I'm recording this call, this is a generative commons call on Wednesday, May 26th, 2021 and we'll put this call in the generative commons just to begin things on the right foot. Who would like to pick up and explain where we are? I'm happy to as well, but Vincent? Maybe we should go around and do introductions or something. I, all of us know each other except hi David, it's nice to meet you. So David probably doesn't know us and we probably don't know David. That sounds correct. I'm wondering to add on to that if we can introduce ourselves and maybe give a sense of why we're here, which could serve as a mini-inter to the generative commons. Michael, awesome. And Lauren is on the way as well. Oh, fabulous. Okay, and we're just starting a round of intros and then we'll start to talk about why we're here. So I'll jump in. Let's wait for Lauren. Oh, okay. Well, Lauren knows the rest of us. Okay, fair enough. I think it's good for all of us to do the same things together. Okay, I agree. Then shall we whistle a tune for a little while?  I can report that we had a 20 degree temperature swing in Minnesota. I mean, the highs the last couple of days were 78 to 80. And the high today is going to be like 64. Oh, nice. Brisk. So I don't need to worry about the AC working today. Open a window or door. Amazing. And there's Lauren. Yay, yay. Hi, Lauren. Okay. I'm feeling that wasn't Lauren. There we go. Oh, cool. Good morning. Cool. So we're just going to do a little round of intros because now we have several people who don't know everybody and several everybody's who don't know people and all of that. So I'm like, wait, how do I introduce myself? So I'm Jerry Mikulski. I used to be a tech industry trends analyst. Two things whacked me on the head during that time back in the 90s. One was this mind mapping tool called the brain, which I still use and is now the world's largest man made brain. You can see it at Jerry's brain.com. And the other is I didn't like the word consumer. And that led me to discover that my word really was trust and that we had by consumerizing our world and many other forces we had basically broken trust in many different ways. So I'm sort of an investigator into trust. A combination of those forces and some interesting conversations led to the birth of open global mind, which is kind of one of the magnets that has us here in this conversation. And as part of the development of open global mind, we had a conversation about intellectual property, which led to the birth of this generative comments thing, but I'm skipping ahead a little too far. But it does say, Pete does say, why are you here talking about generative comments? And so I have a deep and pervasive love of good ideas and helping make good ideas more accessible so that we might actually act on them as a civilization. And unfortunately, civilization doesn't act as a whole. It's always in little tiny units. So we sort of walk into the world that way. So let me pass the baton to Michael. Hi, I'm Michael Grossman, and I come out of the world of media and content, where I spent most of my time as a designer and editor of magazines and helping legacy media brands into the world of digital in the last 20 years, particularly. And I am running a platform, a nascent platform called Factor, and my interest in facilitating people's sharing of information in a trustworthy way, in a way that gives them control of their information is one of the things that I'm glossing over a transition actually from the democratization of information in the post publishing age, which is a great thing, but also a terrible thing. And we're just trying to along with a lot of other people, which is why I'm here in the generative commons conversation, figure out ways for people to build trustworthy infrastructure that helps people both control information and trust information. Thanks, Michael. Oh, and I'll pass it to you. Perfect. Okay. Joe, per year. No, I was going to say, no, no, no, you were just about to pass it. I'm like, perfect, go ahead, go right ahead. Okay, I'll pass it to Vincent. My name is Vincent. I've been for the last few years working on answering questions such as how can we help people find their path to creating impact? How can we help people figure out what's going on and how they can get involved? And more recently, how can we encourage and incentivize people to collaborate and work together to solve pressing problems like climate change instead of having lots of duplicate, duplicitous efforts that are not looking at the root causes and not trying to come together to actually solve the root of the issues. And so that's led me to start working on a few different projects leading up to the current project called Trove. And I think one of the most interesting struggles for me has been in the legal context of trying to find this balance between wanting to protect information and simultaneously wanting to share information. And so how do we kind of rewrite the rules of intellectual property and trademarks and the sort of social agreements, but also the legal agreements that we have in order to be able to find that balance where we can protect our valuable ideas and projects from being taken without people giving back? But in the case where there is that two-way relationship with other platforms, with other communities where we are kind of having this loose reciprocity and helping each other, sharing information back and forth, in that context, you don't want to close people out and have walls so that people can access the knowledge and the amazing things that you put into the world. So that's kind of what brings me here to talk about the generative comments. And I'll pass it to David who I invited. Good morning. Yeah, thanks. Yeah, my name's David. I've known about some of you for a while. I followed Jerry's brain, so I'm familiar with that. Also know Billy Anderson. I've worked with Billy Anderson and John Lipkowski a long number of years ago. So you guys, I know you all probably know Bill. In fact, I've seen you all interacting. So what draws me, and I know Vincent as well, Vincent, and I have been talking with Kylie, so we've had little side conversations. So I'm in this space kind of paying attention and been paying attention for a while. I'll say that my introduction to it a long time ago was something I worked for Vignette, which was a large content management company back in the day. And at the time I was there, I was like, we're going to need a context management system, and I don't know what that looks like. And much of what we're looking at now starts to fulfill what I had envisioned as a context management system. Some way to do, I'll name something. If y'all aren't familiar with John Vervecki, I recommend checking him out. Some of the cognitive scientists are doing some really interesting work. And specifically John's notion, or John presents the notion of relevance realization. How do we filter out the unnecessary and separate the signal from the ways and a frame while still maintaining the ability to break frame when necessary? It's a really powerful notion and beautiful to think about this. Also really enthralled with Jerry's focus on trust. I'm working on a book called Trust is a Technology, paying attention to the distinctions between internal authority, external authority, and that balance line. How do I tell that? I think that also involves and revolves around the notion of relevance realization in that meaningful way. That's me in a very small nutshell. And I will pass it on to Joseph. Right. Hi, everyone. I'm Joe. I am in Oxford, UK right now, where I work as a research fellow in something called the Oxford Brooks University. So it's not the famous Oxford University, it's the other university in Oxford. I work in something called the Institute for Ethical AI. So yeah, I'm a researcher. I work primarily in social machines and computational creativity. And sort of prior to that, and in parallel with that, I have a pretty long history with open source and comments-based peer production and peer learning, and especially what happens when you combine all of those things together. So I'll leave it at that for now. Lauren, I can pass it to Pete, although he put his links in the chat, but maybe he wants to say it anyway. I am more than my links. Hello, everybody. Peter Kaminski. And I've been working for a long, long time on helping people work together better. And then there's another part of that. I usually work on fairly small groups of people working together, but then those people want to publish to the world. So there's tensions there. I've also got a long experience in Silicon Valley entrepreneurship, where I've co-founded a bunch of companies, some of which were open source based companies. So I've got a lot of kind of fine grained experience in structures, IP structures for Silicon Valley, including open source and things like that. So how do we play with intellectual property and ownership and patents and copyrights and trademarks and trade secrets? In regard or with respect to Genetive Commons, one of my, as Genetive Commons has kind of been coming together, one of my positions is advocating for the Commons and advocating against ownership and enclosure. So I'm really excited to see the Genetive Commons coming together. I will pass it to Turquoise. Hello, everyone. My name is Turquoise. I'm glad to be here. I started off and started tech in Silicon Valley. Small tech did big tech after that. I started a closed circuit television station, switched out of Silicon Valley, and then was a touring musician for a while on the transformative music festival circuit, switched