 This is the bill, the OGM call for Tuesday, July 27th, 2021. Pete kindly created an agenda. And HackMD. I'll put the link here. I feel a little bit embarrassed or self conscious of maybe about. Sometimes I create the agenda and it's so that other people can populate it. This time I created the agenda. So because there were a bunch of things that I thought would be useful for OGM to talk about. But they're, I'm coming in with them. So. Sounds great. And I think they're a fine place to start. I looked at them and I added an item at the end in case we have time left. I saw. And let me. I'll share my screen and show off that agenda. Or set of topics really. I wanted. I wanted. The folks on the call to kind of talk through the different topics and then make the actual agenda. So. Or, you know, just the second item on the set of topics. Yes. I will keep sharing this. Yeah. I will keep sharing this, but let's let me know if. If we'd rather see faces than. But pixels. Cool. And are you comfortable with the hack MD and the. Split screen display that that's showing and all that kind of stuff. Good. And different. Sounds great. Hey, Phil. Good. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. So we've got enough people here. That maybe I'll drop this. Or maybe I won't. I don't know. Hey, class. Right. We were just kind of starting check-ins. Yeah. I'll just buy by way of checking in. I'll, I'll just jump in. I'm in kind of a strange place where. Part of me is sort of frustrated for the way things are going and my own slowness on some stuff and so forth. And then part of me is really excited because. Every kind of every important conversation I have around these topics seems to crystallize the ideas better and manifest them better. And. I'm looking forward more and more to where this is all going. So, so there we go. I'll go maybe. So I'm, I'm super excited. Lots of good stuff happening. And I have been. Working on the food sovereign some and feel super productive. I've got other other people I'm working with on other things. Everything is going well. So that's the good news. Bad news is Jerry and I were in a meeting yesterday with one of our. One of the people who works on climate and he said, so new paper out. I've been reviewing it for two or three or four days, something like that. And I can't make it not make sense. And this guy says we're inevitably headed to 3.5 degrees. Like you, he could not figure out a way around it. So. That was really sobering news. Really. Unhappy news. And then, of course. I've been watching Delta. Kind of go from, you know, something that we weren't worrying about at all to something that we're starting to understand how bad it is, except that I'm about two or three or four weeks ahead of in the information curve. And every day, pretty much. I'm seeing stuff about Delta being super, super, super scary. And then watching the rest of the country going. It's very gently starting to wake up and go, oh, it's maybe if we should something, something we should worry about. So it's a weird time to. To watch it yet another train wreck in motion. And just scary and unhappy and things like that. So, so right into that, I think I'm, I don't want to do this. And yet I think I must. I'm thinking about convening a one hour weekly call, at least for. Until the peak starts to. Subside about just processing. All the, you know, anecdotes and science and stuff like that. That we should. That more people shouldn't know about to try to speed that process up. That sounds like a great idea, Pete. And would you also like to strategize about possible ways of upping the vaccine rate, or is this mostly a tracking and understanding kind of call your proposal. It's a really good question. I'm going to drop the share because I think I know if it's a It's a really good question. I'm going to drop the share because I think I know if this is or are in that. It's a really good question. I, I, I, it's funny. I don't want to spend the time on it. And so. And so when I think about that call, it's like, how can I make it the shortest, most effective, most, you know, because it's like, okay, so what the call I really want is just kind of what happens in Corona wisdom in the, in the channel in matter most is like, and, and also maybe a virgin emergent events that's making. Let's do some, you know, let's go around the room. Let's talk about the three things that I've read today that I I've heard about that are super important. Are we, are we all on the same page? Do we know about those things, you know, and I would pick up two or three things from some, some of the things that I've heard about those things, some of the things that I've heard about the calls and let's make a wickier or a set of Google docs or whatever. And poof, we're done with the call. So around that call is a whole another set of things. Right. How can we get more of X vaccination happening? How can we get more? How can we get more vaccination around the world happening? You know, what do I do about my kids? What do I do about my workplace? What do I do about, you know, disinformation? Yada, yada, yada, right? That's what I do. I take my time. I take my time to talk about that. You know, I spend like, like, I spend like, like about 50 hours a week trying to solve just that, right? And it's not what I want to do. I want to do, like, you know, at most for me, an hour call. How do you, how do you deal with the fact? How do you have a, how do you deal with the psychological fact that you're, you're in trauma. Everyone else is in trauma. And together we're, you know, need to move forward. You know, that's another hour call at least, right? Every week. I mean basically, not to oversimplify, but dealing with trauma and dealing with stress are both, they start with self-awareness and other awareness. And those are not hard concepts to understand, they may be hard concepts to learn and practice, but in each circumstance, when I've been trying to do this actively with groups ever since COVID started a year and a half ago, and it ends up taking some time from the standpoint that