►
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
C
Okay,
thanks
tam,
so
so
I
before
I
jump
in,
I
just
wanted
to
say
a
little
bit
about
my
role
today.
I'm
actually
gonna
be
trying
to
wear
two
hats
and
the
first
one
is
like
a
facilitator
hat.
You
know
so
like
trying
to
help
us
all
achieve
some
type
of
like
consensus
reality
about
like
the
plan
like
the
way
forward
with
with
our
money.
C
So
and
then
the
other
is
like
as
a
community
leader
like
you
all,
you
know,
I
have
some
opinions
and
I
have
some
opinions,
some
opinions
in
particular
about
the
sample
stuff,
the
sample
strategy.
So
what
I'm
going
to
try
to
do
is
just
like
keep
these
separate
as
best
I
can,
and
so
I'm
going
to
start
with,
like
just
like
that
that
second
role
like
presenting
us
kind
of
like
a
strategic
frame
that
we
talked
about
in
the
sample
group,
got
some
initial
feedback
on.
C
So
I
want
to
like
share
that
with
you
all
and
then
and
then
shift
to
a
conversation
about.
You
know
in
particular
like
what.
How
do
we
deal
with
the
the
shrinking
common
pool
and
how
does
that
affect
the
way
that
we
spend
money
going
forward?
So
that's
that's
what
I'd
like
to,
because
I
think
that's
the
thing.
C
That's
like
most
pressing
right
now
we're
starting
to
run
up
against
some
issues
around
that
right
and
then
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
I've
got
this
tool
that
I'd
like
to
share
with
you
all
that
it's
just
like
a
way
for
us
to
get
like
a
quick
take
on
what
everybody's
thinking
about
this
stuff.
C
There's
some
specific
questions
in
there
and
I'll
kind
of
walk
you
through
that,
it's
pretty
simple
and
then
I'll
just
end
by
sharing
my
own
opinion,
like
I'm,
going
to
try
to
keep
my
opinion
out
of
it
in
the
beginning,
just
to
facilitate
and
then
I'll
share
my
thoughts
at
the
end
with
yeah,
with
some
closing
actions.
Does
that.
C
To
everybody,
sound,
alright,
okay,
okay
cool,
so
I
am
going
to
share
my
screen,
and
so
the
first
question
is:
is
this
readable
to
everybody
or
not?
Do
I
need
to
do
anything
to
make
this
a
little
bit
better,
a
little.
B
C
C
So
some
of
you've
already
seen
this
so,
but
there
are
a
couple
people
who
have
not
so
I'm
gonna
go
through
it
anyway
and
and
yeah.
So
one
of
the
basic
frames
in
this
and
the
way
that
that
I've
been
seeing
this
is
that
you
know
the
tc
is
not
just
like
a
company.
C
You
know
we
are
we
we
created
our
own
micro
economy,
and
so
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
to
to
think
of
it
in
those
terms
and
like
from
a
lens
of
economic
development
right.
So
it's
like
from
that
lens.
C
We
can
think
of
our
strategy
going
forward
in
terms
of
like
phases,
and
so
what
I'm
positing
here
is
that
there's,
like
an
initial
phase
that
we're
in
right
now,
which
is
really
about
economic
security
and
in
some
ways,
this
kind
of
maps
to
like
the
maslow
hierarchy
of
needs.
C
You
know
so
like
at
the
beginning,
we're
really
just
like
trying
to
keep
the
door
like
keep
the
door
open
and
keep
things
running
right,
but
then
at
a
certain
point
once
we,
but
if
we
make
the
right
investments,
we
will
start
to
build
some
economic
momentum.
Things
will
start
to
we'll
we're
we'll
start
to
gel,
we'll
be
creating
value
and
we'll
start
to
be
compensated
for
that
value,
and
then
once
that
gets
going
fast
enough
once
that
momentum
builds
we'll
be
generating
some
economic
abundance.
C
So
this
is
kind
of
like
in
a
way.
The
analogy
is
like
a
kite
right.
It's
like
in
the
in
the
first
phase
of
flying
a
kite,
it
kind
of
sucks,
because
you're
just
so
focused
on
trying
to
keep
it
off
the
ground
like
you're,
trying
to
keep
it
up
in
the
air
and
you're
not
doing
fancy
tricks
or
anything
like
that.
You're
just
trying
to
like
get
some
lift,
and
so
then
so
that's
kind
of
like
where
we
are
right.
C
Now,
I
would
argue,
is
that
you
know
the
strategies
need
to
be
about
reducing
risk,
reducing
spending
but
being
really
careful
about
the
spending
we
do
do
you
know
not
being
afraid
to
spend,
but
when
we
spend
spend
on
things
that
build
our
capacity
and
then
you
know,
as
that's
as
the
kite
starts
to
go
up
higher,
we
get
a
little
bit
more
freedom,
let's,
hopefully
we're
building
some
services
that
are
creating
value
for
for
users
of
the
commons,
and
that
is
creating
some
synergies
that
then
you
know
just
get
things
moving
faster
and
faster
in
terms
of
like
a
flow
of
value,
and
if
and
finally
you
know,
we
the
kite's
way
up
in
the
sky-
and
it's
like
we've
got
lots
of
room
to
maneuver.
