Week 20
Mon 12th May - Sun 18th May 2025
Last updated
Mon 12th May - Sun 18th May 2025
Last updated
Type of meeting: Weekly
Present: PeterE [facilitator], Maxmilez [documenter], PeterE, CallyFromAuron, Maxmilez, LordKizzy, Effiom, Nwobi, advanceameyaw, AshleyDawn, Stephen [QADAO], Coventry's Iphone, Jeffrey Ndarake, Sucre n Spice, UKnowZork, Ambassadors SingularityNET
Purpose: Weekly Open Governance Meeting
Working Docs:
Narrative: During the meeting we discussed several important topics: Budget submission deadlines for workgroups because only six out of twenty-one groups submitted their information as it is. We need inputs from other WG to complete the form to enable the Q3 Budget progress to its final stage. A key arouse around What should be the new deadline for workgroups to submit their budget information, in order to have others complete their form there will be need for a deadline to be announced on WGs that are yet to complete the form. After several discussions there was an agreed date set for the Deadline which is on Tuesday 2oth May at 14UTC and any WG that failed to do so, we will assume they are okay with their current Budget cap for Q3.
Token minting and its impact on budget allocations: Furthermore there was a brief breakdown on the adjustment of the AGIX token minting plan which was carried out by Peter Concerning the whole proposal here is. He pointed out that back in 2021, there was a plan to increase the circulating supply of AGIX tokens with 100%. So it used to be 1 billion and this proposal turned it into 2 billion. And the very first edition of this proposal included minting these tokens over five years total. And this was changed by community suggestion, by Jan Horlinks actually, to shift it over to 91 years in total. He went further to explain that there is a slow decline in minting over 91 years rather than a total halt in 2026. He pointed out that from the beginning of minting in 2021, the price of tokens has risen dramatically, offsetting the decline in the number of tokens produced. He added that a recent vote had approved giving the foundation 100 million tokens to be used for hardware acquisitions. With this piece of information a lot of members in this meeting understood the reason behind the budget cap and the reductions of 1.5% for every quarter.
Consent Process and Q3 Dates Discussion: (i.e. to check in the room on whether everybody thinks Tuesday is okay as a deadline)? After a closer look on what we have covered in this meeting, We all consent to the date which is Tuesday to be a meeting with the agenda of Discussing the Consent Process and Q3 Dates.
Participation and engagement in budget discussions: According to the the last run of the Anonymity consent process which was found not chaotic, a suggestion was raised regarding the upcoming Anonymity to have a survey to see if there are others will like to share their opinion on some of the budget proposals but doubt if they will if it’s not going to be Anonymous they might just decide not to share. While others suggest going back to the old ways with a point of others using the Anonymity process to consent multiple times without anyone knowing. Someone raised a suggestion in the past of putting on something like the Swarm account or some other account and then appoint one person who can see to it and that person is also not dependent on funding that at the end the column for members Discord name and email address will not be seen and having those that can verity.
While the others who is so there's only one person who can see it in that case it would be Tevo but you know we could create a whole new account just for this that only one person one trusted person can see it could be you Peter somebody who's kind of not dependent on funding is therefore not engaged and then when we share it we just delete the columns that give the person person's Discord name and email address, but we have those so that we can verify.
Structure and implications of the consent process: An issue was raised on WG whose members don’t show concern to consenting on their workgroup looking at the number of members but with little ratio when it comes to consenting and that having 60 Core contributors, what will be the Quorum for that. There was an agreement to this concerning using a Quorum in that way WG will have the responsibility to task members to approve their proposal. Someone added that in scenarios where WG members feel the whole proposal thing has been rushed by their leaders and they are not sure and feeling uneasy to speak up in the WG, they can say so by not consenting. Discussion on Upcoming Consent Round and Participation Issues
There was an addition also in preparation for the upcoming consent round, the need for an anonymous feedback form and the potential for a session to guide participants on its use and someone will have to overlook and gather feedback on quorum and anonymity in a town hall or Discord to ensure clarity among participants due to low participation rates and expressed the need for asynchronous input options.
The meeting ended on a positive and lighthearted note, while we all expressed optimism about getting WG members to consent and introducing a Quorum or not.
Budget submission deadlines for workgroups
Token minting and its impact on budget allocations
Participation and engagement in budget discussions
Structure and implications of the consent process
[action] Maxmilez will announce a deadline for workgroups that have not submitted their budget information, ensuring they are aware of the timeline to meet their obligations. [assignee] CallyFromAuron [due] 16 May 2025 [status] done
topics covered: Budget minimums, Consent Process, Consent deadlines
emotions: Collaborative