►
Description
🙏 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
Organizing
issues,
families
for
them
prioritize
coordination
and
look
for
MSA
work
and
cut
it.
I
was
going
to
go
through
exercise
to
see
what
that
means
to
people,
because
I
think
that
means
a
lot
of
different
things.
So
I
just
want
to
clarify
and
get
kind
of
consensus
with
everyone
and
then
move
on
from
there.
A
So
what
does
cutting
work
actually
mean?
I,
guess
I
think
that's
for
each.
You
know
working
group
to
decide
if
you
know
what.
A
We
are
going
to
be
done
with
the
experimental
Sprint
planning.
I
gave
it
two
shots
and
I.
Think
it's.
You
know
a
rough
rough
look
at
it,
but
we're
gonna
try
to
incorporate
some
of
the
elements
in
there,
but
we're
gonna
get
back
to
the
regular.
Let's
get
back
to
the
Zim
Hub
and
creating
issues.
D
B
A
We
are
but
we're
gonna
go
with
the
the
issues
first
and
just
do
it
together:
Within
sinhub
I,
don't
know
I
just
felt
like
he
was
still
uncoordinated
and
not
where
we
wanted
to
be.
A
I
wanted
to
collectively
decide
on
this
issue
our
Sprint
retrospective
issue.
So
this
is
what
I
wanted
to
talk
about.
How
do
we
swarm
around
this
and
then
create
a
task
list
and
add
it
to
this,
but
I
would
really
I,
don't
know
you've
pretty
much
clicked
up
this,
so
I
didn't
really
realize
that
until
now,.
A
B
I,
wasn't
I
didn't
have
a
chance
to
watch
that
retro
yesterday
and
I
wasn't
able
to
join
because
of
the
parent
teacher.
Do
you
want
to
give
me
an
update
on
the
Retro,
so
in
fact
yeah
I?
Guess
since
there's
not
so
many
of
us,
it's
not
a
bad
use
of
our
time
to
do
that.
I
apologize
that
I
didn't
reach
out
to
you
earlier.
A
So
yeah
so
we
went
through
and,
as
you
can
see
here,
a
lot
of
the
the
positive
things
were.
You
know
around
our
kind
of
new
products.
A
You
know
curation
service,
the
ABC
Advance
page
could
do
better
sitting
around
coordination
and
the
kind
of
uncertainty
and
working
groups
roadmap
being
a
big
one
as
well,
and
then
things
to
improve
swamped
around
this
idea
of
kind
of
building
a
road
map
revisiting
the
foundations
of
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish-
and
this
is
the
winner,
which
is
organized
issues
and
look
for
Unnecessary
work
and
cut
it,
and
so
really
I
think.
A
The
conversation
that
we
can
have
right
now
is
centered
around
this
retrospective
winner,
and
that
is
what
does
it
mean
to
look
for
Unnecessary
work
and
cut
it,
and
how
do
we
go
about
doing
that?
And
so
I
wanted
to
create
a
task
list
for
us
to
swarm
around
in
terms
of
succeeding
with
this?
A
D
A
Yeah
I
mean
in
a
lot
of
ways:
I
feel
like
that's.
All
we
can
do
is
is
plan
with
the
people
that
are
in
the
room
at
that
time
and
if
that
means
moving
at
a
significantly
slower
pace
and
I,
think
that's
just
kind
of
what
we
have
to
deal
with,
but
right
now
it's
just
getting
commitments
from
the
people
in
this
call
right
now
and
saying
Hey
What
Can.
We
collectively
do
in.
A
Kind
of
inch
closer
to
where
we
need
to
be,
perhaps
other
people
have
different
views
on
that,
but.
C
Yeah,
you
know
so
just
stating
the
like
bringing
out
the
elephant
in
the
room.
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
uncertainty
right
now.
Obviously
this
has
come
up
multiple
times,
but
I
think
a
lot
of
it
is
the
relationship
with
the
academy
and
like
straightening
that
out,
which
is
something
that
we're
working
on.
You
know
that's
that's
in
in
progress,
but
you
know
our
kind
of
like
overall
strategy
at
a
high
high
level
like
where
we
want
to
go.
C
We've
been
doing
a
bunch
of
work
on
that
in
sampo,
but
it
feels
like
we're
a
little
bit
stuck
on
that
front
and
it's
hard
to
bring
it
out
and
engage
the
whole
crew.
C
Until
we
know
what
the
thing
is
with
the
academy,
so
it's
like
a
cycle
and
that
doesn't
feel
good
right
for
you
know
we're
all
kind
of
there's,
like
some
frustration,
so
I
do
think.
I
I
do
like
your
idea,
though
Nate
about
like
taking
a
look
at
a
hard
look
at
the
stuff
that
we
are
doing
right
now
and
just
saying
like
Okay.
What?
If,
if
we
really
did,
try
to
shift
our
Focus
to
become
more
relevant
to
the
field
of
token
engineering?
C
C
Actually,
you
know
I'm
High,
it
looks
like
you
know,
like
the
communitas
crew,
like
udam
and
Costa
and
Eduardo
like
they're,
doing
a
big
push
right
now
to
just
clean
up
the
Discord
right
and
like
that's
like
an
example
of
like
how
do
we
just
clear
out
the
Clutter,
you
know
so
like
I
think
maybe
there's
some
ways
that
we
can
do
that
with
our
processes
too,
so
that
we're
not
feeling,
as
stressed
out
by
doing
a
bunch
of
stuff
that
just
in
the
big
picture
like
it
seems
like
it
matters,
but
honestly
it
doesn't
matter.
A
Yeah
and
I
guess
you
know
I
I
pass
it
around
to
each
of
the
the
working
groups
like
zephy
and
Chewie
and
Wonka.
Is
there
anything
right
now
that
we're
currently
doing
that's
can
be
cut
and
what
are
the
impacts
of
cutting
that
and
what?
What
type
of
functions?
Do
you
see
being
the
most
important
that
your
working
group
offers
yeah
go
ahead?
Can.
D
B
Than
things
to
cut,
I
think
what
we
need
to
do
is
like
what
does
the
Tec
need
like
ask
ourselves
again?
What
does
the
Tec
actually
need
and
focus
on
what
we
actually
need
to
deliver
and
then
the
things
that
we
that
need
to
be
cut
become
obvious,
but
I
like
actually
focusing
on
like
what
what
the
Tec
needs?
What
what
helps
the
Tec
and
then
the
things
that
don't
are
like,
oh
well,
we
should
stop
doing
all
the
other
stuff.
A
Yeah,
and
so
considering-
that's
a
you
know,
it's
it's
quite
a
broad
ask
so
I
think
that
you
know
because
it
can
come
from
a
mini
like
what
do
we
need
from
a
com's
perspective
or
Communications
perspective?
What
do
we
need
from,
like
a
community
perspective,
I
think
that
there's
a
lot
of
different
things
angles
that
you
could
approach
that,
as
so
I
mean.
Perhaps
we
can
just
go
around
and
ask
around
and
see
if
there's
any
consensus
around
certain
topics
or
certain
areas
that
are
really
important
is
is:
does
that
sound?
Okay,.
B
Yeah,
certainly,
and
definitely
like
each
one,
each
were
like
what
are
the
stewards?
What
are
the
needs
of
the
TC
from
the
stewards
and
we've
sort
of
mapped
that
out
in
the
proposal
we
have
for
the
steward
transformation
and
we
could
also
say
the
other
need
is
for
us
to
execute
on
the
on
a
plan.
Now
you.
D
B
Start
actually,
the
action
so
I
would
say
like
for
the
stewards
working
group.
What
the
Tec
needs
now
is
for
us
to
execute
on
that
plan,
and
maybe
that
would
help
that
helped.
You
know
that
helps
a
lot
and
you
know
and
I
would
ask
like
you're
saying
each
each
working
group
to
think
about
their
their
working
group,
and
maybe
they
see
other
things
in
other
working
groups,
other
things
that
aren't
even
in
a
working
group.
B
B
B
Ly
that
is
causing
like
we
don't
really
know.
You
know
it's
it's
a
lot
of.
It
is
the
stewards
transformation
it's
like
well,
where
do
we
gonna
go
and
what
is
our
relationship
with
the
academy
and
wait?
We
can't
even
talk
about
it
until
after
the
launch
of
te
fundamentals.
So
that's
still
two
weeks
away
and
it's
like
what
we
want.
We
need
to
start
doing
things
now.
How
do
we
start
doing
things
now?
B
If
we
don't
know
if
we
can't
even
have
a
conversation
about
our
future
for
another
two
and
a
half
weeks,
so
I
feel
like
I'm
in
this
holding
pattern.
That's
making
me
a
little
like
zany
to
be
honest,
but
I
think
we
should
just
start
doing
some
actions.
Like
you
know,
we
you
and
I
mapped
out
the
nomination
process.
Let's
share
the
nomination
process,
start
nominating
common
stewards.
You
know
start
do
Building,
Together,
The,
Advisory
Group.
For
me,
what
I
think
the
Tec
and
I'd
love
to
hear
other
people's
opinion
on
this
too?
B
This
is
not
I.
Think
that
there's
you
know.
I
have
blind
spots,
but
I
I
think
acting
on
the
transformation
plan
is
a
need
for
the
Tec.
What
else
do
you
think
is
a
need.
A
Yeah
I
agree
with
that:
I
think
the.
A
I'm.
Writing
it
on
the
yeah
retrospective
Society
here,
the
yes,
so
the
the
advice,
The
Advisory,
Group
and
the
transformation
process,
I
do
think
is
really
really
important.
I
also
think
it's
really
important
to
start
having
conversations
around
having
this
kind
of
like
long-term
road
map.
That's
a
little
bit
bigger
in
scope,
kind
of
just
directing
us,
where
we're
going
I
think
a
lot
of
the
working
groups
right
now.