C
D
C
The
economic
development
lens-
the
second
thing
second
lens
on
this
whole
thing-
is
this:
this
coming
back
to
like
what
is
the
value?
What
is
the
the
the
resource?
C
That's
at
the
center
of
this
commons
of
the
token
engineering,
commons
and
gregory
london,
and
other
people
too,
have
had
some
interesting
kind
of
ways
of
looking
at
this
question
of
value
and
framing
it
in
terms
of
different
types
of
capital,
and
so
I
think
that
that's
a
useful
lens
for
us
in
terms
of
building
capital
over
time-
and
I
just
picked
four
gregory-
has
like
eight
different
types,
there's
lots
of
different
ways
of
looking
at
this,
but
I
picked
four
just
to
simplify
one
is
cultural
capital
which
we
have
in
abundance
in
the
tdc.
C
The
other
is
financial
capital
which
we've
been
really
lucky.
Actually,
our
financial
capital
is
pretty
amazing
because
it
didn't
come
with
like
all
these
strings
attached
right
didn't
come
with
vc,
you
know
dictating
the
terms
like
we.
We
set
the
terms
right.
We
set
the
parameters,
so
that's
super
cool
and
very
rare.
Then
the
third
one
is
like
social
capital.
C
So
the
the
power
of
relationships
talk
about
that
in
a
sec,
the
different
types
of
relationships
that
we're
like
we're
likely
to
develop
over
time
and
then
finally,
expertise
capital,
which
I
think
is
the
part
of
where
we
want
to
go
and
and
what
this
slide
is
showing
right
here
is
basically,
you
know.
This
is
the
perspective
of
kind
of
where
we
are.
We
start
with
culture,
cultural
capital.
That's
like
our
greatest
strength,
it's
like
it's!
C
This
is
this
is
kind
of
like
a
a
lens
that
has
to
do
with
the
types
of
stakeholders
who
are
involved
in
the
tec,
and
so
a
lot
of
our
focus
to
date
has
been
on
builders
like
how
do
we
or
or
contributors
right?
How
do
we?
How
do
we
pull
people
in
and
get
people
engaged,
and
how
do
we,
you
know
compensate
them,
and
how
do
we
organize
ourselves
and
how
do
we
do
it
in
a
way?
That's
not
like
an
old
bureaucracy
right.
C
We
we
also
have
spent
a
lot
of
time
thinking
about
the
role
of
governance,
like
really
cool
tools.
For
doing
that,
the
thing
that's
kind
of
I
would
argue
new.
This
is
a
stakeholder
set
that
we
haven't
really
focused
on
yet
is
users,
so
so
who
are
the
people
who
are
really
gonna
use?
D
C
Sorry,
I
gotta
shrink
this
one
down
a
little
bit,
so
what
this
all
suggests
is
kind
of,
like
a
high
level
theory
of
change,
for
how
we
build
our
capital
over
time,
and
what
I'm
suggesting
here
is
that
the
thing
that
we
are
really
rich
and
strong
in
is
our
culture.
You
know
we,
I
could
go
into
the
details
there,
but
I
think
everybody
knows
you
know
the
cultural
build
that
we
did
and
was
happening
way
before
I
got
here.
C
C
Interesting
thing
about
this
particular
form
of
capital
is,
is
it's
very
fungible
like
we
can
use
it
for
to
buy
other
types
of
capital,
so
we
can
use
it
to
grow
the
number
of
people
who
are
affiliating
with
us
and
and
deepen
you
know
so.
There's
different
types
of
social
ties,
social
capital,
but
the
other
thing
that
we
can
use
this
for
is
to
develop
a
set
of
services,
expertise,
token,
engineering
expertise.
C
That
will
be,
I
think,
the
thing
that
will
pull
users
more
and
more
into
the
tec
and
so
the
expertise
not
going
to
go
into
a
whole
bunch
of
detail.
But
what
that
looks
like
in
the
document
there's
a
document
I'll
send
out
at
the
end,
but
there's
basically
two
types
of
expertise
that
I'm
I'm
talking
about
here.
One
is
expertise,
that's
embedded
in
people,
so
that's
learning,
that's
the
token
engineering
academy
and
then
the
other
kind
is
expert,
token
engineering,
expertise,
that's
embedded
in
software
or
in
writing
right.
C
It's
like
that's
the
kind
of
thing
that
you
can
automate
and
you
can
scale
to
serve
many
many
people,
and
so
that
will
be
over
time
some
of
the
types
of
services
that
I
hope
that
we'll
be
able
to
start
exploring
the
the
there's
only
two
more
slides.
This
is
basically
showing
this
idea
that
this
this
pie
chart
of
our
types
of
capital.
C
Actually,
once
we
start
this
spinning,
you
know
once
these
things
start
to
bleed
into
each
other,
and
we've
got
financial
capital
being
spent
on
more
cultural
capital
on
social
capital
and
expertise
capital.
The
thing
starts
to
actually
spin
like
a
like
a
flywheel
right,
and
so
this
is
the
economic
momentum
part
where
there's
like
synergy
that
starts
to
build
between
these
different
types
of
capital
and
we're
and
we're
intentionally
investing
not
just
in
these
types
of
capital,
but
in
the
synergy
that
between
them
right
and
finally,.
C
Is
kind
of
sums
it
up?
