Takeshi if you if you have not come to Session Three before Keith is going to come in tomorrow you're welcome to come in. I'm sure we could probably get you like a visitor pass or something I can talk to the team about it but yeah, Keith from serious because coming in tomorrow as well. What time we'll be here all day.
I'll probably early afternoon, early or early afternoon. We're,
this is a side note not related to the KPIs but we're the alphas that Savvy is launching a bond product, a bond program for our SGIP and serious people. Give us a lot of the reasoning behind it and kind of how to do it and so we're actually doing a war room and launching it to get together tomorrow. There'll be the first bond program on sushi so that's going live tomorrow so that's that's why keeps coming in. Oh, yeah.
Yeah, I'll message you. Perfect. Thank you. We'll wait a couple more minutes. See if I think we said Christophe is coming maybe disruption Joe comes there is Christoph.
Hey, I thought it was waving hands clapping hands
all right. We'll wait till the the five and then we'll kick things off then. I don't know if everyone saw the message. We dropped in in the chat last night. I didn't.
All right, might as well might as we'll open it. up then. So I am coming in. Alright. Well, people, people, I'm sure continue to roll in a little bit. But essentially, the feedback we've been getting in all of these groups and all these calls, is basically that, you know, how do you have KPIs without having the objectives of the program? In the first place, which we hear. I mean, our initial perspective on this was, let's just, you know, make assumptions for those and then push forward on this group because obviously, you know, this L tip is kind of, you know, being rushed through and we want to make sure we have KPIs and we want to have this sorted out before it actually goes live. So with that, we decided that, you know, let's, let's not put the cart before the horse and we're planning on essentially, like, you know, trying to solve that problem, first of the directions and like the, you know, strategy and the you know, basically the point of these incentive programs and the point of the DAO and, you know, there's a couple of guys that have been a bunch of people actually have been pushing forward and initiative to kind of figure out what the best strategic pillars are the best ways to move forward, organize things and whatnot. And Daniel's kind of been leading the path on that Daniel Espina. So, we're gonna have him kind of come up and present a little bit of what he's been working on. And then from there, let's let's I mean, then we can all just, you know, work together and figure out if there's anything missing or if there's any blind spots or anything. With that, Daniel, you're good to go. Yeah,
thank you. Um, so firstly, say this is well, this was a regional initiative that was started by Alex and and then we're also in this call. Then, slowly, we've been gathering a couple more more people interested in in this area. I kind of joined halfway through but had a bit of time and it aligned with some of the other things that we were trying to do with the DAO. So be putting a good amount of time helping to think through these and coordinating a little bit. So it's still very early days, I guess. At this stage, what we're mostly trying to do is, do you guys think this is a good idea or not? And I'm going to share a bit of what you have through a bit of a presentation that then help them spread help prepare, that kind of frames a little bit what we're trying to do so they was like, can we empower how we're thinking about KPIs or like can we actually drive these home and make it as effective as it can be as well? As facilitating the job of figuring out which KPIs if we have a good strategic thinking platform, like a good foundation to build on top and then on top of that, we can do the KPIs and all the decisions that are then based on the KPIs and, and all of that so this is kind of about building foundations. And helping to create some alignment around the Dow fundamentally. So that's kind of like the point is that if we haven't agree a strategy, we don't know what we want to incentivize how we have then what do we how do we decide what to measure? And how do we decide then what sort of incentives to create further things and isn't obviously there is already a lot of ideas and a lot of discussions that have happened in these area across multiple different groups. Where we want to do is just build on top of those to create a little bit more alignment and bring it together a little bit more, which also hopefully, means that if we can refactor this conversation, then all the other initiatives that we're trying to figure out some strategy themselves can just move