You
know
we're
saying
cut
on
necessary
things,
but
we're
also
not
saying
this
is
the
direction
you
need
to
be
heading.
A
You
know,
there's
very
little
guidance
in
terms
of
like
hey.
This
is
what
you
need
to
be
doing
so:
everybody's,
just
kind
of
floating
in
The,
Ether
and
so
I
think.
Eliminating
that
uncertainty
and
kind
of
giving
direction
towards
to
the
working
groups
is
really
important.
I,
it's
one
of
those
things.
That's
really
difficult
because,
like
sample,
for
example,
has
a
direction.
It
knows
exactly
where
it's
going,
but
the
other
working
groups
are
kind
of
like
Hey.
How
do
we
support
this?
I?
Don't
know.
Is
it
an
isolated
effort?
A
A
If
we're,
if
we're
going
to
have
the
working
groups
organized
the
way
they
are,
we
need
to
be
all
on
the
same
page,
a
lot
about
how
what
initiatives
are
going
to
be
supported,
what
initiatives
that
we
all
need
to
gather
around
and
swarm
around
and
I
think
that
sampo,
since
they
have
the
momentum
and
they're
leading
these
these
certain
product
initiatives
that
you
know
each
working
group
should
be
helping
them
in
one
way
or
another
and
I
know
that
you
have
your
own
Clarity
and
that
you're
organizing
sampo
from
that
perspective,
but
I
think
there
would
be
a
really
good
opportunity
to
have
some
type
of
input
from
other
working
groups
to
say:
hey
I
can
help
out
with
this
I
can
do
this
from
the
comms
perspective.
A
I
can
do
this
from
a
transparency
perspective
and
have
those
groups
organized
around
you
but
yeah
that
this
is
my
personal
opinion,
but
from
the
steward's
perspective,.
C
Is
it
okay,
if
I
inject
some
or
just
respond,
so
I
would
love
to
do
that
I
think
it
I
mean
this
stuff.
Let's
just
take
the
curation
service,
for
example
like
there's,
no
way
that
sample
can
do
that
by
itself
like
this
is
not
just
a
Tec
initiative,
but
it's
actually
broader
than
that.
So
we
need
to
like
we
need
to
do
community
organizing
on
Twitter
I
mean
we
just
need
to
pull
in
everybody.
C
I
think
the
part,
if
I'm
really
honest
the
part,
that's
a
little
bit.
Frustrating
right
now
is
that
you
know
there's
a
strategy
that
I've
been
trying
to
work
on
within
sample.
C
That's
not
just
a
sample
strategy
right.
It's
like
a
TC
wide
strategy,
but
it's
been.
It's
been
hard,
I
mean
Tam
and
Libby
know
this
I.
Think
and
Nate
knows
this
too,
but
it's
what's
been
what's
been
hard.
C
Is
that
we've
been
kind
of
afraid
to
talk
about
this
broadly
because
of
I
mean
I
would
love
to
be
able
to
talk
about
it
broadly,
but
it
feels
like
it's
just
a
very
sensitive
time
right
now,
with
the
academy,
we
don't
want
to
be
making
steps
like
we,
we
want
to
do
the
planning
and
the
kind
of
the
looking
at
Future
services
and
things
like
that
with
the
academy,
but
we've
been
told
that
we
can't
do
that
yet,
and
it's
totally
understandable
because
I
mean
this.
C
C
We
need
some
kind
of
path
forward
or
strategy
forward,
there's
something
that
we're
working
on
here,
but
it
feels
stuck
because
of
that
and
I
feel
bad
I
do
feel
really
bad
about
this
because,
like
I,
would
love
to
you
know,
get
all
of
the
stewards
in
on
that
too,
but
it
feels
a
little
bit
stuck
right
now.
So
that's
that's
the
tension
that
I'm
holding
right
now,
and
so
when
I
hear
things
like
this
about
like
oh,
we
need
you
know
it's.
C
We
need
to
move
forward
and
have
like
a
big
vision
and
stuff
like
that.
It's
this
is
the
challenge
is
how
do
we
you.
C
Just
have
to
sit
on
this
until
we
can
have
this
conversation,
but
I
think
I.
I
do
think
that
there
is
some
Merit
to
given
that
uncertainty,
maybe
looking
at
the
stuff
that
we're
doing
right
now
to
kind
of
free
up
space
in
advance
of
when
we
can
really
focus
on
like
what
we
want
to
do.
That's
I,
that's
the
best
way.
I
can
articulate
the
the
situation
that
I
see
right
now.
A
From
my
perspective,
you
know
this
has
been
a
common
like
the
one
thing
that
we're
talking
about
here
is
the
te
knowledge
Commons,
the
consilience
library
and
the
curation
service,
and
this
kind
of
overlap
that
I
see
happening
and
and
Omega
still
is
still
pursuing
this
consilience
library
and
I.
You
know
I'm
kind
of
I'm
kind
of
confused
at
like
why
you
know
why
we,
we
haven't,
got
everybody
into
a
room
and
said
hey.
A
We
have
a
lot
of
overlap
and
a
lot
of
you
know
duplication
of
efforts
here,
let's,
let's
unify
under
a
single
vision
and
move
forward,
because
I
I
do
think
this
is
where
the
biggest
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong.
That
is
the
whole
thing
of
the
tea
Academy.
That's
where
the
conflict
is
a
lot
between
the
the
T.
What
what
the
T
knowledge
comments?
What
they're
set
out
to
do
is
there
any
other
point
of
conflict
that
I'm
missing
in
terms
of
blockers.
C
I
don't
know
if
you're
direct
asking
me
that
I
I
do
think
so
we're
sitting
down
next
week
with
the
Omega
team
to
show
them
the
the
Prototype
and
I
think
they're
very
excited
about
using
this
curation
service.
So
I
think
that
I
think
that'll
work.
Its
way
out.
C
We
just
wanted
to
kind
of
like
have
a
prototype
and
seem
like
helping
comms
would
be
was
the
most
important
priority
right
now
in
terms
of
like
helping
with
the
tweets
and
like
get
generating
some
content
that
we
can
share
and
Tec
Twitter,
but
it
does
it
I
I
do
I
am
pretty
confident
that
the
Omega
team
will
be
interested.
This
just
seems
like
a
natural
fit
so
I
I'm
not
worried
about
that.
C
So
much
and
I
think
that
there's
opportunities
for
soft
gov
to
use
this
tool
and
to
really
you
know,
do
some
Community,
organizing,
that's
like
specific
to
special
interest
areas.
I
think,
there's
huge
opportunity.
There,
I
I,
think
that
the
issue
with
the
academy
is
probably
broader
than
just
like
the
the
knowledge
Commons.
A
Okay,
so
let's
let's
move
forward,
then
it's
update.
You
want
to
talk
about
transparency
and
yeah.
F
For
transparency,
it's
like
yeah,
we're
doing
distance
seasoning,
and
it's
like
okay.
How
can
we
make
this
transitioning
smooth?
So
my
idea
was
like
get
all
the
you
know,
get
all
the
tasks
like
transferences,
silently
doing
like
you
know,
Security
Management
recordings,
updating
the
decision
taking
other
things
you
know
make
probably
I
was
thinking
of
making
balls
of
every
activity
that.
F
Are
like
kind
of
like
80
80
of
the
storage
like
it
is
like
I,
don't
think
it
needs
to
go
on
a
community
vote
and
it's
like
yeah,
it's
like
yeah.
We
want
this
or
we
don't
want
this,
and
then
we
cut
or
and
and
yeah
that's
ideal.
I
get
all
the
all
the
things
we
want,
so
those
will
need
still
need
funding
like
later
and
the
ones
we
don't
want
like
we
just
we
just
remove.
A
A
A
And,
and
do
you
feel
like
you
have
you
know
enough
people
to
do
that?
Are
you
is
that
strictly.
F
F
D
F
F
F
F
If
the
thing
is
like,
if
we
want,
because
it's
it's
actually
like
pretty
cool,
like
I
mean
I,
don't
know,
I
don't
want
to
take
like
all
the
call,
but
it's
like
they
have
like
all
these
Milestones
for
each
proposal
and
and
then
you
can
also
like
I-
was
giving
them
people
like
to
integrate
all
of
them
for
the
analysis
I'm.
Basically
like
just
like
you
know,
you
see
everything.
That's
you
you
see
like
you,
trace
all
the
money,
I,
it's
an
inch
with
graph
and
it's
nice,
it's
very
clean.
F
B
And
here's
the
thing
that
I
I
want
to
challenge
like.
Does
the
Tec
need
D
work,
or
is
it
a
nice
thing
that
maybe
we
can
like
I
feel
like
there's
been
a
few,
a
few
different
working
groups
that
have
explore
D
work,
but
we
should
maybe
you
know,
get
the
response
like
I.
G
F
G
It
did
work
like
really
good,
especially
because
the
audits
would
pretty
much
make
themselves
once
once.
Everything
was
laid
down
in
in
the
work,
but
I
would
agree
with
exploring
different
Alternatives
like
back
when
dwork
started
out,
and
we
started
helping
out
like
testing.
It
was
a
whole
different
product
than
what
it
is
right
now.
G
I
mean
great
for
D
work,
I.
Think
it's
an
amazing
product
like
we
just
used
it
also
like
for
the
tour
for
like
paying
different
artists
it.
It
was
fun,
but
I.
Don't
think
that
at
this
point
like
it
would
benefit
organizationally
wise
I
mean,
even
though
transparency
has
really
good
advantages
with
it.
F
F
A
This
is
one
of
those
things
that
I
would
like
to
see
Clarity
on,
because
you
know
you
know
when
we,
when
we
not
sure
about,
because
you
know
it
depends
on
the
compensation
scheme.
You
know
like
how.
