 And the trend. Cool. And so Pete, oh, thank you. Yeah. How can we best set up newsletter information stream? Thank you. I appreciate that question a lot. I think the main thing is if we go to the if we go to the inbox document and write up whatever we know about OGM, at least, it would be super helpful. Which inbox document do you mean? There's a document where I kind of this one. Oh, good. I'd miss that one somehow. Cool. Google Doc. So especially I can't believe that Google Doc doesn't have line numbers. But anyway, one of the first things we can talk about conversations, we can talk about, I don't know. Now you and I created a page on OGM, actually on the OGM website for current projects. Which I was showing Stacy yesterday. Do we want to ignore that? Or do we want to post to it in some way here? Or what's possible? I, let's see, let me find that page. Now, that's clearly open global line projects because it's under the OGM umbrella on the OGM website. And you're publishing mostly about the flotilla, I think. No, this is supposed to be whatever. Well, by flotilla, I mean the various allied groups. Well, yeah. So if you look down, the pretty guys you folks have got actually, I think, a really good update. So, you know, there should be an OGM section basically in OGM. Here's what's going on with OGM. Does that make sense? Yeah, that's kind of what I mean. So then I don't see the not current projects. Cool. I'm not going to copy over Chove. So here's what's on the current projects. And if we can fill this out, that would be fun. Flotilla, we've already got two. So I think maybe we can say something about build OGM. I don't know. The conversations thing is something that is kind of new in the past couple of weeks. And most, you know, not everybody would know about, if you weren't in the mailing list, you wouldn't know about the conversations going on there. This is also an opportunity to kind of stood the conversations to Mademois channel as if we want to, we could set those up now actually. Which has not worked at all, has it? Like our request to shift the conversation over to Mademois, just... Well, we, well, it's different. We haven't really requested it. So I think we talked about setting up a maybe a money and value channel. And we talked about maybe setting up a different one, which I thought was the Civil War. I don't know if that was, but anyway, I don't think we set up channels for this. I don't think we directed channel, directed people specifically to a channel. Specifically into the topics. We haven't, we haven't killed the mailing list, but I know that happened to do that. I just want to say something about the Civil War thing, because I think what's happening is what there was something within the Civil War thread that happened to be what Sam Rose was talking about. And I think that so those two conversations are getting confused into, you know, because it's called Civil War, but that particular conversation that led to a pop-up call wasn't about the Civil War. And when I typed Civil War into the, into the stock, it was a couple of weeks ago, and we could have to go or something like that. And we, I, I, the Civil War, Civil War conversation has kind of stalled out, I would say probably. And we could replace that with the sense making conversation. Well, that, that's where I created the Sense Doing Channel on Mattermost and said, hey, let's carry it over here. And that, that's the fail I'm referring to. Is that no, like, pretty much nobody went over there. Actually, Kevin made a couple posts over there in the channel. And then Johan apparently stalled trying to build a Mattermost ID and just log in to the server, which is now fixed. So thank you for that. So, so if, if we wanted the conversation to move, then just a quiet request isn't good enough, right? We'd have to have a barn raising thing, you know, probably email individual people directly and say, you know, can you move over to Mattermost? And then you, and then on the mailing list, you can, you know, once the conversation is going a little bit on the, on the channel, you can go to the mailing list and say, hey, look, this is what we've just talked about. You're missing, you know, this stuff. But also, I think copying the mailing list and pasting it in to the Mattermost, it might be helpful, because then it's like, hey, look, we just copied everything we've said here, and it's over there. Keep going over there. And then probably, in addition to what you just said, giving everybody a little bump when they post on this topic back to the mailing list and say, it's over there. Okay. And should there be a different channel for the money conversation, which we haven't set up? It depends on, let me look at Mattermost real quick. And maybe I'll show my screen while I do that. It depends. It depends how much we feel like we can support, you know, if it's, if it's, if it's a conversation that, that's kind of a small conversation and time bound, then, then I'm not sure I would make a separate, separate channel for it. If it's going to be, if we're going to pump energy into, into the channel, and it's going to be an ongoing conversation, then, yeah, it makes sense to do it. I've got, for what it's worth, Rob, Rob and I are starting to talk a little bit about reorganizing a bit. Mostly actually to Rob's idea was to use the prefix, the prefixes for more things to organize, to organize this better, the list of things that aren't prefixed. I've