Hey guys, good morning everybody. Thanks for coming today. Give us a couple of seconds. We'll bring all the speakers up. We have a big space today and then we'll start rolling.
as well as big deal with today so we have 30 near around $50 we're gonna select 6 winners so make sure to read to read the space link let me actually post it right here
And then just give us a couple of minutes to set it up and we'll start.
We just had super monovielusted.
Hey, Supermoon, can you hear me? Yeah, I can hear you. Hello. Are we waiting for the rest of the guests or what's the plan?
I think we should wait for a few more people.
Are we good to go or are we still missing someone? Yeah, we can start and everyone I can join a little bit later. Okay, no problem. So we have Claudia, we have a place with morning guys.
First of all, you know, where we also waiting for more people and the rest of the speakers if you would just like to introduce yourself to our community. Hello everybody. Thank you very much for the space organized by Supermone Camp and
and the near digital collective. So really excited about talking about decentralized governance with near digital collective. And also we will be sharing a little bit of alpha today. But anyhow, I don't want to get ahead of myself.
So my name is Claudio, one of the co-founders of Metapul, the first liquid-staking solution on Nier and Aurora, and the leading liquid-staking solution for Nier and Aurora liquid-staking tokens. So thank you very much everybody for being in this Twitter space.
Everyone plays a champion of the NDC for the community. So happy to be here today to talk about NDC.
Thank you and we also just had Lorana join. Good job, introduce yourself. Yes, good morning, everyone. Thank you for having us. I'm also
support of the medical team and at the moment I'm believing what we will be sharing with you today that is our next move on governance.
Got it. So, honestly, from my side, I thought it would be like a more NDC focus space. So, most of my questions around that, but we can also explore a little bit in the Metapool and see what about it. But, you know, first thing I wanted to know, and I think we're going to make like a panel style discussion.
I'm going to ask a question and whoever wants to pick it up, feel free to pick it up. Although, as I understand, we only have Blase from NDC. So the first thing I would like to know and for our audience to know is the history of NDC where it came from and how did it came to be.
Okay, yeah, I think to take that we could also invite Sarah, a boost part of the governance working group if we'd like to to answer some more questions, but yeah, in terms of the NDC, it was originally envisioned by Ilya and he presented it at ECC last year in July.
And so that's where it started. Then in September, there was a joint call with many of the larger nodes in the ecosystem and they put out a call for participation out on the governance forum and the call was really for the community to assemble and to formalize the NDC
which is the near digital collective with really some major objectives of establishing a community treasury that could be managed and governed by the community. And I'm happy to say that went online in late March there. So the NDC Treasury is live at CFO.
with 5.7 millionaire. And then the second major objective was to establish governance processes for the near ecosystem. So that's what's actively being worked on at this stage, wherein governance V0, which means that a few dals of transition are in the process of doing that.
to it from receiving funding from the near foundation to receiving funding from the community treasury. And then we're bringing V1 online, which means voting elections, things of that matter to establish governance for the ecosystem.
Great, thank you so much for that explanation. If we could dive a little deeper into NDC, could you give us an overview of
of NDC and governance framework and the key players in it as well as their relationships between those key players who make decisions on different levels.
Yeah, so one of the outcomes of that called a participation was originally called the Community Working Group, which was renamed Governance Working Group because community was a little bit broad. So the Governance Working Group is basically a working group of community led individuals
that have stepped forward to be part of governance or have also been interviewed for roles. So what we've been doing, so in the very beginning it was a first come, first serve basis. So if you were on the governance forum or participated in any of the initial calls, we had a call
action in multiple places for the community to join the governance working group. And so we had a lot of activity, but in the end about 25 individuals came forward and actually started contributing. So those are the first contributors of the governance working group. Since then we've been opening
and then interviewing for those to the community. So we've been doing that process. And so the governance working group are the shepherds or stewards of bringing NDC online, which is the governance for the ecosystem. All it's organized is actually in work groups. So we have about
about 19 workgroups at this point where there's actually not representatives from the governance working group, but community members and leaders leading those workgroups to do two objectives. One is to find governance processes for the ecosystem as well as
as well as two is to restore funding to the rest of the verticals in the ecosystem that don't currently have funding with the idea that that funding would come from the NDC. So right now there's 19 workgroups organized around everything that you can think of from, you know, NFC.
