Update notes for calls 10 and 3

calls/README.md

@@ -20,14 +20,15 @@ Below is a list of all prior/completed calls, including links to their agenda, r
 
 | No   | Date       | Time | Agenda  | Video | Notes | Resources |
 | ---- | ---------- | ---- | ------- | ----- | ----- | ---- |
-| 0010 | 2020-04-29 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/35)  | TBD  | TBD   |  TBD |
+| 0011 | 2020-05-06 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/37) | TBD | TBD | TBD |
+| 0010 | 2020-04-29 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/35)  | [Video](https://youtu.be/f7nUMpUzu5E)  | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/blob/master/calls/notes/2020-04-29-Meeting-0010.md)   | n/a |
 | 0009 | 2020-04-22 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/31) | [Video](https://youtu.be/TwkrWMA7Eo0) | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/blob/master/calls/notes/2020-04-22-Meeting-0009.md) |  n/a |
 | 0008 | 2020-04-15 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/25)  | [Video](https://youtu.be/Pubkhn-reDk)  | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/blob/master/calls/notes/2020-04-15-Meeting-0008.md)   |  n/a |
 | 0007 | 2020-04-08 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/24) | [Video](https://youtu.be/-5BrfFvPvD4) | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/blob/master/calls/notes/2020-04-08-Meeting-0007.md) | n/a |
 | 0006 | 2020-04-01 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/19) / [Google Doc](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lr9zOLWO5Xtg31M-dKaVXREYcyQn_zCepwPlErD3pvg/edit) | [Video](https://youtu.be/ALeaUzwxTe8) | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/blob/master/calls/notes/2020-04-01-Meeting-0006.md) | n/a |
 | 0005 | 2020-03-25 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/16)  | [Video](https://youtu.be/gpw6byKPeIw)  | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/blob/master/calls/notes/2020-03-25-Meeting-0005.md)  | n/a  |
 | 0004 | 2020-03-18 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/9)  | [Video](https://youtu.be/u8lZsVFCFtc)  | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/blob/master/calls/notes/2020-03-18-Meeting-0004.md)  | @dantrevino [Presentation Slides](https://slides.com/dantrevino/blockstack-governance) / @blocks8 [Foundation Notes](https://docs.google.com/document/d/125MQTwpP9oooAUSES4U_HTcVJ02lVOR7A1IWEC3jh3g/edit?usp=sharing) |
-| 0003 | 2020-03-11 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/5) | [Video](https://youtu.be/d7cGndifjR0)  | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/issues/12)  | [Community Foundation Questions](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/11)  |
+| 0003 | 2020-03-11 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/5) | [Video](https://youtu.be/d7cGndifjR0)  | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/blob/master/calls/notes/2020-03-11-Meeting-0003.md)  | [Community Foundation Questions](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/11)  |
 | 0002 | 2020-03-02 | 1400 UTC | [Agenda](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/3) | [Video](https://youtu.be/jAEHyq4TKeI)  | [Notes](https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/3#issuecomment-593482885)  | n/a |
 | 0001 | 2020-02-13 | 1500 UTC | n/a | [Video](https://youtu.be/GilQ9qU4Sa0) | [TBD](https://github.com/stacksgov/resources/issues/16) | [Presentation Slides](20200213_community_call_001.pdf) |
 

calls/notes/2020-03-11-Meeting-0003.md

@@ -1,3 +1,171 @@
 # 20200311 Governance Working Group Call 3
 
-(placeholder)
+Lane (@lrettig) is moderating today.
+
+## Agenda
+
+https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/5
+
+## Intros
+
+We heard a quick introduction from the following participants:
+
+- Lane Rettig
+- Jason Schrader
+- Juliet Oberding
+- Phillip Roe
+
+## Updates over the past week
+
+Lane provided us with some updates over the past week.
