Week 49

Mon 2nd Dec - Sun 8th Dec 2024

Monday 2nd December 2024

AI Ethics WG

  • Type of meeting: Monthly

  • Present: CallyFromAuron [facilitator], LadyTempestt [documenter], CallyFromAuron, LadyTempestt, PeterE, Aetherblade, Duke, Ayo, esewilliams, Sucre n Spice, advanceameyaw, CollyPride, Onize, AshleyDawn

  • Purpose: Regular monthly meeting of the AI Ethics WG

  • Working Docs:

Narrative:

Tasks on Github We started by going through tasks “in progress”; We went through Q4 Interviews updates. Duke said he has done 3 interviews so far and will wrap up the remaining 7 before we go for holiday this quarter. Clement, Ayo and Kenichi are done with their Q3 interviews. AdvancedAmeyaw has done 3 so far and is looking to finish his Q4 interviews by the 7th of December. Onize is done with her Q4 interviews, Ese’s interviews for Q3 and Q4 are progressing just fine. We are not moving interviews “in progress” to “done” yet until the validity of the interviews has been confirmed (listening to at least part of them to check audibility, clarity, relevance, length all conform to the validity criteria) by Esther, LeeLoo and Vani.

Moderation of the AI Ethics forum: Clement is doing fine here, nothing dramatic yet lol. He will be asked to write an update in the issue itself on how it's gone this Quarter.

Pre-AGI-24 roundtable and AGI-24 Chillout rooms rewards: These payments will not go through the Ambassador program Treasury system after all but will come directly from the Foundation via the Supervisory Council's budget. Esther reached out to the Foundation's financial operations team, and rewards are supposed to go out this week. Leeloo will reach out to her for confirmation. The issue will remain open till it's resolved and paid.

Admin Team Roles: WG Internal Management, WG Async Support, Co-chair and Community Manager have all given updates on what they have been doing, s these issues can be closed and sent for payment.

AI Ethics Events: We are looking to meet before the end of this quarter to discuss in a session what kind of events (virtual & physical) the Ambassador Program should attend next year.

Documenting BeGIN meetings: we will not be doing this next Quarter. Onize will upload any that she has done, and will update the issue on the github board.

We went onto tasks in “to-do”; Sucre isn't doing Q4 Interviews anymore, Ese will get to hers soon. How long should we keep Q3 interviews open? Especially the ones still in “to-do”. CollyPride and LadyTempestt suggested the end of the year or before we all go on holiday. CallyFromAuron suggested we wait till Q1, 2025 and if there are people with Q3 interviews that are yet to be done, and other people interested in doing interviews in Quarter 1 then we should reallocate budget. We will look at producing educational resources to demystify basic AI Ethics terminology & ideas, and rewarding people who attended the training session for interviewing skills again in early Q1 if we have extra budget (which will depend on AGIX price).

We also went through our Q1 2025 budget items: We will assign some specific items to people at the beginning of January or our first meeting next year. Colleen, Ese showed interest in this budget item “ideation on how to get donors”. Onize, Duke, and possibly Stephen are interested in Knowledge Management and Data Analysis. If AGIX goes up we might be able to start doing some transcription in Q1 (using ReadAI and edited by the interviewers) but if not, this will begin in Q2 2024.

We also went through and finalized our Q4 report.

Survey Sharing: We have tested the survey and so far it just needs some small tweaks so it can go out. Esther is working on these, but it might not be ready before the end of the quarter.

Decision Items:

  • Clement will be a co-chair mentee again next quarter.

    • [rationale] He needs more time to grow into an admin role of his choice where possible.

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • We will aim to meet on Monday, 9th December at 14:00 UTC to discuss AI Ethics Events. Vani, Peter, Colleen, Duke, LeeLoo, Esther are interested, and it will be open to anyone else who wants to attend.

    • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

  • We will wait till Q1, 2025 and if there are people with Q3 interviews that are yet to be done, and other people interested in doing the interviews in Quarter 1 then we would reallocate.

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • We will continue to meet monthly in Q1 2025.

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • We will meet on the 13th of January, 3rd of February and the 3rd of March for our WG meetings next quarter.

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

Action Items:

  • [action] Vani to reach out to Onize about documenting BeGIN Meetings to find out where she’s at with it. [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 31 December 2024 [status] in progress

  • [action] Vani to reach out to Clement to put down updates on the GitHub issue assigned to him as a Co-Chair Mentee on what he's been up to. [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 24 December 2024 [status] in progress

  • [action] LadyTempestt to reach out to PG, Kevin Frey and Vasu concerning their Q4 interviews to find out how it is going. [assignee] LadyTempestt [due] 17 December 2024 [status] done

  • [action] Ladytempestt will document on 13th January, Onize will document on 3rd February and CollyPride will take on documentation on the 3rd of March. [assignee] LadyTempestt, Onize, CollyPride [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Interviews, Q3 and Q4 Interviews, AI Ethics Events, Q1 budget, survey sharing, payments, rewards, AGI-24, sNET Foundation, AGIX price, budget reallocation, admin roles, mentorship, co-chair, attendance at events,

  • emotions: Deliberative, quiet, funny

Wednesday 4th December 2024

Archives Workgroup

Decision Items:

  • André has implemented a controlled vocab for people's names in the Archives, based on Vani's "Archive Names" list https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r5LDA7yiERtWuu-HHYsBiG-RLyjDCtTZUB8H-xZHFsE/edit?usp=sharing

He plans to write some code to enable us to go through old meeting summaries and corrrect any incorrect names (i.e. where someone has been recorded under a different name than the one that is usually used for them).

New names can be added when creating a meeting summary, but they will not be added to the controlled vocab until they have been approved in an Archives meeting. We will add a standing task on the Board for this, to ensure we check each meeting.

  • [rationale] To resolve a barrier to good documentation (documenters didn't always know what someone's Discord name was, so "Discord name = Archives name" was not working), and ensure people are discoverable in the Archives.

  • [opposing] none

  • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

  • Q1 2025 Budget: We noted that our Q1 2025 budget has been approved. We agreed that tasks that have been agreed for Q1 2025 will be added as Issues on our GutHub board.

We also noted that the new "budget cap" process has worked well - it seems to have speeded up the consent process, and also, by removing the need for budget fitting, it has removed the problems we noted in our last meeting (i.e. incentivising workgroups to submit higher budgets than they need, in anticipation of budget fitting).

  • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • We noted that in the end, we were unable to include in our Q1 2025 budget an item to support collaboration outside the Ambassador Program: it would have taken us over our budget cap, although we had identified a need for it. So we note that we should try to include it in Q2 2025.

    • [rationale] to enable us to capture material from other areas of the ecosystem, and have a more wide-ranging Archives that demonstrates the links and connections between the Ambassador Program and other areas of the ecosystem.

    • [opposing] None as such, although it might be difficult to do this comprehensively and still keep to a reasonable budget amount. It might be more about outreach to different parts of the ecosystem to see how we can support them with recordkeeping.

    • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

  • We agreed that our first meeting in Jan will be Weds 8th Jan 2025

    • [rationale] Technically it should be the first Weds in Jan - but that's New Year's Day. Other meetings in Q1 will be the first Weds - so Weds 5th Feb and Weds 5th March.