to DFI, to gaming, we have some workgroups focused on more like transparency and reconciliation and just a number of those. You can find all those workgroups in the NDC hub under the topic, join the movement and the NDC hub is on
Telegram best way to find that is to go to our Twitter account which is near DC on Twitter click the link tree and jump over to the hub Thank you so much. I see we also had cast joined Kaz would you like to introduce yourself to the community please?
Yeah, for sure. Can you hear me? Yeah, we can do you great. Awesome. Thanks. I'm one of the core contributors in that governance working group that, um, please just talked about and I joined back in January. A little bit of a windy road. I was called upon to to share some
of my expertise in proof and personhood that was one of the challenges that they were working on. So I just joined and started participating and contributing in the working group in the telegram chats and sharing some knowledge and whatnot. And then I also happened to have 23 years of project management experience and they
needed a project manager. So there was a call to action as a place we were talking about. I said, put my hand in the air and said, yeah, I'll think that I'll be a project manager. There are a couple of other ones that did as well. So there was an interview process. Luckily, I got that job and here we are. Great. Thank you. Nice to meet you.
Again, so I wanted to take a step back from discussing the Black specifics of NDC, although we'll come back to it later. Explore a little more on the vision on the philosophy side. Why do you guys think that decentralized governments, sorry,
centralized governance, not necessarily within near or within blockchain, just as a concept in general is important and is more effective than a highly centralized system with, for example, very professional and motivated players organizing everything. Why do we need
decentralized governance in this world and within the ecosystem. Go shut loud, or you guys can just answer, feel free to unmute yourself and talk once you have something to say. Yes, I think it's something very critical
about building on decentralized protocols or blockchain protocols. And that's the main reason that it attracted many of us to the space, right? It is, are we able to build decentralized systems around protocols that create value for their users? In this case token holders.
I first got really excited about near through their coin list offering a few years back. And so it was early enough to participate in that process. Then I eventually got exposed to Blaze and a lot of the Balladator node operators through OpenChart Solariance.
And then I slowly but surely started to understand how governance or communities were being built on top of blockchain protocols. That eventually grew into what it is right now near digital collective, right? I participated also when we started
around guilds, launched a nearest Spano Guild which is now changing to Nathivo Crypto Hub and which is focusing right now in educating Spanish speaking audiences around decentralized protocols. And so understanding on how these systems are evolving
is critical and governance is the first big step towards decentralizing them. We understand right now that there's a treasury that is being managed right now by near foundation and they eventually will need to become obsolete and this is
But bridges need to be built, right? Because at the end of the day, large institutions and organizations want someone to be accountable around the protocol. And so that's why New York Foundation was created. Now with New York Digital Collection,
The fact of the idea is that can accountability be, how can I say, migrated to this decentralized organization, right? But still, individuals need to be accountable for. It's impossible for pseudo-anonymous or anonymous folks
to be leading this, so that's why it is very important to the proof of humanity, of individuals need to be accounted for, right? And so that's a key part of what that will bring to this ecosystem.
system and it's something that will have to be built one way or another. And so really, really excited about what NDC is coming. But then as a site node, it is important for also the other protocols that are being built on near to also start
to understand how they're going to be aligned to the vision of decentralization. And that's why I raised my hand when they say, "Hey, we're going to have a Twitter space." And I said, "Hey, I would like to have my two cents in it." So when we launch Metapole back in
2021 in August 2021, the protocol is running on a Dow. That's one of the key advantages of building on top of near is that you could build smart contracts running on Dow from day zero from the day of Genesis. So, so that we're really excited about that. Lucio and my
We've always been champions around decentralization and about building for by the community for the community, right? And we wanted this liquid-staking platform called Metapult to be such a platform and so This made forth at the cell GP San Francisco community
event, we're going to be unveiling our Metapole Dow governance version 0.1. So really, really excited about this. I cannot go into too much of the details, but the one thing I will say, and this is maybe Lauren, I can give a little bit more alpha there, is that
This is going to be the first step in order for MetApple to be community-owned and driven. So we will be setting the example for all other protocols being built on Mir and how decentralization should be built on Mir.
