 This is the bill though GM call for August 24th, 2021. And I'm hoping Pete joins us because I was looking to start building. I realized yesterday on the free jury spring call that I think it would be extremely useful I think in many different ways would be to configure up some of the different projects that we're talking about as fundable projects with a project plan and a budget to figure out how many hours are roughly what, what cheap it would take. Hey Bentley hey Pete. Greetings I was just saying that in yesterday's free years brain call it dawned to me late that that having a list of wall the dashboard hi Stacy. Fundable projects that would sort of build pieces of what's going on would be extremely useful. So it was interesting going there but before going there was interested in just a general check in for anybody who'd like to report anything relevant to this umbrella. Good. Pete, shall we dive in. I'll just repeat my. A lot of this is already in sensorica did you have a look. A lot of which. Did you have a look at how sensorica does it does project planning. No, exactly project accounting. I totally recommend doing it. What they're doing and of course they're rewriting it now so it's their legacy version at this point. But they have the projects and people post tasks in the project and people can grab tasks because it's very much network it's not an organization. And every task has, here's what we need and here's the entrance and expect the dexterance. And so anybody who contributes anything to the face of the project gets accounted as having contributed to the project. So that project rewards can be distributed to anybody. And that includes sometimes you know, I went and bought, say the ink for the treaty printer that we used or I bought the treaty printer and that you use that. That's part of the in usage inputs versus consumables. And of course time and but what's really interesting is the whole distributed nature of the accounting, like anybody can take on a task and say can move this. It's not open source events and agents accounting philosophy, it appears. Okay, and this is not open source. It is, it is open source. Okay, it is open source. It's a Django framework for his version and new version will be based on. Wow. Okay, so it sort of bridges a lot of different things that we're talking about. Yeah. And from friendly neighbors and all of that. Let's stop the screen share. Thank you so I have not taken a good look and TV brush the beach and new is one of the people on my list of people to sort of introduce myself to and say hi to and it sounds like an invite there would be great. Hi Hank. He's on vacation. I'll tell you when he's back. Oh, perfect. Thank you. Just on that there's also, I mean, similar to maybe for inspiration would be open collective. And then there's also a bakery in the same bucket or is coming create doing a different layer. Sure. And then there's also disco dot CEO know what is it. TV actually told me that, I mean, he's been in that business for 10 years and that for example this cocoa took a lot of ideas from sensorica. It's the same, but, but he said it was, you know, actually quoted for inspiration. And they do use a lot of the concepts the real concepts and open collective. Let me just share screen and a couple of these things. So open collective PM and senior as a friend, although I haven't talked with her in a while. So this is this is the other group and then this go dot co-op right. There we go. Distributed cooperative organization. And my machine is behaving very slowly. Sorry about that. And just one other mention that's even less than a distributed cooperation is bounty source. It's a way to you can put open source software you can put feature requests up and people can crowd source it right but it's kind of related. Cool. So let me create a new category for these three at least. And then let me find bounty source in my browser and go from there. Cool. And it sounds it seems like this is a common problem and lots of entities are going after it. And I think one of the interesting questions here is architecturally how is everybody going after it meaning. And then in my background question, what are the next two stacks. The second stack is the organizational stack. I think these are all candidates for large layers large slices of the organizational stack. Does that make sense. Yeah. Basically this is distributed accounting and it's, I think it's very important but you're right there are other aspects, like all the regulation things that maybe talks about as a totally distinct layer, the question of recipe ownership. Who owns the knowledge comments and so on and so forth. What is interesting about the way they're trying to do it is they're very much compatible with the whole semantic web activity streams stacks, which makes it easy to have a public stream of activity. So if I call this category this subcategory distributed accounting of value flows is that descriptive it's called peer funding, your funding. I will add that. Thank you. Is your funding the same as I can distribute it accounting of value flows I really like that is it is not there related. Because I think that's a perfect descriptor. And also related would be things like community currencies. Right. Or community autonomous. I created kind of parallel categories I'll share screen again in a second just to show you what I built, but I just created parallel categories distributed accounting of value flows and pure funding. I was going to me, I was just going to add pure funding to the other one and just put it in parentheses, and then Pete uttered the sentence, not quite the same thing so I made a separate category, and I don't actually understand the difference so Jay for pure funding you might want to grab the link off of the chat. Yes, we'll do. Or you can search for it either way. I will do that. Thanks. Cool. Oh, sorry, the shadow matter most. Yeah. Thanks. Excellent. So we already have like three candidates sitting in front of us is there like a bake off here or what's a, what's a reasonable way to start exploring and thinking about these. We have connections into some of these communities. Some, some extended OGMers have already been in some of these communities. Mark and twine you've got some knowledge I think, have you been in the conversations or in the on the platforms at all. I'm sorry you're busy making your coffee by. Yes. I had a conversation with TV. So yes, I'm in conversation. I am having that conversation with them and I think it's definitely somebody worth talking to. And as I said I will invite him when we're done when he's back. Sounds excellent. Thank you. So any thoughts about just a framework for assessing these should we create a matrix decision aid and just figure out what what metrics matter and what how the how each of them falls on it. I would turn things upside down a little bit I think as somebody who's got a number of projects that could get funded. And kind of also related to a dashboard of you know things that OGM could fund. I think, looking at me or looking at Bentley. I feel like we, the person who wants to get something sponsored should write that up right I should have a write up for massive wiki and for distributed directory project and you know a bunch of stuff. Similarly, Bentley should have a bunch of write ups. I think then OGM wants to work with the makers the founders whatever you want to call them and make sure that those things get into a directory on the OGM wiki. I think also somebody like me or something like Bentley the makers should be going out to each of these and figuring out how to get listed or which ones make sense or, or whatever. So I would have the makers drive that and OGM assist rather than having OGM try to do a top down thing where we kind of