11:59:19 All this back and forth about previous MK expenses is a distraction 11:59:20 There’s a request of expenses and revenue on the table as the insult and accusation that started this drama was that OF was a for profit company running MK. The inverse of this accusation is that TE was a non profit and there writer inserting that it didn’t take any money in. 11:59:21 And the quiet inferring it didn’t take any money in * 12:38:29 Checking bridge status 12:38:56 Now working 12:59:05 @tempetassum:matrix.org: I second this. Total distraction. We need to stay focused. 14:20:51 Good morning @ajs_:matrix.org. I would like to ask again, I believe for the 4th time now. 14:20:51 Will you affirm your obligation to abide by the results of the meeting that you called? 14:37:27 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: That really is not up to ajs. After the results are clear they will have to have a meeting between TE members and reach a joint decision. Till then just wait for the meeting. I hope the TE members can also schedule a meeting sometime this month. 14:48:11 @stnby:kernal.eu: Results of what though? What are we actually voting for? I am not sure this has been clearly described by anyone, nor discussed. 14:48:11 The clearest description has been by bawdy (I think) that proposed voting for seperation of infra from organiser. And then "loaning" infra to organiser as required 14:49:18 @midipoet:matrix.org: That or something similar is what everyone in this and MoneroKon room seem to want. 14:49:39 After we all agree that should happen, we can find consensus on organiser (I think). I suppose we can do the latter before the former, if that helps people. 14:49:46 @stnby:kernal.eu: Yeah. But we don't really know how. I suppose that could be worked out later 14:53:46 Prob shouldn't be leased out to a single organizer but MK should still have like a flagship MoneroKon but then anyone else could make their own special side MoneroKons or whatever its best to call those. 14:53:46 And yet again thats just my peronal opinion. 14:53:46 Also I am very much against anything related to MoneroKon being transferred to the so called "core". They have nothing to do with MK and never had and never will. 14:55:23 Unless they wanna come public and join the TE as association members. With majority of current TE members agreeing to that. 14:59:33 binaryfates company handled fiat for mk3, and we moved forward with twed because it was not a great setup. Twed with all its downsides was a legit improvement in terms of flexibility and reaction speed 15:01:59 And bf sponsors the ccs cons using the generalfund, and than historically donated the max using his Rino company 15:02:15 I would imagine that he was involved in mk1, since that was run my mrl 15:02:20 By* 15:02:57 But yea, core isnt community 15:04:49 @ofrnxmr: Some core members were definitely involved in both MK1 and MK2. In MK2 including hauling boxes and running cables. Can't speak to others 15:05:47 Historically before that Core were also strongly involved in DefCon events. Again including on the ground 15:06:51 And C3 events actually 15:08:00 We must make sure digital assets created by the community remain accessible to the community. Taking content offline as a chip I'm negotiations is quite frankly not acceptable. 15:08:00 Right now the idea is have custodians look after the digital assets, who give out access to any organizer of monerokon, upon request of the comminty 15:08:29 @midipoet:matrix.org: Articmine is always involved as a speaker :P 15:08:41 @ct:xmr.mx: But how do you know you'll get it back once lended? 15:08:57 We dont. Look at the current situation 15:09:13 @ofrnxmr: To be fair, I've seen ArticMine do more than just speaking 15:09:21 Do you mean loaned to organizers? They have access, not admin 15:09:29 @midipoet:matrix.org: Im not saying he doesnt, im saying hes at all of them 15:09:41 Including mk6 15:09:59 The most "community" oriented member of core, is articmine 15:10:15 Yeah, I don't know how this would in practice. Maybe it's possible. I don't know enough about it > <@ofrnxmr> Do you mean loaned to organizers? They have access, not admin 15:10:38 @midipoet:matrix.org: On twitter and youtube, its definitelt possible. thats how ajs can kick ppl 15:11:02 @midipoet:matrix.org: You don't given out all keys, you keep admin access to undo destructive changes. 15:11:14 For website, its git repo, orangefren nevwr needed maibtainer access 15:12:49 Yeah, ok. I guess you're gonna end up trusting a bunch of people with admin rights, regardless. Maybe they'll be more trusted than others. 