Week 36
Mon 2nd Sep - Sun 8th Sep 2024
Monday 2nd September 2024
Treasury Automation WG
Type of meeting: Monthly
Present: Tevo [facilitator], André [documenter], effiom, malik, tevo, André, Gorga Siagian, Merryman
Purpose: We develop the Treasury System
Miro board: Link
Agenda item 1 - Development Updates - [carry over]
Discussion Points:
Gave an overview of Excel manager updates and future steps
Gave an overview of serverside json generation updates and future steps
Discussed Miro board documentation and future steps
Decision Items:
Change taskId to recognitionId and use taskId to identify tasks
[rationale] Need to keep track of tasks and task participation/contribution separately
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] Change taskId to recognitionId [assignee] Tevo [status] todo
[action] Update backend to handle exchange rates and token fees [assignee] André [status] todo
Agenda item 2 - Other recent or planned updates related to the Treasury System - [carry over]
Discussion Points:
Discussed Q3 report and Q4 proposal
Discussed how to accomodate other projects needing access to Treasury data
Decision Items:
Create a single source of truth of Treasury data that anyone can access
[rationale] Need to make it easy for everyone to access Treasury data
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
Action Items:
[action] Create Q3 report [assignee] André [due] 3 September 2024 [status] done
[action] Draft Q4 Proposal [assignee] Tevo [due] 5 September 2024 [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Treasury System, Miro Board, Automation, tooling, participation vs contribution, participation, contribution, process, API, Backend, Documentation, json, projects, Q4 2024 budget, Q3 2024 quarterly report
emotions: insightful, reflective, decisive
AI Ethics WG
Type of meeting: Biweekly
Present: CallyFromAuron [facilitator], CallyFromAuron [documenter], GorgaSeagian, LadyTempestt, Clement Umoh, barnabas, Yemi Solves, Effiom, Duke, PG, Ayo, CollyPride, Eric Davies, Ese Williams, Advanceameyaw, CallyFromAuron, aetherblade, osmium, Sucre n Spice
Purpose: Regular meeting of the AI Ethics WG
Meeting video: [Link](No video)
Transcript: [Link](No transcript)
Narrative:
The meeting worked through "in progress" tasks on the Board, and then "to do".
"In Progress": We worked through the Admin team's tasks.
We noted that Colleen's work as "co-chair mentee" has focused more on community engagement than learning about the co-chair role itself - but this is a positive, since she has created a role that the WG needed. We agreed therefore to add this as a role in the Q4 budget.
Vani noted that in future, where it's useful to do so, we can distribute the WG's connection with the GEI - it shouldn't necessarily only be via the co-chair role. (For example, Duke wll be in touch with Esther and LeeLoo as speakers for the AI Ethics Expo in Nigeria).
Vani noted the usefulness and importance of the "async work support" role, given the kind of work we are doing.
We noted that we still don't know the cost of Clement's Q3 role of moderating the AI Ethics forum https://github.com/SingularityNet-Ambassador-Program/AI-Ethics-Workgroup/issues/32 - Clement will suggest a price based on how the Moderator WG costs things. He will also add the same amount to the budget for Q4.
We will create individual GitHub Issues for people's work at AGI-24, as it now looks as if the Foundation will be able to pay the work via the normal Ambassador process.
The Admin team has looked at the interviewing projects that people proposed for Q3, and have brought them within budget; so these will go ahead, ideally by the end of Q3 (although if it goes a little over, that is OK). We note that we have a really good range of people being interviewed. Any interviews that had to be cut can be re-proposed in Q4, as there will be more budget for interviews then.
The training for interview skills will now be 1 session not 2, and will be run by Vani and Peegee. Date: Wednesday, September 11th, 12:00 UTC, lasting 2 hours. It will be recorded for anyone who cannot make it, but Peegee explained how we'd like people to attend live if they can, as it will be participatory. It's open to all - but especially we'd like those who are doing Q3 interviewing to attend.
To Do: We discussed reallocating the Q3 budget line for further work on the Strategies, because it has turned out that all the work that's needed can be covered by Vani's role as co-chair, and by Esther's input.
The AI Ethics Expo event in Nigeria (collab with African Guild) has a date: Sat 28th September. The planning element of our budget contribution has been done (venue and publicity) and the other elements (speakers and volunteers) will be paid after the event. Duke is liaising directly with LeeLoo and Esther as speakers from the GEI side.
Vasu suggested that he could do some Q4 interviewing at an AI event in Dubai on 11th and 12th December, which he will be attending. Vani encouraged him to note it in the WG's Q4 interview planning spreadsheet (in the "AI Ethics Stuff!" doc).
Q4 budget:
We discussed reducing meeting frequency to monthly, but there was significant enough oppositon to decide against it.
We discussed the budget line for Jenn's reportbacks to GEI - are they useful? Does GEI want them? We discussed this, but did not reach a conclusion. LeeLoo suggested that we might need the reports more once interviewing is in progress; possibly they are also good for transparency.
We agreed on budgeting for 40 interview hours this Quarter; conducting a small amount of work to share the GEI survey; and creating some educational resources.
We noted that comments and revisions to the budget need to be made by Fri 6th Sept, to allow for final editing before the submission deadline on September 9th.
Decision Items:
Vani's Q2 task to monitor the strategy-drafting work and maintain the strategic approach of the WG https://github.com/SingularityNet-Ambassador-Program/AI-Ethics-Workgroup/issues/3 was closed.