try to shepherd everybody into the same thing. I'm assuming that these platforms do more than what you're intending to do with massive team. Because a piece of this is could this be emulated or part. Also, for instance, a simple thing for massive is opal needs to get done right. Opal is a software application that acts as a nice pleasant front end to massive wiki. So that's a nice separable project so massive wiki is kind of this big, you know, vision statement movement thing. Opal is a tightly constrained thing that you can say here's the architecture for it here's the use cases for it. You know here the acceptance criteria for, you know, version zero version one version two. So that's the kind of thing that presumably I could take over distance since work or maybe open collective or whatever right or bounty source or whatever. And then. So, so OGM has already done me a service as a maker, just by the last five or 10 minutes of discussion right here's the five things that you should go look at. And see if you can get funding that way. So that's a big help to me already. I feel like it's on me now to drive that forward a little bit more, as I'm looking for funding for opal. And then OGM and I should be collaborating checking in every week or something like that. Hey Pete. I know you were going to check out bounty source for opal. Did that work what didn't work, how can we help, you know, do you need to contact somewhere else, you know, yada yada. So I think my mental model might be off here. Because I was thinking of these projects as infrastructure you'd use the way you would use Salesforce or SAP that you would basically take an organization whatever that is, and kind of flow on to it and start using it consistently as a platform for interactions. And what you say is that it's more like, Hey, there's a marketplace for people who could source funding or pitch projects, or whatever and you could post things the way you would post on multiple, you know, the day before eBay owned all of auctions you would take your, your item and you might post it on several auction sites. So am I am I just a little ask backwards. I think there's two kinds to two aspects one is, you know, I have a project I wanted funded, which can be done on crowdfunding and there's all kinds of open source crowdfunding things. There's the, but open source does allow for more distributed. Oh, bounty for this feature, right, so it's more a team ish, but I think what the next step after that is not just the feature bounty but the organizational. Like, how does this project fit in with, how do we divide the work, how do we structure the work, how does it interact with other projects, how do we, and this is the level up. And this is where I don't know if the interact with other project as part of the platform yet. And, since Eric is done with the area is very much this idea that the, you can break down the, even the management in pieces and give the pieces to whoever is enabled competent and keep track of contributions at any level that's great. It's one piece. It's, it's a valuable piece. But the, what I think we're all missing is, okay, the thinking team wise is a skip, but thinking, how does my project fit in the larger ecosystem of projects and needs. And this is where more global perspective and any tool that can enhance perspective of the needs is missing. And I think this is where a community like OGM is extremely useful, because you know we're here as users of these tools and saying I am more creator than user, but still, I mean, we're users and makers can collaborate on, okay, this is what I need the tool to do. Right. Yeah, I, we do a fair bit of that already. And, and it's super OGM right it's not just OGM that's in that collaboration so on OGM there's, you know, Bentley and I are talking in multiple channels about working on opal or working on the easy editor or working on the zoom chat or, or you know that kind of stuff. This happens a lot of flotilla to which I would say flotilla is adjacent to and not not part of OGM but it's adjacent to OGM and, you know, kind of encompasses, it's within the network of network of networks right. So, I feel like we do that to a significant degree already, we maybe do it. And, and, you know, actually that that network spills out so I'm working, you know, I talk on telegram with with Tiberias or Zeke or Yaro or Yuri. So, right now we're talking about opal in telegram on linked open wisdom commons, which is, which is, you know, kind of another organization, a little bit like OGM or a little bit like he collaborated something like that. So, it's not like these conversations aren't happening and they're, they're, they're happening with a decent set of folks to, I think, maybe if we get out a little bit more into the open world with open collective or bounty source or maybe like, I jerry to answer your question a little bit at most of these look like platforms and operators to me, they're, it's not just, you know, Cots software that you say okay let's tilt up is in Sorica instance they look more like it's a software platform and the operation of the platform. Open collective is the same kind of thing right you, you go, you go into open collective, you don't clone the open collective platform and use it as as a as an accounting mechanism or something. But you go in. I'm almost there but not quite there meaning you go into it meaning you're just using it like you would be a poster on eBay, or Reddit, or you use it as its infrastructure for your distributed ecosystem. And then you're kind of in sensorica but not in the other one. Because are you are you cross posting, let's say you float Opal is Opal cross posted to the all these platforms or do you sort of make a choice about which which ecosystem to live in where you have these discussions about how Opal relates to other you know, all those kinds of things. Yeah, I think there's really many scenarios here and I won't speak for the other systems but I think if you use sensorica the organization then you would be involved in sensorica and making it into a sensorica project and then yeah your I don't know if you'd cross pitch it. Maybe not and maybe it's fine I don't know, but there's a totally distinct thing of doing which is to spin off your sensorica clone using the sensorica software because that's open source and you can spin your own and then of course you can. You're doing a sensorica like organization and then you're free to cross post. I don't know that it be against cross posting but I'm saying is sensorica as an organization, not as a software does act as we're kind of an umbrella for efforts, if only for legal reasons if only for you know, this is the organization doing this, which is not the same as say Kickstarter where you're, I'm my organization and I'm using the Kickstarter service for my crowdfunding, it is different. I feel like the thing that we need I don't feel like we need as much as it would be fun to have this distributed accounting or anything fancy fancier than you know a quick ledger and Google sheets. We're not at the scale where we need, you know anything fancier than that. I feel like we're doing decent project communication collaboration, looking for resources. You know, for instance, Bentley and I talked about this the software architecture for opal and how that interacts with his idea for a wizzy wig editor for massive. I feel like any, any muggle coming in and trying to figure out how to cooperate and what to do will never find the places where you're you and Bentley and you and TV and you and everybody else are actually talking that this is unique to you because you're extremely cooperative this Well, yeah, an ordinary person walking in this crowd will never find this. I'm not sure that so opal is not at the point where a muggle. I