How
are
we
going
to
handle
compensation?
I
still
think
that's
another
conversation
that
we
haven't
really
figured
out
in
terms
of
providing
Clarity.
A
You
know,
especially
because
the
the
steward
transformation
process
proposes
a
lot
of
change
as
to
how
we
do
things
and
I
do
think
that
you
know
if
we're
going
to
stick
with
the
working
groups,
that
we
have
having
that
altern,
that
option
of
having
to
work
as
a
method
for
creating
bounties
small
scale
bounties
and
that's
the
way
we
compensate
rather
than
these
paid
roles.
I
think
that
is
a
legitimate
pathway
for
compensation
within
the
Tec.
A
However,
we
need
to
come
to
consensus
on
that
type
of
topic,
and
so
perhaps
that
can
be
something
we
discuss
and
maybe
the
stewards
Council
coming
up,
but
but
there
are
certain
aspects
of
of
gaining
consensus
on
how
we're
moving
forward.
In
terms
of
that
is
really
important
to
answer
these
questions.
H
I
I
also
want
to
say
that
I
think
that
there
has
already
been
some
cutting
off
and
that
it
has
happened
over
time
that
first,
we
as
the
stewards
decided
to
not
pass
another
proposal
until
a
certain
time
and
and
also
now
the
comes
team
has
also
got
some
of
of
the
themes
and
made
just
one
team
and
I
think
like
there
has
already
been
some
cutting
and
we
have
to
recognize
and
acknowledge
that,
and
there
has
been
a
lot
of
contributors
that
whose
participation
is
has
been
going
down
and
yeah.
H
This
is
we,
we
don't
have
to
think.
Okay.
What
do
we
have
to
cut
right
now
because
we
have
already
been
cutting
and
The
Cutting
like
presents
itself,
and
it
shows
itself
what
what
needs
to
be
cut
so
I
I
agree
on
the
idea
of.
H
Maybe
what
do
we
need
more
right
now
and,
for
example,
I
know
that
also
there
are
some
working
groups
that
are
rethinking
itself
and
a
lot
of
the
work
that
they
are
doing
like
Community
tasks
and
comms,
and
maybe
yeah
I
I
always
say
this
and
and
Nate
you're
right
that
maybe
it
may
be
ethereal
of
saying
like
sleeping
to
the
outside,
but
something
that
I
that
I
would
really
like
to
see
is
like
more
relationships,
or
we
talking
here
more
about
other
communities
and
I
I,
always
think
a
shelling
point
is
like
a
meeting
point,
and
here
we
meet
only
the
people
in
the
TC,
but
we
need
to
to
meet
here
and
and
that
the
people
here
it
says,
hey
I,
am
from
this
other
community
I
am
from
this
old
Community.
H
Let's
share
ideas
and
and
I
think
that
that's
something
that
we
are
not
doing
and
it's
there
like
the
diplomacy,
the
relationships,
the
the
things
of
okay,
how
many
projects
are
overlapping?
Why?
Why
can't
we
increase
communication
so
that
we
are
not
in
that
prisoner's
dilemma
and
we
can
find
a
third
way
to
to
to
to
to
to
benefit
everyone
without
all
having
to
compete.
I,
don't
know
it's
it's
just
this
narrative
that
it's
go.
H
It
goes
back
even
to
astrum
and
and
I
think
we
we
need
to
I,
don't
know
how
to
do
it,
but
I
think
that's
that's
how
at
least
I
would
like
to
see
the
TC
being
a
meeting
point
some
some
place
where
people
say:
hey,
I'm
gonna
go
there
because
there
are
I,
am
going
to
have
a
very
big
overview
of
everything.
What
is
happening
in
the
space
and
not
only
what
is
happening
inside
their
community.
B
To
open
up
that,
we
have,
we
have
a
lot
of
time
in
this
call,
but
I
also
thought.
Maybe
we
can
benefit
from
sharing
the
mural
board
together
so
on
the
mural
board
to
the
right
of
where
the
last
retrospective
is
is
a
section
that
says
what
does
the
Tec
need
and
you
can
also
say
need
from
the
working
group,
and
that
way
everyone
can
add
Post-it
notes,
and
we
don't
have
to
sort
of.
We
can
continue
the
conversation,
but
we're
not
sort
of
stuck
in
conversation.
B
Only
mode
I'm
gonna
continue
on
working
on
it
on
the
sport
cleaning
it
up
a
little
bit
and
I'll
pass
back.
I
think
I
think
really
focusing
on
I
think
really
focusing
on
that
like
not
on
cutting
like
just
what
do
we
need,
and
then
we
might
need
things
we
don't
aren't
doing
now
we're
in
a
different
context,
so,
rather
than
just
looking
at
what
we're
doing
and
what
we
should
stop
doing.
A
Thank
you
Tim.
It's
really
awesome
appreciate
that
yeah.
This
is
great.
So
does
everybody
have
a
link
to
the
mirror
board
I
assume
they
do.
If
not,
let
me
know.
I
B
A
Okay
yeah,
so
you
want,
let's
start
off
instead
of
TC
wide,
you
know
yeah,
we
can
start
off
with
t
c
word.
So
let's
just
go
ahead
and
pass
it
around
for
about
a
minute
and
just
hear
your
thoughts.
So
we'll
start
off
with
how
about
you,
chewy.
G
I'm
sorry
I
was
I
was
just
sneezing
when
you
okay,
what
does
the
TC
mean?
Wait?
I
I
haven't
opened
the
mirror
board
yet,
but
you
give
me
a
second
I'll
start,
adding
my
my
contributions,
but
yeah
I
I
feel
that
mostly
is
about
I.
G
Don't
know
if
saying
like
at
this
point
and
with
like
kind
of
like
the
different
situations
that
we've
had
this
week,
I
don't
know
if
it
would
be
like
a
maybe
like
a
a
euphemism
to
say,
like
Mannix,
manage
expectations
from
contributors
or
if
I
would,
just
like
plainly
say
like
there's
like
no,
like
contributors
should
not
have
like
any
expectations
at
this
point.
Until
until
we
figured
out
how
things
are
gonna
work.
G
So
I
know
that
this
is
not
the
only
working
group
that
is
struggling
with
contributors,
compensations
and
related
stuff
and
but
but
yeah,
probably
Communications
is
the
one
that
needs
like
the
most.
You
know
like
situation,
handling
and
management
at
the
moment,
so
yeah
I
would
I
would
probably
put
a
lot
of
attention
in
in
the
next
few
days
to
change
this
on
the
side
of
comms
I'll,
pass
it
to
Simply
I.
B
Mean
can
I
just
jump
into
that
too
I
mean
I
would
also
I
would
also
add
that,
as
like,
you
know
in
comms,
I
see
somebody
with
Twitter
support
for
curation
and
I
also
think
just
Twitter
Twitter
is
like
the
main,
the
main
must-have
from
from
comms,
but
I
I'd
also,
you
know
say
like
focusing
like
what
are
the
priorities
of
comms,
like
maybe
you
know
filling
out
this
board
later
with
and
figuring
out.
What
are
the?
What
is,
what
is
the
Tec
need
from
comms
and
I?
That's
the
work
that
you're
doing
now.
A
So
if
you
just
want
to
say
like
what
you
think
t-e-c-y,
what
is
what
is
it
something
that
we
need
to
be
doing
just
one
thing,
and
then
you
can
pass
it.
What
what's
your
priority
be
Oh.
F
J
Thank
you,
safety
and
so
forth,
easy
white.
You
know
I
I'm
gonna
just
be
quickly
with
this,
but
all
of
this
conversation
and
all
of
these
different
things
coming
up.
They
always
kind
of
bring
me
to
the
same,
to
the
same
thing,
to
the
same
kind
of
possible
reason
that
this
is
all
happening
and
it
has
to
do
with
Direction,
but
I
would
say
it's
kind
of
like
more
fundamental
than
just
Direction
and
I
think
it
has
to
do
with
with
the
purpose
of
the
TC
of
the
Y
of
the
TC
level.
J
I
I
still
don't
feel
that
there's
Clarity
on
on
the
answer
for
that
or
if
there
is
I,
feel
that
people
have
different
interpretations
of.
Why
does
the
TC
exist?
You
know
like
and
also
like
what
problem
are
we
trying
to
to
solve
as
the
Tec
as
an
organization
or
what
is
the
opportunity
that
we're
trying
to
to
take
over
as
an
organization
you
know
and
I
feel
those
two
that
question
of
what
problem?
J
It
will
be
way
easier
for
all
the
working
groups
and
all
the
contributors
to
really
align
to
that
unique
purpose,
because
I
think
it's
it's
different
from
from
the
mission
and
the
vision
you
know,
I
feel
they
can
be
a
little
bit
Broad
and
not
as
fundamental
so
it's
kind
of
hard
to
to
go
back
to
them
and
refer
to
them
in
in
any.
In
any
specific
situation
like,
for
example,
I
right
now,
I
I
can't
remember
exactly
what
our
mission
is.
J
If
we
see
that
we're
doing
something
that
is
not
a
land
with
this
purpose,
then
it's
probably
something
that
we
don't
need
right
so
trying
to
figure
that
out
trying
to
figure
that
that
question
first
of
the
problem
and
then
an
answer
for
that
question
to
become
the
purpose
that
would
be
for
me:
I'll
pass
you
to
to
leaving
or
I,
don't
know,
yeah
Nate.
A
No,
that's
fine
go
ahead.
I
think
you
hit
it
dead
on
the
head
right.
There
I
think
that
that
is
the
key
to
it
all
like
even
the
Mission
Vision
Values
that
we
do
have
I
know
we
set
out
to
become
a
shelling
point,
but
I
I,
don't
know
if
we've
ever
asked
us.
The
question
is:
are
we
even
capable
of
becoming
a
shelling
point?