got, I've got a really good post for a money channel. So if OGM doesn't want to start a money channel, I think I probably would for CSC, basically. And then OGM could have a money conversation in that channel if it wanted to. Another thing that has gone on is that we've got a bunch of channels that are not, not well used. And so Rob's observation was, you know, my sidebar is getting long. And part of that is just channels that, that, you know, got started, but haven't really, really thrived. And I, I think maybe we should start trimming those and, you know, so I guess it's not OGM's responsibility to do, do the rest of those channels. But foreign beat reporting should go away, probably co-coaching maybe go away, or we should try to revive it. Partly if, if, if Mademois had a feature that said show me, don't show me, don't show me channels that haven't had any activity in the last two months. If it's just had a feature like that, we wouldn't have to worry about this because the things would sort of naturally sunset themselves. And then every now and then you could browse the wall. Yeah. A newer version of the mobile one already does this, a new version of Mademois will sort. Right, which is how, which is how I catch up, which is how I catch up. There's, there's just, you know, there's, there are channels that just don't need to exist. Like foreign beat reporting as well. Yeah. I guess I haven't really thought about, about archiving news or whatever, but, you know, I think it's hard for me to say that there should be an OGM Wiki channel. The Outreach channel is, you know, the Welcome Wiki channel. You know, there's just channels that there's, there's no reason for them to be around, basically. So even if they were sorted someplace, you know, it's, it's just cruft. So on the money conversation, it feels to me like there's sort of at least two conversations there. One was the broader umbrella, one was Grace's specific project. I invited Grace to create her own channel around the project, which feels like a good idea. But I don't know that she's comfortable in the matter most chats yet. And she hasn't taken us up on that. But we could ask and figure out if she'd like to do that because that feels like a good place to coordinate what she's trying to get done. Go ahead, Stacy. The sense I got from her is just that she was really busy right now and she needed a few weeks, but she was interested. I think she was interested. Cool. And then, and then the other one feels to me like a really big, broad conversation that cuts across our different projects and maybe doesn't need to be held in any one of the entities about money, value, wealth, abundance, all those kinds of things. And it's like, I think there's, there's a rich conversation there that certainly like is channel sized. So maybe we start one for that. And then say, hey, Grace, ping whenever you want and we'll help you start your own project channel. But for now, let's take this conversation over there. Does that make sense? I would, it does make sense. To start that second channel, I think I would, or the other channel, I think I would ping some of the usual suspects and ask them if they would participate or not. So creating a channel out of whole cloth and then hoping people attend is we don't, we don't have the, we don't have the kind of the volume that makes that happen. So the thing to do is to construct the channel a little bit socially and then launch it if we can construct it socially. Which we could also do by picking a topic and making a call around it and saying, okay, here, we're going to do this and curate it and guide that conversation over onto the channel, et cetera, et cetera. That would be one, one thing that would help. That would definitely help. It's important to get personal commitments from at least a few people or maybe commitment is even too strong of a word. But instead of having a thing that says, here's a discussion we're having and here's a place where we could have it. That's not enough to draw the link, right? Here's a discussion we're having and here I've asked three or four or five or six people, I'm going to make a discussion. Can you be posting it this week? I'm going to make a channel. If we start having conversations here, would you attend? Would you push things? Would you bring up stuff? And making it personal, making it a personal ask rather than a group ask that nobody feels, everybody feels like somebody else is going to be making, you know, making stuff. Let me ask the question backwards. Aside from coffee shop type, whatever, you know, anything goes kind of channels, which are the most successful channels right now in your eyes? The weirdest thing, I'm very super pleased, but I'm super surprised off topic. It's got the most people in it. And it's probably got a large amount of traffic. But off topic and town square and coffee shop are all sort of similar. Right. Of the focus channels, are there any that are actually thriving? Because maybe this community just doesn't use this medium in that way. That's what I'm wondering. Yeah, the, well, it's almost a different thing, right? So any community conversation social stuff is long tail. Preto, what's the best word for that? So there are one or two people who are the anchor posters. Right. And then, you know, it trails off from there. If you don't have an anchor poster, the rest of the people won't think about posting into it. If you do have an anchor poster, you get people