+
+### Resources (YouTube/GitHub/Discord/Discourse/others)
+
+- last week's video recording on Youtube
+- github has been pretty active, resources are expanding
+- great place to contribute and get started
+- will serve as a shared knowledge base
+- ongoing conversation in Discord
+- chat.blockstack.org --> Discord invite
+- The contribute blockstack repo (@blockstackers) that has working group info, link to specific channels in repo
+
+### Regular updates
+
+- another repository on github (stacksgov/updates repo)
+- publish updates weekly after the calls, factor in any updates that people share
+- open issue that people can add to, becomes a PR, merged in once final
+
+### One on one "stakeholder interviews"
+
+- started with PBC folks, now beginning to speak to broader ecosystem as well
+- 4 done, 5th scheduled, beginning to lose track (a good thing)
+- taken extensive notes, but will clean up and share with each interviewee
+- if you want to nominate there is a form to do that, or message Lane directly
+
+## Standups
+
+### Jason Schrader
+
+Jason: Working on community health files for GH repos - looking at examples from other projects, consolidating resources, we are on the right track
+
+### Phillip Roe
+
+Phillip: Trying to understand experience of blockchain networks, their experience on other networks, a lot of issues with capitalism in the blockchain, many people mention these issues, something we have to think about, how to deal with that.
+
+Phillip: As we launch blockstack apps, we are going forward in trying to get some revenues from the user of the DApp, see that (capitalist) attitude come into the ecosystem. Wanting to understand governance issues from other blockchain projects.
+
+Phillip: Goal to protect the people, ways we can govern, how do we address the "ambition problem", “Brutality of capitalism” is seen in the blockchain arena, many people mention this in different places. He is very technical, but this content is much more technical, curious how we determine governance when this is such a complex subject.
+
+Phillip: governance always under laws of one country, at international level (united nations), enforcement is not being applied sometimes. the law at the end is one that has to be applied, this government has to be under the law, and how this is going to show "proof" or other elements in order to be protected.
+
+Phillip: been working with Blockstack since 2017, riding the horse and it's going faster and faster, (Lane agrees). Would love to review and unpack some of those questions. Let's continue the conversation on the forum, discord, or github?
+
+## Community Survey
+
+Lane: using Typeform, built from Google Doc, few folks have seen it, comments helpful for content and flow, factoring in other feedback now, expect to have minimum viable survey finished by tomorrow (Thu 2020/03/12).
+
+Lane: Jenny/Brittany, any input on how to launch? let's not make it perfect in the beginning. next step is have the working group take the survey themselves, then discuss how it works then discuss again. If possible - would like to share it in a somewhat scientific fashion, from a few people, look at scientific survey methodology to get true results. have some ideas:
+- sampling random stacks token addresses
+- other methods that will be shared
+
+Lane: Another line of questioning: what is the purpose? what are the action points?
+- smart questions, especially before, thoughts shared in the forum (as well as in Google Doc).
+- been adding/removing stuff while factoring this thought in
+- making it clear that every question has an action item associated with it.
+- example: asking location/continents, change to countries, useful because helps like scheduling calls, time zones, blockstack summit locations.
+- possible result: turns out a large portion of the community in an area we weren't aware of
+
+Lane: Anyone have anything to add or share?
+
+Phillip: a question about the behaviors or challenges that you have seen in blockchain communities? a way to grasp the spirit of what's going on and how.
+
+Lane: posted link to the draft survey, not ready to be shared, but can get a sense of it. Doesn't include most recent updates (but will, soon). In the governance section, at least one question toward this topic, open-ended questions: what challenges do you see with the existing governance platform?
+
+Jason: if we have this on agenda, why do it in the survey?
+
+Lane: surveys get the pulse of the community. most people like quick select-answers, not open-ended questions. One option is to turn it into multiple choice: which issues concern you the most (examples from others, with an other).
