
cool!
That's
super
interesting.
We
definitely
would
have,
would
make
use
of
having
like
debate
tools
and
we
actually
met
someone
in
the
conference
that
was
trying
to
do
something
similar
like
that,
like
creating
like
an
instance
within
the
doubt
that
you
could
rank
and
curate
arguments,
and
there
was
some
way
of
like
uploading
them
and
having
like
a
sense.
B
A
Place
within
the
tool-
and
I
think
this
is
like
a
tool
like
more
than
a
process-
or
at
least
it
sounded
for
me
from
what
you're
saying
that
more
than
a
process
is
the
creation
of
a
tool.
A
So
this
definitely
sounds
like
a
great
idea
for
a
proposal
and
something
that
we
can
continue
to
incorporate
like
how,
like
some
of
some
of
the
things
that
we
see,
that
work
in
a
debate
or
some
of
the
things
that
didn't
work
or
how
to
how
to
put
like
you
said
like
ai
or
data
analytics
and
intuit,
and
start
like
having
that
more
integrated.
F
Yeah
there's
there
I
mean
I
was
amazed,
there's
a
ton
of
literature
about
it,
and
so
I've
been
going
through
it.
So
do
you
think
I
should
pivot
away
from
it
being
a
working
group
and
just
making
it
a
tool,
because
the
there's
software?
That
really
does
it
right.
The
thing
is
it's
for
windows
and
and
it's
for
like
illegal,
like
I
want
to
do
it
for
dallas,
because
this
has
the
potential
to
be,
and
I'm
sure
like
that
person
that's
working
on.
F
It
is
like
light
years
ahead
of
me,
but
it's
funny
how
sometimes
things
get
invented
at
the
same
time
like
like
in
different
parts
of
the
world,
people
that
don't
know
each
other,
that's
the
way
we
download
information,
but
I
mean
in
the
end
it
would
have
to
be
like
a
software
like
an
open
source
software.
I
even
I
even
see
it
with
the
potential
as
being
a
module
that
common
stack
would
perhaps
if
it
were
sort
of
like
like
gravity,
maybe
like
a
part
of
gravity's
conflict
resolution.
F
This
is
like
deliberation,
which
is
two
different
types
of
dialogue,
so
yeah.
F
People
into
making
a
proposal
for
like
like
a
program
like
an
app
or
like,
doesn't
have
to
be
a
working
group.
I
just
think
it's
very
valuable
to
to
have
this
type
of
tool.
A
F
E
E
You
know,
maybe
we
could
start
there
and
then
the
because
you
know
just
the
sense
making
there
is,
I
think,
really
powerful
the
group
that
we
have
there.
You
know
in
terms
of
trying
to
figure
out
how
that
would
work
and
also
just
send
them
by
ourselves.
It's
like
a
really
big
powerhouse
in
terms
of
taking
these
abstract
things
that
I
always
come
up
with
and
turning
them
into
actionable
pieces
of
things.
So.
A
C
B
Okay,
no,
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
I've
been
mentioning
that
same
thing
to
to
wank
about
gravity,
to
make
some
kind
of
software,
or
at
least
a
dashboard,
that
we
can
have
like
more
interaction
for
the
processes
and
all
of
that
so
yeah
I
like
it.
I
follow
you
manu.
A
So
we
are
on
the
top
of
the
hour
and
I'll
connect
to
manu
with
this
person
that
I
think,
would
be
great
to
collaborate
on
this.
I
do
think
it
makes
more
sense
as
a
proposal
than
a
working
group,
because
it
feels
like
there
is
a
finite
objective
of
building
something
and
but
also,
if
you
want
to
propose,
as
a
working
as
a
working
group
in
a
space
that
people
can
just
collaborate
gather
to
have
ideas.
Why
not
right.
F
Yeah,
okay,.