DAO Weekly Meeting #66

April 13, 2023

0:00 Introduction • 1:01 Discussion around recovery of exploited funds • 4:38 Operations update • 6:42 BOP-3 BeaNFT DAO • 8:44 BSP-10 Pharos • 18:25 Connections with Euler/ exploited funds recovery • 56:33 Scrib3 questions • 1:02:39 Design update • 1:03:58 Closing statements

DAO Meeting


Meeting Notes

Discussion around recovery of exploited funds

  • Guy wants to point out that not everything Beanstalk related has to go through Beanstalk Farms, and that Bean Sprout set a strong precedent of funding things to grow the Beanstalk ecosystem.

Operations update

  • End of this week Beanstalk Farms plans on sharing a couple of proposals in the Discord. The first is the Sunrise Improvement BIP, which implements the Dutch Auction. The other BIP will enable Stalk delegation. If this BIP passes there will be a forum opened in the Discord for people to apply to be a delegate.


  • BLC has been working for 2-3 months on how to improve BeaNFTs and how they are organized. Currently, there are no governance processes around BeaNFTs. BLC plans on sharing a BOP that will outline various Multisigs and processes for future collections.

BSP-10 Pharos

  • Pharos is an on-chain prime broker, this will allow anyone to deploy a lending market for any asset through an order book. The reason for this BSP is because Pharos wants to launch a Pod lending market. Here is a diagram from the Pharos team.
  • image
  • They are currently working on a Pod oracle that will price Pods and you can use your Pods as collateral
  • They are seeking 25,000 Beans with intentions to launch end of Q2, this would propose to reallocate Beans from BSP-9
  • Pharos will use the Pod Market to price Pods. At liquidation the Pods will be sold through the sell now feature. There is always going to be the risk that some liquidations will fail, the user will be able to set the collateralization ratio. The lender will be able to fully customize the lending terms with Pharos.
  • The Coop project is not scrapped but is on the back burner because Brean is working on getting main features of Beanstalk implemented, and nobody else has stepped up to work on it.

Connections with Euler/ exploited funds recovery

  • Ishan questions if anyone in the DAO has connections with Euler because they have been successful with two fund recoveries. Sync has been talking to Taylor from Metamask . Sync says he has been trying to reach out to the Euler team but their comms have been locked down. Taylor thinks that the DAO needs to connect the dots via a formal investigation.
  • Chainanalysis was connected with Mod323 and they had a a couple of meetings to discuss the Beanstalk exploit. They expressed they had a couple of leads, and they were going to share these leads with the DAO. A couple of days later they expressed that they will no longer be presenting with the DAO. Guy has been trying to contact some of the members of their team but has gotten push back from their team.
  • According to Taylor, the outputs should be easier to find than the inputs now.
  • Sync asks the DAO if they could use the Beans allocated to fund Coop to fund a recovery effort. Brean is happy to give the Beans back to Bean Sprout. IPOandChill thinks no matter what there should be a written proposal to ensure everyone is on the same page
  • The next step for the DAO to work with an analytics firm is to get funding from somewhere, getting funding through a BSP is something new to Sync. They think the best firm for the DAO to work with is intelligence on-chain. If Sync and IPOandChill have to write a proposal they will gladly write one for the DAO.
  • The thinking is the analytics firm will give information to the DAO and DAO members will go to their local law enforcement with the report from the analytics firm. Mod323 mentions that Lossless was the firm that gave more information to them, and Sync is going to reach out to their team to get a quote for how much it will be to put them on a retainer.
  • SweetRedBeans thinks the friction of the BIP process could be good for the DAO and will ensure that the BIP is as good as it can be. IPOandChill thinks it should depend on the amount of the proposal
  • Mod323 thinks the DAO should prioritize how we get information to law enforcement and not the particular analytics firm.
  • SweetRedBeans hopes that within the proposal there is recommendations on what the DAO should do with the information that comes from these findings

Scrib3 questions

  • Scrib3 wants to focus more on the roadmap and how they can add excitement to the community. The Scrib3 team wants to know if they could get their hands on a roadmap for the next 2-3 months and they want to know what people think about publishing this information on the Bean Farmers twitter account. Publius agrees to do a call with the Scrib3 guys about these topics in the next little bit.

Design update

  • Working on the Wells UI and on pace to have a full prototype in the next two weeks. If anyone has any strong opinions feel free to reach out to SweetRedBeans


