 But, you know, the public board meeting is the typical format with an update from Holly on the operations. We'll do board committee updates, and then one main topic, which is the Drupal 8 Accelerate Summary, and a discussion around that. So with that, I think, Holly, you can pick up the operational updates. Okay, well, yeah, so things in the now usual format, highlights, just things to talk about there. Try Drupal, something that we launched earlier this year. We now have six months of data under our belts for that, and it looks really good. So average monthly visitors to that landing page is about 40,000 folks, which is great, and the clicks are really strong at about 20,000 a month. So this has been really great. We feel like we're doing what we set out to do, which is both, you know, driving Drupal adoption and also, you know, giving value to the companies who are part of the program. This has been, I think, our biggest and best revenue experiment this year. So, you know, it's definitely performing. Those numbers are above what we had projected for them to do quite significantly. So we feel really good about that. We also, in September, rolled out some marketplace changes, and now companies on the marketplace are organized by issue credits from the last 90 days, and it's nice to see those changes up there. I think the marketplace, you know, looks a little better, but most importantly, we're seeing that it's doing what, I think, Drew's really called for in his Amsterdam keynote in terms of encouraging participation from companies. So I think when we first launched the changes on the marketplace, the company that was in the last position on the first page had something like eight commits in the last 90 days, and now it's well above that issue credits, not commits, sorry. In the last 90 days, I know it's well above that, and I think that's partly because people are beginning to adopt that issue credit, but we are also getting evidence all the time, anecdotally, from companies who are excited to see it and are actually really trying to work their way up the ladder. So that's really great, and there's more iteration to do there, but it's definitely doing what that set out to do as well. We've been doing that. I know that we see that in the data from the traffic on our site, but has any of them actually said that they've gotten business? We actually have heard some people saying that they're getting more referral traffic from Drupal.org. Specifically, they think they're getting it from filtered pages, so typically whenever somebody has narrowed down the filter to a particular sector or a location, so if it's by country. So we're definitely seeing some improvements there for folks. I would say from the raw first page of the marketplace, I haven't seen incredible number of shifts for, say, Acquia, who was already, even without front page placement, was getting the majority of the referral traffic from the marketplace. So it's definitely affecting people further down the chain a lot. It's been fun to watch. I can ask, look at all the stats on the data, because we're the company that should be affecting, because we were in scrollable land, and then now we're on the front page, so it'll be interesting to see. Yeah, I'd love to get some feedback from that, if you haven't. Another thing I've been doing is I've actually been tracking the changes every three to five days. I've been taking a snapshot of the page so that we can kind of see how companies are moving over time. And that's kind of like low tech way to do it. I can also do it based on the data, and I think at some point it would be really interesting to see kind of how organizations are using it. And also, I will say in spot checking, we have not seen anyone abuse it, which was one of the concerns when we came out that companies would open up a project and make lots of commits and then give lots of credits to their own people, and that does not happen in practice. And so I've been excited to see that, because it means the community is using it the way they should, rather than trying to game it. Your flip side is, I used to be at the top because my company's name starts with C, and now I'm nowhere. But your destiny is in your own hands, Donna. Yeah, no, no. You know, given all those hours that you have free to just jam on that. That's right. And also with my whole two people. Well, yeah. I mean, anything that's one of the things that Josh has actually mentioned, trying to tinker with is how do we show not just aggregate number of issue credits, but how do we maybe show that as a ratio to the number of employees? Yeah, a relative number would be really interesting to see. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Because at the moment, it's pure muscle, pure numbers of bodies. Contributing is going to is going to win. And there's, you know, obviously, yeah, I talked about this a little bit at my keynote at Ned camp weekend before last. And it was kind of amazing to me because I started to talk about it and I finished a sentence and then there was like spontaneous applause about it. So people are really, really excited about it. So that's great. Nice. So marketplace changes and then this one's really mundane, but like, like emotionally was such a win. But we got our European credit card processor was finally, finally approved us and it was our first choice. And now that we have the banking set up in the UK and we have a European credit card processor, we can finally take all of Brooklyn, Europe operations in-house under our own services and not rely on, you know, any of the VZW assets. So we're doing set up for that right now. Should be clear of that shortly. And then, you know, we'll be completely autonomous, which