15:13:26 The idea is to have 2 people 15:13:45 1. Delegate access 2. Be available if 1 dies 15:16:30 It should not be lended nor transferred in any way. Someone within TE should be in charge of the media. Merging stuff into the website. Etc. > <@midipoet:matrix.org> But how do you know you'll get it back once lended? 15:17:04 Right so 2 trusted people. 15:17:04 Is the bond idea still on the table? 15:17:13 email access should be given in terms of username, pass or an alias set up to forward those to the organizers 15:18:26 username 'hardware' is not allowed 15:18:37 Because now if attendee email is stored in the db for ticket sales and that server including the PII is just moving like that between LLCs thats very much a breach of GDPR 15:19:09 Need to avoid doing that for the future Imo 15:26:00 Well, I'm asking him because he is the one with superuser credentials across all that infra. > <@stnby:kernal.eu> That really is not up to ajs. After the results are clear they will have to have a meeting between TE members and reach a joint decision. Till then just wait for the meeting. I hope the TE members can also schedule a meeting sometime this month. 15:26:00 And while there might be a case that TE is the actual custodian (at best I think it's murky), it sure would be nice if @ajs as the chairman of TE could actually participate and be responsive to the highly relevant questions we have in the lead up to the meeting. 15:27:20 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: I can't speak for ajs, but am fairly sure that he'll transfer the infra. The question is really where/to whom. 15:28:09 Thanks midi. I really do appreciate that. 15:28:36 As I'm sure many others do as well 15:28:49 plowsof: Hardware⊙go still in use and monerokon⊙go otw 15:29:03 When can plowsof get community⊙go 15:29:18 this is the email list 15:29:51 @midipoet:matrix.org: I think so, yeah. 15:30:27 I think we have kind of two options. One is to go the corporate route, the other is to use pure financial incentives (bond+reward). 15:30:55 I dont think many/any trusted individuals here have the bond 15:31:23 so, bond would likelt be the most coroporate optiob 15:31:54 Well we could also just use a pure reward system, with multisig for the payout 15:32:26 For example, a payout once per year by agreement of the multisig parties. 15:32:41 Payout for what? 15:33:19 Payout to the custodian, for proper management of the resources. An incentive to follow community sentiment. 15:33:21 and from where 15:33:34 Let's take a step back really quick 15:34:07 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: I would assume the duty is minimal 15:34:09 And intentionally minimal 15:34:15 Whether corporate solution or bond/reward regarding the custodian; I dont think we'll be able to solve that tomorrow at the meeting. Worth discussion, but maybe best saved for the end. 15:35:44 I think tomorrow we mostly need to decide who the primary custodian and backup should be, agree to transfer resources, and decide to restore access to those who were removed. 15:35:46 how big would the bond have to be though? The conference is potentially a 50k profit a year enterprise 15:36:23 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: Having a list of all the assets would also help, so we understand the undertaking 15:36:56 https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/m/matrix.org/rZpJnfUucJqWYKvaKesbhtuR.png (image.png) 15:37:05 From: https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/1417 15:46:22 I assume the MK repositories are GitHub repositories? Was there mattermost as well, and the password vault thing too? 15:54:14 yes and yes and yes 15:55:24 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: The the core issue of whether or ratify that orangefren can use llc to host a monerokon this year, and be allowed access similar to mk6 16:01:42 @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: We need to also understand if there are any other options. 16:01:42 If it's either orangfren, yes or no. 16:01:42 Or orangefren, option B, option C, etc 16:14:46 @midipoet:matrix.org: ajs withdrew his own LLC from the running. So it really is a simple question. 16:14:46 Do we re-affirm OrangeFren as the organizer for MK7? 16:16:32 Unless you or someone else is proposing option B, C, etc ... I haven't seen anyone else propose an alternative to Orange and his LLC (not his swap service, a custom LLC for MK). 16:18:51 @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: What's funny is that, while I agree this was the core issue, I honestly don't believe there's much contention about that, even probably from ajs himself. Everyone that participated, seemed to enjoy MK6 thoroughly. 16:18:51 And altho ajs' objection was stated and handled poorly; I believe that we were able to get to the core of the issue regarding control of the MoneroKon digital assets. For that maybe we do owe ajs a thanks. 