Week 2

Mon 6th Jan - Sun 12th Jan 2025

Tuesday 7th January 2025

Governance Workgroup

Narrative:

Input needed:

  • We noted that some WGs haven't yet added to the draft End Of Year Report - we'll give reminders in Town Hall tonight, and on Discord.

  • There's only been 2 responses so far to the Googleform about what WG Sync Calls should be covering. We'll give reminders in Town Hall tonight, and on Discord; and hopefully discuss in Governance meeting on Thurs 9th or Thurs 16th when we have more input.

Retrospective on Q1 consent process:

  • We noted that GovWG meeting on Tues 14th is scheduled to be the retrospective session on the Q1 budget consent process.

  • Peter has yet to DM Core Contributors who didn't take part in the Q1 budget approval process, to find out why they didn't. He'll do it as soon as poss.

  • We will also ask Tevo if he has data on how many Core Contributors did take part this time (it's hard to tell from the Googleform responses, as people submit one per WG so it is hard to see how many unique consenters there were).

  • We noted it could be interesting in the retrospective to consider overall patterns of how consenters took part (e.g. were there fewer objections than last time? Were objections similar to last time, or different? Were there people who blanket unapproved all WGs, like there was last time?)

Documentation of Governance WG meetings

  • We agreed it's not an entry-level task.

  • We agreed the low-ish price ($20) might be putting people off doing it; people might also be put off by feeling that summaries need to be very detailed

  • We noted that there is still quite a bit of work to do on the backlog of summaries from Q3 and Q4 - there are people working on it, but $20 feels very low, as backlog work is harder since it's not fresh in the mind

  • We discussed whether people should be able to document meetings they were not present at, and concluded that while it's better if you were there, it's OK to work from the Read.ai transcript (though not from just the Read.ai summary, as those are often very inaccurate)

  • We agreed that to make documentation less onerous (especially for the backlog work) it is OK to focus on decisions, action items, and who was present

  • We agreed to raise the price (see "decisions")

Next WG Sync Call date

  • Next call is supposed to be Thurs 30th Jan at 10:00 UTC - is this too early in the day? Peter will ask in Town Hall tonight about preferred date and time - possibly move to Weds 29th at 13:00 UTC

WG unspent budget / budget reserves

  • We outlined the current process (unspent budget used to be clawed back by Treasury - but since Jan last year, it has not been. Anything that a WG doesn't spend, becomes part of their WG reserves and they can still use it.)

  • Should there be a time limit on how long a WG has to use budget that was allocated to a particular task? And if they want to change what they use it for, how should they do that?

  • How to avoid gaming the system (e.g. submitting a quarterly budget to do amazing things, to ensure consent; but then changing it to less impressive things in the first week of the Quarter)

  • We agreed on a suggested approach based on a "change request" process if a WG wants to make major changes (see "Decisions" below) and agreed to submit this as a potential new Treasury Policy.

Discussion Points:

  • Input needed for End of Year report

  • Input needed for Googleform on what WG Sync calls should cover

  • Retrospective on Q1 budget decision process

  • Documentation of GovWG meetings

  • Next WG Sync Call date

  • WG unspent budget / budget reserves

Decision Items:

  • We will raise the price of backlog summaries to $30 per summary. Current summaries will stay at $20; but if AGIX price goes up by the end of Q1, we will give a bonus to documenters

    • [rationale] Backlog work is more onerous, and can take a lot of time, so price should be higher - and we do have leftover budget to cover it in Q3 and Q4 budgets. But our Q1 budget has allocated $20 for documentation - so we cannot raise this price unless we know AGIX price is high enough.

    • [opposing] none

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • Suggested process for WG budget reallocation:

  • If the changed budget line is 0-5% of a WG's total quarterly budget, the WG can change this at their own discretion without any consultation (1x per quarter)

  • If it's 5-35% of the total quarterly budget, the WG should submit the suggested change to #decisions-to-be-made Discord channel, tagging @Core Contributor, and there will be 1 week for any objections to be registered. (If no objections, the WG can go ahead: if anyone objects, we didn't decide how that should be processed. Discuss in a Governance meeting?)