A
Just
as
a
single
you
know,
Discord
channel
is
a
single
group
like
in
my
the
way
I
look
at
it
now
is
that
the
shelling
point
is,
you
know,
is
broken
down
between
so
many
multiple
token
engineering
projects
that
we
have
a
lot
of
you
know
a
lot
of
gathering
of
token
engineers
in
different
places,
all
over
the
place
and
I
think
you
know,
instead
of
us
becoming
the
Shilling
point,
that
we
facilitate
the
Shilling
Point
by
interconnecting
these
these
Partnerships
and
these
relationships,
but
having
that
Clarity
on
what
our
mission,
vision
and
values
are,
and
you
know
what
our
purpose
is
again
reframing
it
from
the
perspective
of
how
do
we
get
this
economy
working?
A
How
do
we
you
know?
How
do
we
get?
This
token
engineering
shelling
point:
what
does
it
actually
look
like
in
reality
up?
The
scale
is
really
important
to
consider.
So
thank
you
for
saying
that
and
Olivia
opacity.
Sorry.
J
G
J
We're
leaving
so
we're
doing
just
to
to
add
on
to
that
really
quickly.
Sorry,
yeah
I
feel
that
it's
really
good
how
you
what
you
pointed
out,
Nate
I,
feel
that
the
mission-
and
this
idea
of
becoming
the
shielding
point
is
the
the
what
transferring
to
the
what
we
want
to
become.
We
want
to
become
a
shielding
point,
but
why
do
we
want
to
become
a
shielding
point?
J
K
No
worries
yeah,
I'm,
just
thinking
now
listening
to
everybody
that
this
became
like
the
one
word
right
from
Mission,
Vision
and
values
that
we
got
so
attached
to,
and
maybe
that
was
a
bad
use
of
a
word,
because
there
are
so
many
other
things
that
are
in
our
Mission
Vision
Values
that
inform
a
little
bit
more.
What
is
TC's
purpose
so
I
think
building
safe
tokenized
economic
systems
is
something
very
important
like
how?
How
can
we?
How
can
we
create
guidelines
for
safe
token
economics
to
be
built?
K
Who
do
we
need
to
have
around
to
do
that
like
how?
How
could
the
Tec
help
to
standardize
token
engineering
as
a
discipline,
so
token
engineering
is
so
nascent,
is
on
the
stage
of
becoming
an
academic
discipline,
of
having
multiple
bodies
of
knowledge
and
people
working
on
it
collaborating
to
the
space?
K
That's
why
having
a
Commons
body
is
important
for
the
discipline
that
is
not
only
attached
to
possible
profits
that
that
for-profit
projects
can
have
so
I
think
this
is
present
in
our
mission,
vision
and
values
and
and
I
think
there
is
a
lot
of
the
values
that
we
have
there
that
have
been
uphold
and
there's
a
lot
of
what
is
written
in
there
that
we
can
come
back
to
and
realign
with
and
not
perhaps
be
so
focused
on.
The
shelling
point
perspective.
A
K
I
didn't
know
who
hasn't
gone,
maybe
a
year
in.
I
Thank
you,
Olivia
yeah,
I
think
a
lot
of
great
things
are
covered,
but
something
similar
to
compensation
model,
I,
think
in
income
or
some
sort
of
Revenue
or
grants
funding,
not
necessarily
because
we
need
to
you
know
like
be
making
that
money
immediately
or
income,
but
I
just
sense
that
it,
the
lack
of
it,
is
causing
now
like
Juan,
you
mentions,
like
cut-offs
and
layoffs
or
people
not
engaging
as
much
and
some
sort
of
stress
and
anxiety
and
emerging
conflicts
that
I
been
witnessing
so
yeah
I
think,
but
even
though
that
shouldn't
be
our
main
focus
since
we
also
want
to
do
the
work
and
go
back
and
see
okay,
what's
the
problem
that
we're
solving
Clarity
on
purpose
and
before
these,
how
do
we
even
try
to
create
services
or
products
that
may
or
or
get
grants
to
later
on,
like
fund
other
projects
and
help
other
projects?
I
In
this
token,
engineering
community
yeah
that
there's
still
the
need
I
feel
from
just
yeah
like
energetically
I've,
been
feeling
that
sort
of
like
frustration
or
maybe
the
conflict
or
just
Stress
and
Anxiety.
If,
due
to
the
lack
of
that
yeah,
if
anyone
went
already
I'll
just
pass
it
back
to
you
tomorrow,
I
think.
B
A
No
worse,
I
just
want
to
get
this.
The
Tec
wide
conversation
from
everybody
in
perspective
from
everybody.
Then
you
know
we
can
individually
add
to
individual
working
groups,
but
I
think
the
Tec
y
concerns
are
the
ones
that
are
kind
of
foundational
to
how
we
move
forward
so
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
pass
it
over
to
get
in.
C
Thanks
Nate
yeah,
you
know
I
I,
think
about
this.
A
lot
actually
and
I
think
that
we
are
not
really
sure
what
we
want
to
be
when
we
grow
up.
You
know
like
there's
like
this.
The
shelling
point
is:
is
one
always
one
thing
I
think
there's
kind
of
like
a
git
coin
kind
of
re-granting
Vision,
that's
baked
into
that
too,
and
you
know
Olivia
to
your
point.
C
C
Why
is
super
important
that
we
just
get
good
Clarity
on
that
and
I
think
that's
actually
pretty
clear
in
the
mission
I
agree
with
you
Libby
that
that's
like
you
know,
we're
building
the
field
of
token
engineering,
and
that
doesn't
mean
that
we
are
building
it,
but
it
means
it
doesn't
mean
that
we're
building
token
engineering
that
we're
in
charge
of
doing
all
of
that.
But
it's
like
what
can
we
do
if
there's
a
field
or
a
network
that
supports
the
coordination
across
the
field?
C
What
would
we
be
doing
to
support
that
field
of
coordination?
You
know,
like
an
electromagnetic
field,
is
what
I
mean
you
know
it's
like,
if
you
can
think
of
it
as
like
the
connections
between
people
that
kind
of
facilitate
coordination,
the
coordination
that
might
not
happen
by
itself,
like
with
one
individual
organization,
doing
its
thing.
You
know
what
are
the
things
that
no
one
organization
could
ever
do
by
itself,
but
that
together
they
might
be
able
to
do
that.
To
me
feels
like
a
calling,
that's
like
definitely
worth
doing
and
needed.
C
I
I
think
the
problem
that
we're
facing
today
is
that
you
know
we
we've
kind
of
thought
of
ourselves
as
a
selling
point,
but
the
reality
is
is
that
we
don't
really
have
the
the
people
here
to
to
be
a
shelling
point
to
be
able
to
operate
at
that
level
where,
where
we
are
building
the
field
and
helping
to
kind
of
facilitate
that
so
I
think
of
the
shelling
Point
as
like
a
means
to
that
end.
Like
the
shelling
point,
is
it's
not
the
the
reason,
but
it's
the
way.
C
It's
one
way
that
we
get
there
and
I
think
that,
without
that
critical
mass
of
people
coming
here
and
I
by
here,
I
don't
mean
to
the
TC
Discord
server
I
mean
to
the
set
of
services
and
the
activities
that
we're
trying
to
help
coordinate
across
the
the
sector.
C
Without
that
kind
of
Engagement,
then
we're
really.
We
don't
have
a
lot
going
for
us,
I
mean
honestly.
C
So
it's
a
bit
like
a
social
network
in
the
sense
that
you
know
you
need
to
have
that
kind
of
Engagement
and
excitement
with
the
core
energy
of
this
of
this
field
and
the
people
who
are
trying
to
kind
of
help,
pull
that
together
and
I.
Guess
the
last
thing
I'll
say
is
building
on
my
you
know,
I
miss
saying
you
know
like
imagine,
Twitter
or
Facebook
or
LinkedIn,
or
any
of
these
networks
trying
to
make
money
with
nobody
engaged
there.
You
know
like
it
just
doesn't
happen.
C
So
if
we
do
decide
that
the
shelling
Point
like
this
bringing
together
and
Connecting
People,
is
the
path
the
how
we
get
to
the
the.
Why
of
helping
to
build
this
field,
then
that
kind
of
net
social
network,
like
aspect,
is
where
the
value
comes
from
and
from
that
value
grows:
Economic
Opportunity,
but
until
we
have
that,
there's
really
not
much
Economic
Opportunity,
whether
it's
like
people
getting
individual
stakeholder
value
or
like
a
like.
You
know
token
token,
utility
or
you
know,
funders
coming
and
saying
like
wow
look
at
this.
C
L
I'm,
hoping
thanks
well
I
am
hearing
a
little
kind
of
the
same
and
I
I
agree.
I
sense
that
we
we
were
sort
of
building
the
roots
and
now
it's
time
to
get
the
trunk
together
and
so
for
that
first
I
I
think
I.
Like
a
lot
of
the
idea
of
a
roadmap
of
just
having
some
I
know.
L
The
comments
means
a
lot
of
different,
a
lot
of
different
things
for
a
lot
of
people
and
that's
the
beauty
of
it,
but
that
also
makes
it
super
complicated
to
get
to
coordinate
towards
something.
So
we
have
to
compromise,
take
a
decision
and
work
towards
it
and
iterate
over
and
over
and
over
again,
and
so
there's
a
few
things
in
there.
So,
for
example,
in
in
the
case
of
compensation,
I
think
I
agree
a
lot
with
cuanka
we
have
to.
L
We
have
now
to
look
at
opportunities
instead
of
instead
of
things
we
have
to
let
go
especially
because
I
feel
like
we've
with
the
whole
temperature
of
the
community
and
how
things
are
going.