just used a little as any example but but I'm just saying, you know, and or even something like massive massive is not quite yet to muggle level. And, you know, and massive is actually had between Kiko lab and OGM it's had a good, good contribution from muggles. So Wendy Elford kind of counts as a muggle. And she and I had a wonderful time working on massive wiki and her project. So I think that the thing that that we're missing right now. I feel like and maybe Bentley and I haven't done as much as we could but I feel like the thing that we're missing right now is what we would call in the digital network for all distribution. Right. And kind of like what you're saying, you know, 1000 or 10,000 muggles, looking at this thing going, Yeah, I would pitch in five bucks to see an easy front end to, you know, or a collaborative personal like Rome or like obsidian but but better, you know, so that's the thing that we're missing and that's the thing where I can look at open collective or bounty sourcer sensorica and so, you know, I, you know, spinning up as an instance of the software but it doesn't get me the community and right now, a community of people who are not us and people who have time and money to invest is kind of what we need. That's that that's the part that we're missing I think. I think Mark and also I would, I would agree that if I took opal I wouldn't shop it around to five things, but what I would do is I would log into each one and start a draft project or whatever, and say okay when they when they asked this question. That's where it didn't make sense for me this platform is probably not the right fit for whatever reason right. So you kind of pick one and center there to because you won't you don't want to disperse your effort, you know, you don't want to spray and pray you want to like hunker down on the one that's a good fit and and you know invest time and energy and getting get it going. Right. So, so two things. One is, I would like to create a service that responds to a question Stacy asked a couple calls ago. I'm not sure it was on this call it was on one of our many calls of hey I have two hours to donate to something I'm really good at these skills. Where can I apply those skills within our ecosystem with that with a trusted with a trusted party. Great, like like that be it's so it's not just where do I invest money in a project to fund, which is Kickstarter Indiegogo, Akiva, what have you, but where do I take my particular skill set and who needs my skill set as a second layer to that so it totally get that. And then I appreciate that Pete, I think what you're saying is, let's do it sort of test sense and respond from the ground up rather than have a bake off and make some kind of a platform choice for OGM whatever OGM is it only being a kind of an organization, I guess, which I totally like. But then I think, I think the end product that whatever that process at the end product of it as we sort of make a choice and we're like, Oh, we're going to be disco co op folks or oh we're mostly going to use this. And if you wanted to go see our dashboard, it lives in that ecosystem, whether we've spawned it off here or not. And all of that said, when I opened this call, the direction I thought I was heading in, or I thought we would be heading in was, how do we mark down files, each of which contains a product plan project plan, each of which get rolled up into a simple display device in massive. Okay. And so the first thing Mark on front said, you know what, this is much better done and these other platforms than we open up that which is a fascinating conversation to me. Lovely that many of these are open source lovely that were connected to many of this, and it feels like these are integral parts. And by the way, the, you know, the meta currency project was going to be this as well. The whole chain is a cleaving off of the calving of a big iceberg of the meta currency project into the great seas of open source and this turbulent world, and had the rest of meta currency been in here we would be talking about them in the mix as well. And now whole chain I think is a different piece of the platform that some of these platforms may try to live on top of, but but art and Eric Harris brawn and Mark, Mark, I'm trying to bell that was this. So Mark, I'm forgetting the third person in meta currency. They've been working on this problem for 30 years. Right. Jean Francois Nouvelle, I think. He's in my brain, of course. Anyway, so, so I like the sense and respond kind of approach to this. How do we unify that so that we learn from what each person or each group posting something has figured out what worked what didn't work do we do we need a framework for assessing each probe, because probe sense and respond. So I'm just reading John Boyd's famous deck, his discourse on combat and and like unless you're communicating heavily with the little units that are busy probing the enemy, you don't learn anything and it doesn't actually work so you need very good communication. I think we need to apply war metaphor to our project here. Point is, is a, you know, a systems theorist. Yeah, they happen to be working with war but Yeah. So, so one thing to back up a tiny bit. My guess is that you were thinking that we would end up kind of centered on one platform my guess is that we're going to end up centered on a couple different platforms for different things. And maybe that software, you know, goes to bounty source and hardware or 3D printing or something like that goes to Sensorica, and, and I think there's another thing that OGM can do that's beyond the platforms that we just listed out here right so if I think of the grant writing exercises, especially that that Lauren and Keekalab kind of wanted to get into right. It, I think OGM has the opportunity to say, Oh, look, you're trying to actually you're, you're trying to do emergent events since making that's kind of a social structure it doesn't make sense for the, the, the, you know, you're a maker and you're building something it's more of a social thing. And it talks about misinformation and along with Sensorica open collective and bounty source we also know a bunch of NGOs or foundations that give money that are have, you know, that work and misinformation. The three grant makers that you want to talk to. Here's the grant templates that we have in our library for talking to, you know, MacArthur and, and Craig Newmark and whatever right. So I think that's, if I'm thinking of OGM doing that, it's not just, you know, these platforms it's also, you know, here's the Small Business Administration playbook, you know, the Service Corps retired executives playbook. Let's get you going, right. So to answer your question about probing and sensing I think OGM has an opportunity, and maybe some of the folks here and maybe some of the larger, the larger OGM network has an opportunity to pick up and run with a merchant events that's making Delta search or Opal or with the big front end and do it right do the thing. Say, hey Pete, let's have a couple, you know, let's have a couple, let's start up some weekly meetings and in three or four weeks, figure out how Opal got funded right or or Opal is on the path to getting funding. There's a, there's an on ramp to, to shopping it out even right which Bentley and I are kind of in the throes of for our various projects it's like. So do you have a roadmap, do you have a, you know, do you have some estimates of cost, do you have, you know, a scope and a scale do you have an architecture picked out. Do you need an architecture bake off, you know, all that kind of stuff. So I certainly could could use help and in kind of operationalizing the turning bunch of crazy ideas and discussions all over the web into, you know, a project plan and a timeline