+
+Lane: Survey aspect of what other projects are doing, doesn't belong here, can crowdsource that on github or in the forum or both. Already happening as a part of the cryptogov working table / group. stakeholder survey created for projects in general. Wharton crypto gov initiative - we can lean on this as well - has collected responses from a dozen the projects or more: https://cryptogov.net/
+
+Juliet: read out question regarding governance, concerned that after looking at governance conversations in the community, not sure if they really know what it is, or what it means
+- ideas of rules of law vs on chain vs off chain governance
+- concern of question being very general
+- if I'm going to answer: "Blockstack's done a great job", without considering what was in place
+- maybe something we can do some work around, what is the governance model right now, and what does that mean?
+
+Lane: There are two pieces to it:
+- what is governance in general
+- what is your understanding of how Governance works now (or has worked) in the Blockstack ecosystem
+
+Lane: the survey is a great place to ask questions, aiming for the latter. What is in your opinion, the "mission of the project"? Also degree of alignment, and around values, could be phrased differently, what do people think?
+
+Joris Hermans: governance is very broad term, integrated many different ways, when you are really familiar with the blockchain world it's much easier. know that a lot of poeple / devs joining from outside that world thinks open source projects, how they govern their ecosystems (Lane strongly agrees).
+
+Lane: thought to add on, a lot of what we are doing feels very new/novel, but a lot of this is not new, been done for decades, there are great examples and much to learn from open source.
+
+Joris: lots of foundations, stakeholders in foundations, really like: Gatsby, how they organize themselves, all developers are empowered to take ownership of pieces of the whole stack, how they comunicate in github appeals to him, also wants to bring up on community dev calls, also nice to look at javascript foundation.
+
+Dan: my confusion is that we still haven't defined (to Juliet/Joris point) what the governance affects, the only visible indicator up until now has been around app mining (standing from the outside). we have a very heavy handed (corporate controlled) approach to development (but PBC is working on it, they accept PRs, not a complaint), structure of dev team much different for app mining
+
+Dan: what is the purpose of governance? what does it cover? what is the mission statement for stacksgov? will we come out of this without doing a stacks foundation? Friedger asking if app mining should be included, secondary to the mission or "the whole point", PBC doesn't want to govern the network, separate foundation makes sense, have we talked about what the structure of the foundation, the questions we are asking don't seem very directed.
+
+Lane: the goal of the survey is not to ask people how they want to be governed going forward, gauged more to level of understanding and involvement. I’ve been asking these questions on the one on ones, agree they’re important, probably not helpful to ask such open ended questions on the survey, but - how do we make sure we hear everyone’s voice here?
+
+Juliet: contributing to the call on the foundation, setup in singapore, based on the type available there, one director required to be a native, director and secretaries, and the kinds of directors and who are selected and what their role yet has not been discussed with us yet. Brittany is working on and haven't heard updates yet.
+
+Dan: totally remember that, confusion comes from it seems like "we" picked an idea for a "foundation". created, established, structure semi-defined. still feels like we are asking the community "what do you think" when the direction was already defined. would like to see not just the notes, but also the "here's where we are" with a timeline, tentative structure, opportunity to voice thoughts on what that structure looks like.
+
+Dan: What are the open questions around the Foundation? I don’t think anybody is questioning that. What can we the community actually contribute to vs. what has already been decided? What are the things they think the Foundation is gonna manage? App mining? Where’s that list of questions? E.g. how will it be funded? There’s a cart-and-horse thing there. It feels like we’ve picked a general structure but it’s not being communicated; what is governance?
+
+Joris: basics not right, collections, contacts, don't see any further work on that, working group for data, where we can define data structures, what are we going to do to open up between every application. to bring unity. These things are very important, they need to be defined, structure to let them grow. feeling now: a lot of poeple are experimenting on their own islands.
+
+Dan: what he is saying is hugely valuable, but his question, does that have anything to do with the stacksgov foundation? He likes open source software, working in Github, on the development side is a different side and structure than what we are talking about with funding, governance, and others. Ad hoc the community has been working on collections, but does the foundation have a role in organizing dev teams? or organizing development?