out of that. I started an intentional community and since then have been doing heart-centered leadership, organizational development and design, and coaching. I worked with the Integral Leadership Review and the Integral Leadership Academy, as well as my own company, Dire Global. And so I teach at the local university in Tampa, USF, engineers, how to do heart-centered leadership and those sorts of things. My interest here is I didn't even know it was going on, but Vincent just pinged me and I was like, oh, I need this because I have some side projects around tech. And as I'm getting back into related to the Linked Open Wisdom Commons and creating some of these new sort of P2P networks that inform the IRL, the in real life embodiment of some of the psychotechnologies to quote some Don Verbenky stuff, social process technologies that are necessary to kind of weave together with our traditional digital technologies or everything from like agriculture on up of what we think of as technology. And so the intersection of those is where I'm interested, the inner operability between memetics, collective intelligence that can kind of be in service to that, and so kind of getting back to nature and balance in a holistic sort of systems field. So I'm really interested in learning more about IP as it's such a key component to all of that. Thank you so much. Oh, and there's Benjamin. Benjamin, you've just fallen into this room. We're doing a short round of intros and maybe it's more merciful to have someone else who hasn't said hi yet go first and then come back. So how about Judy and then Benjamin? Good morning. I'm Judy Bannum. I'm from Minnesota. I met Jerry about 15, 16 years ago in a consultancy role that he was in and connected with a variety of groups that he's been involved with during the years in between. I'm currently retired from corporate life about 15 years ago and am working largely with nonprofits now and helping them manage change and vision change, create new futures, find different ways of engaging people with an undercurrent or maybe sometimes overt current of sensitivity to inclusion and diversity. And I'm interested in the generative comments because that's how you connect all of these people to share ideas and become wiser together. Sorry. That's right. Love that, Judy. Benjamin, do you want to jump in? Yeah, I'm happy to. Can you hear me okay? Just fine. You're coming in five by five as the radio geek say. Nice. I actually just came out of a radio station. I am working in a suburb of Jackson, Mississippi on a mayoral campaign, which might seem not relevant or related to this conversation. But I see the civic space and the renewal of the civic space being very connected to the renewal of the commons, that space in between trying to create a culture of togetherness, practicing what could be called integral politics. I've been really inspired by the conversations I've been having with turquoise recently around doing the practice of integral, not just the theory of integration and wholeness, but actually having generative conversations that create novel insights. And then as I've been invested in systems entrepreneurship, I've been following deeper and deeper down the rabbit hole of what are the most fundamental changes that we can create to create new systems and structures. I in the last few months have gone from the blockchain governance world, the cooperative new models of creating cooperatives, hollow chain, different ways of thinking about sharing information connected to different ways of organizing people. And that all of that led me to the commons. And so I've been thinking a lot about how to create interoperable data structures for people to share, not just linked data, but linked wisdom, wisdom being information that is contextually relevant to a particular context and the context that I'm most inspired by is creating a world that works for all. And I think that is a story, a meta narrative that can actually weave together the systems thinkers with people who are actually on the ground building things. And to create a wisdom commons, where we're able to share that information to accelerate those systemic changes. So I'm very excited to be here. I think the generative commons is a big missing piece that I had not been thinking of that when it came to my awareness, like, Oh, yeah, of course, we need that. And so I'm excited to play with Vincent and Peter and Turquoise and Alex and all of you that I have yet to meet to see how we connect all of these systems and kind of an ecosystem of wisdom commons. That was a little bit long-winded, but I'm complete. That was awesome. It's too bad we have so little in common as a first time posse. Alex, would you want to jump in? Yeah, everyone can you hear me right? Yes. Yeah, great to be here with you all. Thanks for pinging me into this, Vincent. I recognize some of you from some of the previous schools. So yes, and from elsewhere as well. This is I mean, I think I'm probably going to be sort of riffing off a little bit from what Benjamin has been saying really. My background is actually in film. And I've been working on a new model of collective that I'm hoping we'll be able to distill some of the information that's out there in terms of some of these complex problems that we're all aware of. And essentially kind of I'm looking at creating a system in which we can be utilizing the collective intelligence of a larger group and how we can actually be sort of distilling that information into its component parts and then restructuring it into some kind of coherent narrative that then can can be presented through new forms of interactive media film and story and how do we actually kind of talk about where we're going? What's what's coming forward? What's what's the what's the future that we were all looking we're all looking at that I think is emerging from some conversations like this. So yeah, and I'm looking very much to try and almost kind of present a bit of a blueprint as to how to build these sovereign networks of people that and the others can follow. So I'm sort of approaching it from very much kind of like working in public type of type of approach that where I can essentially be talking to some of the people that really know about some of this stuff and we can be weaving in some of this information and I can be kind of talking about that that that kind of storyline of how you you set up something like this how you protect commons within a group of people how you how you begin to kind of create these sharing and gifting economies within within groups. So something so that you can have something that is protected and presenting an alternative to the current models that we currently have. So yeah great great to be here hopefully I might be able to add some parts here and there but I'm hoping I can at least be a sort of channel for any of the the kind of results here in some way. It's a pleasure to meet you thank you thank you for joining us. Vincent thank you for inviting so many cool people to join the conversation. Charles? Hi everyone. I'm delighted to be here and see everyone and Vincent could move on a few extras that you brought in. Well I guess almost everyone knows most of this but to try to bundle myself somehow here for why I'm here I'm an idea DJ a music DJ festival event and series producer team builder catalyst of communications community content blah blah blah LinkedIn stuff. I'm co-founder of KikoLab with Lauren here and we are and aspire to be commons innovation laboratory and by the way June 7th market calendar that Monday in the northern hemisphere we have a round table specifically around the commons with hopefully everyone or many of us here energizing that and yeah we're sort of tackling head-on and also sideways the challenge of really collaborating including around IP and these kind of things so what does that really mean how can we really do it the nitty-gritty and the meta around interoperability flow wisdom flow these are some of the things that we pass around. We also weave communities like the grace one guild which is scaled in a shorter time than us to over 1200 worldwide so these are all our friends these very sister circles including how Vincent and I know many of you here through the clubhouse the systems innovators club and weekly room that we now move to Wednesday so today four o'clock Eastern we're back there so that's a bit about me. Sweet thank you and Lauren has a slime pass which is unusual novel but but really appreciated so who'd like to set the table for the conversation Pete do you want to take a swing at that? I actually don't okay I appreciate the offer Jerry but no thanks. What about a tiny backdrop on the term and the name and sort of what that came that's what I'm heading toward exactly. I did post a couple links so people can read faster than we can cover it in speech exactly well we could take a break and read the documents let me just give a quick one in speech is also great yes exactly follow the links the links are really good because the links summarize kind of where we are we in the middle of conversations about creating a fiscal sponsorship between open global mind or a piece of a nascent piece of open global mind and this entity called Lyonsburg moving toward a structure called steward ownership which is one of many different structures that seem to be amenable to making a living while nurturing commons while creating sustainable long-term sort of businesses and and commons we hit a passage about intellectual property while writing a memorandum of agreement and that the language in the in the electoral property section