is huge. Wow, that's awesome. Yeah, it will take two years. Yeah, that will be super awesome once we get there. We're getting close, though, so. Yeah, so that's a big win. Things to watch. We're still watching performance to mid-year adjustment. I know we'll talk more about this in the executive section, but a session. But, you know, I think the net net is that on the expense side of the plan that we put forth, we're, you know, meeting or exceeding our adjustments overall, but revenue continues to lag that plan, particularly supporting partner program. So, you know, we'll talk about some more details there. But, you know, that's the thing we keep an eye on. And then this was this was not really a problem in September. It started to crop up in October, but as soon as the RC one came out, this is like, I think, the biggest low light for me as soon as RC one came out. We had a slight elevation and slight traffic, but the it's just a gigantic spike in in spam incidents. And I know that was really tough for community members to try to wade through all that spam all the time. So it's, you know, it's one of those things that when that happens, it is a constant battle and almost nothing else can happen while we try to grind through that. So I know the team's really trying to think through how to manage the resources for when the actual release happens, because I can only imagine it'll be some level of crazy worse when that happens. This is true. And we've got lots of things that we've put in place. And I was I put out a blog post that was fairly vague in part because you never tell spammers what your techniques are. But we do have some things planned that may do a little bit more wholesale removal of new account creation by spammers, which that's that's part of the biggest problem we have right now is we don't have a means to stop the account creation process for people that are clearly spammers and all the other things if we tighten them down too much. Frankly, our community can't a new member to the community cannot participate. And so we've been hesitant to tighten it down that far. What is the need of that spam problem? Like, what's the implication? Like, from a staff, like, how do we need to think about it and how can we help you with that? I guess, well, we've got some great people involved. We've actually been working directly with some of the mollum leads on some tweaks that we could make there. We've put some code changes in place that do a better job of basically reducing the value of our pages to spammers by by changing some of the meta that's passed along. In this particular case, I would say I'd like to take this one offline because I think there are some things where we could we could get some help and we could get some funding and support. But it's not something I would really discuss in a public board meeting because, as I said, the the reality with spam fighting is it's it's an arms race. And so anything we say that we're doing, they immediately begin looking at how to how to use it to their advantage. So I'm and the real tension really has to the real tension and negotiate the whole way through is the openness of the community versus how many gates you have to put up to keep spam from getting on the site. Right. And we're just really trying to honor the community values. We'll also you know, managing that, creating some of those gates. We have a pretty significant amount of human spammers, as opposed to robot spammers. We've we've done the things that can block robots really well. But the reality is there are economies in the world that thrive on SEO placement and and really that's that's what we're fighting against is they just want their word to show up on a page that has decent SEO ranking. So I've been monitoring it pretty closely with Google as well. And we're not negatively impact from our own standpoint, other than on the individual pages that occasionally get reported through to Google. So we're we're in a good position, but it is taking up way too much of our bandwidth. And, you know, there's entire conferences devoted to spam fighting at scale. Facebook put on one in 2015 and also I believe in 2014 because it's it's a very real thing for open sites. So Twitter, Facebook, I'm not necessarily comparing us to that level, but we're that open. And so we're as much of a target. And that's that's that. Lots of others have happened, but any questions? No questions. All right, so first committee updates. Holly, is that right? Nobody met the end. Yesterday, we did. Financing because we hadn't met yet when I submitted it. Yes. I guess I'm going to keep moving. Yeah, we're back on track in time way. So yeah, let's do the Drupal Excel Rates session. OK, so I know you guys heard and lots of updates. But now that we've officially reached the goal, we just wanted to think about, you know, I want to take some time to think about whether we, you know, to talk about the campaign, but also the bigger picture of how and when the Association tries to fund project activities in the future. So just as a reminder of the timeline, we we really started this in in January in earnest with the board recruiting the anchor donors and launched it publicly in March and hit our goal in September. So it was a nine month process to raise that quarter of a million dollars. We use crowd crowds for the donations. And then there were a number of things that the Association tried to leverage to get people engaged in the campaign. So we did put aside our block on 80 we did not put any campaign assets on Drupal dot org itself. We did direct emails to Association members and non-members in our database, but no direct communication, no direct emails to anyone on any Drupal lists. We