should be or it shouldn't be right because at the end of the day we're out of beta testing that's why it's not version one it's version 0.1 and so we need help from all the community to shape how governance and medical should be done but anyhow sorry for taking a little bit too much of the mic but
just really really excited about what we're building on top of Nier and how decentralization should be. Thank you very much everybody. Thank you very much and feel free to take Mike as much as you need. We appreciate that. I wanted to compliment what
The idea was giving the power to the people, like the power of decision making to the people. But it's not only giving them the power, it's also giving them context on what are you doing and responsibility on how
We all together build this project, build this protocol, build this future something. And that is what we are trying to do. And we've been working with the community already, but this is taking one step forward.
Thanks. Thanks. Okay, go ahead. I see. I wanted to get back to your question on why is it more efficient or effective and I'm not sure that it is more effective in taking decisions, but that doesn't make it less important.
What it is, it's more robust, it's more inclusive, it's more democratic, and we're trying to build a DAO, that's a real DAO, and what I mean by that, it's really decentralized, it's a ton of people involved in various aspects of
decision making. There are so many doubts out there, there are thousand name only and and really what it is is just a copy paste of regular web to centralize institution with a Dow with you know five council members that take all the decisions and there's one or two
them that are dominant and the other ones are. But anyways, I shouldn't brag down on one other does. What I should say is that what we're trying to build is something that doesn't require people to be approved into the Dow. If you're a part of NDC, you're automatically a member of the near
digital community. The only thing you need to do in order to vote is to register yourself as a voter and what you do with that is you only verify yourself as a human. If you're a human, you can vote. The reason for that is we don't want bots to vote. We don't want people to create 200 accounts and create
200 dotes, voting power. It's one person, one vote. So you have to register and then you can vote. And we will elect our percentitives. The representatives will be elected into three different houses. So we are designing checks and checks of power, balance of power between the three.
And if there's ever anything that the community doesn't agree with what those three houses are doing, the community has the power to out them or to veto their decisions. So that's real democracy, real decentralized democracy, active and participating democracy.
No one can throw you out. And, you know, it's hard. It's really hard to build proper decentralized organizations. It's probably not going to lead to very fast decision making. It's probably actually going to be slower. We find that too, that, you know,
the governance working group, which is to some more on the spectrum, you know, doubt and not doubt, we're in the middle of that. We're a little bit of a centralized organization working hard to decentralize the whole community. And we have to cause times two when we'd like to take a decision
We have to say that we're not empowered to take this decision, we have to actually not take it. We have to put it to a vote. And right now the voting system isn't built out in its end state, so we have to rely on telegram votes and whatnot, which you could argue could be gained. But we're trying to listen as much as
possible to the community. And that means that we stop when take pause and then we listen to the community and we come back, make a proposal and then listen again. So it's not more efficient. It actually takes more time. But it is more inclusive. It's more robust and it's more democratic. So that's why I'm in here.
Yeah, I think this add to that effect could just real quick and a few little quick words. So the whole idea is that, you know, one of the things that the community is consistently asked for over the last two years as near protocol has been online is
these things, one, they want more self-atonomy and the ability to make their own decisions, two, they really want to manage their own funding and be able to distribute funding in the way that they would like, and three, transparency, they want more transparency around funding decisions.
where the funds went, how they were spent, who approved it, so forth and so on. So in terms of what we're trying to do on near protocol, the vision of near has always been to give people power over their assets, data, and power of self-governance.
So the NDC is the vision around self governance and how we create really a decentralized ecosystem where people have the autonomy to make their own decisions over time and that that that autonomy is granted more and more instead of
central authorities making those decisions and picking winners. That's kind of one of the key terms that has been used a lot. Oh, we're picking winners here. Well, we really want to create an ecosystem that's decentralized where we don't pick winners, but we really give broader opportunity. And then
through building reputation on near, you have more access to opportunities if you will over time instead of having more of a top down. So NDC is focused on bottoms up funding, which is more of a grassroots level funding, and that's what we're focused on.
