Season 3 - Ep. 7 - Plurality Labs w Feems + Disruption Joe

Transcript

[Music] welcome to the green pill. network podcast if you're just joining us we are building a coordination a network Society of thousands of hackers dreamers and doers using crypto to bring positive sum digital systems to the world this podcast features the people who are doing it and we publish a season of five to 10 episodes every couple months this season is impact season how can we manifest the meme of impact equals profit what are the most promising experiments in and ideas in Impact backtracking and how can we build cryptoeconomic systems that elevate impactful Builders these are the themes of green pill impact season 2024 one other special thing we are doing this season is we are allowing you to collect this episode so if you go to pods.

medgreen pill you can collect this episode on chain if you want to learn more about the green pill Network you can visit our website at Green pill. Network where you can download the green pill book for free join the Discord and become a member of your local green pill. Network chapter today's episode is uh is with themes and disruption Joe from plurality Labs plurality Labs makes understanding and coordinating decentralized grants and governance easier they conduct Discovery creation and implementation of processes and policies to help your community build trust the guests that I have today are uh FES in disruption Joe who are both working at plurality Labs FES is a dow governance operator Grant framework

specialist and researcher who has contributed to projects for various protocols including arbitrum interest protocol a and saddle she co-founded the Dow governance Collective a telegram group for Dow governance operators and her work is driven by a mission to create Fair avenues for governance participation and Equitable Grant distribution our other guest today is disruption Joe who is a leading figure in cryptocurrency building a pluralist grants framework for the arbitrum Dow which has delivered 3 million arbs in six months Joe is founder of plurality labs and head of decentralization at Thrive coin where he's been immersed in crypto since 2017 at getcoin he managed the grant operations and FDD fraud defense in detection workstream

preventing over $3 million in fraud and aiding in the distribution of $50 million of funding and I am of course joined in this episode by Carl Carone who is my co-host for impact season I am excited about this episode because I think that uh Joe and FES are really on to something when it comes to how to distribute capital and they're practicing it at arbitrum Dow you can tell by the numbers that we're talking about here $3 million in fraud defense during Joe's time at gcoin and then three million ARB in distribution that this is something that they not only are are thinking about but they're actually practicing and so I think that this is a fun episode for talking about the plurality of ways that Grant making is

happening in the ecosystem but also in the arbitrum da ecosystem and I think FES and Joe complement each other really well uh in in in this episode so without further Ado I give you plurality Labs enjoy coordination all right hey Carl hey FES Hey Joe how you doing hey what's going on chilling Joe what is plurality Labs why don't you kick us off so plurality Labs is currently serving only arbitrum and we are building a best-in-class uh puristic Branch framework um the idea of this pluralistic Branch framework came from a lot of the work that we do getco and thinking about like pluralistic uh data models and so forth you know the dock paper and so forth and the idea is

pretty simple it's really saying instead of having one program that uh you know tries to figure out everything and test one thing at a time instead use competition Marketplace Dynamics and evolutionary pressures to find what works best allowing many people to participate and bring their own unique creativity uh since we're only working with arbitrum you know there's there's not a lot of uh hey what else do you do you know we had a few things in our site but like uh the idea of launching a giant grants program for arbitrum is actually big enough for us and we could use another company our size added to us to like do this task so uh yeah that that's where we're at right now there's

four of us on the team we have our second proposal up we've been in business six months uh we we were just finished up our first Milestone where we delivered 3 million in Grants in AR grants and we're pretty excited to move on to the next steps I love how there's a plurality of mechanisms that you're trying out with a single D I'm curious how you selected the mechanisms that you wanted to experiment with was that bottom up or was that something where there was actually a set of things you wanted to deliberately try and experiment with uh it was both um I see it broken into kind of thirds if you do it by money it's a little different if you do it by number of programs uh if you take a look at arbit dr's forum and