and a set of hypotheses in phases and, you know, working to get that into, you know, do we post that on since work I do post it on open collective do post on bony source do we go out to talk to MacArthur do we tell go out to talk to Craig Newmark. So do we end up with a page on massive that is a display a table display that tells us and has a link to whichever of those platforms this particular project got posted, and where to track it, but that that becomes our dashboard, maybe. Yeah, that sounds great. That seems very doable. And then I'm really interested in the mosaic or puzzle map of these various parts because what I'm trying to get to as a place where massive has posted six projects, wherever it's posted them. And then trove has posted three projects for us posted them, and then OGM as a movement is has a map of how these different pieces fill in different parts of OGM's mosaic. How do we build the collaborative sense making infrastructure that allows us to have different kinds of maps in an infrastructure that separates data in blah blah blah blah with exciting new visualizations right and maybe we have 100 or 200 different projects that we're trying to get funded, some of which come from each of the entities that are floating through our movement or ecosystem. And, and the conversation about what that mosaic looks like is really important. And I don't know where we're having that yet I think it's being had in small bites and small chunks all over the place but I think that that needs to be held as well. It makes a lot of sense what it makes me think of is enterprise system architecture. Partly, I'm going to be, be training my background or or be lying my background or something. But a big company has that kind of mosaic map right. Here's what we use for accounting here's what we use for asset management here's what we use for HR systems here's what we use for payment payroll here's what we, you know, and and somebody in enterprise system management has, and I have to say by the way, the way I have seen that work. There can be a lot of emergent stuff but you really want one person or a very small number of people on a council who run, you know you want. When you're doing architecture you kind of want a master architect you want somebody at the at a locus saying, yeah all of these things make sense together. So, I kind of wonder as you went through that that, you know that mosaic. We've got our love for collective and decentralized, but when you're talking about architecture you really need to figure out how you do the centralization and coordination, because that's what architecture is kind of. But yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. There's there's also like fractally down there's there's other other similar things. Massive wiki needs kind of an architecture. And we and Bill and I have actually worked on some of those diagrams right where it's like, this is the editing piece this is a synchronization piece. This is a collaboration piece. And, you know, we can ask questions like do we swap in get or efficient or or next cloud for the synchronization and the versioning. And we do those kinds of conversations already and then a little bit above that is currently an eye talking through. Okay, so how does Opal share components with the busy way editing front end that's doing things that are partly massive and partly other stuff right. So that that architecture diagramming goes on, you know, up and down up and down the scale, and we're doing a fair bit of it already. So it's kind of generalized but back in the day what would happen would be Tom Siebel would invent a Salesforce management app and then they would start by they've got successful they would start buying other things and you'd have a roll up you basically have a Titan platform like Salesforce is now that try to do everything for everyone where you kind of had to buy into the platform where all these dependencies and contingencies happen. And if the vendor was aggressive they would get platform lock in right. There's a, there's a flip side of that which is it reminds me a little bit of coast in the theory of the firm. There is. There's transaction costs, you know, you can build your system out of like various components. But if you pick a vendor and the vendor is decent and promulgates decent into internal standards at least. You start to reduce transaction costs between your, your various systems that you need to integrate right so you kind of see the same thing. Same thing happens in open source. So you get, you do get centralization you don't get. You don't get the weird monocultural single vendor stuff but you do get centralization around standards right so. So when I needed versioning and sharing for massive wiki. I picked to get because get is used by most people right and when I say hey, can we collaborate and I'm using get what are you using the answer is going to be well I'm using get to let's collaborate. So, there's, there's activity, even in the distributed system, you have activities which centralized towards architectural choices, and architectural choices start to go together to right. If you pick Kubernetes versus whatever other thing you would pick. There's a whole bunch of whole suite of stuff that goes along with Kubernetes. So that pattern of, you know, you pick, you pick Siebel or you pick Microsoft or something like that, even though we associate that with these, I was going to say predatory I don't know if that's exactly the right word but exclusionary vendors and closing vendors. We don't want the enclosure part of that, but we do actually want the working towards a suite of, you know, protocols and systems and, and architectures and stuff like that that all interoperate together. So that's a good thing that's not a bad thing. And, and OpenERP apparently is now Udo, or Odoo, or something like that. It wasn't an entity, unless you meant Mark on phone OpenERP as a general category, which is I think maybe, you know, you meant the event. I didn't mean the product, yes. Yeah, they renamed. Yeah, that's true. Forgot. Yeah, no, the general agreement with a lot of what you're saying and the question is how to do a network ERP. Right. It's not just beyond enclosure. It's for a kind of less organization centric so I can be in my ERP node, you can be in your ERP node and we can share activity. And this is, and this is why I think the value flows because they're thinking about sharing across nodes with activity streams. It is still relevant, I think, to some of the thinking that's happening. And I mentioned GlassFrog, like the notion of shared governance is extreme. And again, something else. It's not the same as ERP. It's about, you know, shared project definition. It's another concept and who does what in distributed organizations. So in this world, I can envision, although I can't play it out all the way in my head, that HRM dissolves and we individuals who are working on various projects as part of various communities wind up having a preferred home where we dock and do our books, so to speak. And every entity that hires us merely connects up to our profile and our books. That's how we get paid. That's how we obey the law. That's how all those kinds of things happen, but they are no longer centralized inside of one company, which has an, you know, HRMS package that everybody who's working with that company must use. In fact, it becomes sort of this constellation of people on different platforms that obey the same sort of interoperability principles. But then individuals would connect to and stay on their preferred platform over time. ERP has a distributed service. Yeah, and that's why I wrote rollups versus rollouts. If the 90s were the era of the rollups where we got these mega enterprises, maybe what we're