Thank you so much everyone there was very insightful. Another thing I wanted to ask is, you know, I did some research in NDC and sort of checks and balances of the system and I was really amazed by the complexity of it.
And now we're only talking about it within sort of this near narrative, blockchain narrative. What I wanted to ask is the system so complex that allows for community members to vote and
than for different parts of it to check on each other and control each other. Could it be, would it be like fair to compare it to some existing governance systems outside of the blockchain, for example, the governance system
of the United States government and how would it compare? And do you think this framework could be, possibly theoretically extrapolated onto something that's not blockchain, but just anything that requires governance to sort of bring the power back to the community or the people?
Sure, yeah, I mean in terms of comparison to the you know US Constitution that was certainly one of many Architecture's that we looked at for you know governance. We looked at you know Countries in the way that they were formed
including the UK and Switzerland. We looked at other blockchain ecosystems, including those of Polkadot, Cosmos, Ethereum, and others. And kind of went out and really did a lot of research to determine what was working well. And then looking at all the failures
years of existing blockchain governance. Right. No one has really solved governance on blockchain technology in a great way yet. So most of it tends to be centralized. And you know, in any case, we have the largest at this state community treasury.
government community treasury that exists. So although there are correlations, one thing that you'll see difference in the NDC governance that Michael, Ozzy Mandayas, helped really craft along with the community is that you'll see that they
executive power is removed. There's no executive power in NDC governance. And the reason for that is the executive authority belongs to the nodes within our ecosystem, right? The executive power belongs to the DAO, the projects, the collect
the communities, the executive power results within themselves because they require their own autonomy to make decisions. Now in the case that one of those autonomous organizations wants to request funding from the community treasury, there are some certain
stipulations that you have to meet to make sure that the community funds are going to be spent in an appropriate way. We want to limit community funds from being spent on terrorism, anti-money laundering. We don't want grifters and non-deliver
and all of these things that we've experienced in the blockchain ecosystem to take place against the NDC Treasury. So governance has been set up in such a way that number one, there's these governing bodies that are stewards of the ecosystem.
system and are elected to steward the ecosystem and you know make sure that budgets are aligned and that you know there's no misconduct going on in budgets and then to the power ultimately belongs to the community because if the community doesn't like this V1 governance framework
once it goes online, they have the ability through voting to change that governance model over time, right? So it's not like a locked in model. And that was actually one of the challenges that we noticed as we were looking at a lot of governance, including countries and institutions is that it was very hard
for them to adapt the adaptability of their governance models was very difficult. So in architecting this governance for the near ecosystem, we looked at how do we make it adaptable, how do we make it antifragile, how do we make it so that you won't be censored, so censorship resistance.
There's a lot of core principles that have went into drafting this governance framework and, as a matter of fact, we have eight of them now. So we have eight core principles of the NDC that are guiding the governance process. Would you tell us what those principles are?
Oh yeah, sorry I was on mute. Yeah, so there's a slide deck that it'd be good if someone could drop in to Twitter because the slide deck really has all of the slides in it that talk about the NDC but let me run through those. So the first one is
inclusiveness. So we really want to create governance that doesn't have infringement and doesn't have bias towards certain individuals, collectives, projects, or any of those things. That's one of the core principles. Adaptability. So adaptability means that we create governance that's able to adapt, change, scale
be retrofitted completely replaced over time. And so that makes the ecosystem antifragile. Along with that, we have kind of a subprincipal that there needs to be decentralization at the heart of it, right? So we don't want to create citadels and we don't want to create these huge institutions that make
all the decisions. So there's going to be some metrics that says, you know, if you're of a certain amount of expenditure, you have a certain amount of members, and it's probably a good time to think about decentralizing because we really don't want any one node in the ecosystem to control more than X amount of the funds of the ecosystem.
