Collective Psi Metagov
Speaker 1: Hi, everyone. Welcome to the second session in MediGov's, practical governance concepts workshop. Really excited to have everyone here and see a nice group of people. This is like I said, the second session our last session was with Alex Rodriguez from Sociocracy for All who guided through us through an experimental collective poetry writing process using sociocratic principles. And...
Top Keywords
- zoom 0.006
- collective 0.006
- prompt 0.006
- local interactions 0.006
- chat 0.005
- discussion 0.005
- nick 0.005
- animal 0.005
- audio 0.005
- idea 0.005
- ideas 0.005
- waiting room 0.004
Transcript
Hi, everyone. Welcome to the second session in MediGov's, practical governance concepts workshop. Really excited to have everyone here and see a nice group of people. This is like I said, the second session our last session was with Alex Rodriguez from Sociocracy for All who guided through us through an experimental collective poetry writing process using sociocratic principles. And in today's session, we're really lucky to be joined by Niccolo Pascatelli from SCI, which is short for people supported intelligence, who is a researcher focused on collective intelligence and decision making. I'm also gonna share a link to his slightly outdated but truly incredible website, niccolopescatelli.com. Even if it is outdated, I highly recommend it. It's probably one of the most entertaining and compelling researcher websites I've ever seen. So, like, definitely on the mood board for me anyways. And, yes, it really is. And I also had the opportunity to catch Mikaelo's previous talk with us at MediGov where he first introduced Sai. And so he's an active member in the community and a really brilliant thinker and really honored to be able to introduce him today to lead us through the session, which is gonna have us basically doing a short presentation on collective sense making that, Nick is gonna be running us through. Take about ten minutes. We're then gonna have a short introduction into how Cy works, how to get inside, sign up, etcetera. We'll then have about ten minutes for uploading ideas and joining the waiting room, and then we'll have twenty minutes of discussion on Cy and a little bit of wrap up. And then there's also gonna be the opportunity for people who are interested to join the Slack. I'll post links to this and all the other things in the chat, and to also carry on the conversation afterwards in the channel, hashtag collective PSI. So with that, I think I'll pass it over to Nick, and then I'll also populate, the Zoom chat with some links and feel free to chat amongst everyone in the the chat as well while things are carrying on.
Thanks. Thank you so much for the, yeah, fantastic intro. Very flattering. Hi, everyone. I'm Nick. So let me share my screen. I have just a few slides. Yeah. Because, yeah, asked me to sort of start with maybe, like, a sort of bird's eye view on this, like, topic of collective intelligence. So, well, welcome to, you know, another practical governance concepts workshop. You know, the title for this week's workshop is Collective Sense Making with Sai. Or, as you know, I decided to rename it last minute, learn about animals with Sai, because we will take several examples from nature to understand how, different information aggregation strategies at the local level can give rise to different properties at the group level. So I have, as I said, like, you know, a few slides that would give you this bird's eye view on this field of collective intelligence. And then we will move to have, you know, some fun on the platform side. Okay. So what animal is this? And you have to unmute and say it because I don't have the chat in front of me.
A cow.
A cow. Perfect. So it's almost customary now to to start a workshop on collective intelligence with a cattle example. So how heavy do you think is this cow? And feel free to, you know, enter a number now. This time, you can use the the chat, and, you know, put units. Some people use metric. Some people use imperial. So okay. I can see some estimates coming in. Perfect. So if you are, you know, part of the Metagov community, you probably have heard already, of the wisdom of crowds. So what is it? So if I take all these estimates that, you have put in the charts and I compare them with, you know, the actual weight of this cow, the median of your estimates would be very, very close to the true weight. Now, unfortunately, this is not, possible because I don't know the weight of this cow. It's just a image taken from the Internet. But this, was an actual experiment that was run by, Francis Galton, and sort of popularized, the wisdom of crowds, in this, paper, in Nature published in nineteen o seven. And the wisdom of crowd is a purely statistical effect. Right? So when you average independent estimates, noise tend to average out. Right? So some people overestimate, some people underestimate, but the signal, right, like the true value is maintained. And so if you, you know, if these judgments are really independent, the more people you add to a group, the better this estimate becomes. Right? But it's very important that judge judgments need to stay independent. Right? The problem, though, is that independence is very difficult to find in nature, in the real world. And you know why? Because, you know, we like to interact with each other. We we read the same news. We even try to actively influence each other. And, you know, we are a social species. Right? And and and this is good to to some extent. Social interaction is, at the heart of community living, politics, governance. And so for now, let's, maybe put a pin on this conclusion. Right? So there is some value in preserving independence, but at the same time, there is also value in social interactions. Okay. So how can we, achieve this balance? Okay. So let's shift gears and look at two examples from, you know, like something that is a little bit smaller. So what animal is this again with your mic?
