Week 32
Mon 4th Aug - Sun 10th Aug 2025
Monday 4th August 2025
AI Ethics WG
Type of meeting: Monthly
Present: CallyFromAuron [facilitator], Clement Umoh, CallyFromAuron [documenter], Sucre n Spice, LadyTempestt, PeterE, Alfred Itodele, CollyPride, advanceameyaw, barnabas, AshleyDawn, UKnowZork
Purpose: Monthly Meeting of the AI Ethics Workgroup
Narrative:
Task Review: "In Progress" tasks on the Github board were reviewed.
Transcription tasks: these were all completed by the due date at the end of July
Co-Chair (Vani): Vani has been reorganising the folder structure on the BGI Nexus drive where interview material and transcripts are stored. Esther and Vani are discussing whether to retain or delete the original (non-anonymised) recordings - likely they will be deleted to avoid accidentally sharing them. Once all this Quarter's interviews are done, Vani will be verifying interview validity and sending the tasks for payment.
WG Internal Management (Sucre n Spice): Sucre's work is progressing well for this Quarter; she has somewhat less to do than in previous Quarters due to lower token price, the Workgroup has fewer paid tasks that need processing.
WG Async Work Support (Love): Work is going as planned; no blockers.
Transcript checking (Vani): in progress; no blockers, although checking ranscripts is always quite slow work.
Interviews: Deadline for Q3 interviews is 8th August. If any interview is not done by then, tbe budget for it will either be reassigned to someone else, or returned to the pot. The assignees are Clement(2x), Grandi(2x), UknowZork(2x), Rems, and Jeffrey. The validity criteria will be similar to previous quarters, but with a slight tweak to the thresholds for part-paying interviews that are too short.
Conferences & Events: Nothing concrete yet about any potential involvement in the BGI-25 conference in October 2025 in Istanbul. Vani will meet with Esther later this month to discuss.
We discussed how to manage payments given the current low token price - see "Decisions" below.
Decision Items:
AI Ethics MOOC Study Group: We decided not to proceed
[rationale] we realized that nobody currently has time to take part in a course so we agreed to revisit the idea in our September meeting.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
The timing for task payments will be dependent on token price
[rationale] The WG will maintain its financial decision of no task payout during the Quarter if the token price is below the price at which the budget was calculated (Q3 2025 was calculated at 1 AGIX = $0.30)
If the token price stays below $0.30 for the whole Quarter, then at the end of the Quarter, priority fr payments will be given to "output-based" tasks done by members, rather than admin roles - so the admin team will "take the hit".
Action Items:
[action] Vani to meet with Esther and Haley about the Workgroup's potential involvement in the BGI-25 conference in October [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 11 August 2025 [status] in progress
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: AI Ethics MOOC Study group, Interview Transcription, Interviews, Budget Management , Events, BGI-25 conference, low token price
emotions: Brief, Deliberative
Knowledge Base Workgroup
Type of meeting: Monthly
Present: Tevo [facilitator], Alfred Itodele [documenter], Alfred Itodele, Tevo, UKnowZork, advanceameyaw, Henshaw
Purpose: Aggregating Ambassador Program assets and relevant information under GitBook
Meeting video: Link
Miro board: Link
Working Docs:
Agenda item 1 - Knowledge Base Onboarding and Feedback - [resolved]
Discussion Points:
New Member Onboarding: Welcomed Henshew, a new contributor from Nigeria interested in AI and blockchain in Africa. After he enquired about SingularityNET's strategy for African infrastructure challenges, Tevo provided some initial insights and then detailed the purpose and function of the Knowledge Base workgroup. A notable insight was shared by Tevo: our GitBook documentation is structured more effectively for machine comprehension (LLMs) and also for individuals who have a design thinking background than for intuitive human use. There was new feedback in the onboarding feedback form; a discussion was held on whether it should be rewarded or not.
Decision Items:
The new feedback would be rewarded; A fixed rate of 10 Agix token
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] Reward the new feedback [status] todo
Agenda item 2 - Workgroup Management - [resolved]
Discussion Points:
Might need to update Google Calendar to have the last session 1 week earlier, on 1st September, to potentially meet up with the budget consent deadlines. We noticed there was an error in the meeting summary archive date
Decision Items:
Henshew to draft meeting summary; Alfred to review
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] Henshew to draft and archive the meeting summary Alfred to review and publish the meeting summary. [status] todo
Agenda item 3 - Proposal Drafting for Next quarter - [resolved]
Discussion Points:
Should we draft proposal for Q4 or keep using our reserves Creation of another survey to get feedback about the impact and the use of the Knowledge Base GitBook. How far our reserve could take us
Decision Items:
create Q4 proposal so we get to keep reserves. creating new survey around Q1 (Q4 feels too early) We potentially have leftovers until Q4 Allocated 1 hr to proposal drafting.