seemed very old school to us and it was making all of us itch and crawl and so we started thinking and we started thinking sort of generatively and we were like well we love creative commons that's really good but that's just about copyright what about patents and trademarks but also what about the spirit of stepping into this kind of conversation what how do we give people some awareness of how what this what this dance is like and why we're all leaning into feeding nurturing the commons and the many different kinds of commons but here what I think we're talking about idea commons and electoral commons wisdom commons whatever else and also trust commons social commons and so forth so I think that that a lot of what came up here really you know I think that that societal trust is a is a form of commons just like clean air is a form of commons and that led to this idea just bursting out about well why don't we create a generative commons agreement which will wrap itself around things like creative commons and other sorts of stuff that's already established and already like works pretty well but wrap a sort of a bigger container around it so that people knowing that they're walking into something that's agreed to the generative commons basically means that means certain things about any electoral property they might own it means things about how we work together it means it has a whole bunch of implications which this you know this conversation is meant to help flesh out and figure out where to go and that idea sort of took hold we like it a lot we bought generative commons.org so we have a domain there's nothing on it yet but this is the this is the first sort of organized conversation to sit down and figure out what does it look like where to go who might role models be you know is this like is this like a linux distribution is this like creative commons plus plus is this like something else entirely we don't know and I will pause now for anybody who'd like to add to that story I just wanted to try to know I put in the chat and Lauren sort of I don't know if you can hear Lauren if you want to chime in I flagged your long research and specialization into innovation commons so I just you know maybe add to the list and my lens is like through action getting shit done producing so I think thinking in terms of innovation might be useful here as well which rapidly brings us into the misuses of intellectual property law and overprotection of intellectual property and a bunch of other things that irritate me for sure and I think a couple of those of us along the way Lauren Charles was pointing to your work on intellectual commons or innovation and how that fits do you want to re-explain it Charles well I was trying to prompt you Lauren from afar but if you feel like to just to commenting on your work and sort of one reason the sparks were flying when we came together a few years ago but and just how that fits in that type of commons approach maybe no not enough okay nevermind okay okay anyway you got it go carry on everyone I love that that's that's a meta comment on everything I honestly cannot hear a thing with all the whining in the background was that social commentary I think this is really on point so it's very obvious that some of us know doing you know vocal tracks you know not listening on the headphones to the rhythm section anyway they don't need to an example of Lauren's pithy wisdom it's LPW Lauren's pithy wisdom in a pithy expression right so I'm interested in how anybody would like to frame this or what who is inspired by this in terms of a structure or a path or a framing for the conversation I would I would actually love to prompt you slightly more Jerry in terms of the context and the notion of the sovereigns I mean without I don't know if there's some kind of very concise overview possibly in terms of the also the notion of a of a guild or just you know a sovereign in itself energizing this conversation and creating a kind of container I mean I'm I'm I'm seeing a lot of fuzziness all around but these are the things that we have been involved in conversation some of us here so if that's useful I was trying to avoid an explanation of of the steward ownership and a bunch of other stuff that didn't seem exactly relevant to the generative commons part of it but a piece of what we're I think we're trying to build and model is what does a flotilla of small sovereign entities look like that are that are moving together to make the world better which I think is a shared intention here in this room and and how do we collaborate so that the value gets shared so that the rest of the world can benefit from the things that are created and how do we shape ourselves into entities or or different kinds of agglomerations with with sort of purpose and that the notion of a guild for example is in the air right now borrowing from medieval guilds and borrowing from world of warcraft guilds although actually quite different from world of warcraft but the notion of might there be a trade or a craft that is specific to some aspect of mind in commons so in conversation with Christina Bowen and a couple others that are part of the dig life collective a couple years ago we came up with map whisperers so we have the domain map whisperers dot com and the idea was I'm a map whisperer using the brain technology which I did not create but I'm a black belt brain user she's a black belt kumu user so is gene bellinger so are other people and I apologize there's a spam message that just came in and got blocked automatically by the system why it rang I don't know but but how might there be a guild for people who are really good at visualization and mapping and what does that look like I think I think there's a reason for that and then there's a variety of other kinds of trades and crafts here that could be represented in guild like structures so that could be a part of the generative commons agreement um and we had a conversation yesterday about what stewarding means and whether we should be stewarding commons or nurturing commons or guardians of commons or what is the right language around this that's interesting interesting as well and Charles I don't know if that addresses the the kinds of things you wanted to put in the room no that's great thanks looks uh now Joe sorry um so uh I feel I'm coming both kind of late to this conversation and also even more late to the whole thing in a sort of sense that I've been doing this 20 years maybe I got here a bit too early in a sense so I was too early to be late then now I'm just late so um I think that the uh the thing I just dropped in the chat with this notion from Triz of ideal final result and probably those who know a design may have come across the ideal final result um Jerry what you just said um talked a lot about how but what does this generative commons what would it do what would it achieve it wouldn't just exist uh what would it what would it be not what would it be what would it get done that's the question I see it as an opportunity for affiliation of ideas and an affinity grouping of individuals inspired to work on similar things of importance so that they can share and collaborate in moving in whatever that vector might be and there's an infinite number of vectors but the commons is a way to allow individuals and groups to find one another and share their visions and actions and amplify both by working together collectively and to build on what Judy said um part of our energy is backlash against the overprotection of intellectual property in today's real world which means that the gene for breast cancer is patented and research on that gene is controlled by a company that owns the rights to it seriously um and that the way to profits and becoming famous and wealthy is to lock away parts of the commons and to make them inaccessible to others and maybe sell metered access to them and other sorts of things and and and one of my frustrations for years is that books basically are protected by intellectual property laws and it's like why is the wisdom in books not just available in the world so I think the thing we're aiming toward is the usefulness of what we know and the manifestation of what we know in ways that that are easily accessible so that all of us can draw on one another's wisdom and build together solutions for how things you know for for for the world's elements or better yet good designs positive designs uh for uh thriving together and and that's made very very difficult by the depletion of commons in ways like the copyright act of 1973 and others and the latest copyright term extension act of 1998 which basically denuded the commons further uh rather than enriching it so I think Joe I think a lot of this is about helping us know what we know and use it better if I could try to be brief about it David go ahead and uh David then Joe um something that and recently as I've been thinking more about the commons and it really was a shock to me how little I was aware of commons as a as a as a real generative notion um because it's it's there as a as a concept but something that I've been thinking of lately is um through actually looking at is is thinking as an ecosystem rather than thinking about an ecosystem and there's something that really changes in that that agent arena relationship is that dynamic actually co um co existing co experiential notion rather than okay I'm I'm here doing that to this environment right and so even the phrase um a world that works for everyone sort of keeps the world out there rather than a world towards which everyone is working right that we're actually creating the