16:25:51 [CCS Proposals] Lee Clagett opened merge request #687: Add vtnerd 2026 Q3 proposal https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/687 16:41:46 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: To be honest, I have a different opinion on what the core of the issue is. 16:41:46 it's been articulated by binaryFate in his GitHub comment. 16:41:46 I don't believe that an LLC should be able to profit from the goodwill built up from the slog of five years of community run events, using community created assets, piggy backing on the cypherpunk ethos of the wider Monero community, all whilst not having to deal with any of the complexities that come with attempting to[... more lines follow, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/0r2ds5ULU1dMdHNu ] 16:48:27 @stnby:kernal.eu: Results of what though? What are we actually voting for? I am not sure this has been clearly described by anyone, nor discussed. <<>> as to the question "what are we actually voting for?" although this covers only a small piece of the issue it is the only question that ajs wrote in the meta for the meeting he called for 16:48:33 "Question: Should MoneroKon’s revenue go directly to a privately controlled LLC with no community oversight?" 16:49:21 if the only issue is community oversight then I believe that there is no issue :) 16:58:03 what do I have to build to get the hardware⊙gc email address? I can make hardware :p > <@ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Hardware⊙go still in use and monerokon⊙go otw 16:58:10 @midipoet:matrix.org: I find this fascinating because, being such an important matter, you remained totally silent during that entire meeting last Saturday, despite being a board member of TE itself. You asked for no clarification, proposed no alternatives, made no objection. 16:58:10 Despite an arguable obligation to host MK6 (which TE already had 155 XMR in funds), the decision was made by either TE, or its chairman, (or both), to abandon MK6. Orange picked up the torch (on a compressed timeline, taking upon him the full risk), and it seems like the TE chairman and/or board consented to this. 16:58:10 Moreover, the original proposition by the TE chairman was that their own personal LLC both host MK7, even as they retained control of the assets. I'm sorry but there's no way to ask this nicely ...[... more lines follow, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/zbnZs5ULSnQxUF9u ] 17:02:42 nioc: I believe the community oversight, is the ability to withdraw access to the MoneroKon digital resources. 17:04:41 that seems like oversight 17:09:12 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: I stayed silent during the meeting, as I was not available. There is no way I could access my phone in any meaningful manner. There was also no way I could changed plans to ensure I was available. 17:09:12 The community decided to not run MK6. 17:09:12 TE didn't (and doesn't) have an obligation to run MK. The entity was created to facilitate a community run event. There is a distinct difference.[... more lines follow, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/iPCBtJULOUlCcXd3 ] 17:11:13 So you're saying the sequence of events was a community decision, not TE's decision? 17:18:35 since there is contention on both sides, maybe handing the reins to orangefren for next year is premature. can it wait until later in the year so we can see if other options become available? it seems early to precommit at this stage and while six months of lead time is not ideal, it was obviously enough time to put it together. 17:19:09 Their sre no reins being handed to orangefren 17:19:34 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: For MK6? 17:19:34 Yeah, I remember the organising team that had worked their ass off for the the last years didn't have the energy to do another one, or couldn't get motivated (understandably). 17:19:34 It was not a decision that TE made, that's for sure.[... more lines follow, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/lu2ntJULY0xGa1Js ] 17:19:55 Its only "obviously" enough time if you can work as efficiently as OF did for mk6 17:20:12 Thanks for confirming that the sequence of events was a community decision, not just TE. 17:20:20 IN which case, the community already decided that a MoneroKon event could be organized as a for-profit endeavor. 17:20:20 And then ajs himself organized a vote to decide which for-profit LLC would run MK7 (despite also being the custody of the resources). 17:20:20 You might not have had time Saturday, but you had every opportunity in the moments leading up to last Saturday, to object. 