A fly?
A big thing.
Some people say a fly. It's it's a flea. Because it's very tiny. And what animal is this? Coronavirus. Coronavirus. Yes. Our beloved coronavirus. So why did they pick these two animals? Like, some people say, you know, the the the coronavirus is not properly an animal, but, you know, bear with me. Now I picked these two examples because they are related to two completely different contagion patterns. Now the flea was the first vector of contagion of an even, like, smaller animal, which is a bacterium that is called Yersinia pestis. And I just Googled it, that caused the plague in the fourteenth century. And now this is how the plague spread through Europe in the fourteenth century. East. You can see here a timeline in the top left. So we start here on the East, then it spreads through the Mediterranean in Italy, Greece, Spain, France. And then as time goes on, it progresses more here, sort of Germany and then towards Scandinavian countries. Okay. So you can see that this is a kind of wave like pattern, right? Because probably it was brought from village to village by people that were moving on foot. And so, you know, these are entirely, sort of a contagion that spreads through local interactions. Now compare these with COVID. Right? That was in just a few months. It was everywhere. So a radically different spreading pattern because COVID did not travel on foot, but by plane. Right. So we had this ability to really, like, pop up in new places. And, what you see here is the image of the network of, air travels. So COVID was much quicker at spreading and, way more difficult to contain because it's essentially moved, on a network. And so rather than local interactions, now global interactions, these long range connections become way more, consequential. Now let me here. So this is Facebook social network, an image that is has, like, a few years now. Different type of network, but very similar characteristics. So, again, you see these global long range connections. And, you know, Facebook, social media is where a lot of people today read their news, talk to each other, form political groups and political opinions. And so this is to show that today, you know, both viruses and information travel on, densely connected networks. And this paper here, highly recommended, you know, makes the point that networks are really good at spreading things. Okay? So this can be, you know, funny memes, news, and vaccines, but it can also mean, you know, misinformation, fake news, and viruses. And so you reach a point where, you know, according to these authors, by increasing the connections in the network, you also increase the fragility. Right? Because now you can create too many dependencies, which is kind of like, you know, the opposite of independence that we saw at the beginning. But also, you know, as we saw from the the the social animal slides, too much independence is also bad. Right? Because we want to preserve social interaction because, you know, with too much independence, information doesn't travel at all. Okay. So how do we bring it up altogether? I have my last two animals. What animals are these? Birds. Say again?
Birds.
Birds. Okay. So, yes, more specifically, this is like a flock of starlings. Okay. And this, you know, beautiful pattern emerges entirely from, local interactions. Okay. So no starling has any idea of what's happening, you know, more than a few meters away And definitely doesn't have any idea of, this like global pattern that, is the, is the flock. And so in a way, it is like, not really like a COVID pattern, but it's more like a plague like pattern. Right. And yet, you know, these types of collective are not entirely chaotic. You know, the flock stays together. There is coherence in it. And interestingly, it can also show very useful collective properties. So for example, flocks and sort of collective behaviors can avoid very well predators. So this is my last animal. What animals are these?
Seals.
Seals and?
Fish.