forward so we can unblock the road for the holdout to move faster, obviously doing the strategic thinking requires quite a bit of work. So that's the trade off but if we can mobilize and make these investments in time, then we can keep on reaping the benefits across all the different initiatives and projects. And so that helps us as well like to synergize between different strategic initiatives, different projects, and move also with a little bit more focus taking into account that there is a lot of other strong L2, SEL ones etc, that that are around and if we can converge and gather forces to one or a few pressure points that we have carefully selected. Hopefully that allows us to make sure that we are actually conquering those arenas that were making really good progress in those areas. And that we have a clear story to tell as well to the broader ecosystem of like, these are focus areas if you're interested in these come here for other things, you can maybe go to other places. So the more we can do these then as well hopefully we can tone down a little bit the L2 wars and make and make it more collaborative is Arbitrum is focusing on these areas other players can focus on on their own areas and there will always be a bit of competition. But the more we specialize as well, we can facilitate collaboration across the ecosystem. So there and by the way, if anyone has a question at some point or wants to interrupt me, feel free to just kind of unmute yourself or raise your hand or something I'm I'm just trying to walk us through these, but feel free to interrupt me at any point. So the idea would be that we can kind of do these strategy work, then that goes on to inform the strategic pillars or like the big objectives that we choose. That goes down then to the to the incentive programs to the procurement process to other programs that we create. All of that can then be assess by the by the KPIs. And the KPIs can be define per program, as well as having some KPIs. That can be a little bit more global. Depending on which of the objectives let's say each program is assessing to or we can have a set of KPIs and the programs can select. Well, we are contributing to these 234 areas. And hopefully that as well. could trickle down to facilitating the task to grantees because right now, one of the challenges is if you're building a new protocol, that also is going to do a lot of community and I'm taking the quest book grants as an example, then you don't know which one to apply to. And the guys who are managing it, they go and see well, okay, these programs applied, but these may be better suited that user okay, go and reapply to the other side. Or like in our case, one of the small projects in the r&d ecosystem, put a grant and didn't know which way to put it. So we put it on both sides. And then the guys are like, Hey, why are you posting on both sides? So you're trying to game us? And we're like, No, we just don't know which one to put because it actually serves both objectives. And so the the issue there as well can be is like maybe it doesn't serve each objective 100% But let's say it serves both objectives. 70%. So it's actually if you added value for both objectives is a lot of value that an initiative provides. But because he's not optimized for a single thing, he can be dismissed on every single grant program. So if over time, we could try to harmonize that into kind of like a menu of impact areas and many of objectives and you can tackle one or multiple, then is the value of an initiative across the board. And not just for one a specific program that can determine its value. And anyway, I'm going a little bit too far. From the strategic view probably like did Why are you doing going into that rabbit hole. But the idea is that we can kind of then have these areas and that synergy and going back and forth in between the KPIs and the KPI groups that are doing some sort of budgeting and analyzing the programs and that's feeding back into as well a bunch of insights that help to feed our strategy and we can keep on evolving all of these areas, iterative cycles. Alex.
Yeah, I guess just a question from from your perspective, because even though I think many of us have done strategy work in for protocols or companies, but you have a lot more experience in terms of strategy work within Dows irrespective is this is this strategy, like the first step towards having some more of this clarity amongst these KPIs and other things because in the past, when we had these KPIs, conversations people like, like T norm or other people have talked about, well, we can't say KPIs unless we have objectives for the long term incentive program and unless we have a some objectives for Arbitrum Overall, is this kind of this framework help tie those things together?