world not not trying to interact with it from an external perspective um and there's something else that comes up in this that I think is really beautiful in the commons stewardship type notion which is actually listening to distance um with either not having animosity or antagonism or having generative antagonism having some way of noting that that that dissonance actually is calling attention to something that is um dissonance only happens in me because there's some disconnect or some um something out of tune between my head and my heart kind of is the way that I think of that and actually listening to that not as you're causing me pain but ah you're inviting me to look at something that I didn't want to look at something that's challenging who I think I am and who I think we are so those notions kind of as a frame um in some way preceder kind of the foundational part about what we might do all of that kind of it changes my perspective of how I might engage with others when I find that I'm not really trying to stifle or compete in some way that I'm really trying to express more fully beautiful David Joe. So yeah so I just wanted to come back and say that out of what different answers that people were saying I felt some of those things were answers to what I what I prompted about some of them were about how and some were kind of about what and I would really quite encourage a little bit more thinking about about what because I think some of the hows were like we would be a flotilla of collaborating projects and stuff and that we heard that before now for some months and there's nothing wrong with that but I think this was meant to be sort of a new thing and what's this new generative comments thing going to do or going to achieve just as a for example something that's been on my mind that I haven't achieved but this might achieve would be building something that's equivalent to Walmart but is open source 100 open source and run as a run as a co-op or something like that building that's equivalent to Walmart or Amazon but is a worker owned co-op something like that and you would have that thing and we'd all be stakeholders in that and that would be the ideal final result because that would be what the generative comments would achieve and then this other thing would go off on its way that's just an example because that's something that I would love to do but I've never gotten around to doing it but yeah there may be other things and that's not against the house I think the thing is about the house as you know we'll do it in an open source way or we'll be collaborative all that kind of stuff I think we're pretty skilled on that but I think in terms of figuring out what is this thing that we're going to actually get done I haven't seen it happen yet in my own life for 20 years so you know I'd like to know more about it I'd like to jump in for a second then pass that to Charles um riffing off what David said a moment ago for me dissonance is kind of a clue and the reason I'm worried I've got worried about trust was that I felt that the word consumer caused dissonance in my life and I noticed it and I slowed myself down enough to pay attention to it and then I paid attention to it for 25 years and it birthed a thesis in my head that I love that fits where the fits I think the way we're seeing the world um and so I so for me a lot when kids are great like little magnets for this because kids ask like totally brutally honest questions like why is this you know why why is this not working um and then we basically tell them well that's just because the what that's the way the world is but the way we the way adults think the world is is stuff we've been socialized to believe in and we speak the world into being all the time every day and when we generate those words they're they're they're invented in this sort of framing we assume to be true um that this sort of generational or slightly longer than generational and I think a piece of what we're looking to do is to change these scripts so that we can speak a world into being that's abundant instead of scarce that's collaborative instead of competitive that has you know and because there is abundance all over the place we could feed people we could do a bunch of other things and so so in the background there's a war between communism and socialism and free market globalized neoliberal capitalism and that's that's a big piece of the background radiation for this conversation because the capitalist model wants to eat ideas so much and and and sequester them but there's a whole bunch of other kinds of battles sort of in the background which a generative commons agreement like we've lost the word commons so much like when I give speeches I'm like who can tell me what a commons is and there's like a pregnant pause for 30 seconds and then somebody says that's like forests right I'm like yes and then we go from there right because we've lost this whole notion of commons which is something that indigenous people around the world knew and had internalized and knew how to maintain and then we broke that in the colonial era sorry for the long street off to you in the in under the corn trolls thanks yeah I'm enjoying this conversation I just wanted to kind of go back to Joe something you said about something new to try building and the example that you gave kind of triggered a few thoughts and actually I'm just going to sort of promptly go past it to Vincent possibly but I think just one one approach rather than a Walmart is like what about a dynamic knowledge repository you know what about actually making this thing that Engelbart and others you know fervently wished for and just never really quite got going but but to this other interesting idea of the new kind of Walmart that's cooperative I would point to Vincent I don't know if you had any really kind of quick inputs there having got some fresh learnings if I understand around cooperation and also knowing quite a bit about retail and supply chain and stuff I don't know how that example fits for you Vincent the new kind of Walmart I guess it thinks Charles it kind of prompts the dissonance as a clue like trade-offs is like the word that comes to mind because any centralized system like Walmart's versus having a farmer's market they're going to be trade-offs to both right so you have consistency of a brand on one end which is something that is valuable for a lot of people and a lot of businesses and then on the other side you have like you know the ugly fruits where it's like it's okay to be inconsistent and the thing between those two and the reason where one of those is a positive versus a negative actually could be the cultural narrative right like if we saw things that were cookie cutter and mass manufactured as ugly and cheap and things that were more unique and handcrafted and artist laws higher quality which that's starting to happen then it actually switches which one of those trade-offs is positive or negative and so I think the cultural narratives definitely sit in a big way between these different trade-off trade-offs and when it comes to kind of like the knowledge repository there's trade-offs between the quantity of information and the quality there's trade-offs between how that information is linked or whether you have very loose constraints over being able to put information out there and not having to link it to things um and so yeah I think the general comments um I think the hope is is like an ecosystem in nature those trade-offs end up kind of being in a dynamic equilibrium and are kind of balanced and I think we need to do that with our social systems like how do we how do we create that that balance so that the trade-offs are playing back and forth in a way that is working for all of us thank you how where does that put us right now seems to me that part of the definition we're framing here is an intrinsic wholesomeness and constructiveness of the sharing of content and information as well as the processes that enable that and if we can frame that as sort of the doctrine of belonging as a consensual process and a social commitment that would take us in the direction I'd like to see the commons go rather than thinking of it as collections of sovereign entities which their own order structures and so forth I mean I think sovereign entities are part of that but they entered the commons as a participant in a shared value system and a shared ethos um other thoughts alex benjamin turquoise um where does this put you hey I posted two questions uh in the chat one of which I think Judy answered quite elegantly and beautifully um what would be the underlying agreements or worldviews embedded within a generative commons agreement um the the notion of wholeness wholesomeness this kind of meta modern sincerity of participation um that feels like something emerging and then I'd also posted something about reputation um in a previous comment in terms of uh what mechanisms would the integrity of the generative commons be maintained um because I don't see uh being an overly litigious group and so I feel like outside of uh the traditional legal frameworks available this kind of this may sit outside of those frameworks and so reputation is just one mechanism that I've discovered that could be applied to the the commons uh to maintain the integrity of that agreement um obviously you would need everyone on the planet to be participating in this shared information space where we can signal to each other about the intense and the actions of various agents within a system um but at least within the the communities that we're a part of to maintain that relational