Why don't we go ahead and kick things off? GM Everybody. So at some point, I think that, as usual, I want to run through some development updates on the stock farms front. But of course the topic around it could be a moment. No worries. Of course, the topic of the day and the discord has been around around some of what the work remaining to be done regarding a, you know, exploit recovery effort could look like. Who's going to do the work? Who's going to fund the work? And some of the discussion in the discord felt like it had devolved a little bit. So probably has dropped some long comments and the general chat. I also followed up there with some of the processes that folks can follow to get any and all work around this effort. Funded. So figured we could just to kick off the meeting, could open the floor on that and see if there's any comments, questions, concerns that people want to talk about. If there's someone who wants to step up to lead the effort and talk about what next steps could look like. You know, originally Publius had intended to publish a document of sorts containing all the information that they are aware of with regards to, you know, leads on the exploiter where the funds deposited in tornado may have come from, things like that. They were originally intending to publish on the Discord, but there was a lot of a lot of comments from the community that mentioned it'd be best to only share that with folks who were or directing the effort. So that is unlikely to be shared publicly. But as I understand it, next week their their legal counsel still intends to come and do a Q&A of sorts for the community to ask questions and and get answers. And I guess one other thing I'll add for opening up the floor. I feel like a lot of the tension was around who is going to do the work and just would like to share personally that feel like it's not necessarily the right philosophy for the Dow to, you know, think that all the work necessary to be done in the Bienstock ecosystem to be funneled through and worked on by the EFF necessarily, You know, beef is just one organization with limited resources. And of course, there was a great precedent set by BP by being Sprott in funding its own organization to work on things unrelated to exactly what Bienstock Farms is focused on and feel like. If someone's interested and and spend their time to figure out how we can get a new recovery effort funded are always happy to help and provide guidance on that front paper. But I don't mean to call you out necessarily, but curious if you had any input you wanted to share verbally at the at the down meeting with regards to selling some of the comments you dropped in the discord over the last couple of days? Jim, I'm sorry, we're a few minutes late. We are obviously collectively all in a real time experimentation phase. And yesterday they tried to put out some written content in the discord to sort of complement the discussion happening in the DOWN meetings, particularly now that there's less audio based meetings happening. And so it seems like people were there was a very positive response generally. And, you know, as we all looked to improve how we communicate with one another to tackle these pretty complicated things, we will continue to try to do our best to help foster a really productive discussion. So don't have any specific comments to make but feel like this is the long haul and you know, we're just getting started. Great. We'll leave it open for a moment, see if folks want to hop in or share any thoughts on that front with what's been said and the and the discord over the last day or so. Great. And if not, we'll leave some time at the end as well. Feel free to drop me any questions or comments. And the Boehner trap on this end as far as development goes. Keep my will. Keep my update relatively brief. The long and the short of it is that either at some point by the end of this week or early next, we hope to share the drafts for a few different proposals and start discussion more formally in the discord about them. So the first of which is the Sunlight Sunrise improvements, which we've been talking about for a while. We've Holborn is auditing an updated commit hash of that. That changed after some more internal code review. And that is a bit that implements the Dutch auction in the field, which was a much discussed community initiative later last year. The other proposal or other DEP, rather, is one related to enabling stock delegation on the various snapshot pages and the beanstalk ecosystem that is, you know, the Beanstalk forums page, the Beanstalk, Dale Page, etc. and that is the result of a lot of the conversation happening around the last time the budget EP was proposed. With regards to, you know, comments on around stockholder voting participation and the like, so interested to see what people think of that one. And in particular, after we share that, we will open a forum for people to be able to, you know, more formally apply to be a stock delegate where folks can drop their address, talk about why they think other stockholders should delegate their votes, then, etc.. There are also a couple other proposals, one of which I think Belsky is here to talk a bit about with regards to benefits. And then MOD is also going to talk about a bean sprout proposal they're intending to propose, but I think we'll see if you're around. It would be awesome if you could talk a bit about what you've been working on as of late. GM Do you hear me? I can hear you. Great. Awesome. Okay. So I think for maybe two or three months this year, I've been stewing working away in the background on how we improve benefits and how, you know, benefit holders are organized and coming up with a proposal to introduce to the Dow to create maybe would be enough. Don't currently. At this time there's no kind of formal representation of the NFT holders and therefore no governance processes around the being of the contract at this time. So looking to just put this proposal up, have some good discussion around you hear from from being up to holders thoughts and see what we can do to, you know, further decentralize this with community. Right now the the contracts that are held by individuals rather than, you know, groups. So look to see what can do that and also look to see what we can do in terms of implementing proposals for future collections, upgrades to existing collections and and such like that. Think the full proposal will go up in due course and looking forward to the discussion in the discord regarding that. Great. Thanks for. Thanks for walking us through that. I'll see my did you want to talk a bit about what the proposal you were intending to show that I would look like? Yes. Can you can you hear me, Guy? Sounds great. And thank you for that. So, hi, everyone. As I said, we were thinking or intend on proposing a beanstalk of an inspired proposal for the grant. And this grant is for Saddle. Saddle as as the rhenium or we rebranded module. And that I presented, I think, sometime ago to allow you to read out to those who you know. You know, we were there before the hearing about this for the first time. I'm just going to throw out a few links and then maybe briefly explain what what is what are we doing and then what is the grant for? So what I sought out as we ferrous as an on chain point broker, what this basically really means is that, you know, we or what the technically is, is that we would allow, you know, anyone to deploy a lending market for for any asset through. So an order book and an order book start what what we are thinking or the reason we're asking for this grant is that one of the markets we would like to launch with or deploy as a