Yeah, so Chicken, chicken and egg I think what the does he then helps improve to improve it a lot? Because you can try to have those discussions in every decision that you're making. And then what you what you end up doing is you end up doing the whole strategic analysis. You have to do it for that discussion, because he's not thinking that you can borrow. So what we're doing is kind of refactoring that thinking and we go okay, let's do it very thoroughly. Let's do it properly. Let's do it all together. Let's try to bring all the different stakeholders luxury stuff had some really good feedback on the other qualities like Mitch, let's make sure it's not just the delegates talking to the delegates. Let's make sure we get some of the protocols and some of the other people etc. And plurality labs have made some progress in this area, but you know, there is a lot more to be done still. So if we can gather that really good thinking, then that becomes a resource that can help everyone else. So let me maybe go that we had it. Now anyway, we had it a little bit as an idea that there was this concept of the strategy as a lighthouse. So we're not trying to mandate everyone exactly what to do. We're not trying to create like a full top down Corporation. But if we can have a way to point to people, Hey, here's the here's the shore, here are some rocks. avoid that. Because we've done this analysis. Then every boat, like every project or every workgroup or every actor in the system, they can decide where to go and if they went ahead where we told them there are rocks, that's up to them. But at least we have delineated and created that public resource. Of essentially sense making a common understanding. And that to say that at this stage is still an early exploration like what strategies in Dallas is a new frontier? So we want to be thinking about it and having a lot of these discussions like essentially the question that you answer and the question that you asked, sorry, and the answer that I gave, this would just be the starting point for a conversation. And that's a bit the objective with the forum post that's up right now, is to say, hey, here's an idea. Now let's tear it to pieces. Let's put it together again. Because one of the one of the painful lessons I learned trying to do organization design and change management is that not everyone agrees with you, in theory until it starts to impact them. And then you realize that actually they didn't agree but they just didn't spend the time. thinking it through. And he's normal because everyone is busy and doing a million things. So the more we can engage people with the process, and thinking about how does this actually impact you personally, the easier it's going to be to for people to start thinking critically about it to be like, actually, I disagree here. And that's the goal that we need is figuring out where we disagree, etc. And then we can work with those disagreements and try to get somewhere more useful. Obviously, there's like the whole bandwidth, how many how much time can we get the right people to be involved and and all of that, which is a lot of the intricacies of these processes that we need to figure out and think through how much can we push? Can we push it and, and he's kind of you know, is this idea there is a traditional strategy practice there is the DAO dynamics. The objective here is we'll be refining how we do strategy as well over time but by having a focused conversation about it, we can be a lot more disciplined and start leading this area because if realistically there is no single DAO and very few organizations in the world that are properly good at this, so we have an opportunity to be to be leading the way here. What we're suggesting is that has a combination of a lot of internal analysis and external analysis, and then bringing these together to make some hard trade offs and decisions. And basically, what that is, is let's make sure we get the right people we get this stakeholders, let's make sure as well that we have expertise here like strategy is not a new discipline is as old as humankind. Communities are not a new thing. There is a lot of new tools and systems but let's make sure that as well that we can bring some of the people that have been doing them been thinking or at least they're the thinking that's been going around platform strategy around Minimum Viable systems around anyway, all kinds of different methodologies, etc. And let's make sure we can bring some of those learnings into how we're doing strategy here. So if we can get some people that have good backgrounds on these and then in the initial work team were quite lucky that a lot of us have participated in strategy processes across many different types of organizations. So both being part of startups engaging in dowels, but as well, more traditional strategy houses. And that's some of the things that we're trying to bake he baked into these but of course, the more people we can get to participate and engage with the process of building the framework of agreeing on the process and then discussing the thing the more buying we're going to get, because of the thing I was saying before that if people don't chew on it, they only agree on paper, but not on practice. And that is understanding those factors, and then curating the framework out of which the first Super draft as put as a prompt for conversation is what we have in the forum. So we're saying this is very early stage, etc. We have prepared a micro workshop to get to capture a little bit of everyone's thoughts on these. If there are any questions or comments you'd like to ask now, feel free to if not, the idea was to do these hope fears once small things and we can do that together after if if it's cool with everyone. But as I was saying right now, if you have any clarifying questions, let me know if not, we can go to the other exercise or any comments or concerns before we go into that. Alex,
Joseph was bringing up a bunch of good points on our chat. I was wondering if you want to touch on those first during the like, let him write it out or touch on them in the like before we go into that
I couldn't quite follows so I don't know what you think is best. Well,
so we can bring it up. Basically, just a question from wrong. It's this concept of like how KPIs and OKRs tie in to strategy overall. For example, Joseph, you were talking about having OKRs for for each project. And in Dino, correct me if I'm wrong, but the way you're thinking about it is that we do need OKRs we do need KPIs that can happen for a given workgroup for a given work stream, but at the high level, whenever we start to think about OKRs, or KPIs, we still need a strategy kind of definition first. I think that's part of the hopes and wants that we would put into the into the model. Do you know and maybe we can have Joseph write that out first?