had email newsletter mentions, though. So like in the Drupal in the Drupal newsletter, for example, part of the wrapper there included the campaign a few times, et cetera. And then we also used social media. And those were all pretty manageable because those are all assets that we're interacting with every day. So it wasn't a huge lift to manage those things. To give you a sense of how the donations rolled in, you know, in March, when we launched the campaign, we started with sixty two thousand five hundred dollars of anchor donations, right? So that's why the number is so big in March. In April, we did some direct emailing and managed to boost up into five figures there. And then we also had a big bump around Drupal Con LA. A number of the partners and sponsors there at that event made contributions that were, you know, four figure contributions. So that was great. And I think in August and September, as things started to heat back up and Drupal eight release actually looked close. We saw a little more momentum there. Of course, we finished in Barcelona. Thanks to one more innovation donation and finishing the campaign out at the at the keynote thanks to XOA, which was really cool. So just a sense of how the nation came in. And then if you remember the campaign, part of the credit rise platform allows individuals to create their own campaigns and do fundraising on their own for the overall campaign. And so I just wanted to give you a sense that of the top donors, it's the top campaigns, right? So people who set up their own little sub site here to do the fundraising. There were relatively few who actually did recruit donations from more than themselves, right, or more than two or three people. So our top campaigners were Dries and Donna from the board, which is great. And Jeff, yeah, I'm sorry. What was that I had at least two of your conversations. We're like, oh, that's a good idea. Yeah, we already talked to you. OK, yeah. Yeah, Dries and Donna and Jeff. Jeff comes in pretty well in there, too. And, you know, everyone, you know, this might be a little hard to read on the screen, but everyone is sort of bold and italicized. Those are people who actually raised money from more than three people. So just to point out that, although in theory, like this crowd raising, crowd funding idea is a great theory. It didn't, in practice, happen so much. But we did email those campaigners, you know, as soon as they created a campaign site, they got an email and suggested ways to donate. We gave them updates throughout campaign, et cetera. It just I think most of what you see in there are people or companies who created a fundraiser so that they could put their own big donation in there and be seen on the page, right? Which I also don't have a problem with. Thank you for the money, right? But just to point out, it wasn't exactly, you know, driven by crowd funding. It was mostly our own communication and fundraising efforts that made it happen. I will say that it was a lot of work. Yes. I mean, it wasn't like sales in a way like, we just do an announcement and people come to us. It actually took going after people and going back and back and back. Yep. Yeah, and I felt like what I did a lot of was emailing my network, which is putting, I mean, it's not something I could continue to do without putting my own reputation at risk, like being the panhandler. But, you know, emailing every CEO over Drupal shop four times in four months is about as far as I'm personally willing to go before I just start looking like, you know, oh God, here comes Jeff, he wants money. No, it's fine. There's a sustainability problem to going back to the well that we need to consider if we're talking about, like you said, sort of how do we do this again in the future? Exactly, exactly. I feel the same way, like you can only ask people so many times. Right, right. So some other facts about the campaigns. We raised 250,000 from 461 people that made the average donation $544. And of course that's grossly inflated by the number of five figure donations that we had. The median donation was $50. So your sort of average Joe was giving around $50 to the campaign. And that actually is a really interesting number because that is higher than most fundraising averages are. So it's good to know about our community. And we also raised donations from 52 countries, which was pretty cool. And only 44% of the donations came from the US. So I liked how representative it was of the overall Drupal community. Just to keep in mind that $75,000 of that 250 came from anchor partners. And then of course, 62.5 from the association itself. There's not a lot of actual crowd raising going on. Like I mentioned, it was just eight people who had more than $500 from eight sources, or five sources. So issues that were raised during the campaign, the one thing we heard a ton was like, this is the saddest fundraiser ever. Why can't the community just come together and finish Drupal? And of course, we knew why that was not going to be the case. It wasn't like we needed more manpower. We needed more specific manpower. But I think that's the thing to keep talking about in the community about how Drupal actually gets developed. Because I think there obviously is a community effort. But I think we do need to talk more about that specific man slash woman power that's needed. Because of timing and the features that we were looking for, we didn't use an open source or Drupal specific fundraising tool. And so if we're going to do it again, we might look at doing that differently. And our tool was not super internationally friendly. You could only donate in US dollars. And that's definitely a problem for our folks in a lot of places in the world. And