Week 23

Mon 2nd Jun - Sun 8th Jun 2025

Monday 2nd June 2025

AI Ethics WG

Narrative:

As usual, we worked from the GitHub board, starting with "In Progress", and then to "To Do".

MEETING SUMMARIES We noted that meeting summaries - and tasks in this WG in general - need to be completed a bit quicker than is currently happening. Meeting summary tasks need to be done in future within a week of the date of the meeting, not several months after.

TRANSCRIPTION Most of the "in progress" Issues on the board are transcription tasks, and were assigned in Q1. However, due to the big token price drop during Q1, we note that we were unable to afford under the Q1 budget all of the transcriptions we budgeted for in Q1. In the end, we did 5 out of the planned 15. So the outstanding ones, we have officially transferred to the Q2 budget. In Q2 we budgeted to do 11 transcriptions: 4 are done and waiting to be paid, and we agreed on a final deadline of the end of June for the other 7; but ideally, people should try to complete a little sooner, so we have time to a) check the transcripts and b) process payments by the end of the Quarter (last payment processing day this Quarter is Thurs 27th).

Q2 PAYMENTS We noted that some of the Q2 tasks - including quarterly-paid ones, such as admin tasks - have been paid or part-paid in advance now that token price is above $0.30, just in case price falls again by the end of the Quarter.

CO-CHAIR REPORT Vani gave an update on how work is going. Underlined that the core priority for the WG in future is collecting further research data - so interviewing will be a key element of the Q3 budget.

SURVEY-SHARING Survey-sharing was a paid task in Q4 2024, but should it be in future? or should people just share it if they like, withut needing to evidence it and withut being paid? Too be discussed in a future meeting, perhaps with the aim of including it in Q4 2025 budget

AI AND EMOTION DISCUSSION We noted that this discussin session, organised by Colleen as community engagement manager, took place on 19th May, and the recording is on Youtube here https://youtu.be/9QA1U40VPEg?si=_n1gIkTXFuxTK1M-

Q3 2025 BUDGET Peter pointed out that the balance between admin/overhead tasks and actual outputs (interviews, transcripts) should be more towards outputs, especially given that we have said that further interviewing is a priority for the WG next quarter. Vani agreed that the admin team are already thinking this, and that at times of lower AGIX price when there is less "output" work going on, there is alsoo less admin/overhead work to do; so the admin team will make adjustments to the budget before it's submitted.

INTERVIEWING IN Q3 We noted that there will be budget for some interviewing during Q3, so anyone interested should start to think now about who they would like to interview. Also, if someone new is interested in trying interviewing, Vani will be prepared to offer a bit of training, and we will have updated training materials available.

Decision Items:

  • We agreed that as of now, documentation tasks need to be done within 1 week of the date of the meeting

    • [rationale] because we're typically waiting too long for summaries to be finished

    • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

Action Items:

  • [action] Outstanding transcription tasks to be either completed, or an update given to say they will not be done, by the end of the Quarter (end of June) - or ideally a little sooner, to allow time to process payment or to reassign if necessary. [assignee] Ayo, Clement Umoh, CollyPride, Peegee, kenichi [due] 25 June 2025 [status] todo

  • [action] Admin team to tweak the Q3 budget, to shift the balance more towards outputs rather then admin /overhead tasks [assignee] CallyFromAuron, LadyTempestt, Sucre n Spice [due] 9 June 2025 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Q3 2025 budget, interviewing, transcription, task completion times, Documentation, AI and emotion, token price

  • emotions: quick, well-attended, Only a few of those present spoke, Organised, practical

Tuesday 3rd June 2025

Governance Workgroup

  • Type of meeting: Weekly

  • Present: PeterE [facilitator], martinsoki [documenter], UKnowZork, AshleyDawn, Kateri, CallyFromAuron, guillermolucero, Tevo, Effiom, hogantuso, Alfred Itodele, Sucre n Spice

  • Purpose: Regular Weekly Governance Meeting

  • Working Docs:

Narrative:

The workgroup discussion centered on the analysis document created by Tevo and Effiom from the survey, with the intention to clarify if it would affect the budget caps.

Peter mentioned Slate’s comment on the Discord channel, noting that the survey still remains non-binding as no decisions have been made so far. He further said that during the workgroup sync call, we suggested doing another round of the survey with higher participation. Vani noted that if we use the budgets suggested by Tevo as a result of the sentiment analysis, some WGs would get significantly less budget than they would with our existing caps. She has marked these WGs in blue on Sheet 1 of the Budget Minimums spreadsheet.

Guillermo provided feedback on the analysis, he emphasized that it will be critical to have a second round so we could compare. He also noted that some workgroups and guilds are not committed to deliverables and updates during monthly Town Hall Updates , he highlighted that the analysis does not reflect this and he will appreciate seeing analysis on deliverables and output. Peter suggested that we could do the other survey before the budget consent round, to ensure things are done well before moving forward. Tevo suggested that we could add sentiment to the consent process, as it will help target specific proposals of the workgroup/guild. Vani opt about the idea of attaching sentiment to the content process, as it will be enough for everyone to be advocating for their own group and could prompt dishonesty for separate workgroup/guild members.

Sentiment vs Output Reality: Tevo highlighted that low sentiment scores might result from low engagement, not poor performance. Some workgroups had minimal participant feedback, making results unreliable. Peter proposed having continuous sentiment collection to reflect changes over time, not just quarterly impressions.