[rationale] Because the task is complete for Q2. We noted that the strategy drafts that were written were broader in scope than needed, but this shows that it was a learning exercise, and people were engaging with it.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
for Jenn's "GEI reportbacks" task https://github.com/SingularityNet-Ambassador-Program/AI-Ethics-Workgroup/issues/20, there were no GEI meetings in August; we agreed this shouldn't affect Jenn's pay.
[rationale] Because the cancellations were beyond her control.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
We agreed to add a new role for community engagement in the Q4 budget, to be taken by Colleen
[rationale] because Colleen's work as co-chair mentee in this quarter has taken her in this direction, and it seems to be a role that is needed
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
We agreed to reallocate the Q3 budget line for further work on the Strategies, and use it to compensate those doing Q3 interviewing to attend the Interview Skills training, as this training will cover how the strategies are going to be practically implemented. Priority would go to those who are assigned to do interviews in Q3; anyone else is fisrt-come, first-served.
[rationale] Because the further work this quarter on the strategies has been started by Esther and Vani, and the meetings we budgeted for are not really needed any longer
[opposing] We note that this was a budget element we were going to cut completely when token price was low - so using it this way will depend on token price.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
We agreed that the current admin workers will stay in their roles, except that Colleen will move to a new community engagement role, and there will be budget for a new Co-Chair Mentee in Q4.
[rationale] because continuity is needed at the moment, and to avoid too much mentoring/handover overhead
[opposing] There was a suggestion that those in admin roles should not have first refusal on other tasks.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
After discussion, some people felt uncomfortable with the suggestion of moving to monthly meetings; so we will continue to budget for fortnightly meetings in Q4
[rationale] Some members were uncomfortable with the suggestion of monthly meetings, and argued that fortnightly meetings will enable new people more opportunities to engage and contribute; and that monthly meetings can make it harder for new people to learn how things work in the Program overall.
[opposing] The suggestion to move to monthly was to minimise unnecessary costs - partly because the particular work we do doesn't require meetings, but works better in small groups - especially in the coming Quarter, when we will be focused on interviewing; and partly because we are unlikely to have many tasks to invite new people to, so having extra meetings to engage new people might raise false expectations.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] All to comment on the Q4 budget draft by Fri 6th [assignee] all [due] 6 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Sucre to add an update to her GitHub Issue for internal WG management by the end of the quarter https://github.com/SingularityNet-Ambassador-Program/AI-Ethics-Workgroup/issues/21 [assignee] Sucre n Spice [due] 30 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Colleen to add an update to her GitHub issue for Co-Chair Mentee by the end of the Quarter https://github.com/SingularityNet-Ambassador-Program/AI-Ethics-Workgroup/issues/27 [assignee] Colleen [due] 30 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Vani or Sucre to create individual GitHub issues for people's work at AGI-24 [assignee] CallyFromAuron, Sucre n Spice [due] 16 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Vani to create a Zoom and add the forthcoming interview training session to the calendar [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 6 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Clement to add a suggested price to the Q4 budget for his AI ethics forum moderation [assignee] Clement Umoh [due] 6 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Vani to post draft of Q3 quarterly report in the Discord channel for comments [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 5 September 2024 [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: review q2 task completion, Roles, compensation, interviews, training session, Budget , Q3 quarterly report, Nigeria event, Q4 budget draft, Collaboration
emotions: Collaboration, ideas, insights
Treasury Guild
Type of meeting: Biweekly
Present: Tevo [facilitator], Effiom [documenter], callyfromauron, effiom, gorga1103, tevo
Purpose: Structuring Ambassador rules around payments, tasks and anything related to financial activities
Meeting video: Link
Miro board: Link
Other media: Link
Agenda item 1 - Ambassador Account Permissions - [resolved]
Discussion Points:
How many and which tools are tied to the Ambassador account?
Ambassador Tools: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hFAp0dm5Tmoh29EgxC9r5XTey_EWeb9lRdrI0JCpbPk/
Who decides, and how do we decide, account permission changes?
How do we update Ambassador account permissions?
What is the quorum required to grant a person access?
Decision Items:
The headers for the google sheet for requesting access were agreed on
[rationale] This was decided based on the relevant information the person requesting needs to provide, like Discord name, position, tools they use (Zoom, Google Drive etc), comments, is the account accessible etc.
[opposing] None
We agreed to keep the process simple, hence no need for quorum
[rationale] Deciding on a quorum can be a stretch and would definitely make the process longer
[opposing] None
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
There should be a degree of anonymity in the decision-making process, in case people have reservations about the people requesting access. Hence, the feedback form should be created under Swarm account.
[rationale] It is expected that whoever is requesting is a Core Contributor and might have access to view the feedback. For these reasons, there is a need for anonymity and to achieve this the form would be created from an account outside SNET
[opposing] None
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
Permission Granted (in 3 working days)
[rationale] This number of days is ideal for the process
[opposing] None
Action Items:
[action] Create a Google Sheet list of those who should have access - 06.09.2024 [assignee] Effiom [due] 6 September 2024 [status] done
[action] Create a form under Swarm account to collect anonymous information [assignee] Tevo [due] 6 September 2024 [status] done
Agenda item 2 - Coordinate Treasury Guild Q3 Report and Q4 Proposal - [carry over]
Discussion Points:
How best to capture the deliverables of the quarter in the report, since it will be shared before end of Q3?
Do we update the report later, at the end of the quarter?