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Action Items:
[action] Tevo to draft Q4 proposal [status] todo
Agenda item 4 - Assets Collection and Organising - [resolved]
Discussion Points:
Should we move Miro Board Asset Collection directly to Google Sheets instead of using Miro Board? Deciding on which Assets go into GitBook and Distribute who Organises them What is or not relevant for GitBook?
Decision Items:
Let's move collecting assets to Google Docs first. Let's keep updating Miro Board. Let's give mental model and where we might miss information. 2 hrs allocated for the task
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
Alfred, Henshew, Advance and Uknowzork would be organising assets. We are including following assets to Knowledge Base GitBook; SingularityNET-Archive - SingularityNET SingularityNET Archive oracle - Code GIT Governance WG Sentiment Survey – Version 2 (July 2025)-Google Form Meeting summary template: Video WG - Google doc meeting summary template: Full Archival - Google doc meeting summary template: Narrative - Google doc meeting summary template: Onboarding WG - Google doc meeting summary template 3 - narrative - Gamers Guild - Google doc
Action Items:
[action] Assets to be organised by Alfred, Henshew, Advance and Uknowzork [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Miro Board, Reserve, Proposal, Report, Quarter, Budget, new member, onboarding, Q3, Q4
Wednesday 6th August 2025
Archives Workgroup
Type of meeting: Monthly
Present: Stephen [QADAO] [facilitator], CallyFromAuron [documenter], CallyFromAuron, Stephen [QADAO], PeterE, Alfred Itodele, Tevo
Purpose: Regular monthly meeting of the Archives WorkGroup in the SingularityNET Ambassador program
Meeting video: Link
Working Docs:
Decision Items:
As token price remains low, we still won't submit any pending Q1 tasks at the moment; although we might rethink and pay anyway in September
[rationale] The Q1 budget was calculated at $0.55 so we're not there yet
[opposing] but we shouldn't leave tasks unpaid for too long, despite token price
[effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup
On the monthly archives GitBook issues: summaries are still being submitted without any chasing, so the Archives are fairly complete for August; although as previouly noted, there are fewer meetings happening in general.
There is also a continuing pain point with finding time to do Town Hall summaries.
[effect] mayAffectOtherPeople
In July, Stephen and Vani's focus (see https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/274) has been on developing learning resources and community engagement around how to use Neo4.j Aura, and rule-based auditing of its outputs. However, we have begin to think about whether there could be a more open-source approach than relying on proprietary tooling such as Neo4j
[rationale] using proprietary colsed-source tooling is not in line with the ethos of the Archives project
Q3 quarterly report and Q4 budget are likely to be due on 8th Sept September. Vani has started draft versions, and we will sign them off in the September meeting (Sept 3rd).
We are likely to need to work with quite a low budget, and will need to take money from reserves to cover work on the summary tool redesign. We might have to choose whether to prioritise graph work or summary tool.
[rationale] because the agreed exchnage rate for Q4 may be even lower than $0.30, so we are unlikely to have money for anything beyond core activities.
Action Items:
[action] A member of DF Events Circle, Abdulbasit, has taken on documentation of DF Town Hall - Vani gave a walkthru/training session and he's planning to start with the next TH meeting. [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 29 August 2025 [status] done
[action] Stephen to post in the Archives Discord channel to say that our graph development repo has been moved to the sNET GitHub organization, and to encourage people to have a look
And he will attend the next Town Hall to say this and say a bit about what we are doing this Quarter. [assignee] Stephen [QADAO] [due] 15 July 2025 [status] done
[action] Vani has contacted AI Sandbox/Think Tank, and yes, they will host a workshop on our graph work towards the end of September - exact date to be confirmed [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 11 July 2025 [status] done
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: AI ethics, rule-based auditing, Deepfunding Town Hall, token price, Neo4j, Ambassador Program calendar, community engagement, q4 2025 budget, open source tooling, Knowledge Graph, Knowledge management across the singularityNET ecosystem
emotions: interesting, short, forward-looking
Education Workgroup
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: esewilliams [facilitator], UKnowZork [documenter], esewilliams, UKnowZork, Slate, Gorga Siagian, LordKizzy, Kateri, osmium, Alfred Itodele
Purpose: Weekly meetings update
Working Docs:
In this meeting we discussed:
Content Creation Task - Project Focus, Assignments and Progress - Low Attendance Concerns
Discussion Points:
Ese opened the meeting by reviewing the discussion from the last session. She restated the key points and highlighted the action items. Gorga confirmed that all previously outlined action items had been completed.