our review of the Milestone one you can just type in review mil one and uh there's a nice little chart a little bubble graph showing some of them were chosen more for the experimentation and some of them were chosen more for the needs of arbitrum to be fill and so you know arbitrum being very new and that's one of the first funding course of funding opportunities that were available we needed to address some immediate needs of arbitrum so one program called Fire Starter started up where we were giving funds to the uh one person to cat hord or move along really necessary immediate neede problems uh

most of the other programs uh were split between ones that came through an opening application process and ones where we reached out you know use professional discretion our experience of the space B say this is really cool so for example joke race like we all know that's cool but has it gotten the iterative opportunities to learn you know like I was with gitcoin for many rounds and every round we we learn something you know so I want to see some other tools that you know we we in the Dow space all new were probably really cool there's something to them but they really haven't gotten that like shot of having iterative uh cycles of real funds what was great about gitcoin is that

there was a round and every round there' be one or two variables that we Chang but there'd be effectively the same structure set up a project set up a voters every time you went back in So as you think about configuring these different experiments what are you hoping to learn if things are working well how do you want to carry that forward yeah there there's two ways that I think about this and we need to distinguish um some of these levels of how we think about it there's a grantee who's funded from a grant program that they apply to in our program for Mone one we had uh 12 programs and we we don't use the term program at that level we call it a framework so there's a framework in which programs can apply and participate and our framework helps uh solve problems at the framework level

like how do we uh review grants as fee does uh across all of them in equal ways right and have like equal viewpoints to them um how do we create dispute and appeal systems that are available in a governance that you know each one you wouldn't want to have that bureaucracy like redundant um how do you make sure that a grant that applies in one round doesn't apply for the same work in another program and they don't know about it it's okay if it's explicitly known right but like they got to know um so there's these problems that come up when you try to create a pluralist framework that aren't there when you're just doing one program

so when I think about it I think about us our job at the the Milestone level is to look at the programs to coach them in terms of hey you could have done tighter Cycles with $300,000 instead of doing one program you could have done one at 100,000 one at 200,000 right you had this dispute issue it could have been better solved through our governance doing X um we then also you know use the model of the grant impact measurement or grantee success measurement and we need to separate those things most Grant programs don't they're looking for impact and impact is generally hard to

find because it's relative to what you said you were going to do or set out to do or to what somebody else did but it's relative to something but what's not that relative is did the grantee do what they say they were going to do right so at each of these levels there's opportunities for refinement our our coaching to the program should be uh doubling down the amount we're putting through programs that are great and cutting programs that really weren't that great uh the one thing that I think is like a caveat where you might be be less than maximally successful as a operator of a framework is cutting out programs after one try because anybody

who's been a founder and tried to start something like that first time you try something most of the time it sucks even if you think it was great like a lot of times it feels like a failure sometimes it feels great that you got something done but you look back and you're like we did everything wrong but you need that first step for like people with that entrepreneurial Spirit who are going to go and like create a new mechanism right because we're talking about building new mechanisms and using them in different ways in our side and like the reason that we have to do this is because the Dow has onec decision making modality we if they want to try any other decision-making modality it has to be approved through that first modality right so it's a very slow process to experiment and find new

unique ways of allocating value in your community so me coming from gitcoin I'm seeing we got Al protocol and we can experiment with as many different ways of allocating funds as there are unique ideas in our community that we can support to be built and run some funds through and find out if they're good and go forward so if you think about those different levels there's the grantees want to do their best and they want to communicate great to the community the programs want to learn how to tighten their cycles and double down on the grantees and their winners or how to connect to other Grant programs that complement them so like quadratic funding is great for sourcing grants

director uh delegated domain authori is great for doubling down on them though we might connect a round manager from the direct domain authority to quad Dr funding to Source a bunch of grants that then they can watch three months later they can double down into and at the framework level we're thinking okay we we have to coach these we have to watch in between them we have to remove redundancies we have to build governance Frameworks and we have to put it all on chain and remove ourselves from it so as as we build up and we think about these iterations in our plan with arbitrum we're what we see is you know we we built a pluralist grant framework I'd like to say it's best in class but it's