Guillermo emphasized the need for output-driven strategy, not just activity. Unifying criteria across content creator groups (marketing, video, writers) would reduce redundancy and improve strategic effectiveness.He suggested that the sentiment analysis should be used to reallocate budgets towards groups with strong commitment and effective delivery, not simply sustain the status quo.

Peter suggested that groups with known reserves could reduce Q3 requests or not request at all. However, this raises fairness concerns as it might penalize honesty and reward silence. To be continued...

Discussion Points:

  • A second round of sentiment collection may be needed, ideally with improved outreach, clarity, and explanation of purpose.

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: priority, Workgroups, budget caps, consent process, Workgroup reserves, budget allocation, sentiment analysis, Q3 2025 budget

  • emotions: detailed, educative, caution, need for clarity

Wednesday 4th June 2025

Archives Workgroup

Decision Items:

  • Due to current token price being above $0.30, we agreed we can submit fund requests for all Q2 tasks now.

But we won't submit any pending tasks for Q1 at the moment

  • [rationale] The Q2 budget was calculated at the agreed exchange rate of $0.30, but Q1 was calculated at $0.55 so we're not there yet

  • [opposing] We might rethink in a month or two, and pay outstanding Q1 tasks anyway

  • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • André's tool development in May (see https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/262) included

  • working on a caching issue with the Archives dashboard (still not completely fixed), - updating scripts to capture meeting summary audits, so we can see what kinds of corrections are made when we do audit summaries.

We discussed how it would be useful to categorise what different types of corrections are made to meeting summaries - Vani will add a list to the June tool development issue.

  • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

  • In June, Stephen's focus will be on beginning to develop rule-based auditing of knowledge graph outputs - see https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/266 and https://github.com/Quality-Assurance-DAO/neo4j

This work will also be what Archives WG intends to focus on in Q3 2025; it might draw on sme ideas from the proposal that the Archives team submitted to the BGI Nexus funding round in March: https://deepfunding.ai/proposal/ethical-ai-auditing-a-practice-based-approach/

  • [rationale] To look at how communities can audit the knowledge graphs of their own data - an ethical approach

  • [effect] affectsOnlyThisWorkgroup

  • We closed the tag taxoonomy issue https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/133, and André will be using the defined tags in Q4 2025 when we re-start work on the redesigned Summary Tool.

We might also use some of the insights from it in ur knowledge graph wrk in Q3.

  • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

  • On the monthly archives GitBook issues: we noted that so far, Q2 summaries are being submitted without any chasing.

There are fewer meetings happening in general, since most WGs have moved to meeting only once a month; but the meetings that are happening, are generally getting summarised.

However, we noted that some cancelled meetings are still on the Calendar - we will ask WGs to tidy that up, since we take our list of what meetings are supposed to take place from the Calendar.

  • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

Action Items:

  • [action] Vani has approached DeepFunding to ask if the Events Circle could take on documentation of DF Town Hall. Events Circle is interested and is asking one of their members if he would be interested in taking it on. We'll review this next meeting. [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 2 July 2025 [status] in progress

  • [action] Vani to make a list of the different types of coorrectioons that get made to meeting summaries, and add it to https://github.com/SingularityNET-Archive/SingularityNET-Archive/issues/263 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: AGIX price, controlled vocab, Knowledge management across the singularityNET ecosystem, AI ethics, Q3 2025 budget, Q2 2025 quarterly report, summary tool redesign, meeting summary audits, rule-based auditing, tag taxonomy, Deepfunding Town Hall, token price

  • emotions: interesting, low attendance, slow

Thursday 5th June 2025

Governance Workgroup

  • Type of meeting: Weekly

  • Present: PeterE [facilitator], Tevo [documenter], UKnowZork, Kateri, CallyFromAuron, guillermolucero, Tevo, Alfred Itodele, Sucre n Spice, Clement Umoh, Duke, Jeffrey Ndarake, martinsoki, maxmiles, PeterE

  • Purpose: Regular weekly Open Governance meeting This group discusses governance issues for the Ambassador program, such as how we make decisions, how we reward contribution, how we decentralize, and how we ensure inclusion

  • Working Docs:

Narrative:

Q3 Budget Cap Finalisation

Discussion Points:

  • How do we proceed with Ambassador Program Budget Limits to existing groups?

  • Even if some groups wouldn't request funding, it still would affect the broader structure

  • Sentiment analysis provided interesting outputs and an opportunity to change how we govern the budget, but further discussions and more involvement were expected before we implement it to steer our budgetary decisions.

  • Several workgroups have not communicated their Q3 funding needs clearly, delaying the collective understanding of total financial obligations.

  • There's a reliance on a few active contributors to raise concerns, with others remaining passive

Decision Items:

  • Proceed with the percentage decrease based on the budget request in the previous quarter for the Q3 budget limits.

    • [rationale] There was pushback to this change, but we could not find agreement on any other alternatives that could be applied in a relatively short amount of time (before the budget submission period)

    • [effect] mayAffectOtherPeople

Action Items:

  • [action] Update Core contributors about the new context and budget limits [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 9 June 2025 [status] todo

Keywords/tags:

  • topics covered: Budget caps, Workgroup Funding, Sentiment Analysis

PreviousWeek 22NextWeek 24

Last updated