Ese then asked Slate if he had assigned roles for the content creation task. Slate responded that he had not done so yet. He suggested that content creators might require a separate group, but mentioned that Gorga had recommended they remain within the same group. He also added that the assessors would be responsible for assigning roles to content creators. When asked about ongoing projects, Slate confirmed that the CCCP program is currently the main focus.
There was a brief discussion about the low meeting attendance. Ese asked if the shift to biweekly meetings was the cause. Slate noted that attendance may have dropped due to the change in administrative focus—many only attend meetings when they are directly involved in decision-making. Kateri agreed, adding that there’s also been confusion around meeting dates due to the biweekly schedule. She pointed out that this miscommunication is affecting the guild. Given the budget constraints, she suggested that perhaps meeting announcements should be made at least a week in advance. Gorga supported the idea.
We talked about the project updates and Ese noted that the education series led by Ese, Gorga, and Kateri was in progress and the presentation series led by Kinechi was almost done while the governance series was led by LordKizzy. LordKizzy reported that he has created a slide for the presentation. The remaining part is for Vani to complete. Although there’s no strict deadline, the project is expected to be completed within the quarter. Slate asked whether Kizzy was developing presentation materials, and Kizzy confirmed that the slides focus on in-depth governance models. The series will consist of 8 sessions followed by a sprint in which participants answer questions based on previous governance sessions.
Gorga shared a Web development presentation he presented in the Gamers Guild. He explained that the idea was to repurpose it into a web development glossary for the ambassador program. It would resemble a GitBook but would focus solely on education and onboarding content. Slate also added that he has built a Wiki website for DeepFunding and proposed that the Education Guild could adopt a similar approach. The wiki could house the glossary section and include a voting tool. He mentioned he would check with Guillermo about the possibility of integrating the skills database into the platform. Gorga asked if the CCCP program could also be integrated, and Slate responded that he could manage that, though he would take the lead on the development. Ese and the group supported Slate’s idea, noting that a centralized wiki platform would make the program appear more organized. She asked if it could be created at no cost, considering the guild’s limited budget. Slate replied that the wiki site itself could be created for free, but integrating the glossary might require some budget.
The meeting concluded with Ese emphasizing the importance of follow-up and accountability for all individuals handling projects this quarter. She stressed that timely submissions are critical to ensuring that the guild meets its quarterly metrics and goals.
Action Items:
[action] Slate will share a proposal for the Wiki website creation and the Wiki platform is expected to be revamped by next week. [assignee] Slate [due] 20 August 2025 [status] todo
[action] A system of follow-up and accountability will be put in place to ensure timely completion of projects. [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: Governance series, CCCP, glossary, GitBook, low attendance, wiki website, wiki
emotions: Ideating, Collaborative, Insightful, relaxed, Poor Attendance
Research and Development Guild
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: guillermolucero [facilitator], LordKizzy [documenter], guillermolucero, LordKizzy, CollyPride, Mayor Defi, osmium, Alfred Itodele, Jeffrey Ndarake, Tevo
Purpose: R&D Updates and Discussions
Agenda Items:
Welcoming new Members and Introduction
Review of last meeting summary Action Items
UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: Governance Dashboard, W3CD-Web3-Contributors-Dashboard, CSDB-Collaboration-Skills-Database, Social-Media-Dashboard, Reputation-System-using-SoulBound-Tokens-SBTs, Event Scheduling and Notification System / Enhancing Calendar Integration with Custom Access, Enhancing Search Engine Optimization for the Ambassadors Program, AI-Agent @CoreContributor / Human-AI Powered Collaboration for Ambassadors.
Address concerns; Gov-Dash / SingularityNET Ambassadors Governance Framework.
AOB Open discussions: Operations moving forward, identify and establish priorities, New proposals system redesign, Onboarding Devs
Discussion Points:
UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: Event Scheduling and Notification System / Enhancing Calendar Integration with Custom Access: Tevo discussed the status of event scheduling tool. Tevo clarified that he initially considered canceling the project but was contacted by REMS, who expressed interest in proceeding. He mentioned an upcoming call with Reims to review the project architecture and assess his capability in completing the project. Lordkizzy inquired about the postponement of the Guild's payments and how it affects the governance dashboard project, noting that funds were kept in treasury due to concerns with the governance dashboard. Tevo clarified that he initially considered canceling the project but was contacted by REIMS, who expressed interest in proceeding. Guillermo expressed concerns about the development capabilities within the guild, particularly concerning Tevo's proposal and the involvement of REIMS. Lordkizzy pointed out the need for proper resource allocation, noting that some developers, like AJ and Advance, are available to contribute.
UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: Enhancing Search Engine Optimization; Vasu Madaan highlighted the strategy of using Ben Goertzel and AGI in export integration to enhance content outreach. He suggested converting long meetings into multiple shorter highlight videos to increase viewer engagement. Tevo contributed by mentioning his previous work with the YouTube API to automate title updates and streamline the content upload process. Vasu Madaan highlighted the potential for increased traction by focusing on decentralized AI and AGI content, suggesting that storytelling videos and targeted keywords could enhance viewer engagement. Guillermo supported this by noting the importance of data-driven decisions in content creation. Lordkizzy introduced a plan to identify key keywords for videos and proposed conducting training sessions to address findings from audit reports, aiming to improve content optimization across various wg groups. Guillermo presented the SEO proposal and confirmed that two milestones are already covered, suggesting the allocation of expenses be divided for disbursement. Lordkizzy preferred discussing the allocation at the end to encourage project completion, and Vasu supported the plan. Guillermo emphasized the importance of results and the need for training on the new systems. Lordkizzy highlighted the importance of enhancing SEO to boost video performance, with Guillermo agreeing on the potential for significant growth. Vasu Madaan mentioned the need for a proper SEO tool and stressed that workgroups must cooperate for successful implementation. Guillermo added that training on the tool would be essential, although it would not be mandatory.
UPDATE STATUS ON DEVELOPMENT: Governance Dashboard; Guillermo discussed the progress of the Governance dashboard platform, emphasizing the need for SSL security to enable GitHub and Google logins. He outlined the implementation of a tagging system for proposals and the creation of a skill database to enhance collaboration. Additionally, he noted the functionality for users to cast votes and provide feedback on proposals, which is currently being tested. Guillermo outlined the role of education in the R&D process and the need for an integrated agent framework. He reflected on the guild's recent dynamics, emphasizing adaptability and the review of objectives and treasury allocations. Lordkizzy expressed concerns regarding the source of funding for tracking contributions, prompting Guillermo to explain the integration of governance proposals and the importance of tracking participation to ensure fair rewards.
Action Items:
[action] Guillermo Lucero will schedule a call with Tevo to discuss the integration of the Governance dashboard with the treasury [assignee] guillermolucero [due] 13 August 2025 [status] in progress
[action] Kenichi to share a visual presentation highlighting the progress updates on the R&D Channel [assignee] kenichi [due] 13 August 2025 [status] todo
[action] Tevo will assess the capability of REIMS in the meeting scheduled for August 7 and provide a status update in the next call [due] 13 August 2025 [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: CSDB, Proposals, SEO, Governance Dashboard, Status update, Project Management
emotions: Understanding., Satisfaction , Lengthy
Thursday 7th August 2025
AI Sandbox/Think-tank
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: osmium [facilitator], martinsoki [documenter], Alfred Itodele, Gorga Siagian, UKnowZork, CallyFromAuron, LordKizzy, Jeffrey Ndarake, guillermolucero, John Zaks, Santos, Kateri, osmium, martinsoki
Purpose: AI Sandbox/ Think Tank #38
In this meeting we discussed:
Introduction and welcome: The meeting began with a warm welcome, followed by Vasu leading a continuation of the previous agenda. The discussion focused on AI agent development, includimg the governance advisor agent EthosGuard, and introducing new roles such as an analytics agent.
Treasury and Budget Automation Insights: Vani and Guillermo discussed the automation of treasury and budgeting consent processes, emphasizing the importance of aligning budget formats and quarterly reports with the tools under development by Guillermo’s team. They pointed out the shift toward a more formalized budgeting process, and noted that an agent could be used to flag possible omissions in budget submissions to ensure completeness.
Integration of Treasury Database and Core Contributor Criteria: Guillermo highlighted the importance of integrating the treasury database with Archives WG's forthcoming knowledge graph to improve data visualization. Vasu proposed using an ASI1 LLM agent in the Governance dashboard to automate the onboarding process for core contributors.
Data Integration and Contributor Metrics: Vani and Vasu discussed merging data from sources like Dework and GitHub to identify core contributors. They also considered a leaderboard system, though Vani raised concerns about potential negative effects of fostering competitiveness among core contributors.
