:+!: agree

I was going to propose the same thing - keep is simple.
I would adjust the focus slightly - IMO what we're proposing changing in this experiment is :

1. being open to one another about how much we're being paid
2. being involved in each other pay
3. trying out what doing that is like with a multisig wallet

For me, my focus is on what the dynamics are like. I love @peg's invitation to pay very close attention to the emotions that come up as we do this. For me I think that's going to be an order of magnitude more instructive than the details of multi-sig. But I could be wrong, there might be hidder empowerment in cosigning my colleagues pay ... I can't wait to find out (if that's what we do)

edit ^^

agree

1. being open to one another about how much we're being paid
2. being involved in each other pay
3. trying out what doing that is like with a multisig wallet

agree

It seems like we're already embarking on (1) & seem to be zooming in on (2). We're yet to figure out the practicalities of (3).

I also really resonate with what @mix has said here in relation to @peg's comment:

For me, my focus is on what the dynamics are like. I love @peg's invitation to pay very close attention to the emotions that come up as we do this. For me I think that's going to be an order of magnitude more instructive than the details of multi-sig.

I'll wait to hear back from @Alanna, @Kieran & @peg before jumping in. Feel like it's good to pause and see if we have an agreeable proposal here, or it if needs more tweeking.

Agreed, I feel like I alluded to my opinion in the first post was to keep change slow and incremental given the highly emotional nature of the experiment and the different angles people will be coming at it from. Looking back it appears I missed that off my post, my mind was jumbled up with many thoughts that day.

Regardless, the can of worms I alluded to in my previous post that may emerge at the other end of this is worth noticing. Especially since the second part of the experiment is patching on a tool to use alongside the multisig, I think our choice of tool will be tied into this. While the experiment can remain simple, its direction will emerge through more broad and challenging conversations.

And I'm in whole hearted agreement with Peg (and @mix and @Dan Hassan's sentiment) on emphasising the emotions that arise when having this conversation, much of the both positive and negative emotions that Peg mentioned also were raised for me, learning how to set your own workload, knowing where to draw a line, how to value your own skills and work, and thinking/worrying about how others value your work. I feel like much of that came across in my last post, perhaps it was the subtext.

on the translation of Euro rate -> cryptocurrency rate

I have a strong desire to want to include a variability adjustment to that converstion.

e.g. on a recent quote for a contract I gave NZD and BTC rates, and for the BTC rate I decided to quote the equivalent of my NZD rate + 30% (an arbitrary number that I guessed the market could easily slump).

I guess the reverse could be true too... like the market goes up.

hey @Kieran what are you talking about here :

Especially since the second part of the experiment is patching on a tool to use alongside the multisig, I think our choice of tool will be tied into this. While the experiment can remain simple, its direction will emerge through more broad and challenging conversations.

@mix I'm referring to the 'Tooling' section of the experiment phase, i.e. we've got shared funds in a multisig wallet, now how do we distribute them? Is this done through cobudget, open collective, loomio, our own transaction system... etc.

Mount Roraima

Hey all,

Ok, to recap we have agreed the following:

• 1 being open to one another about how much we're being paid
• 2 being involved in each other pay
• 3 trying out what doing that is like with a multisig wallet

We got yes votes from @mix, @Dan Hassan, @peg & @Kieran. @Alanna abstained. @Nikolai Berkoff and Sophia have elected to not participate in experiments / voting.

Priority

Next up as has been mentioned is practicalities of how to facilitate the above.

Mix has mentioned one practical consideration.

There are likely others.

Next Proposal

I propose that we spend then next half of this experiment mapping the practicalities of getting paid out from the multi-sig wallet.

This includes:

• frequency
• how to set rates
• how to think about volatility
• how to handle accounts and tracking
• how to handle 'reporting'

Once we have this process clearly defined we can then have a follow up experiment which looks to use what looks like the most suitable tool

More thoughts

Not specific to the proposal but perhaps right afterwards

To recap, we have a multisig wallet. We can think of this as the bank account.

We have a number of tools which could be used for accounting which we have started to list here

• cobudget
• open-collective
• loomio
• my.ensprial
• french one (can't recall the name right now)
• crypto-currency
• mmt accounting system
• dyne's social wallet
• ...

Perhaps rather than thinking about getting 'locked into' any one of these tools, we could perhaps try each on for a period of time (a week? two weeks?) and make notes as we go about what we like about each?

It feels like what we need at this point is a conversation about the purpose and opportunity of using each tool. What's our why in this case?

Why?

1. We actually need a way of tracking our pay and accounts with eachother.
2. We are trying to find out if there is a space where the tools available don't allow us to do the thing we are trying to do. Put another way, we want to make sure we are not just recreating the wheel, where another tool would suffice.