  • A 35% + change request needs to be included in the WG's budget proposal for the following Quarter (note that it would be separate from, and in addition to, their budget cap for that Quarter. So if a WG has a cap of 5k AGIX for Quarter 2 2025, and has 1k AGIX unspent from Q1 that it wants to reallocate, it will therefore have a total of 6k AGIX to work with).

  • If a WG has unused budget at the end of a Quarter that they still intend to use as originally planned, they don't need to do anything special - they just do the work as and when they can.

    • [rationale] - To enable WGs to respond to changes that emerge out of their work, and to reallocate unspent budget if they find they no longer need to do the tasks they originally got the money for, but something else.

  • To prevent WGs losing budget that they have secured simply because they have realised there is a better use for the money.

  • To prevent gaming of the system.

    • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

  • The above policy suggestion will be discussed in Town Hall and in the Gov WG Discord channel, and then will be submitted as a potential new Treasury Policy

    • [rationale] The Treasury Policy process seems like the best way to ratify and agree the idea.

    • [opposing] none

    • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

Action Items:

  • [action] Peter to DM Core Contributors who didn't take any part in the Q1 budget consent process, to ask why they didn't [assignee] PeterE [due] 14 January 2025 [status] todo

  • [action] Peter to raise items from this meeting in Town Hall later today (Requests for input on End of Year Report and WG Sync Calls; sharing info on proposed new policy on WG budget changes) [assignee] PeterE [due] 7 January 2025 [status] done

  • [action] Vani to ask Tevo if he has info on how many people took part in the Q1 budget consent process [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 9 January 2025 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: End of Year report, Workgroup Sync call, core contributors, retrospective, participation, consent process, Q1 2025 budget decision, Workgroup reserves, change request, WG budget changes, Documentation

  • emotions: Discursive, Good natured, interesting, progress made

Wednesday 8th January 2025

Education Workgroup

  • Type of meeting: Weekly

  • Present: Slate [facilitator], Slate [documenter], Gorga Siagian, esewilliams, AshleyDawn, Kateri, Zalfred, hogantuso, frosh, photogee, Clement Umoh, osmium, LordKizzy, Malik

  • Purpose: Regular meeting of Education Guild. Covering: Happy New Year Greetings - Follow-up from Projects - Task Assignment based on pending tasks - Certification Program next steps discussion.

In this meeting we discussed:

  • Happy New Year Greetings

  • Follow-up from Projects

  • Task Assignment based on pending tasks

  • Certification Program next steps discussion

Discussion Points:

  • Slate started the meeting by greeting everyone and giving best wishes for the new year to everyone

  • The meeting started with warm welcome from everybody, and how their holidays went

  • Then the meeting set off after this, getting updates in regards to the ongoing projects. The first update was from Ai For Beginners project

  • Ese notified that the project is ongoing and we have all the scripts ready for the videos, only the SEO and Graphics part is left which will be selected in the coming weeks

  • There was a pointer in regards to the videos which were posted in the education guild channel; ese notified that those videos will be going through a last set of adjustments before getting published

  • Slate notified ese to create a specific sheet for this purpose so all the videos can be tracked

  • Then afterwards the discussion on the webinar series started on which clement, photogee and ese are going to be working on moving forward and will be providing an initial document

  • Then Osmium notified that he is working on the governance framework series project and that vanessa is working by his side, and they will soon be having updates in regards to this

  • There was also a discussion in regards to the certification program updates, Slate notified that the certification program will now be launched on the website for more public to accesss it and before making more resources we should wait for franklyn's update

Decision Items:

  • Certification Program Resource Creation will start after the website creation maybe near to it

    • [rationale] most Agreed

    • [opposing] nil

    • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

Action Items:

  • [action] Ese to create a single google sheet document for the AI for Beginners [assignee] esewilliams [due] 15 January 2025 [status] in progress

  • [action] Photogee, Clement and Ese to work on Webinar Series Document [assignee] esewilliams, Clement Umoh, photogee [due] 15 January 2025 [status] in progress

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: CCCP, announcement, website, Ai for Beginners, design, Task Assignment

  • emotions: productive, Collaborative, Businesslike.

Thursday 9th January 2025

Governance Workgroup

Narrative:

Compulsory participation in Governance:

Should we have compulsory participation for individual core contributors?

  • We noted that we give core contributors the right to take part in the decision making process but it doesn't have to be mandatory. (The call contributor tag is given based on their participation and not based on personal request).