integrity through some sort of signaling of how in alignment someone is with that generative commons agreement um and then use uh kind of demand side regulations to maybe boycott organizations that are manipulating the commons um and and using it to to a benefit that's not seen to be wholesome um so I'm curious thoughts on those ideas thank you that that broadens my notions of of this conversation in really nice ways I appreciate that and I can see easily a path toward silly language but lobbying to change some of the framing legislation that makes us live within crappy rules around the commons and and all of that that could be a part of this as well you are muted a newbie error totally get it a newbie yes um I posted it in the chat I also wanted to read it into the transcript um thanks Benjamin in in partial answer um this is something that Jordan wrote so by the way there's an interesting kind of background to this one of the participants in this in this quest is is Jordan Sukut who's not here today um but he I recognize the writing he wrote this part the generative commons itself should have among other things a sovereign identity and governance structure a voice in higher order systems a proactive strategy to acquire protect and preserve um he uses the word property but he puts it in parentheses because he doesn't want to say property um because property is ownership is enclosure which is the thing that we're working against um and and and aside by the way so one of the dualities or or dualities that we find ourselves in when we're talking about the generative commons is that the generative commons um is in contrast to the existing culture of enclosure and ownership and capitalism and property and so where they're when we're all together and and we're living in the generative commons we don't have to use things like property and ownership maybe um maybe we use things like participation instead but when we have to start interfacing with other parts of the world that aren't there yet um we need to start using language like you know I'm protecting stuff um I you know I I own this and when you know when I say I own this you know in the commons world it's like I'm shepherding it or I'm stewarding it or so or whatever I'm I'm holding it for all of us but over there it sounds like um uh well if nobody owns it then I'm going to take it and so then I have to say that I own it you know on behalf of others um uh in the last bullet that Jordan had was um a strategy associated with estate and organizational succession planning so one of the one of the other interesting things that we've got ourselves into as a society is this concept of um extra human structures um by extra there I mean outside of human structures so we have the concept that there can be six successional ownership and um corporate personhood and things that um benefit um benefit larger structures that become larger than individuals and larger than than groups and then we have a another fight on our hands that we have to fight corporate structures that have you know legally at least um human rights and and the ability to last forever and and to grow as big as they can um which you know which isn't fair um when we're talking about putting those structures up against humans uh individual humans or groups of humans um one of the things in my in the background for me it comes from the book The Great Transformation by Carl Polanyi where he talks about the transformation from pre-industrial to early industrial society and one of the cool things he says is that uh three new fictitious commodities were invented land the labor and money and those ate our brains uh and and so land like you couldn't just walk down the block to the century 21 and buy buy a plot of land for your factory land had to be sort of pride loose and made into a market labor everybody was tied to the land or tied to some indenture or futile or something or other there wasn't just a labor workforce and everything didn't have a price a lot of people stayed alive without any money because they grew stuff behind them they shared you know when they slaughtered the pig they smoked they sheared out parts of the pig with their their neighbors or their family or whatever etc and this shift was really profound increasingly profound because another wise thing that Polanyi says is that market uh market economy requires market society and the analogy I draw is that capitalism or industrialism which becomes capitalism which then becomes consumerism it's like a cuckoo bird it's a brood parasite it it it should it can't really have other forms of thriving or of existing living next to it because it needs everybody in the labor pool it needs all the land in the land pool and everything has to have a price or you know we don't get this sort of market effect for everything and so and so at eight all of our old understandings of commons all of our old understandings of reciprocity all of the old ties that made society got crashed through that process of industrializing consumerizing etc and in part I think we're trying to mend some of that and and so I think there's another yet another as we're talking around the room here I'm seeing oh there's another leaf of this flower of what this could be and I think another piece of this is how can we how can we unfold include head back toward uh different notions of of being together on the planet that don't include things like ownership and property and all of that uh in a way that but but how do we do that in a way that actually sort of works as a social path because because when the industrial revolution happened that that still has eaten our brains like like that model for how the world works is why the sdgs exist and one of the sdg one of the sustainable just development goals is people should have a certain amount of money so that they're not poor and poverty is a new term in 1650 we don't have poverty before 1650 we we might not have any money and we might starve because the crops failed but the idea that one family in town is going to die because they don't have money to buy food is foreign to us that's not how things normally work um unemployment is a new word in about 1750 um anyway uh and I can put the uh I can put a link to um that talk in the chat in a second so is this an ongoing set of conversations do we want to um how do we want to organize ourselves to tackle this relatively big thing we only have some artifacts on the web as pages that pete has put up uh as documents that jordan and matt who's not in the room also and a few other interested parties helped create uh we have a bunch of interested people here this is clearly a time-consumptive endeavor I mean given all the different aspects of this problem that we've already put uh on the table here there's a lot here and from my own perspective if we were to discover tomorrow that someone else has done most of this really really well it'd be like awesome let's join them and make their effort like succeed that I I feel no reason to go build some a unique thing if if something that satisfies the the the need that we have here already exists and there are clearly component parts that already exist like creative commons in which we can include by reference and try to sort of figure out how better to blend in with what it is we think we're doing. Charles? Um Rome wasn't built in a day big wisdom here um so I I'm guessing I didn't hear it stated but maybe I missed it this is sort of um now on the schedules of some of us uh as a weekly thing or is that the notion maybe possibly I I'm not advocating I'm just kind of weighing that out with regard to the other regular things on on my own calendar for example but um again just want to underscore the invitation the open invitation which will be disseminated more broadly um for June 7th at Kiko lab as a round table a kind of a summit and that's an opportunity to sort of have something of a deadline to to to focus and to to get some something together and that's up to us and others as well um and it's not just about getting a bunch of people there but getting the right people there and having the right types of structures within which to to focus and so forth um yeah so that's some kind of meta structural stuff around the container that we we some of us will be or want to be or are checking out the idea of co-building the container um I will go ahead Judy I was just trying to suggest that um we could spend our entire lives cramming this in its context because it's so enormous and the phrase that I like from another organization was let a thousand flowers grow I think we should just identify some flowers let them germinate grow and connect with one another and and let this evolve rather organically because I think you can't plan something that's a belonging and gaining and growing organically something it's not a plan for process per se it's an enabling process so I would encourage us not to try to spend too much time cramming it unless it's in a context of how do we pluck the weeds from the flower garden because I think there's a danger of weeds in any flower garden for sure and so I think that I'd rather get lots of flowers growing and see how they evolve which will in itself define what this process is rather than investing a lot of friend energy in the process itself because I think it will inevitably not be fully inclusive even in the best outcome sir course I had a question um taking that approach what is the tracking mechanism by which we can you know see the weeds and kind of you know watch the growth and and iterate on on whatever happens or tend to the garden so to speak if that's kind