doing now is we're rolling out the functionality across many suppliers in interoperable network ERP-ish webs or something. I think I would differentiate between ERP and enterprise architecture. ERP kind of manages, you know, I don't know, resources, but there's a bunch of stuff beyond that, like security or collaboration or things like that that show up in enterprise architecture framework but aren't necessarily ERP. I like that a lot. And I think that the language is changing as the concept is changing and ERP is very much the traditional enterprise software approach. And so I haven't seen enterprise architecture framework. Thank you. Where does that put us in terms of what should we do next? And how do we walk into this? That's why we all need to write out our projects. I would like to come back next week with a list of projects that need better definition and more funding. I will submit something. I think we need more criticism of projects also. Right now we've had a lot of us have this idea and this is what we think is worth doing and, you know, I've been a bit relentless in my criticism of your project. And we need more, okay, how does this project work with that? How does that, you know, asking those questions about is that really the thing we need to build or what is the fit between the goal and means and things like that. Which is that discussion is similar to Jerry's conception of a mosaic of systems that plot different, you know, solution points in the larger solution space that we understand that we need. Another quick thought is similar to criticism is idea of kind of validation and part of marketing. So, you know, kind of testing the waters to see who's interested. Like recently I did a quick zoom chat format. And, you know, there's a little bit of interest and then of course, you know, only 2% converted, which is actually fairly good. So, yeah, anyway, so having a process around getting getting feedback out from the ideas from potential users along with the criticism on the architectural would be interesting. And this also brings up that and I'm in two communities where they're based on projects that are trying to save the world in very specific ways. And one of the things both communities have is a meeting where you can come and bring in your project and then it's kind of like a kind of like a shark tank where people kind of try and give you tips and advice and suggestions. So maybe, you know, it's just an idea. I say shark tank isn't really a place where you get tips and advice and suggestions but I'm just saying. They give you criticism. Yeah, but they're not mostly trying to help they're mostly trying to like figure out how to win big on your tank. Yeah, yeah, that's true. There's a lot of framework to shark tank that is useful though. You know, he's hearing Mark Cuban saying here's how I evaluate your product. That kind of stuff is super, super amazing, right. Or even say there's no market for X or something like that. Yeah, yeah, close go ahead. Well, it's a, it's a catch 22 because I've been exposed now to two groups who had that forwarded one of them, Jared is Felix, who is a friend of bills. And they have like a phenomenal idea it's well articulated it's well laid out but you need now resources to hire people who can work on this. And so, so, and you can't really carry this forward in any way until there are some professional resources that that can actually do the work it's it's very frustrating. So I think so I think the notion here is that putting up a map of these projects each with a budget each fundable. And that means that participants in the broader ecosystem are now swinging from vine divine of funded projects. And that's how they make a living on going is they're busy choosing which of these projects will take their time and energy, and get them paid for the next stretch of time and they may have three to six overlapping projects that hopefully don't all time out on the same day or then they're like looking for work in lots of different places but I think this ecosystem that we're talking about this this way of seeing what's on the big board that I might want to play on and who would I like to play with is a part of the new economy. And I don't know that that equals job security the way getting hired by some company that was going to have a hard time not hiring you did in the past but I sense that this is like where we're headed. Super hero. And freelance needs to be like there's many ways in which freelance can be much more secure, including small teams that band together to do freelance work as teams I think that's interesting and I don't think anybody's really paying attention to that. You know, high impact teams that they built the database back in for three startups they know that are really good at it their friends they have a, that they're really like boom, and, and they want 10% of your equity and then they'll go away after they've installed this thing or something like that right but that that could easily be a team that gets known and hired in for lots of lots of engagements. The component to this is money. So class class points out a good problem you know you can have the greatest idea in the world but if you don't have the professional people that you need working on it, whatever they are. It's you, you can't make progress right so, and the way that you get the professional people as you hire them and to hire them you need the money and, you know, so we have to, we have to bootstrap ourselves out of that or, or get better at bootstrapping ourselves out of that. So I just wanted to have a little deeper on hire them, those two words, because hire them presumes a job and a salary, I think. No, I, whenever I, sorry, freelancer higher means. Here's a thousand bucks can you get this done in 10 hours you know. Okay, so so the, but the, but the process I was describing a moment ago might fit that then. Yeah. Okay. Well, yeah. Where does it fail where does it not get that where does it need to be improved. Where does what the idea that there's a bunch of project plans off that, and that individuals basically swing from vine to vine inside these projects by being part of a team that has a budget, etc like where does this what does that fall apart for what you are intending that all makes total sense, but if you're not pouring in money somewhere. This is awesome. Exactly, somebody needs to show up and say this is awesome I'll take this one this one this one this one this one, or there can be funds outside of that, possibly an OGM fund that says hey poor money and us and we have really good judgment because we have a vision about a mosaic hey look at our mosaic. Our mosaic is composed of these piece parts over time unfolding. Look, if you pour money in here it goes into those and this thing this whole thing moves forward, and we relieve you of the responsibility of sitting here and like throwing darts at the board, or trying to figure out who who's in this community or what's going on. So I think that there's the intermediary like a like a fund of some sort, we. We have a lot of projects mosaic stuff but we have a fair amount. The thing I feel that we're missing in our ecosystem is. We've talked a lot about connecting to money and we haven't at all. I think we're severely ended developed in connection to money. I know that I'm on that train and very slow train and part of the reason is, I don't know what to show them on this end of things and that's why we're having this conversations like suddenly coins fell in my head. You know, where I was like, damn, if we had the thing we're talking about right now very fruitfully. We have enough right now we're. I think this is just a conversation at this point. I feel like there's been a little bit of effort at the fingertips, but I feel like