that post along because, oh, it looks like there's activity here. So I used to see my screen, right? Yeah. The green bar is one away for some reason. So that whole anchor poster thing is leading up to, so Block Cheney has got some reasonable stuff. Books is new, actually, I think by Rob. Game based sense making, Jack's doing anchor posting, I think, and it's got some, you know, some traffic. And Stacey, that might be interesting for you for the idea you were suggesting at the beginning of this call too. I didn't even know it was there. Yeah. Mass mapping is active. And there's a, this one is kind of interesting. I think there's, it's not quite, it's got enough, it's got enough volume from a few people that it's kind of self-sustaining that tools and technology is a really good, that's an active one. And then for their, I'm the anchor poster, tools and technology is a good example of, of an active channel. Didn't even know there was UX of knowledge. Yeah, I think this is fairly new. And I don't think it's got, it doesn't, yeah, it doesn't have critical mass at all. So, so, so instead of saying, I think this community is there, you know, maybe this community doesn't, doesn't converse that way. The way I, the way I look at it, we haven't, we haven't set up the conditions for the community to use, use any of the channels well. I mean, it's just sort of, you know, natural traffic or whatever. And well, some people like Jack Park is really active in a bunch of places on it. Rob is active. Charles has sort of come back in and is posting and, you know, he's not, he's not in our zooms, but he's on the, on the Mattermost. There's a few people who kind of like it and frequented and bounce around to that. But as a community, we're not using it that well. And I just, what's going on here? I just restarted Mattermost because I rebooted my machine last night and it's only showing me like one channel. That's weird. I, I had a weird thing the other day, last week or something like that where it was, it was really confused and I actually uninstalled the app and reinstalled it. Really? Yeah. Cause I'm, I'm, I'm only coming back up into free jury's brain, which was the last channel I had active. Everything else is gone. My direct message history is gone. Everything's gone. Yeah. Are you using the app? Yeah. I don't know what that is, but I would uninstall it and reinstall it. Okay. I'm just going to restart it and see if that helps at all. You can also hit it on the web browser if you want to see what's going on. Yeah. Wow. That's weird. So Pete, I think you're absolutely right about the anchor posters. And I'm, I'm just wondering if we had again a conversation because we have people that like to talk about which channels to even have. Like I'm just thinking like with kids, when you want to get them to eat, you help, you have them make the meal. I'm just wondering if we spoke to those main people that are putting all the posts and the emails and we said to them, what channels do you think that we should, you know, divide into and would you be committed to, you know, at least get two people for each channel to, to like sort of monitor it. That might be a good idea. I like that idea, except I think I would make it even simpler than that. And to use the kid, kid eating analogy, we learned with our first kid that asking, asking them what do you want to eat wasn't, wasn't a good question. It was, do you want to eat pizza or, or noodles today and force the question, right? There's one difference. Kids have to eat. People don't necessarily have to take the responsibility for posting. So, so I wouldn't even have the conversation about what channels do you think we should have. What I would say is, hey, we've got a conversation, we think there's a nascent conversation about value and money. It seems like we've had some success with that. Would you post to a channel called OGM value, value, money and value? So don't even say which channels do you think because that's a big universe of possibility, right? It's like just a binary thing. So how about, how about which ones might you want to help take responsibility for? Yeah, that's okay. I would simplify it even to that from that, you know, it's like a binary choice. There's a value, money and value channel waiting to happen. Are you in? And then if, if we get no, even if we get crickets, then it's like, okay, build OGM call next week is brainstorming three more choices and we narrow it down to one. Would you post in a, in a conversation about soil health, would you post? Actually, the other thing is we've got some generative comments that is a place where we've got a little cul-de-sac that we built that nobody, nobody attends, right? So we should also try to fill in conversations we think we want to have that we've kind of gotten started and, you know. And where is, I'm sorry, I kind of, where is that place where we would put in conversations that we want to have? In the build OGM channel. I think I, to the, to the general population, I would ask a binary question. We're starting money and values, you know, are you interested? And, and then I wouldn't ask that in plenary until I've asked personally and gotten a positive answer from a couple of people, right? Right, got it. So, so then if nobody rises to the bait on money and values, then next week build OGM the channel and gets to talk about, you know, okay, I guess either we either we need to double down on our outreach or we need to