Week 31
24th July to 30th July 2023
Last updated
24th July to 30th July 2023
Last updated
No summary given
Not this week
No summary given
No summary given
Hosts : Stephen Whitenstall
Date of Meeting : Wednesday, 26th July 2023
Attendees : Andre, Peter, Felix, Stephen, Tevo & Vanessa
Agenda :
1 - GitHub Project Board - Stephen
2 - Discussion - Guidance notes/templates for meeting facilitators - Vani
Not this week
Developing process models for new workgroup formation
Description - We went through the facilitators who were assigned to the preparation of the meeting and the tasks assigned to them, and also went through the facilitation rotation that who will be preparing for the next meeting and its tasks.
Insight - The onboarding process for new community members is essential for their effective integration into the workgroup. Creating a step-by-step guide ("A Program") will provide clear instructions and guidance, making it easier for newcomers to get acquainted with the workgroup's activities. Learning - By implementing "A Program," the workgroup expects to see improved efficiency in onboarding new members and a reduction in the time taken for them to become active contributors.
Insight - Improved visibility of available tasks within the workgroup space is crucial for facilitating collaboration and encouraging members to engage in relevant projects. Learning - By listing all the assets that workgroups deliver, members will have a comprehensive view of available tasks, enabling them to choose tasks aligned with their skills and interests more effectively.
The workgroup will take a break for two weeks.
Cran, Fly
cran, fly, headelf, peter, waka, chris, slysyl
Meeting with Grace Rachmany
1 hr
Ask questions to Grace Rachmany and bring up topics to help the Ambassador Program move forward.
The first question was on scaling programs to which the reply was why are teams getting bigger? "What's all the bigness about?"
The topic moved into reputation of a person and how there's all these additive ways to add reputation but hardly ever ways to take away reputation. This brought us into topics of roles and leadership where there needs to be some way to manage the program. Great points around how would you demote someone? What is the appeals process? For example: could there be a minimum threshold of people appealing that someone needs removed from the program before it goes to some sort of vote or decision? We discussed ways to prove or provide levels of participation/reputation with the examples of a dojo and belts which would be hierarchical based on who is a master. Other categories could work like having 5 categories with various levels within those categories. A category could be AI knowledge - maybe you're level 1 or 2 there and a 5 in a different category.
The importance of KPI's. How we need to get to the root of the problems, steps for identifying problems. When things are difficult we need the ability to challenge/remove/sit and hash things out. See meeting recording above for more detail.
What's in the Ambassador name and stages of Ambassadors
Headelf (host), Fly (co-host), Cran(co-host), Peter, Chris, Waka, SlySi, Tevo
45 minutes. This meeting followed a lengthy Incubation meeting with special guest Grace Rachmany so we started late.
Headelf filled in on previous meetings about the name, rankings, path and some confusion of how to become an “Ambassador”. Previous meetings came up with names of Lurkers (not yet engaged); New-bee (newly engaged); Trusted; Work Group Lead; Leadership (role at roundtable?). Lengthy discussion followed with Chris and WaKa having solid input on some of the names. Peter, Fly and Tevo expressed concerns on some of the labels and stages that had previously surfaced.
It was decided that “Lurker” was not a warm name and perhaps Explorer would be better. Chris suggested an old Europe use of names ie. Initiate, Apprentice, Journeyman(person), Master. It was also brought up (WaKa maybe?) about Grace's use of belt colors as used in martial arts : white, yellow, orange and black. This will need more community input and discussion, thought it was almost agreed on via a light consensus type discussion that there are four formal “Ambassador: classes starting with New-bees. Oh this name was not particularly liked but until we decide on one I will continue to use. To this farmer in a bee hive the New bees usually come with spring and the revival of life after winter.
The conversation pivoted to what does it take to become an ambassador. Waka commented that there was too much between stage 2 (trusted or newbee?) and stage 3 (trusted and WG lead?) where someone could begin to get paid. It was agreed after some convo that a formal request needed to be put in by an applicant. Not complicated but it ensures the person wants the position and they are cognizant of the process.
NOTE: Headelf had to leave the meeting due to a previous date (engagement) so anything discussed after this (see below) is an addendum from other participants.
Avoid naming the participation types and levels in ways that are offensive or patronizing, like Lurker or n00b. We should assume a new member perspective, and use terminology that maps for them the trajectory of meaningful growth in their participation lifecycle. Thus, Explorer or Prospect for recent arrivals.
Levels structured around leadership and management of org entities [Guilds / WG] is limiting and does not promote recognition of non-management contributions and subject area expertise.