    • [opposing] none

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • There has been a shift in direction on our work on a RAG retrieval process, after Stephen reviewed Ubio's work (see https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/224 ). Stephen is aiming to structure the work as an autodidactic/self-learning approach, almost like a course. We have been questioning what we expect to use generative models for, and what we expect them to do; and looking at using (human) data analysis and data mining before we apply an LLM. Standard augmentation is usually about applying a context - so, what contextual constraints do we want to put on our use of a generative AI model in the context of the Archives? We need to be aware of where the data is structured and where it is unstructured (i.e. free text in meeting summaries), and look at how to structure data in a more constrained way (we note that JSON uses a "tree" structure, which has some parallels with the hierarchical structure of a traditional archival catalogue; and we can also see parallels with the approach of a knowledge graph database). Eventually we may use LLMs to help create semantic queries/prompts against an SQL database - so a hybrid of JSON/SQL rather than an actual knowledge graph.

This might also have implications for the redesign of the Summary Tool, in terms of how much of the data in a meeting summary is structured (and in what ways) and how much is free text.

See also, updates in the relevant issues at https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/225 and https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/222

  • [rationale] Stephen's work has shown that simply throwing large text corpora at a generative AI model tends to produce hallucinations and inaccuracies.

  • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • Summary tool redesign - in the light of Stephen's work above, we noted that in the new version of the Tool, rather than the current approach of several different summary templates, we might want all summaries to use the same template style as Treasury meetings, where actions and decisions are connected to each agenda item.

We discussed at length how to disambiguate summaries from summary detail, and constraining the "rambling" narratives which we see in some meeting summaries.

  • [rationale] Aiming to minimise the amount of free text, and structure where free text is used.

  • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

  • Summary tool redesign: possibility of linking/integrating summaries with GitHub pproject boards?

    • [rationale] because more and more WGs are starting to manage themselves via a GitHub Board, so the detail on an agenda item will be in the relevant Issue, and shouldn't need to be repeated in a summary - but how do we ensure that this is integrated and searchable in the Archives?

    • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

  • André's tool development work for November https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/217 has included building the new Archives dashboard https://archives-dashboard.netlify.app

It is working, despite a couple of minor bugs.

  • [rationale] It enables searches, particularly of decisions - interesting in a governance context to see which WGs are making decisions that affect everyone, and where decisions across WGs might vary. Could help us keep abreast of when contradictory decisions are made in different meetings.

  • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

  • We noted that Sucre has completed her update of the Ambassador GitBook for Q4 2024 - see https://snet-ambassadors.gitbook.io/home/welcome-and-how-to-join/our-workgroups

She will update the relevant Issue https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/215, then it can be closed and paid.

  • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

Action Items:

  • [action] Stephen presenting the "Open-source paradigm" work at a TH - this was done on 3rd December https://youtu.be/iXsVeA5B7ao?si=_qW9xhC43TbapYxD [assignee] Stephen [QADAO] [due] 3 December 2024 [status] done

  • [action] Vani to check through Budget issues from previous Quarters (such as https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/73 and https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/131), which we keep open until all issues that are costed in that quarter are closed, and ensure that they can be moved to "Done". [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 21 November 2024 [status] done

  • [action] Vani to start a draft Quarterly Report for this Quarter, and post it in the Issue here https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/214 for comments [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 14 November 2024 [status] done

  • [action] Vani to draft Q1 budget, and post in the Issue here https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/218 for comments and suggestions [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 14 November 2024 [status] done

  • [action] Vani to approach DeepFunding, to ask about the issue raised in our November meeting about documentation of DF Town Hall: i.e. sometimes timestamps are not great, and additional work needs to be done to document the sessions in a meaningful way - could DF itself could make any further contribution to the work, e.g. by paying someone from the Town Hall team to add the documentation to the summary tool?

and discuss how the Archives dovetails with documentation that DF is doing itself, such as https://community.deepfunding.ai/ [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 8 January 2025 [status] todo

  • [action] Vani to add the tasks in the Q1 2025 budget to the GitHub Board [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 8 January 2025 [status] todo

