Skip to content

GitLab

Verified Commit 4da083ac authored by el00ruobuob's avatar el00ruobuob
Browse files

Meetings logs: 

- Tini2p meeting from 2019-09-19
- MRL meeting from 2019-09-23
- Community meeting from 2019-09-28
parent 20cec20a
Hide whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
_posts/2019-09-19-logs-for-the-tini2p-dev-meeting-held-on-2019-09-19.md 0 → 100644
View file @ 4da083ac
---
layout: post
title: Overview and Logs for the tini2p Dev Meeting Held on 2019-09-19
summary: Current project status, Roadmap, Meta issues, and miscellaneous
tags: [dev diaries, i2p, crypto]
author: el00ruobuob / oneiric
---
# Logs
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** time of the meet
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** 0: Greetings
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** h
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** 1: What's been done
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** A lot
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** Finished tunnels impl, and merged into master
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** (with helpful review from @DavidBurkett)
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** I'm still used to being the only person working on the project, so have to habituate myself to a workflow that includes other people
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** started work on the router context (what ties all the pieces together)
**\<DavidBurkett>** Don't change anything because of me. I'm slow and unreliable
**\<DavidBurkett>** I'll catch up eventually, just keep doing what you're doing :)
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** in the process, came across some impl bugs in NTCP2 (fixed), updated NTCP2 to include a testnet v. mainnet netID, and started working on ECIES updates
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** no worries, I just meant that you're the first other than me to review my code :)
**\<DavidBurkett>** Haha, got it
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** for the ECIES updates: there has been a lot of them
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** zzz pushed updates to move us to something much closer to standard Noise, and I love the changes
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** it's a bit of work to change my impl, but all the changes are for the better
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** the code is looking much cleaner now
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** the cryptographic guarantees are stronger and more clear as well, which is the bigger win imo
**\<DavidBurkett>** :rocket: Do you have a link to zzz's updates?
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** you can follow my work in my context branch: https://gitlab.com/tini2p/tini2p/tree/context
**\<DavidBurkett>** Ah perfect
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** yeah, zzz's updates are pushed to the main 144 proposal: https://geti2p.net/spec/proposals/144-ecies-x25519-aead-ratchet
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** we're still working out some kinks in the handshake, and will need to update the ratchet KDFs afterwards
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** we are getting \*\*much\*\* closer to finalizing the spec though, which is awesome
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** so, my impl may deviate from the spec a bit until we get everything figured out
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** we're trying to get as close to standard Noise as possible, while maintaining the necessary properties for ECIES-X25519 stated goals
**\<DavidBurkett>** That's great news
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** definitely
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** :smile\_cat:
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** the downside to all that is I've spent a good amount of time refactoring, so don't have code that is ready for a release candidate
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** long-term it's for the best, in the short-term it's a slog to get to alpha release
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** which leads to the next item
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** 2: What's next
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** continue the refactors for ECIES-X25519
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** get something working for end-to-end crypto sessions, and work with zzz on fixing spec bugs (if/when they come up)
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** finish the context impl
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** create the docker testnet for local integration testing
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** idk how long the docker testnet will take, but I'm hoping something minimal will be fairly easy to setup
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** if it takes more than a day or two, I'll push an alpha release candidate without the testnet
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** the biggest hurdle I see for the testnet is populating the NetDB of the routers with the RouterInfos of the other routers in the testnet
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** I don't have reseed impled, so I'll have to do something manual
**\<zlatinb>** you may find this useful: http://zzz.i2p/topics/2756-testnet-with-lxc-instructions
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** really hoping this is the last time I'll have to say this: pushing the alpha release date back another two weeks
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** awesome! thank you @zlatinb :)
**\<zlatinb>** also talk to "obscuratus" on Irc2P, he has a mixed i2pd/java i2p testnet, also with lxc
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** right on, I'm hoping to do it with docker for eventual windows support
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** right now, tini2p only builds on linux. will be working on cross-platform builds post-alpha
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** there's probably a lot of crossover in approach to lxc, so I appreciate the resources. will definitely be reaching out to obscuratus
**\<DavidBurkett>** Builds on mac also
**\<DavidBurkett>** But of course, that's based on linux
**\<DavidBurkett>** I nearly had it building on windows, but I got frustrated and quit :)
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** haha wow, thanks for build testing
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** yeah, I imagine the windows experience is pretty hellish atm
**\<DavidBurkett>** np, wasn't intentional. I'm the 0.1% of devs who prefers windows
**\<DavidBurkett>** So I tried there first
**\<DavidBurkett>** It wasn't quite as bad as you might think, but 1 of the dependencies was pissing me off lol
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** noise-c?