Yeah, exactly. It's all OKRs like the power of OKRs is understanding that the metric and the objective are just not the same thing. A lot of issues in corporations come from setting up a metric and and setting up bonuses tied to that metric. So then people maximize the metric at the expense of actually the well being of the organization. And a couple of and the other, the other huge issue that happens with with OKRs is if you're trying to have a completely fully coherent top down OKRs and by top down I don't necessarily mean the objectives. I mean, sorry, the executive dictated for everyone else. I mean, more you have kind of like that big vision then from that to quarterly, I don't know two to three year goal from that to quarterly goals from quarterly goals then to the departmental goals. If you try to connect all of those different layers, super tightly, that's a very long process of cascading goals. And if you can get there you in theory, you get a lot of alignment, but it's a it becomes a very expensive process, especially if you mix it together with bonuses and the different agendas of the team. So you end up trying to do so many things at the same time. So, for here, what I would think is we do need to make sure that for every objective we have a metric or a few we need to keep in mind that distinction that the the metrics are not reality. They're just metrics, they're just ways to get some insight. And also that sometimes the different layers are not going to perfectly cascade into each other. And I think that's fine. And if we try to make them to perfectly cascade we're going to become super rigid and he's going to be very tricky. And also we need to have some some funding outside of this like it the the objectives shouldn't take over absolutely everything. The objectives are a way to apply more pressure in the area, but we should leave some funding and some keep some capacity to address things outside. At least that's what I what I seen from the more recent critiques related to the OKRs and all that stuff. Takeshi but obviously, this is an open conversation. I don't want to monopolize these maybe after we're done with these questions and comments, maybe let's go to the to the workshop bit where we can go more more multi multi person participation to Kashi and the crystal.
Yeah, it might be just the wording thing but strategy sounds familiar to corporate, like kind of top down strategy coming from like a few delegates setting up and then like many other delegates not participating in the call or maybe some some from protocol might kind of be against like aligning with strategies that by like a small number of people. I think I feel like it's more about direction or like more vague directions that DAO should aim for, not like a strategy like prioritize strategies, objectives, that might be something we can think about, but overall the idea that I agree with ya, we'd like to, I'd like to hear what others are thinking.
Crystal, I think you're up
so I want to echo some of sample Prakash said and like before we go into this this exercise I would like to know that like, while it's still probably worth it to do this exercise, within this group here, we are nowhere near you know, being representative of the antigen now. Community and something that I I mentioned at our office hours, Daniel, is that like from Mike effective, like, I've read this proposal, and I think it's a valuable initiative and I supported, it would be great to have some kind of a Northstar that we are all referring to in terms of like, where's, like, what's the goal of Arbitrum DAO? Like, where do we want to go? Where do we want to optimize? What do we want to optimize for however, like, I think it's, while it's not that easy to do this in the DAO, as it's not like a corporate where we can simply lock some key stakeholders in the room for a few days to figure it out, because it's simply impossible. And I want to make sure that whatever we come up with, like, we should have the representation of different stakeholders. And in that case, I wouldn't even say when somebody mentioned that we need a balanced set of stakeholders. I would say that maybe even not balanced like for me not all stakeholders are the same. And then this this regard, like for example, I believe that me being even the one of the bigger stake, delegates, like I don't want my voice to be to be dominant. Like I would prefer to hear what Camelot has to say well, GM X has to say in terms of what they do they think about about DAO strategy. I would like to know what Oxley labs are thinking What Arbitrum foundations thinking what their BD departments thinking because like, if we are going to set this strategy, and I'm all up for it, it is important that that all those participants that actually do have an influence and, you know, apart from the DAO, we have those key players in this ecosystem that no matter if we agree with that they simply have a huge influence on record system, whatever, whatever the DMX will do in this ecosystem, you know, they move something and the wave hits us whether we like it or not. So I want to make sure that that like what what I do what what the decisions that I make are in line with their thinking, and not that I'm enforcing something on them because this would make it wouldn't make sense. If we set a strategy at Northstar saying that we are going there, but they are actually having their that will have a problem and will like and this will be a huge problem. So I would say that while I'm happy to engage in this experiment, and I do this exercise, similarly, as we've been doing with blood labs for half a year already with those neural bots. Like I would like to stress out that the results of this this this exercise, like they are for our youth but not necessarily something that we should like take as a result of now, that was one of the for example, and I promise I'm finishing. Right laughs already did it and they created this like strategic framework for the DAO, with some vision