Graven - less in economist perspective. non-rivalrous, not really. tons of things on gitcoin grant rounds that aren't economist definition. root of public and good, separate and think in terms of positive sum type products. broaden the definition and focus on impact side of things

Viktor - inequality regarding distribution of goods. many places where it is not possible to own houses. education can be seen as a public good but a lot of things are privatised. in a much fairer way. liked Scott's article. (Alisha.eth: express support for viktor's experiences)

Scott Davies - share with Viktor framework of public goods. how do we provide these goods and services traditionally done by governments. close some of those gaps and inequalities. increasing globalisation and all. how do we make up for some of those gaps for communities that are missed out by those governments or are not good at managing it. (Alisha.eth: good to have lots of people in the space)

Kyle MacLean - I'm at a loud cafe so I'll stay muted. But I'm focused on "sweat of the brow" common law idea of copyright type thing. E.g. it takes a person 1000 hours to learn how to do something in 10 minutes, and can teach that skill to others in 1 hour. If others take advantage of that shortcut, hopefully equity compensates the sacrifice. Also I'm keen on discussing the "s" i.e. "public good" v. "public goods." Time is money. Concept of UBI. Tough to figure out how to make it happen. Great way to look at it. Or see from a baseline and providing that. Hopefully can support education and students and support. (Alisha.eth Sounds Thiel fellowship, pay people and they might change the world)

QZ - 1. in gitcoin we see things that are good for the public, as public goods- its easier to communicate when there is a clear narrative. to remind ppl of the inequities we face every day. merit goods + public good = public goods in Gitcoin. public goods are good for the public.

Justin - new to the space. worked in Web2 for very long. building software with global communities under umbrella of public goods for global health. Product for the intention of being public goods. Excited in Web3 for the idea that public goods can be facilitated from a broader context. Not write code then contribute if you're skilled enough to use it. But to build the resources around it. Idea that we can create public goods that are so diverse in their approach that not just software engineers can contribute. (Alisha.eth great perspective on this)

Sumedha - long time Discord lurker and general observer of the space. definition somewhat economics based. not necessary non-rivalrous non-excludable. mostly thinking about things that are systematically undervalued and underprovided. not just products but also services that we don't assign value to

Lani - different answers keep coming up. as we defined it personally. especially web3 in context of Gitcoin community as founded to facilitate dev of open source software. essential needs we wish governments provide access to, things we need to exist and live peacefully. those are things that are public goods. how can we create small scale experiments to facilitate access to those goods. DAO basic income, create on a small scale and open source the process of facilitating access to it. that's a pathway to move away from colonialist paternalistc mindset. away from central authority, experiment with these ideas. things that could contribute to planetary flourishing. (Alisha.eth future of us. us could just be people in front of you)

Kishoraditya - product background. what might be good for India might be different from different context and perspectives. understand the impact it is causing and the needs. air water shelter. grown into larger domains like education and we try to understand from that impact. public good for that smaller community.

Paul - always feel should clarify, writing about Gitcoin in an academic sense. participant but also writing about what Gitcoin is supposed to be. good and bad in terms of definitions. political stance of some of this. Ethereum in general is a political project. Argument that Ethereum has a politics but it hasn't fully accepted its a political project yet. They're in the business of thinking about providing public goods etc. something like decentralised analogues for state functions because of financial system and they don't provide goods. its a solarpunk attitude to fix it. like definition of commons in general from Ostrom, 2006. commons is a resource shared by a group of people that is subject to social dynamics. but also public goods is something difficult to define. interesting that we're very deep into this kind of project of web3 public goods funding. but nonse of us are settled on what it should be. not necessarily a bad thing but interesting. non-rivalrous, non-excludable, anything in Web3 but might not be the right one. "Clarifying the commons" is public goods the appropriate term? should we use public goods when relating to Ethereum. like source code. But the blockchain has some economics side like paying to use it. Is it not a public good but something closer to a club good because you pay to use it. ideas behind knowledge commons, digital commons which are different from resource commons. you discover that the story was more complex and better to leave as it is. Gitcoin is it a public good or club good? A good term is commoning, the process or act of creating commons. Maybe the problem is not with us but maybe the term from Ostrom isn't updated enough. Maybe something from web3 that are so unique that we need new terms. Hard problem because we're doing pre figuration. You try to live as if you are in the world you want to see. Acting as if it has already happened. We're already in web3 but it hasn't happened yet but we live as if. Collateral damage is we have to retroactively give terms. We're edging towards a new type and we might have to introduce a new term. (Alisha.eth good to hear from you, super excited)

Sid - as QZ said should be a common definition that's simple to understand. Go the meme route. Public goods are anything that's good for the public. public can be people, environment, anything in the public domain. good depends on the public, on how they define good. so its things that make anyone better. can be local community. public good is greater than the sum of its individual parts.