there was a lot of concern that we were training contributors to expect payment for their work. So we'll have to continue. I would also add, I got a lot of people saying that it was amazing that we were able to raise that much money. But the flip side is that also people say that it was kind of pathetic that we were only able to raise that much money. So I feel just from talking to people myself, I feel people were a little bit over the map in terms of how successful it was, I guess. Yeah. I agree. I've heard both contradicting things. I want to comment on the training our contributors to expect payment bit. Increasingly, because that's been raised a couple of times, but I think there's a flip side to that is are we also expecting, in some ways, open sources becoming a kind of slave labor for corporations? So there's this great infrastructure that the corporations are relying on. And they get this extraordinary value from, and yet we have this expectation that it will be completely built free by people in this spare time. And it is a form of exploitation. So I think that's a counter narrative to that. Oh, it should all be free. It's like, well, do you get a wage for your work? Yeah. And I think positioning it, when I talk to people, I position it as, hey, it's give these people a break. They've been working really hard for a long time. They're burned out. They need help getting over the line. And this is one thing we can do. And it's not something that we should do always. It's not something that they're even asking us to do. It's just something that we need to help push forward and show a little recognition. Does that set in a precedent? I don't think so because I don't think we put enough money out there, honestly, to enough people that it's much of a precedent. You know? I don't think we paid, you know, son or chicks or cats or any of these guys enough money to come close to the actual time that they spent. So it's really just, to me, it's like when you do a nice gesture for someone, but it doesn't actually fully thank them for what they did. It's a nice gesture and I just appreciate the gesture. It's more in that camp than they got paid for their work thing. Did we get any direct feedback from them? From the contributors? From the Q&A? From the comic camp, yeah. Yeah, we definitely did. I mean, I know from several people that they were able to say no to client work, to be able to do Drupal 8 work because of the funding. So we definitely did, I think, achieve what we had hoped for in terms of freeing people up to be focused because of the money, right? They would have kept working on Drupal 8, but they wouldn't have had the same time for it without the payment. I think that's the whole point of the challenge. People have different expectations and perspectives on what money in open source means, depending on where they're coming from. There are a lot of like, and I don't mean this in a demeaning way, but there are a lot of people who just sort of expect open source to work for free. And then there are people who are actually like in the trenches trying to get worked on and pay their mortgage, who have a completely different perspective on what open source money means. And so I think you can hear a lot of complaints from people who actually don't have skin in the game, frankly, when it comes to funding open source and what that means and why, versus the people who are actually trying to make the things happen, doing the things that they're passionate about, but also literally trying to pay for their kids' diapers and their mortgage while trying to do the things that matter to them. And so I think the feedback that we get is good, and aggregating that is good, but also keeping in perspective where that feedback is coming from is very important in terms of what that actually means in terms of the bottom line for the different people involved from different perspectives. I completely agree with that. Yeah, I don't, yeah, and none of these are things that I feel like are showstoppers. I just want to share some of the feedback that I heard is a concern, so we have to, now, it's something we can message differently or think about in the future. I think, I mean, one thing that comes to mind is that I'm probably a user of, I don't even know, the different open source projects. But even as somebody that's extremely passionate about open source and only contributing to one or two or three, we're not contributing to open SSL. We're not submitting patches to Apache. I'm not making changes to MySQL. And so I think a lot of people are just users. Okay, so just taking some of that data and some of the considerations in mind, so what do we feel like worked from the campaign? I think one thing that we identified early when we were talking about it that really did work was to come out of the gates strong with those anchor partners. I don't think we would have seen the momentum in March unrolling into DrupalCon without that. Just wouldn't have made the goal. Everything that we did, of everything that we did, nothing was as effective as a direct email in terms of driving clicks and then donations. There's all that there is to it. So for all of the, tweet your friends, this is the thing that does it. We're calling. Yep. Using the cons to communicate with businesses and help them showcase themselves at those cons as donors was incredibly impactful at LA and even in Barcelona. So there's something about being all together in that space and using all that energy and that momentum that really worked. So there we go. And we also got great support from the camps. There are several camps, there are about half dozen camps that on their own and without an appeal from us decided that they