of our way of being so there's a couple things we have already and can do now Pete pointed out in the chat there's some documents that live in a wiki online there's also a chat space on matter most which is a slack like service that we're using so there's a place to talk sort of persistently if we want to so just click on that link and join that matter most and you'll be in that conversation where we can pick this up and keep going and and David I think you have to leave as well don't you yeah thank you for thank you very much for being here really see you David I appreciate it I'm on the matter most and I've got the thing the things is there I've looked at the the links is there like a repository of the experiments that are going on or are we calling like flotilla kiko labs are those the experiments are there other experiments of like generative commons that are kind of spinning up or so part of what we probably need to do is develop some examples of generative commons and a storyline through that through that in my brain for example I curate all this kind of stuff so I have I have a bunch of ideas about you know commons organizations a bunch of us know a little or a lot about Lynn Ostrom's principles for managing good commons and that's clearly an inspiration for what we're doing and making easier access to that I think is an interesting thing and the other the last thing I wanted to mention before passing the mic to Pete was that open global mind has a structure a still nascent unfortunately structure called gill called quests which is basically something's a project that has some kind of a some kind of a deadline where we know when we want to when a quest is kind of done and we could we can use that framing to create a an ogm quest that this can live under for a while until until and if it gets its own sort of sovereignty and that would be great because that would help us sort of attract other interested parties and we then have some we then have some spaces into which we can we can pour our energies Pete thanks jay I wanted to say that the the links that I posted are the web version of wiki pages so those wiki pages are right now in the ogm wiki I can imagine that generative commons could have its own wiki and then there's pros and cons to having it be a massive wiki which we can get into of course I'm happy to help anybody use a massive wiki or set up a massive wiki but I also recognize that they're they're not as easy as they could be right now um I also wanted to um also I guess Vincent and then Vincent and I are also in conversation about repositories so um you can also imagine part of the repository might be within trove and part of the repository might be within trove the generative commons wiki and those things might talk to each other that's what I was thinking yeah I would flag kick a lab in that mix around repositories because we're trying to bridge on this as well so the thing that's pretty easily doable but a little bit wonky is to use massive and Pete tell me if this would make sense to you if you'd like to do it we have generative commons.org we can stand up a massive site there and make it its own vault in obsidian uh and basically collaborate to build up just build a web presence uh that's a wiki in the background but looks like a website where we start framing out all these kinds of things and have a link to hey join our chat over here do whatever and this could this could look like an entity relatively quickly given technology we have on hand uh then collaborating on that means understanding how obsidian and github and a few other other tools work uh but it's that's very doable we have a bunch of people doing that but that's that's something we can stand up really quickly and Pete does that sound like a reasonable direction um I I think so um but then I'd also like to hear from more people if that's a reasonable participatory way to do it yeah and part of the reason I say that is that um anybody who understood how to post uh documents markdown documents into that vaults roughly speaking or onto that wiki would then be able to modify that website we could sort of build it collaboratively in that way so it's so the barrier is tech is sort of a little bit of technical know-how but it makes it pretty even handy in terms of us being able to improve this thing together other thoughts is that I maybe did you say because you said earlier but I didn't catch you just um connected that to this domain the generative comments so what I'm saying yes what I'm saying Charles is we would do exactly what we did when we rebuilt the open global mind website which I originally built on google sites and we just moved over to massive so exactly like that but for generative commons.org so so gerry I have a very direct question um I'm going to try to just say it straight you said we bought so I purchased I own there is no there is no ogm entity at this moment so so allow me just to finish the thought which is can we in the spirit of the commons co-own this can we come together and literally collaborate even down to that level uh described to me what entity to transfer the ownership of the domain to and I will happily I don't know if that's exactly what's what I'm uh asking about but just the idea of it and then we can you know really collaborate around that who's got access and does what and so forth and I will I will add in my ignorance that there's tons and tons of entities working on the decentralized web uh distributed sorts of ownership and value creation and a bunch of other models that we can probably some of which I'm sure we can harness to solve this problem I want to add real quick that uh collective sense commons already has some shared ownership of things and and it's not technically done at all it's it's actually just um uh handshakes and um uh and co-agreements and you know a shared email account is actually the the root of it so uh it can be very simply done uh socially without a lot of technical infrastructure other thoughts this is um I don't know how long we're planning to go I think I have to get to some other things shortly at some point but the this is really overlapping and weaving with um I think many conversations that many of us or all of us are having elsewhere as well including with each other some in some combinations so there's um this idea of a coalition of sovereigns coming together there are other alliances and partnerships happening you know certainly from from keek lab to some of you and um I guess just keeping it broad strokes for the moment um there's also more and more talk around different types of business models um maybe relating to blockchain or or not but with with tokens and and kind of value flows and and how to reward you know value inputs and and and things like that so I just want to kind of throw some very sloppy ideas in the mix because this is a big topic and there's some chats going on about dowels and I think maybe just to say one really specific thing just to kind of put this on the table in some way sitting here in Switzerland and there is a kind of organization called the ferrine which is most simple quick easy non-profit type of organization that is I guess getting more popular and because it has advantages for for working in these modes with with alternative currencies so just it's just a kind of interesting element I can offer for the mix of our conversation and thanks Charles and I'm realizing that we have um that we have a a bit of a scope creep or mission creep problem like right at hand immediately because are we trying to frame participation in commons oriented conversations or are we trying to change society and I think we're all trying to change society I think I'm not trying to get rid of that as a as a mission but I'm afraid that the generative commons project is also going to become what all of our projects are which is how do we move value around how do we you know there's a there's a whole series of questions about the future structure of organizations and ecosystems and all that and the moment the moment we step through that looking glass we are suddenly absorbing all the different things that we're working on rather than parsing out a clear question in the middle that serves us all and so I'm interested in are there any and we don't need to answer this right now but are there any sort of conceptual boundaries to the the generative commons work that will keep us from turning this into the the the holographic rendition of all of our efforts to fix the world Vincent I'm wondering I asked you before if there's something I could I could respond to that question from your from your co-op stuff or something else yeah so I think it's a little different so my experience is with cooperation Long Island just kind of like no one really wants to take the realm and and I feel like that might be a little different here because I feel like each of us has a kind of sovereign where we're okay with more or less stewarding it and the problem it seems of a quite a bit of a different nature which is we know that we want to work together but we don't know how because we don't feel like the agreements or the the legal structures that exist are going to make it easy and so I think why we're here and I think the scope maybe could be what is the generative commons agreement right what what are what and that agreement could have a legal like actual text on paper it could also be a series of ongoing conversations to have a dynamic social agreement a social layer to the agreement space but I think Benjamin's question of like figuring out the underlying agreements and worldviews that we could all kind