+
+Joris: not just development, structure, documentation, the fact with PBC is they are developing docs, very basic thing that needs to be setup. important to take next step forward. saw a lot of things about PoX, read a lot about it, but things are very complex.
+
+Dan: hugely valuable, if you can send us all a link to the community you just mentioned, documentation working groups. like to see how other groups are doing these type of things. big example on how stewardship is setup. If we leave it up to PBC it's going to be all VCs. They can set up leadership, but community wants to have input too, maybe someone more into development. What does the foundation actually cover?
+
+Phillip: questions in the survey? his view: difficult for all the people that are participating, hard to understand full view, as you said there are always some people that work one way for years, leave because they have info, likes openness of these groups that let us understand what's going on. Surprise to learn about Singapore for foundation, didn't see this last time, heard of Estonia has a corporation, start wondering what's going on with that, something that we have to put in place.
+
+Phillip: appreciate your interest and participation, only have so much time. this is the opportunity to express and thank you to Lane for being selected and working through tasks. other thing is that the law is something already defined. structures defined. the way you have to implement the foundation in different parts of the world. have to jam through those and use that part and adjust our knowledge on top of that. the new knowledge is about concept of blockchain governing itself. Don't believe it but want to embrace new concept.
+
+Lane: In the future, we can move from 60-90 min call, running short on time (top of the hour). Summarizing the questions briefly:
+- I think there are very important/valid questions about some of the basics: right structure? why was Singapore chosen, better option? how should it be governed? what should it's scope be? what is the mission/charter? all questions already on his mind
+- first: actual formation of the legal entity is not within his personal scope of work. PBC is leading this effort, and Brittany is the main source (not on call), he will collect questions to bring up with her.
+- my understanding: Juliet mentioned, it will be a foundation, Singapore entity, "minimum-viable" to start, fill in the positions and what happens from there is up to us (as a community)
+- "It's on us". This is a permissionless peer-led commons project. We have to come together to answer these questions. As long as we are reasonable in expectations and cost then PBC should step up.
+- Closing thought: let's think through these items and start throwing out proposals. Excited to work with everyone.
+
+Jenny: on that, hear what Dan is saying, all this activity super valuable to understand how it works, what it could look like, surface all work streams we are all involved in: Elijah and data collections, as an exercise with the community we can organize those work streams under those questions, hearing Dan's questions, maybe a disconnect between the directive of wanting to work together versus what the practical example of what it is.
+
+Juliet: Dan nailed it, each question needs to be outlined, follow and answer those questions, thanks for raising that. really really important those questions are answered, and at this point, we don't have any input. where are we making input? how we are contributing input? how are we being heard?
+
+Joris: add transparency and clear communication, makes more sense to recommunicate clear, get everyone on same page. thinks it will be a big challenge.
+
+Lane: volunteering to type up a list of these questions as Dan put them forward, will raise other questions as part of the process, happy to put them on the forum as a starting point. do invite and ask everyone else to contribute. can mean more questions, answers, making sure people have a voice.
+
+List of questions from the call:
+https://github.com/stacksgov/pm/issues/11
+
+Lane: finishing up this agenda item, clear actions:
+- draw up list of questions
+- start drawing answers from everyone
+
+Jenny: happy to help sort questions into categories (macro categories) of governance, each question can help illustrate what aspects we are working on
+
+Juliet: happy to advocate for getting those questions answered and pushing forward
+
+## How to get involved/contribute
+
+- add the How to Git Involved blog post to the resources
+- when the survey is up, please respond and let us know thoughts
+- resources repository on stacksgov, open issues, add info
+- contribute to regular updates (out by tomorrow)
+
+## Next/recurring call schedule
+
+This time slot on Wednesdays, weekly, any strong objections? sticking with for now (based on those on the call), if its an issue, please jump in on Discord, or comment on Github.
+
+## Open call - any other updates?
+
+(none)