system or the decision making power. Number four is contribution and reputation first. So one of our core principles from near foundation is ecosystem first, right? We always hear that ecosystem first. What's it actually mean? It means that as a community, we believe we should contribute to the near ecosystem and you
build reputation and then rewards come second. So it's not like what we did last cycle where we give a lot of grants, we give a lot of funds up front and there's non-delivery, there's grifting, you know, there's friends, funding, friends and so we want to avoid those things. So the way we do that is to contribution first. Number
We don't want cartels and governance, right? We don't want these nodes that hold all these decision power and we don't want money being funneled to anonymous people that are masquerading as different groups or different projects, but they're really all the same projects and groups. So we really have a strong
own declaration of conflicts. And if you have a conflict and you don't declare it and the transparency commission, which is one of the governing bodies of the ecosystem, has an investigation report brought against you. They have the ability to stop funding from the community treasury.
based on that, you know, that bad behavior or bad actors. Number six, collective decision making. So it's really important that the community has a voice and we call community voice once voting comes online and that will allow the community to make decisions around who they want to represent them. By the way, those
We're going to be really small for like six months to start. So when V1 goes online, I know that's not a lot of time for people to adapt, but we really do want to test this. NDC is about experimenting to adapt and create the best governance we can.
yourself. So we want censorship resistance in the process so that no boy buddy's going to silence you for having your own opinions and it really allows you to be yourself. But then with that comes number eight, comments for everyone. That means that those are safe spaces. So there has to be some
places within the ecosystem where we have, you know, safe spaces for everyone, where there's a code of conduct, there's community guidelines that are followed to really keep the community in a cohesive manner. So those are the acore principles. I want to ask a question. So please, when you talk
talking about representatives. Can you elaborate on that part a little bit more? Why do we need representatives? So the reason for the representatives and I was just having a conversation a little bit ago with William who's part of the GWG around this is like,
Let's take for instance, let's just go through a simple example, NFT. What we call NFTs in this new NDC nomenclature, this architecture of NDC is it's a constellation. We call it a constellation for this reason. It's not a single dow or a single entity, but really what it
is, is it's a series of communities, entities, products, you know, advisors, councils, panels, it's all of these very complex things to make this NFT ecosystem two things decentralized and sustainable, right? That's what we want to find in NDC governance is a sustainability mechanism.
for these constellations so that eventually they wouldn't be dependent upon the community treasury, but they would be self-sustainable. Why do we need electric representatives? Well, if NFTs is one constellation, one vertical, and we have over 15 verticals, somewhere there needs to be some central plan
of the ecosystem to say, "Okay, our ecosystem mission for this year, which not everybody may know, but here's our mission, 10 million monthly active accounts, right? That's what we're working towards." So the reason that you need some electric representatives is when you have these comprehensive budgets from an entire ecosystem
of 20 plus verticals, someone's going to have to have some central planning to say, you know, what are kind of some of the budgeting thresholds that we need to look at. How do we consolidate these budgets? How do we make sure that they're fair across all these verticals? So that's the House of Merit. The House of Merit
right now as specified has 15 members, they're responsible for collecting all of the budgets for the entire ecosystem and then doing fair and fair planning around how the budget is allocated from the community treasury. So that would be one. The other House of Electric Represents is a transparency commission.
They're the watchdogs of the treasury. So I talked about a little bit before, but in the case that someone is not delivering on their promises, not delivering on what they committed to deliver, or there is cartel type behavior taking place or misconduct.
taking place of transparency commission investigates those cases and they only really have a couple of powers and that is if there was someone in the House of Merit that was approving budgets or there was collusion they could remove people from the House of Merit so that that behavior doesn't continue
And then it's a check and a balance so that in the case that they removed too many members so that the house of merit could not vote the whole body would be defunct and would have to be reelected. So it's a check against really the reason we need these is to protect the community treasury, right? Our number one goal is to protect the treasury
from anti-cartel, friends, funding, friends, and misconduct taking place. So that's the second governing spot. The third one is the Council of Advisors. What they're focused on is making sure that that budget that's created by the House of Merit is aligned to our strategic direction of near protocol.