mission goals and so on. However, like my concern about it, it was that they they gather that by gathering insights from some people in joke race or something like Tiger some something like that. But like I do some document, but I didn't like it wasn't ratified by the DAO, for example. We could have ratified, for example, by the DAO, and then we could see whether the DAO actually agrees with those strategic priorities. And once we would have it ratified, then at least you know, it wouldn't be official, and if somebody disagrees with it, then somehow he disagrees with something that's official. But unless it's something like that, then it might cause more issues than not because if something is not ratified, then like, Why should I be obliged to follow it? Like why should anyone be obliged to follow it? If it's not an official now, statement? And in this case, I actually would like to, especially referring to one of your early sites, where those programs that we have, please don't forget that we had this Arbitrum foundation with several 100 60 million app tokens standing, which is part of the Dow it's not like a separate entity, it is part of the Dow that we should be working together. And we should take their perspective into account because they are actually doing a lot of great job, and they have people who have their objectives. already set up and we should learn them that I wrap it up sorry for taking
so crystal up I think your thoughts mirror the slide that has like the different experts and stakeholders. Builders it's definitely part of their I think its foundation and OCL should be part of it as well. So excellent points.
The 101 Sorry for interrupting but I think though like not sorry for another like mapping and not all those stakeholders are our like, wait, wait the same like and in particular, like my voice should wait a bit more. That's a GMFCS not because like I don't, you know, don't respect my the people who delegate votes to me, but simply like, I should rather take into account that like GFX has perspective and not the other way around like they are building this ecosystem. They're building this ecosystem. And I don't want to put GMs at the stoplight like maybe Savvy let's say that Savvy is also like super important builder. So be with say all those all those people like it their voice more important than mine. I would like you also to treat their voice more important mine.
I'm sure there's a lot of us here that are builders I would also say the opposite Christoph I don't know how we wait DAO voices but I would also say that sometimes even like ourselves over Avella like strategically we're so heads down. We're looking at the floor. We're building building building that will forget to look forward and try to plan ahead right. So there's weaknesses that haven't builders like give their thoughts and this lead strategy is heavily weighed themselves. So I think it's an evolving discussion. And Alex, Daniel, correct me if I'm wrong. Is this something that we want to get ratified? Eventually, once there's kind of like a good dialogue and agreement or is it something where you kind of just throw it and say, Everybody agrees?
I, yeah, it's hard. It's hard to say I personally think if we can get at least some aspects of aid ratified. That'd be great. The other possibility is not getting it ratified. But getting some form of budget allocation, like earmarking pools of funding, that could be a way to without imposing it on everything at least saying well, we have put some energy towards the priorities that have been agreed or something close, then Christophe.
Yeah, thank you. I think that's a really interesting point. You know, Takeshi, what you're naming there about, you know, traditional top down strategy versus what is what is appropriate strategy for DAO where you have, you know, a constellation of different individuals and organizations that you know, have loose sets of agreement and alignment and, you know, are we all pulling in the same direction, you know, Arbitrum stated goal is scaling Aetherium at you know, at the most simplest level, so, as long as we're all doing that, and then that's an alignment, and then the Constitution has, you know, a specific specific set of claims, for instance, financial sovereignty and how do we provide that? From my work? I used to run a brand strategy organization for three years in London. And so we would help organisations get clear on you know, what is your vision? What is your mission? What is your values, how does that translate out to, you know, strategy in KPIs and everything that kind of cascades through from that so at the moment, we're in the conversation, that strategy, but there is, you know, a taxonomy of other things. Which that nests inside off. And so, when I think about a vision, okay, where do we want it? What's a future that's compelling that people are aligned and going in that direction and making real and then when you move from vision to a mission, like the missions or specific taking vision, you know, over time, how would we implement you know, a portion of that vision in some time bound component, you know, six months, a year, two years, three years, right? And then your strategy is, you know, what's your action plan to fulfill a given mission? Right, so this is there's there's actual rigor around like the taxonomy, to actually think about how these components and things hang together. Just want to expand out that kind of conversation. I think, having fair representation of, you know, different stakeholders is super important. And I actually would take a leaf out of the book of plurality labs of having a plurality of options. I don't think we're ever going to get consensus and agreement on strategy. I think there should be a way that a DAO can support a plurality of simultaneous bits. That can be you know, and some of them actually work in the in more people than way and okay, that's really great. Let's kind of you know, put more fuel behind behind the fire of that.