lending market for parts, the way that would work is that, you know, pod holders would be able to use pot as collateral and then take out a loan for, you know, for the funds and then they could do different things. So I'm going to draw them a quick diagram that maybe is an example. And hopefully the proposal will have more details. And of course, I'm always happy to take any assets or so to any questions now or just just any time on the discussion. Okay. So what I've gotten here is two examples of what you can do, you know, with response. So what what the grateful in title is that we will develop a pod oracle and then that would be able to press pods and this example that I'm having here are two loan examples. The first one is taking under collateralized loan with with your funds and then you know, you can do certain things with it. And just this example, you're using Uniswap to swap, you know, the loan that you took out for you. So, so here you're, you're coming with your funds it's got a lot of you see of then you go to Uniswap and then you slept videos for it. The other example is that you take an older collateralized loan which is, you know, probably more common in general. And that would work the same way that you you know, you take out a loan on Obliquity or RV and so on. And you know, you also still use your, your bonds as collateral. But let me know if this is you know, this explanation is clear on on what we intend to do. Again, I'm happy to answer any questions. There will be a proposal that would come out. And maybe the last thing to mention is the amount of the grant that we're seeking. So we're asking for 25,000 beans. The intention is that we want to launch by the end of Q2. The the beans that were requested are or the intention is for those not to be newly minted beans. There was a proposal the past year for the chicken for a chicken coop. And our intention with this proposal is to ask for or to allocate some of that previously meant to beans, to this to this effort. I hope I hope this was clear enough. And once again, I'm happy to answer any questions emerged. Super interesting. Two questions. One, are you familiar with the irrigation protocol? And I'm curious if you've chatted with them about, you know, any possible overlap in what you guys offer, how these the pods or for going to determine the price of a pod. Yeah. So briefly I think briefly familiar with irrigation but not the details of it so maybe maybe seamlessly but you're here you can talk about what the overlap is. We can briefly talk about how we intend on pricing pods. So we would be using the pod marketplace as the the place where liquidity is available in order to liquidate the pods. So the way that that would work is we will will be taken. So you can always price pods that we're able to want to read the article can work out in a way, but this is one example of how we are going to do it. So it'll be a weighted average on the available liquidity to sell pods on the pod marketplace. And this will basically be the, you know, the maximum amount that you can take out or you can, you know, take out lawns using pods. How would that work then, is that once you know the price of the pods that the liquidation price, then the what the liquidation would be is that the pods as collateral will be taken and then they will be liquidated. And the pod marketplace through the, you know, the sale now or this, is that it or does it make sense? I guess the only concern is the pod marketplace now is not particularly liquid. So if there is a higher value order placed in, then I if someone wanted to take a loan against those pods and in that order was canceled, then you actually would not have the liquidity to liquidate the pods, which could bring some. You set the system to a point where there's not enough backing to repay the loan. Yeah, So so two things here. One is you are correct that the amount of loans issued will be limited to the amount of liquidity available in the pod marketplace. So you'd expect it to scale accordingly. But that is, you know, a limitation for sure. The second point is there is always going to be a risk within liquidation sale. So that is also something to take into consideration. But lastly, there will be some sort of Amazon saw, you know, the minimal collateralization ratio to say it's like one 30% or one 40%. And in theory that should give you or will give you the, you know, that you wait for if someone cancels an order or something like that happens, then the price will drop and you would still be able to liquidate, you know, and the amount of you know, got a margin do want to take is often so you can make it 200% just to be like super, you know cash or so or 500%, whatever it is, the amount of electricity you would like to take against that loan or your price, the interest in terms of let's say you want to borrow usdc against my pods, how is that interest rate determined? Yeah, that would be up to the lender. So the lender who will accept pods as collateral and that would be up to them to choose what you know, what is the lending terms that they want to give up. Maybe we can take, you know, separately on on the way the Saudis would work is that, you know, lenders would be able to fully customize the the the lending terms. So you as a lender who is happy to take in pods, you would also choose, you know, what are the terms that you want to lend out your user to see or whatever asset it is that you're lending out. That includes like, you know, the origination fee of interest and so on into your lender and you're interested in closing your position before the borrower is interested paying this rate to make that possible. So if these and and I'm not sure if I understood this what I heard the Yeah. So let's say, you know, let's say you have pods and I'm going to loan you usdc against your pods and let's see, I want my usdc back. But you're not ready to repay the loan, is it? If there is some way that the owner of the Usdc can close their position early and get their custody back? Yeah. So? So that would also be one of the terms for the lender. So that under which was what is the duration of that loan that you want to give out. Maybe it would be sort of like a month and after that month then anyone controls that loan or liquidated or it could be perpetual. And in that case, you know, it would would only be a 1 to 1. The borrower closes the loan. BLOCK You mentioned the launch date of some time in Q2. Does that include a full audit of the code and will it be open source, Not it, of course, the way you would like to get a positive, you know, we'll do that, but we currently don't have a funding or plans to get that ordered. So the proposal well that as one of the risks that you know, the ground that we're seeking will not cover any audit. Just a quick question for the co-op idea that was a 90,000 pieces were minted when that was approved through it being part of a proposal several months ago. So you're proposing to reallocate 25,000 beings from that, is that correct? Not correct sequence. So is the co-op essentially scrapped at this point? I think Bryn would probably be able to give us an answer to that, but from my understanding is that it is currently on hold or actually maybe Brian would be able to shed more light on that. I wouldn't say scrapped, but given that no one has stepped up in a year requested for a job and you know, my current focus is getting the major components of being stuck with it. You know, it's not a top priority list currently, but, you know, we'll be employed eventually in the future. I want to hop in here and ask a quick question. Does anyone maybe have like a relationship with some of the guys at Eular? Because, you