one-on-one, it's sort of, how are you doing? And then you patiently listen to how they're doing. And then you acknowledge and reinforce, well, it sounds like you're having a really tough time. And then my husband's words of wisdom as a psychiatrist after a certain amount of what he would call perseverating, which he attributed to me at times, he would say, well, that sounds really complicated. I'm sure, excuse me, I'm sure when you're ready to do something about it, you'll know what you wanna do, which was enabling and settling and implied we had some power and so forth. And I don't mean to be prescriptive, but I think we can't collectively solve the problem. We could collectively identify ways to reach out to people to begin a blog or something else that is a source of information that we feel is more reliable or more balanced than what we're able to see. Or maybe we just wanna refer to a lot of other reliable sites, not that everyone would go there, but there's a lot of good sites on COVID. Michael Osterholm here in Minnesota has a really good one called SIDRAP. It's pretty easy. Great, yep. And so my question is, how can I spend 30 or 60 minutes a week for the next month and not talk about emotional trauma and not talk about public education even, just like for me, right? I'm doing a lot of sense-making and my wife is doing a lot of sense-making around. Here is the emerging information that is going to be that people will understand is important in a month, right? How can we make a list of that, process it, get other people in the same kind of boat, just, so for this particular effort, I'm really at the very front end of sense-making, right? And that's the only work I wanna do on it publicly, kind of, obviously I do a lot privately and with friends and family and stuff like that, but, so, but then there's a lot more, there's like a cone of work to do, right? And then of course, looking at Klaus's face, this is in a microcosm that the training sprints we have for the thing, the slower but bigger train wreck of climate and food and things like that, you know, so. Trudy, would you like to check in? What kind of did? It's been a little bit of a chaotic week with some ups and downs with medical tests and other things, but I think things are steadying out, so that's good. And right now I'm trying to figure out how to get my apple pencil to work so I can sign something that needs to be in Missouri that I sent with an error number in it. So, that's from the sublime to the ridiculous. Thanks. Let me know if I can help you. Klaus, go next. I'll just say that, you know, most of the people that we talk with, the trauma that they have around COVID is about COVID, but I'm actually saying people who are traumatized, the more conspiratal-minded people and what they're traumatized of is this idea that once you mandate a vaccine, you've created a framework for always keeping the control over people. And I'm just trying to help these conspiratal minds to think, well, maybe that was the point of the disinformation, because if you'd just got the vaccine, we wouldn't have to mandate anything. And to what, I think it was Charlotte, the woman, the woman that spoke, that was uncomfortable talking about the dangers of the vaccine. Curly hair, nobody. You don't remember, she was saying she was uncomfortable talking in the group. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, Grace. Grace, okay. To her point, you know, I've had people who I've seen them say, well, there's been this many thousand deaths from the vaccine. And what I've done is I said, rather than argue, which you can argue that number, that number's crazy, but I didn't wanna waste my time doing it. But I did the math for them and it comes out to 0.0089%. And I just put that there and not that that's gonna sway them, but at least it's there for somebody else reading it, not that particular person, but the other people. So I think she had a point in terms of addressing things that even if we think they're bullshit, they kind of have to be addressed. There were some really good articles over the weekend about this, about we're treating people who aren't vaccinated and wrong. Phil Clausen. Yeah, things going pretty well with some interesting meetings last week with the, with actually a future scene within Lego and then the International Civil Society Center as well, so that was exciting. I am, I guess, as everyone's saying, I am starting to encounter a lot more pushback from people generally around the vaccine, around, and a lot more kind of conspiracy-focused information sharing in my circles, which is concerning. I find, I ran into a family friend the other day at a sporting, I coached a men's soccer team and he was saying on, none of you guys, everyone's nearly, like around 30s, early 30s, late 20s. Like, none of you young people should have got vaccinated. Like, I've had kids. I know that I don't, I'm not gonna have any more kids, but how do you guys know if you can still have kids? And it's just like, people are talking about it after the game. It's just weird how it kind of spirals out into this kind of doubt in people's minds, just that one interaction. I don't know, it was, it's a bit concerning. I'm also, I'm moving to London in two weeks and the US put up a stage four kind of warning for travel to London last week, which is concerning. But yeah, that's my kind of COVID related reality. Wow, is the left side of your computer working properly now? No, I have to bring it on Friday, yes. I sent my computer into Apple to get it fixed and they changed the battery and broke two of my ports. Oh, perfect. That was a kind of unfair trade off, but yeah. That would explain that. Thanks, Petter. Klaus? Yeah, I'm trying to not focus too much attention on COVID, you know, it's, I mean, it's a huge distraction because it's basically a political, has become unfortunately a political issue and it will run its course, but it sucks up all the oxygen from other conversations that we really need to have. I was on a call earlier this morning with a European Corp, a guy from the Netherlands