this is where we're sort of painting pictures in the air like the cost of doing his light drawing. We have a, we have a really crappy way of expressing it we don't express our like we, we don't have those, you know me and Bentley and and Mark Antoine, and maybe even class. And they say, Oh yeah, here's the, you know, here's the project plan for obol, you know and here's how much of a cost and here's what you would get we don't have that yet, but we can wave our hands around all of that stuff. We've been doing it for months and months and months. The thing that we don't have and so in my fundraising experiences you don't need more than that. You know, it's, it's easier to get more investors with a crisper clear, you know, take away. Leave behind, but there's plenty of plenty there's also plenty of investors who invest on crazy wacky ideas because they, you know they're early investors they like, they like a, you know, so we've got plenty of ecosystem. We're really not selling well. We don't do selling stuff. Got it. I'm just what I'm trying to say Pete is that I could not have had this conversation with a potential investor before this conversation. And we're 16 months into OGM blah blah blah like, like, I didn't know how to express what we've just talked about and how it fits into things, even to paint it with light. Okay, and I, and I knew about flotilla and I knew about you and Bentley and the zoom chat process post-processing and a bunch. I knew about all those big parts but I hadn't thought about the mosaic. Yeah, so now this week you can pitch it and sell it. Or do we have to wait for next week. I, we've been, we've been dragging our feet. I watch, you know, in my, so I'm a maker, not a salesperson sales and funding all that stuff scares the hell out of me and it just like it hurts and I don't like it and, you know, but I've been in my startups. You go over to the sales team and they're like, oh man I hate all that figuring out what stuff is but let me just talk to some potential customers or potential buyers or potential investors right. And the good salespeople, you know, pitch on a hell of a lot less than what we've got right now, a lot less. So we're not pitching. And we don't, and you know, maybe, maybe it's just not that we, we maybe we don't have the right pitch teams and I think that's part of the problem. We don't have the equivalent of a sales force. And we should, and we should figure out how to figure that out. I don't know. So, the ogm sales force if there is one is me. I don't know. Why would that be true. Well, I don't know. At this moment, I don't know of anyone else who is pitching to try to fund ogm and the conversations that have been mostly with the pre wealthy people who might fund us here, who've taken me in a bunch of different directions that have evolved the idea of what the hell I think I'm pitching, including I'm like, ah, crap. Like, like, what would it mean for for this to be set up as a dow? How does that work? What's going on? He points me to a bunch of high functioning bows that are really interesting. I'm trying to absorb that kind of thing. And I don't know how that exactly fits. And I need to have that conversation here as well. I think the when Pete is saying salesperson, I would translate this into a grant writer, because the salesperson they're looking for is really, that's how people who are making a living, you know, bringing together money to the grants to the right places. And they know how to frame stuff. They know what type of funding is available that would be interested in what kind of projects. So, so that's, that's, and I'm slightly allergic to that only because the grant process seems like stepping into the library of targets to me, but that's only because I haven't been through it probably. I would call it a broker or an angel investor or things like that. I, all of those, you know, they're kind of the same thing. And they, they may be good for different markets. It's a completely legitimate function. I wrote a grant once when I first retired, just to figure out how this works and I got 120,000 dollars for a small food tab in Coachella Valley. And it was through USDA and there's a grant, you know, I found one, a dozen of them. I found one that was compatible in its intentions and we applied for it. So it's a, I mean, it's a, it's a skill set that I don't have. We don't really have a skill set in the mindset and network usually. If you're, you know, if you're a grant writer or a broker or an angel, part of the reason that you've got, you've got supply side deal flow and demand side funding is because you've, you've built a network of funding demand already. And so you either know where the grant needs to go or which other angels to contact or, you know, which, which early customers to sell to. Thank you. Yeah, I understand what you're saying that we have more than enough to pitch and in one sense or absolutely right. In another sense, I feel there's still a lot of gray zones into how we build this into value proposition, like we have pieces. And a lot of us are technologists pushing their favorite pieces forward, including me. And we have a kind of idea of how these pieces can be useful. But I don't think we have a global value proposition for how these pieces fit together into process. And as I think a lot of us insist some part of which must be public slash common some part of it can be private and money making, but there's a lot of gray zones there so I have a bit of unease with you saying we're ready. And I don't know if we can be ready up to a point because we have also the diverging ideas on some of some of those, which may or may not be fine maybe we'll have to create subsets with their own distinct value proposition and that's fine right. But I do think there's an organizing theme between us, which it would be nice to be able to articulate as these projects we have there. Oh, pieces going towards that common vision. And I'm not sure we have full agreement. We have contrary in here. We haven't had a lot of discussions all over the place and especially we haven't had a lot of discussions about about a coalesced or mosaic of solutions that work together to deliver, you know, value. So, I totally agree completely totally agree. You know, our, the thing that we have to sell right now is like a C minus or something like that. And, but, but I can also represent from my experience getting funding that so so that the problems that you have there are not that you can't get funding with that it's that you have less addressable funding market and and your price is going to be more dear. It's not that you cannot get funding with even the crap that we've got right now. So, so on the one hand you go okay well if we make our crap less crappy if we make it a better saleable thing will have more addressable funding market and we'll have we can get a better price for you know what we're trying to sell. And I said that's all true and I, you know, we need to work on that. And from this conversation is like crappy just fricking right down the opal thing, you know, and, and, you know, and come back next week and get other people to help you like make that better and and pitch it and sell it. And my observation is that even at a C minus or a D or whatever our stuff is our, or, you know, we're, we're 70% complete or 65% complete on kind of architecture and vision and making and stuff like that we have a 65 out of 100 maybe 70% it's the wrong thing to say. We have like funding stuff we're at like a 10 or a five or something like that we're really not trying Jerry is our main main sales person. Jerry loved you to death I'm not sure that sales is your best and true highest purpose. And I don't think that you should think that you're the only sales person. De facto. I'm just pointing