  • [action] André or Sucre to update the Ambassador Calendar to add the correct dates of Archives WG meetings in Q1 2024 (8th Jan, 5th Feb, 5th March) [assignee] André, Sucre n Spice [due] 18 December 2024 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: LLMs, LLM development, Q1 2025 budget, budget caps, meeting summary tool, RAG retrieval process, archive names, controlled vocabularies, Budget fitting, Collaboration, spin-offs, Knowledge management across the singularityNET ecosystem, archives dashboard, narratives, concise summaries, good meeting summaries, Governance, Decision Making Process, decision tracking, autodidact, self-learning, data mining, data analysis, generative AI models, data structure, archives cataloguing, JSON, SQL, structured and unstructured data, hallucination, fabrication, education, learning, open source, open source ethos, knowledge graph, summary template, github board, DeepFunding

  • emotions: small, in-depth, Discursive, exploratory

Research and Development Guild

Agenda Items:

  • Welcoming new members and Introduction

  • Review of last meeting summary Action Items

  • UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: EC-Entity-Connections, W3CD-Web3-Contributors-Dashboard, CSDB-Collaboration-Skills-Database, Social-Media-Dashboard, Reputation-System-using-SoulBound-Tokens-SBTs

  • R&D New Metta Coder lab

  • Q1 Budget and Tier system

  • Facilitation in Q1

  • Open discussion How to implement the potential outcome of AI SandBox & AI Think Tank in the R&D Guild in the next quarters.

Discussion Points:

  • Review of last meeting summary Action Items: Advance went through the action items for the previous meeting and we had a brief introduction for new members

  • UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: Teams are currently working async on their projects and will give an update at the end of the month

  • R&D Guild Metta Coder Lab Initiative: The initiative is set to start in Q1 2025 and communications are still ongoing with the representatives from the Foundation.

  • Follow up on the CSDB: AJ gave a presentation update on the Users' Data Consent

  • UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: Governance Dashboard, lordkizzy couldn't have a call with Guillermo due to his busy schedule but promised to host one in the coming week

  • How to implement the potential outcome of AI SandBox & AI Think Tank in the R&D Guild in the next quarters: Lordkizzy shared his views on the the open discussion, he felt that there is a possibility for a collaboration between the R&D Guild, Education Guild, AI Sandbox/Think-tank and Marketing Guild, and he gave a scenario where tools being developed by the R&D Guild could be presented as a project showcase for AI Sandbox, then educational materials could be created on the tool by Education Guild and then these tools could be marketed by Marketing Guild.

Action Items:

  • [action] CSDB team to finish and get ready for redeployment by 25th of NOV [assignee] AJ, Advanceameyaw [due] 11 December 2024 [status] todo

  • [action] Lordkizzy and guillermo to have a call to discuss on the governance dashboard project [assignee] LordKizzy, guillermolucero [due] 11 December 2024 [status] todo

  • [action] AJ to give a presentation on his updates to the CSDB project (Data privacy) in the next call [assignee] AJ [due] 11 December 2024 [status] todo

  • [action] Members to express interest in the sheet for facilitation [assignee] All members [due] 18 December 2024 [status] todo

  • [action] Lordkizzy and Guillermo to schedule a call with the team to discuss the automation of core Contributors by Treasury guild [assignee] LordKizzy, guillermolucero [due] 11 December 2024 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Tool Development, AI tooling, Presentation, Operations, Workshop, Facilitation, CSDB, collaboration skills database, data privacy, privacy, Marketing Guild, Education Guild, AI Sandbox/Think Tank, collaboration

  • emotions: Casual, speedy, Welcoming, Thoughtful, Friendly, Collaborative

Education Workgroup

  • Type of meeting: Weekly

  • Present: Slate [facilitator], Slate [documenter], Gorga Siagian, esewilliams, AshleyDawn, Franklynstein, Kateri, kenichi, kishman, LordKizzy, Zalfred, hogantuso

  • Purpose: Regular weekly meeting of Education guild, covering: Certification Program Discussions; Website / Wiki Integration Updates; AI For Beginners Updates

  • Working Docs:

In this meeting we discussed:

  • Q1 2025 budget consent process

  • Certification Program conclusion

  • AI For Beginners updates

  • Presentation Series start

Discussion Points:

  • Slate started the meeting by greeting everyone

  • After the introduction, the meeting began with the the topic of the Q1 2025 budget consent process. It was notified that Education Guild passed the consent round with no objections, which was a taken as a good sign for the guild's reporting .