kind of the only in class at this point um then this next Milestone is all about scaling that right and putting it on chain so this is kind of like Milestone one we we had our kid and put them on the bike and we're like let's start Wheeling around and we're holding them and kind of it's us it's not really them mil two we want to get to the point where the we all start on and we're watching them right and in Milestone 3 well once they ride successfully with the training wheels we're not just going to be like okay good luck we're g to stand there a few times and be like we're here to catch you if you fall but this is you riding you have no training wheels right so that's kind of the progression that we're going to do and at each level we hope to be able to

coach uh the different levels and help them you know produce better so by that we can walk away and a pluralist framework is a thing that other communities can adapt just to add to that we're also doing that kind of stagered approach when it comes to impact evaluation and reviews so the current ones that we're running are not are not questions like did this project have an impact um it's more about did this project align with the objectives of the program do what is your sentiment on whether or not we should fund programs like this because I think when we look at impact evaluation we look at it from a program or funders perspective

but what we're also trying to to kind of showcase is a grantee experience and a grantees uh Grant uh Journey there there are a couple quotes that I connect to that I always talk to people about I was talking to a great Dev shop scope list and they were like when we go to get a grant from a da it's the same amount of administrative work for us to get 25k and grants as as to get half a million in client work and that sticks with me so the granty EXP experience in it's like how do you get top talent when top talent has to be like first they're put up for like actual like personal attacks when they go to the Forum and reputational attacks they have to be a diplomat a Salesman a creative they have

to be up for like a month and a half to four months of no pay without knowing if there's going to be pay at the end of it and you want to get top talent like that like we definitely need to improve the grante experience all the way through yeah I'm that kind of like a sneak Chas in its own tail because you're going to a grant or to a to a dow for a grant in order to improve grants so that the next person doesn't have to do all that political right yeah just yeah uh Carl you want to take the next question yeah I was just gonna dive in a little bit on what themes was saying about trying to measure impact and improve the grantee experience so obviously as you're getting grants to be on boarded for the first time at the

same time they're getting exposed to different mechanisms what are some of the ways you're to connect them make the experience more seamless and ultimately get better tracking you um so I think from our point of view we as Joe said that like Milestone one was about experimentation but then the next step is is that how do we learn from that experimentation so that we can better address the needs of grantees in order for them to succeed in Milestone 2 which is like incubation before Milestone 3 which is release um and so I think that the way that we're looking at it is first is by asking these particular questions we're able to actually see the consistencies of the um objectives between different grants but rather than having different Grant programs compete

with one another the one that we are actually applying using Karma Gap is actually categorized by by categories of like things like tools education community so then that way we can actually develop some sort of assessment Frameworks based on those particular categories rather than having programs who are already working in silos to then compete with one another so I think that also in web 3 you know not only from a grantees perspective but a grantee like ours as well a lot of programs could feel like um by collaborating then they might be able they might be limiting the opportunities for them to get funding this well however in Dows and using arbitrum Dow it's already so new that we

really need to understand what is the alignment of the priorities of the community and where do we have the funding gaps that prevent us from growing just being one of the participants and recipients of one of the the early grants I have to say that you've done a really commendable job trying to find collaboration opportunities between different grantees and I almost feel like every day waking up and there's another telegram group but just trying to connect different grantees together and make sure they learn from each other so I think that's really awesome same if not overwhelming it's a little overwhelming but it's it's overwhelming in a good way hopefully you get to pick and choose and there's opportunities for you to find a plurality of opportunities ined themes you were mentioning that there is a role of getting the community