to the facts on the ground. I'm the only person pitching this thing right now to the outside world. So not that I need to be not that I, not that there shouldn't be others. Our, our making maturity, you know, we're like five years old or something like that. And our funding maturity we're like, not even a year old we're like six months old or four months old or something like that. And there's an imbalance there. What, what that says to me if I were on the board of a startup, it's like, Okay guys, you know, you need to keep improving you need to keep maturing your making stuff, but, oh my gosh, you guys really need to like, put some of that aside and start figuring out how you're going to sell this thing, because you're, you've got this massive maturity imbalance. That's kind of what I'm saying. We're coming up on our hour and I just have two things at this point, maybe three things to say. Number one, I've been really lagging on this has been crappy I'm sorry about that and it's like, I get it and it's probably not shouldn't only be me. So two things to add. One is one of my whales, one of the people I know personally who is on my list of people to pitch to fund this thing is read Hoffman. He 90 minutes sit downs one on one with him, but we're lovely. Like, we came back and we sit down and sit down in his, in his offices in near bucks and in Menlo Park, I guess, etc. And he's really libertarian and we did sort of idea combat over the relationship economy which was my thing back then and design from trust and a bunch of other things. And he asks great questions, we don't really agree on that many things but we sort of do it's like, it's really weird it's not like we're sort of both pulling in exactly the same direction, but there was a really really fun conversation going on. And I know that at this point, I know sorry, I believe that this point if I sat down and said hey there's this thing and you could do this. And he by the way is deep into politics is like on a whole there's a whole bunch of like hot red fires on his plate right now. And he came up and said I got this thing and it looks like putting male to a tree. He'd be like, What are you talking about, I think, and this conversation has actually helped crystallize a whole bunch of what I might say to a person like him. And, and that's why what's that's what I meant earlier by I couldn't have described what has materialized here before this conversation and I feel stupid for it. And that's kind of it. And then the second thing is, if the, if the vision of what OGM is or could be seems to evolve every week. Like, now it's more a hashtag or a movement than an organization. Thank you Pete, and we had that conversation and I hadn't understood the differences or reasons for that and I'm still unclear how to pitch a movement. I have to pitch somebody to pour money into a movement so I'm shifting to having them pitch money into weaving the world which is a show that has a blah blah blah, which is then a whole different explanation. Right, a whole different thing to start describing and then I have to describe three things that describe weaving the world which is feeding at the big quilt or the big fungus, which is all part of open global mind which is a movement and I'm like, hot damn stack overflow right then, right, can you give me the elevator pitch and I sort of think I can, but it's really really hard. And then John Warthwick says, is this a dowel. I'm like, shit I don't know. Right, and I kind of need to buy a year or two of runway to figure all that out and I think that's the investable proposition is like can you help us build some of this runway so that we can kick so that we can put some primer in the engine, get it all funded get this thing actually moving and I can have that conversation, but just barely, just but but just barely. And I feel like I'm essential to that conversation. I don't feel like I can tap three people in OGM and say, hey, could you go represent and we'll give you a 10% finders fee from any money you collect. I don't know that they'd know what they're pitching. And I don't have a deck that says cleanly, what we're talking about here and what to go in so I don't know how to offload this. We started writing grants that feels to me like a very slow pace and cause I totally understand that. I just don't see a bunch of grants out for the thing we think we're building here, and how it might glue together. Just got to say real quickly, I think that if we do bring someone in and give them a commission on a thing they find their responsibility is to integrate you Jerry and pull that and help you craft that. So I wouldn't worry about you having to have it. And I think Pete's idea of us writing these things up will be another step forward. I think that's a great action plan going forward and then we'll figure that out and maybe we should think about are we all willing to pitch in to get to pay a marketing person to come in and help Jerry out in this area. I just wanted to emphasize the grant application process is a very interactive way of doing things. So my experience when I was applying for this grant. I had to talk with the operator of this food hub and saying okay here some adjustments you have to make to your model. Money is available but there are some things that you don't comply with. So, so I think that's what will happen is when when we meet in our case some really high level, you know, grant writers particularly in the regenerative space there's a lot of money sloshing around, really looking for high level projects that have the capacity to scale. And the once we have enough raised enough interest where someone is saying okay this seems to be solid well rounded has many moving parts. I think we can then iterate our way into something that that would be fun to build. Anyway, in what you just said class you raised one of the other one of my other mental problems with grant making which is that most of them have strings restrictions, whatever that suddenly cause you to work your design and I'm trying to figure out how to get some clean funding into an OGM fund or something else, where we can sort of pick and choose the projects and the methods of funding as much as possible. I'm not described in the SBA, or other kinds of databases but it might be and I don't, and I don't know, but I'm worried about restrictions and the things we might apply for, go ahead Mark and come. You're muted. Yeah, I, I really want to emphasize something I said is my disaster scenario is we get funding and we don't agree what to do with it. And it's, it's, there's so many things each of us want to do. And, you know, of course, part of the dissensus is, you know, between some of us and I'm, I'm usually the Kermit you probably have more consensus if I drop down maybe that's one solution. I do think that we need to also take it more as a project and when I want to tie this with the other conversation that was happening is Jerry you said you're not the salesperson and I agree, but you're also the more than the face you're embodying a certain idea. And when we're pitching we're pitching the kind of perspective you bring. I mean when you're pitching or when OGM is pitching. I mean you started the OGM movement and I think it's an accurate word actually I quoted it but, and I think that you being part of the pitches is actually essential, even if you're not primarily a vendor, because this kind of flexible multifaceted thinking is what I think OGM is trying to sell. And, and then all the tools that enable and, and how to train people into thinking this way and how does one actually take decisions and take action based on that kind of which is still working on. Yeah, and how do people make a living inside this ecosystem that's equally important. Absolutely, absolutely. But