29 June 2022 / 10:00-12:00 AM (UTC-4)
Council: Elation Studios, Ryan, Phantz Club, Song Sjun, Sash | Elacity, MButchy – Nenchy, DR, Rebecca Zhu, Strawberry Council, PG Bao, Jingyu, infi
Secretariat: Cassie, Greg
- Paladin auditing – Ryan
- TLGG organization report – Elation
- CRC rewards proposal – Sash
- Elacity – Sash
- Business continuity plan – M&N
- Action Items
Bullets denote reporter information and replies to queries. Initials/names indicate questions/ideas raised.
Paladin auditing – Ryan
- Surveyed different companies last fall. 20-30 considered.
- Glide used Paladin for 2x audits.
- Relationship in place/partnership possible for Elastos:
- 10% discount for ESC projects + priority processing + network monitoring.
- Watchdog for ESC – security reassurance for new users.
- Paladin has RugDoc affiliation – rugdoc.io.
- Avalanche have a similar deal with Paladin, as a recommendation.
- No payment needed – it’s for referrals.
- 0 ELA proposal to make it official and for structuring promotional efforts.
Elation – Is the discount negotiable?
- Possible, but let’s not over-haggle
MB – How does it compare to others? Certik for example.
- Reputation not as high as Certik, but Paladin is established and well-thought of by communities and has many happy customers.
RZ – Is it too centralized if all ESC protocols are audited by the same service?
- It’s not exclusive, but recommended as reputable and discount available.
RZ – Does it need CRC?
- No need, but less official, lesser relationship, adding the proposal gives the opportunity for badging websites, calling it a strategic partnership. “ESC: Protected by Paladin”
RZ – Useful marketing partnership for Elastos
MB – Worth a proposal then it has the official support of CRC. Zero risk. CR is really the only entity responsible for Elastos ecosystem, excluding EF of course. CR should really make ecosystem partnerships.
Sash – Ecosystem partners. Is Essentials being audited? Who by? Unknown
Elation – Ecosystem page with audits visible. List of audited projects with firms added. Wording of the proposal is key, it would need to be clear that Paladin is recommended and not mandatory.
Ne – It’s a strategic partnership for us. Showing that with CRC proposal voting makes it look “legit” and we can add this to our published documentation. We just need to mention other auditing firms are also available.
DR – There is no downside to the Paladin suggestion. If anything I see pure upside. There is even a faint possibility of developers from another ecosystem seeing ELA from this exposure.
TLGG organization report – Elation
- Comprehensive report created and shared by TLGG about the organization of Elastos and how it is limiting progress in a major way.
- Lots of hard truths shared.
- Has everyone received and reviewed the report yet?
- Feedback has been requested by 3rd July – before the community sees it.
- CR/EF/Core needs to provide a response to the report as just releasing it without a response could be seen as though CR and Elastos are directionless -which is exactly what the report says.
MB – TLGG totally “nailed it”, it’s entirely correct in its findings, now what?
Ne – All counselors need to speak up and present thoughts. Who is the leader for moving forwards?
- Ideal result:
- TLGG share the review ✅
- Project organization is holding Elastos back ✅
- Ideas for solutions – pending
- CR forms a plan to address the issues – pending
- Bring report AND proposed solutions to the community – pending
- Community can then give feedback – pending
- July 3rd feedback deadline.
- July 10th community share.
- It’s a terrible “look” if no action or plan comes from this report.
- Elation to provide feedback following receiving others’ feedback.
Ne – Did EF respond to receipt of the report? One has replied.
MB – Leader: External? From EF or CRC?
- All stakeholders should be contributing to the solution. CR, EF, Core. It’s critical and important and there has to be a response from as many people as possible to get the best solution moving forwards.
DR – TLGG hit the nail on the head. The issues must be acknowledged and resolved from the top down. The community needs to see the report, but options for solutions must be presented alongside the findings. Plan of action by the 10th is critical. COOs specializing in restructuring must exist.
Cassie and Fox to liaise about arranging a specific meeting to discuss the next steps.
CRC rewards proposal – Sash
- Not enough attendance, missed votes – set back progress.
- Gamification of CRC rewards:
- All votes chained – no deductions
- 2 proposals – bonus
- Attend a meeting per month – no deductions
- Council thoughts requested – feedback needed
- Can this solution enhance the performance of the council?
- Being on the CR is paid through existing rewards. Further payment should be unnecessary. But it isn’t working, or not well enough.
- Perhaps more involvement could be encouraged by rewarding insights and ideas through proposal submission rewards
M – Look to merge MB and Sash proposal to find a middle ground that takes the best of both. Or some of the points raised can be implemented with others next term.
Elation – some changes would be good to lead into the next term. All CRC members have to do is vote. That’s it. But they don’t. Encouraging council members to engage is key
- Reporting attendance alongside voting records might be enough for some members to improve their behaviours. The financial motivation isn’t enough, but it’s a nice bonus for those who really do contribute.
Elation – Elab proposal first, then to move into CRC. Like a referendum.
- Further honing the idea is needed and Sash will continue to gather thoughts and support.
Ryan – Incentives aren’t sufficient at the moment. Beware of corruption accusations
MB – Very small numbers with regards rewards, but some effort to inspire more contribution is important.
DR – I can see the concern of conflict of interest, but it helps interest in running in the future. I am all for rewarding, but our purpose is to vote. We shouldn’t necessarily be given praise for doing our job.
Ne – This needs to go to proposal and vote upon! It’s all pretty straight to me – rewarding and punishment part – as a package.
Elacity – Sash
Working towards the CR bounty from last term.
- Smart contracts are implemented, 2% dividends, digital capsule that uses all of Elastos tech stack is the continued vision.
- DIDs and Hive integrated. Login and details from Hive to Elacity profile – control of data with the owner.
- Elabox and Elacity work together.
- Tiered reputation through KYC.
- Hive data minting – for NFT data. Token on-chain and image in data vault the goal.
- Elacity DID and IPFS is working.
Business continuity plan – M&N
- What happens if <24 active DPoS nodes
- No blocks if 35 or fewer supernodes! Mainchain.
- Does this revert to PoW if the nodes are shut down?
- So the mainchain stops if we fall under 24 public nodes.
- Central team that can start new nodes if we fall under 24 nodes.
- 24 backup nodes standing by in times of need.
- A plan is definitely needed.
Mainchain-ESC transfers – Nenchy
- I would just briefly like to hear/check, what is the current status with CR nodes used for fast transfer? Few days ago there were some issues for tx’s from MC > SC with a transfer below 1 ELA.
Jingyu and Rebecca: All should be fine now. Some issues with fast transfer but small transfers are okay but may be slower than expected.
Council nodes and voting – Fox
- Only 8 of 12 are able to vote on the test proposal.
- Perhaps because SNs not set-up
- Bocheng to investigate why they aren’t permitting voting.
- Council members affected:
- PG Bao
- All council members send feedback on the TLGG report to Elation ASAP.