would gift any net income from their camps to the Drupal 8 Accelerate campaign. So Denver was one and Twin Cities was another that I remember off the top of my head. And we should totally organize the camps better next time for that kind of support if we did this sort of thing again. And then I think a thing that we heard over and over again that was positive feedback, right? That the transparency, like having all of those grants listed on a page and you could see who got paid what to do what work, right? And you could see the impact of your donation. That was really meaningful for people if only because they could see that we were taking that extra step to align the campaign with the values of the community. So people really appreciated that and I do think it was a driver of donations. People were on the fence about it. It was a thing that helped tip them over. So those were lessons that I think things that we would wanna repeat or do more of in a future situation. Did you guys have other observations about what worked? I think that your point about email was good. I think you and Karen and I went through some hoops in terms of access to a CRM and stuff. And I think if we had to do it over again, I would say getting our contact database or Salesforce or whatever absolutely scrubbed for who we did wanna send to and do a lot of it through there, I think would be an improvement. I just think we could have leveraged it, but it's weird because of the whole sales team, we don't wanna step on the same toes with them. And I think we could have harnessed that if we started earlier, but once we really started pushing on it, it was too late. Yeah, agreed. And I also heard, one other thing I heard that wasn't necessarily, by the way, so also did wanna agree with you about like the transparency of where the grants were going themselves. Like we talked about this being something you could direct people to in case they asked and they did. And actually more than one case on Twitter, someone was like, you know, whether they're being snarky or genuinely curious or whatever, you know, where do the funds go or whatever it's like, here's a link. And it's like that just shut everybody up. And I did that in email too to three people, like they're like, well, I mean, how do I know that it's being prioritized well or you know, whatever it's like. I mean, people just ask those questions and just literally not even answer, just give them a link and be like, there it is, it's right here, it's all right here. That's huge, it's huge to like convince people, like nobody can say anything after that. They can't come back and be like, well, really you're gonna give $1,500 to that guy for that bug. You know, I mean, it's like, it's unquestionable, right? And so that kind of transparency was great. I felt like the, I think it was a hundred bucks an hour, right? I think that worked well too, like sort of setting the rates so you don't have to be like negotiating or. Yeah, it's just very easy. There's no time to do that. I hate to sing. Yeah. Hey, I have a question on that. How much money is left in the grant pool? I knew the answer to that last week because I calculated it. Well, just roughly, I mean, I don't even think it's accurate. I did a rough tally of what's on the page and it looks like we'd spent about $220,000 but I don't know if the page was up to date at that point and that was a couple of days ago and. Okay, so it's close. Yeah, it's really close. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. Let me just open my spreadsheet. So it got us beyond RC one or, well, RC one. To RC one, yeah. And I think when Anne's just sort of fully back in the game, you know, we definitely have to talk before maintainers about what to do at this point. You know. If there's some money left, then we could keep funding some grants. Right. Okay. I'm not sure where the RC candidate is and what may or may not need to be done there, right? Okay. Okay, any other lessons learned? I would echo what you said, Holly, about the camps. I think that talking to other camps after some of them found out what we were doing in Colorado, there was a general buzz of, wow, that's a great idea. We'd love to do that. I think we could have cleaned up, even if it was just a quarter of the gross profits or rather net profits or 10% of the net profits, especially if we were to do something like provide some kind of badge to the camps or something like that, so they could show their support. I think that that would be really, really positive positive direction. And I think provided there's a good mechanism next year, Colorado is gonna do it again. Awesome. So, Holly, just one last thought on this, sort of the number and the amount and all that. So I think whether it's great that we raised a quarter of a million but that if we raised a quarter of a million, we set it all in a time frame and we did it. And I think that's a win. And I think we definitely owe Karen a thanks for challenging our original number, which if you recall in January, in Chicago was or in Portland or wherever we were, was like we were trying to do, I think we set out to be exactly half that. That's right. And Karen was like, well, if you're gonna bother to do it, why not go bigger? And he was right. Like, I agree. Like, we probably would have spent just, it would take just as long, we would have spent just as much effort because we wouldn't have asked so many anchor donors. The DA wouldn't have matched as much. And so we would have taken this probably the same amount of effort and it would have gone to the same public process, whether it was 125 or 250. But in the case of 250, it was enough to get significant grants through, whereas 125 probably wouldn't have