kill that idea and come up with the next one, which is social justice and, you know, and, and global equity or something like that, you know, whatever, right? Is there a channel just for collaboration, just for information regarding collaborations? What kind of collaborations? Anything like just, you know, getting, you know, any kind of information about getting communities to work better together, any channel related to that? Tools and technology, oddly enough, is, is pretty good at that. So Tilla does some of that too. Okay, I kind of dropped something in the new sense doing channel. Yeah. So maybe in this conversation, what we've come to, come to is that OGM is kind of meh on, on Manamos in general. Maybe it's a good, like, place for people to belong to so they get announcements and stuff. And maybe, well, the way I think of it is we haven't done enough to foster conversations here. But another way to think of it is that OGM, however it's set up, you know, doesn't, doesn't want to have conversations here. So I really, I really like the Manamos server. I think that we've had multiple really interesting conversations there, but they kind of, you know, spark and die. And we don't, and we have a few people who are stalwarts, but not really the community over here talking. And I'd love to do that, to have us like over here, rather than over on the, on the Google group. And I don't, and I, to make that happen, we have to facilitate it. Yes, exactly. And one alternative also is to like kill the group group. And I just don't really want to do that. But that means we have to light a fire over here and get people over by the bonfire. So instead of, instead of a topic based thing, maybe we could start building volume in an OGM general channel. So I think calls should get renamed to something like general. However, if we, you know, we want to language that and then, and then we could actually even do money value conversations in the general channel. I think the facilitation team would want to have kind of a public topic, topics calendar. And purposely, you know, purposely start conversation there. And, and again, drag people into it by the lapel and say, okay, this week, we're going to talk about, you know, since string, we already have a channel for. So I guess we would have that conversation there. But maybe if a topic comes up, a new topic comes up on the mailing list, then, you know, drag that person, the main person over and plop them down in the general channel. And then announce the fact that it's moving. So should I start an email or should one of us start an email right now to six people asking about money and value? Um, I think maybe, um, I think, let me share again, to keep bouncing back and forth. Or should we ask, should we invite the six or eight people we think have been most active on matter most and like it the most and contribute the most and have a strategizing call with them and say, Hey, here's, I like that. Yeah. I don't, I don't, except I don't think we need to um, there's a little bit of analysis by paralysis there. Um, we did three of us or quorum for doing, you know, deciding what and I'm thinking that it's the same thing as the email asking them, Hey, would you participate if it were called this that like, if it's going to, you know, we could send an email and wait for responses or we could just say, Hey, let's, let's get together. Here's what we're thinking. That's all I'm thinking. Um, so I like the idea of sending email. Um, another, another, another proposal I've got is to take the calls channel and call it the anchor channel. Um, and then rename it to something better than calls. This section, this channel actually has, you know, a decent number of people and it gets decent traffic. Um, and people know it's here. So we name this to OGM main. Yeah, something like that. Um, let's see, CTA actually had a general discussion. That's a really good one. Anyway, yep. Yeah, I just want to say I think the reason that people, and we should ask, but I think the reason that that has a lot of things that people go there to look at the recordings of the calls. Yes. And, um, we purposely, uh, Jerry did a human's job for, um, for a couple months saying, okay, um, please stop talking in the zoom chat and go to this channel, this particular channel. Um, so we, you know, and that's one of the reasons we've got 74 people in here and one of the reasons people keep coming back to it. It's partly for the, the call posting for me actually partly it's because the link is here. Um, but it's also because we push people here a lot. Um, so we need to rename this main or general discussion or whatever. Um, and then have the money conversation start here and then if it gets critical mass and needs to be spun out to its own channel, we do that. Um, but we might want to market this channel by having the money value conversation here rather than starting a separate money and values channel. I kind of like that, but I kind of don't because I sort of, um, it would swamp, you know, it would, it would kind of push out people having other conversations. Right. Right. Um, and, and in a strange way that channel now serves as the archive for the videos and the chat files and whatever else if somebody wants to find them. And that would, that would actually get harder to do if it was, if this was an active channel about some other topic. Um, go ahead. What about if it was like, you know, build is after the call. So you go