to buy in to the grant making that you're doing and I think the sense out there is that arbitrum is very decentralized as far as Dows go and so there can be a pretty public process of getting buy in for any new idea or thing that you try I'm guessing you might have some Battle Scars From participating leas see others do that so any advice in trying to get a community to believe in and give by in for a grants program or some kind of new idea well I I think that in regards to the community buy in for Grants idea I I would I kind of push that to to Joe because a lot of great people come to him and say like oh I have this really great idea um I'm not really sure where it fits in um in terms

of the community review yes of course there is incredible Buy in that I needed for the community but then it's also like what kind of information can you set them up so that there is an in incentive for them to continue so I think that if I approach the karma Gap review process with blank sheets and just told grantees just to fill it in with without any guidance or without any information then of course nobody would fill it in and actually prior to releasing this I've actually talked to grantees and programs running in the Dow as well as delegates to get their sentiment about this so that I can actually plan ahead so I think that for for anything is having those early conversations before you release

anything but release an idea to understand what type of information or incentives um would drive uh community members to buy in into your project initiative or in in my case a decentralized review yeah anything you want to add to that Joe I know that you have some some battle stories of your own oh man I I have plenty but you know most of them are like the inevitable like flow of like the current in doubts like one of one of the things you want to do is like find where you're with the current and uh you know as hard-headed or stubborn as a great idea can be because sometimes you know it's like pretty good idea like you have unique

experience and insight um and you want to push it through I think a lot of it is being like user centered focused you know like experienced you know I mean you know FES as a masters and has worked with governments doing public private Partnerships it really understands like the intricacies of this you know Mary on our team you know she worked uh doing like change management consulting specifically around user centered design and design thinking like um they both care and their passionate Sean as well and I I think that's it's essentially need is the people will give people like others the time to speak and express what they want um I have one story that

really like from our grant program which kind of shows two aspects of it uh there was a guy named Gavin Who had who was you know brought over to me because they were like hey he runs optim or arbitrum grants and like you you're thinking about building on optimism maybe you should talk to him and see if there's an opportunity and I asked him a little bit about his company it's called side chain and uh you this was a few months ago three months ago and this last week you know arbitrum is being used on New York City's winter Jazz Festival where you know thousands 50 100 thousand people will be getting an nft using side chain they're not even going to know it because his user experience is so awesome uh but uh it's out there because of this grant now this grant was given

by the arbitrum foundation not one of the plurality programs now why did that happen it's because people always say if you're interested Grant in the Arbitron Foundation go talk to Joe and that's because there's a lot of people have stories about yeah I was successful so whether it was like you know girl with like yours where it's like I actually went and found you because I saw you were building something and knew it was amazing I wanted to bring it in there's some things where there was a huge problem like cim lot put this liquidity incentive proposal it didn't go down GMX said we have the votes to pass something none of the little guys will get fed but we're willing to wait a reasonable amount of time not too long so we were like we can give a grant to somebody to

shepher this process and facilitate the idea of what could we pass in one month if we could move something and then there's these other times where people just bring people and any of these times I'm making the space and taking those calls right and giving them a half hour time and learning what it's about and we're going to direct them whichever direction they need to go but I think being user centered and putting yourself in the position of those grantees and program managers and the delegates that you're talking to trying to figure out what's reasonable rather than telling about how right we are is uh probably the hardest thing to do uh especially for me and my personality and other people who have like creative

ideas you know like we're always telling people about great ideas that we have and when they work out we were contrarians then so why shouldn't we be a contrarian now right but finding that ab and flow where you can be with the current is is really really powerful for making those inro a great Point um I'm curious what you all are excited about with it when it comes to impact attestations and impact evaluations I know that that's a theme that we've been focused on in this season of green pill maybe uh FES this question to you what are you excited about when it comes to impact evaluations and attestations um I'm really excited about um I mean of course the program or the projects that we had funded but individually they're really