  • Slate mentioned that the certification program has finally ended and the prize winners will be rewarded in the next TreasuryGuild call

  • Then we had updates from AI For Beginners. There was a video submission on which a remark was given that the video was completely comprised of subtitles and there is mostly stocks attached to it. Ese said that she has already notified the team about the updates, and they will be working on it

  • Then Gorga and Franklyn showcased the education website design; the initial design was finalised

  • Kenichi showcased the Presentation Series roadmap and everybody liked the solid plan, and that he will be assessing people based on their interests in accordance with the research topics

  • Slate notified that Education Guild will also be going on holidays later in December, which will be announced in the next meeting.

Decision Items:

  • Improve the Ai For Beginners video

    • [rationale] most people agreed

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • Holidays will be announced in the next meeting

    • [rationale] everyone agreed

    • [opposing] nil

Action Items:

  • [action] Ese to finalize the last announcement on socials in regards to the certification program winners [assignee] esewilliams [due] 11 December 2024 [status] done

  • [action] Gorga and Franklyn to keep working on the site design and finalize it [assignee] Gorga Siagian, Franklynstein [due] 11 December 2024 [status] in progress

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: CCCP, core contributors, certification, education website, AI For Beginners, video, Presentation Series, Q1 2025 budget, consent process, certification program, Rewards, winners

  • emotions: productive, Collaborative, Businesslike.

Thursday 5th December 2024

Governance Workgroup

Narrative:

AI Sandbox/Think-Tank is the only remaining Workgroup with unresolved objections to their budget.

We discussed the objections, and the responses that the workgroup has made in this doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RsIiorAun9Hkn9Dq26TMq1J5M7vkIPHHCuRnjVrqTk0/edit?usp=sharing.

The objectors were not present in the meeting, so the objections were discussed based on the information given in the consent forms. We noted that if those who object are not present, this means they must accept that the decision will be made by those who do attend.

Key points raised:

  • the comment (not an objection) about the group's GitHub Board not being under the Ambassador Program github organisation: accepted as a valid question, and the group will consider moving it; but as it's not an objection as such, it doesn't affect the budget decision.

  • the meeting could not see any similarity between what AI Sandbox does, and what R&D does, so could not understand the objection that the two groups are doing the same thing.

  • AI Sandbox's work is a form of community engagement and community contribution, so the objection that there is a lack of these things is inaccurate.

  • several of the objections seem to be based on a misunderstanding of what the group is trying to do - for example, it doesn't aim to focus on assessing tools built by the community, but on tools (often commercial tools) that might be used by the community.

  • To the objection that AI developers and specialists should be invited to be involved in Sandbox sessions, LordKizzy (speaking on behalf of the workgroup) noted that although this would be good, it could incur costs beyond the group's budget. However, Peter offered to ask around at the Foundation to see if there are people who would be prepared to get involved for no cost.

The meeting also noted that several of the comments are not really objections, but suggestions. Since no specific harm was identified, and no solid reason not to approve the budget was given, these points are not valid as objections. The person suggesting these things should progress them, if they want to do so, by joining the workgroup and working on the issues they have raised.

Overall, the meeting agreed that the points raised have been sufficiently answered, so the group's budget has passed.

Discussion Points:

  • Reaching agreement on AI Sandbox/Think Tank's Q1 2025 budget.

Decision Items:

  • AI Sandbox/Think Tank's budget has passed

    • [rationale] Because the objections raised in the consent form are either not valid as objections, or have been adequately answered by the workgroup.