17:21:23 right, he has shown he can make it work under that timeline. and the way you want the question phrased (mk7 to orangefren y/n) is handing the reins over. I proposed a more open question which I think is more appropriate at this stage 17:22:34 the question is whether to allow orangefren to use the socials etc for mk7. And further, since its a point that keeps being brought up, whether it is even ok for an llc like orangefren to host one 17:22:47 There is no reason to delay either of these questions 17:23:02 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: I tried. I raised concerns about the Governance Framework as soon as I saw it. I don't know how long it was up, but I immediately asked about it. I also commented that I didn't understand the vote, the options, or the implications (I still don't), as other also seemed to comment. 17:23:38 "Does the community wish to continue @OrangeFren's nonexclusive access to use the MK website and socials for a MoneroKon in 2027?" 17:23:52 I think this is an appropriate question 17:24:15 They can say no 17:24:16 @midipoet:matrix.org: That's why I asked you yesterday if you could point out where your objection was. Because I searched the chat history, and found nothing 17:24:25 geonic: Agreed 17:24:28 who is they? 17:24:40 The community 17:24:49 The question you just quoted 17:24:53 right, that's what the vote is for 17:26:03 so, like the that "there are 13 standards -> lets add a standard to standardize the standarda -> not where are 14 standards", i agree that is the question to be asked 17:27:06 note that this vote wouldn't stop a "nonprofit" from coming along and organizing a "community-run" MK in 2027 17:27:19 (We need to vote on which questions to ask /s) 17:27:39 yes, meeting agendas are a thing :) 17:28:19 geonic: Agreed 17:29:05 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: I pinged you in the other chat with where it started 17:29:14 midipoet & others: do we agree to vote on this question as phrased 17:31:51 geonic: I guess, but the options should probably be 17:31:51 1. Yes 17:31:51 2. No 17:31:51 3. Abstain[... more lines follow, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/lOLUtJULRElBaGh1 ] 17:32:13 @midipoet:matrix.org: Your doubts were likely well founded. As the group in general voted it down. 17:34:04 @midipoet:matrix.org: This isnt a reasonable response. 17:35:16 You either agree that Orange should have his access restored tomorrow, or you disagree. The reason for why you disagree to restore his access immediately is a separate issue. 17:35:47 Also, abstentions are implicit. If you didnt vote, by definition, you abstained 17:36:24 geonic: Bawdy, he csnt see your emoji 17:36:50 geonic: Yes, agree, 100% 17:36:52 Some people might agree with the idea of an LLC but want a choice of which LLC. If we just have yes/no, and it lands at no. What then? 17:37:14 Did the phrase "non exclusive" trip you up? 17:37:28 1. Did we choose DR? 2. We had a choice, ans chose OF 17:37:39 The other choice was 4lice 17:38:06 This isnt difficult, midi 17:38:42 If the vote is "no," then we can hold a future vote at any point in time to add any type of organization that proposes to organize MoneroKon, or even MK-adjacent events 17:39:00 If the vote is "yes," that is non-exclusive to another organization coming along and proposing to organize a separate MoneroKon 17:39:05 Yes it did. > <@bawdyanarchist:matrix.org> Did the phrase "non exclusive" trip you up? 17:39:08 There are actually multiple choices. OF, 4lice, TE, other, skip mk7 17:39:16 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: No need to be tetchy 17:39:36 Sorry man, but this is feeling slightly tedious 17:39:44 I apologize for being impatient 17:39:50 I mean we could, but it wouldn't get us far and might end up meaning little petite feathers get ruffled 17:40:15 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: It's ok. It's good that you're self aware enough to realise. 17:40:56 I hope in return, you're self aware enough to understand that not everything needs to be litigated to the Nth degree. The phrasing is simple, and we have been discussing this for 3 days now. 17:41:52 @bawdyanarchist:matrix.org: Sure. But we've discussed it because people felt there was stuff to discuss, plus all the drama. 3 days isn't that long, imo. 17:42:07 Well sorry, like 5 days at this point now. 17:42:15 Plus, the vote was always Saturday. What were you gonna do in the meantime? Touch grass? 