Planning ahead for budget fitting; the preferred approach
Decision Items:
In quarterly reports we highlight things that are not yet completed
[rationale] Because the quarterly is being prepared before the end of the quarter
[opposing] None
Adjust dates in Q4 Report to include the Q3 final date and Q4 Report creation date
[rationale] It would better represent the reporting cycle, as quarterly reports are usually prepared before the end of the quarter
[opposing] None
In Q4 report we have a section to address Q3 proposal deliverables that was not completed in Q3 report
[rationale] This would allow us to capture all our deliverables accurately
[opposing] None
We reduce the number of Treasury Guild meetings when we get budget fitting
[rationale] It made sense to adjust the meeting schedule to accommodate budget fitting
[opposing] None
Propose to create a tool to calculate Core Contributor List that provide different outputs for updating and sharing public lists under Treasury Automation WG
[rationale] This is an automation and since Automation WG is getting a different budget from Treasury Guild, It made sense to move it
[opposing] None
Action Items:
[action] Draft and share the Q4 proposal [assignee] Tevo [status] todo
[action] Draft Q3 proposal Report after Tevo has created and shared template [status] todo
Agenda item 3 - Review the newly selected policy - Slow Start - [resolved]
Discussion Points:
Policy list link: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-tAwCD3vrXNSbUdQApljTVMfFGVDJo6PBdM39CO73Uk/
The current treasury policy template
Should we move to ratify this policy?
Decision Items:
The policy should be moved to ratification
[rationale] The policy meets the requirement to be moved to ratification
[opposing] None
Next week in Policy WG further review and possibly assign last action items to help see this through
[rationale] Policy WG has an upcoming meeting on 09.09.2024
[opposing] None
Action Items:
[action] Add to agenda of Treasury Policy WG session on 09.09.2024 [status] todo
Agenda item 4 - Consent Recognition - [resolved]
Discussion Points:
Bare minimum Recognition Influence
Is there a need for any additional tokenomics?
Tokens with tickers (INF)
Should we include label to represent Decision Making?
Decision Items:
We don't include MINS as it is hard to assess
[rationale] Hard to assess and overhead to request or track
[opposing] None
Include Auditing and Decision labels to represent decision making
[rationale] For better representation
[opposing] None
Action Items:
[action] Mint INF Tokens for consent recognition [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Miro Board, Q3 Report, Q4 Proposal, Consent Recognition, Ambassador Account, Permissions, Access, Treasury Policy, Swarm account, privacy, confidentiality, MINS, Slow Start, deliverables, reporting, quorum, access
emotions: interactive, decisive, interesting
Wednesday 4th September 2024
Knowledge Base Workgroup
Type of meeting: Biweekly
Present: Tevo [facilitator], LadyTempestt [documenter], Advance Ameyaw, Tevo, LadyTempestt, Gorga Siagian, Vasu, Onyeka, Thandi, Prefina, Celiwe, Effiom, Mapula
Purpose: Aggregating Ambassador Program assets and relevant information under GitBook
Miro board: Link
Other media: Link
Agenda item 1 - Open Questions - Why do we not do more async organizing? - [resolved]
Discussion Points:
Currently, we have run out of funds
We should refocus on planning, reporting and proposals to continue our work effectively
Use LLM first to organize the items before we start with team
Lets have an onboarding kick-off session so that we can reach and involve more people into organising Ambassador assets.
Agenda item 2 - Open Questions - What LLM experiments is Knowledge Base WG doing? - [carry over]
Discussion Points:
we have a working ChatGPT Prototype
Currently we have ideas to improve it even further
What other LLM experiments Knowledge Base could do?
Agenda item 3 - New participation-based rewarding model for Knowledge Base WG - [carry over]
Discussion Points:
What is the Rewarding Model? This is a new model to reward people who attend our meetings and participate in discussions.
Do we want to change the current facilitation mechanism to participation reward distribution based on contributions?
The current model does not consider how long a person was in the meeting and applies rewards equally regardless if they were in the call 10 minutes or 100 minutes.
Do you think we should differentiate that?
When should we apply reward changes weight based on how long the person was in the meeting?
Decision Items:
Most people leaned towards including weighting the individual rewards before calculating participation rewards. Except Onyeka and AdvanceAmeyaw who suggested after.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] Participation is captured using the Process Guild service to import from Zoom [assignee] Tevo [due] 18 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Review the results of the next and last session this quarter [assignee] all [due] 18 September 2024 [status] todo
Agenda item 4 - Review Q2 & Q3 Proposal Report - [carry over]
Discussion Points:
We went through the Quarterly reports while Tevo listed tasks/deliverables and other items carried out so far under the Knowledge Base Section.
The main aim of Process Guild which is to maintain open spaces and support Knowledge Base WG and Dework PBL WG.
Process Guild Q2 Proposal
Process Guild Q3 Proposal
Decision Items:
We moved around some items such as average attendance metrics, deliverables, etc.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Agenda item 5 - Q4 Knowledge Base WG Proposal - [carry over]
Discussion Points:
Should the Q4 proposal include a ChatGPT yearly subscription for use in async organization work?
Is a separate Gitbook from the Ambassador Gitbook a good idea?
Decision Items:
We agreed to include it in the Process Guild Q4 budget. It's a useful tool, and we will use that if we get funded with the proposal.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Knowledge Base WG will have its own GitBook instead of focusing on introducing items to Ambassador GitBook. The sentiment here is that this will allow the Process guild to automate and be consistent with their structure of adding information and storing assets.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] Draft Knowledge Base Q4 WG Proposal. [assignee] Tevo [due] 9 September 2024 [status] todo
Agenda item 6 - Workgroup Administration - [carry over]
Discussion Points:
Should we include this workgroup's info in the main Ambassador program GitBook?