    • [opposing] None

    • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

Action Items:

  • [action] Peter to ask around at the Foundation for specialists and developers who might be able to join Sandbox sessions, to fulfil the suggestion that "Absence of AI specialists, AGI developers, or credible panelists reduces the sandbox’s value". [assignee] PeterE [due] 14 January 2025 [status] todo

  • [action] LordKizzy to look into the possibility of moving the group’s GitHub Board to the Ambassador Program github organisation [assignee] LordKizzy [due] 14 January 2025 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Decision Making Process, consent decision making, Q1 2025 budget, Q4 2024 quarterly report, AI Sandbox/Think Tank, validity of objections, experts, AI developers, SingularityNET Foundation, R&D guild, github board

  • emotions: decisive, focused, thorough, calm

AI Sandbox/Think-tank

In this meeting we discussed:

  • LordKizzy reflected on the previous session, and proposed a mentorship program aimed at assisting new members on documentation. He noticed some new faces in our previous calls and suggested a documentation roster for the next quarter. When creating the documentation roster, he will speak to Kateri so she can include the names of our new documenters, hopefully they will get to document within Q1 2025.

  • Metrics and attendance, log context e.g: growth trends, significance, tie activities such as productivity enlargement. One of the goals for AI Sandbox is keeping the community engaged through exhibitions and open discussion. One of the things we were able to achieve in the last quarter, which we documented in our Q4 quarterly report, was the fact that we were able to average a total of 15 participants on our calls this quarter.

  • LordKizzy: One of the things I noticed in this program was due to the fact that we presented our budget in a way that so many workgroups also did, like presenting the average participation so far. It was something that he saw in so many reports. All those that used the same format for the reports were meant to be spotlighted for metrics and KPI in terms of participation.

  • Discussion on testing tools: If we are having two presentation machines and we are not testing the tools to see if they can possibly adopt the ecosystem, then we would have been criticized for just having a session and having no impact on the Program. If an AI notaker is better than read AI and we are able to present this tool to the community, and it benefits, and it's fully adopted by the Ambassador program, this would be something that we can claim as an achievement from our sessions. Same with Zapier, same as with Behagetri.

  • Reflection points for Q4 and Planning for Q1 2025: We were asked to speak on the sessions we enjoyed most. Gorga and Advance spoke on the debate session for think-tank, LordKIzzy listed things that we are going to have in Q1, which are project showcase sessions and AI tool exhibitions for AI Sandbox, and discussions on machine learning, vision analysis, AI roundtable discussion, theoretical debate and critical thinking sessions for AI Think-tank.

  • AI sandbox and think-tank Discord membership tag: Gorga suggested the membership tag should be "think/tank". Or "sandbox think/tank?" LordKizzy suggested "thinkers", Ashley suggested "AI tank" or "ThinkAI", Kateri suggested "AI thinkers", MartinSoki suggested "Thinkers".

Decision Items:

  • We agreed to create a documentation roster for the next quarter and also mentorship program for the newcomers who cannot document.

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • We decided to add "action items" into the agenda as a regular item.

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

Action Items:

  • [action] Create a Google form on the feedback from various AI Sandbox/Think Tank sessions [assignee] LordKizzy, osmium [due] 12 December 2024 [status] todo

  • [action] Members are to fill out the Google forms concerning feedback from various AI Sandbox/Think Tank sessions. [assignee] All [due] 19 December 2024 [status] todo

  • [action] Lordkizzy to speak to Kateri about the documentation roster for new members. [assignee] LordKizzy, Kateri [due] 23 January 2025 [status] todo

  • [action] Lordkizzy to prepare a report comparing the effectiveness of different note-taking tools. [assignee] LordKizzy [due] 12 December 2024 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Roadmap of AI Sandbox/Think Tank, Documentation, note-taking tools, tool testing, Q4 2024 report, retrospective, Q1 2025 budget, attendance, metrics, Discord tag

  • emotions: welcoming, informative, interactive

Friday 6th December 2024

Video Workgroup

  • Type of meeting: Weekly

  • Present: Malik [facilitator], Zalfred [documenter], SubZero, Zalfred, Rojo, hogantuso, AndrewBen, malik, LordKizzy, killy, devon, osmium, Slate

  • Purpose: Weekly meeting of the Video WorkGroup. The meeting focused on weekly updates and tasks distribution.