**\<DavidBurkett>** Yes, that's the one
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** yup
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** that's a bear
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** I'll be moving all the noise stuff into the project proper, and remove the noise-c lib
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** it's a great reference, but making it cross-platform is such a pain
**\<DavidBurkett>** Excellent. Let me know when you want me to try building again
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** will do, I appreciate the offer
**\<DavidBurkett>** :thumbsup:
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** long-term I hope to contribute a CMake build system to noise-c
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** atm that's low priority though
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** that will be extremely time-consuming, but I want to give something back to the project
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** rweather did a lot to help me understand Noise :)
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** so, that's more-or-less what I'll be working on: router context, ECIES updates, some NetDB stuff, docker testnet
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** 3: Questions/comments
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** alright, so that's the meeting
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** will do my best to get a release candidate out by next Thursday, and alpha release the following week
**\<DavidBurkett>** Looking forward to it
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** :+1:
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** 4: Next meeting
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** 2019-10-03 18:00 UTC
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** holy shit, we're already almost in October
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** thanks all for attending
**\<tini2p\_gitlab>** @tini2p\_gitlab twirls the gavel
_posts/2019-09-23-logs-for-the-Monero-Research-Lab-meeting-held-on-2019-09-23.md 0 → 100644
View file @ 4da083ac
---
layout: post
title: Logs for the Monero Research Lab Meeting Held on 2019-09-23
summary: Surae work, Sarang work, and miscellaneous
tags: [dev diaries, community, crypto, research]
author: el00ruobuob / sarang
---
# Logs
**\<sarang>** First up, GREETINGS
**\<suraeNoether>** howdy!
**\<sarang>** And, I suppose, ROUNDTABLE as well
**\<sarang>** suraeNoether: care to go first?
**\<suraeNoether>** sure, I spent all weekend working on the CLSAG paper for submission
**\<suraeNoether>** the deadline is 5am (my time) tomorrow morning
**\<sarang>** Some really good changes to definitions
**\<suraeNoether>** i've been up past 2am for the past few nights trying to get it all done
**\<sarang>** Better capturing forgeries, and cleaning up linking :D
**\<suraeNoether>** yeah, the paper is actually v gorgeous now, and i'm excited to update the preprint after submission
**\<suraeNoether>** also, reviewing the DLSAG paper today for submission to the same proceedings
**\<suraeNoether>** i missed the deadline for getting thring signatures out there, but 2/3 ain't bad
**\<suraeNoether>** once that deadline passes, i'm shifting gears back to code for a few days
**\<sarang>** Oh well, there are other good destinations too
**\<suraeNoether>** aaaand that's it
**\<suraeNoether>** yes for sure
**\<sarang>** Some with rolling deadlines, which may be much more convenient
**\<sarang>** I've been working on a hodgepodge of items
**\<sarang>** FC 2020 submission review
**\<sarang>** Ongoing work with the Lelantus author on ideas and constructions for removing its sender tracing issue
**\<sarang>** It's proving surprisingly tricky to get a Lelantus construction that admits both one-time addresses and prevents sender linking
**\<sarang>** It has to do with how range proofs are constructed using the one-time address, since this is used directly in a commitment
**\<sarang>** In the case without one-time addresses, the recipient generates a representation proof that assures verifiers the range proof is with respect to generators with unknown discrete log relationships
**\<sarang>** In the case with one-time addresses, I don't know a way to achieve this
**\<sarang>** So, work continues on it
**\<sarang>** Finally, the RCT3 authors released an update to their preprint
**\<sarang>** This is quite exciting... it modifies how public keys are used within spend proofs to fix a problem with a particular proof (which would otherwise lead to an exploit)
**\<sarang>** but it also permits the use of a single log-sized proof across all spends
**\<sarang>** So there are substantial changes to review and test
**\<suraeNoether>** i'm eager to get further into the details of them. i'm still skirting the edges of lelantus, ringct3, etc. HALO was a surprisingly short paper, and so many recent results are showing us all how important it is to formalize our transaction protocol as a circuit...