Should we make it compulsory for workgroups to take part?

  1. Should a workgroup have to be present in the objections-resolving calls?

  • If any workgroup puts forward a proposal and there is an objection, it is important the workgroup is present to respond and discuss the objections. We noted that even if the workgroup lead isn't available, a representative from the workgroup should be present in the meeting to discuss the objections.

  1. Should it be mandatory for a workgroup to be present during either Governance calls or workgroup syncing calls?

  • We noted that workgroups should prioritize coming for Workgroups Syncing call. It is not mandatory but to encourage workgroups to participate, we suggested we propose to reward the Workgroups that send a representative to all 3 Workgroup Syncing calls in a quarter and note that one person can only represent a maximum of 2 workgroup. While for the governance calls, we are not mandating or proposing anything for now but we encourage workgroups to participate in order to know what is going on in the ecosystem.

Discussion Points:

  • Compulsory participation in Governance for individual core contributors

  • Compulsory participation in governance for workgroups

  • Compulsory workgroup participation in the objection-resolving calls of workgroup budgets

Decision Items:

  • We decided to propose a positive reward system for workgroups that attend three workgroup syncing calls in the quarter, instead of a sanction for those who don't. The funding for this would come from reserves. We will post this suggestion in the Governance Discord channel and ask for unput - if no significant objections, we will go ahead

    • [rationale] To encourage participation in the monthly syncing calls

    • [opposing] none

    • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

Action Items:

  • [action] Martinsoki to post the proposal on the Governance Discord channel regarding the positive reward system for workgroups that attend three workgroup syncing calls in a quarter [assignee] martinsoki [due] 9 January 2025 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Workgroup Sync call, core contributors, participation, compulsory participation, consent process, Governance WG

  • emotions: progress made, Thoughtful

AI Sandbox/Think-tank

In this meeting we discussed:

Meeting Coordination and Introductions: Lord Kizzy welcomed everyone, and Osmium gave a presentation on the overview of the AI Tools Exhibition, talked about the mission, and highlighted the key takeaways and how relevant it is to the Ambassador program.

Showcasing the first presentation of the exhibition made by Advancemeyaw AIRTABLE AI: Airtable AI is a tool within Airtable and Airtable is a cloudbased collaboration plattform. It combines database functionalities with spreadsheets or any form of data. It is widely used for organizing and managing data and collaborating on data based on project or task. https://www.canva.com/design/DAGbkFCuaPo/sZzWOF2E83QWZvI6E-hEyg/edit?utm_content=DAGbkFCuaPo&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

    • a) Overview of the toolset [Detailed Description and Use Cases]

    • b) Architecture and Technology Stack [Library or repository of the framework of AI model or visual or graphical representation of the architecture through diagrams or flow chart]

    • c) Demonstration [live demo or tutorial/ video walkthrough]

    • d) Outcome Report or Results and Impact [ illustration through case studies or showcasing measurable results eg. key performance metrics]

Questions were asked and clarity was made on the operation of the ARTABLE AI

Membership tag: The voting of the membership tag has ended on the channel and the tag name with the highest vote was SANDBOX/THINK-TANk. Lord Kizzy noted that he was going to meet Peter with the names of the members that should be given the tag and also said that those interested to become a member and have the tag needs to attend three meetings in a row or attend five meetings in a quarter.

Budget allocation and project showcase planning: Suggestion for Think tank was around the theoretical debate, round table discussion but the potential for AI think tank is fast and we need to operate on our blueprint. AI sandbox project showcase: This is to showcase tools that were created by community members within the ambassador program, the person or ambassador gets to educate the community on the use of the tool.