Discussion Points:

  • UPDATE FROM THE TASK MANAGER A quick update from Tuso on various tasks assigned within the week.

  • UPDATE FROM THE SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGER adding that he will be off for a few weeks. Offering a special training for qualified and interested persons who'd like to take up the task.

Decision Items:

  • Concerning the need for a temporary social media manager, Andrew Ben emerged as one who'd take up the task.

    • [opposing] No oppositions as Andrew Ben is a senior member and qualified to take up the task.

Action Items:

  • [action] SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGER [assignee] AndrewBen [status] todo

  • [action] TASK MANAGER [assignee] Malik [status] todo

  • [action] MEETING FACILITATION [assignee] Zalfred [status] todo

  • [action] MEETING DOCUMENTATION [assignee] LordKizzy [status] todo

  • [action] TOWN HALL VIDEO EDIT [assignee] devon [status] todo

  • [action] TOWN HALL SUMMARY EDIT [assignee] hogantuso [status] todo

  • [action] REVIEW TEAM [assignee] killy, SubZero [status] todo

Marketing Guild

Discussion Points:

  • Low Participation: Ese highlighted the low participation within the guild and suggested closing activities for the year. Kizzy recommended continuing work on the governance document to establish a clear direction for the upcoming year.

  • Governance Document: Ese presented a governance document outlining attendance, task completion, KPIs, payment guidelines, deliverables, rules, penalties, and governance goals. Kizzy shared a roles and responsibilities document for feedback. Ese proposed sharing the document within the guild for further input before the next meeting. Kenichi recommended merging the two governance documents, adding them to Notion, and instituting a regular audit process.

  • Core Members: Kizzy noted the reduction of core members from 12 to 10 due to role adjustments. Kareem proposed assessing current core members' contributions to optimize roles based on guild priorities.

  • Analytics Team Debate: Kizzy emphasized the importance of having an analytics team to replace redundant roles. Ese opposed the idea, suggesting that social media managers could handle analytics. The group discussed whether to maintain the analytics team, with Kizzy suggesting its removal if deemed unnecessary.

  • Community Initiative Review: The review team mentioned consolidating feedback into a single document.

  • Technical Tools: Kenichi clarified that Notion is not Tally's backend but was adapted as a database for the guild. He explained Tally's features, including CSV export and integrations with tools like Airtable and Zapier, suggesting improved visibility for tasks and contributions.

  • Outreach Strategies: Kenichi emphasized aligning the ambassador program's outreach strategies with the upcoming funding round, focusing on event guidelines, KPIs, and leveraging community diversity for greater impact.

Action Items:

  • [action] Kizzy and Photogee to have a call on the key roles that are important and the ones that we need to push going forward. Also to get the list of members that have not been performing, or review the performance and get the list of members so that we could discuss their fate in the marketing guild. [assignee] LordKizzy, photogee [status] todo

  • [action] Kenichi to share the link to the governance document created. [assignee] kenichi [status] todo

  • [action] Kizzy to share the roles and responsibilities doc in the marketing guild Discord channel for inputs. [assignee] LordKizzy [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Governance, Roles, task assignment, members, member performance, participation, low participation, Analytics team, outreach, technical tools, tooling, Notion, Tally, Airtable, Zapier,

  • emotions: Thoughtful, Collaborative, analytical, informative

Saturday 7th December 2024

Gamers Guild

  • Type of meeting: Biweekly

  • Present: Slate [facilitator], devon [documenter], martinsoki, Malik, rebel, AshleyDawn, LordKizzy, Kateri, SubZero, Gorga Siagian, hogantuso, merryman007

  • Purpose: Regular biweekly meeting of Gamers' Guild. The purpose of this meeting was to present progress on Workgroup building creation, discuss potential expansions and integrations with other gaming platforms, and outline the upcoming roadmap and next quarter’s initiatives.