know, it seems like not only did they help get Eular and that looks like that was a pretty successful recovery, but also they helped sentiment as well. Have there been any efforts to engage, you know, anyone from the Eular team or, you know, I mean, I think they also use Chainalysis, but I'm obviously not totally sure about what routes they took, but has anyone tried to approach them yet about how they went about it or have kind of ideas or tools and resources that they found pretty successful in that process? Hey, I can comment on this. I know it's a secondary to what my proposal is. I want to respect my proposal though. My I can talk about this later. I think if anyone has any question regarding the grant, of course that's going a smooth topics pool. Yeah. So just to quickly address the question is on the after the Dail call last week I actually had an exchange with Taylor Monahan from Metamask, so she was one of the lead contributors that helped the weather finance team on their recovery effort. She was actually the first one that they thanked and there Twitter thread about it. So I unfortunately the weather finance team has kind of locked down their comms are totally locked down. I've tried to reach out to people that are part of their community and it just it is what it is. But I was able to engage with Taylor and I referenced some of the tweets that she and I exchanged. She had some interesting insights as far as the being the Bienstock recovery effort. Long story short, she pretty much said that the crack and lead, as promising as it may be, unless we connect the dots through a formal investigation, we're not going to really get anywhere. So I can share that her her thread or her comments with you there in the BOP to channel as well. If you want to take a look there. When you say a formal investigation, what do you mean an in-depth investigation of everything that's going on with that, exploring all the transactions, 22,000 plus on on tornado cash. You can't just suggest that we do this privately or is that something that you actually recommend to Chainalysis? Because she brought up Chainalysis so she asked me, have has Bienstock engaged? Chainalysis And I respond to her and I said that chainalysis my understanding based off of the previous communications that bienstock funds has shared that Chainalysis was engaged, but they wanted a $300,000 retainer. So she actually explicitly referenced Chainalysis. But I'm just trying to understand like what the contents of the formal report you're talking about. What what would be the thing in the report that would get us further along the path? Then we have the Kraken connect. Like is it what would be in the report? I will share what her comments were with everybody in the Barnyard chat and people can infer from that what she is meaning. I can't. I can't say what she was meaning beyond that. Thanks. You said in the Barnard chat. Yeah, I'm just pulling up the thread now, so I'll just go ahead. And so she originally on Banksy, put out a thread, you know, about just in general about the tax coin. And so she this was her original response to it. And then she and I had a and this was several hours after Dow called last week because I know Al and several other community members had asked me as an action item from that call to kind of see if I could reach out the Oilers. And I tried. But obviously that never really get anywhere. But Taylor was probably the best I could do given the circumstances. So that was her original response. And then we had a few more as I'll share some additional replies that she shared with me in mind. Could you briefly describe what Chainalysis communicated to you last year when they were intending to speak at the meeting and then decided not to? Yes, and most of this is going to be, you know, as much as I can be really collected. So they reached out through I think it was through one of the one of one of our farmers here. I can't remember their name, but I know they reached out to us and we first have a call and we've been all we briefly went through, you know, what happened. And then we had another call with there with a CTO sort of member correctly. And in there they they mentioned or they requested that for us to be engaged with them for a year and also for them to be able to do that. So social analysis, we we told them then is that we, you know, for us to do something like that. So we wanted to know or there to be some sort of a lead that they were going after. So they told us that they, you know, they have some leads. And then during that call, we asked them to tell us what those leads were, because some of those leads turned out to be just like missed directions. I think there was a kind of member of the other exchanges, but there were a few days, I think, or one or two leads that were meant to manifest to us. So they said okay, that they were going to look into it and then come and present to to to the DOE in a meeting of then a few days later they came back and they were like, you know, that they were going to cancel the, the, the meeting. My interpretation of why they canceled that is, you know, from my thinking was that they maybe spent a little bit time on what what they thought was originally found, but it wasn't like, you know, worth worth pursuing. But again, this is this is my interpretation. Look, I'm not sure why they decided not to come make sense. And just for everyone's reference, you know, whenever some of these conversations had resurfaced a few weeks ago, I asked mod to, you know, forward me some of the information and tried to reach out to a couple of different folks that might have talked to you from their team, had gotten a response, you know, filled out the form on their site, and then they're asking for for context. And you know, why Beanstalk or why the Dow might be interested in working with them after all the conversations that they had with Mod last year. And I found it really strange and yeah, frankly, a bit unprofessional. So that's not to say that, you know, someone from the Dow shouldn't, you know, meet with them and see what they can offer. But just wanted to provide that as context. Yeah. Just to add that our thinking then was, or our concern then was that it was going to be a contract with, you know, with no understanding on on what on what exactly are we pursuing and doing. And you know, they, they also expressed that it wasn't going to be like a short term thing. It was going to take, you know, over a year or so. And we continuously monitor it until, you know, someone loses interest in pursuing this. And hence we didn't do that because, you know, we weren't following or we didn't think that it was worth pursuing then, just given that there wasn't much to to go after, which I think is still the concern to an extent to some, you know, to some members that we're unsure what what exactly it is that we were going after. Yeah. And just to reemphasize what I mentioned and just called yesterday, you know, what Martineau describing are just our opinions to community members opinions. So, you know, I feel if folks who are particularly inclined to to engage with Chainalysis and see what they have to offer, you know, I'm happy to help out on that front. Yeah. In Taylor's response, where she mentioned Chainalysis, she in a separate tweet, she had mentioned that the outputs from tornado cash would be easier to kind of sort out at this point because apparently the Ronin hack that those outputs have already been identified. And so, you know, just connecting the dots here in general, she just mentioned that her her tools at our disposal are not as robust as a company like Chainalysis, which specializes in this type of