If
we
cannot
get
to
the
point
where
people
are
compensated
and
feel
great,
we
won't
probably
be
able
to
to
keep
the
TC
off
from
from
this
from
this
stage,
and
so
we
we
have
to
be
careful
and
strategic
I,
don't
think
we
have
to
be.
L
That's
that
and
then
there's
there's
something
more
particular
to
my
point,
which
is
with
with
all
of
these,
with
having
a
more
a
more
common
set
of
goals
or
whatever
I
think
we
have
to
also
up
some
of
the
operations
management.
Overall,
we
have
a
lot
of
dependencies,
other
things
that
break
and
we
cannot
maintain
and
I.
Don't
I,
don't
see
now
that
we
are
prepared
to
deal
with
with
those
things
like
I,
don't
know,
the
convert
page
is
broken
right
now.
A
lot
of
people
have
issues.
L
Also
the
price
of
Honey
is
going
down
and
that's
a
possible
attack
surface
on
Celeste,
which
pretty
much
secures
our
our
common
pool.
So
there's
there's
there's
a
few
things
there
that
we
may
want
to
think
and
we
may
want
to
take
care
of
us.
We
will
the
next
step
in
the
TC
and
but
to
negative
customership
rules.
A
A
I
think
Monica
have
you?
Have
you
got
a
chance
to
go?
I
know
you
spoke
a
little
bit,
but
don't
you
have
anything
else?
You
wanted
to
add.
H
Yeah
sure
I
I
also
resonate
with
what
Livi
said
of
like
also
standards.
H
Maybe
we
need
to
to
show
better
what
we
did
in
the
TC,
because
it's
still
something
difficult
to
explain
for
people
who
is
outside,
but
maybe
we
can
work
better
and
on
on
our
narrative
on
how
do
we
present
ourselves
and
going
back
to
where
we
come
from
I?
Think
that's.
That's.
That's
also
interesting.
H
H
Direction
that
we
are
going
and
I
think
that
sometimes
we
want
things
to
go
faster
than
we
want
or
that
or
like
we
can
decide
what
to
cut
off.
But
I
think
that
time
and
interaction
and
the
value
that
we
generate
like
it's
is
the
one
that
ultimately
can
say
which
which,
which
is
the
best
direction
that
we
want
to
go.
H
So
so
I
I
just
want
to
keep
a
positive
mind
on
on
this
process
and
also
what
what
Auntie
said
really.
H
Of
like
we
having
dependence
on
maybe
other
communities,
and
and
how
are
we
trying
to
like,
have
our
own
infrastructure
in
this
in
in
this
web
3
environment.
A
I
I,
agree,
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
different
foundational
challenges
that
NT
brought
up.
You.
A
And
honey
and
then
X
style
and
the
maker
Community
with
the
usdc
debacle,
that's
still
a
looming
thing
that
we
still
don't
have
a
plan
for
I.
You
know
these
are
things
of
the
long
term,
but
they
still
remain
issues
for
us,
and
you
know
out
of
all
of
this,
you
know
I
really
appreciate
everybody's
inputs
and
I.
A
Think
that's
really
important
if
you
have,
if
you
have
10
minutes,
if
you
can
get
into
this
mural
board
and
please
go
through
each
of
these,
these
working
groups
and
add
what
you
think
is
going
to
be
beneficial
in
terms
of
what
we
can
be
doing
in
order
to
move
forward.
Please
please
take
that
time
to
do
so.
A
I'm
going
to
put
you
know,
I'm
going
to
have
10
minutes
here,
but
in
terms
of
next
steps
and
the
Sprint
planning,
you
know,
I'm
gonna
have
to
kind
of
defer
to
Tam,
and
maybe
maybe
Gideon
as
well
in
terms
of
what
to
do
next.
A
In
my
own
opinion,
I
think
what
we
should
be
doing
for
the
Swarm
in
the
Sprint
is
to
develop
a
Collective
roadmap
and
perhaps
have
a
document
that
we
all
work
on
to
develop
that
roadmap
together,
and
so,
if,
if
that
is
something
that
might
be
a
good
idea
for
this
Sprint
I,
would
you
know
like
to
hear
some
feedback
on
that
as
well?
Yeah
I,
don't
know
if
you
have
any
thoughts
on
this
Tim.
B
A
B
B
I
think
I,
like
the
challenge
that
Livia
shared
earlier,
you
know
I,
maybe
I
feel
like
I'm
in
a
holding
pattern,
but
that
you
know
is
maybe
not
I,
don't
think
the
whole
all
the
Tec
is
in
a
holding
pattern.
I
think
that
the
most
important
thing
for
the
Tec
right
now
is
each
working
group
to
which
is
hey.
You
know
if
I
were
to
create
this
working
group
today.
What
would
it
look
like
you
know?
All
many
of
these
working
groups
were
created:
okay,
not
sample,
not
the
reward
system.
B
Those
are
our
newest
ones,
but
many
of
the
other
working
groups
are,
you
know
a
year
and
a
half
two
years
old
and
manifestos
haven't
really
been
updated
or
challenged
or
changed,
and
you
know
new
processes
haven't
you
know
so
I
think
it's
well.
Teams
teams
did
a
restructuring,
I.
Think
it's
worth
looking
at.
What
would
your
working
group
look
like
if
you
were
to
start
it
today?
B
What
what
would
you
present
to
the
Tec
is
like
the
service
that
you
provide
to
the
Tec
the
thing
that
the
Tec
needs
I
think
we
we
got
into
a
pattern
of.
B
The
idea
that
what
we
did
is
what
we
should
continue
to
do
because
it
worked
before
and
we're
saying:
okay,
it
doesn't
work.
You
know
you
gotta,
we
gotta
change
things
and
adapt
to
the
new
context
and
the
the
new
needs
of
the
Tec
and
the
idea
of
the
tecs
really
built.
You
know
we
don't
need
to
be
in
build
mode
anymore,
so
that
I
think
is
I,
think
that's
the
best
use
of
the
time
and
then
even
just
to
say
well
how?
B
B
If
other
people
think
that
you
know
trying
to
pinpoint
objectives
for
the
next
longer
term
make
sense
at
this
juncture,
then
it'd
be
interesting
to
hear
those
things.
A
There
there
are
some
like
concrete
things
that
I
think
are
going
to
be
Universal
within
that
roadmap.
No
matter
what
we
do,
I
think
Partnerships
is
definitely
one
of
them,
but
then
again
you
know
this
is
something
that
we
probably
need
some
foundational
guidance
on.
A
So
perhaps
this
Sprint
planning
we
could
request
that
each
of
the
working
groups
re-evaluate
their
Manifesto,
maybe
submit
a
new
one
that
that
kind
of
re
you
know,
redefines
their
role
in
this
new
phase
of
the
Tec,
and
that
way
we
can,
you
know,
allow
them
to
to
go
to
their
individual
working
groups
and
talk
with
the
contributors
within
and
say
hey.
This
is:
is
this
what
we
need
to
be
doing
right
now?
Is
this
match
what
our
goals
are
and
what
are
our
goals?
A
C
At
the
risk
of
sounding
like
a
broken
record,
I
I
think
that
you
know
not.
Everybody
is
going
to
have
a
natural
place
to
plug
into
the
curation
service,
but
comms
definitely
does
I
would
love
to
see
that
communitas
already
playing
a
key
role
in
that
and
cons
is
too
like
acid.
Laser
has
been
plugging
in
I.
Think
that
you
know
like
this
is
a
great
opportunity
for
us
to
become
relevant
again
and,
like
start
to
build
some
excitement
like
pull
in
some
people
around
specific
categories
of
token
engineering.
C
You
know
like
things
like
governance,
maybe
safety,
those
kinds
of
things,
and
so
man,
if
there's,
if
there's
like
one
area
where
we
can
just
really
focus
and
build
some
energy
and
like
get
the
community
excited
again
that
it's
like
oh
TC,
they're
doing.
Oh
they're,
look
at
this!
It's
pretty
cool
like
this
is
pretty
cool.
I
think
this
is
our
window,
at
least
in
the
next
three
months.
It's
probably
our
best
bet
for
like
becoming
relevant
again
and
becoming
an
exciting
place
again.
So
I
I
would
love.
C
You
know
if
there
are
ways
that
people
can
plug
in
immediate.
You
know
meaningfully
into
that
that
that
would
be
great
I
understand.
Other
people
have
other
priorities
and
stuff,
but
I
think
there
are
a
few
key
groups:
calms
communitas,
where
that's
particularly
important
right
now
so
and
and
may
I
I,
don't
know
how
we
open
that
up
to
get
broader
involvement,
but
I
think
individ
on
a
working
group
basis,
but
individually.
C
We
can
all
be
contributing
to
the
curation
process
itself
and
getting
involved
in
engaging
and
having
conversations
around
those
things
that
other
people
are
sharing.
L
I
also
think
it's
I,
don't
I'm
I,
don't
know
if
that's
like
for
right
now,
but
I
think
it's
increasingly
important
to
start
having
more
input
from
from
the
senior
t
top
Engineers
on
like
prior
to
Preparing
a
roadmap
ourselves
have
more
insight
into
what
do
everyone
else
think
of
the
field
and
what
it
needs
and
then
we
can
adjust
to
whatever.
How
is
it
good.
J
B
Yeah
sure
so,
there's
a
a
few
things
that
Nate
and
I
have
been
discussing
around
the
nomination
process
and
keeping
it
very
similar.
The
nomination
process,
an
off-boarding
ceremony,
Advisory
Group,
nomination
process.
B
You
know,
there's
a
few
of
those
things
and
what
we
started.
I
don't
know
if
this
is
the
what
we
I
don't
know,
I
think
that
maybe
the
this
I
don't
know
if
this
is
the
right
place
to
discuss
it
or
if
everyone
is,
is
interested
in
it,
but
it
what
we
started
talking
about
for
the
nomination
process
is
to
have
it
look
a
lot
like
the
nomination
process
that
exists
now.
