# BBB Sync 11/16

## Action Items

* **RG Josh**
* Create view for must-pass V0 test cases
* **Bill**
* (Oustanding from last week) Ping John/Justin about current stack
* **SporkDAO (Bill/0xJosh/Derrek)**
* Discuss and create survey for users
* **0xJosh**
* Talk to Jason and ensure that traitswapping is hinted at in the ETHDenver application

## Documents Referenced

#### Development Timeline

[11/16 Meeting Recording](https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1bETuEVNKLUVPTZCMoUlSAwQNK_iZEX9t?usp=share_link)
[Project Proposal ](https://hackmd.io/dH7umlMIT2uCsIMc504BAA?view)
[Kanban](https://airtable.com/invite/l?inviteId=invowI6rbkpUSjGMu&inviteToken=79d8ef5c47016a3eb3e971d7dbf19e44fcb4e555b034d70d23e9730b8d212609&utm_medium=email&utm_source=product_team&utm_content=transactional-alerts)
[Architecture](https://hackmd.io/fTNdNUUMR6yJbFfW6zNq4Q?view)
[Saimano's Test NFT Contract](https://goerli.etherscan.io/address/0xa3afe17b63a8917ef77062b99061da7e0707c550)

## Lightly Edited Meeting Notes

Derrek/Damu intros

### Development Timeline

[Calendar Looks Good]

BW - tracking software for UR. Shouldn’t be too expensive

Looking at stories - don’t need to micromanage (unless we start falling behind)

Make QA explicit
-have QA test cases - once we know that test cases pass, we're good to launch (JD to work on)

### Launch Strategy/Publicity

DC: To what extent do we want to titrate this out?

-is it okay if we do the lazy big launch - announce on channels?

BW: feels like it’s a good strategy. Don’t hold back - if we put in newsletter, will get a trickle of people using it. Provide a good sample size - add a survey at the end. Realistically, as collect user data - some will become apparent, others will take longer - talk to folks

Don’t know how engaged ETHDenver community is - but gently put it out there

DC: Can easily distribute survey. Want to collect as needed

BW: helpful for DC/BW/0xJ to do survey. Simple, stick on site, include communications. User research - gut is a lot of time for UR, UR can be ongoing.

JD: can always throttle folks who sign up becoming users if there's too much interest. UR depends on how user informed we want the V1 to be -

DC: Has most of info in context.Tease on twitter/newsletter on screenshots. Want you to get in there early - most of what he needs. Mostly dialing in finer point communication - QA needs, N people. Just let him know - can

Daniel: trying to avoid gatekeeping with buffi corns. Always disappointed that whale channels/deep channels - maybe less soft announcement on those. Some sense of status

Separately meeting tomorrow with Derrek, will bring up

BW: make it feel special on the channels, leak alpha there

0xJosh - wanted to do a reward thing. Some engagement. B3, whale channel - want raffle of 10 to community

JD: engage community preceding newsletter or post newsletter?

JL: don’t know

DA: as community, people are on the edge of their seats for applications. People booking airfare, exciting. Want clarity that it’ll be consistent

Daniel: resonates with him. Having it be more limited - some reasons to participate. Tiny bit of alpha to say something is coming - advantages to buff for application, having a sidecar to say this is coming to build momentum

JL: ETHDenver app is coming out this/next week
DA: if people hear that having NFT will help app. Leak saying trait is valuable- move off the floor

JL: tells folks choose fur and horns. Continue with that messaging. Difference between having a bufficorn

DC9: this all sounds cohesive. All tied into ecosystem. Whole world is combined - some reason to holding it. Application, buff lounge, btw there’s other things to do - whole is greater than individual parts. Can be presented collectively

David: value of $SPORK is amorphous - spend in opposed to vote. Having right pillar of rarity/functionality. Push buff doesn’t have to be ready anymore - when JL gave talk last year, mentioned traits being important to you.

JL: thinks it’s a better narrative. When announced, started off with rarity tiers. Tier 1/2/3. Haven’t leaned into it. Will lean more in

JD: need to include rarity but focus on community

Daniel: rarity, people will have. Irl relating to personality - that’s new. Allows rarity seekers to do their thing, market state. Focus on newer things. If community is going to be focused on building perfect buff, okay with going people down to building tier1/2/3? Then find out they missed on some benefits - learn later in they lost something

JL: can almost definitively say - those who really care about identity will also have tons of buffs to farm spork

Metadata tags being erased when buff moves to other address. Get a sense of buffs that are identities versus other buffi corns

David:Tiers going to shift, need to be transparent

JL: leaned away from doing rarity things

JD: building rarity engine?

JL: hard to do snapshot because sponsor tees aren’t rare items. With equip/unequip - just another item, equip on top of another things - possible that rarity of other things change. Put an NFT of the sponsor tee into their wallet

DA: that is ignored by calculations

JL: instead of sponsor tee, will be normal tee - own category

DC9: predefined traits. Wildcard traits swapped in

JL: another thing to add in is see which NFTs are in your wallet, and pay spork to equip/unequip to change

DC9: saw comms that tiers are determined by rarity tools. Paid a huge premium for tier1 buffs - if algo changes, feel bait and switch

JL: won’t bait and switch. Do carefully

DC9: found a way to reproduce rankings. Also want comparables- could go with reproduced. Could go with own proprietary. Could also consider open rarity - what opensea is moving to. Could have control

[Openrarity project](https://support.opensea.io/hc/en-us/articles/9517355517843-What-is-OpenRarity-)

JL: planned sponsor tees as same multiplier as old sets

JD: fork their rarity and add our own?

DC9: total control over that, very easy to choose how these things occur. Can just drop a trait entirely. Short version - we can do whatever we want. Mention open rarity - value in having own version of this. Forgets if openrarity is enabled in collection - shows 1500 rank. Having a standard across-projects makes a lot of sense. May have to if want to do wild things. Extend/contribute to open rarity?

Common standard - odd use case. If extended. Maybe we just it

JL: maybe open rarity could fit

DA: happy to take a look too, if JSON files, could change, transparent file

DC9: can predict rarity in swaps

JL: can integrate into swaps?

DC9: short version, can set it up - API call,

JL: not a problem for people to go to other websites.

DC9: make sense to launch website w v simple interface for rarity?

[Wrapping Up]

JL: talk to Jason about language being included