who has set up a company or an effort to build aquaforce tree systems and to work with very small scale people to set up gardens and co-trees and so on. And he invited his alumni from the Amsterdam University so they have people in from all over the world. I mean, not huge, but 20 some people and he was soliciting support for his efforts and over the last he described how he spent 10 years to get to the point where he's at and he has created a very nice platform but it's minuscule in comparison. So I'm thinking if this guy had had a knowledge base to draw from that shows him how to set up his organization which he had to figure out on his own so he can solicit grant money so he can provide an organizational structure. He could be in a completely different place today. So we get confirmation and reaffirmation really that weren't the right track setting up this platform and letting it evolve. So good news is we have a commitment from Tricia so we have a Costa Rica case study which Tricia is totally excited about this and she's like a perfect case study because it's subsystems, small scale farmers who are struggling to first of all figure out how to farm more efficiently and then have like zero access to the markets. We have a meeting tomorrow with Christina from Crease. She is totally on fire, you know, that's scary. But she is just definitely in and then we haven't heard back from Kerry yet because we may have to find someone else in the US or preferably I guess in California. So yeah, I think actually we can't run fast enough to keep up with this. It is really starting to resonate. So my focus is totally on how can we set up this structure and communication systems and everything to capitalize on the momentum that it has created. Sure, I'll just echo the work classes just referred to since I am partnering with him on that. So just ditto on that front. But setting COVID aside, I think for me I have a child going into high school, I have a child starting middle school this year and I could have picked my battles, I could have picked education and I could have picked food security. I picked food security, but I am already seeing things that make me worry not just for like COVID but like for the longevity of my kids' education and their ability to learn, their ability to be in diverse environments, to be exposed and my kids are well to do when they have access and I'll fight for them but not every family is gonna be able to do that. So I'm worried we are about to be on track to have a generation of kids who don't have the foundations to be good human citizens. So COVID aside and in my mind COVID's here to say I heard on a podcast three months ago or two months ago this will not be solved for a generation. So to me, problems for my kids go for the next 20 years because the foundation that's happening right now. So that's what's top of mind for me but I'm super excited about the works Klaus is doing. So that's balancing out my anxiety with my optimism. So thank you Klaus for giving me some optimism. Thank you all. Pete, do you wanna pick up and share with us the agenda and? Yes. Let me share again. Yeah, COVID is not like smallpox. It's not on a path to eradication. It's definitely becoming endemic and we're gonna have to figure out what to do. And if that means taking an annual booster and then suffering through the people who are overloading the system and that's the worst of it, okay. But it could get far freaky than that. That's the likelihood of what's gonna happen. They're gonna keep modifying it with boosters and you'll get another injection but there's a lot of crazies out there reporting that because it's mRNA it's gonna affect whether or not you can have kids and all kinds of other scare tactics that are just total garbage. The messenger RNA is just that. It's a messenger, it doesn't alter your genes. So there's just a lot of craziness out there and I don't know how to systematically debunk that except direct people to sites that are not bunk. And I'll say to that, I mean this generation of kids that I'll call it the 30 under so the 20 year olds, the teenagers they don't wanna have kids. They're like, it's not worth it. So it's like even if they convince themselves it's secure and safe. I think there's a lot of other reasons why we're gonna see a population decline. Which is its own good conversation. Yeah. I'll stop. I love how I blew up our agenda. I was the one who blew up the agenda with COVID. And then I have to finish it. The reason I'm worried about Delta is because the US is woefully underprepared to meet the challenge of Delta. It moves fast. We think we got used to wild type variants. So we're used to the signs and symptoms and sequelae from that wild type. So we've got that baked in or not. Delta is a different animal. It works differently. It moves faster. It has different effects. I'm worried about 100,000, 200,000, 500,000 people in the US and around the world, more of them having neurological problems for the rest of their life. Reduced IQ, psychological disorder, all that kind of stuff. It's just like, so there's a way kind of around. We could reduce some of that or we could lean in and make it worse. And we're on the lean in and make it worse thing right now. And it's like, why do we need people who already don't wanna get vaccinated to have a lower IQ because they got COVID and long COVID and things like that. And it's like, oh my God. You've opened the Pandora's box again. Go ahead and play. You started it Pete, wasn't it? But historically viruses are teachers. It's nature sending out a teacher. If you look at it this way, look at the Colorado epidemic, the black plague, I mean, look at all these amazing viruses that have hit populations. And in the process, we had to clean up our sewage systems, right? Because Colorado came out of it. And so each time that a virus comes, it is a response to the damaging behavior, behavior that damages the natural systems. And that's basically how I looked at this virus. If this virus hadn't shown up, Donald Trump would still be in office. So these are really