gotten us that far. So I think we picked the right number, whether that's too low for who we are and should be. I think it worked. I think it was the right number. Yeah. I would also declare success in big three. Oh, for sure. Yeah. I think it was definitely very successful. We had no idea what we could do and we did almost exactly what we set out to do. So we're not scared. Yeah. So just quickly again, things that didn't work, right, expecting, I think I had some expectation that we'd have more crowdfunding come in. And it happens, it's just not gonna be a significant portion of the fundraising total overall. And, you know, we really did not exploit the triple dot org as a channel at all and no one looks to ADO in comparison. Was that really intentionally we didn't do that? Because I wondered why we didn't do that. Well, part, yes. I mean, really it was about being concerned about, I think not really wanting to necessarily, it was a little bit about being able to go stealth with the campaign in the sense that, you know, I think we weren't really looking to elevate the attention to the kinds of conversations that we were already having around $250,000 is a pathetic number, it should be 2 million or it's sad that you have to do this at all, right? Like, and the latter we were on triple dot org about that campaign, the more we were gonna have to answer those kinds of issues, you know? So it didn't seem like we'd be getting positive payoff for doing that. I think now that we've done it once and we succeeded at raising the money in the future, we'd be in a better position to do it because we have a track record to point to and we can show how it benefited the project. Yeah, I mean, I think when you look at what Mozilla Foundation does and what Pidia does and so forth, they slap it right up at the top and they're unapologetic. And you know, this is a nonprofit, right? This is not unusual behavior for nonprofits to engage in. Yeah, we're running the membership campaign now so now there's also a precedent for that kind of banner takeover on the site, that sort of thing. So, we would just be in a different place with it, I think, in the future. Good, I think that's also a positive that's come out of it then. Yeah, like I said, it was actually really tough for international donors and they usually give it much smaller dollar amounts but you really want it to be a grassroots campaign, that's an important part and we don't want to exclude people so I would really consider that for next time. And also the exchange rate was a real bummer, like in terms of say, the Linux-Australian contribution, when they made that Australian dollar and the US dollar were at parity but by the time it got paid, it was a little less. Yeah. So that was kind of real sad. Then we had sads. And then we were just honest for nine months with the association, so that was tough because we were putting all of, we were trying to get all of our community's eyeballs on this for nine straight months and that was just a challenge when we had other things that we want people to look at and pay attention to also. So we might want to think about timeline in the future. Anything else on the change it side of things? Okay. So moving forward, I just think, you know, doing this in an ongoing way, like trying to fund core development forever is not a possibility the way we are today. I think, you know, we'll build capacity and expertise in fundraising as we go, but like expecting that we would do this sort of long term and continue to provide investments for core contribution is probably not a reality. And I think, you know, our time and resources are better spent trying to make contribution easier, whether that's through tooling or, you know, supporting mentors and camps and all that sort of community building activities that we can do, but we can run these really periodic campaigns. I think it was a good thing and we should do that and play a role in unblocking things. And I know that when triple eight development got going, there were a number of initiatives, for example, the CMI stuff, right, that needed funding to get it off the ground, right? And that's the kind of thing where I think we could step in and help those initiative leads or the core maintainers, you know, find eyeballs and audience for their needs and help them get that work done. But, you know, it'd be great to know what those were ahead of time so that we could plan for that work. And I think that was part of our execution difficulty was, you know, just inserting this into stuff that was already going on. It meant that like competing priorities, just competing priorities just didn't get dealt with because we had this thing that was ongoing forever. So that would help us. And of course, we needed leveragetruple.org a lot more if we were to do this in the future. I think it would help us find success a lot faster and that would be important because it's a long, hard blog. So, you know, in general, I think it's something that we should consider exploring as new initiatives or, you know, features for upcoming releases of Drupal need assistance, but not something that I think that we should bake into the association's programs forever more in an ongoing way. I will say that I'm really glad that we did this. I think it was a right thing to do. I do agree that this can't be something we do. And I think that we, more on the community side than on the DA side, need to see, think strategically about ways to prevent us getting in this situation again. And I think Dries has done that. And I think some of the changes that are already being made will help with that. But, you know, I was looking back at the mid-camp keynote and one of the slides had the projection