there to watch the call and then you could talk about the call there and then you see what conversations come out. But like, you know, there would be the, you know, you would, you're expecting to go there to talk about the call. So it's there, the zoom link is there and any conversation you want to have it. It's a good idea that the promise, the, the calls are like a different modality. So when people leave the call, they don't think they want to discuss it more. They're like, it's like after Thanksgiving, right? Wow, that was amazing. And but I'm going to, and I want to ask Jerry if he feels the same way, because I know you feel that way, but I think there are a lot of people that really, I mean, that really want to go back to the fall. I mean, Jerry, how do you feel? And I like the idea a lot of the conversation continuing in the channel. So I mean, I'm, and I think a bunch of people still have ideas after the calls. They're like, no, no, no, this thing didn't feel right. What about this? I mean, so maybe a way to do the transition is to start the like screen share manner most. It's like, okay, we've had some amazing stuff about blah, and get a couple posts going so that people can see it. Instead of, you know, there's a big face shift in the modality, right? People are like all jazzed and they're seeing all the faces and stuff like that. It's like, oh, this is amazing. It's really different to go, okay, now I'm going to go over to this thing where there's no faces. There's, you know, there's, there's no voice. There's, so at least getting the, I think getting the conversation starting to move over during the call, pick a topic at the end of the call, do like a 90 second or two minute screen share, you know. So, oh look, Pete's already posted something and Stacy's already posted something. Let's keep it going over here. So, so a couple different things. One, trying to get people to use matter most again during the calls instead of the chat. The only way I see that actually working really well is if Zoom had a feature that lets you swap out the Zoom chat for your favorite chat on some other server, in which case it would just show up in the interface and we'd be, we'd be gold. Short of that, I don't know that we're going to be able to shepherd people over to the call, the chat during the call. I think we did a good job of it before. I think we tried really hard and it was just like hard. I think we gave up. Well, I think because it was like hard to keep shepherding. Like, you know, the dogs had to keep pounding the sheep. Or yeah, of course it's hard. That's, you know, but that's. But do you think that would be worth the effort? Oh yeah. Okay. And then the second thing is really, there's three or four people who've been posting a bunch lately about whether it's money or the civil war topic or whatever else. If we get, if we just stay on those couple of people to go post on the channels, that moves the conversation. You just get the frequent posters to move and the conversation has to move. And that's, that's Kevin and Ken Homer and a couple of the people. So. Gil, maybe Grace. Right. Right. So we just, we just like address them and say, hey dudes, we really want this thrive over here. That'll work. I have a matter of observation. One part of me is going, is, is, is, I was racially going, crap, we're not doing the inbox document at all. The other part of me is going, yay, this is what, this is what the violent community dispatch is supposed to do. It's supposed to drive these, you know, drive the facilitators of the communities to go, crap, I don't want to think about this. But I guess I am right. So it's, it's the, the plex dispatch is doing its job, even though we're not talking about it at all. I'm cool. And we can go back to that. And also, I'm being a little cranky about stewarding people over to the matamos chat during calls only because, only because it didn't seem to stick that well. Not that I wouldn't love that to happen. I happen to think Jerry's right, because there are two different kinds of personalities. So yes, I know you think Pete that, and there will be people that will do it, but there will be other people that are more like the way Jerry and I think. I totally agree. There's two different kinds of personalities. My, can I just add one? I just want to say something because you mentioned before about seeing the faces. So here's my point. If there is an after conversation, people going there are going to first be the same people that were in the call. So it is almost a continuation of seeing those faces. And maybe even a second call will be planned within that area. So it is a blend of the two approaches. Michael, a channel, a channel is probably only going to be as good as the people who are in there posting. So sorry. So yes, Stacy, you're totally right. There are two different kinds of people. And my point is that unless you show the people who are never going to come to Mattermost that there's something happening in Mattermost, they're really never going to come. So my, and Jerry, I get it. It's totally fine to be cranky about that. We collectively haven't put enough work into facilitating moving, shepherding conversations. And when it feels hard, that's not because we should give up. When it feels hard, that means that we should maybe talk about why it feels hard or maybe sometimes just double down and do it. Facilitating is hard work. It's not, it's helping people do things that