horribly traumatic and painful teaching moments, but Colorado wiped out one-third of the European population when it was running. So the black plague wiped out one-third of the European population. And similar things happened to China and everywhere else. I'm happy to, you know, there's, so the larger thing I take away from COVID is that we learned a lot about the way information works and how we together as a society learn things and things like that. So the overall thing for me for COVID is, I'm glad we had an easy one to give us, to help us figure out how people like us actually and other people like us, how do we manage, you know, the longer term, the same kind of train racks in the longer term of climate change and food challenges and things like that. So I totally agree, it's a good teacher that doesn't mean that the lesson is pleasant. By the way, the other interesting thing is within my family, I've got family who are on the other side of the, and in a spectrum, right? On the other side of the whole vaccine thing, right? So just the personal trauma of wondering whether how much you care about whether or not your close family dies or not, you know, it's like, well, do I go, I'm really sad and I wish that didn't happen or do I go, well, you know, do I kind of like Zen go, okay, well, I guess they knew what they were up against and I don't know, right? So anyway. It comes back to the sort of self-awareness, self-care, other care. And every person's gonna have a different formula. And there are people where you'd like to do other care and they absolutely won't accept it. And then it becomes a self-care issue for me to accept that they won't accept it. And I don't mean COVID per se, it can be any variety of self-damaging behaviors or relationships or other things. Out to energy systems and food systems and climate systems. It's been a wonderful learning year or two. I wanted to talk, yeah? My last word would just be that historically some percentage of the population survives even with long-term consequences yet unknown from something like COVID and they end up wiser because of the experience and they do make the world a better place. And maybe in that time, they'll work on these other big problems which clearly need working on. Nobody's saying those problems are going away. They're not gonna run a cycle and finish. So I don't know. I'm trying to be a little bit mellow about the whole thing because spinning my wheels at things I cannot influence is a sure way to end up with chronic anxiety and other mental and physical ailments myself. There's a, and speaking of COVID or food systems or climate systems, there's a continuum that we are all exploring about how do I do self-care and pull away from intervening and how do I lean into intervening enough so that I'm making change where I can and yet not damaging myself and my family and things like that. That's right. You got it, Pete. So how long do we have on this call? Another half hour or another hour? Another half hour. We've shifted these to be a one-hour call. One of the things I wanted to point out with this was just in setting up these potential topics. I had an interesting choice on these. So, and it was around precision, right? Do I say, I can guess how long these things are gonna take. Do I want to pick a precise number here but maybe too little or too big or do I wanna pick a range? I've gotten pretty good at doing for smaller meetings. This is a little bit bigger than I can predict but I've gotten pretty good at writing a pretty precise number here but then as the meeting gets bigger and maybe a little less organized you have to increase this window. So that for me also goes out to task management and project management and things like that. So let me hit these real quick and maybe we can talk about what we'll talk about for the next half hour. In talking with Ann about the food sovereign and let me stop myself there and note that I heard from somebody in the network that sovereign is a sensitive word for indigenous folks because it was the sovereign nations that came and colonized them, massacred them and things like that. So I'm trying, I'm wondering, this was last night the word that I've come up with to replace sovereign in the way that we use it is independent actually. So I think I'll switch to be in independence. Like independence just by itself or independent? Independent. Yeah, independent entities or just independence? Just independence. As a noun, independent as a noun. Yes, I know, but that could mean an independent individual to me, not an entity. Another interesting meta topic is we've talked a lot about language and metaphors and things like that. One of my observations is you don't have to worry too much about expanding out the accuracy of the metaphor. At some point, if you're doing a good job of memeing, you pick a word and then you explain what it means over and over and over. And you essentially colonize to use another bad word. You capture another bad word. You take over the meaning of that word, right? So at some point, I mean, the way we use sovereign isn't the way most of the world uses sovereign. So the way that we use the word independent and it has a halo of meaning around it ends up, you know, or whatever word, quilt or whatever, right? You take a word, you say, okay, I'm going to change this a little bit and this is what it means for me. And then hopefully that meme grows and expands. And so we worry a lot about whether or not we're picking the right word. I think we could worry a little bit less and worry more about, you know, how we explain what we mean about it to the rest of the world. So in conversation with Ann, Ann comes from a tech background. Ann and I have been having a lot of fun together, getting stuff done and I think that will continue. I was explaining to her how OGM operated with transparency and why that might be a good thing for a food sovereign. So a food sovereign has a choice to make, right? As we have internal meetings, as we have, you know, projects to do, where do we draw the line on making things public