**\<sarang>** Halo is quite interesting, but seems to be widely misreported as something that is practically usable now for chain verification, which it is not
**\<sarang>** There is also not a soundness proof, but there are for some of the underlying constructions (which bodes well)
**\<sarang>** Sean (the author) thought there might be an interesting application to how Bulletproofs' inner-product arguments are batched
**\<sarang>** so it's neat stuff
**\<suraeNoether>** i liked the response "big if sound"
**\<sarang>** Heh, me too
**\<suraeNoether>** i don't know who tweeted that, but it's working it's way into my daily vocabulary.
**\<suraeNoether>** at the grocery store, looking at humongous squashes. Knock on the squash. "Big if sound."
**\<sarang>** -\_\_\_-
**\<sarang>** Does anyone else have interesting work to share, or questions on anything?
**\<mikerah>** Can you go into more details about specifying the monero transaction protocol into a circuit
**\<suraeNoether>** its\*
**\<defterade\_>** What are the chances of CSLAG making it in the April hardfork?
**\<suraeNoether>** mikerah: long story short: a lot of the ZK proof systems out there rely on showing "Given an arithmetic circuit that describes a function f(-), here is y and a proof p that I know a secret x such that y = f(x)."
**\<sarang>** Specifying transaction requirements as a language suitable for various proving systems is useful for broader application
**\<suraeNoether>** the function f formalizes the language sarang just mentioned
**\<sarang>** defterade\_: depends entirely on audits, which I'd like to address momentarily
**\<suraeNoether>** it can be complicated to take a statement like "I know one of these ring members, and the associated commitment opening" and turn it into an arithmetic circuit
**\<suraeNoether>** or, the resulting circuit could be really slow
**\<suraeNoether>** or too large or what have you
**\<suraeNoether>** so there's a challenge in formalizing our ring confidential transaction "statements" into an arithmetic circuit
**\<sarang>** Well, systems like Omniring take such statements, formalize them into a language, and then construct a proving system for that language
**\<sarang>** (albeit less generally)
**\<mikerah>** Have there been other attempts at specifying ring signatures in arithmetic circuits
**\<kenshamir[m]>** eprint 1076 also uses recursive proofs. The benchmarks are asymptotically equal to Marlon though.
**\<suraeNoether>** we can exploit a lot of available proving systems out there, possibly yielding more efficient ring confidential transactions, given a description of such a circuit
**\<sarang>** Not without trust requirements at this point
**\<kenshamir[m]>** There was no comparison to Halo because Halo was too informalq
**\<sarang>** Proving systems specific to particular language constructions (Bulletproofs range proofs, Omniring, RCT3, etc.) tend to be reasonably efficient for having no private setup
**\<suraeNoether>** mikerah: not that i know of, yet... certainly not in the DDH + ROM setting without trusted setup
**\<sarang>** As far as CLSAG goes, OSTIF informs me that one code reviewer quoted $24750 (code only, not the paper)
**\<mikerah>** Ooh. Another research project idea!
**\<kenshamir[m]>** \<mikerah "Have there been other attempts a"> I think you can do it, but it would not be efficient; a statement like Pubkey 1 OR pubkey2 OR ... PubkeyN
**\<sarang>** And one math reviewer quoted $7200 (paper only, not the code)
**\<sarang>** They are looking into it more
**\<suraeNoether>** i have to go for a doctor's appointment; please accept my apologies for bailing early. sarang, care to take it from here?