Fish. Yeah. Very general. So, these are, it's a it's a school of sardines. Yes. Hunted by seals. And again, like in the other example with starlings, most sardines do not know that the school is being hunted. Right? They only react to other local sardines in their neighborhoods and their movements. And yet when, you know, once are the in perhaps at the edge of of the school perceives the predator and tries to avoid the predator. Now that information, right, that rapid movement quickly spreads through the school. Right? So there is, like, this information transfer from one side to the to the other of of the school without any sort of long range connection. Right? Just like local interactions. So like a swarm, Psy was created with the goal to reach this, like, global consensus, this global sense making, but only from local interactions. Okay. So we wanted to create a methods for aggregating information at the scale, you know, of entire, like, groups and cities that on one side is not entirely independent. And, you know, it's not like voting, right? Like it allows for some social interaction. But on the other side, it also reduces fragility. Okay. So let me stop here. We will now sort of play with with the platform. Let's see. How are we doing on time? Nine past nineteen. Perfect. So let me let's see now how we can create this global collective sensemaking only from local interactions. So keep all these principles that we talked about in mind as we go through through the exercise. And if I can ask Sents to share maybe in the chat the URL and the session codes because you will need it to get to the side discussion and upload your idea. Let me show you how to do it. So if you follow the link, you should get to a page like this. Okay? So what you should do, maybe, like, now just follow the, like, yeah, my screen sharing, and then you can do it on your own. So I go on. I sign in as guest, so I don't have to create an account. So Nick and sign in as guest, and I can share an idea. Okay? So I can share my sort of, like, my answer to this question. I think we should experiment with GPT three giving us orders. Okay? I go on submitting. And now I'm asked to, like, record a short voice message where I can simply expand on this idea. Okay? If you don't want to record your voice, you don't feel comfortable just, sort of record the silent message. When you're ready, you upload, and you you will get to this page. Now it is super important that, you enter the discussion waiting room. Okay? If you don't enter the discussion waiting room by sort of thirty past, by when the time the the conversation starts, you are not gonna be able to join. Okay? Because the conversation would start without you. So, whenever you're ready, you know, enter the discussion, waiting room and you enter the session codes, that is in the chat. Okay. So this is it. And then, like, all the rest would be will go, like, automatically. I suggest, now let me stop sharing. Any questions before we move on on the discussion? Awesome. So if you have any problems, any questions, maybe, like, type them, in the Slack channel. Based on experience, I recommend that we know don't stay on Zoom because it's not an audio platform. So there's gonna be, like, you know, problems if somebody tries to unmute on Zoom or or on on the platform. But we will be back here on the same Zoom link when everything is ready when the the conversation ends on on-site. Can you put the question prompt in the chat or Slack? Yes.
It's a problem to stay on the Zoom. We can't just mute on Zoom.
We can stay, but the problem is that if somebody unmutes on Zoom or somebody speaks on Zoom, it's going to be, like, picked by the the microphones. And so it's gonna create, like, problems. There
were some people who had some issues with non alpha characters or certain names being invalid. Have you run into that issue before?
Sorry. With with what exactly?
Sean is writing here. My name is invalid. And so it seems as though some people are having some difficulty signing in as a guest.
In in so, like oh, the the hyphen. Yeah. If there are, like, special characters, maybe, like, yeah, try to avoid, like, those characters. I haven't tried all the characters, so apologies for that.
Daniel has a question. Quote, what kind of collective is it a story prompt? I think That
was just clarifying Shauna's or just furthering Shauna's question that the top is slightly cut off. Is it meant to be a story prompt, or is there a further part of the quote?
Yes. The I think Bee made a good point of posting this here in the chat, but also posting it in I'll post it in two places on the Slack. So I'll post it both in the seminar discussion channel, and I'll also post it in the collective side channel so people can see that there.
And if we if we need, like, a little bit more time, I can just add time. Maybe we don't start at thirty past. Like, we can start at thirty five.