versus keeping things private, right? And it was an opportunity for a little bit. I've been working with some public stuff for a while. So I've learned a little to lean into the being public a little bit more. We've done that kind of together with OGM. How can I explain to Ann what the accommodations are that you take to do that? Is it a good thing? Do we like doing that? What have we learned? You know, what are the bad things? What are the things to watch out for? So that's that discussion. This one I think we should defer to another time. But this was an idea I came up with for Jordan. He was talking about a concept that needed to be not owned by anybody. And yet, how do you make the website for something that's not owned by anybody? Because as soon as you make a website, obviously the person making the website owns it. So the short answer was hashtags. And I had some discussion around how to use hashtags that way. Another thing that we could probably defer is, or maybe not actually, maybe this is the only thing that's important for this call. For a while in different contexts, I've been thinking it would be nice if we start explicitly making commitments and then explicitly trying to keep commitments. Jordan on the Linesburg OGM call brought over some stuff from construction. They actually track a metric called a percentage of promises kept. So if you've got a big multifaceted, if you're building a dam or overpass or something like that, you've got hundreds of people involved, dozens of organizations. And the way that you either make or break the project is by promising, making commitments. Yes, I will get cement trucks here at this time. Or I'll have so many earth-moving equipment and the drivers for them or whatever. And the more that you keep promises to each other as you're doing a big project like that, the likelier you are to come in under time under budget and the more promises that get broken, the more likely you're gonna blow out the thing. So I've been wanting for a while to keep meeting metrics and to time box things, like asking, so how long is this meeting going to last? And can we commit to stopping it on time? And can we keep that promise? Meeting metrics for me, a little bit comes out of the OGM meetings where we don't have, obviously, I feel like we don't have enough diversity. So diversity to me is one metric to keep and, but another metric might be, did we end on time? Did we keep good notes, those kinds of things? So this is like the small version of OKRs. Can we kind of take the concept of OKRs and make it fractal all the way down to each meeting even? And then I had a discussion with Jerry, we've got a gap in our funding situation where we have conceptual funding models and we're waiting to pour money in one end and distribute funds in another end. Some of those funds need to go to things that need to get done now rather than in a month when the dollars actually pour into the bucket. For some of those things that need to get done, CSC matter most needing some improvements or some massive wiki glue code or something like that, it would be nice to just get them done. And then there are things that I wanna do that I can't afford to do without promise of funding. But actually, I kind of realized promise of funding is almost good enough. I could probably take an IOU from OGM or Lyonsburg or something like that in lieu of payment. And then with the understanding that there's maybe an 80% chance that I'll get paid and maybe there's a 20% chance that I won't get paid. And then the accuracy of the prediction of getting paid by an IOU goes back to things like commitments and metrics. I will let Jerry take this one, the big quilt. Thanks, Pete. And why don't I pause for a second because Carlos has got his hand up. Let's pause before this and see what questions we have so far and deal with this separately when we're moving further. Go ahead, Carlos. Yeah, Pete, we had a discussion with Jordan, that involved Jordan yesterday and Samit and Ann Wayne there and the question came up that we urgently need this website up because every time you talk with somebody, the question is, can you send me an invite or can you send me some information, right? And so the only thing we have right now is this hypothesis. And that has almost run its course. So is there a funding issue with setting up this website? There is not. Well, no, there's not. Okay. So the timeline for setting up the website is a function of me and Ann getting together and starting around Thursday last week and doing things like deciding on a name and deciding on where simple things like where and how to buy the domain name and the technical steps from turning a name into a domain name into websites that are up. So it's just, we had a weekend. We worked over the weekend, but it's not, there aren't any blockers besides kind of just physical time. Okay, thanks. And the inputs to that, right? Ann and I had to talk about a bunch of domain name stuff and that includes things, not just the website it includes things like how are we gonna do email? How are we going to keep shared folders? All that kind of stuff. Yeah. Oh, sorry, Klaus, are you done? Yeah, we talked about setting up our first regular meeting next Monday, starting next Monday and wanted to focus on this marketing and messaging topic as a first step. I mean, I've got an inquiry. I had a conversation with the Education and Leader from Kiss the Crown, the Kiss the Crown organization. John Woodluck is the founder of that group. Well, they want to get in on this. So they're already asking, can you send us information? We will send somebody to participate in the Monday meetings and so on. But his first question was, would you have a website or something not that we can send around? So this, thank you so much for pushing that. Of course. Mr. Kennedy. One thing just really quickly. I mean, one thing I've done on projects previously while waiting to put up a website is just to create a one-sheeter that you can share like a PDF or a single-page file just with like the basics of what it should inform the website