they have the ability to veto that budget if it's not aligned or if it's too exorbitant. So it just creates this system of checks and balances to ensure primarily and fundamentally that the community treasury is not looted and that it goes for the purpose of growing and
sustaining the near ecosystem. I was a different from a current government system. We actually had conversation with Ilya recently during consensus and he also brought up a point that representatives were existing because before people couldn't physically travel
are to all occasions where the voting was taken place. That's why people who are electing representatives are so they can attend all the meetings in the voting events. However, if we're talking about protecting other people, that seems to me a recent
the traditional government structure that is saying that we're going to protect people, but then we end up with a lot of corruption, lack of transparency because that also comes with the human nature. So I want to ask, how is it different from what is already existing with
representatives and the current centralized authorities are as are like supposed to provide protection. We all know they don't. How is it different and how can we ensure that this system not going to be corrupt? So we go ahead.
Yeah, just a quick mention there. I think the primary reason for electing representatives is not the travel. It's hard to travel to vote. I think the primary reason is it's work. It's a lot of work to understand a proposal to
to craft the proposals and to debate and to understand all the aspects of the vote before voting. That requires a lot of time. And I don't know if you guys have tried it, but governance can be boring. And a lot of people are not interested, even if they are interested.
have don't have time. They're busy on the elsewhere. So the reason for electing representatives is that we need someone to actually take the responsibility and do the diligence and you can't get away from that. We need to have someone to own from that. And then if we are
facing a major vote, we can now take it out much faster than, you know, if you compare to an American governance system where they vote every so often, three or four years, we can vote as often as fast as we want. So if the elected representatives feel that something is really important and needs a public vote, we can do that.
So I think this is a way better system that you know the elected representatives take care of the daily grind the boring stuff and they can send a turbo to the community whenever they want. Place I'll let you continue. I just want to ask a follow-up question and Claudia I see you I see you have
I just want to ask, okay, then if if representatives have feels sorry that something should be brought to a public vote that doesn't seem to me really decentralized, doesn't seem to me really community oriented and I like I agree
that voting is boring, I agree that people need to have a knowledge, but why we're trying to remove this knowledge from them and any incentive instead of incentivizing it. Before you go to far down that rabbit hole, I didn't say that that's the only way that things can be put to a vote. I said that they can put it to a vote.
vote if they wanted to, but anyone in the ecosystem can put forward a vote for anyone else to vote on. There's no censorship at all. There's no superiority that only the elected representatives can put things to vote. Anyone can do that. And that's super important, especially when it comes to veto
what the houses are doing. If the community feels that the houses are not doing the right thing, they can put forward a vote at any time to disband in the houses or to eject some of the corrupt players if that was ever to happen. I may just clarify that.
not let everybody else go, but the clarification is this the power still remains with the community. The community has the ability at any point to veto a budget, remove someone from an individual house or eject the entire governance framework and bring them
system to a halt and force re-election. So the power is truly with the community. These are the representatives that they elected, but if they do not act according to the purpose of the community's treasury and trust or the purpose of near ecosystem, the community has the ability to vote and eject them.
I'll get back to these questions. I see Claudio raised the hand for instance on Chris. Guys, if you want to unmute yourselves. And, Jim. Yeah, thank you very much. No, and this is coming from also a
know the point of view, right? We're just getting started with our governance as well with Mata pool. And it's down to task, right? One of the good things about this bear market is that right now, and this is also, if I reckon the
conversations would be a little bit more difficult if this was during Able Run, right? Because there would have to be a lot of stake, literally. And so we're having even like Blaze and
in CAS has a kind of explain right it is difficult right it is difficult to set up a governance structure that will allow the Process to be seamless and decentralized so it's like you have to pick and choose right and and I think
I understand a critical point of view. We do have to understand that we're experimenting at a very high level because at the end of the day, it is resources that are being put forward by the protocol itself and in this case,
by the near foundation in order for the communities to start experimenting on how to best disperse and allocate that funding, right? You know, I think this is something we're leveraging at Metapole. I cannot go into too much of the details, but let's say that the conversations around
right now during a bearish market really filter out the bad actors even though they're not going to go away right because if we see price action improving then we're going to see a lot a whole lot of interest in NDC and this will bring in yes good actors bad actors and filtering is going to be a key mechanism
And so we need to build a robust process in order to filter out or at least take out the bad apples from the basket, right? In a void contamination and going back four or five steps, even though this back and forth of
a dance will have, will have to be part of it, right? And so my, my two cents in it is, please everyone be patient. It takes time to build this. It is not going to be perfect. Yes, there's going to be some, some errors being made and course corrections to be done. But let's,
But let's keep the eye on the target, which is moving forward towards decentralization. And yes, critical points of views are important, but come with a solution as well. Because it's easy to be on the sidelines and pinpoint.