Should we stay on here until we open the room? So in case anyone has questions, can you? Sure. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So in that case, everyone mute on Zoom and then go through the the flow, and then we'll make sure everyone's in the room. We'll exit out of this, and we'll come back here after that. I hope I'm not cutting anyone off while they're doing their recording, but we have seven people in. Discussion starts in two minutes. If you're having any issues getting in, just make a note in
the chat.
Yeah. Chris makes a good point that Zoom might be taking the microphone pin permissions if you're using it in the browser. So let's go ahead and I'll just leave, and then let's start the discussion in two minutes. Give Val a little bit of time to do a recording, and then we'll come back here at 11:55. Alright. Is that yeah. 11:55, my local time. Yeah. Hope to see you all back here. Thanks. Yes.
Okay. So how did he go?
Few hiccups?
Yeah. The audio ended up being the the biggest blocker.
Do you think it was because of Zoom or, like, something else?
For me, personally, it was because I had my browser set to a different audio input, and it's fine for me to yeah. I don't think it was because of Zoom. At least for meetings, But
Definitely, it seemed when I went to listen to I when I recorded mine and I played it back, it seemed like it recorded fine. But there were other peoples I tried to listen to where actually, I took a screenshot I'll put in the Slack, but, like, there were it looks like it had tried to record something, but there were just these occasional lines in the playback. So I don't know.
So, like, it it it might be that simply people don't want to be recorded. Like, as I said, like, it it's not compulsory. Right? Like, if people don't want to get recorded, like, I usually suggest, like, just have that audio, sort of empty. But I guess, like, yeah, it's interesting, like, to to to see, like, how the the the text and the audio can can can be combined. Some people, like, prefer one or the other. Like, we we are still discussing, like, you know, what's the best way to to to have this, like, idea moving forward. And, Bee, you had, like, great comments in the Slack channel. Can you can you share a bit more?
Yeah. Well, I mean, one thing I was
sharing was since this is our first time trying out
the platform, it could be helpful both from a technical perspective with the audio, but as well from kind of a knowledge of navigating and how to how to respond to prompts perspective to have, like, a test run that's doesn't actually have to show it to anyone or anything. But some people clearly were just testing it out. Like, one person wrote test. And, you know, that's that's fine. But as a result, it meant that when we went to have our group conversation and we went to listen to recordings, obviously, there was there was nothing there. And as a result of that, you know, if you were in a group that didn't have a lot of people who did contribute something, you had no choice but to vote for
Yeah.
Those other options because you can't vote for your own option. So I thought that was an interesting barrier. Like, I I get why you wouldn't want people to be able to vote for their own option, but also, like, sometimes there are no other options too. So I wanted to name that.
Like, originally, it was just to to avoid, like, stalemates. But you're right. Like, there isn't, like, no reason, like, why someone could just, like, vote for their own. And regarding it, like, no. Definitely, like, the the tutorial or, like, at least something at the beginning where people can just, like, play with the platform. Like, it's it's definitely important. We we have, like, that we have done, like, now a few of these. And, yeah, like, even when once people, like, enter in the in the in the discussion room, like, the first minute is like, so what should we do? Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. We have please. Please. Please. Please. Oh, I'm thinking, yeah,
I think it would be great to have a little bit more of a facilitation introduction, which is just, like, introduce yourselves. Like, maybe not with your name, but just be, like like, where you're, like, where you're from, whatever it is that you want because it's gonna be recorded.
Speaker. Yeah.
Yeah. Like, just some sort of prompt. Like and, again, like, your like, if if if I recall correctly, your team includes a facilitator, so they have a good intuition about what you want that initial prompt to be. But I don't I didn't think I I I saw that and just even some texts that just, like, also unmute yourself would would potentially be be helpful. But I no. I mean, it it's exciting, I think. I mean, I and then it's worth probably listening to the recording from our last conversation because we were talking about the platform, so you might find that interesting. I I didn't see a way to look at the to listen to previous recordings in this conversation. Is there a way to do that?