thing, or an intelligence on chain or loss less or what have you. So in general, regardless, whatever avenue, if this is pursued by the Dow as a daos supported effort, we're going to need the resources of these types of subs. Subject matter experts to support us on that front. So actually, that builds on my my question earlier, to be frank with you, as you know, because my proposal as you know from from this previously allocated 90,000 pieces that were minted for the co-op idea that I also understand Brian's point, that there's other development priorities that take precedent at this point. And quite frankly, liquid chicken bond's idea, as great as it is, unless there's you know, unless there's a real like yield source that's actively kicking it doesn't, you know, doesn't really spark. And you can kind of see that with how chicken bones has kind of deflated in recent months. So one of the, you know, things that I was thinking of immediately based off of the conversation on today's calls in regards to a DAO coordinated investigation effort, would it be possible to partially or fully fund that would some of the beans that were previously minted from the co-op idea without through a beans proposal if if that's a possibility inside of a bid? So I'm just doing that out there, just kind of see if that's possible. So while the beans weren't minted for the for the chicken bonds and yeah, they were meant for the bean sprout proposal or for the bean sprouts budget. But, but yeah, to your point, your point still stands. I mean, it's a great question. I mean, to some extent it's like you know the beans are custody by the the coop Multisig. I believe so I guess in a way it's like I don't know who has say over that. Is it brain is it okay for funds you know allocated for the bean sprout budget which is sort of around like you know, accelerator project projects and building in the ecosystem that those can be reused for something unrelated. I'm not sure I have a good answer for you. We should just I mean, we feel like we should discuss that now with folks who are interested. Yeah, from my perspective, I'm more than happy to bring the money. The beans back in custody of beans sprout. But I think, you know, Manafort, you know, resigned his position as being sprout manager. So I'm not sure who would lead efforts there. Well, not sure that any effort needs to be led on the front of like managing funds for. So there's still a multistate that can custody the funds. So I'm not concerned about that per say. But yeah, I mean, you know, we're there to proposal to use the funds just as if it were a bet that, you know, presumably there would be someone proposing and leading that project which is sort of the crux of the argument that I was outlining in the general channel yesterday. So I don't know. I mean, I guess open question, what do folks think of I guess I guess one of the questions I'm I'm posing based on thinks sinks question is like, is it acceptable for I guess these these funds that were technically meant to fund projects in the ecosystem. Now this organization doesn't really exist anymore. You know, is it acceptable for those funds to be reused for other purposes? Okay, sorry, I just have a potentially or I just have a question with regards to any kind of investigation or recovery. I do think we should have a written out proposal just so people know what's happening versus talking about it. But in terms of the fund usage, just help me understand. So when like earlier on the call when modest, talking about redeploying funds from elsewhere to do something like would that be the same thing, is this or would this be different? Yeah, similar. So I'll just give the restate like the high level what happens. So there was a queue for bean sprouts budget in general beans for it was intended to fund different projects working in the beanstalk ecosystem. Bean thought was an intended to be like an accelerator for those projects in a way. And one of the projects that proposed the remaining the largest, the most of the remaining beans in the beans budget was brains coop idea, which was a a form of liquidity. Chicken bonds believe that was for 90,000 beans. I think there's like 3000 beans or less or fewer left in the beans from all these and you know, manifold doesn't run bean sprout anymore. I guess it's I guess that sort of means bean sprout as an organization doesn't really exist to some extent. And so Mud's idea was, you know, if Brain was comfortable with it using some of the funds and originally intended to be used for the coop development. Now technically, at some level, you wouldn't really need a proposal for that. It's it's just brain deciding. But but given that the proposal was to use the beans for the coop development, it felt I think Mark felt it would be appropriate to have the down vote on it even if the funds aren't coming from the bean sprout multisig necessarily. So to the question would any other use of those funds follow a similar process? I suppose the answer would be yes, and let me know if that wasn't clear. I guess the difference being is that Ferris would be developing, you know, tech that is beneficial for Beanstalk, similar to the ethos of bean sprouts was for whereas, you know, funding a analytics firm for a recovery effort is does feel like a bit of a different thing, but maybe that's okay. And you know two things point you know a bean sprouts proposal would be would certainly be a lower friction than the the BET proposal process. Yeah I don't expect like to answer on today's call. I just thought I would just throw the idea out there and, you know, happy to discuss this further considering the next steps and what the best approach may be. Obviously I want to respect MoD's proposal and you know, he obviously should be able to propose that. I don't want this to kind of interfere with that. And anyway, so at this point I'd throw that out there. Yeah, I mean that what you're explaining that generally makes sense. I think as long as it's easier for me to think of just guiding principles, as long as there's a general guiding principle of the least possible path to friction, I think that makes sense, right? If it's some large, big new change that we're proposing that actually needs been amended, I think going the full vote process, etc., etc. makes a ton of sense. If it's something where the beans are already sitting somewhere and they're not allocated for something and we have a general consensus on what we want to do, then maybe we take that passed. But it's difficult to say without having something specific. Yeah. Given that, you know, it seems like you are in agreement that the next step would be to actually draft a proposal independent of what type it is. Yeah. I guess making a decision on this front isn't necessarily the the blocker at the moment as far as where the funds come from. But I mean so I guess what we're heard while we're talking about like IPO and Shell or it could be like, you know you two guys have been some of the more vocal around either working with an analytics firm of some sort. So I guess I'm curious from your perspective what you feel like the next steps are, if any, to to make that happen? Sure. Yeah. I mean, just reading what Taylor said last week kind of reinforced me that we're going to need some sort of subject matter expert in this regard, whether it's Chainalysis or whoever, happy to pursue this through, you know, this being spot proposal idea, if that's a possibility, you know, and potentially work with intelligence on chain or whoever their communities are agreeable to working with, they seem to be the most in terms, of course, at least relative to what Chainalysis had previously quoted. You