Agenda

• Welcome! New Members Intros!
  • Mike | M11E
    • Got into crypto recently
    • Part of Eco project
    • Proof reads IRL
• Editorial Review & Discussion
  • Guidance on deciding if an article is publishable aka Stage 1
    • Links asked if he, as primary editor, has the authority to determine if an article is publishable or not and how do we determine that?
      • nonsense explained that we have the authority to decipher if a piece meets the Banless ethos, and if not we have processes to help them improve
    • hiro asked if we should put on a class to help writers or editors improve
      • Ap0ll0 said that a class structure doesn't really fit the decentralized nature of what we're trying to accomplish since a classroom is a hierarchical structure
    • It was proposed if we should reduce the time limit between retests if a writer or editor fails the first test from 60 days to 30
      • Many members felt 60 days was fair.
      • nonsense proposed that reducing the time limit could increase members but could reduce quality
      • we want quality over quantity
      • Ap0ll0 suggested we reduce the initial wait time to 45 days and increase it to 60 days if there's a 2nd failed test and increase it again for subsequent failed tests
    • Frank reminded everyone that getting published on Medium or Mirror platform does not requires passing the writing test. It's only required to work for Client Services or the Newsletters
      • If a writer presents an article that fits the Bankless ethos and it's not publishable, we should try to encourage that writer to improve by suggesting resources such as Top Edit or Writers Mastermind Group
      • We don't necessarily need to hold them by the hand, but a little reassurance could go a long way
• Sponsorship/ Grant partnerships request (siddhearta)
  • Product Menu
  • Sid explained that a new initiative was started with the goal of securing sponsorships for different projects in the DAO
  • There was a discussion about what EPA could offer as well as costs for services
  • A recent collab left some members frustrated and we addressed it
    • nonsense explained that there could have been a better workflow to include the EPA in decision making - EPA was committed to perform services without knowledge
    • sid apologized and asked for clarification on which process to follow
    • frank explained the rate structure and process and ap0ll0 asked for a clause to be added if the announcement is time sensitive
    • ap0ll0 explained that he believes part of the frustration arose when the EPA was expected to suddenly perform services and it interferes with current work-stream. If we have more notice, it would prevent future issues.
    • Everything was addressed and solved and we're moving forward - I love this DAO!! 🥰

On the agenda but not discussed

• Publishing
• Governance
  • Managing the coordination layer
• Workflow details:
  • How best to move articles from submission to spreadsheet