I
think
that
what
this
suggests
is
that,
if
we're
really
careful
about
our
investment,
the
money
that
we,
the
financial
money,
the
financial
capital,
that
we
have
right
now
conserving
it
and
being
very
strategic
about
how
we
invest
it
in
building
social
capital,
so
you
know
bringing
people
in
and
figuring
out
how
to
engage
them
in
meaningful
relationships
that
build.
You
know,
services
and
that
that
are
in
line
with
the
mission,
and
then
we
build
the
services
that
build
our
expertise,
capital.
C
C
Okay,
end
present
mode:
let's
stop
there
for
a
moment
and
what
I'm?
What
I'm
gonna
suggest
is
that
rather
than
comment
or
have
a
discussion
about
this
at
the
end,
I'll
send
out
a
link
to
the
document,
and
I
think
you
can
all
just
like
use
the
document
as
a
way
to
do
async
commenting
on
the
document.
Some
of
you
have
already
done
it.
C
I
think
a
better
use
of
our
time
today
is
a
conversation
about
how
we
deal
with
the
shrinking
commons
pool
fund
right
now
and
what
that's?
What
what
that
does
to
the
way
that
we
spend
our
money
and
then
invest
our
our
money.
And
so
that's
the.
B
I
can
start
and
because
for
me
we
don't
need
to
worry
so
much
about
this
thing,
because
the
the
conviction
voting
is
doing
it
for
us.
So
eventually,
like
you
know,
proposals
are
being
harder
to
pass
and
the
proposals
that
are
passing
are
the
ones
like
the
community
agree
most
on.
So
this
shrinking
on
expenses
is
something
like
the
conviction
booking
is
doing
by
itself,
so
I'd
rather
focus
on
creating
abundance
and
not
so
much
on
on
the
expenses,
because,
again,
like
the
commons
is
going
to
do
it
by
itself
eventually.
So.
E
F
I
totally
agree
with
the
zepty
as
see
conviction.
Voting
is
doing
some
sort
of
reduction
job.
Also,
while
I
was
thinking
about,
I
think,
tc's
burn
rate
is
not
like
immense
compared
to
other
organizations,
I'm
contributing
in.
So
I
think
in
terms
of
spending.
We
have
like
kind
of
a
let's
say,
healthy
approach
like
we
are
not
overspending.
I
believe
at
least
I
feel
like,
but
I'm
wondering
about
opinions
as
well.
F
I
think,
as
zepta
said,
we
can
focus
on
creating
abundance
and
creating,
like
maybe
utility,
for
our
token
or
like,
as,
as
we
have
discussed
many
times
like
we
can
create
service,
etc
and
since
in
the
beer
market,
having
these
kind
of
revenue
generations
will
help
a
lot,
at
least
in
these
contexts,
maybe
more
because
since
we
have
like
a
bonding
curve
economy
like
we
have
kind
of
more
problems
of
dumping,
since
we
have
like
early
buyers
of
the
curve,
so
yeah,
like
my
thoughts,
are
on
that
level.
I
believe.
A
I
guess
I
just
want
to
share
one
thing
and
it's
maybe
something
eduardo
and
I
were
thinking
about
when
we
were
doing
like
looking
at
the
communitas
budget
again
and
perhaps
if
the
stewards
working
group
proposal
funding
proposal
doesn't
pass
will
have
to
do
with.
Stewards
too,
is,
I
think,
focusing
on
essential,
like
you
know,
really
essential
roles
that
produce
value
and
essential
expenditures
that
produce
value.
I
think
all
of
the
working
groups
should
take
time
to
you
know
all
of
the
new
funding
proposals
should
be
coming
online
soon.
D
I
would
echo
basically
exactly
what
tam
said.
I,
I
don't
think
it's
necessarily
about
reducing
spending.
As
far
as
as
much
as
it
is
focusing
on
focusing
spending
focusing
the
spending,
we
don't
want
to
have
an
awesome
project
and
be
like
well
yeah.
It
would
make
a
profit,
but
well,
you
know
just
don't
have
the
money
you
know
like.
It
should
really
be
more
about
like
how.
How
does
this
money
that
is
spent
actually
go
towards?
D
E
Yeah
so
my
two
cents,
hello,
everyone,
my
two
cents
on
this,
it's
pretty
similar
to
what
gift
said.
The
last
part
I
got
reached
back
by
peter
from
upala,
and
he
asked
if
like
if
the
funding
is
still
available
for
projects-
and
he
replied
this-
he
asked
me
this
yesterday
and
I
haven't
replied
because
I
was
waiting
for
this
console
to
give
him
a
proper
reply,
because
it's
like
do.
We
have
funding
actually
to
to
fund
allan
power
project
or
any
other
project
that
that
applies
to
this.
E
So
you
know,
is
this
kind
of
sustainability
dead
spiral?
We
do
we
fund
our
our
working
groups
to
be
able
to
keep
going,
but
also
we
need
to
sort
of
fund
projects
that
are
that
will
advance
stock
engineers
or
I
don't
know.
I
would
love
any
insight
on
this,
and
how
do
we
answer
this
or
any
other
proposal
that
may
come
during
this
time?
And
how
do
we
deal
with
that?
It's
a
question
that
I
have
at
the
moment.