know, right now at least they seem to be the most agreeable. But yeah, as far as spearheading this, I'm happy to continue to do that and, you know, work with a high potential on that front and, you know, put, put together a proposal if that's the required next step. So I'm happy that we clarify this on today's call. I think that was very I appreciate that. And, you know, we can sort out the details moving forward for what it's worth. And I know that. Sorry. Sorry. I'm not sure to. Go ahead, Margie. Go ahead. Yeah, I'm not sure I. I know that the name analysis goes around, and I remember even when I reached out to Zach, he also mentioned its analysis. But for what it's worth, from our experience, I think it was lossless whole, you know, the ones that were most engaged. I guess I just have a question. Think or I don't know if you want to answer or if somebody else has an idea, but is the idea here that we would let let's say we you know, somebody writes a proposal and we meant some beans to fund an intelligence effort, is the idea that we would then take you know, say, I don't know, like, does it come back with some information that, you know, the doubt it tends to take to law enforcement? Or is the idea just to sort of try to uncover some more information of things that, you know, law enforcement may have missed? Or I guess I'm just really curious like what the intended result is of of working with one of these analytics firms? Yeah. My understanding, based off of the last we heard when Jason presented, is that essentially he would whether it's him speaking for his firm, I presume anybody else would do something similar. They would provide a report to the Dow and any community member could essentially provide that report to their respective law enforcement authorities. And they were in their in their country. Right. So whether it's in the United States and the U.K., what have you. Right. This is a global community at the end of the day. So beyond that, I can't definitively say, to be frank with you, I wish I could I wish I had more information. I wish Euler's finance team wasn't locked down in their communications and I could pick their brains as to how they made it work on their side. But I just don't have that. So I would be disingenuous to me to to kind of give you guys a clear cut like this is what we're going to do with this. But at the very least, it may help to to Taylor's point in her response on Twitter to me last week and may help to at least maybe better connect some of the dots as far as all this is concerned. And to MoD's point, if lossless, if you know, they were the ones who in fact originally flagged this potential crack and lead though, you know, they are you know, if they're open to working with the community, then that's cool too, you know, so I'm not really fixated on one specific firm or what have you. I'm just looking to get something moving if possible. And as soon as possible. So while just to bring it back around to what I was, the message I dropped on the discord, this is sort of where the, you know, the rubber meets the road and somewhat it would need to, you know, make a decision around, you know, recommending the community funding initiative with Lossless or with analytics on churn. You know, I think this might get group chat somewhere where we could connect that person interested and you know making that evaluation with lossless so you know not that any decision needs to be made today about who that is but just you know open call that if that's something the community wants happy to help facilitate that Yeah I appreciate that and I don't know if they if if they have provided oppo for like an investigation, if you guys have that information. I mean we know what Jason's cost would be for intelligence on chain. But if lossless has a a comparable, you know, maybe we can present both options in a proposal and just be like, hey, this is there's other options on the table and kind of let the Dal decide. But I don't think we ever got a code from Lossless the work that was or they were working them with the expectation of the 10% bounty that we have or that the DA had offered them, which also expands maybe what they also stop at some point. Okay, I actually hit a dead end with them too. I reached out to their CMO, Monica after Bill Peter was approved and the ethical return contract was deployed back in January. She had initially acknowledged my messages and then I asked for a follow up and I kind of never got anywhere with her. So I believe we are in touch with with someone from there. So like, you know, as this conversation continues with progresses and we want to continue, we'll probably be happy to or will be happy to introduce you. Okay, great. So I think as a as a kind of actionable item from this calls, I'll just work with I'll start with drafting something up based off of the possibility of her potentially doing this, the would be inspired proposal. And Gail, I'll share that with with with you or, or in the BBC2 channel whatever is the most agreeable approach and we can go from there. And I would add, if there are specific questions like in the course of I do want to move quickly, but in the course of asking follow cinch analysis and whatever else pops up, what they can offer, if you have questions, I think it like to be up to chat is the best place to put them. I think just to keep them all in one place versus putting them in general. Okay, sounds good. So. So yeah. So I guess if there are members here that have questions that they'd want forwarded to those guys, then put them in the VIP to chat and that I think I can just add something in the general chat. If community members have questions for any of the potential vendors, I feel like, you know, from my perspective and I think I'm, you know, we're still sort of discussing whether we should use, you know, reallocating some of the funds from being spread out to the fund, this sort of initiative. But I do sort of feel like maybe the friction involved with getting a bit passed would be sort of an opportunity to ensure that the quality of the the proposal is sort of solid in the sense that it drives towards the direction that the community is interested in sort of getting to in terms of whatever engagement we're sort of interested in pursuing with any of these firms and the outcomes that we sort of are hoping to get from that. I think that could actually be a productive sort of result of maybe having it sounds like sync is the individual who's going to write the proposal, which in this case I think it might be productive for it to be a bit been sort of using the bean sprout funds. But, you know, just sort of thinking out loud here. Yeah, I was going to do a quick straw poll in the final chat trying to figure out how to word this question exactly. If you'll give me a minute. But if folks want to keep discussing by I mean, I guess I'm curious to hear if others disagree with that. And, you know, if if they feel strongly that it should be a reallocation of some of the bean sprout funds in the accelerator. But yeah, open to to just hearing the more thoughts there, does it come in below that that monetary threshold that would require being a bit I mean that would be my comment like I think it depends on the amount. So with intelligence on chain that that shakes out to around 13,000 a month. So in my opinion that would be way too small. Chainalysis last I saw they quoted 300 K for the year. I don't know if their rates went up because those rates are a year old. Obviously the engagements much bigger and new beans have to be minted then answer by default I think would have to be more formal. So I think it depends on how it looks, you know, more