(1) and (2) are at odds with eachother IMO. For (1) we want some level of reliability and not to keep changing it. That sounds stressful. For (2), we want to be experimental and open to learning.

naive perhaps - but don't we have the blockchain tracking who is paid how much? I think the only thing we'd need is a ledger which maps names to receive addresses

I'm going to throw the challenge - let's use as few tools as possible. I only want necessary complexity in my life (this is a programming phrase, let me know if you want it expanded), I want to focus on having fun and being empowered and exploring.

Can we manage with conversation and a ledger and notice when and where that gets unteneable?
By conversation I mean in person, with written agreements (written agreements on the butts are immutable, so that's nice)

I notice this only works because of the blockchain - other groups would need to choose another ledger.

The aim was :

To ascertain if MMT Dev Team has a good time running own internal economy. Therefore the experiment should surface a 'yes' or 'no' from folks to keep going with experiments which are in this vein.

I think we're more likely to surface "yes when ...[conditions]" and "no when ...[conditions]"

Said another way - we could spend a week and a half talking about rates and tools.
Or we could co-sign some payments at market rate and then notice the vibes

@mix I like your thinking. Yes, blockchains are an immutable append only linked list of transactions. What this doesn't help with are all the other human related things such as seeing graphical visualisation of balance, reserves etc

I guess the question is how to handle that part.

OTOH everyone with access to the multisig wallet can actually see how many BTC are left in the wallet using the electrum GUI. So in our case, the cosigners can see this, but @Nikolai Berkoff, Sophia and others in the team won't be able to right now...

The above suggestion(s) surfaces the following action(s):

1. Make a new multisig (async) which includes @Alanna
2. Place an amount of coins into this commonly controlled pot.
3. Sign out some crypto wages.

The suggestion has been that we do this through dialogue here on patchwork.

Personal

I like this suggestion! We get to have more fun doing stuff, doing stuff and then talking about the doing of stuff is often more of a Good Time than just talking about doing stuff.

I'm going to take another little pause here to wait to hear back from @Alanna, @peg & @Kieran for their thoughts on this iterative next proposal...

Aside - making a dashboard that synthesises blockchain transactions around particular account(s) into an accessible dashboard would be fun/ useful. Probably already exists right...

Aside - making a dashboard that synthesises blockchain transactions around particular account(s) into an accessible dashboard would be fun/ useful. Probably already exists right...

Yes, there exists such tools for individual gamblers (investors, speculators) but I have yet to see a set of tools which does not assume an individual user.

Put another way - yes BUT not for groups.

I'm in agreement, like before. Our first plugin to the wallet is direct conversation + patchwork/bay.

I totally recognise the desire to minimize the number of different tools being used (less is more, etc). I also feel like part of this experiment is working out how we can intelligently, collectively and asynchronously interact with the crypto in the multisig. We can glean more insight by sequentially testing different approaches on top of the wallet.

I am interested in having a look at experimenting with how cobudget and/or some other existing community finance tool could work alongside a socially managed crypto wallet.

I'm also of the thinking that the timeframe we're dealing with here is vast. If we're only doing this once a month, how are we going to learn about the actual fund distribution process with such large gaps in between 'payday'?

@peg

Which of these two options?

1. Said another way - we could spend a week and a half talking about rates and tools.
2. Or we could co-sign some payments at market rate and then notice the vibes
3. Other ...

@peg I have created an mmt group in cobudget and have invited everyone to it. This is just to look around, am not proposing we use it just yet....

Interested to hear what you think of mix's latest proposal

@peg RE: the shortlist - this isn't a shortlist, rather just a list of the tools I could think of at the time of writing :) Feel free to add to the list of tools in the ecosystem, I guess at some point we'll figure out a way of analysing them methodically ...

If anyone else would be interested in an attached mini-experiment I'd be up for choosing one of the tools and keeping track of things that way. For me it would be interesting to compare say cobudget with the mmt-transaction-log

Might not be worth a highlevel main experiment, unless the mini-experiment surfaces some interesting points which indicate interesting possibilities for investigation...

cc: @Kieran @peg

@peg you ask

@Dan Hassan when you say such tools already exist, do you mean stuff like 'Blockfolio'?

Yes, that's one example. I am on the hunt for examples of this tool for groups or organisations... haven't found one yet. There are LOADS aimed at individuals.

Ok, so to recap we're going to use scuttlebutt to organise payments and releasing funds.

Once our new wallet is setup we can then do a round of co-signed payouts and "check the vibes".

i worry we might bore the other scuttlers with little technicalities other whether are payments have gone through each month, which might not be what people who subscribed to the channel were interested in... make sense?

Private groups are on the way, so eventually we'll be able to migrate over to one of those for 'boring technicalities'. That being said my gut says that there is value in others being able to passively following along with this type of thing...

I'm also of the thinking that the timeframe we're dealing with here is vast. If we're only doing this once a month, how are we going to learn about the actual fund distribution process with such large gaps in between 'payday'?

It is also possible we can look into doing more regular payments such as weekly? BTC transaction fees are very, very low atm.

cc: #mmt-experiments