Yep. Thank you. I just so I just quickly wanted to say about diversification, so like, for me, I feel pretty strongly strongly about the ratification by the dial. So if if we if we if you if we as the group, come up with some some kind of strategy pillars that we would like for others to recognize then like, I will put that up for certification, just to figure out whether the DAO agrees with that or not. Like I was almost going to do this with the with this brighten up thing simply didn't want to, you know, the be a disturbance at that point, but kind of feel differently about initiatives right now. So like, if if not like, if you don't plan on ratifying it, then like I'm planning on SO. Like, I will put it up for a vote anyway. If we were to go forward with it. Just getting your heads up.
Um, yeah, I'm kind of have the same opinion. I mean, it feels like this is just gonna continue to be this circular conversation until we have at least something there that everyone's looking towards. That's kind of the problem that we ran into. It's like, well, you need this to do this. Okay, you need this to do this. And I feel like at a certain point, we have to have some type of strategic alignment. Otherwise, this is just going to kind of persist forever. We thought it would make sense to kind of push that from this direction, however much Biden we need to get and I guess whatever steps we need to do, we should probably figure out as a team, because I agree we should be having buy in from I guess whoever we consider to be those valuable voices. So I guess if anyone has any ideas on how to get all those voices in and so that people at least can agree on some path forward, like we need, I think we need to, like that should always be a moving target. That should always be changing, but we should at least have, you know something in place that we're able to kind of build off of. Otherwise, it's gonna keep going in circles.
Right. Thank you, Joseph. Just an idea that came to mind. Now it could be the stupidest thing I've ever said. But so just you know, a preamble. Would it potentially be a good idea moving forward? You know, we're nine months in we have a treasury that could last us years. We're still in this industry and another FTX doesn't happen on a six month basis. Would it potentially be a good idea to every year in the January of that year, set strategic priorities and ratify them via constitutional AIP for example, so every year who would set these strategic priorities for that particular year and put them in the Arbitrum DAO constitution, so a higher level of ratification, although you know, nothing is binding, but I think this gives it a bit more oomph, as we say in my country. So maybe, you know, it will be a good thing to test like, every year set strategies for the quarters moving forward. It's a bit more organized as well. We know that in every January this would get revised, amended, supplemented. I don't know just an idea that came to mind now. That could be very stupid. Yeah.
I'm liking that. Let us maybe move now to the to the minor board. So we can start to at least play around with one collective way to gather ideas. If anyone is not familiar with Myro please let me know and I can do a quick explanation. The link is in the in the chat. And we can each just try to answer these questions if we need more postdates put it there. If you want to add your name you can add it but the idea is more that we just get a lot of ideas now. Usually, we used to in our in DAO always Banana, banana idea what we were saying. So that meaning right now we don't want good ideas. We want all the ideas good, bad, ugly, stupid, funny. Just let's just brain dump everything here. Across these categories. You can go one by one for a bit. And then in a few minutes, I'll just run a voting. Just so at least within this group, we can start to cluster and get a sense of what is important for us. And if you have any questions or comments just let me know
All right. For everyone as well. If you haven't used comments there, you can just press C on the keyboard and then click somewhere. And so if there is anything that is not super clear with you, or you like to understand a little bit more, you can just put a comment and that way get a little bit more information on what the other person is thinking and we can create a few different fields. So if you see any comment that is not super clear, you don't know what someone means etc. Or simply want to understand better their perspective. Feel free to drop a comment
so I got a question about maybe this question about a comment. The comment about the possible need for a variety of strategies. Not so sure. Like I know I'm usually you know, open for plurality of ideas and having different points of views but like, priority of strategies, sounds kind of like variety of goals and like the purity of goals. is not necessarily something that will help us if you know imagine having a plurality of, of strategies with one being very traditional and conservative approach to treasury management. And the other would be to have strategy like the aggressive and very experimental nature, nature of treasury management, like how can you like combining different strategies is not easy. So notice, I'm not sure if having the variety helps are actually is problematic. Yeah, yeah.