17:42:48 If only I didnt live in a desert. I do touch iron tho. 17:45:42 Before the community votes for who leads MK7, we need to know who controls the digital assets. Right now, AJS/TE shut everyone out, correct? Pending tomorrow’s vote. We need to decide who is on the governance board, so to speak. Then we need to decide on who the organizer is. 17:45:42 The second vote needs to happen quickly on who’s the organizer. Just because it was done well on a compressed timeframe doesn’t mean it is efficient to do so. 17:46:25 Saturday is like tomorrow, dont leave much time to refill the popcorn 17:48:19 @tempetassum:matrix.org: Ajs did it on his own. TE wasnt consulted 17:48:41 The governance board of TE is ajs, midipoet, anhdres 17:49:40 Well that’s even worse lol 17:56:06 Which is why we believe that the emergency meeting that ajs called for tomorrow, should at a minimum, see restored access for all of the maintainers that he cut out. In addition to Orange 17:57:23 We also believe that in these actions, not consulting with TE, taking unnecessarily severe actions, even as he was attempting to do what he now complains about ... That ajs has proven himself an unreliable custodian of these assets. 18:43:05 there are recent matrix posts that shown on irc but not matrix 18:43:21 remind me again why people use matrix? :D 18:44:58 Because you can just open it on your phone 18:46:00 oh thre they are, just 1 hr late lolol 18:46:23 smfh 18:47:04 I have irc on my phone <3 19:00:27 images/media? Emojis? > remind me again why people use matrix? :D 19:05:31 https://usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/YjglLt9z/20260625_140553.jpg 19:05:57 enjoy the view bawdy 19:17:51 I am stripped of my logix. Only emojis remain. 19:19:53 🥺 19:20:12 IRCv3 even has reactions and replies 19:20:21 Nice 19:20:28 Too bad we cant bridge them for votes. 19:20:32 On my phone too 19:20:36 Or can we? 19:20:38 We can 19:20:51 It is already supported if matrix users opt in for a puppet 19:21:14 Voting would be so much easier with a proposition under which people just thumbs up/down. 19:21:21 They need to register a libera account, I won't do it for them otherwise as that brings way too much risk otherwise specially with spam 19:21:52 👍 > <@bawdyanarchist:matrix.org> Voting would be so much easier with a proposition under which people just thumbs up/down. 19:22:06 https://irc.gammaspectra.live/75b09570725db90e/IMG_9363.jpeg 19:22:19 Libera didn't enable support for that yet but it's planned 19:22:29 Bridge is able to map them in different ways 19:23:24 It already transfers the "user is typing" events Matrix<->IRC both ways for puppets (so IRC->Matrix, and Matrix->IRC for opted in users) 19:23:35 thumbs_up 19:24:08 lol 19:24:31 The command otherwise can be called "post the vote in text" :) 19:36:12 if we’re serious about the nonexclusive part we need to mandate that monerokons are advertised MoneroKon + City_name + Year and not MoneroKon + Year 19:40:26 any objections to adding that to the agenda for tmrw? 19:41:33 Adding what exactly? I personally dont like such a mandate (altho in practice that's how it'll have to be handled). I think the simpler question is better. 19:42:23 Naming conventions can be adjustable, but suffice it to say, responsible de-confliction of multiple events will be expected. 19:42:38 So for example, if there's only one MK event in 2027, no need to complicate the naming. 19:44:29 if an event is already being advertised as MK 2027 that disincentivizes additional events being held 19:45:33 so in effect the first person who gets a MK approved gets the “official” name and everyone else has to settle for something else 19:45:38 This is true regardless of naming convention 19:46:33 how so? MoneroKon Warsaw 2027 doesn’t stop me from organizing MoneroKon Istanbul 2027, whereas a MoneroKon 2027 would 19:47:55 First, it's easy to make space. "Hey, we have another community approved event. Please pivot to your backup name, MK7_Warsaw." 19:47:55 But also, even if the first approved event doesnt pivot their name, there's still nothing preventing you from having MK7_Istanbul. 19:48:00 give it codenames :) 19:48:19 MoneroKon-Ultra 2027 19:49:03 MK7 Pierogi 19:49:14 And also how do you propose to deconflict if there are two MKs in the same city? 19:49:15 See what I mean? 19:49:16 By your logic, it wouldn't be fair if the second MK applicant wants to host in the same city. 19:49:17 So now we need more mandates for that. 19:50:22 This kind of thing is why you need good faith of a competent custodian. Guidelines are reasonable, mandates are more difficult 19:52:28 yes, I assume that "we" wouldn't approve a competing MK in the same city if there is already an event being held there 19:52:50 mandates work. if I've already advertised my event as MoneroKon 2027 for half a year, good luck getting me to change the name 19:53:10 MK7 Warsaw Blue and MK7 Warsaw Red, you're welcomd 19:53:27 East and West 19:53:33