So because it was done on my account, I can do it. So I I would download it and send it to to Sent by, yeah, something that the admin so the the host of the discussion can see.
I see. Okay. Yeah. Because I I don't know what the conversation was. I wasn't involved in anything that had the winning idea, so I'm, like, very confused by it as a participant. Like, where what does this even mean? I don't even know what you're talking about. And so it would be great for me to have heard the dialogue that led that idea to be winning because maybe I would then agree to it. But without that, I'm just in the dark. And that's both as a participant, but also as a member of the public who isn't seeing this conclusion of this, you know, deliberative process.
Yeah. And I'll I'll address that. BB, do you have a question as well? Oh, I
was just getting in the queue.
I think Sen had something, though.
Oh, I in fact, I think I mean, the only thing is maybe I wanted to circle back to Daniel who had kind of asked a question prior about hierarchical winner takes all voting. I also wanna say I mean, I I know that our seminars normally end on the hour, but because we have some technical difficulties, I'm happy to stay on for another ten minutes. If people are interested in continuing the conversation, if people need to leave, please no pressure to stay on. So maybe, Daniel, then we can go to B.
There's there's many ways it could be. It was it was an awesome experience and just was wondering about how hierarchical decision making equates to consensus because one could just slip by in the primary, slip by in the secondary, and is that consensus and so on.
Yep. So great question. So one thing and and I think, like, there are some elements that can maybe, like, tie with with Abhiv's question, which is so, basically, like okay. So let's start from the voting, for example. So the voting, you you know, like, it was just, like, the like, a way for us, like, to to to essentially give people, like, a way to both vote on, like, the the idea, but also say, you know, like, how confident are you in, like, a specific idea? So if you are, like, really supporting one idea, you can put all your coins there. Otherwise, like, you can spread them more equally. But that's just, you know, it's not a hard choice. Like, I what we want to do is now make that completely up to the, to the host. So maybe, like, you know, someone, suggested quadratic voting and, like, you know, maybe, like, your organizations want to to try different types of voting. So that should be just, like, you know, like a like a, you know, drop down menu and you select your, your voting mechanism. And and on the point of Aviv's, kind of, I didn't know what was happening in the rest of the, you know, like, I did not have a sense of the global, sort of conversation. I I was like always in conversations that had not the winning idea. And so it is kind of like a bug and a feature at the same time, right? Like the, the, the feature part is that that is like the local interaction. Right? Like, you know, only what's happening on on on your table and then you move tables. But what happens in the background and you guys couldn't see that because as a user, you cannot see it, but you can see it from the admin side is that the same ideas are discussed across multiple tables. Right? So it could be that maybe, like, your table, you know, didn't vote for that, but it was voted in other tables. And so what we do is essentially aggregating all tables that discuss the same ideas. Right? And that has the the property of kind of preserving that independence between tables, but also allowing for this, like, social interactions. Right? Like, this conversation between people. But the bug part is that, yes, we need to and and this is, like, part of the UX audits that we are doing at the moment. Give a sense of to people that, you know, there are conversations happening also in other tables. So, like, maybe, like, some visualization or, like, what's happening globally, it's it's also useful. So give both the the local starling, but also, like, the the the whole flock.
Yeah. I think, you know, to Aviv's point, it's not
it's not necessarily during the process. Also, certainly during the process, it could be good.
But after a decision is made, it it could be useful to have some semblance of understanding of, like
Oh, shit.
Why was that what what what does that mean? And I think that similar to the point of having, like, a waiting room sandbox space where people can mess around with something, it it does feel pretty important. Like, one of the reasons that the conversations in this were tricky was because we didn't entirely understand the prompt. And so people took the prompt in very different directions, which could be okay, but then you had to spend some of your time explaining why you're what why you wrote that in response to that. So I think that having potentially exposing people to the prompt and and I know that you had sent some stuff ahead, but, like, giving people an opportunity to, like, ask questions and chat to the facilitator or even just make it known that people are having questions about the prompt could be useful.