great but when they can work together it's like a real system that we can build for impact evaluation an example would be like the karma gap for example has integration with Oso um as well as what um mcky and burns are building in terms of dat data dashboard and so when we're looking at impact evaluation we actually should be looking at the complete user journey of the grante so what sort of what does the application process look like what is the database in which the application process is actually um approved and then from that How does it go into a a uh user interface like Karma gap for example in which grantees can fill out their particular Milestones their project information and updates and so forth and

then what are the validating tools that we can use to validate some of those decentralized reviews because if we just have open-ended questions we're not really going to get any answers and it's also not going to be able to provide grantees with a fair scale in order to measure their project um and so I think that what I'm really excited about in terms of impact evaluation is the way that the projects that we had funded are able to really integrate with one another but we're also you know creating a plan in which we can build a system for that actually to to be fair Equitable and also data that we can pull from so that we can learn from and reiterate um so for me impact evaluation

could should be like especially for longer term projects should be like a business plan it should always be a living document in which it continuously gets reviewed one of the things I think is really cool about what you're doing and what you described there with with karma is that they're also using ethereum attestation service to log both the profile of the project and the updates that are made and the milestones and so not only is that putting the information on chain so that anybody can go in and look at it and explore the metadata it also makes it very easy for projects like open Observer to find artifacts that that product is submitting it could be giab repo it could be contracts they put on chain it could be the wallet they're using to receive funds and so with very little with very little friction we actually

able to go and identify those types of artifacts about the project and make it so you can Surface new insights about the project to users absolutely yeah some of that open data being on chain is like a lot of what I'm excited about more of it available for the community to sh bir sh there there's also like uh like two components of it that like what we're doing with the impact evaluation I think are pretty novel and like exciting um one of them is that if you want to pay people to review uh grants you run into this problem or to do anything where you eventually are paying for more noise and less signal uh people for

example if you say we'll pay you to put into joke race submission you know N9 out of 10 will put in great and that's not a great like review or submission or answer uh what we realize is there's all these Auto validations on chain and they're great for giving you a binary did this happen or did or not but they're not great for reviewing quality or giving like a range output of like how well it was done uh humans are great at that so you know one of the things we're using is like the Thrive protocol behind Thrive coin with human validation where any of the entries you know we can say we'll pay you to come and participate if you hold ARB you're eligible you're get past the G and then you can review a grant anybody in the community right so we don't

propagate power to a web a trust which embeds some circle of influence or to token holders which the people with the most circle of influence we put the accountability and spread it all the way to the edges and we couldn't do this before because if you paid people to review you'd get that noise so what we say is we not we're not going to reward you until you're validated by the human validation protocol where we other people rewarding and we use a lot of that research from getcoin where we were doing participatory reviews for both civil and Grant evaluations you know we had come up with some math proofs that uh some people Octopus from like Fen engineering and J from the uh ather Foundation helped us with built out

simulations this is a continuation of that great work at gitcoin where with those proofs we know that we can actually pay people to participate and some of the other work the wrote about in 2016 but it kind of got popularized at Google in 2019 pure prediction mechanics if you ask people what do you think your peers will answer this OB question and then if by asking in that way you can scale the amount that you pay rewards and it doesn't change your expected outcomes so between these two mechanism design components we're able to uh spread the accountability across the edges of the arbitrum network and we aren't then susceptible to the circles

of influence at form in the way that a Webber trust uh would or the network application of like token holder our does it's something completely different and unique and we get the side benefit of a memory or reputation of who routinely is willing to put in the effort uh in in reviewing I hope we're at the point where we can actually start turning some of these things into ways to make the Grant application process seamless maybe even invisible for for grantees I me honestly I I would love to see a world where someone could say if you've done if you participated in three different getcoin rounds and you've been able to build a certain reputation and you've been able to get say recurring

donations from certain members of the community then you are Auto qualified to participate in some kind of a larger round all the data is there I think we could just stand these things up that's a question while start seeing that happening I I love that idea like building building some type of memory for people or reputation that was other thing that scopi followed the 25k to 500k comment with they're like now we get the 25k we do great work hoping that we come back and either the Dow has changed people who have the authority to do whatever so they don't want to use our work anymore or it's the the same people and there's no memory for them to say okay now they get 50k because they did a good job right so there there