**\<sarang>** The math review could be completed by the end of November in this case
**\<sarang>** sure suraeNoether, see ya
**\<suraeNoether>** that's a decent deal for the math review tbh. who is it?
**\<sarang>** It isn't clear if I can share that publicly before they've made a formal commitment
**\<sarang>** but it's someone quite respected
**\<mikerah>** If I'm going to take a guess, I think it's Dmitry Khovatovich
**\<mikerah>** Not sure if I spelt his name correctly
**\<sarang>** Unclear about the timeline for the code review
**\<sarang>** OSTIF is inquiring with other groups
**\<sarang>** Any other questions or items to share before moving on?
**\<sarang>** All right then; on to ACTION ITEMS
**\<sarang>** This week, I'll be completing the edits and submission for FC 2020 (and updating on IACR and MRL archive)
**\<sarang>** and continuing review of the updated RCT3 proofs and proving system
**\<sarang>** there's a lot of stuff to unpack with that
**\<sarang>** Anything else before we adjourn?
**\<defterade\_>** Do the changes made in CLSAG warrant a level of audits to the extent of RandomX? (i.e. >= 3 code reviews)
**\<sarang>** The code changes for the basic signature scheme (and some underlying plumbing) aren't terribly complex... there are plenty of other code changes that plug it in to the rest of the codebase
**\<sarang>** The math isn't very different from MLSAG, but is different enough to warrant a formal review... additionally, the proofs in the original MLSAG paper weren't very formal either, and we've worked to make the CLSAG definitions and proofs more extensive
**\<sarang>** That being said, I would be surprised if 3 separate code audits would be of value in this case, depending on the scope
**\<sarang>** Getting review of the math, whether by the usual peer-review process or a paid review, is certainly a good idea
**\<ArticMine>** So are looking instead at one maybe two audits?
**\<sarang>** It's not up to me
**\<defterade\_>** But it would be fair to say the financial burden for the community is expected to be lower than RandomX?
**\<sarang>** Given the numbers presented so far, it seems so
**\<sarang>** The sum of the two current quotes (code and math) is $31950
**\<sarang>** Hopefully the code quote will be reduced once the scope is more clearly (and perhaps narrowly) defined
**\<sarang>** There's the code that produces and checks signatures, and then there's the code that integrates these into transactions etc.
**\<defterade\_>** Has there been any discussion on changing the ring size when CLSAG goes live?
**\<sarang>** There has been
**\<sarang>** IIRC increasing from 11 to 13 would retain the same verification time as we have now
**\<sarang>** Whether or not this marginal increase is "worth it" is an open question
**\<defterade\_>** Doesn't break the prime sequence, nice
**\<defterade\_>** Okay
**\<sarang>** Righto, thanks to everyone for attending; logs will be posted to the GitHub issue shortly
_posts/2019-09-28-logs-for-the-Community-meeting-held-on-2019-09-28.md 0 → 100644
View file @ 4da083ac
---
layout: post
title: Logs for the Community Meeting Held on 2019-09-28
summary: Community highlights, CCS updates, Workgroup report, and miscellaneous
tags: [dev diaries, community, crypto]
author: el00ruobuob / SamsungGalaxyPlayer
---
# Logs
**\<sgp\_>** Meeting time
**\<sgp\_>** 0. Introduction
**\<sgp\_>** We would like to welcome everyone to this Monero Community Workgroup Meeting!
**\<sgp\_>** Link to agenda on GitHub: https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/391
**\<sgp\_>** wait jk
**\<sgp\_>** Link to agenda on GitHub: https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/396
**\<sgp\_>** Monero Community meetings are a discussion place for anything going on in the Monero Community, including other Monero workgroups. We use meetings to encourage the community to share ideas and provide support.