Mhmm. Yeah. Very good point. Like, a way like, maybe, like, for the host to kind of be in touch with or, like, being able maybe, like, to address, like, specific questions in various tables.
Shauna?
Yeah.
So I left a comment in the chat, which is, like, more of, like, a low key suggestion, which is just that having a way for people to flag audio problems so that it can maybe be fixed in the sense that, like, I know that, for instance, in our group, SENT was having trouble with their mic, but, like, probably could have taken a chance to provide a little bit more text knowing that the audio wasn't working. So, like, just having, like, a little bit of a fail safe. Like, I think that doing audio is great. Like, that verbal element is really nice, but also text can be a bit more reliable in terms of conveying information. And then the other thought I had was just around even though I've listened to multiple like, I have listened to multiple presentations about this platform, so I feel like I'm coming into it with a much greater understanding of the dynamics. And even there, I was still surprised and confused by elements. And I think that understanding the process is, like, a really crucial element in people feeling like they're the the the result is legitimate. Because if you understand the process, even if you're gonna certainly even like or agree with the process, knowing that there is a process as it's being followed, like, can just make you be like, okay. Well, this isn't what I would choose myself, but, like, you know, it's fair. It's a system. And so to the extent that you can, like so one element was when in my first group, all of the all of the things got the same votes. Everyone got two votes. I think we all just really wanted to support each other and validate each other's ideas. And so it said, this is the one that was chosen. Presumably, it was random, but it didn't say, you all liked everything equally, so we've chosen something randomly. And, like, even just that, I feel like, would have been nice. And then also, I was able to remember from previous discussions that the second group was, like, the winners from previous groups together, but there was nothing that actually said that. So, again, it was a little bit confusing. So just a little bit more signposting about what's happening.
Yeah. Yeah. For sure. Yeah. This is, like, actually, like, the the feedback that we get very consistently. Like, it's re like, people are kind of, like, feel, like, now they are almost teleported through different, like, parts of the platform, and they don't like, they're a little bit confused and sort of give the assigned posting, but also, like, the sense of, you know, why this happened and not this other thing happened.
I wanna turn to the meeting shortly, but I also wanna say, you know, Nick and I were in conversation about perhaps doing kind of postponing the session and doing it in, I think, September because they're like, they've they've had a lot of these calls and a lot of this type of feedback that's just mentioned. But I think in some ways, like, this is nice because you get a chance to kind of experience it in this state. And then come September, October, we're let's let's do it again and actually, like, have the experience of having gone through it and also have the experience of seeing, like, all the changes. So I think that'll be really interesting for for us and for Nick and but yeah. So I just wanted to recognize that that this actively being worked on. I also have other comments, but I'm I'm gonna pass to a few first.
I just shared a a just a few thoughts in the Slack in case I mean, in the in the chat in case it would be helpful. But I think one of the things that was interesting is I didn't know who I was talking to. And within a community, that's actually pretty nice. Like, I see this as a very useful tool. Like, I would love to use this within a community of 20 people or 10 people just so you can do a round robin, like, conversation. And I don't know. Maybe, like, there's some good Zoom, Slack, or, I mean, things that do this, but I don't know of any way to do that. And so being able to do a round robin with a sort of tournament y process could be really useful in communities. But then you wanna be you might wanna be anonymous in some in in in some context and not in others. You might wanna have an introduction period where you just all get where what's your name? Where are you from? And then that part isn't recorded. Right? And then the the rest of it is recorded. Right? So recording turns on after some period of time. Or the names are you know, it says you can put in I could we could put in our full names. I wasn't sure where this is gonna go, so I didn't put in my full name. I tried to put enough people to know who I was. But, again, that that's the other the other side of this.
Yeah.