of latch on to and say like this feels like a good direction to start going in and then using that to start being able to work together and and have our products be moving together in parallel to whatever end goal we we decide and Vincent that's a I love that addition and and you're saying that reminds me of your dilemma which might be an aspect or a facet of the generative agreement generative commons which is how visible am I when I participate here because so far I'm thinking what happens to the ideas that are shared here fine fine fine fine fine but one of your problems is I'm a member of this entity but this entity is sort of private and not public and how do you architect Trove to let me be as visible as I want to be and is other aspects of identity that are remained to a generative commons agreement and if not then we've made our lives a lot simpler by the way but if they are then that that sort of loops in a bunch of other interesting topics about you know disclosure transparency visibility you know what and including sort of non-reputable identity self-sovereign entity whatever else you want to call us that we know that people are who they claim to be is that an aspect of a generative commons don't know but that's a whole another pedal to the to the flower that that just came in for me I think it should be just a quick answer there for Alex just just to just to add in just because I have to go in a sec but um I think just just from what I'm also kind of reading from spaces like the the crypto space you know there's there's a there's a kind of thing where there is the all of the tools and people know how to use them of how to allow for you know participatory governance and allow for people to have you know votes and says on things and to have skin in the game and and own you know what they're creating but at the same time for a lot of them they don't have doesn't mean that people participate there's there's there's still I think there is some sort of there is a there is a social aspect as well as kind of you know the mediation of technology aspect in the sense that you know people people don't feel as they have the the time to commit to to projects even if they do have you know a kind of shared intention to some degree so I think being able to being able to kind of disintegrate sort of the the the tasks that are needed to be done in a way that people feel like they can they can kind of step into them or they can fit within their you know within within their time frames or whatever is something or even maybe just having you know breaking it down into smaller groups so that there's you know more accountability or a quicker way of of kind of operating on things that that that is able to sort of produce something I think maybe that's maybe that's kind of what I'm wondering is are we talking more what's the kind of initial commons that we're beginning with is it more digital knowledge based commons that we're focusing on or is it something something a little larger or but yeah I do I mean I certainly think that if we're able to kind of solve that issue in terms of how people are actually you know people how to make that process for participation easier and how we actually kind of enable people to step into some responsibility in something then I think that will eventually kind of slowly shift society because we want to be able to you know if we can start putting forward these proposals of how you know how people can participate you know what what are the ways in which you can bring participation into something that might have a DAO structure or some other thing whatever then you know then more organizations will adopt it they will they will want that participation from customers or you know communities or or whatever but it's it's how you sort of make that that an easy process I think is how yeah I think it's there's a there's a necessary kind of like on ramp of it if it is getting getting easier or you kind of have more of an incentive for people to put people that going in I think but once people are stepping into that civic responsibility I think that's there's a lot of potential there and it feels to me like what I'm describing as petals on a flower feel to me like sort of parsable domain zones within which people could collaborate to answer questions or whatever and that one way of framing this initiative in this at this stage is just to put out the most important questions and then to tweet those questions as a filter for different kinds of activity that we would engage in that would attract people who have who are interested in each of the different questions you know what is the role of identity in this in this agreement would be its own its own conversation and its own subtopic and maybe its own channel or whatever else um Pete uh you're muted time took place did you want to go first yeah um I want to yeah if I can go and then I'm I'm going to have to flop to switch to phone because I've got a doctor's appointment but I'll be listening in the year in my ears so um I just kind of want to go back to um scope and so like if we're speccing this what I heard from Vincent was three areas basically um legal structures social structures and digital structures were the kind of three areas that I heard touched on and maybe that's too much or maybe we need to kind of close that and then so like answering what IP like uh is is generative commons um and then what I heard earlier from from Pete is the handshake between so like if we think of a generative commons embedded in a local system there's this kind of diffuse pattern like concentric circles like okay so the people that aren't really able to participate in that type of thinking in that worldview will be a circle outward a circle outward to this harder you know neo you know um uh like uh old school you know the past like the future is at the center and the past is here and so the you know we can talk about them as permeable membranes or diffuse kind of patterns of of how we interact and so this idea of like okay we're we're going to create this idea at the center this is the way of being these are the new social structures of trust of identity and then from that there are like circles is kind of what I was hearing um that so so that they can both be protective and grow and germinate and not be co-opted by this you know the hungry capitalist neoliberal global capitalism and so I'm curious if we're going to be answering those questions about identity if we can block them out into their sections you know so like if this is a you know and so I'm thinking of like did you know scope how we scope this and so that you can get into that lane and chat on that lane or work on that lane or we're doing social technologies we're doing IP we're doing um I forgot the other thing we're doing digital tech so we're doing dows we're doing hollow chain we're going P2P we're doing federated and so we can kind of make these channels um or if there's a better framing I'm I'm all for it but that I just wanted that that's what I was hearing and uh yeah so I'll stop there and I'm gonna hop back over and I'll be in the car listening and I feel like we're talking very similarly because if you take a circle and you stretch it really long it becomes a petal on a flower it's an it's an ellipse and we're off and running so totally totally yeah I was I was I was layering your model on I was like okay how do I integrate Jerry's petal so that was my next train of thinking in the car awesome thank you and and it aligns with what Alex just said and off to you Pete uh thank you um I wanted to suggest I I thought um I thought Charles this question was actually really really interesting and so I I don't have direct experience much with uh with dows and hollow chains and all that kind of stuff um I have I have a lot of peripheral experience but not direct experience but the thing I do have direct experience with is is uh starting tiny little community owned resources um and I've done that a lot uh and so it's totally possible uh to uh to have a community ownership of generative commons org that just the domain name right and then from there you can bootstrap into let's have a website and let's have a wiki that runs the website and all that kind of stuff all of that stuff is super simple to do were you just saying like the domain itself needs to be hosted on some domain hosting registrar like doing that as a community when there is no community entity I don't like that that's well so what I what I would suggest is you can bootstrap a community anyway sorry right now it's registered at google but that's the the service bureau that's handling it right right now jerry literally owns generative commons.org the domain which I'm perfectly happy to donate in and one of the things that could happen is we decide that generative commons is an entity under the steward ownership structure of ogm it then floats out as an entity and as soon as it has framing I transfer domain ownership into that entity and we're done like like that is a path I can totally see so my my suggestion is that community ownership it's as simple as a shared email address and maybe a chat channel that's all that's all you need um so uh the other thing that I think it would need is at least four or five participants if it's too small of a group it's not really community ownership but once you get to four or five or something like that and I think one of those people should be Jordan um we can do that literally like within the next hour if we wanted to and if there were four or five people that that were up for it and and I'm willing to help I've done that before