**\<sgp\_>** 1. Greetings
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<el00ruobuob>** o/
**\<intj440>** hello
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** hiya
**\<xmrscott[m]>** Sup
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** will be on IRC soon.
**\<darkaleph>** hey everyone
**\<sgp\_>** welcome everyone. thanks for being here!
**\<sgp\_>** 2. Community highlights
**\<sgp\_>** See Monero weekly highlights at https://revuo-monero.com/
**\<sgp\_>** There was an initial "policy & regulation" meeting here earlier this week: https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/392
**\<sgp\_>** Head to #monero-compliance to join that initiative
**\<sgp\_>** Of course, the most important news is that 0.15 is expected on October 31, with the scheduled protocol upgrade on November 30. Here are some of the major changes: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/d9lbji/what\_are\_some\_of\_the\_major\_notable\_changes\_coming/
**\<monerobux>** [REDDIT] What are some of the major notable changes coming to Monero this Oct 2019 for v0.15? (self.Monero) | 31 points (80.0%) | 16 comments | Posted by patoshii | Created at 2019-09-26 - 15:38:56
**\<sgp\_>** Release schedule: https://twitter.com/JEhrenhofer/status/1175830009254166534
**\<monerobux>** [ Justin Ehrenhofer on Twitter: "Tentative Monero 0.15 release schedule: Oct 24: code freeze Oct 31: release Nov 30: network upgrade… " ] - twitter.com
**\<sgp\_>** Are there any outstanding questions regarding the upcoming update?
**\<sgp\_>** None? Wow, you people are quite informed
**\<sgp\_>** Please help us contact exchanges. I'll make a Blockfolio notification today, and we should make a Monero-announce mailing list announcement: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/daacw0/reaching\_out\_to\_the\_exchanges\_network\_upgrade\_v015/
**\<monerobux>** [REDDIT] Reaching out to the exchanges / Network Upgrade / v0.15 (self.Monero) | 26 points (90.0%) | 4 comments | Posted by mishka1984 | Created at 2019-09-28 - 02:37:16
**\<sgp\_>** Does anyone have community (non-workgroup) updates to share?
**\<sgp\_>** 3. CCS updates
**\<sgp\_>** Monero Wiki October 2019 (5.2 XMR): https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/merge\_requests/98
**\<sgp\_>** All ideas in funding required have been fully funded.
**\<sgp\_>** Any comments on this new proposal in ideas?
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** hmmm
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** Thoughts on the wiki thing sgp?
**\<sgp\_>** It's a really small amount. I'd like to see a better idea how the funds are rewarded though
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** I'm a little bit skeptical
**\<sgp\_>** Asking for sensible server hosting costs is totally reasonable to me
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** I know asymptomatically is as good as they get
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** but I'm just afraid of the burnout that comes with having to maintain something as..."intensive" as a wiki
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** but hey, he's asking for server costs, so I guess it doesn't matter
**\<sgp\_>** Possibly, but the ability to edit the wiki is much simpler than editing the getmonero website
**\<sgp\_>** especially from a newcomer perspective
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** meh, what the heck? it's not much XMR, and we'll see how it goes
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** I'm for
**\<sgp\_>** Any other comments? I prefer the format and approachability of a wiki compared to the main website
**\<sgp\_>** 4. Workgroup report
**\<sgp\_>** a. Daemon/CLI workgroup
**\<sgp\_>** RandomX was merged, and all hands are on preparing for release at this point.
**\<sgp\_>** There were a few instabilities on testnet that are being ironed out, hence the slightly later than expected network upgrade (hardfork) date
**\<sgp\_>** b. Localization workgroup
**\<sgp\_>** ErCiccione has a new translation platform at translate.getmonero.org.
**\<sgp\_>** Join #monero-translations to help out
**\<sgp\_>** c. GUI workgroup
**\<sgp\_>** i2p support is finally anticipated in the GUI for 0.15! It may also include the ability to send funds to multiple addresses in one transaction (feature available in the CLI), but this is lower priority.