Alisha - in tiers. what is a traditional, economic definition or digital is one class that Gitcoin was intended to support. Reason why started thinking about public goods was through a grants round. Are we trying to get to a point where anyone in the community who turns up to the grants round makes them feel comfortable that they have enough context so that they think that Bankless is a public good or not a public good. I think that this project that an artist is stating is a public good or not a public good. and the metric was value created or provided to community (market failure). the thing that is created is a public good but the people creating it is not a public good. Project itself vs the people.

Project itself vs People

Sumedha - public goods in economic sense we're thinking about the kinds of things that are meeting those criteria are open source software the final end products that don't have an owner or sense of depletion. there's a sense of depletion in the commons. In web3 space the resource is hours. finite amount of time people can spend doing these things. incentives structured. are a lot of people that stand to benefit from people's talent, ideas, and time but not necessarily a lot of people incentivised to contribute. Need to think through incentives for actually rewarding people.

Paul - governing the commons is focused on communities. social disputes. most of the work you find on the commons is really based on a sense of conflicts. negative atmosphere around the projects. don't get a sense of this in web3, the disputed commons. social dispute as a key part of public goods doesn't really ring through. if I was introducing a new culture. usually people are seen as the problem. polycentric governance. original stuff on the commons. not even elinor ostrom, her husband. he writes about the gargantua. the metropolitan city is something that isn't well defined. its presumed to be governed in this ad hoc way. this is something similar in the web3 culture. communities working in polycentric governance but absent of conflict.

QZ - go through a bear market. lots of people got cut. how do we protect the people building the projects?

Graven - utopian vision. so much abundance. now we're back to this. lots of open space to collaborate. don't have to argue over the pie, we can keep growing the pie. its not going to carry on forever. need a new paradigm deep in the future. we have to try to delay that date when we're in cutthroat competition. we can set the tone for all of this and not get caught up in mind and depletion and scarcity. naive to think that day will never come. we should acknowledge that.

Kyle - A public train with first class tickets v. a diverse ecosystem like a working old growth forest. Both have conflict but the prior is much more competitive as a baseline. Send a message to everyone

Lani - what do we as a community need to thrive so we can experiment our needs for that community. what's emerging is the public good isn't the thing itself, its the process of facilitating access to it. even traditional non-rivalrous, non-excludable we want to cultivate systems that flourish that are non-rivalrous and non-excludable. one way is to facilitate access to local communities. circumvent this future experience when we enter the inevitable bear market that everyone in our community is cared for. that we might be able to cultivate systems of resilience.

Paul - agorism. ross ulbricht. philosophy is to create what is essentially autonomous zones (black market activity) but we want to create places of web3 zones that are extremely attractive and we slowly establish ourselves as more attractive decentralised alternatives. just create more attractive options, analogies for what's happened already and the space eventually expands itself. and these spaces find each other over time and suck people into the web3 mindset. no need to confront the state and we do it parallel to it.

Lani - don't try to convince anyone that the system is wrong and we create an alternative that's superior.

Kishor - bear market made me think what happens if a decentralised public good DAO

Justin - ultimately the best solution is something that comes out of the community it serves. we can make progress towards that but its hard. how can we make the community provide for itself.

Next?

More calls that we can bring on to discuss this specific topic.

could let people also drop in and peace out. a space that you don't have to pledge allegiance to gitcoin 50 per week and we figure something out

don't want Gitcoin to be seen as the colonial power. what if we're the base layer for where things can flourish.

how do we move beyond the dialogue of how we can move things

Twitter spaces? Make it more public

PG PR #1

Agenda

Attendees

Agenda

Attendees

Action Items DB

Action Items Database

Meeting Minutes 

Go round robin, what we're excited about it, what do we think about it, definition