G
G
So
I
think
it
would
be
interesting
if
we
start
to
like
slowly
move
into
restructuring
the
role
of
a
steward
and
understanding
what
does
the
stewardship
pace
for
and
what
are
other
things
that
are
happening
in
the
working
groups
that
could
be
proposed
as
small
projects,
and
maybe
they
have
like
a
5k
budget
or
a
3k
budget.
And
then
we
have
a
lot
of
this
like
very
fast
and
more
dynamic
proposals
in
conviction
voting.
We
would
probably
have
more
activity
in
conviction
voting
too
and
have
more
awareness
of
the
impact.
G
The
funds
we
are
investing
are
giving
us,
and
maybe
this
would
also
reflect
on
token
engineering
projects.
If
we
have
more
projects
that
propose
a
short-term
impact
that
maybe
we
can
visibly
see
how
this
affects
the
token
price
or
how
many
people
are
entering
joining
the
commons,
what
is
the
awareness
this
is
creating
to
token
engineering?
C
So
so
let
me
build
on
that
and
ask
another.
That's
a
related
question
to
that.
So
yeah
we're.
You
know
it's
we're.
Seeing
with
this
the
stewards
funding
proposal.
It's
you
know
it's
moving
slow!
It's
you
know
it's
hard.
It's
it's
hard
to
pass
big
projects
right
now
right,
so
it
seems
like
one
path
is
to
you
know
what
you're,
what
you're
describing
olivia
is
break
them
up
into
smaller
projects.
C
Another
is
to
you
know,
do
a
lot
more
active
vote
herding.
You
know
like
going
out
and
like
doing
like
kind
of
what
you
do.
Griff
like
you
know
you
you
help
like
move
things
along
cat
herd.
You
know.
Do
we
need
to
do
more
of
that?
Do
we
need
to
like
set
that
up
as
like
some
specific
thing,
we're
doing?
Do
we
need
to
do
griffin?
I
talked
a
little
bit
about
like
working
with
the
whales
like
in
some
cases
they
can
they.
D
To
that
point,
would
some,
with
some
sort
of
quasi-political
structure
emerge
for
delegates
in
terms
of
kind
of
a
camp
of
this
type
of
thinking
or
a
camp
of
this
type
of
thinking
and
lobby,
the
whales
or
whoever
else
my
old
tokens
to
support
or
follow
this
type
of
thinking?
Or
is
that
something
that
would
be
an
ideal
for
some
reason?.
D
G
Well,
another
point
for
having
smaller
proposals
is
that
we
wouldn't
have
to
do
so
much
cat
hurting,
because
last
people
would
be
required
to
vote
on
proposals
for
them
to
pass,
and
I
feel
like
those
would
filter
the
interests
of
the
community,
like
whoever
is
interested
in
a
certain
area,
will
have
more
voice
on
that,
just
by
being
active
and
paying
attention
on
that.
And
then,
if
there
is
eventually
a
big
proposal,
people
are
not
like
feeling
drained
for
having
to
participate
in
everything.
D
Sorry
I
wanted
to
re
iterate
a
second
olivia's.
That's
really
an
intelligent
way
to
go
smaller
proposals
later
meter.
E
I
will
just
say
that
I
I
support
the
idea
of
the
smaller
proposals
at
the
same
time,
that
will
require
commitment
from
us
to
sort
of
you
know,
build
some
build,
not
build,
but
more
consistency
in
our
relationship
with
token
holders
that
it's
barely
that's
barely
existing
at
the
moment,
so
I
think
token
holders
as
not
the
people
who
comes
here
daily,
like
they're
all
the
peoples.
Besides,
that
I
guess
there
is
283
or
probably
more
by
this
time.
E
Hutchers-
and
you
know
there
is
not
much
relationship
with
them.
We
don't
so
it's
a
bit
for
me.
It
gives
me
certain
level
of
discomfort
to
certain
points
to
be
carrying
people
to
towards
small
proposals
or
any
kind
of
proposal.
By
that
mean
when
we
are
not
actually
building
anything
else
for
them,
it's
like.
Yes,
it's
a
philanthropical,
probably
approach
we
we
need,
we
still
need
to
build
and
we
still
need
some
time
in
order
to
achieve
what
we
want
to
achieve.
E
But
I
think
some
conversations
with
them
or
some
kind
of
clarification
about
this-
will
help
be
helpful
to
this
relationship
and
yeah.
So
I'm
just
like
sort
of
hesitant
on
on
this
kind
of
hurting,
because
everyone
again
everyone
likes
the
idea
of
cut
hurting
and
everyone
sort
of
supports
that
idea
when
it
comes
to
execution.
That
doesn't
happen
quite
often,
and
when
it's
consistency
about
that,
that's
where
we
sort
of
need
a
commitment
from
wider
people
to
commit
to
the
idea
that
they
will
be.
E
This
will
be
constant
if
we
need
to
pass
how
many
more
working
groups
in
order
for
you
know
for
the
next
month,
so
that
will
demand,
and
if
we
divide
that
by
small
proposals
it
will
be
12
20
proposals
and,
and
then
that
means
every
time
you
need
to
cut
her
people.
So
that's
that
generates
certain
level
of
you
know
when
you
turn
off
notifications
that
you
have
too
many
notifications
kind
of
vibe
kind
of
mood.
So
how
do
we
contrast
that?
E
H
Maybe
it
would
be
worth
it
to
consider
having
all
the
working
groups
funded
like
like
the
ones
to
have.