Action Items:

  • [action] Lord Kizzy and Osmium to make up the roadmap and showcase it in the next meeting [assignee] LordKizzy, osmium [due] 16 January 2025 [status] todo

  • [action] Lord Kizzy to reach out to Peter with the list of members to be given the SANDBOX/THINKTANK Discord tag [assignee] LordKizzy [due] 16 January 2025 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: AI TOOLSET EXHIBITION, AIRTABLE AI, membership, Discord tag, roadmap, budget allocation, planning

  • emotions: welcoming, informative, interactive, educational

Friday 10th January 2025

Video Workgroup

  • Type of meeting: Weekly

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

  • Purpose: The meeting focused on weekly updates and tasks distribution

Discussion Points:

  • UPDATE FROM THE TASK MANAGER A quick update from Malik on various tasks assigned within the week. He highlighted that there wasn't much activities due to the holiday and that the townhall edit video has been edited and sent to the review team

  • Update from the Social Media manager, Andrew Ben noted that he was on transit and won't be able to give the update

  • Town hall updates: Zalfred gave the updates from the previous town hall. He noted that there were some conversations around crypto scams and a discussion around a new policy on how WGs can make budget changes mid quarter.

  • Goals for Q1: Lordkizzy spoke on reaching out to ecosystem spin-off projects for collaboration on video creation, he also spoke on how we could raise the level of engagement on our content through the zealy platform and also said he was going to need a representative from video wg for a call to structure the collaboration

  • AOB: Devon asked if the task assignment was meant to be done in the present call but zalfred addressed that we were on holiday for the previous weeks and assignees will continue work on january as agreed in our previous call

  • AOB: ECOSYSTEM Update Videos: Zalfred and Killy proposed creating the leftover ecosystem videos

Decision Items:

  • We decided that Zalfred and killy will work on the leftover ecosystem videos

    • [rationale] Those videos need to go out as soon as possible

Action Items:

  • [action] Osmium to present the videos from Bangkok [assignee] osmium [due] 17 January 2025 [status] todo

  • [action] Lordkizzy to submit a short report on the video workgroup achievements to Peter [assignee] LordKizzy [due] 17 January 2025 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Video Edit, Q1 2025 goals, Ecosystem Update videos, Zealy, Town Hall Videos

  • emotions: Friendly, speedy , Collaborative, Thoughtful

Marketing Guild

Discussion Points:

  • Retrospective on Q3 and Q4 Performance: Ayo initiated a reflective discussion on the Marketing Guild's performance over the last two quarters, encouraging members to share both successes and areas for improvement.

  • Meeting Attendance and Task Completion: C.J. Frankie emphasized the need for consistent attendance and timely task completion to improve collaboration.

  • Zealy Campaign Review: Gorga acknowledged the success of the Zealy campaign but stressed the need for better planning to avoid last-minute execution.

  • Mascot Initiative Review: Kevin clarified that while he wasn’t the originator of the Mascot Initiative, he found it valuable and appreciated the team’s swift execution of the mascot contest.

  • Guild Progress and Areas for Improvement: Kizzy highlighted both the guild’s achievements and areas for improvement, such as enhancing the content calendar, improving attendance, and providing compensation for extra efforts.

  • YouTube Channel Guidelines: Kizzy introduced YouTube channel guidelines covering purpose, collaboration, feedback, and admin responsibilities

  • Attendance Review: Kizzy summarized attendance reviews, noting that some members fell below 20%, and C.J. Frankie asked about the fate of members with less than 70% attendance. Ayo reiterated that consistent availability is essential to retain roles, and inactive members may lose their positions.

  • Task Force Update: Kizzy announced the inclusion of Ashley as a sixth Task Force member, enabling fairer compensation despite some role adjustments.

  • Role Compensation Feedback: Kizzy presented an upgraded role distribution and compensation sheet for feedback.

  • AI and Media Initiatives: Kevin highlighted plans to use AI and media to support Ghanaian athletes, establish a global podcast, and empower West African talent.

Decision Items:

  • We agreeed that the cutoff for attendance review is set at 70%.

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • We agreed that some members will take on a Task Force role, while some will assume a Core Member role based on performance and popular opinion.

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

Action Items:

  • [action] Kizzy to create a sheet for Core Members to indicate role swaps and check available positions. [assignee] LordKizzy [status] todo

  • [action] Cjfrankie to compile a document summarizing activities and accomplishments from Q3 and Q4. [assignee] CJFrankie [status] todo

  • [action] Kareem to prepare to present the governance document during the next call. [assignee] kareem [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Rewards, Budget , Roles, Zealy, Quarter 1 2025, attendance, retrospective, Ghana, Ghanaian athletes, Ambassador YouTube, Mascot

  • emotions: Collaborative, Thoughtful , productive, warm, interactive

PreviousWeek 1NextWeek 3

Last updated

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