conceptually speaking. I think like expediency is important here. And then on top of that, generally speaking, I mean, look at the usual attendance of these meetings. And then even in the past for actual important proposals, quorum has been an issue. So it may not it just just because the proposal is very well thought through doesn't necessarily mean people are going to show up to vote, which would end in a process dead end. That is not even related to the merit of the proposal. So my general view would be to the extent that we can, you know, since all the the people who care enough about it are already involved, maybe we can just hold ourselves accountable and make sure the proposal is what we want it to be, similar to what we've done with the scribe market engagement and other things where we haven't gone through the formal process. But to the extent that the thing, you know ends up being a $300,000 engagement, then you know, by default we might have to go through the formal process. Yeah, it's a good point that it totally depends on what the proposal actually is, which at this case it seems like we're still trying to figure out what the different options are. So that's a that's a good point. Again, I just want to echo like the fact that, you know, when Chainalysis quoted their $300,000, they were pretty clear, according to what BFA shared with us, is that, you know, they didn't promise anything. Right. That and, you know, Jason similarly said the same thing on his presentation on the 30th. So, you know, an investigation will help potentially connect some of these dots a bit better and maybe help the authorities move things along if possible. But we have to be very clear here that if the community agrees to move forward, that, you know, there should not be any expectation whatsoever that we're going to recover anything needs to be very clearly establish. And I just want to re-emphasize that, that, you know, the primary goal here is to follow up based off of some of the people that have done stuff like this, such as Taylor Monahan with the Euler Finance recovery, based off of their suggestions to maybe hopefully connect some of these dots a bit better. Beyond that, we can't definitively say what the outcome will be. So just want to be clear on that. So I just dropped a straw poll in the barn and would be curious to get a temp check from folks. The choices in the multiple choice are probably not ideal, but you know, just coming up with this on the fly. And then the other thing is on the the amount of beans, I guess, you know, Brian mentioned that they'd be comfortable sending the the coupons back to the beans for Multisig and that would be that would leave the beans for quality sake with about 93,000 beans. MoD's proposal was for 25,000. So whatever the differences would be, what would be left in the beans? Probably so yeah. This, you know, based off of the numbers that we have from the intelligence on chain that would be 40,000 for up to three months and maybe less if they can knock it out in less than three months. And then perhaps we could agree to some automated monitoring for, let's say, six months after the fact, which would you know, would be it would be an additional, I believe, 9000 or so. So and that would still fall. Give us some beans left over to do work with something else. So I'm not looking to use up all the remaining beans on this. If we're strictly looking at what the quote that, you know, intelligence on chain offered us chainalysis but like IPOs said, their quote was 25,000 a month. So much more. You know, it's a more costly quote. But, you know, something to consider as well. So I know I briefly mentioned this before, but maybe I can reiterated, which is I think if you know the Dallas to pursue such an effort, I would prioritize figuring out how to deal with law enforcement versus staying on, you know, on chain analysis. I understand some said why not do a boss, you know, great that you do both. But again, I would say the priority is to figure out, you know, what is that we're going or how we're going to deal with law enforcement versus just doing, you know, further analysis and reports. So I agree with Mudd's point here, and I think hopefully that information on will help sort of drive the sort of proposal or, you know, the thought process behind which engagement we should pursue, with which firm for what information. And just to be clear in the message that Law Lossless sent last April, my interpretation of that message was that they don't have connections at law enforcement, is that interpretation correct? I believe they do. But again, you can't do it. So, you know, even even if you know someone in law enforcement, it can be you that goes there. It needs from my understanding, again, I think it would be a victim or someone, you know, who lost one. Okay. So lossless, as far as I remember, reach out to both Kraken and Ether, and both of them told them that, you know, you need to law enforcement involved to, you know, really sort or uncover the data. Okay so as a next step, just to kind of close the loop on all this, we can move on to something else. I'll you know, I'm still working on some sort of preliminary draft of something that, you know, some of these beings that are remain from prior been special allocation or maybe use towards such an effort and again, not looking to exhaust all of those being so want to respect my proposal I want to respect anybody else in the community that may have other ideas for some of those remaining beings as well. I don't think that we would need to use all of that. So I just want to be clear on that point and thank you again, everybody, for this conversation today. I think it was a very productive and sometimes having vocal conversations is much more productive than typing. So hundred percent. Thanks for spearheading this sinking keeping the ball rolling. Sometimes it can be tough, man. No problem. And like I said in the BOP to channel, you know, I did you know intelligence on chains on vacation this week already share this with us so you know he's not planning to be on the Dow call next week. So I just want to be clear with everybody. But his door's open and he's, you know, depending on how the community decides to move forward, whether it's with him or whoever, to several the comments that are I'm seeing in the barn outside. I think we just need to be clear about expectations with whoever we ultimately decide to move forward with with this if we do move forward. So well, I sort of hope that, you know, if and when the proposal gets written that in the proposal there is sort of a clear recommendation on like which firm we're going to hire, what they're going to produce and how we're going to use that information. And so I guess I'm sort of hoping like, you know, less of the community, sort of like voting on different engagements and more that, you know, an individual can sort of think about the situation and take all of the context and sort of package it into a proposal as is sort of my thinking here. But but yeah, otherwise, you know, happy to sort of support the effort and looking forward to seeing how it develops. Yes, I think I don't know if I'll say this quickly. I think that's the general idea here, just to keep it as quick and easy as possible. Like we don't I don't think anyone wants this to drag on. This shouldn't be the primary focus. Like my vision here is that this is something that just occurs in the background. And if there's anything meaningful, there is. And if not, if not and it doesn't drag on. So with regards to the potential proposal, I think I would say think of more as a recommendation. We just need to obviously get some more