They
have
like
a
fixed,
let's
say,
budget,
maybe
based
on
what
we
have
in
the
commons
pool.
So,
for
example,
each
working
group
will
have
a
budget
of
30k
40k
4.
I
don't
know
three
six
months
and
that's
gonna
be
for
all
the
working
groups
and
then,
with
that
budget,
every
working
group
can
start
working
on
their
different,
let's
say
roadmap
or
proposals,
but
once
they
already
have
like
this
money
available.
H
So
it's
just
like
funding
working
groups
like
in
advance
and
then
allowing
them
to
organize
and
to
plan
according
to
that
budget,
then
that
way,
I
think
it
would
be
easier
to
track
expenses
conv,
because
then
we
have
like
a
a
bigger
view
of
like
the
coming
months
of
how
how
how
much
money
is
being
used
across
the
working
groups,
and
then
we
can
do
like
an
audit
or
some
kind
of
review
after
that
period
and
see
if
the
if
the
whole
resources
were
used
or
how
many
proposals
were
delivered
or
what
was
the
progress
in
each
of
the
working
groups.
B
I
don't
think
that
makes
sense
like
not
all
the
working
groups
have
the
same
needs
and
we
already
like
conviction
voting
itself.
It's
you
know,
people
is
doing
a
budget,
and
then
we
have
like
the
forum
to
reach
like
milestones,
and
we
already
have
an
audit
to
see
like
proposals
are
doing
so
again.
I
I
really
don't
think,
like
all
the
working
groups
should
get
the
same
amount
of.
H
H
So
I
mean,
I
think
it
would
be
interesting
because,
for
example,
you
could
give
them
like
the
same
amount
of
money,
but
maybe
for
one
group
they
will
allow
them
to
operate
for
three
months
or
six
months,
but
maybe
for
another
one.
It
will
allow
them
to
operate
for
a
year
or
even
more
right,
depending
on
their
needs
and
depending
on
their
operations,
because
something
I
see
that
there
are
some
working
groups
and
there's
some
work
happening
on
the
working
group.
So
you
can
think
about
omega.
H
For
example,
there's
a
lot
of
work
going
on
there
and,
for
example,
they
don't
have
a
budget.
They
don't
have
funds
for
their
group
to
start
like
paying
to
that
people
that
are
already
operating.
You
know
they
have
the
funds
for
the
consilience
library
project.
That
is
really
specific,
but
not
the
group
is
not
funded
as
a
whole.
So
in
this
case
maybe
they
could
start.
You
know
having
a
more
more
room
to
start
paying
their
contributors
and
maybe
based
on
their
needs
like
what
you're
saying
safety
they
will.
H
I
mean
maybe
they
could
start
doing
proposals
more
based
on
like
projects
and
not
like
asking
for
money
like
for
each
every
single
proposal.
You
know
that's
kind
of
like
the
thing
that
would
be
kind
of
trying
to
avoid
like
asking
money
for
every
single
project.
H
Every
single
proposal
I
mean
you
submit
the
proposal
in
the
forum
goes
through
advice,
process
and
everything,
but
the
working
group
already
has
the
the
funds
and
they
already
planned
this
proposal,
this
project
based
on
the
fonts
that
they
have
so
it's
kind
of
like
reducing
into
this
smaller
scope,
like
all
the
planning
and
all
the
operating
of
the
project.
You
know,
I
think
I
think
it's
easier
for
people
to
plan
based
on
what
they
already
have
available
than
trying
to
predict
how
much
money
will
they
use
to
complete
what
they
are
proposing.
B
Like
what
libya
was
saying
about,
having
smaller
proposals
and
projects
for
the
for
the
proposals,
as
accountability
like
what
you're
suggesting
it
actually
removes,
accountability
like
I
have
funds.
Oh
I
have
friends
there.
Maybe
I
just
spend
on
those
and,
in
my
opinion,
more
inefficiency
like
oh,
I
have
money.
I
have
to
spend
it
somewhere,
but
if
you
think
the
other
way
around
like
okay,
I
want
to
build
this,
and
in
order
to
do
this,
I
need
this
amount
of
money,
and
I
think
this
ad
efficiency
and
also
accountability.
H
C
Hey
guys,
I'm
gonna
interrupt
for
just
one
minute
on
this,
just
because
I
think
we've
identified
in
this
case
what
the
issue
is,
and
we
can
I'm
gonna.
I
I'm
gonna,
take
notes
on
this
and
and
we
can
follow
up
so,
let's,
let's
see
if
we
can
shift
a
little
bit
tam
did
you
have
something
I
just.
A
I
just
want
to
add
just
one
thing:
you
know:
blossom
labs
is
working
on
something
called
osmotic
funding
for
recurring
dow
expenses
and
it
essentially
solves
this
exact
problem
ish.
So
I
don't
know
where
it
is
in
terms
of
readiness.
It
was
like
a
hackathon
project,
so
I
think
it's
probably
a
few
months
away,
but
there
may
be
a
a
more,
I
would
say,
technical
solution
that
we
could
use.
That
would
allow
funding
to
work
in
groups
to
sort
of
shift
asthmatically
based
on
what
the
community
is
feeling.
B
E
Can
I
ask
a
question:
I
don't
know
if
this
has
been
asked
on
sample
or
not
and
I'm
sorry
I
apologize
if
it
is
a
repetitive
question.