B
So,
for
example,
the
current
stewards
would
nominate
Commons
stewards
and
then
there
would
be
a
chance
for
those
stewards
to
say
whether
they
wanted
to
or
not
accept
the
common
stewardship,
because
it
comes
with
a
lot
of
responsibility.
Actually.
L
Wasn't
the
proposal
sort
of
stating
that
working
group
leads
were
stewards
or
anything
that
makes
more
sense.
B
Working
group
stewards
so
there's
working
group
stewards
who
would
Steward
pieces
of
work
and
then
Commons
stewards,
and
that
was
the
that
was
the
differentiation
in
The
Proposal,
really
that
there
would
be
these
different
groups
so
bring
in
an
advisory
team
to
be
able
to
help
make
decisions.
B
So
what
we
can
see
now
in
hindsight
is
that
as
the
Tec
was
growing
and
developing
new
work
streams,
each
of
the
leads
of
the
work
streams
became
a
steward
and
we
ended
up
really
with
15
stewards
and
a
lot
of
attention
diffused
across
many
different
areas
which,
during
the
build,
maybe
made
sense.
Now.
It
makes
a
lot
less
sense
and
it's
only
also
unsupportable
financially.
B
So
there's
this
the
idea
that
working
group
stewards
would
be
funded
by
token
holders.
So
if
you
propose
a
piece
of
work
and
I
want
to
spin
up
a
working
group
around
that,
you
would
create
a
proposal
for
conviction
voting
and
if
it
passes
you,
the
person
would
would
say
who
the
steward
is
in
the
funding
proposal.
B
So
this
is
happening
now
for
each
working
group.
Actually,
that's
how
it
happens
now
and
then
there
would
be
a
group
of
common
stewards
who
would
really
just
be
focused
very
strongly
on
the
health
and
path
forward
of
the
commons.
Many
often
that
the
the
the
working
groups
would
be
complementary
to
that
work,
but
yeah,
there's
that
that
that
that
that
small
group
of
common
stewards
would
be
really
responsible
for
coordinating,
but
also
making
sure
that
that
the
Tec
is
meeting
he
goes
every
quarter.
D
A
Know
we
have
the
current
current
group
of
stewards
that
we
have,
that
we're
working
group,
stewards
within
the
Tec
nominating
the
common
stewards
and
then
having
a
vote
on
that.
But
then
I
I
think
did
we
come
to
agreement
on
that?
The
working
groups
would
decide
to
nominate
their
own
working
group
stewards
as
part
of
that
process
as
well
or
is
that
something
different.
B
B
B
Yeah
so
and
then
for
The
Advisory
Group
this
we
thought
we
would
open
up
to
the
the
community,
but
you
know
there's
certain
people
that
have
a
history
with
the
Tec
and
have
vested
interest
in
seeing
the
Tec
succeed.
So
we
thought
it
would
make
sense
to
get
tacit
approval
for
them.
You
know,
rather
than
just
finding
out
that
they're
nominated
through
the
the
the
Forum
you
know
getting
some
buy-in
from
Key
advisors.
That
we
would
hope
would
would
be
willing
to
advise
the
the
Tec
in
in
a
larger
context,.
A
Yeah
and
so
I
think
that,
after
listening
to
everyone,
I
think
that
the
biggest
aspects
of
Sprint
planning
for
this
upcoming
Sprint
is
going
to
be
the
steward
transformation
process
and
the
review
of
The
Working
groups
to
renew
their
manifestos
so
or
evaluate
that
manifest
those
and
see
what
they
can
offer.
So
I
think
those
are
the
two
things
that
we're
going
to
have
here
and
yeah
I
will
create
that
zenhub
and
if
anybody
else
has
any
thoughts,
please
let
me
know
now:
yeah.
L
Well,
I,
try
to
we
chat
about
this
a
few
weeks
ago
with
Nate
the
only
thing
I'm,
not
I,
don't
really
get
is
why
why
would
we
choose
nominating
comms
as
keywords,
instead
of
them
being
closer
to
say
a
regular
contributor
on
on
terms
of
how
they
work
with
the
working
group,
because
I,
I,
I,
think
nomination,
and
all
of
that
adds
an
extra
sort
of
political
step
in
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
seeing
the
utility
of
that.
B
What
do
you
mean,
how
else
would
they?
How
else
would
somebody
become
the
commons,
a
common
Steward?
What
would
an
alternative
path?
Look
like.
L
I
mean
they're
pretty
much
like
when
we
chatted
what
I,
what
I
understood
is
that
I
come
stewards,
pretty
much
someone
who
who's
doing
organizational
work
for
the
TC
on
a
higher
level,
and
so
that
seems
to
me
that
that's
something
of
that
say
I
don't
want
to
say
anyone,
but
anyone
could
do,
and
so
maybe
they
just
add,
like
other
contributors,
I
come
to
the
working
group
and
if
I,
if
I
am
able
to
provide
value
for
extended
period
of
time,
then
I'm
on
the
working
group,
just
pretty
much
as
every
other
working
group
operates.
L
I
mean
I
would
consider
them
as
a
steward
come
to
Stewart's
anyways.
It's
just
that
the
process
is
different.
You
it's
more
like
I,
see
it
more
like
a
meritocracy
than
political
nominations,
so
you
work
your
ways
towards
it
and
same
same
way.
Otherwise,
if
you
have
to
be
off-border,
you
just
I,
don't
know,
stop
contributing,
have
an
agreement.
L
Maybe
the
working
group
doesn't
feel
comfortable
with
you
anymore
whatever,
but
I
believe
that
brings
I,
guess
I
would
say
more
opportunity
for
anyone
to
be
found
come
Steward
if
they
wish
to
become
one,
and
just
you
know,
let's,
let's
tie
to
forward
to
political
power
dynamics.
L
Well
me
like
I,
don't
know
if
I
were
to
end
up
doing
the
work
of
a
comma
Stewart
I
would
have
to
wait
for
any
of
you
to
notice
me
and
then
nominate
me
and
go
through
a
process.
Why
shouldn't
I
be
able
to
just
jump
in
on
the
working
group
and
do
my
thing.
A
Yeah
I
I
think
you
know
it's
unfortunate
and
but
that's
the
truth
is
that
you
know
it
does
come
with
this
political
and
social
Authority
that
sometimes
the
steward
title
people
perceive
and
I'm
not
saying
it's
right,
because
I
don't
think
it
is
I
think
you
know
when
we,
when
we
designate
Stewart
it's
just
kind
of
a
a
role
of
focus.
You
know
if
you're,
a
common
Steward,
you
have
a
specific
realm
of
of
thought
and
approach
towards.
A
You
know:
responsibility
towards
a
certain
area
of
of
a
particular
function
within
the
Tec
rather
than
this
is
a
designation
of
authority
and
I
think
that
that
is
problematic
in
a
lot
of
ways.
You
know
if
we
have
a
comms
working
group,
Stewart
I
I,
see
it
more
as
this
person
is
strictly
focused
on
cons
and
they're,
you
know
they're
the
ones
carrying
the
institutional
knowledge
of
that
working
group,
The,
the
history
of
that
working
group
and
they're,
somebody
that
can
be
trusted
and
relied
upon
to
understand.
B
I'm
sure
I
just
agree
with
that
statement.
Can
I
jump
in
I
disagree
with
that
actually
and
see.
I
see
it
more
of
the
way
you're
seeing
it,
but
there's
just
two
different
things:
there's
one
I
want
to
clarify
the
two
different
Steward
roles,
the
working
group,
stewards
and
Commons
stewards
I
want
to
clarify
that
and
then
the
second
thing
is
I
want
to
say.
B
The
original
intention
of
the
steward
is
not
to
be
a
title
that
that
is
like
an
unfortunate
byproduct
that
I
think
we
need
to
stop,
but
it's
you
know
the
way
that
the
way
that
we
originally
described
it
is
it's
it's
it's
a
role
that
someone
can
come
in
and
energize
and
then
walk
away.
You
know
not
walk
away
from,
but
it
shouldn't
feel
like
it's
something
that
you've
lost
and
it
shouldn't
feel
like
a
position
of
power.
It
shouldn't
feel
like
you're,
the
king
of
this
working
group,
and
you
tell
everyone
what
to
do.
B
That's
that's
not
what
it's
supposed
to
be
at
all
and
it
I
think
that
in
some
I
think
in
it
it
can
come
across
like
that.
As
you
know,
the
person
who's
deciding
everything
for
the
working
group,
but
it
really
is,
is
meant
to
be
servant,
leadership
and
empowering
the
people
in
the
working
group
to
be
more
successful
and
I.
Think
there's
a
you're,
a
few
things
that
are
sorry
I
know,
I
interrupted
you.
But
let
me
finish
because
I
was.
B
B
It
should
be
to
want
to
one
person
and
that
you
know,
as
as
working
groups,
we
could
get
better
at
at
that
as
well.
You
know:
we've
experimented
in
a
few
working
groups
with
like
Coast
stewardship,
Eduardo
and
I
and
caminitas
and
Nate
and
I
in
in
in
in
a
Stuart's
working
group,
because
I
think
it's
really
important
for
us
to
you
know,
come
in
and
out
of
the
stewardship
role
with
Grace
and
allow
other
people
chances
to
to
also
Steward
the
the
community
and
the
work.
B
Okay
and
then
just
to
to
you
know
what
we're
talking
about
is
like
the
first
nomination
process
for
Commons
stewards.
We
haven't
had
common
stewards
before
so.
Yes,
it
is
a
little
bit
like
okay,
where
how
do
we
do
it?
Do
we
have
the
community
decide
who
the
common
stewards
are?
Do
we?
You
know
people
decide
themselves
like
it
seems
the
easiest
just
to
be
like
we
have
a
nominee.