wasn't like that lasting component that we could build upon totally agree just to add to that like I also think that like what we've been discussing as well is that like how much should we invest in terms of like experimentation same thing with like step in the STI back fund right so if larger protocols and smaller Protocols are competing for a larger pool um there's a higher expectations but what about for like smaller projects there's really no like period in which you'd say it's like okay we accept you unless it's like a such a small amount that it also doesn't cover their operations so I think that when we're looking at kind of grantees Grant Journey we could also look at Grant

programs funding Journey right and so it's not necessarily like yes they might have five million but then we could also release like a million to smaller smaller projects with these particular lower expectations because we understand there's an experimentation or newness right and then from there like you said um like you said Carl is that if they're successful then it could unlock you know the opportunities for them to get great like bigger grants and so I think that that also um could be something that that could be applied in which Grant programs would create more of a phased approach for grantees um user Journey if we're looking at our grantees as a long-term investment rather than a

shortterm in which they would just be shopping around ecosystems for grass yeah absolutely what's what's the pathway like so many times if they build infrastructure who's out there marketing that infrastructure and telling you know the 500 protocols building on arbitrum now you have this opportunity and it's going to make your life easier right if you're taking a product Market fit shot bet and you give some you know entrepreneurs some funds to start building well did you give him a pathway to investment are you choosing to give grants to things where you have VC Partners ready to invest in that if somebody can nail down the three or four things they need to be investable right do those VC Partners have uh corporate

Partners or Enterprise Partners on the other side who are directing hey we're buyers of this product if it gets there right so like building the pathway whether they're uh public good infrastructure or a private good you know product Market fit bet with whatever way you're simulating your ecosystem with grant funding is is there a pathway or do you just give them some money and say good luck um so uh just a time check we're getting towards the end of the episode I think we got to land the plane in the next 10 minutes um I'd love to start zooming out towards the bigger picture maybe Carl uh you want to ask one last question and then I'll start asking some closing questions one question that comes to mind is that we have a lot of mechanisms that are pretty good at doing

a egalitarian or peanut butter spread across a bunch of projects so you're able to get money funding within a certain range but people complain often times that there isn't enough to do something super super ambitious were we able to place moonshot bets that could have incredibly massive upside are there anything things that you're thinking about or experimenting with where you see potential to actually power some Moon shots absolutely um you know the our Milestone 2 request we we had put three things as out them of our three milestone progression those were when we walk away when we put ourselves out of a job delivering this it will have been

that we delivered capture resistant governance for the grants program uh that that was a mangle that was a passionate thing that was driving me but also we saw optimism to listen delivering H hundred million dollar last week you know even six months ago we knew they were way ahead polygon delivered like 200 million the year before uh we knew that arbitrum needs to scale right so we said we're going to scale massively scale the the amount you can safely allocate right not stupidly allocate but like safely um and then third that means that we need to create systems that that use like evolutionary pressures to double down on winners and cut losers um that's both at the grant level within programs we want to find programs that are better at doing that

and then we want to double down on those programs at the framework level and then we want to find systems where the input of the community identifies those winners losers in a way that's similar to a control group of experts or the most informed delegates so a lot of the community review stuff that FES is running you know if we can Community review just the grants in terms of did the granty do the job and was the grant successful and have impact those are two different things usually aren't considered two different things but they are uh then you can also then do other things like automating Milestone payouts on the pre-processing of the Grant you can have one place for an application

and then you can have a fair routing system where it routes to the program that's best for it to fund and in this Milestone too we're saying hey we were able to come up with all these experiments because you gave us a license to an open mo decision-making modality and you're trusting our professional discretion to experiment in that space and anything that we're doing we're not ratifying to the hold out but we are making available and so I think R decentralized governance is where the systems work well enough that people are opting into it you it's like the race that encourages people to run as fast as they can not the one that encourages them to knock down their neighbors right