Action Items:
[action] Tevo to create a section of Knowledge Base WG in Ambassador GitBook and add proposals there if the work continues. [assignee] Tevo [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Ambassador GitBook, Miro Board, Quarterly Report, Budget , Q4 2024 budget, Q3 2024 quarterly report, GitBook, ChatGPT, participation, Rewards, rewarding model
emotions: contributive, insightful, quiet
Archives Workgroup
Type of meeting: Biweekly
Present: André [facilitator], CallyFromAuron [documenter], André, CallyFromAuron
Purpose: Regular fortnightly meeting of the Archives WorkGroup in the SingularityNET Ambassador program
Meeting video: Link
Decision Items:
Summary tool redesign: See issue https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/181 - André and Vanessa to meet to discuss priorities
[rationale] Because want to focus initially on things that will have the biggest effect on ease of use of the tool
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
PDF export function in the Summary tool is broken again - André has decided to replace it with export to Google Doc
[rationale] This is a feature that people have requested too - it makes it easier to share a draft meeting summary with other memebers of your WG and get their comments. This will also obviate the need for more complex tooling to allow people to comment within the tool itself, which was a suggested new feature at one point.
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
We went through the Q4 budget, and were sad to acknowledge that a lot of the work we would like to do, we cannot afford, so it has had to be cancelled for the coming Quarter.
[rationale] due to token price drop in August, we had to move some core work to Q4, leaving not enough for routine but less valuable tasks
[opposing] some people felt understandably unhappy that their tasks have had to be cut.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
We also acknowledged in the Q3 quarterly report (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZJeuLJ_5GYUjxZiUUEfXHkMfDTJoH11wjLmsTU-K3n0/edit?usp=sharing) the problems raised by an increasing uncritical reliance on Read.ai summaries. We noted that the problem is that superficially, Read.ai summaries can seem fine; and it is only when one reads with attention and with some knowledge of the Program that it becomes clear that they do not make any sense. We suggested that documentation for WGs such as Treasury and Governance, which are about the Program as a whole rather then the internal activities of a WG, should no longer be seen as an entry-level task, since they require considerable understanding of the program to document well.
[rationale] This has been a big issue this quarter, and has slowed down the meeting summary process since many summaries have needed to be extensively corrected or redone.
[opposing] We recognised that it is ironic that we are an AI ecosystem and yet one of our stumbling-blocks is an AI tool - but we noted that the problem is people trying to use Read.ai's documentation uncritically, or without skilled and knowledgeable human intervention. We also noted that it may actually be an ethical issue to understand the limitations of any AI tool, and not to expect it to work beyond its limitations.
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
We noted how many corrections core members of this WG are needing to make to summaries at the moment; and that there is a need for ongoing training for new documenters. Onboarding WG recently (15th August) delivered some training on documentation; perhaps other WGs can take this on within their own WG to some extent.
[rationale] Training is needed not only to learn how to document a meeting, but also to understand the limitations of Read.ai summaries, and the ethical issues raised by using AI tools.
We agreed that anyone who does need to do extensive corrections to a summary should add their name to the "Documenter" field alongside that of the original documenter
[rationale] as a way of noting that correction has been done
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
We agreed that we need to find ways to raise the issues around read.ai summaries, perhaps in a WG Sync call. Suggestion that perhaps we need a Reviewers' Circle to review summaries; or a Documenters' circle to avoid poor summaries in the first place
[rationale] Because over-reliance on Read.ai is an issue that affects the documentation of several WGs, and perhaps could be addressed at Program level
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
Action Items:
[action] Video walkthru of how to use the GitHub Board - see https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/116 - no response yet from Ayo. Vani will DM him. [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 4 September 2024 [status] in progress
[action] Stephen was to decide how best to present the "Open-source paradigm" work at this meeting, but he's not present. TBD next meeting. [assignee] Stephen [QADAO] [due] 18 September 2024 [status] in progress
[action] Vani to submit the budget and quarterly report by Monday [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 9 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Sucre to finish updating Ambassador gitbook to reflect changes to the Onboarding process by the end of the Quarter [assignee] Sucre n Spice [due] 30 September 2024 [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Q4 2024 budget, q3 2024 report, Town Hall, Ubio, open source ethos, read.ai, Ethics, training, documentation training, Budget cuts, GitHub video walkthrough, Core activities, Outreach, education, community engagement, Google Docs, google doc export, Correcting errors in meeting summaries, tool redesign
emotions: despondent, disheartening, Discursive, Thoughtful , budget request problems , limited, restricted
Research and Development Guild
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: guillermolucero [facilitator], lord kizzy [documenter], AJ, Advanceameyaw, Clement Umoh, lord kizzy, Yemi Solves, guillermolucero, Nengi, osmium, CollyPride, Kenichi, barnabas, $rojokaboti
Purpose: R&D Updates and Discussions
Working Docs:
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
Follow Up > New Operations System Deployment: Announcements and Follow Up actions, Draft and Set Voting System for Community to select Q4 new proposals, Discuss further upgrades and Challenges
Kenichi on NDA for the Legacy project.
Discussion Points:
Review of last meeting summary Action Items: Lordkizzy went through the action items for the previous meeting
Guillermo gave an introduction to the new members on the updates from the guild so far.
UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: AJ and Advanceameyaw gave updates on the Collaboration Skill Database: the fields have been updated, the expectation is to deliver the tool for testing before Friday, the expectation is to host the database with Rojo's project
UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: Rojo gave updates on the social media automation tool: he notified that he had struggled to get the license due to card issues and hopefully he will get it done before Friday; more expectation on the reporting and documentation.
UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: Rojo gave updates on Web 3 Contributions Dashboard: he gave a presentation on the project. He highlighted that a change in username caused an error but hopefully that will be fixed, and he highlighted some features of the tool.
New Operations System Deployment: Guillermo gave a brief summary on the new system and some suggestions were made for the voting process; we went through the eligibility review for new proposals submissions.
Presentation on new proposal: Research on Ambassador Participation in AI Discussions and Blockchain Preferences within the SingularityNET Ecosystem. Barnabas gave a presentation on the cross-chain interaction between SingularityNet and Cardano; there were many questions on the scope of the project, and the benefits of the project to the Ambassador program. Barnabas will work on the scope of the project and present it in the next meeting.
Presentation on new proposal: Contributors' Portal Integrations. Rojo on the continuation of the Web 3 Contributions Dashboard: the project will be called a Web 3 portal, they plan to add new features like the archives Wg having documentation access to the portal, hosting of web app and so much features. They hope to solve the information retrieval process
Presentation on new proposal: Legacy 0.1 Milestone 2; Kenichi on the continuation of the Legacy system. There were questions on why the proposal template wasn't used and why there is a change in the proposal; Kenichi highlighted that he couldn't understand the template and he had to submit due to time constraints, and going forward the focus is the design and architecture of the system.
Presentation on new proposal: Consensus Dashboard for Quarterly Reports and Budgets; Guillermo presented the proposal for Consensus dashboard for Quarterly budget and voting. The scope of the project aims to streamline the process of creating, reviewing, and finalizing quarterly reports and budget proposals for WorkGroups (WGs) and Guilds within the SingularityNET Ambassador Program. This project will span two quarters, with the first focused on research and ideation to define requirements and design, and the second on development and implementation.
Discussions on an NDA for the Legacy project: kenichi highlighted the need for protecting the code and documentation of the project, and the members agreed to this.
Integration of the ambassador program and deep funding: kenichi presented an initiative on creating a pool in deep funding for ambassador program. Further discussions will be made on this in the next WG syncing call.
Decision Items:
We agree to have an NDA for the SBD token project
[rationale] This was done to protect the data and coding
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] Lordkizzy to meet up with Duke on the presentation of the Ideation Project on Impact of Lingual Differences [assignee] lord kizzy [due] 11 September 2024 [status] in progress
[action] kenichi to present the Skeletal framework for the Legacy system. [assignee] Kenichi [due] 11 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Team members to update the Repository with a documentation of the progress so far [assignee] AJ, Advanceameyaw, Kenichi, Rojo, WaKa [due] 11 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Guillermo to disburse funds to Rojo for completion of the Web 3 Contributions Dashboard project [assignee] Guillermo [due] 11 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Kenichi and Guillermo to have a call to discuss the report on the deliverable for Q1 milestone on legacy [assignee] Guillermo, Kenichi [due] 11 September 2024 [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Guilds , Tool Development, AI tooling, contributors, Operations, Deliverbles, Presentation, Documentation, voting, skills database, NDA, DeepFunding
emotions: Casual, Collaborative, speedy , Welcoming, Thoughtful , Organised, Friendly, lengthy, forward-looking
Education Workgroup
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: Slate [facilitator], Slate [documenter], Slate, osmium, WaKa, esewilliams, Tevo, GorgaSiagian, Ayo, Clement Umoh, DevonHardy, Photogee, Effiom, SubZero, Zalfred, sergiobenar
Purpose: - Regular meeting of Education Guild. This meeting covered: Education Guild Budget Request Discussion - Dework PBL Budget Request Discussion - Education Quarterly Report Discussion
In this meeting we discussed:
Education Guild Budget Request Discussion
Dework PBL Budget Request Discussion
Education Quarterly Report Discussion
Discussion Points:
Slate greeted everyone, then started off the meeting by discussing the projects that education guild is taking forward to next quarter. These are: CCCP Automation, Ai for Beginners, CCCP Website, Webinar Series
After going through each project there was a discussion regarding the webinar series and through multiple suggestions and ideation we were able to set up a proper process to move forward with the project
Then after finalising the education guild budget request, tevo presented his dework pbl wg budget request
WaKa had some concerns regarding the dework pbl budget request which were discussed and some were also made part of the budget request
Then at the end of the meeting we took a look at the Q3 quarterly report for the education guild, made by clement and yemi solves; some adjustments were requested and presented by Slate
Decision Items:
Budget request agreed by everybody
[rationale] most of the group agreed
[opposing] Nil
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Webinar series to be included and be part of the request
[rationale] nil
[opposing] nil
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Put the website setup in consideration and go with the figma file first, also look for currently existing apps which can do it
[rationale] Most of the group agreed
[opposing] nil
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] audit most of the completed tasks [assignee] Slate [due] 31 August 2024 [status] done
[action] Review and finalize the quarterly report [assignee] Slate, osmium [due] 7 September 2024 [status] in progress
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Presentation, CCCP, Budget Request, dework pbl request, Quarterly Report, ideation
emotions: productive, Collaborative, Businesslike.
Thursday 5th September 2024
Onboarding Workgroup
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: Ayo [facilitator], LadyTempestt [documenter], Vanessa, SucrenSpice, Peter, lord kizzy, Clement Umoh, LadyTempestt, daniel effiom, MartinSoki, Ayo, Cjfrankie, Gorga Siagian, Eric, Photogee, Kateri
Purpose: Weekly meeting discussing how to onboard people to the Ambassador program
Town Hall Updates:
Update on how the Onboarders team are doing with new members.