willing to do it again love doing that kind of stuff so so then I think that's a you know that that's a transitioning from one person owning to four or five people owning it on behalf of the commons one person owning on behalf of the commons four or five people owning it together none of those owning all of it each of them owning a part of it socially and then from there you know you start moving into what problems uh that that brings up a bunch of problems right who pays for it uh you know who's going to whose credit card is on the line and could get auto charged the next year right and things like that and how do you intermediate those discussions and um you know how do you how do you how do you understand how do you how do you record who owns what and how much um how do you add the next person in how do you add you know what what happens if you bump into something else that you need to co-own with another group that's like that that's another four or five people all of those kinds of questions are generative right and then the next level up is probably something that starts to look more like a formal dow rather than just an informal collective of four people that said yeah I'll I'll co-own the thing um Charles and I'd love to pass the mic to Lauren who appears to be free to her slime adventure oh perfect um pretty slime comment just maybe the bridge in between or the first the the piece that you didn't list in your in your wonderful list there Pete was um the wallet you know the shared wallet so there's this idea of a multi-sig wallet or there's different things that are still um not specifically or necessarily on the blockchain but then you know normally dows are on the blockchain but Lauren um good time and we don't have to start there you can start before you have a multi-sig wallet well in terms of that that piece about the the costs and then the credit card and whatever there's this idea of a co-owned wallet so yeah over to you the honeycomb one oh what am I commenting on anything at all you'd like like any any take over anywhere from check-in to risk reactions to where this is heading to whatever I don't have any strong opinions at the moment just glad to be here um yeah I mean one thing I think that um oh we've been developing a key collab that's important is um kind of an idea of a framework of hash bins and that in a hash verse and that is these um just containers which is not uh necessarily related to any tech but can be done with trove and um massive wiki whatever technology we like um but they're basically just ways of attaching uh resources to ideas um and I think that that will give us a really uh powerful framework moving forward that's more fun and can attract um attention and be fun and which is sometimes missing from the commons and um and I also feel like you know we've had talks on this before going back to Joe Cornelli and um talking about it and Christina Bowens too advising me to um make sure that the what's most important mapping of resources is uh resources that actually mean something so that's why we're um doing this grant writing quest and I think that um one really important asset is you know um cash and where the pools of cash are and working together to try to get some of those um although I know everyone not everyone here likes grants but um I think that it's it's a it's something that attracts other people so plotting out where the funding is and working together um to get some of the funding I think would be a uh a good goal for us that's it thanks and I was going to add Pete just relative to what you were just saying about we could move there pretty quickly um from my perspective until we've had like six calls and realize who the people are who showed up for the six calls it seems really premature to say four people are going to step forward and decide to actually be there for a look for the long haul for this thing and that they will sign up right now makes sense um uh makes sense and I hear that and also I Rick I want to suggest that we have a problem we have an information structure problem uh IT infrastructure problem right now which one where's where's the wiki and where's the website what do you mean where's does generative comments have a website right now there's a domain and if we if we built the same thing we just did who owns the domain so why does it matter if the intent of the domain is to donate it to whatever entity shows up as soon as it shows up why is that an even an issue right now because we showed up no I mean there's no entity to put poured into perfectly happy to shift ownership the moment that's needed why is that a dilemma right now I'm personally I am more uh more incentivized or more aligned I'm more aligned with a domain that's held by four people than one person and it will be the moment we have a thing to do that could literally be like we don't know who the four people are Pete so I volunteer yeah I volunteer I mean you know and also there and you said something about showing up there but we're there now and we didn't even define if this is like a weekly call with it right exactly so but you also said again we bought but it's not we I was saying we because I was trying to sort of say we the crowd I bought I went and got the domain I get the intent you personally don't I personally don't mind Jerry that you bought the domain name I also think if we're gonna get serious enough to buy a domain name that Jerry bought it knowing that we might change the name and then we'll buy another one I really don't think it's a I think it's a non-issue I think in our last few minutes we should focus on something a bit more substantive in terms of action items and I trust that Jerry will do the right thing I love the generative flavor of the call but I have to hop to a different one so yeah you have to host Judy thank you thanks Judy and I'm happy to follow your lead and just transfer the domain immediately I'm I'm I'm not going to like drop on that sword I just don't see why spend energy on that right this second when we have like 50 things to actually stand up something that'll look like generative comments I agree with Vincent and I also agree with you know if it's if it's like an hour's worth of I mean it's not even anyway if it's a simple and easy enough thing then it's not like getting stuck on this that also includes then me figuring out how to fold a bucket email into my email so that I get those and reply I mean there's there's like a series of other implications of the simple task that complicate our lives right now instead of simplifying our lives right now so go on please come down for it I have a pretty strong opinion that it's going to go much better if we can get a very small team to go in and move fast and do things instead of having a great big group of people do social negotiation for two years to have like tons of talks and very little outcome because I feel like small groups can just forge ahead get stuffed on and then gather some momentum that other that will attract other people it's just it seems to be the way sounds good thank you um other thoughts do we want to replicate this call next week so of course it's good Michael's good on the channel we can also discuss that sounds good but why don't I just duplicate the invite into next week and then we can move it or do whatever but let's let's have an assumption that there's a another call like this next week that seems like a good starting point a bunch of people had to leave and we've gone 90 minutes it feels like we've gotten somewhere um and uh so why don't we get ourselves all on the same chat channel on matter most um we'll figure this out we'll be recording the calls and posting them online as as per usual as per our usual generative commons mo uh and consider how we can pump up and take that opportunity of the summit as key collab as well we can frame that we can code design in any ways and and as I said the last words I just said I'm like oh there's another pedal on the flower which is um what are the assumptions for when you're doing something in the spirit of the generative commons and the assumptions might be that your notes and transcripts are open that you record and post the video except that has privacy implications etc etc so so I think there's a pedal here about what what what is what is of the normal working order and that includes what does it mean to feed the commons like when do you know you've actually added to the generative commons like like this posting to youtube good enough does it need to be simpler someplace else and I don't think we need to solve the internet archive problem of you know how will this be available thousand years from now but we do have to think about those kinds of issues as well bless you Vincent um cool any any last thoughts um thanks everybody for coming thanks Jerry for for hosting us um it's been a wonderful call Benjamin Turquoise lovely to meet you thank you for coming yay and systems innovators later today um one o'clock pacific for o'clock eastern I will be there I gotta hop to an integral thing and then integral leadership then I'll be in the system same as y'all all right do you mean your health being integral turquoise or or yeah integral to the whole thing I'm I'm going to go get some health stuff and then integral leadership room on these spaces I think something like that um yes and my health is integral to the whole project y'all so that is this week thank you thanks oh and the chat will appear somewhere maybe in the channel I will copy that to us yes that would be beautiful thanks so much I have a cool mind map I'll post as well yay yay awesome and we're all