And how can I say, be very critical without contributing to it, right? And so let's be very, very honest about it, right? If you have something to say, if you see something that is not working, please come forward with a solution.
for it because that's the only way we're going to move forward if we're going to be able to launch a decentralized ecosystem around near. So anyhow, thank you very much everybody for your comments. I really, really appreciate about all your points of view. So let's keep at it and let's keep building.
Thanks for everyone for being here. It's good to see everyone again. Have a nice.
I wanted to touch a bit more on the governance system. Another is there's the three houses. You mentioned the House of Merit, I think has 15 people in it, right?
Yes, correct. Do the other houses already have contributors?
So right now, where we're actively at is, you know, bringing online voting in Q2. So the focus of this quarter is to establish I am human protocol register. So our objectives are OK.
are really sure a thousand humans on there and then to also bring the voting contracts online. So there are no elected officials at this stage. That's really the next phase of NDC. There are there is one workgroup spun up around the transparent
But yeah, there are no elected officials at this stage. So that I guess that was my question about the House of Merit. So the 15 people that are there, they weren't elected right they were I guess selected through within their community or within the group and you see it.
So yeah, to this point, the House of Merit does not exist, nor the transparency commission nor the council of the advisors. They're proposed and we're actively working to bring them online.
Okay, I guess I thought I heard that there were 15 people
that were already in the house.
No, there's not, but what there is is the governance working group right now. The governance working group are the stewards of bringing the NDC online and that's a community led working group. So within that working group, I think we have maybe 25 contributors.
And most of those are just community members that have stepped forward and started contributing and work group actively. Other of those are appointed roles where for instance we just had a project manager position opening and we put that out on the
government's form near social, create a panel to do all the interviews, and then we selected a candidate which is Jane, weighing that just joined the governance working group, starting this week. Not sure if that's what you're referring to.
And to Claudius Point, I think we should come with solutions if we point out, if we point things out. So I was wondering if anyone had an idea how many, if there's a limit to how many people are in this house and would it go by like a 51
percent majority if the house voted within itself. And if a house completely like 100% voted on something but the majority of the community outside of the house disagreed with it, what would happen in that case?
So let's talk about the House of Merit, specifically, right? So they're tasked with creating a budget for the ecosystem, right? And maintaining the budget and, you know, receiving the numerous amount of requests for funding that would come from Dow's projects, you know, things of that nature. They will actually
only fund a limited number of entities if you will and then those entities would be responsible for distributing funds. Let's take an example of the NFT working group or the NFT Constellation. They would fund the NFT Constellation and the NFT Constellation would self-govern, however, they're going to handle funding, right?
And so we have kind of, you know, architecture for the NBC that will be coming out. But let's let's take for instance, they approve the budget for the NFT community, right? The House of Mary does. But the actual community is against that budget. The community has the ability to veto that budget.
Got Chris do you have any more questions? If the community vetoes the budget
Who actually has the power to actually press the big red button and move funds along or stop it from passing along?
So the way that it works is if the House of Merit, let's say creates a budget for the NFT, the NFT community sits, submits a budget, the House of Merit approves that budget. Here are the checks on that budget. The Council of Advisors has
window to veto that budget. And so the Council of Advisors could veto the budget and then it'd have to go back and be reconfigured and resubmit it. The community also has the power to veto that budget. So there are two veto options.
one via the council of advisors, one via the community. If neither one of those vetoes that budget within a specific time window, then that budget is by default approved if approved by the House of Mayor then would be distributed.