feel not natural. Like in-person facilitation when you're in a room, it's like the facilitator is bugging us again. All I want to do is have a cocktail party. And the facilitator is trying to get some, to form the cocktail party into a world cafe or something because, and at some point, the reason people nowadays will, back in the before times when we actually had in-person things, the reason people will sit still for a facilitator and do world cafe is not because world cafe is a natural thing. It's because they've done it a couple of times before and the rest of the community is doing it around them if they haven't done it before. And everybody knows that the world cafe is going to be a productive and generative discussion. Even though it's like, all I really wanted to do is come and gossip. I don't know, but when the whole herd moves over to world cafe, it's like, okay, let's do it. And then afterwards, everyone goes, wow, that was super generative and super productive. It's the same thing. We don't have a, we don't have a culture of people understanding you and why you would chat in Manamos, right? So if we just observe that people don't chat in Manamos and follow that, then we're never going to build the muscle memory and the culture and the memories of positive things that means that, oh, I want to have a conversation and I'm going to go to Manamos because it was fun last time, right? We just don't do that yet and I think we should. And we could. Michael, two things. One, your image is coming through really crisper than usual and you are well lit. You're like, the quality of your inbound is like bumped up. Have you done something with your place or with your gear? That's some work done. Yeah, actually, I do have a better light on and that's probably the difference. And that's it? Like because you're fed up? I mean, I'm in a different place than I often am. But this is a place I've been before without you saying that and what is different here is the fact that I've got a better lighting. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Sweet, well done. And then the second thing was a question. I think you were in our OGM Thursday calls when we were pushing sort of trying to hold the chat over on Mattermost, correct? Yeah, yeah. And I was just I was actually just typing into chat, you know, if we're talking about fostering Mattermost over Zoom chat and perhaps over email and other disparate things, I was sort of sorry as somebody who like at first grudgingly because it seemed unnatural, but then, you know, more in a more satisfied way, went over to Mattermost and tried to be in Mattermost, but then the floodgates opened in Zoom chat and that turned into the place to be. And, you know, I don't go to Mattermost anymore. I mean, during a call. And I it's not because I don't wish that were the case. It's just because that's not what the conversation is. Yeah, that's not where the conversation is. And and you I think you and everybody were more concerted about, hey, the chat's not here, you know, just posting that and pushing people over to Mattermost. And I know some people just refuse to go. But What's the value in having the chat in Mattermost or does it not? Totally. No, I thought it was better because, you know, it allows you to attach images and links and those good things. It keeps it persistent. It allows it to go on beyond the end of the call. It allows you to immediately read back if you mean I mean, there's everything. Everything is better about it, honestly, except that it's another window, except that it's another window. But even that is sort of an advantage because I'm so trying to work out not having share screen hijack my zoom into full screen, which I think I did manage to do in one browser and then walk. Yeah, I found a trick where if you right click over the arrows that over the widgets to give you screen thing, you can do split screen right. And what I was doing was I was splitting the screen between Mattermost on the right and zoom on the left. And that worked out pretty well because then I had a then I had a big Mattermost chat and I could still see everybody in the tiles and gallery view. Yeah, the only problem is like making anything out when the screen is being shared, you know, you it's too small. Yeah, meet as a horizontal image in a vertical pane. But yeah. But anyway, aside from that minor drawback, I did think there was value in Mattermost. And beyond the immediate value, like, you know, getting everybody in Mattermost and with its capacity for, you know, asynchronous direct messaging and, you know, searchability. I mean, it's not quite slack, but it's pretty good. And then certainly zoom chat is so ephemeral, you know, and I save the chats, but like I barely have the energy to go back through them to find the stuff that I think very few people go back and consult them. Okay, so an easy thing to do is to make another effort to move the chats during the calls over to zoom. The second thing to do I think is to, I think we create a money conversation channel, money and value or something like that, just let's go create it. And then let's go take the three or four instigators on that thread on the Google group and say, Hey, there's a nice new fresh plot of grass for you. It's yummy grass. It's really good. It's tasty. We planted like special tasty grass and carry it over there. And then come back into the group and say, Hey, everybody, there's like good stuff happening over