the, and any project that individually helps that, of course is valuable in its own right and that way we have good things but I don't I still maintain. I don't think we have enough money will do we really have a path forward, not just to bring pieces that make that a bit easier but that make that drivable and sustainable I don't think we have a path forward. So that's my sorry to hammer it in. That's why that. And then to lead the CDL meeting. No apology. Yeah, no apology needed. So on the diversity question you're asking and I think it's fascinating question and I totally support like if we find diverse more diverse developers who have projects of their own that's brilliant. But I think it's also my experience is, you know, ideas they get ideas. So getting somebody to help with some of the projects but making sure that there's a clear path towards, listen, how can that project inspire you to have your own project is absolutely valid. Getting. I know that there's a, there's a perfectly unhealthy support nation thing and bring somebody else up for my project or your beats project or whoever's project, but on the other hand, there is a way to make it healthy so that the initiative is welcome then it does it stops being precisely one person's project. That's another path. Thank you. Um, so on the diversity front. Some ideas one is going to organizations that are doing og me things that are more diverse than us like impact ventures, which I've talked to in the past and I directly asked them what are some things that we could do. One of those ideas really fit exactly. One was that they have a lot of problems with early business owners, not even understanding enough to do their personal finances. So they can't so some sort of educational tool where they can do self directed learning, which actually does kind of fit all the those in my queue where people can publicly build a training program based on existing YouTube videos and articles and so it's just like a list of things to go through to learn something. And then also I am mentoring a junior developer who happens to be female and I think it's not traditionally white. So, bringing bringing those those people in. And then hopefully they would also be inspired to have an idea. So, yeah, so yeah, focusing on on the needs in the areas and stuff like that and then we just kind of don't maybe highlight that there's a white guy who's managing the project and that person being more of a more of a mentor, more of a decision maker because you know as you're doing these projects if you're serving the customer that should really be the one kind of in charge of the direction and hopefully multiple organizations that need the same product so we get some scale. Just some, just some thoughts. Thank you. I think it might be a good moment to wrap this call I think we have a lot of things to do to bring to next Tuesday. I would love. I feel great about this call. I don't know about you all but I, I'm like on fire this has been super helpful to my understanding of what we're doing and how we're doing it, and what to pitch what to tell people we're doing. I deeply appreciate that. I also think that that my mental image of what the dynamics are about our process or general activities together as an equal as a flotilla of different non sovereigns in non guilds in a non organization. I might be moving together into the new economy and prototyping the new economy which is part of what Jordan has been sort of lifting our chins to look up at the whole time it's like hey, we're trying to prototype what the next thing is here. And we're trying to do it with a whole lot of more mature efforts than us, like the things we were talking about, like all these entities. Disco dot co op etc at the beginning of our call. And I think we have some unique aspects to bring to them a vision that we're holding that is different from what they're after, and how this all fits together as complicated and thorny and fun and damn challenging. Anyone with a want to put a bow on the conversation, or shall we wrap it up. Doesn't have to be a pretty bow, just be a messy bow. So going forward from today, it sounds like makers should be writing starting to write up a more Chris, you know, product offering basically. And then there's a thing that we talked about today which is kind of an overall service map or or mosaic of how all these things fit together. And I don't know that I feel like our homework is probably just to think about that. But maybe an intention for next week could be to start to firm that up and to figure out how we have that conversation who's in that conversation. What does the work product look like to start to address Jerry your concerns about, you know, how does, how do all these solutions together make OGM, and especially mark and once thing like, which of these fit which of these don't fit which makes sense how, how do we need to change some of these to make them fit better. What is, you know, what is that picture and, you know, do we have the right parts, and where do we have goals. So it feels to me like two things to work on one is like, and Pete you sort of already have some of this I don't know if it needs to be probably needs to be tweaked for what we've learned here, but a template project plan in a markdown file that we can use and replicate. So let's coordinate through the build OGM channel on matter most so that we kind of have a place where we're talking about these kinds of things. So, as anyone fleshes out of project plan and finds that needs to include this or that that's different from what's in a template let's just let's just add that there. I will take a swing at painting drawing imagining a map of the mosaic and how to describe it to anybody that's really important in what I'm doing so I need to do that for sure. That sounds great, and we can pick all that up on Tuesday next. I want to make an ups or were quick report out on on massive wiki. Project is going great. It's still not usable by a lot of people. So, the, I, so I think we have a good proof. It's a little bit more than proof of concept. It's more of a prototype we have a prototype massive wiki thing and it works really well. And some of us can see, you know where that gets us. On the other side, it's not to the point where the folks on this call could use a massive wiki to make, you know, project plan to roll up project plans and things like that. So, where I have fallen back to with a couple different projects is, let's, let's keep thinking of massive wiki as as a centralizing as a way to centralize stuff as a way to collect stuff. But let's also use tools that people are more comfortable with to feed that. So, Google Docs is going to be one of the things that is going to I like most people can get into Google Docs and do stuff. And then Google Docs is going to be flowing into massive wiki real soon now. I have a separate question that I meant to ask you, Yuri has indie wiki in motion I don't really understand much of it right now I need to sort of delve into it and I clearly don't understand how indie wiki and massive wiki might interact interoperate what what the common ground is etc. No time to really go into that right now but I'm really interested. And if it was, and if there was a brilliant overlap between the two, I would be very excited that would be a mosaic win. Yeah, right. I would include Fedwiki and probably Tiddly wiki and into that. Yeah, and other other historic wikis. Yeah. Indie wiki is fundamentally. It's more Rome like in that every paragraph is its own object that wiki has a bit of that, but not to the extent. Indie wiki has. So, it's more atomic that objects. Right. It's not tech as text based. All right. Thank you for a brilliant call really. I'm really appreciate you all. This has been great.