the text-only `raw' button on monerologs.net may be helpful for extracting meeting logs

so, could be saturday night mania, but had a thought regarding the potential expansion of the CCS for more extramural projects.

the initial blatherings are here: repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/c…posals/merge_requests/115#note_8794

but that CCS proposal is probably not the best spot for it

the discussion, that is

.hmm

but TL;DR - Being accepted and awarded Monero CCS Funding could become a desirable thing in and of itself, independent of the actual funding

i don't know rick...

of course, this could require more formalizations of the whole process, or it couldn't

shut up morty!

lol.

don't you see? can't you ( bbrruuuup ) see? It's so much bigger! It will just go and go and we won't have to worry about all these little specks just flying around and around

bbrruuup lol.

you're slaying me tonight, good sir.

and it will all just come together! We just need to do it Morty. WE just need to sit down, get it done, put it on straight, and go!"

Hey there,

I couldn't see any README on Russian review of GitHub. In what format should I submit commits?

gingeropolous: is there ever a day when you ARENT feeling manic?

interesting proposal though, are there examples of open-ended open source funding request places in the wild?

wow. Helsinki is a hotbed of Monero nodes.

Hey Fellow monero users

yo Jae

gingeropolous: unless Monero rises significantly in price I don’t see how your proposal is realistic

so, realistic then.

Inge-: its where we at

<xmrhaelan> Sorry for missing another meeting yesterday. Life tends to get in the way sometimes... Thunderosa thanks for sharing the Monero Outreach updates. I see the valid concerns about the Locha Mesh CCS proposal, but wanted to share a few observations over the past few weeks communicating with them. They have much more development going on than we can see, because a lot of it is happening off of GitHub (which they are changing

<xmrhaelan> They are even starting to mention Monero on social media which is a good sign in my mind: twitter.com/randybrito/status/1222963972690804739

<xmrhaelan> And a final note on some of the criticisms... it is one thing to be gatekeepers against spam and fraud. It’s another to prevent a project from moving into the funding required status just because there are concerns about whether a project fits certain priorities individuals have. Let donors decide whether they want to donate to something. These conversations should be about preventing spam, fraud, or controversy. Not

Spam moment: have you already read Mastering Monero? Please leave us a feedback on Goodreads! goodreads.com/book/show/43307435-mastering-monero

xmrhaelan: this point was rised before and it has been already discussed (it was the main point xeagu had when he wanted to rise funds for his crazy stuff). The point of discussing a ccs proposal is not just to prevent spam, fraud etc. That's not what the ccs is. We analyze proposals and we move to funding required what we think it's worthy. Many in the community simply donate to all proposal, because they

know there is a deep discussion before moving something there.

I think would be a huge mistake to transform the ccs into a "whatever gets in if you are not trying to scam". The donors don't have unlimited funding.

but beside that, the ccs is not a basket where everybody can try to get their idea funded and it shouldn't be

i explained myself poorly with that last one. I hope my point went through :P

that makes sense to me. people can still ask for donations for their crazy stuff, but on their own sites and posts

<xmrhaelan> I get it, but there’s a huge difference between the fruitless, crazy antics of xaegu and the tangible, observable, and meaningful work being completed at LochaMesh. It’s rather extreme to compare the two as being equal....

I'm not comparing the two situation as being equal at all. I'm just saying that we have a vetting process and we shouldn't bypass it for subjective reasons

<xmrhaelan> Well it appears that support for this particular proposal is split 50/50 here and on GitLab, and on Reddit the comments were overwhelmingly in support of the proposal. It would sure be a shame if it didn’t get moved into funding required just because a few of you don’t see the potential value.

well, if you present to the users on reddit a cool project and ask for funding, they will all say yes, obviously. The technicality are discussed here and during community meetings, i think it's very limitative to say "a few of view". We discussed it in two meetings and the discussion is still ongoin.

I understand you are very affectioned to this project and you are pushing for it a lot, but it's really important to see things from an objective point of view, because this proposal is something new and its approval would set an importance precedence from many points of view

*important

*important precedent

gingeropolous: I don't think that idea makes sense, maybe under another name. At that point though you're essentially providing an approval service for legitimacy

sgp_ I could see this being a thing that somebody might want to start up independently to see how it goes

but Monero isn't it.

*Monero's CCS