What
will
happen
eventually,
that,
after
stewards,
there
is
no
possibility
to
pass
any
other
working
group
proposal
like
what
what
will
we
be
doing
like
what?
What
is
the
plan
b?
What
is
a
you
know
what
we're
going
to
do
with
that?
If
that
happens,
yes,
the
stores
may
have
made
pass,
but
if
any
other
working
group
doesn't
pass,
what
is
the
plan.
B
D
F
C
Back
to
the
this
question
that
eddie
is
asking,
because
I
think
it's
really
important
and
I'm
even
going
to
wrap
it
a
little
bit
bigger
what
role,
if
any,
should
the
stewards
play
in
helping
to
shape
our
spending
pattern
right?
Should
this
just
be
left
to
the
community
to
decide
through
conviction,
voting
and
you
know,
and
and
maybe
we
just
get
stuck
and
then
we'll
have
to
respond
or-
and
I'm
not
advocating
either
one
of
these.
But
I'm
asking
this
this
question
to
try
to
get
your
opinions.
C
The
other
response
would
be
to
say
that
the
stewards
are
are
coming
together
and
saying.
You
know
what
these
are:
some
of
the
things
that
we
think
are
the
greatest
sources
of
value
that
will
build
value
over
time.
So,
let's,
let's
try
to
really
focus
on
passing
those
proposals
right.
These
are
ones
completely
hands
off.
The
other
is
more
proactive
thoughts
on
that.
D
And
then
what
is
the
role
of
leadership?
I
mean
they
obviously
there's
a
lot
of
abstentions
and
they
need
some
assistance,
some
help
and
understanding
what's
going
on
at
the
most
granular
level.
So
what
what
help
do
you
give
a
voter
to
say?
This
is
the
information
that
you
need,
and
these
are
the
people
that
have
the
best
view
as
to
what
what
is
required
going
forward.
A
D
F
I
actually
I
agree
with
the
zepti,
so
I
think
the
funding
funding
power
should
be
in
the
hands
of
the
community.
What's
the
rule
of
leadership
here
is
that
I
believe,
since
stewards
are
the
legitimate
leaders
we
assume
so
they
may
raise
their
concerns.
Like,
for
example,
I
saw
lots
of
water
guides
in
the
git
coin
now,
so
they
were
like
suggesting,
suggesting
and
reasoning
how
they
are
voting
for
the
new
budget's
new
season
budget.
F
B
Stores
already
have
like
their
reputation
and
normally
what
stores
are
suggesting
more
people
is
trading
into.
You
know
like
it's
easier
for
us
to
us,
to
pass
proposal
based
on
the
reputation
than
someone
that
do
not
have
any
reputation,
and
I
think
that's
where
the
leadership
plays
out
and
that's
it
like
the
restless
decision
of
the
token
holders.
My
opinion.
E
So
sorry,
if
I'm
being
practical
on
this,
but
I
feel
we're
having
a
high
level
conversation-
and
I
still
don't
don't-
have
even
a
suggestion
of
an
answer
to
my
question
and
I
know
that's
part
of
the.
I
know
it's
part
of
the
answer
what
you
ask
asking,
but
I
feel
this
high
level
conversation
is
interesting,
but
there
are
a
practical
aspect
to
it
that
we
sort
of
like.
I
would
like
to
have
a
conversation
too,
not
only
about
the
high
level
part.
C
So
eddie
do
you
want
to.
I
think
your
question
was:
what
do
we
do
if
we
can't
pass
any
proposals
right
correct,
so
anybody
have
any
thoughts
on
that.
G
I
think,
and
maybe
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
I
think
can
do-
is
talking
also
about
some
type
of
work,
security
of
like
how
people
are
being
compensated
by
the
effort
they
are
putting
in
the
tac.
And
then,
if
proposals
stop
passing
for
funding
the
working
working
groups.
What's
going
to
happen
with
the
work
streams
that
are
ongoing
and
the
people
that
are
committed
and
are
somehow
expecting
to
have
a
compensation
from
there.
E
Yes,
and
also
for
rewards,
and
also
for
our
mission
for
funding
proposals
at
advanced
stock
engineering
like
we
like,
I
feel
like,
we
will
hit
a
limbo
sort
of
a
status
where
we
won't
be
able
to
move
and
rely
on
basically
the
goodwill
of
people
who
will
want
to
keep
trusting
the
project
who
will
be
allowed.
Probably.
But
it's
still
like
this
conversation
of
okay-
is
that's
a
tough
conversation
to
have
or
that's
a
tough
situation
that
will
come
if
this
doesn't
offer
any
other
solution.
That's
good,
but
that's,
let's
be
honest.
G
Yeah
so
I'll
just
finish
something
and
pass
you
mark.
Sorry,
that's
why
I
was
bringing
up
insoft
gov
and
the
importance
of
having
some
type
of
like
a
boundary
or
a
commitment
ladder
for
every
individual
in
terms
of
compensation
like
what
would
be
like
if
acts
happen,
I
can't
commit
anymore
or
unless
y
is
provided.
G
Oh,
we
have
this
three
initiatives
that
might
bring
income,
and
this
is
the
roadmap
of
them,
and
this
is
the
expecting
like
revenue.