and uh if we can build a governance system like that that will be great because it's evolutionary well big shots come from delegates like the people at arbitrum saying yeah I understand that we're decision making modality right here we need some other decisions to be made and we're not sure who else should have that trust and so it's a matter of how quickly do we get there to you know should we allocate 2x what we did last time should we allocate 5x 100x I don't know what the right answer and I think it's up to the arbitral community decide they're going through that process right now but the bigger amount that they are willing to put into an allocation fund

for us or for another group that comes by and has great ideas you know hopefully if we got a large allocation we would be identifying two or three amazing other groups and spinning them out uh such that they could interoperate with our governance but were directly funded by the Dow in the future yeah I think that's how we get big bets as people understanding that we need more than one decision-making modality to be successful so a plurality of decision-making modalities exactly we got some lamps trying to figure it out yeah keep saying the word plurality until I can pronounce it on the first try um yeah one more thing actually just uh going into the plurality meme do you see a world where there's a plurality of

funders that are funding products that are building in the opportun Eos system yeah yeah I I see the a world where let's say years from today where per so we bre we back off having built the framework but we're competing in the mechanism that we built Maybe themes breaks off and does a workst stream where she's competing to be the best uh impact evaluator and she's finding out like hey here's how we have a community-driven impact index that can work not only so that like she was explaining earlier that programs can work together but actually optimism and arbitrum can work together have you know the the competitive drive that they give

to each other and in positive some outcomes for ethereum because we're we're all scaling ethereum all right I'm going to move towards uh my my favorite wrap-up question which is in a world in which you're maximally successful what does that look like and FES will go to you first it looks like that we have a plurality of projects um and people coming from from different walks of life actually participating um it also looks like Equitable Pathways for funding um and checks and balances of those distributions of funds J same question you yeah I'd say that it's um like I want to see the barriers uh the friction uh gatekeeping of how to access work

completely annihilated right like you can show up and it doesn't matter who you are what you look like where you're from what your background is what degree you have whatever there's some amount of work you can do to prove yourself and you can get paid for the value you create consistently right and you can get the sh sh to Double Down triple down whatever the next levels are and the only thing stopping people from you know being able to use their potential is their will to do so right and hopefully in that world when some of us lose the will to do so there's enough other people who are ready to back them up that we don't have that problem anymore you know it's that's a good world to me thanks Carl anything to add uh as we

start to move into wrapping up I think that was a great not to end on we want a plurality of builders that are contributing in all sorts of different ways to a flourishing ecosystem okay and deth Denver we're going to play the plurality drinking game where we have to take a shot every time Joe says plurality you take a a drink of your mirror when somebody says it you take a shot when they say it right okay all right well uh FES and Joe thank you so much for your contributions to the ecosystem glad to finally have you on green pill and I see you all at beath Denver thank you both so much all your contributions have been amazing thanks for having us you just heard from FES and disruption show of plurality Labs I'm excited about the work that

they're doing because they're Distributing so much capital in the arbitr ecosystem and they're clearly thinking about it in a new and unique way I think that they're pioneering in a lot of ways the different ways that grants could be effectively deployed in Dows of the size of arbitra thank you again for listening to the green pill. network podcast again we are featuring The People who are building a coordination a network Society of thousands of hackers dreamers and doers focused on using crypto to bring positive sum digital systems to the world like my co-host Carl Kone like disruption Joe and FES if you value our work you can collect this episode at pods. medgreen pill and it please remember to subscribe rate and review gratify us with likes and sharing this

episode that is the source of all our powers and that is how we build this movement for proo web 3 and how we build this coordination at least until we we write our social media algorithms for the better please remember to subscribe rate and review and I will see you on the next one peace and [Music] love