We
have
a
nomination
process,
a
steward
nomination
process,
onboarding
and
off-boarding.
B
Already,
let's
use
that
process
for
the
first
group
of
Commons
stewards
and
just
to
differentiate
the
working
group
from
the
commons
stewards.
So
let's
take
some,
you
know,
there's
gravity
and
you
know,
and
they
have
their
own
work
stream
and
they
have
their
own
objectives.
You
know
in
Q4
they
want
to
finish
this
in
q1
23.
B
They
want
to
do
this
so
they're
they
have
their
own
okrs,
they
have
their
own
road
map,
they
have
their
own
working
group,
they
have
their
weekly
sync
and
then
there's
transparency
and
then
there's
you
know,
there's
many
different
working
groups
who
are
focused
on
their
work
stream
and
the
idea
of
the
commons
stewards
is
there's
a
few
people
who
are
focused
on
the
Tec
writ
large
right.
We
have
these
Partnerships
that
are
strategic.
We
have
this
revenue
and
and
all
of
the
working
groups
can
contribute
to
that.
B
But
their
responsibility
is
to
be
focused
on
that
to
be
focused
on
driving
the
Tec
forward
and
it's
it
it's
a
lot
of
work.
Actually,
you
know
in
our
in
our
proposal
we're
expecting
that
the
common
stewards
like
working
group
stewards,
was
expected,
like
10
15
hours
a
week
a
week
of
work,
we're
expecting
common
stewards
to
be
30,
35
40
hours
a
week
to
really
focus
on
on
on
the
the
core
strategic
direction
of
the
Tec
and
executing
on
it.
L
Yeah,
are
you
finished
or
I
I'm,
not
sure
oh
yeah,
well,
I
I
want
to
address
first
in
Nate's
comments
on
on
I,
guess,
sort
of
the
overall
responsibility.
L
I
think
that's
proof
for
everyone
in
the
TC
in
that
and
I
feel
that
that,
like
that's
also
one
of
the
areas
we
should
focus
more
because
Bounty
compensation
is,
is
not
great
for
responsibility,
and
so
the
stewards
stood
and
have
a
responsibility,
but
also
does
everyone
else,
and
so
this
is
where
I
go
back
to
to
my
point
on
come
stewards
you
don't
need
a
nomination
process
for
just
to
for
commitment,
I,
don't
in
I,
don't
think
you
even
I
I,
don't
even
think
a
nomination
means
commitment.
L
Commitment
is
more
contractual,
more
an
agreement
and
you
can
have
those
with
people
being
not
necessarily
being
nominated
and
so
I
don't
know.
I
come
to
Steward
after
X
or
Y
requirement.
I
do
believe
comes
to
what
you
should
probably
be
held
to
like
I.
Don't
think
anyone
can
be
a
consisting
word
so
there
there
should
probably
be
some
requirements
to
that
agreement.
L
But
ultimately,
what's
important
is
the
agreement
and
then
I
still
see
the
the
nomination
as
a
political
barrier
in
in
some,
not
necessarily
great
power
Dynamic
there,
but
I
also
believe
that
applies
to
other
working
groups.
Talking
about
compensation.
Maybe
the
way
to
go
forward
is
with
certain
commitments
in
certain
working
groups
that
are
actually
that
are
currently
paying
with
bounties,
but
they
do
need
someone
responsible
for
stuff
anyways
and
we
are
not
providing
for
any
any.
F
F
Like
and
he's
also
saying
and
I
see,
like
you
know
like
if
time
have
a
vision
that
something
like
can
change
the
the
way
of
the
DC
and
then
maybe
you
have
another
different
like
I.
Think
it's
and
we
are,
we
think,
that's
something
wrong,
but
I
I,
really
don't
I'm
I.
F
Think,
like
you
know,
Tom
can
say:
okay
I'm
going
to
do
this
for
the
TC
and
put
it
up
to
conviction
voting,
and
this
is
the
theme
I'm
going
to
work
with,
and
this
is
totally
fine
because
the
token
holders
are
voting
on
the
team
on
the
proposal
and
anyone
can
create
this
proposal.
It's
open
to
everyone,
so
I
think
that
would
be
like
a
solution.
And
then
you
know
the
toggle
holders
at
the
end
of
the
day
is
who
are
deciding
first
giving
the
money
to
towards
towards
something
yeah.
I
J
J
I
mean
I,
feel
that
that
could
come
from
the
contributors
themselves
and
emerge
organically.
You
know,
I
think
that
kind
of
like
to
attendees,
saying
you
know,
but
bringing
this
up
to
the
bringing
it
to
the
to
the
space
of
the
working
group.
I
think
natural
leadership
could
start
emerging
in
the
working
groups,
and
that
could
be
like
the
the
light
guiding
the
efforts
within
the
working
group.
J
So
we
might
not
need
to
have
like
a
super
defined
role
for
working
groups
toward
and
instead
just
kind
of
like
focus
on
having
these
comments
towards
where
they
have
these
yeah.
Basically,
what
Tom
was
saying
you
know
that
definition
of
the
roles
and
trying
to
to
keep
keep
up
with
the
with
the
mission
of
the
Tec
right,
I,
don't
know.
J
I
think
that
that
could
be
an
idea
and
I
say
it
also
because
and
for
example,
I
right
now,
I
can
think
of
communitas
right
with
a
ram
and
Costa
I
feel
that's
a
really
interesting
experiment.
J
That's
going
on
there
I
I
feel
that
that
working
group
doesn't
have
a
Steward
right
now,
but
it's
finding
their
way
in
organizing
themselves,
and-
and
it
was
there
like
an
advisor,
you
know
and
Gideon
is
also
there
as
an
advisor,
so
I
feel
it's
a
really
good
Dynamic
coming
up
from
there
I'm
not
saying
it
will
work
100,
but
I
think
it
would
be
worth
exploring
and
same
thing
with
I
feel
like
Gideon
has
been
the
working
group
Steward
of
sample
I
think
he
has
been
able
to
really
take
a
good,
a
really
good
approach
to
it
and
and
I'm
being
being
more
of
this
leader
and
and
guidance
within
the
working
group
that
has
come
to
play
in
a
really
organic
natural
way
that
that
he
feels
more
as
a
contributor
and
part
of
the
group
than
as
a
manager,
let's
say
so.
A
Right,
yeah
I
think
that's
a
really
good
point.
I
I,
but
I
just
wanted
to
pass
this
over
to
Aram
and
just
kind
of
how
has
your
experience
been
in
terms
of
cultivating
leadership
within
Community
toss
and
how
your
relationship
with
Costa
and
how
you
guys
have
been
delegating
work
and
organizing
around
stuff
is?
Is
it
how's
your
experience
I
just
wanted
to?
If
you
don't
mind.
B
B
Bear
I,
think
it's
you
that
yeah
that
made
that
comment.
I'm,
hesitant
but
I'll
share
my
hesitations
about
about
it
being
successful.
You
know
yeah
I,
think
you're.
You
want
to
just
try
if
it
works.
I
B
B
I'm,
just
gonna
I'm
gonna
finish
because
I
do
think.
I
do
also
think
it's
an
interesting
experiment.
You
know
my
hesitation
comes
around
accountability.
I
think
that
I
think
there's
so
I
just
also
want
okay,
I'm
gonna
interrupt
myself
to
say
that
Gideon
is
extraordinary
and
I
think
he's
helping
cultivate,
Next
Generation
leaderships
in
the
Tec
and
I
think
he
should
get
a
lot
of
credit
for
that
and
I
think
it's
really
important.
His
leadership
style
is
just
unbelievable.
B
But
accountability
is
where
we
end
up
reaching
the
you
know
the
critical
point:
you
know:
how
do
people
get
compensation?
How
are
they
getting
how
what
if
they
don't
get
compensation?
B
What
if
the
working
group
squanders
the
funding,
so
I
think
that
there's
some
there's
the
problem
to
be
solved
is
accountability
within
the
the
group
that
has
funding
from
the
Tec,
whatever
we
call
it
and
whatever
the
the
account
like
the
point
of
the
steward
is
to
be
like
this
is
this?
Is
the
person
who's
accountable
for
that
who
we
come
to
when
there's
a
problem
in
the
working
group
and
with
a
group
of
five
people?
B
Even
if
they're
extraordinary,
like
in
the
case
of
communitas
I,
think
we
have
extraordinary
contributors,
we
might
have
a
case
where
there's
five
people
that
aren't
extraordinary
and
how
do
you
know
who's
accountable
in
that
case,
I
think
that's
the
biggest
challenge
with
having
a
funded
group
sort
of
a
stewardness,
but
I'm
really
interested
in
hearing
ideas
and
solutions
and
I'll
pass
to
you.
Iran.
Thanks
for
your
patience.
I
You
can
hear
me
right
all
right,
yes,
yeah
I
mean
it's
very
new
so
far,
but
it's
it
I
think
it's
been
fairly
easy
to
navigate
like
you
mentioned,
Tamara
thanks
to
Gideon,
and
all
these
Community
I
mean
Nate
and
auntie
and
bear
like
they've
been
all
along
like
helping
me
and
Costa
with
every
like
thing.
I
Basically,
so
it
just
became
this
Collective
effort
of
you
know,
transitioning
from
like
Edo's
presence
into
just
like
I,
think,
reconstructing
and
thinking
of
new
ways
how
we
can
coordinate
and
how
we
can
take
ownership
and
also,
how
can
we
be
accountable
in
a
way
that
doesn't
necessarily
require
a
certain
Steward,
but
I
mean
still
you're
right
like
it
does,
I
mean
the
name
doesn't
really
matter
because,
like
at
the
end
of
the
day,
coaster
and
I,
we
basically
just
shared
what
edu
was
doing
I
mean
we
agreed
to
take
on
certain
responsibilities
right
like,
even
though
that's
not
formal,
stewardship
or
even
though,
like
we're.