as well. But it is a kind of not the ideal in between but it's nice to have if people want more information. Just a suggestion. Thanks, Phil. Jerry, Klaus. Sure. And this may throw a tiny wrench in things, but I want to go into the quilt discussion in a second. But, Pete, if you can drop the share, I just want a screen share for a sec. Sure. So two Sundays ago, I had one of many great conversations recently which led me to the idea of having a show as like a mainstream of activity through OGM and that we would take kind of like the stream of calls we're doing but actually perform OGM work on the calls. And on the surface that this would present as a vlog or a podcast. In fact, it could be a video log and have podcast outputs and other sorts of things. But underground, we would be taking the transcripts and analyzing them. I would be weaving with my brain. Other people would weave with other tools. We would be doing OGM kinds of things and we would direct this thing toward the kinds of people who are trying to solve the world's problems, preferring to go to non-white guys ideas first. So that's the broad idea of the show and the name that came up for me was The Big Quilt. And we can have a conversation about like quilting is an interesting metaphor here. Then the next day, Pete and I and Judy were on a call that Jordan was helping run for the one degree network. And at some point late in the call after we'd sort of done some breakout work, one of the leaders said, so how do you explain this to a five year old? And I pulled out the quilt thing, which I thought, you know, which you could come up the next, the previous day. And I'm like, we're weaving a quilt. And it's like, it just stuck. It was like, yep, sounds great. And we moved with it. I'm really liking the quilt analogy and it seems like a simple thing. But the reason I'm asking a spiritual screen is yesterday I bought TheBigQuilt.com on Google Domains. They have now added a feature when you start a domain. Would you like to build this on Google sites? I said, yes. The old little tiny hack that I had to do to point the domain to the website is non-existent and unnecessary at this point. It just stands up and transparently builds your site. Google sites looks like this. I actually have added an image back here. I don't like, so I haven't published this. And I can easily drop Google spreadsheets, Google Docs, Google anything's in here. And this is, I can also easily add, see the little people icon. I can add humans who have full edit privileges. This is, and the service costs $0. What I'm paying is $12 a year for the domain on Google Domains. So, and I can do this. This is no challenge whatsoever to do. And I know that we have a beginner website for Open Global Mind on Massive right now, which hasn't changed since we published it. And we don't really have a process or a thing to do it. And I'm like, Pete, I don't know what to do. Because this is so simple, and yet it's like Google, Google, Google stuff. But I gotta say, this was instantaneous to set up. It propagated pretty much immediately. All the DNS messy stuff was done for me. Like, and we can switch from this to a different site later, no problem. But this was just so simple. Sorry. Thanks for the walkthrough. I can talk pros and cons between Massive and Google sites. I think Google sites is fine. And Klaus, if you all wanted to have a name, you could buy a domain and set it up as quickly as I did. We could do that, Ann or Ann and I, or I could set up a Google site's website. Exactly. We can do the same thing with Massive. So it's not, well, the question is, in a month, I don't know, Massive is about participation. Google ends up to me being about enclosure. And it's a trade-off, right? And also, the other thing that I need to say in there, or want to say in there, I guess, is that in conversation with Wendy Alfred, we've already started, Massive has already started being able to suck stuff out of Google Drive into a massive, and a massive wiki and a website. Same thing with in conversation with Ann. It's going to be able to suck Google Docs into massive wikis and into websites. I don't want to stick on, I don't care. Let's do the thing that's most collaborative, the most open, the most scalable. If that's Google sites, I'm fine with that. I don't think it is, but. So I would, the panel I would put in is, and I've had this conversation with Keith, I don't know if I've had it with Klaus, is I'm hearing from the community I implied into in the farm space, the agricultural space. They are, which is what I want, very, very strong opinions with regard to large technology companies. Amazon always being the big target they shoot at, but Walmart's right behind them and Amazon's right behind them to the point that many organizations are saying, I wish I didn't have to be on AWS. I wish I didn't even have to use services that were on AWS. So when Pete and I had this conversation, there was a conscious discussion around what are the technologies and platforms that, while may not be perfect, are at least aligned in spirit with that. So that was one of the reasons we chose Massive Wiki versus Google Sites, but in the end, I bought the domain through Google. So it's not a perfect world. But that was a factor in our thinking, even in Google Sites, like I could have done it last night over a beer and we would have been done, but that was not aligned with the intention. And I totally agree with that. And I agree with what Pete said. And I think Pete knows that in spirit, I've been traveling the massive road now with him for this whole time. But I feel like when we build anything in Massive, Pete, it's like the rook that's trapped between the queen and the king or something, I don't know. It's like Pete gets trapped because without Pete, I feel like I can't really actually do much with Massive. I feel like you become a linchpin to anything I wanna try to do. And that endangers our relationship. And then I can't figure out how to fill an IOU or like we go straight to the IOU conversation because I feel like I'm waiting for you