The documentation session will take place on 15th August. There will be a recording and slides of this session made available to everyone.
In this meeting we discussed:
Minutes from the last meeting
Action items from the last meeting
Facilitation/Documentation roster
TownHall Updates
Onboarding Journeys Scripts - no decisions on what to do with them yet as it is budget-dependent
SkillShare Matrix
Temporarily closing the WG
Documentation Session on 15th
AOB (Gorga’s allegations)
Decision Items:
We agreed to have the focus group decide what needs to be cut out of our budget before doing more items on our Q3 budget proposal.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
We agreed to add Eric Davies as one more member, and then close our WG till next year. So from now till next year we will not give people tags or tasks.
[rationale] It will be unfair to leave him hanging till next year if we open up our WG as he is 1 meeting away from being a member
We agreed that the Onboarding journey scripts finetuned by Onize and Vani are great and should be used!
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] Gorga is to reach out to CJ Frankie to fix a date to sort out his allegations against the WG. [assignee] Gorga Siagian [due] 5 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Sucre to edit the Onboarding WG facilitation/documentation roster to reflect our current plan. [assignee] Sucre n Spice [due] 5 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] CJ Frankie will give Onboarding WG town hall updates on the 27th of August. [assignee] Cjfrankie [due] 27 August 2024 [status] todo
[action] Gorga will mentor CJ Frankie in giving TH updates for the month of August. [assignee] Gorga Siagian [due] 27 August 2024 [status] todo
[action] Lord Kizzy to reach out to Timmy and find out if he's interested in being mentored as a documenter by shadowing Lord Kizzy at our next meeting. [assignee] lord kizzy [due] 12 September 2024 [status] todo
Learning Points:
What should we do next year with new members who have been attending our meetings this year without the tags since the WG is currently closed?
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: TH Update , Budget , Session, Onboarding Journey Scripts, Workgroup closure
emotions: Collaborative, tense, argumentative, funny
Governance Workgroup
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: guillermolucero [facilitator], CollyPride, CallyFromAuron [documenter], guillermolucero, CallyFromAuron, Olokoji, Advanceameyaw, lord_kizzy, LadyTempestt, Effiom, esewilliams, Onize, CollyPride, hogantuso, CJFrankie, Timmy, photogee, Tevo
Purpose: Weekly Open Governance meeting
Media link: Link
Narrative:
Should people who subbed for Peter E as facilitator for Town Hall during his absence (PhotoGee, Guillermo and Ese) be paid via Gov WG budget? We agreed yes. And how much? We agreed on $20. Vani will add tasks to Dework.
Guillermo has created a timeline infographic RE: budget submission deadlines. He and Vani will proofread it after this meeting, then start sending it out. Meanwhile, Ese has been sharing the infographic reminding WGs of budget submission date.
Finalising Governance WG's own Q3 report and Q4 budget: Guillermo has drafted the budget, and shared it in the Governance Discord channel a few days ago. So far, no comments. We set a final deadline for comments/edits of Sat 7th Sept; but essentially, we signed it off. Clement has drafted the quarterly report - same arrangement, we basically signed it off in this meeting, but final comments or changes are possible until the end of Sat 7th.
Q4 consent process: when to calculate new Core Contributors list and run the opt-in process? It needs to be done by Monday 9th, as the consent process begins then. We agreed for Tevo to do it (and he noted that he is aiming to automate it for next time). We also noted that being a Core Contributor is supposed to be an "opt-in" thing - so someone, probably Peter, will need to ping people and invite them to opt in. We noted that doing this on Monday is cutting things fine in terms of the timeline, but there is no alternative for now.
Vani had created a draft initial consent form (i.e. just a list of all the WGs and "consent/object/abstain") a while ago and posted in Governance Discord channel. (The purpose of having this initial form, with no rationales required, is to make it quicker and simpler for people to participate in a first round, and "weed out" the WGs whose budgets everyone consents to - last quarter this was around half of all WGs - so that the next round only focuses on the groups for which there are objections.) We tweaked the introduction to the form, which was too long, and might be offputting for people. The form now needs to be moved to the Ambassador Gmail account before it is sent out.
We discussed how far the consent forms are really anonymous (see "decisions" below)
We discusssed what "Abstain" means, particularly in the final consent round, when WGs need to get at least 80% consent. (see "decisions" below)
We re-discussed and confirmed what will happen if budgets are submitted late i.e. after deadline of Mon 9th Sept. (see "decisions" below); although we did not finalise the exact process for how the "small operational budget" will be decided on; we agreed to discuss it later if it actually happens. Tevo suggested that those who do not want to make the effort to submit a budget request by the deadline probably do not need funds, but the "new ideas" budget of 2% can be accessed by anyone who really needs money.
We discussed whether we want to move to a different decision-making method, other than the consent process we are currently using. We noted that Consent was only ever adopted as an experiment, so we can change; and we noted that the consent process has become quite consuming, with most of Governance WG's time being given over to it. We mentioned alternatives including Consensus; weighted voting; sortative or aleatory processes (such as a jury); Consultative; or creating collective funding proposals rather than individual WG proposals. Objections were raised to voting as a process, because it doesn't give room for discussions, reasons, objections, and doesn't work to increase community engagement. There was interest in Consensus and Consultative processes; and some comments in favour of continuing to explore Consent processes because it encourages listening, ideas, and iterating, despite problems with having too many iterations in the process. It was also mentioned that R&D guild plan to build a dashboard to make the consent process run smoother.