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** I2P is for this update? woof
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** when did vtnerd say this?
**\<sgp\_>** As of a few minutes ago, pigeons set up an i2p Monero node for testing that "seeds" peers to other monero clients. So that's coming along nicely :)
**\<sgp\_>** That was the main holdup afaict
**\<dEBRUYNE>** and we should make a Monero-announce mailing list announcement \<= I will have that ready tomorrow
**\<dEBRUYNE>** ErCiccione[m] will put it on the site as announcement too
**\<sgp\_>** Tor support probably won't make it
**\<sgp\_>** But most users will see larger practical benefits from i2p anyway
**\<sgp\_>** d. Monero Research Lab
**\<sgp\_>** Sarang and Surae have focused their attention on CLSAG, Omniring, Lelantus, RingCT 3.0, and matching. A new RingCT 3.0 preprint is out with large changes.
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** sad on the Tor, but it's good for I2P{
**\<sgp\_>** You can always view their logs in the meta repo
**\<sarang>** Yes, I've been focusing on sublinear protocols mostly
**\<sgp\_>** Any questions on Monero workgroups? We are speeding through this meeting
**\<sgp\_>** 5. Open ideas time
**\<sgp\_>** It’s open ideas time! Feel free to propose your ideas to this discussion group, and feel free to comment on others’ ideas. If you disagree with the idea, please reply with constructive criticism. Thank you!
**\<xmrscott[m]>** Just a comment that I don't think technically translate.getmonero.org has been released to the masses, so keep it on the downlow
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** I have something to discuss.
**\<kinghat>** \*hands torch to rehrar\*
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** This is a semi-serious idea. Similar to the testing of the minecraft server for people to play on
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** what are some things the community might be interested in doing, that's online?
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** together, I mean
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** online board game, book club, debates, discussions?
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** maybe the answer is nothing
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** but it'd be cool to have a few different things going, and having a vibrant "community space"
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** that's not just Monero-centric
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** different people want different levels of engagement. I'm sure there's some people that don't care to be involved in a "Monero community" in anything past Monero related matters
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** but others might feel differently. Just wanted to ask in this meeting what people might think
**\<sgp\_>** I'm not going to directly answer your question, but I can speak to the importance of something like this
**\<sgp\_>** For university student groups, they strongly encouraged us to have someone who role was to focus on promoting group "culture." Bonding, doing fun things, etc
**\<sgp\_>** Maybe it would be worth making a long list of ideas people would be interested in doing and seeing who wants to do these?
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** if engagement in this meeting is anything to go by..... :P
**\<xmrscott[m]>** Yeah, probably best done offline
**\<xmrscott[m]>** Make a reddit post etc, a select few can only be so representive of a community
**\<xmrscott[m]>** \*select few in a meeting
**\<sgp\_>** It seems like people are busy doing other stuff today. Make a reddit post and hopefully it will help encourage engagement
**\<sgp\_>** Unless there are other comments, I can end the meeting early
**\<sgp\_>** 6. Confirm next meeting date/time
**\<xmrmatterbridge> \<rehrar>** kthanksbai
**\<sgp\_>** The next community meeting will be in 2 weeks on 12 October at 17:00 UTC. The next Coffee Chat will be on 19 October at 16:00 UTC.
**\<sgp\_>** 7. Conclusion
**\<sgp\_>** That’s all! Thanks for attending this Monero Community meeting, and we hope to see you on r/MoneroCommunity and #monero-community. Take care, and know that change starts with YOU.
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment