[Bulk Issue] Developing the team site - how should we deploy?

[JFWooten4]

Note

Not logistically, lol.

There has been a longstanding idea in my head to host flat-org team materials on its own .dev site. In my mind, this gives us a clear, non-document working (internal) policies with the full public disclosure of a repository. This was started during the migration from Zoho earlier this year here.

There are some material nonpublic-related concepts I'd like to publish to explain the scope here:

Fiat Flow

One of the biggest terminus items on our roadmap is operating bank-like dollar payments (so that you can actually buy a stock).¹ I have the fortune of reimagining the TA internal control requirements thanks to our sturdy relationship with the Commission. However, I do not yet have such connections into the state banking agencies or the (governmental) OCC.

Thus I expect needing to keep things tight on the dollar side at a level relatively more 'controlled' than equities. That scares me a little because I will need to stand strong on our commitment to entirely open-source code, which I've seen others use to explain going proprietary.² I do believe it's possible to execute these responsibilities with a distributed, autonomous team.

This particular concept uses the ecosystem standard for bringing old banking infrastructure to wallets, using a nonfunctional legacy partner in Step 2 (and 1 functionally). Since every processing system would use open standards, I think it's a very reasonable jump to permissionless team members once we have ownership ironed out. That's my biggest hiccup with this move—whether we deploy on the blocktransfer or DRS side.

Investor Support

This also gets into the concept of support members, which I've thought about without complete clarity for a while. There's a very permissioned internal (read: opaque) way to do this as a company, even if all the calls and interface is public. I would prefer to make a decentralized implementation with a program open to all investors who want to help.

So the strategic path here changes the structure concept and hence the deployment locale, to start. I'd like to get the shares moved over to give some clarity and fuel for discussion in the community as we figure this out together. Hopefully something like this will be easier to manage and engineer once we get the development worked out on the Issuer Portal.

I've imagined this sort of site as a form of public employee directory for some time because transparent and permission-minimal working arrangements make the whole world more efficient and (probably) happy.³ It relates deeply to the pending registry concept which sits as the basis for permissionless remuneration. Very doable when we think as a team!

Footnotes

1. I put in significant efforts these last six months to entice another expert community party to accomplish their own version of this feat, to no present avail. While I do have long-term mission-aligned objectives for launching this sort of institution, I'm more than happy to use literally any other non-offensive functioning Stellar USD anchor, but no suitable alternatives have surfaced in my searching. I consider this a prerequisite for managing nonprivate primary offers. ↩

2. I've seen this with firms of all sizes from tiny startups to famous behemoths. In the former case, I usually interpret the choice as profit-driven sleazing excuses, with the occasional partner-bank strong-arming (I have seen how hard they can push contractually). And in the latter, there's always a combination of self (shareholder-sold) interest and some hand-wavy 'money laundering' stories, despite ineffectiveness. ↩

3. For instance, you can see some original email headshots meant to signify inclusion in the startup phase, as shown by removal when paid work or studies took priority. In the latter commit, I even went out with gear to take a professional headshot for our emails to clients and partners. Obviously we are now moving away from this central coordination and group persona dictation. ↩