to build stuff that I can't pay for you to build. So what Massive needs are then, so one easy choice is to say, let's throw up our hands, let's use this Google thing, it works great. I'm fine with that decision. I don't have a problem with that. I think it's missing the mark, but other than that, I'm fine. So if we don't wanna choose that, if we wanna choose the Massive approach, then Massive Wiki needs help, right? How do we make Pete not the linchpin? Already, it would be pretty easy for you, Jerry, to just ping Bill and Bill can plow through a lot of the stuff I can plow through. You mean Bill Anderson? Bill Anderson, yeah. But Massive Wiki would love to have more concierges, and Bentley could do the same thing. I don't know that he's got the interest necessarily, but the skills to help somebody with Massive are pretty small and very common and easily. It takes work to use open source. It takes work to build open source. And if the open source stuff isn't working for you, you can pull away and use something easier where you can lean in and make the open source stuff work better. Phil? Sorry, this is a great conversation. I don't wanna be overly critical, but I was very excited actually when I saw Pete's agenda for this meeting, because I think there are some issues around commitments, time boxing, things like that that we do need to talk through. I find that a lot of times in these meetings, we kind of have these great emerging conversations, but then don't address the initial subject matter. So I just wanted to call attention to the agenda again, if possible, just to say. Thanks. Good, we're kind of on the agenda because this was on the, this conversation was on the agenda and nobody went back to the commitments thing when we paused before stepping into this, because I was looking for anybody who wanted to go back to things like commitments, which I'm happy to go back to. I just feel like we're not off the agenda right now. We're sort of reobeying that, I think. I feel like, so this has been a wonderful call. Thank you all. I'm enjoying myself. I don't know, there's a community discipline or something like that that we need to get better at. So I don't care too much. I think we've kind of blown the agenda. I think we're not on the agenda very well, which is totally fine. If I think the way that we developed the agenda, it wasn't really collaborative. I just threw up a bunch of stuff that I know is important that we need to cover sometime. And I kind of thought, interestingly enough, I was a little bit inspired by an experience that Ann and I had where I did kind of the same thing with more precision on the numbers actually. And Ann and I actually tracked the agenda pretty well. So partly that was, we have a bunch of really important stuff that we needed to get through. So we both drove to it together. Part of it was the fact that we only had two people instead of six or seven. And kind of me too, the call rhythm and the team discipline that we have developed over the past year with the folks in this room is one where we are drawn to emergence. And I'm including myself in here too. We're drawn to emergence and we think that emergent topics are really important. And so we bubble those up, right? And we still haven't quite developed a discipline to say maybe a code word or something even. This is one of those calls where, looks like we've got an agenda. We're gonna just drive through that. Anything else is off topic. Let's put it in the parking lot and keep going on the agenda, right? Because we wanted to be productive this call. The process I'm used to for agendas and effective meetings is that a small subset of people in an organization like a nonprofit, it's usually the executive committee of the board of directors is responsible for affirming with the chair of the board the agenda. We don't have a designated individual, but I think if we could agree that we are going to do an agenda, first of all, whoever is going to put out an attentive agenda can ask for topics to put on the agenda that can be refined in the first five minutes of the meeting. And it's basically, here's what we have on the agenda that we think we can do in this much time. Does anyone have something they feel is more important or needs to be inserted instead on the agenda, in which case you put it on the agenda and bump something else, but you're still practicing discipline around time. And you don't do the check-ins and the how are you doing this week stuff until after the meeting's over. I mean, that's the way you work the meeting and then everybody stays after or they come half an hour early before the meeting and mingle before they start the meeting, both of which would be options on Zoom if one wanted to do that. We could say the meeting's at nine o'clock, somebody will open the room for whomever wants to show up to mingle between eight 30 and nine, whatever. And I'm just offering that as an option because I've seen that work pretty well in fairly disrupted boards and so forth because there's a shared understanding of what we need to do to have an effective meeting. Thank you, Judy. That makes a lot of sense. And of course you can kind of see the structure I've got there that recalls that at least. The difference that we have here is that OGM itself is kind of solving an emergent set of problems. And it's my fault I brought up COVID but working through that is one of, I would say that was on topic for OGM. It wasn't on topic for the agenda but it's not like we weren't being productive or doing important stuff. So the difference is in a company, one person or a person's delegate or something like that is gonna say that's in bounds, that's out of bounds. And you can keep shoving stuff out of bounds. None of the stuff that we talked about today is out of bounds for OGM, I think. I think we're pretty good at keeping the conversation going and keeping it productive and not rabbit holeing. So a big problem or a big challenge or a big actually pleasure is that OGM itself doesn't have this call, this call doesn't have a charter. OGM has a multi-charter