for when DA would come out. And it was at that, the day we launched the campaign, it was February 26, 2016. And, you know, we will have helped it not be February 26 of 2016, but we won't have influenced it that much. And I actually think that what we saved us is from slipping a date even further than February. And I think that's pretty sobering. So, I'm glad we did it, but we really need to not let the project, you know, get in that place again more systemically. It can't be the DA funding whore to do that, so. Right. I'm glad to try it. I think we kicked off the meeting saying that the credits look promising. I think that's an area we could explore more. You know, we've only really touched the marketplace, so there are more things we can do to see if that's gonna help us. Ryan, a non-fundraising capacity. Yeah. We've already had some really good feedback about expanding who's contributed, expanding who we show as a contributor to be a wider group, including some of the big companies that are customers that are contributing back and those sorts of things, so. I think we've done all of these things from credits to occasional, you know, fundraising like this too. Yeah. For sure. I think we have to use all the levers, right? And we're just dipping our toe in the water with the marketplace stuff, you know, and there's so much more to be explored there, like making sure that we're incentivizing the kind of work that the community needs. I think it's wonderful as a baseline to reward the work that people want to do, right? That's open source through and through. But, you know, what we found at the end was that we needed to incentivize very, very specialized work that nobody wanted to do, you know, that was really tough and really specialized and really difficult. And we need to find ways to really use, we need to identify and then use all the levers we have to help the project be successful. Yeah, and we do have a lot of communication resource at our disposal, and so, you know, I very much want to have a more close working relationship with the core maintainers and the initiative leads so that, you know, they can say, hey, in three months I'm gonna kick off this thing and I need 50 people with this kind of experience and we can help go direct that work, right? Or direct people to that work, not direct to work. So, yeah, there's a lot more opportunity there for sure. But, you know, I also think this was a really great example of our convener role, right? We do it a lot with DrupalCon, but I think this was a really great demonstration of that part of our role. So I was really excited about it organizationally. Yeah. Another way to look at it is there's people that can contribute at time and that can translate and commit credits and then there's people that can contribute money, but that may not have time to contribute. So I think both of these things potentially reach a different kind of audience. Is there enough? So we'll keep this in our arsenal of things we can deploy when it's really strategically important. Sound good? Sounds like the strategies of a general, the way you said it. Do you use that arsenal as a weapon that you can deploy in theater? Yeah. Well, I don't confess that I've been obsessed with reading books about needy seals lately, so maybe that's why. Hey, Holly, I think we're kind of wrapped up on the ad accelerator. I wondered if we could have a quick update on the membership campaign. Yeah. Give me one second to pull up numbers. You may know by now that I can't remember anything ever. So we launched the membership campaign a week ago today in the afternoon and that, so it's been running for a full week now and the campaign consists of the banners that are on top of Drupal.org, every page, as well as some email follow-ups that are also going out at Drip Campaigns set up there. And the goal of the campaign is $100,000 and 1,000 new memberships. Started out with about 3,200 members. As of Monday morning, that's the last real stats I have for you, we had sold 186 memberships. 117 were new, so 69 were renewals. That was great because we have a lot of brand new memberships coming in from this and we sold a little over, so roughly $10,000 of that $100,000 goal so far. So it is a nice solid start. There is no, it wasn't like we put it up and there's a rush at the gate to buy memberships. But what we're seeing is basically 10 to 15 memberships every single day, which is way better than the 0 to 1 to 2 that we were seeing every day. So I crunched the numbers and it said, so there's a $100,000 goal but 1,000 members and 70 days to go to the end of the year, which is I think an average of 15 members a day will get us to that 1,000 goal. So it sounds like we're kind of tracking towards that. Yeah, it might be a little on the low side, but it's pretty strong and the fact is we set these goals, we had no context to understand what was actually possible, right? So we've just never done anything like it. So we're definitely learning a ton and we are also using it as an opportunity to experiment with calls to action and other kinds of things on the site so that when we launch other campaigns for other reasons, we know that green is the color, not gray and use this kind of language, not that kind of language and have the button in this kind of place. You know what I mean? Those things that just help us with the conversion. Awesome, thanks Holly. You bet. All right, anything else Holly on this topic? I don't think so. Is there any other questions that we wanna ask in the open session? If not, I think we should move to the executive session. Sounds good. Thanks for demeaning everybody for all of those listening. Thanks Ray. And yeah, we'll see each other on the other side.