We
we
have
planned,
and
this
would
safeguard
this
and
this
work.
That
is
happening.
So
all
of
this
kind
of
needs
to
happen
simultaneously,
I
think
for
us
all
to
be
aligned.
E
Thank
you
just
quickly
and
said
to
you,
murder,
sir,
I'm
so
sorry
to
interrupt
you
yeah.
I
think
I
think
something
along
those
lines
will
be
healthy
for
everyone
just
because
for
me,
the
big
picture
would
be.
If
we
hit
that
we.
If
we
hit
that
wall,
then
it's
not
that
we
fail
as
an
economy.
E
E
That's
something
that
I
I
it
will
sort
of
make
weird
yeah.
It's
a
weird.
It's
a
weird
context
to
have
like
if
us,
as
a
tech,
engineering
community
who
want
to
be
a
shilling
point
for
tokyo
engineers,
we
fail
to
our
contributors
to
be
able
to
create
a
sustainable
economy.
How
do
we
expect
to
sort
of
you
know?
I
don't
think
I
have
to
explain
for
a
bit.
This
is
where
my
also
my
thoughts
came
from
mert.
A
F
F
I
believe,
but
for
the
other
thing
like
what
will
happen
if
we
cannot
pass
proposals
because
the
co
quorum
is
so
high
due
to
a
lower
treasury,
I
think
it's
kind
of
showing
that
as
a
autonomous
agents
within
dao,
we
should
work
on
increasing
common
pools.
So
it's
like.
If
we
are
autonomous
agents
and
now
we
are
doing
it
actually,
so
it's
very
good.
Maybe
one
can
criticize
us
saying
that
this
started
very
late.
So
that's
that's
why
you
are
having
this
pain
point,
but
at
the
end
we
said.
F
Okay,
we
find
that
problem
and
we
are
working
for
it.
So
if,
for
example,
if
we
stopped
funding
the
proposals,
some
may
say:
oh,
this
is
failed,
some
may
say
okay,
but
they,
the
community,
just
find
the
pain
point
and
working
for
it.
Maybe
they
want
to
work
for
the
cause,
but
at
that
point
maybe
we
can
offer
some
sort
of
universal
basic
income
people
who
don't
have
like
a
means
of
living,
but
I
mean
as
an
autonomous
agent
the
responsibility
on
us
so
and
we
are
working
for
it.
C
So
we
have
just
maybe
five
more
minutes.
I
I
also
like
in
five
minutes.
What
I'm
going
to
do
is
point
you
to
this.
This
url,
where
we
can
just
do
a
quick,
just
check
on
where
everybody
is
because
I'd
like
to
capture
that
so
five
more
minutes
of
conversation
welcome
mitch.
We're
talking
about
you
know.
Does
this
shrinking
common
pool?
How
does
that
affect
the
way
that
we
spend
money
in
the
way
that
we
think
about
spending.
C
C
So
come
back
to
one
other
question
external
projects
that
are
not
internal
operating
projects.
Do
we
think
any
differently
about
them,
or
is
this
just
the
same?
You
know:
do
we
just
treat
them
the
same?
No.
D
I
I
think
all
projects
should
be
considered
external,
including
our
own
working
groups
like
that
would
be
ideal.
I
mean
if,
if
every
and
yeah,
if
every
project
was
the
same,
I
mean
it's
like
what
this
is
the
magic.
I
feel
like
that's
the
the
decentralization
approach
you
know.
Every
project
is
its
own
and
they're
all
competing
on
conviction.
Voting
for
what
the
token
holders
want.
You
know.
C
No,
it's
not
know
it.
That's
totally
fine.
Actually,
so
look
on
the
text
channel
for
stewards,
there's
a
link
there
and
you'll
see
it's
like
a
little
twitter-like
statement
and
you
just
click,
agree,
disagree
or
pass
you're,
not
sure,
and
you
know
as
you're
going
along.
If
you
think
that's
not
quite
how
I
would
I
mean
I
sort
of
agree
with
that
statement,
but
that's
not
how
I
do
it.
You
can
actually
add
your
own
statement
down
below
and
that
will
be
something
that
other
people
will
be
able
to
vote
on.
C
C
Yeah,
so
that
is
basically
in
investments
that
raise
our
ability
to
to
increase
value
over
time.
B
C
Capacity
building
is
making
investments
that
are
specifically
focused
on
raising
our
ability
to
add
value
over
time,
rather
than
just
say,
like
I
mean
operations
can
be
that
too,
but
like
this
is
more
like
investments
that
that
grow.
Our
capacity
to
add
value.
B
C
I
mean
for
those
of
you
who
are
finished,
I'm
going
to
just
show
you
something
that's
kind
of
cool.
So
basically,
this
is
an
example
of
a
report.
This
tool
is
very
cool.
Actually
I
ran
across
it.
Kevin
owaki
was
interviewing
glenn
well
on
the
green
pill,
podcast
and
kevin
asked
glenn
like
what's
your
favorite
tool
like
what's
the
thing
that
everybody
should
be
looking
at
right
now
and
he
said
polis
for
sure
polis.
C
Looking
at
these
different
statements
and
I'll
just
highlight
this
so
over
here,
you
see
clusters
of
statements
that
there
was
pretty
much
consensus
on
either
people
all
agreed
or
they
all
disagree,
and
then
over
here
you
have
like
a
statement.