We briefly revisited the discussion on "Increasing participant numbers, with a non-increasing programme budget" which has been covered several times. We felt it may still need discussing again - and particularly, the question of whether we should be training people, or just giving tasks to those who already know how, and looking at capability. We noted that the issue was initially raised when token price had recently dropped dramatically; but now it has recovered a bit, do we see things differently?
Decision Items:
Facilitating Town Hall in Peter's absence will be paid from Governance WG budget; and at a rate of $20
[rationale] There isn't any other WG that it could reasonably come from; Governance will probably have enough budget to cover it; and the content of recent Town Halls has been quite Governance-related. The pay rate is the same as facilitating a Governance WG meeting.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
We agreed and signed off the Q3 quarterly report and Q4 budget for Governance WG, although we will still leave them open for any last-minute changes until the end of Saturday 7th Sept
[rationale] They have been open for comments for a while and there have been none - and we don't want to be making changes on the submission date of Monday 9th itself.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
We decided to make the intro text to the initial consent form shorter
[rationale] Partly for accessibility, as long blocks of text can be offputting; but also because some of the information is repated in the Context-setting doc.
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
We agreed that the intro text of the consent form should not say that the forms are "anonymous", but rather, "private"
[rationale] because they are not entirely anonymous - people's identity can be seen by anyone who has access to the Ambassador Program Gmail account.
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
We noted that an abstention doesn't count either as a consent or an objection for the purpose of the final consent round, when WGs need to get 80% consent
[rationale] "abstain" is just a way of checking how many Core Contributors are aware of the consent process and participating in it, even if they do not have time ("abstain" might sometimes mean "I didn't have time to read this WG's budget").
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
We confirmed that, as agreed in our meeting last Tuesday, if a WG's budget is late, we will go ahead with the idea that the WG will be withdrawn from the consent process, and will get a small operational budget based on their operational costs over the last couple of Quarters; the amount to be worked out collaboratively with them.
[rationale] This has been an ongoing problem and everyone has been informed about it numerous times
[opposing] One objection was raised to this idea when we posted it in the Ambassador General Discord chennel - but it didn't fully explain its reasons and there was no suggestion on a way forward, or what to do instead; and when Vani responded and asked for this, the objector didn't make things any clearer; so overall the meeting felt that it wasn't valid an we can't hold up the process for it.
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
Action Items:
[action] Vani to add Town Hall facilitation tasks to Dework (facilitators were Photogee, Guillermo and Ese) [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 12 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] All to check Gov WG budget and quarterly report, and make any final amendments [assignee] all [due] 7 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Tevo to re-calculate who is Core Contributor, ideally by tomorrow (Friday 6th Sept), but definitely by Monday 9th; and Peter to ping all of them and check that they want to be one. [assignee] Tevo [due] 6 September 2024 [status] todo
[action] Tevo to send out the initial consent form (once it has been moved to the Ambassadors' Gmail account) on Monday [assignee] Tevo [due] 9 September 2024 [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: More participants, less budget, Q4 2024 budgets, budget submission dates, timeline, Q3 2024 quarterly reports, core contributors, Town Hall, Dework, Decision Making Process, consent decision making, consensus decision making, consultative decision making, abstention, abstain, late budget submission, anonymous, anonymity, opt-in, aleatory, jury, sortative, weighted voting, vote, voting, community engagement, Iteration, listening, dashboard
emotions: Casual, talkative, open, wide-ranging
Friday 6th September 2024
Writers Workgroup
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: Kenichi [facilitator], Cjfrankie [documenter], Kenichi, Mikasa, cjfrankie, LadyTempestt, devon, Gorga Siagian, Advanceameyaw, Nebula, King David, Emmanuel Isaac, Nengi, Inesgav
Purpose: Weekly meeting of the writers' workgroup, focused on the Q4 budget discussion.
Narrative:
The meeting started with Kenichi welcoming everyone, and then he highlighted the meeting agenda; we ticked off the action items for the last meeting, and the meeting kicked off properly.
Momentarily, with screen sharing, we began to tackle the Q4 budget draft. Although there is a significant decrease in the amount, WG members (Lady Tempestt and Devon) shared their concerns and thoughts on some of the deliverables. The meeting featured a discussion on Gorga’s initiative, which aims to expand the reach of SingularityNET in Indonesia through X (formerly Twitter). Many were of the opinion that we should implement the idea in Q1 2025 given the fact that AGIX is dropping and with a concern about the Q4 allocation not being able to sustain the WG. Following that, Lady Tempestt suggested that Kenichi give Gorga a KPI tracking matrix for the proposed initiative. Inés supported Gorga’s idea, and she suggested that the French X page could be suspended to give Gorga a chance. As a matter of finality, Kenichi added that the French page could still be functional regardless; he also said that we could still go forward with the Indonesian page as it might perform better than we expected.
Kenichi spoke about the August points system allocation, highlighting that the payout was pretty low due to the AGIX price decline.
Kenichi also talked about the “We Are Reading" Series by Inés. He expresses his love for the previously published series. He added that he’d glance through Inés’s latest submission while having Mikasa make a thread for it.
Decision Items:
Due to the AGIX token decline, we have decided that the WWG onboarding window will be closed after September 2024 until further notice.
[rationale] We wouldn't like the fact of having people around without engaging them with tasks.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
One of our biggest visions of the WWG is to begin a podcast series; however, we have decided to push the idea to the marketing guild, and we’re looking forward to having 4 episodes in Q4.
[rationale] Everybody agreed because the WWG Q4 budget won't be able to handle the podcast.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Following a discussion on AGIX token price, Kenichi decided that the SingularityNET ecosystem page should get more attention moving forward to keep readers engaged. Following that, he also pointed out that some tasks will be uploaded on Dework without any reward until Q4 kicks in.