here. Come follow us, etc. So let's do a little architecting. And then maybe a fourth thing is going back to our moderator group and saying, Hey, can you help us? What do you think? What else should we do? How's this working? Yep, sounds right. I have one question about the Google group, which I have just, I don't know. I'm sure Pete, you were the one to like notice, Hey, there's a new application for being in the OGM or the discourse. Yeah, the forum. The forum. I just joined the forum. Maybe I was auto responded to, but I figured I thought maybe somebody saw, Oh, God, we've got our first new membership and, you know, over many years. But I was looking around there and, you know, I know that Pete, you said it wasn't a valid force of action to like keep it there. I are privately because of privacy issues and all the work that we're doing. So that, yeah, I mean, Stacey, it is being closed down. And I was just like, you know, it's that that sounds like a crossfire. We're going to keep it the the information. We're not going to. Oh, okay. It'll be we don't like there's no privacy stuff. That's that's a problem. Okay. Okay. It's just going to be static. Okay. Okay. It's still viewable. Yeah. My, well, my question is only partially moved. I mean, the other thing I was, I was wondering about was, and this gets into the conversation that Pete, we were having in CTA context about chat slash communication in which every message was a file, which I also might have partially misunderstood. I'm not sure. But that is very interesting to me in the context of like these forum posts and, you know, ones that would be, you know, there are posts that are something like, you know, what he said, you know, or what she said that nobody's going to look for. But there are long essay posts that are valuable in a sort of knowledge graph of, you know, okay, this is weaves together this subject and this subject and it's worth finding and having that exist in whether it's, you know, factor, trove, massive wiki, you know, some connectable, taggable context is something, you know, and I don't mean to say or, I mean, and ideally, you know, and Jerry's brain, you know, I'm wondering about like if there's any way to export posts en masse as objects to be. The forum posts, you know, you could more or less do that with a forum post. Like just as a URL, as a link. You could do it as a link. Yeah, if to take massive wiki for an example, I would actually copy the whole post over as well and then put a link to the original so that you could find the thread and stuff like that. Vincent might do that with trove too. In fact, or you could do that too, Yeah, I mean, it would be manual unless there was, you know, an OSS. Yeah, I think there isn't any automation that does that, but it's, you're totally right. And that was kind of, there was some intent to do that a little bit with the wiki, to use the wiki as a place, OGM wiki, to use the wiki as a place where you would construct, you know, since make the stuff that's turning over in the forum into something a little bit more the funny thing is, the forum is actually already kind of it ends up being an archive of good stuff pretty much. So it would be another good way to do it would be to have a post or a thread, I forget what you call it, a thread on OGM forum, best stuff, right? You know, here's Stefan talking about, you know, whatever Stefan talked about, and here's, you know, Rob talking about, you know, so, yeah, the other, the other, you started that with, I've got a question, and I think I'm going to have to build it. I've got need for, we've got need for things more metamaskized as individual files. And that's going to be a good thing to use in massive wiki with syncing. And that's why that's coming up. But it's interesting to talk about those things kind of together because the way Bill and I are starting to use massive wiki, we, you know, it's, we don't have the git cycle, it just flows, you know, you just do the massive wiki and it and it flows. So grabbing stuff like this post off of the forum and putting them in a wiki and then having that kind of filter around the network of wikis that are connected together is, is kind of a thing that could happen. And I mean, I think, sorry, Jerry, we'll get to you. All right. It's fun to see you in the role of thing that I would love to crack is that, you know, figuring out a way for massive wiki and trove and factor and to like, if you're adding a tag in one interoperate to the extent that it like can help people find stuff in another because the tag appends there, which I know is a tall order and I have no technical knowledge of how that can come. One way to start it is for somebody to stamp a UID on that post unique identifier of some kind and then as it floats around, you know, trove could have or a factor or a massive wiki could publish a thing or it's like, okay, we've just added, you know, the tag energy policy to UID, whatever. And then it's a good idea. I can't believe that we, like we, you know, the Web 2 community did a bunch of this work of syndicating information and, you know, doing kind of that kind of stuff and it's all like ancient history now. And then of course, before that, there was like Usenet and and that was doing a bunch of that work that now we just don't even know about and, you know, we don't pick up the technology. It's really weird how that happens. Jerry. Oh, thanks. So several things. And I've got a bounce at the top of