Discussion Points:

  • Slate confirmed that the Gamers Guild’s quarterly report and budget were approved without objections. This approval is significant since it demonstrates that the guild’s documentation, financial planning, and deliverables have met the required standards. With the AGIX token value currently higher than expected, there is a potential budget surplus that can be allocated toward additional tasks and improvements in the upcoming quarter.

  • Martin presented the final stages of the Treasury Guild building, showing animated NPCs and functional dialogue systems. Slate praised the visual quality but recommended adjusting character positions so NPCs appear seated correctly at tables rather than floating above them.

  • Gorga reported on the R&D Guild building, noting that he has been handling most of the workload. The intended contributors have shown minimal progress, limited to adding a few environmental elements like trees and grass. Slate stressed a deadline: if other team members fail to make meaningful contributions by the end of December, the project may be reassigned to more engaged developers such as Ashley and Sub-Zero.

  • Rebel showcased new animations in the Dework PBL building, notably adding a teaching NPC who uses objects (e.g. a pointing stick) to instruct newcomers visually. Rebel expressed concern about his partner’s delayed contributions. Slate agreed to address the partner’s inactivity, reassuring Rebel that either the partner will meet deadlines or Rebel will receive fair compensation for taking on additional responsibilities.

  • Malik mentioned small updates to the Education Guild’s animations and dialogue systems.

  • Slate introduced the pre-alpha launch of the Elowyn game by SingularityNET, highlighting its potential relevance to the Gamers Guild’s future projects. By exploring games like Elowyn and other platforms such as Decentraland or Sandbox, the guild can integrate cutting-edge features, expand its reach beyond Roblox, and possibly incorporate AI-driven elements or decentralized functionalities.

  • Looking ahead, Slate outlined the next steps: selecting two additional map creators to join Gorga and Kateri for creating the water area. Gamers will also refine existing building models, adding interactive functionalities to enhance realism, and possibly developing areas for newer workgroups like Latam and African Guilds. With AGIX value higher than anticipated, Gamers' Guild can leverage the extra funds to accelerate development, broaden project scopes, and support more ambitious tasks within the Roblox environment and beyond.

  • Lord kizzy and Devon updated that they will start working on the Writers' Workgroup building creation

Decision Items:

  • Treasury Guild’s animations and dialogues are approved pending minor positional fixes.

    • [rationale] almost everything is done

  • If R&D Guild creators do not show progress, Slate will reassign their tasks.

    • [rationale] So that it can be completed with other workgroups

Action Items:

  • [action] Animation & Dialogue System - Education Guild [assignee] Malik, hufiumer69 [due] 4 January 2025 [status] in progress

  • [action] Animation and dialogue system - Treasury Guild [assignee] martinsoki, scarecrow [due] 4 January 2025 [status] in progress

  • [action] Department Creation - R&D Guild [assignee] oep, CollyPride [due] 4 January 2025 [status] in progress

  • [action] Department creation - Writers WG [assignee] LordKizzy, devon [due] 4 January 2025 [status] todo

  • [action] Department creation - Dework PBL [assignee] rebel, photogee [due] 4 January 2025 [status] in progress

Game Rules:

No games played

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Roblox, metaverse, department creation, work updates, Map creation, #WorkgroupPresentations, Elowyn Game, roadmap, Q1 2025 budget, animation, task reassignment, incomplete tasks

  • emotions: Friendly, Collaborative, informative, Building, contributive, forward-planning

  • games played: no game

PreviousWeek 48NextWeek 50

Last updated

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License