That's
like
just
divisive
to
the
community.
Okay,
so
and
then
it
breaks
out.
C
So
you
can
see
each
one
of
these
questions
each
one
of
these
statements,
like
the
kind
of
the
overall
sentiment
so
not
gonna,
spend
let's
not
dive
into
that
too
much
right
now,
but
I
think
that
this
tool
has
a
lot
of
potential
for
us
for
assessing
just
kind
of
like
the
general
sentiment
in
our
community.
C
So,
okay,
so
everybody
pretty
much
done
at
this
point
with
the
survey
yeah.
Okay.
What?
If,
if
I
could
I'd
like
to
share
some
of
my
thoughts
in
in
closing
and
then
maybe
some
next
steps,
because
I
I
mean
this
is
this-
is
going
to
be
a
decision
that
we're
going
to
have
to
you
know
like
if
we
make
no
decision,
then
there's
one
opinion
that
was
expressed
in
here,
which
is
like
making
no
decision
is
a
decision
right.
The
the
conviction
voting.
C
And
and
that's
the
decision
right,
if
we,
if
we
decide
to
do
another
one,
then
it's
going
to
be
a
little
bit
of
work
to
figure
out
what
that
other
option
is.
My
take
is
that
I
I
feel
like
we
do,
need
a
shift
in
focus
like
we
really
do
need
to
think
about
how
we,
as
a
community,
want
to
invest
in
creating
value
right
for
this
for
this
commons.
C
For
this
mission,
are
we
really
doing
it
the
very
best
way
that
we
can
be
right
now
or
is
there
waste
in
our
budgets?
C
I
think
that
there
is
personally
I
mean
I
don't
know
what
it
is
right,
but
I
feel
like
there
are
always
ways
that
we
can
get
more
focused
on
the
mission,
and
I
think
that
it's
time
you
know
for
us
to
to
to
go
after
that,
and
really
think
about
that,
like
what
does
that
mean
for
us,
you
know
to
if
we
really
are
building
like
an
attractor
like
a
shelling
point
for
for
bringing
token
engineering
professionals
together?
C
What
does
that
really
look
like
how
do
how
do
we
define
who
those
users
are
of
these
services?
That
we're
going
to
be
building,
who
are
these
people
exactly
like
in
order
to
know,
what's
going
to
be
valuable
to
them?
We
have
to,
we
have
to
understand
who
they
are,
and
so
I
feel
like
you
know.
There
are
some
risks
of
just
kind
of
like
being
laissez-faire
about
this.
You
know,
if
we're
not
careful,
we
could
lose.
C
You
know
if
we
run
out
of
funding
for
the
people
who
are
gathered
around
the
builders
right
now
we
might
lose
people,
I
mean
we
really
could
lose
a
bunch
of
people,
and
if
that
happens,
you
know
if
people
can't
afford
to
stay
here,
because
proposals
aren't
passing
or
they're
they're,
so
small
when
they
pass,
people
will
make
some
people
will
end
up
making
other
plans
and
that
could
actually
set
us
back.
C
So
that's
the
thing
that
I'm
I'm
thinking
about,
I'm
thinking
about
like
how
do
we
as
a
community,
make
sure
that
we're
you
know
this
isn't
about
cutting
people
like
it
may
be
just
more
about
redeploying
and
thinking
about
how
we
want
people
to
engage
the
kinds
of
things
we
want
to
engage
in
being
a
lot
sharper
about
this
kind
of
libya's,
like
being
a
lot
a
lot
sharper
about
the
proposals
that
we're
putting
together
and
making
sure
that
we
are
just
being
really
focused
on
creating
value
and
defining
that.
C
So
I
I
guess,
as
last
steps,
I
would
encourage
you
it'd
be
great.
If
you,
you
know
that
document
also
I'm
going
to
share
this
document
about
like
the
kind
of
sampo's
frame
for
thinking
about
how
we
create
value.
But
I
do
think
that
that
is
a
question
that
we
really
need
to
come
to
some
consensus
on
this.
Is
there
some
agreement
on
the
kinds
of
value
that
we
really
want
to
be
creating
investing
and
focusing
on
in
this
next
stretch,
especially.
B
C
As
the
financial
capital
is
getting
tighter,
so
I'll
send
that
out
I'll
put
it
in
the
stewards
channel
and
yeah.
It
would
be
great
if
you
can
comment
in
that,
and
then
I
will
take
all
of
this
feedback
and
I'll
take
the
results
whole
that
we
all
just
and
and
try
to
get
something
back
to
you
all
in
the
next
couple
days
like
by
by
early
next
week,
to
just
kind
of
see
what
kind
of
consensus
there
actually
was
here.
Okay,
tough,
this
is
actually
a
tough.
E
C
You
for
for
everybody
hanging
in
there
and
and
for
all
the
good
opinions
and
yeah
tam.
Do
you
have
anything
else
you
want
to.
A
C
Absolutely
yeah
I'll
go
ahead.
I
just
see
I'm
now
seeing
a
bunch
of
them
in
there.
So
I'll
just
accept
all
those
and
that'll
show
up
in
the
next
round,
and
we
should
just
talk
about
if
we
want
this
poll
to
go
out
any
further.
If
we
want
to
do
anything
else
with
with
something
like
this,
does
that
sound
good.