Introducing the Free TON community members to the text version of the Analytics & Support SubGovernance meetup. The participants discussed Free TON Payment (current state, initiation) and contest proposals.
The current status is a verification for independent payouts, since any distribution requires a preliminary double check. The full description of the tools is already there, you just need to do it. Unfortunately, a person cannot do this on the fly. The only working option at the moment, according to Pavel P, is to entrust this to the Stats group, show them the contest and ask them to make a table. “We need to create a web interface that includes the addresses of the contest contracts and issues a table of contests with the calculation of all the results, — explains Pavel P. — You enter the payment amount, addresses, rewards, and everyone can check whether the table is correct or not”.
Fyodor Skuratov suggested validating independent payments at the moment. Pavel P agreed that the contest for payout table automation could be launched.
Roma (Free TON) spoke up in favor of holding a contest without big prizes, but where real ideas are chosen, and later a “contract” for further implementation is signed with the winner, support for the division into vesting for 1-2 years. Pavel P believes that this is not quite the right approach, because development is a very difficult question.
Vlad V is convinced that the jury must write some kind of conclusion, based on the results of the contest. Pavel P objected that the word “must” does not work in a decentralized system: “The jury members vote in contests not because they shouldn’t, but because theoretically they make tokens on it. But then everything will be redesigned, the jury will have stakes etc. Therefore, everything should be tied to motivation ”.
Pavel P also believes that serious analytics should be done on a voluntary basis. And if there is a group of people who are ready to write a result, a report, he is ready to join them, with his formed opinion: “But not on behalf of SG analysts. This should not be taken as a rule, but rather as conclusions for everyone, for the benefit of the community. I am ready to participate, but I can’t do it alone.
Vlad V noted that he also does not mind joining, and Platon proposes to collect all the best ideas and implement them in a cool general collection that everyone can use: “It is important for us not only to hold contests and bury them but also to somehow use these solutions, collect the best ideas and create a contest for implementation.”
Vlad V, returning to the original topic, noted that a group that deals with all the payouts has been formed, everything has already been prepared, payments have been verified.
They are already being published in chats, where they have also been tested: “No questions emerged, everything fits together. All that remains is to sign the multisig and transfer money to smart contracts.”
DeAnalytics Token Distribution Program
A discussion about what exactly this contest means has begun. Vlad V considers this a reward for volunteer efforts, but Platon is sure: “This is a verification of incoming requests for partnership, nothing more.”
Pavel P tried to dot the I’s: “DeAnalytics is a contest to see who the judges will pick, who will make the most effort into writing partnership analytics. It is important. The same people can participate everywhere. But someone has to present the contest, because in the post-announcement it was written in two ways”.
Platon noted that when it was said that the contest would be held by analogy with DeSupport, it meant that applications would be submitted as in DeSupport. After the contest is over, everyone will submit an application, where they will describe what they did, and all this will be judged. Anyone can participate. After the report is ready (who did what, what contribution was made), they will come up with some motivation.
Plato also tried to clarify the contest: “Partners join us, submit an application, and who it is is not clear. They can be eminent, they can be no name. Key ideas, supported in chats and calls, are compiled in my contest proposal. We need to check the applicant after the application is submitted, whether he has the right to write from this company or not. Then there should be some standard brief, tools for checking it, async — public information validation, is there any negative, etc. And within 48-72 hours there should already be some kind of report about the partner on the forum. So that those who vote could rely on something relevant, and not just trust some nicknames on the forum”.
Pavel P is convinced there is no problem with the validation mechanics, there is a problem with the validation sources: “Verification of legal capacity is a legal issue that can’t be done without documents. And the company will not provide internal documents to the forum. You need a law firm to check the powers of certain people. Unfortunately, such a competition won’t solve it.”
As a result, agreed on making a separate call on this issue with clear comments being prepared in advance.
The formation of the next motivational budget
Vlad V reports it’s time to request a new budget session as we are running out of money on Giver. And this requires some kind of agenda. Pavel P is convinced that there is nothing to discuss. The text will not appear on its own after discussions, it is necessary to write the draft of the tasks.
When Vlad V asked whether it is necessary to request tokens for each contest separately, Pavel P replied: “If we don’t know what we need tokens for, then we don’t need them. If we do nothing, we won’t have to ask for anything ”. Therefore, Pavel P offered to write all the ideas in the documents and take an active part. Fyodor Skuratov noted that 300,000 are needed, promised to describe why and provide a report.
Creation of Palantir — Social Media Dashboard. Mini presentation
Fedor Skuratov recommends combining this with an analytics contest, or maybe even distinguish some separate direction, a contest for a separate product, because this is blockchain analytics.
Roma believes that all information should be available in one accessible place, Including tokens (distributed and in use), how the community is growing, how many wallets have been created at the moment.
But if the task is set broadly, it will never be solved, believes Pavel P: “When it is necessary to unload the number of users, the dynamics in the groups – this is understandable, but when you say, you need to collect from everyone, the problem will never be solved.” Roma believes that this can be done with an elementary script, but not by hand.
Vladimir Lazarev, however, got interested in what the “event” should include — scripts, parsers, or the proposal directly implies analytics to clearly show everything, or, including software mechanisms for collecting all data in different groups (Youtube, Telegram, Twitter).
Roma replied that first it would be ideal to get at least an NVP, so that everything would be collected in one place and not manually. Vladimir Lazarev noted this information with inspiration: “I have been doing analytics for a long time. NVP goes first, they end up using it. They look at some piece of data, the decision is made after on how to further develop and promote everything. I think this is the right move. I approve, great contest, you need to implement it.”
Pavel P added that this is a development, and everything starts with a specification. Each block must be described as strictly as possible, adding the mechanics.
Grigorij iTuber Team believes that there should be a solution for each source: “For example, on YouTube by the name of the most news video, search through SEO. There are a bunch of solutions to automate this. There are hashtags. Every process has to have a mechanism.”
Additionally, Pavel P proposes to describe in the criteria that the description of not all methods will significantly reduce the rating of the proposal. “And when we start writing the specification for the implementation,” adds Pavel P, “we’ll take something from here, from there. And now the implementation can be divided into three contests… The amount of the reward should be equal to the amount of time you spent on this or that specification. And the problem is not that someone will write works for the contest, but that someone will not be able to judge it… Basically, we will be able to judge data sources in theory. I don’t know what kind of jury we have, but there will probably be a question for the contestants so that they can check that this actually works, and not just that they think so… Someday we will make a global jury on smart contracts ”.
Vlad V approved the idea not to submit proposals to another SG, but to invite them to the jury.
Validator map froze…
There was a proposal for the Validators Map contest, but no one presented it. And if there is no one who would come and say “I’ll do it,” Pavel P believes, then there is no need. The time has not yet come for this contest, it is obviously being postponed.
At the end of the call it was decided that it would be nice to make a call for those interested in Palantir, where Lazarev would like to share his vision, thoughts, and discuss some points.