And it's not like we just need to have a workshop here on going through V1 governance as probably a good next step.
Yeah, we have the first one of those happening right in an hour or so where Osay is going to go through the product book and then we have a plan for him to go through each one of the houses, how it works, how it all works, so that's all in the works.
Thanks for clearing it up because it's I know we're talking about something pretty grand to use here, but it's there's obviously a lot of small details to make it a Reality so we're gonna have to go through all the whole of this country Yeah, there's there's one more check that was mentioned that's the trustees
and then force it up the trustee. So they are supposed to, the trustees will issue funds from the community treasury as long as it's approved by the houses as Blades mentioned. But then there are a few other, you know, sanitary checks and balances. So it has to follow the
spirit on the intent of what NDC does and we can't fund illegal activities and whatnot. So the trustees also access another check-in balance on power. But we hope that they never would have to get involved in executing that.
Thank you so much. Thank you Chris for asking good questions. I wanted to ask Blaze and we have questions from community as well as I still have a couple of my own questions.
Although I understand that something so deep and big as NDC is impossible to fit into one Twitter space, but what does your time look like? Can we go for another 25-30 minutes?
I can't. I don't know, but you guys.
Yeah, we actually have our NDC weekly community call so we do a community update every Tuesday and that's happened in four minutes so if everyone would love to join that NDC weekly update
we can continue the conversation there and ask questions at the end. But on that meeting each week we give an update to the community just an overview about the NDC what we're actively working on and what we're going to accomplish this week.
And how would be people able to join that call? Yeah, let's just let me jump in the Twitter space here on and just share the zoom. Well, we can't do that. Maybe here's the best way to do it. If you guys jump over to near DC,
on Twitter and you hit the link tree link there and then you join the NBC community hub. The zoom link will be posted in there. The reason we don't want to share it on Twitter is that's how we did that we got.
Spamers came and took over the meeting so And what platform is it shared on? Is it in Telegram? Yeah, it's in Telegram the NBC hub. Let me just share that link directly here
Thank you guys. It's been fun. Let's do it again. I'm happy to talk about these things at any time. Anyone has any questions? Thanks for having us on. I feel I have to do a follow up for sure.
I really appreciate all your responses and guiding us through MDC. I think it's really important for our community to know every single detail and what Chris mentioned before. There are so many small details that still need to be determined to be discussed.
For sure as well as we have 19 requests for questions from the community. So we definitely need to follow up and have some of those questions answered. Should we also prepare maybe we can aggregate these questions from the community and also share it with our
please and the cards from and the C and maybe they can reply to the NDC Telegram chat. You know we can do that if somebody wants to go ask question telegram chat for free to do it but also it's nice to have like a conversation of flow on the spaces where members if you need to come up and ask a question.
But anyway, I guess we have two minutes left, so much else we can fit here. I just want to say thank you everybody for coming. Thank you. I mean, Kaz is not here anymore. Thank you, Blaze. Thank you, Supermoon for organizing this. And yeah, definitely let's do a follow-up place because I still have my own questions.
there's so much more left to sort of explore in the NDC and for the community to understand different parts of it because of how complex and deep it is. I want to thank everyone as well and thanks for the transparency because these are not music questions and answers so I understand like it's still a model that's being built.
I think we're figuring this all out together. I would say if you had questions, you know, write them down. Let's not forget because I definitely want to do a follow up so we can get a different to this. Okay. Thank you, everybody. Blasecoffedam, sorry. Wonderful. Thank you, everyone. And what's really cool is that
The governance framework and constitution actually had a tremendous community input early on in the process. So yeah, it's going to be good to go back through it with more community now and just see where we end up. So looking forward to it and for sure, maybe we should be doing multiple AMAs per week. And I think we're happy to do that. So
Thank you, everyone. Thank you, everybody, for coming. Blaze dropped the link for the Telegram call in the comments to the space. So check it out. We'll be there. And I'm going to rug the space. Now see you tomorrow on my next space. Thank you, everyone.