information, renewed rates for some of these other firms. And then we have a pretty very, very good idea of what, you know, Jason or Intel 19 would cause. I think we just have some follow up questions about what the services would entail, which are going to be easier to do, you know, outside of the the 420 call. So, you know, maybe, you know, think I can connect to you offline, but maybe within the course of a week or two weeks, we can, you know, depending on how long it takes people to get back to us, we can probably have something. Yes. Sounds good for sure. Happy to move this forward if possible. So great. Thanks, guys. So, yeah, just acknowledging we're at the hour, but also wanted to acknowledge that I know some of the scribe folks turn up today and I'm not sure if you had some questions for the community to get feedback on or my memory escapes me. I know we talked about yesterday maybe had some questions about some of the roadmap and upcoming upcoming developments. Yeah, that's exactly what we were what we were looking at is so, you know, just to kind of give a tldr of the conversation we had yesterday is like, you know, you know, like a totally for obviously all kind of like recovery efforts and you know, happy to support in any way we can there. But you know, for us, you know, that's not, you know, at least like on the marketing effort like that's not really a focus for us and not something we want to really talk about too much, but we want to focus on is like kind of going forward. And I think like so so, you know, the conversation that we had in our marketing weekly yesterday was around how can we kind of add a little bit of a jolt or, you know, a little bit of a kind of revamp to some of the, you know, general apathy that, you know, we've kind of seen around the protocol in the community. And I think one of the ways that we've seen to do that really successfully is like roadmap talk, right? Like, you know, markets and users in the space are generally pretty forward looking. Everybody likes to get excited about, you know, what's kind of coming down the pipeline in the roadmap. And so we've been thinking about kind of some strong campaign planning and a little bit of a strong push to kind of get back in front of everybody's faces and kind of show them that, you know, that, you know, our focus is kind of on the red. And so with that, you know, we've been looking at kind of running a strong campaign in the month of May as we kind of prep for Wells to kind of show almost like, you know, we're thinking of something like a like a bean manifesto or something along the lines of like a large road map to kind of get people excited about, okay, well, you know, this is what's coming on the roadmap. This is how this is why you should kind of get excited about the protocol, etc.. So one of the things that we wanted to come to this call to look at was, you know, and I know we talked about a little bit of this in our kind of technical deep dive, but kind of wanted to rehash and revamp. Some of it is like, you know, maybe at least for now. I mean, we don't have at least I don't have a bunch of time and I don't think Joey and Rob do either. But if we can kind of get a look at the roadmap over the next call it, you know, the next kind of two or three quarters at least rest of the year, like what is the, you know, kind of revamp for us? What is the Deveraux roadmap look like so that we can start to put out content? And also, what's the kind of public appetite for kind of like putting out some of this content into the being farmers account in such. So just to be clear, I guess one of the assets like have a dedicated call like dig into all the upcoming grown up stuff. Yeah yeah I think that would probably be best since we don't have a whole ton of time here. So maybe we can have like, you know, maybe we can take kind of, you know, if earlier, if better. But, you know, at worst, you know, maybe we can have pwds come to the kind of marketing weekly and kind of give us the whole roadmap so that we can take that, transcribed that, and then put that into, you know, into the into the roadmap content that we're planning to put out. So so what we kind of imagine is like a big kind of, hey, this is what's happening and this is what is on the roadmap and on the dev roadmap as far as improving the beanstalk protocol and, you know, getting people excited about what's going to be happening and what's coming down the pipeline. So yeah, any kind of help or thought that we can get there, I think it'd be pretty helpful for us as far as the content. Yeah, and apologies for recommending we do that on this call. Wasn't what I wasn't expecting for us to cover so much ground. But, but you know, on the other hand, it was great to have so much, so much discussion here. So yeah, we can all assuming I mean, do you feel equipped to have a conversation like that as far as like things you're working on over the next six months or so? Prime The scribe guys, Of course. Of course. Right. Yeah. That we can schedule something. And then with regards to the question around our willingness to put out content on this front, we reckon is that, you know, we do need to take a part in this type of discussion. But I would say that we're we're still figuring it out as well. And so, you know, happy to start the conversation, but don't think that we're going to have all the answers. But with that said, obviously more than happy to chat. Okay. Yeah, definitely helpful. Yeah. As long as we can kind of get inside your heads a little bit and kind of see how the roadmap is shaping up, I think like I think it would help galvanize a lot of people. If we put out a lot of content around what's coming down the pipeline and people will get excited to reengage. And then I think that it'll also help on the community front as well as like we can kind of, you know, start to move more conversations forward looking rather than backward looking. I think that's always good for everybody. So. So yeah, so nothing I guess nothing too big of an ask here. I, I guess we can just we'll just coordinate and we'll get a time where we can have like a larger roadmap discussion. Totally. So. All righty. Anything else folks want to go over, discuss, ask questions about? Guy didn't have a chance to give an update, but I can just give a few sentences, if that's right. Sure Did a lot of work on the as you see this weekend, actually getting really excited about the direction it's going on. I think we're on track to have like a full clickable prototype in two weeks. And in general, I think the idea here is to sort of like point all of the messaging and the vibes and the esthetic towards this idea that we're we're building these open source primitives, particularly this stacks in a way that doesn't require governance tokens or feed tokens. And I think the thing to highlight is architecture. So yeah, I hope to have like a the full sort of MVP of the UX in a week and then the next week after that we'll spend trying to round out the animations and the illustrations. But yeah, if anyone you know has opinions or is very curious what that looks like, I would love to show it to you. So please send me a message. But that's it from my side. Amazing. Thanks for haven't. All right I think I can call it there and before we wrap would just give a huge plus one to what st pointed out earlier around you know the conversations being much more high fidelity here over voice and then in the discord and you know when encourage everyone when they see problems in the community they have things they want to speak up about to do so and feel like this is a really high quality discussion overall. All right. Thanks, everyone, in Discord.