Best avoid framing the levels based on Discord roles, permissions, or validation steps.
Terms like Member, Participant, Contributor may have additional implications and should be used selectively and consistently. For example, Participant vs. Contributor may imply eligibility for compensation. Member [of an organization or a legal entity] may have jurisdiction-specific statutory implications.
Community involvement at next week's Town Hall and Strategy meeting.
SucrenSpice (host), Kenric, Tevo, Atmosphere, Vani, Fly, Peter
1) Onboarding email gives mistaken impression that recipients have definitely been accepted as ambassadors. Needs correcting. 2) Some meetings have not been very welcoming to new people. 3) Name of "ambassadors only" meeting might be unclear, especially since new people have received an email that may have given them the impression that they are already ambassadors. 4) There is discussion in other workgroups about hierarchies, levels, names etc for different levels of involvement: but since these are not agreed yet, we'll send out the onboarding email to the backlog of people (c. 300) describing the process as it currently stands. 5) Suggestion to implement the idea from a few meetings ago of asking people to attend as many meetings as they can, just once, and send feedback. This is includd in draft onboarding email: to be discussed further outside meeting.
Vani and Sucre to tweak the onboarding email and then post a new version in Discord for comments.
Once the new email text is agreed, Peter will share his list of 300-ish people with Sucre so they can be contacted.
When emails go out, they will be BCC’d.
Name of the “Ambassadors Only” meeting has now been changed on calendar to “Leadership session”, for clarity.
We will give a heads-up to WG and Guild leads that new prospective Ambassadors might attend their meetings, and they should be welcomed.
Sucre, Ash and Vani will continue to contact new people 1-to-1
There is a lot to do in this group, so we'll move to weekly meetings as of next week.
Not this week
No summary given
No summary given
Rojo [facilitator] [documenter], Agus, Peter, Slysyl, Lilycupcake.
Discussed workgroup progress (projects, social media,…)
Discussed ways to increase the number of clips output.
Discussed Lily’s progress on the onboarding video.
Discussed Rojo’s progress on the Dework video.
[decision] Increase our clip output.
[action] Finalize ongoing videos.
Slate [documenter], Mikasa, Kenichi [facilitator], Peter, CJfrankie
We reviewed the published articles and updates from Inside SingularityNET for the months of June and July. It was noted that several tasks had been successfully completed.
The main focus of the meeting was the review of the recently written "Inside SNET June/July Edition" article. All attendees were assigned to read the article, and it received positive feedback from everyone.
Updates on the Ambassador Program graphics were discussed, and the submissions were made by the assignees. The graphics will be shared on Discord for further review and feedback. Kenichi, the workgroup lead, will reach out to the assignees to coordinate the process.
The creation of the Mindplex account was announced, which will serve as a platform for community-based content. SingularityNET's internal activities will be posted on Medium, and highlights will be shared through Twitter threads.
Considering the substantial amount of available content, there were slight delays in completing some article tasks. Kenichi encouraged everyone to share any article suggestions they might have.
[decision] Kenichi proposed that Slate combine his two article topics, to which Slate agreed. This consolidation aims to streamline the content and make it more effective.
There was an acknowledgement that videos covering AGI topics and discussions involve more effort when being transformed into articles. The compensation for such articles was discussed, and the possibility of holding a meeting to collectively work on this content was suggested to make the process easier.
[action] Review and provide feedback on Ambassador Program graphics submissions on Discord. [action] Kenichi to reach out to the assignees for further coordination on the Ambassador Program graphics. [action] Create an article based on the content of Townhall #52. [action] Assign specific tasks to members for creating articles on selected topics from the town hall. [action] Initiate discussions on creating an onboarding thread. [action] Combine Slate's two article topics as agreed upon.
We began with an intro to Grace Rachmany: Grace has her mind in many various projects in the space: recently spearheading a DAO Leadership course and working on Priceless DAO. She's written ICO Whitepapers, has a wide ranging blog on sites like Medium and Mirror, and videos on Odyssee.
How do we automate processes? Discussion came up about how one poisonous person can destroy a community without an anatomical structure to correct the situation. Sociocracy was brought up a few times and Grace mentioned exercises we could do: see
Inside SNET June/July Edition
Dr Ben Goertzel: AGI, SingularityNET, Blockchain, The Dangers of Centralized AI Development
[decision] It was decided that a new article to be published would be about the content covered in Townhall #52 re proposed Ambassador budget structure for Q3 2023, given its abundance of valuable information. Additionally, tasks were assigned to explore specific topics from the Town Hall for further articles.