I think the the other big sort of realm of thing is, like, what are the ways in which you can combine things? And I think there's, like, the heavy way and then the light way. Right? The heavy way is, like, actually having modifications and, like, thinking about how to do modification and reconciliation or having iterative prompts. Like like, we do this, and you do it again with new ideas based off the ones you had before. There's a whole set of processes around that. And then there's, like, order of growth implications for different approaches there. But then there's also this question of just what if there are things that can be combined in the voting stage? That's sort of this lighter way to approach this. And so, oh, if the prompt allows things that aren't or if if there are things that are not mutually exclusive, people wanna combine them as their vote. Is there a way to do that? And, again, that has a complicated UX implications, but it's just something to think about because it feels really like the thing that you wanna do and you feel really torn by the system to not be able to do that in the social setting.
Yeah. That that that is great. And and on the point of, like, yeah, the the the size, like, sort of ten, twenty people. So you you saw you you had the only two rounds of discussion. And but because it's a tournament, it's of idea where, like, every time ideas are reduced. This is very scalable. Like, even if you have, like, 200 people, like, it actually converges very quickly. You are just, like, one or two iterations. And on the point of, yeah, combining ideas, if if you know how to do it, that would be fantastic to talk because we have a few ideas. Like, for example, you know, annotating ideas when when people discuss. That's also another way. Right? If I see that maybe, like, two ideas are connected, maybe I can make a note or, like, maybe link them. But it yeah. Like, UX, UI design stuff is gonna be, like, tough. Unless you want to have the option, for example, to add ideas to the pool during the discussion. That also
And then, yeah, I think there's a whole slew of options here. And I think, like, using this sort of tool to actually and this is my my suggestion, but I I've learned another thing, so it it doesn't matter. But but, like, using this as an instrumental approach to actually answer questions of relevance to Medigob or or to Psy might be, like, an interesting way to explore that.
Well, that's actually the thing that I wanted to bring up in our last section here. I mean, also, I really like that idea of, like, being able to combine things, and the annotation approach seems really nice. Because one of the I think one of the things that Nick and I or at least I kind of was, like, struggling with a little bit is what kind of question do we bring to this context? And I guess also a part of that is, like, what kind of question affords a kind of modularity where you could be able to combine those ideas? The like, the kind of annotation approach seems really nice because it it's more qualitative and descriptive being added that way rather than necessarily, like, taking two people's things and combining them, and maybe they didn't want it to be combined. But as a kind of open, you know, ending question, I am really curious following on Adi's point of, like, using this to address questions that might be relevant to our community or Sykes community. Like, what are some questions or prompts that you might have wanted to discuss that maybe we didn't get a chance to discuss? Or was there anything in this process that is spurred for you as something that might be interesting to explore when we come back to this in October or September? Happy to take just first impressions, through voice, but then also to, leave comments in the Slack. But I would since we have some people here, I'd be really curious if anyone has thoughts on that.
And I guess I'll just repeat what was in in the idea that I have, which is simply these like, if there's foundational questions, for example, like, what is the what what should the goal of the Medigov community be? What are some, you know, what are some things that could be done better? Like, what are we what are we aiming for in the tools that we're creating is sort of the question I just I just posed more broadly and in in governance or democracy more generally because then then that helps inform and measure the the tool itself against that. Those are all problems I find fascinating.
Yeah. We had the chat with Sam. Like, you know, what kind of questions should we ask? Like, is it, like, mission vision alignment? Is it, like, problem solving? It's we we yeah. TBD. It's difficult to to to tell you at once.
Yeah. I mean, I think we also went with a more kind of just exploratory approach to get a feel for the the software because it wasn't clear exactly what we would be able to implement. But we could have people get a sense for how going through this process might feel and work, and and then from there, build out some ideas and think about that more operationally, perhaps. But I realized we've gone way over it on the whole time. And I really appreciate everyone staying and coming back to the room and going through the process. And, yeah, it's it's really for me, anyway, it's a lot of fun getting to explore and practice with this software that's in a development stage. So I wanna thank Nick and everyone else who came for coming and participating and look forward to the next session that we're gonna have next month, which is still to be announced.
Thank you so much for having me.
Thanks, Seth.
Thanks, everyone.
Bye. Yeah. Bye, everyone.