AI Agent Integration and Ethical Considerations Guillermo highlighted the capabilities of AI agents in GitHub analytics and proposed the creation of a character-driven assistant for governance discussions. Vani raised concerns about the reliability of AI suggestions, suggesting that they should be treated as prompts for critical thinking rather than authoritative recommendations. The conversation also touched on whether AI should/can be used to help track reflections over time in governance.
AI-Human Collaboration in Decision-Making Guillermo highlighted the AI proposal on the BGI-Nexus funding round, stressing that AI offers decision-making support through suggestions, while humans retain final authority. He emphasized the need for clear, specific queries to avoid generic AI responses.
Ethics and Governance in Decentralized Communities: Vasu stressed the importance of fairness and transparency, proposing sentiment analysis to track changes in community sentiment. Vani emphasized focusing on governance experiments over granular details. Both agreed on the value of educating the community with interactive tools.
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: AI Agent, AI agent for governance, Governance Dashboard, BGI Nexus funding round, AI ethics, R&D Guild, Archives WG, Knowledge Graphs, contribution, contributor metrics, data integration, GitHub, treasury, Core Contributor
emotions: informative, Educational, Collaborative
Onboarding Workgroup
Type of meeting: Monthly
Present: LadyTempestt [facilitator], Kateri [documenter], PeterE, CallyFromAuron, Sucre n Spice, LordKizzy, Gorga Siagian, CJFrankie, martinsoki, Alfred Itodele, UKnowZork, osmium, AndrewBen, LadyTempestt, Kateri
Purpose: Monthly Onboarding WG Meeting
Working Docs:
In this meeting we discussed:
Updates from the onboarders team:
LordKizzy: most new arivals want to join the content creation workgroups (video, writers, marketing), which are currently closed.
Gorga: has onboarded new members to Gamers Guild.
Vani: fewer new members, but this means being able to do more thorough mentoring, e.g. on documenting and facilitating. Many new people go first to Governance WG.
Love: Some people have expressed interest in partnerships with sNET, but didn't seem committed. Peter agreed that most inquiries about partnerships via social media are not genuine; legitimate proposals typically arise from real-life interactions.
Sucre emphasized broadening onboarding strategies to include ecosystem spin-offs. Peter supported the idea, noting that full onboarding into spin-offs might not be feasible but that inviting them to town halls could be valuable.
Onboarding experiences and engagement:
Alfred noted in the chat that when he first joined he was only told to join meetings and when he joined he was still confused. He felt that the onboarders should give more context when onboarding.
Love responded that she gives out meeting summaries, budget sheets, quarterly reports, etc in cases like this.
Lord Kizzy noted that we cannot possibly create onboarding materials that will answer every question and give all possible context = rather, we need to create an environment that enables a new person tpo ask questions that focus on what they personally want to know.
Alfred went on to highlight his initial confusion about the program but noted that attending meetings, particularly with African Guild and Governance WG, helped him engage more deeply and understand the context of the conversations. He highlighted the confusion new members face when joining Discord, suggesting that live onboarding sessions - either in groups or one-to-one - could enhance their understanding of the ambassador program.
Vani reminded the group that previously onboarding sessions had low turnout, which led to discontinuing them. We could consider trying them again at some point, but for now, one-to-one engagement async is our approach.
AI Agents for Onboarding:
AI Sandbox/Think Tank has been discussing the idea of AI agents for onboarding. Vasu presented insights from the discussions, aimed at addressing FAQs and being available 24/7. He proposed integration with Discord, Notion, and GitHub to create personalized member journeys based on individual skills and interests. He proposed a four-phase implementation plan which includes setup, integration, testing with 10–20 users, and a full launch aiming to address 100s of queries per month
He did npt finish the presentation due to time constraints, but the group agreed to support the idea and help devise context for the agent. However, we noted that with the lower numbers coming into the Program at the moment (largely a result of low token price and low availability of paid tasks), we wou;ld be unlikely to be able to test it at scale.
Action Items:
[action] CjFrankie to write the Q3 2025 report [assignee] CJFrankie [due] 4 September 2025 [status] todo
[action] MartinSoki to write next month meeting summary [assignee] martinsoki [due] 4 September 2025 [status] todo
[action] Focus group to draft a Q4 2025 budget [assignee] Sucre n Spice, LadyTempestt, CallyFromAuron [due] 4 September 2025 [status] todo
Keywords/tags:
topics covered: ASI 1, onboarding agent, AI Sandbox/Think Tank, Q3 2025 quarterly report, Q4 2025 budget, onboarders team
emotions: Collaborative, informative
Last updated