the hour to a different call. One of my longtime frustrations, one of the inspiration, motivating forces for OGM is I've been on way too many private mailing lists where brilliant things get written and float on by and they go into the bit bucket because it's a private mailing list that's not searchable by Google. And I created a policy I didn't promote way back when for Wrex, which was, hey, let's post outside in, which means if you're about to have a really nice idea, don't write the whole idea in the damn email and send it to this private mailing list, go make a blog post or whatever the present technology is of that time and then send us a link to that thing. And then we can have the conversation in semi-public and that benefits you, that benefits everybody, gets the idea, et cetera. I didn't really promote the idea of post outside in and nobody much does that, although a bunch of people are busy writing posts and all that kind of stuff. So that's one of my frustrations. So given that occasionally a bright little nugget floats by in the stream, I not infrequently will copy that nugget and then post it on a private thought in my brain that says Michael's thoughts about sense making, right? And I'll just put it under you and I might connect it to the call where it occurred and then I'll paste the text that went by into the notes field of that thought in my brain and that's just like, it dies in obscurity in my brain, but I'm busy trying to curate those and bring them out. Then another, an aspect of what we've been trying to do in our GM is try to separate the data layer away from the apps so that as anybody's busy tagging, curating, improving some node, it's better for everybody and it's improved for everybody and we can all just kind of point to it and refer to it and the curation just happens in whatever tool anybody happened to use. That's a nice idea, but it doesn't really work yet. In principle, it's one of the reasons why I think markdown is interesting and why Pete is sort of over, you know, using markdown as a foundational structure for massive wiki, et cetera, et cetera. But we don't have like meta data layered on top of that properly and like we fail at it, it's more complicated than just, hey, there's a bunch of markdown files over there. And then also we're busy drowning in flows and we don't have enough stocks. And then there's this whole conversation about, okay, so what should the stock look like? What does the big fungus look like? What is this scaffolding or infrastructure for the long-term shared memory? In particular, when we're using a variety of exotic tools, more or less, to curate and to create these nuggets of memory, right? And we don't have that question answered really well either, but it's a really nice and dearing question that, you know, that if we manage to separate the data from the tools, I think that answer gets better somehow. I think that having a healthy layer of soil, of data as soil alone, is maybe metaphorically closer to the big fungus and also like maybe a place to aim. So for me, like I'm in frustration, I'm busy curating those nuggets when I see a good one float by, I'm like, damn, I got to capture that and put it someplace where I'll find it. And hopefully somebody else will also find it here too. But if that were an easier way to do that in common, that would be fantastic. And last thing I want to say was, in some sense, this is like live crabbing of good conversations, whether they're happening live in the zoom and in the chat, or whether they're happening on some mailing list or whatever, but you know, the active crabbing or context weaving or whatever we call it, is this and we should all more of us should be busy being practitioners of that in a way that is easily shared. Yeah. I love that, Michael. And I'd like to put that matter most, but I don't see a matter most chat for this call. So there is a build out here. Yeah, but I looked and saw that it was not called yet. So I'll stick it in there anyway, out of context. Yeah. And I must bounce. I'm happy to leave the call open or we can we can fold anyone. Let's fold. Okay. Yeah, I got to my doorbell anyway. So cool. Oh, wait, wait, wait, one thing, one thing. You can turn off the recording if you want. But I got seven responses to what I asked you guys for. However, and I don't know, well, two people, well, yeah, that's another thing. Two people though, didn't fill out all nine. And I really need all nine. The other thing is, I don't know if two of you are some of the people I know I have Wendy and Ken. Yeah, I did. And well, I don't want to know if you did nine or how many he's going to go. Yeah, I gotta go. Go ahead, Jer. I'm sorry. But anyway, yeah, how do I so okay, I just want you to know so you put something there. If you're one of the people that didn't put nine, I'm going to ask that you please do that. Michael's gone. So I can't ask him. He's going to come back to answer my door. And I did answer and I did answer all nine. Okay. And you didn't have to tell me that because I don't want to be able to figure out, but I really want. So how do I? Okay, so I know you sent out that email already. Just send it out again. The one that says, by the way, we have Pete, we have Michael, we have Ken, we have Wendy, we have me, we have Jerry, there's one more person that I'll just put the list up. Okay, I know what to do now. Cool. Thank you. All right, I'll see you at one. Well, my time one. Sounds good. Bye.