<ajs_:matrix.org> plowsof: to be clear, in your comment on “coordination tasks which have been omitted”.. does this mean you will no longer be hosing community meetings or dealing with the CCS process?

<ajs_:matrix.org> It appears you are suggesting moving form the CCS coordinator to a more more general helper of miscellaneous tasks

[CCS Proposals] plowsoff closed merge request #638: CipherNerd-educational-articles-highlighting-real-world-uses repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/638

[CCS Proposals] plowsoff closed merge request #639: Monero News App and Monero Magazine: Build a Community Media Platform for Monero repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/639

[CCS Proposals] plowsoff closed merge request #636: Open-source Monero browser extension wallet repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/636

[meta] plowsof opened issue #1356: Monero Community Workgroup Meeting: TBD

> monero-project/meta #1356

my reliability for chairing the meetings is not adequate enough anymore to claim that role sgp_ ajs_, i would still be involved in the CCS process but more directly with the in-progress list, and this hasn't been what the majority of my time is spent on to call myself the "CCS coordinator"

[meta] rbrunner7 opened issue #1357: Monero Tech Meeting #162 - Monday, 2026-03-23, 18:00 UTC

> monero-project/meta #1357

<pyxmr2025:mozilla.org> plowsof: I believe you ought to find a suitable replacement prior to making this decision.

<syntheticbird> I disagree. this falls upon core to decide of a new ccs coordinator if anything. People can of course propose themselves and see how it goes.

<sgp_> Yeah this is on core to handle if they want feedback meetings

I propose syntheticbird

<sgp_> I propose thankful for today

<hbs:matrix.org> @sgp_: what is he up to these days?

that description is too wishy-washy for my taste. this was one of the problems with diego's role and it would be an issue here as well.

ccs coordinator 👍 general help to the project 👎

e.g. running seed nodes is not a paid position

fwiw I disagree that core needs to be involved in picking a CCS coordinator, since the first C stands for Community, not Core :p

geonic the info in the who section: the wording is not intended to be 'i want your moneys to type ./monerod' - just seems relevant to mention/highlight - that i choose to rent servers and put community/project infra on them, since years, and that im seemingly trustable enough to do so, with funds given to me from donors to my ccs', and genuinely

care that they're online

do note that there are many contributors, who have sunk more of their own time, larger brain power into doing things for us totally unfunded for longer than ive been around, i wouldnt even dream of bringing the above up to people in here as though it where some trophy worthy achievement lol

letting the dev/research groups be self governing in terms of getting proposals into a state ready for funding, or, allocating funding to tasks (e.g. fcmp++ research/dev proposals) has relieved a large chunk of the coordinator roles work, to where i may only have to ask someone to end a file with a new line

those who fall outside of these groups (myself included) require feedback , which is sometimes hard to obtain, da rule book of the ccs just says goodluck/have fun "Do not expect others (especially the Core Team or other trusted members of the community) to do it for you. Others may share and support if they are excited about your project, but

ultimately it is nobody's responsibility but your own.", so the biweekly community meetings are still a life savour.

i forgot the point i wanted to make and im doing the media training thing of ignoring the question and answering one ive asked myself then saying 'any more points to address?' as though your concern was handled by a wall of text

<321bob321> Politian

<321bob321> Also core never decided on plowsof to be a co ordinator, they were conscripted by community.

<321bob321> But previously before conscription it was a love job

<syntheticbird> Maybe this situation is an opportunity for the community to "choose" a GROUP of coordinators. Instead of a single individual. I know some people here that are very well served in CCS lore but are very opinionated, so having like 3 people doing the work can help on the burden and make judgement safer.

<321bob321> Community votes, you just need a stick to make sure people are doing the tasks

<syntheticbird> in what im saying, 3 people would be the stick instead of one

<jpk68:matrix.org> And it could still make judgement safer, as multiple people have to come to an agreement on what should be approved/rejected in the first place

<syntheticbird> also community votes are too vague. Everyone knows the rough consensus in meeting is based on weighted votes from known members

<321bob321> People don't agree here

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> @jpk68:matrix.org: This is already the case

<syntheticbird> like there has always been a community vote so far

<syntheticbird> and plowsof have been doing a good job at identifying consensus state

<syntheticbird> I'm gonna kill myself monero.social is lagging

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Plowsof never had unilateral control over what gets approved or rejected

<321bob321> Matrix.moment

<321bob321> Scream at plowsof, plowsof do

<syntheticbird> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: Sure. There is the core veto

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> He doesnt merge proposals, he just relays the consensus to luigi

<321bob321> Server on a go slow

<jpk68:matrix.org> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: True, but I mean I agree with what SyntheticBird said

<syntheticbird> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: Yes. But unless luigi has some veto to make, most of the CCS are based on the consensus gathered by plowsof. Which i'm not criticizing in any way, he has been doing a super job at that. But finding another plowsof is gonna be difficult I think, so having 3 different people doing the "what is the consensus in meeting" part might alleviate issues from one person.

<syntheticbird> that is simply the poin i'm trying to make.

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> With plowsof's changes, there would implicitly be at least 2 coordinatoes moving fwd

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Because he still has his roles of coordinating gitlab (nohody else has those ops) and liasing with core

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> I've personally thrown my name in the hat to assist multiple times and either fallen on deaf ears or was NACKd, so shrug. Currently the team is supposed to be diego & plowsof

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> + luigi ofc

thinking more about consensus: i could re-add "- Gather consensus for CCS proposals. (feedback from GitLab/IRC/Reddit)." or , reword to 'relay consensus from community to core for them to decide'. im still in all those places pulsing. if the title of "general helper-ish" is a concern of lowering the bar of those applying for community funds, or a

slap in the face of those who help the project more, i understand, i just dont feel like the majority of my time now is actual CCS coordination, or, it ends up being beneficial to do the bare minimum in some areas so i have more time to contribute elsewhere, i'm also severely lacking in some aspects, e.g. not actively seeking new talent to bring

into the project: i have sought funding for some contributors not on the ccs to help/keep them around though - meeting agendas late, 2 weeks pass by in what feels like a few days being occupied with other things, and calling everyone ai sloppers? come on meow fire me from something please 😭

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> You dont get paid to call ppl ai sloppers

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Thats just the plowsof the community member

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Being ccs coodinator doesnt stop you from having a vote or an opinion