[rationale] Since the community page has more interactions, we should focus on the ecosystem page moving forward so the page won't be left out.
Action Items:
[action] Kenichi to give Eve the Scribbler tag. [assignee] Kenichi [due] 13 September 2024 [status] done
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Marketing Guild, X/Twitter, Indonesian X page, French X page, podcasts, AGIX, Zealy, LatAm, community page, Twitter threads, WWG Test, social media, Points system, Q3 report, Q4 budget
emotions: interactive, insightful, informative, speedy
other:
Marketing Guild
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: Ayo [facilitator], Eric Davies [documenter], Ayo, Eric Davies, Photogee, GorgaSiagian, esewilliams, Advanceameyaw, kateri, Cjfrankie, Kareem, hamzat, malik, lord kizzy, Mikasa, Kenichi, inesgav
Purpose: Marketing Guild weekly meeting
Working Docs:
Discussion Points:
Q3 report: Lord Kizzy reported that the Q3 quarterly report is still in progress, awaiting input from team members. They have been discussing this for about two weeks, with an initial draft ready but incomplete.
Documentation: Lord Kizzy reminded documenters to add meeting summaries to the meeting summary tool, and export it to a google doc for comments.
Document archive: Photogee emphasized the need for a central document archive where guild members can upload their completed tasks, making it easier to compile the final report.
Community Spotlight: The Community Spotlight is focusing on the African Guild. They are seeking new communities aligned with SingularityNET values for cross-collaboration with the Zealy Program.
Q4 budget proposal: Lord Kizzy reviewed the Q4 budget proposal in detail, with Ayo raising concerns about the AGIX downprice situation and its impact on the Marketing Guild.
Mikasa made mention of the issue of not having access to the SNET ambassadors' Twitter to facilitate community engagement.
Gorga reported completing his weekly design schedule.
Task force members: Malik asked how the new set of task force members could be added to the comms channel.
Mikasa announced that the second community spotlight would be going out.
Podcast Episodes: Kenichi proposed four new podcast episode ideas
We discussed the Zealot initiative by Ese
Decision Items:
It was decided that the Q3 report must be finalized immediately to meet the deadline and avoid losing special initiative funding.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Members must clearly communicate availability and task completion status to prevent future issues with task assignments.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Due to payment issues with our old Notion account, even after resolving the debt, we have successfully exported our data to Markdown format on a personal account to prevent data loss. As a result, we have decided to create a new Notion account for project management.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Kenichi’s proposed four podcast episodes should be included in the Q4 budget.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
We decided to collaborate with Zealy to refine the structure of the Zealot initiative, given its alignment with Zealy's existing efforts.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] Communications to provide all remaining information for the Q3 report by Sunday and ensure it is publicized in the channel. [assignee] Cjfrankie [status] in progress
[action] The Graphics team is to finalize and provide the necessary graphics for community initiatives by next week. [assignee] Graphics Team [status] in progress
[action] All members need to review the Q4 budget proposal and provide feedback before the final submission deadline. [assignee] All Members [status] in progress
[action] Cjfrankie is to update the marketing Q3 report on communications with the onboarders. [assignee] cjfrankie [status] in progress
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Marketing, community engagement, Archiving, Zealy, Q4 2024 Budget, Q3 2024 quarterly report, Notion, Documentation, Onboarding
emotions: Collaborative, calm, engaging
Saturday 7th September 2024
Video Workgroup
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: Slate [facilitator], Hogantuso [documenter], malik, killy, Zalfred, lord kizzy, Slate, SubZero, osmium, AndrewBen, oep, Hogantuso
Purpose: Weekly updates
Discussion Points:
UPDATE from the task manager by ZALFRED: he listed the various tasks created during the week: budget fitting discussions, operational calls by MALIK and LORD KIZZY, updating for KPI sheet from LORDKIZZY, two clips from LORD KIZZY, two clips from SUB ZERO, and a clip from ANDREWBEN. He also added MALIK as a co-assignee to work with OSIMUM on the narrow AI video; and created a task for an operational call for LORDKIZZY, MALIK and ZALFRED for a more efffective communication line between the editors, task manager and review team in smoothing the process and navigation around the sheet. Call with ROJO and LORD KIZZY for their concluded operational calls on the monthly analytics on the budget review and Zealy task allocation; and gave updates on the uploaded Town Halls TH 111, 112, 113 as uploaded on the KPI sheet.
UPDATE on Zealy by DEVON: He submitted a total of 10 videos for the monthly Zealy, and gave updates on the issues he was having with the KPI sheet including suggesting ideas in order to make it easy to access with different socials and columns, as there should be a task for every social media post.
Reviewing the KPI sheet with LORD KIZZY explaining the new sheet and the process of task creation, and giving feedback on the social media role as a permanent role due to the new tool which is yet to be implemented.
Decision Items:
We are not including the animation in the next quarter, for budget reduction
Action Items:
[action] Devon to reach out to Kenichi on the delay in posting from Zealy for the next monthly. [assignee] devon [status] todo
[action] LORD KIZZY to give DEVON access to the KPI sheet for effective posting [assignee] lord kizzy [status] todo
[action] SLATE to send in five (5) topics for voting [assignee] Slate [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Rewards, Budget fitting, Zealy, Zealy quest, Zealy Updates, Town Hall, Narrow AI, analytics, review, task creation, social media, Collaboration, communication, KPIs, animation
emotions: Organised, informative, interactive, inconclusive
Last updated