I
Actually,
thinking
maybe
should
communitas
work
in
group
dissolve
in
the
future
and
just
let
all
these
Community
Building
be
a
collective
action
of
the
community,
rather
than
certain
individuals
doing
that,
but
by
keeping
certain
tasks
and
like
responsibilities
like
guide
ship,
for
example,
so
yeah
I
I,
like
I,
really
like
working,
maybe
like
splitting
the
work
as
like
the
steward
work
between
multiple
individuals
in
this
case
like
right
now
Costa,
we
are
working
on
well
really
great,
but
I
also
feel
confident
and
supported
thanks
to
I
mean
yeah,
Gideon
bear
and
teenage
and
all
the
other
people
that
have
been
super
helpful.
I
A
No,
it's
perfect.
You
know
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
think
you
know
looking
at
how
this
happens
and
if
we
can't
keep
that
accountability,
it
might
be
something
worth
exploring,
because
my
biggest
fear,
with
the
stewardship
and
within
the
working
groups,
is
that
either
you
become
locked
within
a
certain
realm
or
you
become.
A
A
We're
doing
this
thing
and
it
kind
of
closes
the
the
decision
space
a
little
bit
more
than
it
needs
to
happen,
and
so
eliminating
that
title,
eliminating
that
rule
and
just
having
a
group
of
people
who
are
you
know,
leading
and
sharing
that
responsibility,
I
think
is,
is
worthy
of
of
exploring
and
experimenting
with,
and
so
I
hope
that
we
can
keep
doing
that
with
Community
class
and
see
where
you
know
it
heads
and
what
kind
of
problems
that
you
see
along
the
way,
and
perhaps
that
is
a
you
know,
a
path
forward
for
the
working
groups,
and
maybe
we
don't
have
working
group
stewards,
but
you
know
I
do
think
you
know
we
shouldn't
be
afraid
to
experiment
with
this
and
I.
A
Think
Community
toss
is
a
great
example
of
that.
So
perhaps
we
can
just
keep
an
eye
on
that
and
maybe
see
where
we
go
from
there.
L
I
actually
hold
a
a
different
point
of
view
of
what's
happening
in
communities,
because
I
think,
what's
what's
seen
before,
stewards
is
about
I,
guess,
sort
of
responsibility
in
cross
working
group
in
high
level,
TC
involvement
and
while
the
Edo's
responsibilities
have
been
split
between
Iran
and
Costa,
Iran
is
at
least
so
far
is
who's
been
sort
of
in
Steward
schools,
all
the
working
group
calls,
etc,
etc.
L
So,
like
more
more
involved
in
the
community
and
at
the
end
of
the
day,
they
share
work
but
who's
going
to
give
the
high
level
input
from
the
community
to
communities
is
going
to
be
a
ramp.
So
we
can
call
it.
However,
we
want,
but
in
my
point
of
view,
Iris
leading
communities
right
now
and
so
I
think
that
goes
back
to
the
point
of
time.
We
can
call
it.
However,
we
want
it's.
The
same
thing
about
I
was
I
thought
of
an
example
about
com
common
stewards.
L
Maybe
it's
useful
So
like
let's
ditch
the
term
Commons
and
stewards
and
use
I,
don't
know,
maybe
probably
when
I
get
I
don't
know,
what's
what's
more
appropriate,
let's,
let's
use
probably
manager
for
the
sake
of
project
manager,
even
if
they
are
private
managers
for
the
TC
on
a
higher
level.
They
are
still
project
managers
you
on
a
normal
case.
You
wouldn't
nominate
a
project
manager,
you
sort
of
contract
them
sort
of
have
an
agreement
with
them
within
your
department,
I
guess-
and
so
that's.
L
I
see,
there's
value
on
on
on
political
movements
on
stewards
and
delegates
that
have
stake
in
governance,
power
delegated,
but
stewards
are
contributors
like
as
far
as
I
understand
contributors
as
anybody
else
and
so
I
think
they
should
be
held
to
very
similar
structures
as
in
pretty
much
every
other
working
group
and
because
that's
I
think
you
said
that,
for
example,
contributors
in
working
group
still
would
are
sort
of
held
accountable
to
some
extent
by
funding
and
I
guess
so
do
are
the
stewards,
the
common
stewards
and
so
like
the
only
thing
I'm
not
saying
is
why?
L
Why
would
we
use
nomination
for
them
and
not
for
everyone
else,
or
vice
versa?
Why
wouldn't
we
use?
Why,
wouldn't?
Why
aren't
we
using
nomination
for
anybody
else,
but
yes
from
for
common
stewards
and
I
guess
that's
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
at
so
for,
for
instance,
I
think
Gideon
has
been
making
a
really
good
a
really
good
job
on
placing
everyone
on
Sample
on
the
right
place
and
so
I
don't
know
how
exactly
he
does.
L
He
does
it,
but
maybe
there's
a
thing
to
learn
from
that,
and
you
know
if
you
get
roles
properly
described,
you
can
fit
people
that
fit
into
the
role,
and
so,
if
anyone
comes
across
this,
they
were
working
group
that
sort
of
fits
the
role
and
there's
a
need,
and
they
can
agree
to
some
extent
to
an
agreement
to
a
mutual
contract
or
whatever
there.
You
have
a
new
common
steward.
C
I'm
not
can
I
add
a
couple
of
thoughts,
I
think
I.
First
of
all,
I
think
this
conversation's
really
valuable,
because
I
think
we're
just
like
going
into
this
world
of
like
Dao's,
and
we
we
don't
want
to
adopt
the
models
that
are
kind
of
broken
from
the
past,
where
you've
got
centralized
hierarchies
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff
right.
C
This
is
the
challenge
right
and
by
the
new
thing,
I'm
I'm
gonna,
come
back
to
the
thing
that
Tam
was
saying,
which
is
accountability,
is
everything
when
it
comes
to
fulfilling
a
mission
like
it
really
is,
and
you
know
so
in
in
these
working
relationships.
We
have
to
balance
the
the
relationships
right,
that
comes
with
the
culture
and
all
of
that
kind
of
stuff,
with
the
tasks
that
are
involved
in
actually
fulfilling
the
mission.
C
C
So
we
could
probably
learn
from
those
models
and
actually
Bear
and
I
have
been
doing
some
looking
into
those
kinds
of
things
and
and
figuring
out
how,
for
example,
the
the
idea
that
Auntie
brought
up
about
roles
like
clarifying
roles
of
what's
needed
and
differentiating
those
from
the
actual
people,
so
that
people
can
slot
in
and
out
and
be
flexible
and
and
and
and
move
around,
but
that
the
role
is
actually
there
forever.
C
C
I
think
it's
there's
accountability
of
the
individual
and
then
there's
accountability
of
the
collective,
and
the
reason
that
we
have
hierarchies
I
think
is
because
it
becomes
much
easier
to
just
say
you
know:
Blanca
you're,
you're
responsible,
like
the
the
community,
is
making
you
accountable
for
making
sure
that
all
that
stuff
over
there
happens,
as
as
you
promised,
it
will
Gideon
same
with
you.
C
You
know,
and
so
I
think
that
those
are
kind
of
shortcuts
right,
like
for
accountability
to
the
whole,
like
it
comes
down
to
a
specific
relationship
and
I
think
there
are
ways
for
that
person
who
has
that
group
accountability
to
run
things
more
as
like
a
coordinator
or
a
servant
leader
in
ways
that
don't
have
to
look
like
the
old
models,
but
we
still
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do
to
figure
out
exactly
what
that
looks
like,
and
the
last
thing
I'll
say
about
accountability
is
that
accountability
without
good
back
systems
is
just
it's
very
hard.
C
So
I
think
that
what
Livia
did
with
the
polis
survey
recently
is
a
really
good
step
in
that
direction.
It's
like
it
would
be
so
good
I
would
really
love
to
hear
feedback,
not
just
from
the
sampo
group.
I
mean
we
do
that
individually
on
the
calls,
but
like
from
the
community,
you
know
kind
of
like
a
pulse.
That's
there
and
the
pulse
doesn't
say
like
Gideon
is
fired
from
the
you
know,
but
it
says,
like
oh
Gideon,
there's
some
problems
in
Sample
or
the
the
community's
perception
of
sample
or
whatever
right.
C
That's
like
acts
as
a
flag
that
now
Gideon
needs
to
take
a
look
at
that
area
and
if
Gideon
doesn't
take
a
look
at
that
area,
the
feed
processes
in
place
to
be
able
to
push
Gideon
out
for
the
good
of
the
whole.
So
these
are.
These
are
just
some
they're
kind
of
random
things,
but
I
think
they
all
spin
around
this
idea
of
accountability,
building
accountability,
structures
for
this
new,
this
new
world
that
we're
going
into
and
the
fact
that
we
don't
know
exactly
what
to
look
like.
But
we've
got
to
do
some
experiments.
A
Yeah
I
think
that
is
a
really
great
conversation
that
we're
having
around
this
and
I
think
this
will
continue
to
happen
during
the
stewardship
transformation
process,
as
we
go
through
the
advice
process
and
so
I
encourage
everybody
to
have
these
conversations
engage
on
the
Forum
and
discuss
more
about
it,
because
I
do
think.
This
is
a
really
important
topic
and
you
know
I've
always
been.
You
know
not
not
the
centralization
for
the
sake
of
we
need
to,
especially
during
this
transition
time.
A
We
do
need
to
have
a
system
that's
in
place
that
can
help
us
guide
and
have
more
accountability
among
the
initiatives
that
we
were
taking
under.
So
if
anybody
else
has
any
comments,
please
feel
free
to,
otherwise
we
can
close
out
this
Sprint
planning
session
and
move
forward.