No, I didn't actually write this one. But when you mentioned a call the other day, about like optimism has this one thing but they have multiple programs and it's like, what is the fundamental difference? There's this awesome article that I'll share with you from radical exchange where it talks about the way governance works for zoning in New York City, versus or in San Francisco, I think it was versus in Tokyo. And it really gets to the core of this and the idea is that there's like the laws of like, here are the boundaries of which you can move assuming that we know how to set those boundaries very well, versus the idea of saying you can do anything and here's some boundaries. Of what we know is for sure off limits. And here's a system to reconcile if anybody challenges that you're going to do something that might not fit within the broader context, but it really opens up like a much healthier much more like natural flourishing way that the community builds. And I think none of us may be accurately saying and so I'll try and find that link and share it here.
Joe, also, if perhaps you can bet and this goes for everyone else who thinks there is an interesting framework or reference, I just shared the link to the forum. If you could also share it there. That would be fantastic. And I'm going to add to the myRA board in a second. Klaus or I'm not sure exactly who but there is a channel created for this initiative in the citizens Arbitrum Town Hall and we have a strategy channel there. So we'll maybe in the future, try to centralize a little bit more or create a single place for the conversation. But for now, we have the forum post and these telegram group and I'm saying these because I'm sure there's going to be more resources like this and educating ourselves and each other on how to think about strategies precisely the purpose here and those links are quite precious. Maybe with a bit of time we can Yeah.
Clouds go around the plurality piece so you know, this section of the mirror board is saying, How would strategy help you personally? Right. So if I asked myself that question, personally, if there's a strategy about you know, the next 90 days pursuing something around treasury management, probably not going to help me personally at all. Maybe if there's a bit around, you know, doing something strategically around gaming as a vertical. Maybe I'm not aligned in a contributor to that at all. But maybe if there's a strategic bet about how do we attract world class talent, and make onboarding and retention of people working in the DAO, super easy, I'm hugely invested in that as a strategic bet. So there could be a plurality of different strategic bets and different time horizons.
Yeah, yeah. Absolutely. All right. So I'm gonna on these I'm seeing the activity wane a little bit on the board. So what I would suggest is I'm going to start us giving us some timers. I'm gonna give us maybe three minutes to read the first section and if there is anything you want, you can still doing during this time. If you need more posters, just add them. And if you see posts that are similar, please drag and drop them so we create some clusters. And then after about three, four minutes of us reading the section, I'm going to start a voting process. So we can just signal which things deserve more discussion. We're not going to have the time to discuss them now. But at least we can say, these are some things that we looked at that we identify as potential topics for further discussion and further attention. And let's play around with this
big thing if anyone finished reading, you can also start doing it in another sections, but only if you're bored and you're waiting for now let's try to concentrate on the top left one.
Around losing you can hide the
it's not part of the exercise. We're trying to cluster the things Yeah, yeah. Sorry, I thought I was supposed to be moving things. Around.
No, no, no. Yes, please, please do please do move them around. And if anyone has ADHD, and I know this is a challenge with this sort of methodologies, a really good thing to do is you can hide everyone else's cursor. So when the towards the top in the middle, you see the triangular blue arrow here where it is. So just click there and then you start seeing other people that that really helps to ease here Okay, yeah.
Cool. I'll give us
so that's why that bothers me. Okay.
Learn something new every day. Yes. That was kind of that was kind of a route call out there
was going to have a panic attack. Thank God somewhat address,
right background music
you can also if everyone could mute themselves, but you can also turn off a sound here you'll be able to split the music
right, I'm sure we could keep going for a long time with all of this stuff. But for now, I'm just gonna get a quick sense make around which of these things are kind of important for us? There are clusters and everything in a cluster is very similar, so don't worry too much. If you need to vote for one posted or another posted in the same cluster. It doesn't matter here. We're just trying to get a very quick heat map. Of what's happening.
All right. Oh, I'll make sure we can collect some notes of these and shared later but for now, let's go immediately to the fear side, please and I'm going to give us three minutes to cluster and read those
Yeah, for okay for anyone else that is unable to move move posted states. Mirrors just bugging refresh the page. And then it works.
The silence is killing
must say something, please. Yeah. So we are we're essentially about to run out of time. So the one thing I'm going to ask you then is let's think about the next steps once and please add plus emojis to anything here but if you think we shouldn't have another meeting or continue discussing these or he's like, You know what, guys? This is not right. That would be the first sense make we're not trying to make any decisions here. We're just trying to figure out if this is a conversation we should keep on having
Oh, sweet.
Were you looking for that right now Daniel, or should we kind of put them in the chat when?
Yeah, if you can put it on next steps. If there is one there that kind of resonates or let's have another meeting here, and you can give it a thumbs up. That'd be absolutely great. Then if any, if anyone wants to do a checkout, please do so. In the chat. Verbally will take too much. But and that would be
amazing. Well, thank you everyone for coming. And we'll see you all next week. Cheers.
Thanks for hosting Daniel. Thank you. Yeah,
really good. Yeah. Good shit, Dan.
Thank you. Thank you.
Yeah, it was great stuff. Just everybody. Please.
Add just before we jump off, how do you propose synthesizing this and next steps. I think one of the key antipatterns is, you know, we have great juice for like an hour. And then you know, how do we take the ball forward? No one's getting paid for that. If you just you know, the right. Move forward of everything, right.
Yeah. So, I mean, on one side, I'm like, I don't think these possible to do this initiative without harmonica. And I don't know if the guys are gonna have it ready in time. harmonica is a tool that one of the Arendelle Fellows is building. It's an AI bot that you can essentially just talk to the bot and the bot synthesizes everything for now. I think I would do is I would ask Ross or for West Indies meeting, to sort of distill the key points and share that as some sort of document that output as a as a reply to the forum post and share that delegates and I'll I'll circulate the draft between us so we agreed because there's still a lot of framing like what I'm sensing for now is this is a thing that's going to happen like if there seems to be enough energy here, we can make it concrete enough and focus and actually process that remains to be seen. And we haven't really started discussing process for these like not really. So that's maybe for us to brainstorm a little bit. What's the next step we want to suggest to the community? Left out etcetera. But I'm not too sure about these yet. For now. I'll ask grocer to gather the insights from the workshop. I'll say a little bit and we can check the week on this channel.
I think using forum posts, not just for proposal, technology, what a working artist or work stream is doing is really good. I'm gonna be doing that. Around headphones and whatnot. So rather than try and my biggest fear is we try and boil the ocean and try and get too much agreement for something of too long horizon to broader scope, or including too many voices because you can never get that like asymptotically impossible task to actually realize. I would say, you know, set a timeframe and let's do it, you know, experiment and make money days or, you know, on a specific vertical on enabling constraints, otherwise, class I think around even if you had, you know, 25 or 50k to have a small group just to something
I think that's where you're, you're very Denver really fits into this. It gives us the constraint of a forcing function of this is where this is where the conversation can happen. This is why we have to set everything up to go there. And in actuality to help enable both proposals conversations kind of to educate of why each member's important why strategy is important kind of perhaps up
that's one way I can set this up to whim is we do some prep work is a team that actually, you know, works across those two days in the hackathon all around strategy. And they actually pitch something to everybody in the room, requesting, you know, a chunk of cash for you know, an initial three month, six month experiment, something like that. Yeah,
I have to run but this is awesome. Great job. You guys. Talk to you soon. Thank you speak so Oh, and Dino essentially the otter so you can get the recording of everything. Oh, amazing.
Super, super helpful. I appreciate it. Right drop off. laters