and we work on a lot of different things. So we don't have the ability to say, go for it, Jerry. This call is meant to be our getting things done call with the goal of making OGM a working thing. That's why we renamed it build OGM. So it doesn't have a written charter, you're totally right but I think the intentions are meant to be much crisper and narrower and time boxed and like I think our intentions for this call are actually like hit agenda items and get things done and go great, awesome, that felt really productive. So that's my sense of it. I think we need to be more explicit about that and if that's what we want. Yeah, Stacy. Just one small point. As far as the agenda, if all the estimates went to the maximum, it would have been 85 minutes. I would just suggest that with all the maximum it should add up to 60. Like looking at every agenda as if it took a long time. If you, that's kind of my note about precision. It's an interesting, there's a whole set of questions that are interesting in my brain about that. So one of them, if you'll notice, to be precise, there isn't an agenda yet. The thing that I've got for that heading is topics. Topics are meant to be a set of things that we might talk about that get gardened into the agenda during the first five minutes in this thing. So then also, I don't know, I could talk about the variation of the numbers. I would rather put a precise number there and then hit the numbers. Yes, I agree. And I also agree. The meeting not only should it add up to 60, you actually have to add a little bit of slack time, right? So each topic should cover, you should cover like 50 minutes and then there should be five minutes for like jostling around or switching topics or telling somebody or asking somebody, this sounds like a rabbit hole. Can we put that in the parking lot and pick it up later? So I totally agree. Which also I think comes back a bit sort of recursively to say we might need to collaboratively develop agendas more. Because you had kindly in a burst of energy, you had put up a quick agenda. I said, that sounded great. I pinned mine to the end. Nobody else talked about it. And that's what we walked in with. So maybe we need to have a asynchronous process to just chat through the agenda together before the calls more. Agreed. Yeah, I think the process will be good. I mean, when I first came in, I tried to listen to the recording of the previous call to pull out what wasn't discussed in the previous call, but even then it kind of became a merging conversation. So I think some sort of formalized process in terms of topics, how we decide on which topics are included and how people suggest topics would be, I think helpful. And maybe we can outline that in our Mattermost chat. And last week was very much a talk about the food systems project. So most of our time was in there, which was very fruitful. And I felt was really actually targeted and productive. Any other thoughts on this? We're at the top of the hour. Last thoughts on where we are? I would just say quickly, I didn't mean to be overly critical when calling out the agenda. It's just a bit of a pattern, I thought. I think these conversations are very rich, very fruitful. It was just something I think we can at least try to make a little more of an effort to be disciplined about. And thanks, everyone, for your input and for Pete's work on. Putting that together. I think, so some of these topics would be good fodder for maybe next call. And I think actually another reflection is I wouldn't wanna see so many people. So I put my name after these as kind of like topic lead or something like that. Or I was gonna kick off the conversation. And then most of the time is actually hopefully conversation and taking notes and things like that, thinking and taking notes. I think there are too many Pete's on this one. I would rather see it much more balanced for future agendas. I also would love if we started thinking about meeting metrics. So was this different kinds of essentially OKRs, right? Was this meeting productive? Was it on topic? Did we enjoy ourselves? Was there friction? Did we productively address friction? Did we keep notes well? Did we all of those kinds of things? I wish we were tracking better and being more conscious about. Because I do apologize. I have to jump on to another call, but I will just share an activity that I had in the nonprofit I was at last, which was quite good, is that the close of the meeting, not even the no discussion, you had the grid upon sort of criteria and everybody just scored the call. And we did it virtually, meaning everybody just entered their score on the note page when you had a record and you moved on. And then that was insight for the next time around. So I'm gonna leave that little nugget before I jump off. You wanna score the call? Yes, I'm looking forward to joining more of these. Thanks. We don't have a scoreboard right now. Yeah, I actually think we covered your agenda mostly. A lot of it, yes. And so what we didn't do is wrap it. Okay, so I got commenting this hashtags. I got, I'm using IOUs to bootstrap. We talked about those things. And I think from my standpoint, I acknowledge this is how this can work. What we didn't do is talk about the big grilled idea that Sherry has and flesh that out a little bit. There's things we didn't flesh out about each of these. So there's more about hashtags that didn't get said that are important. We didn't cover transparency and accessibility for the food sovereign. What I was hoping to come out from this was something that Anne could say, okay, I get it about transparency and I get it about accessibility. And there's things that OGM knows that the food sovereign needs to know and decide whether or not it wants the things that OGM. So we, I talked about each of these. We did not cover them, which, and I agree, we didn't talk about the big quilt, but we didn't talk about many of these things. More comment. I need to run this way to another comment. Thanks everybody. And I want to drop because I want to be crisp. Okay. Thanks all. Bye for now.