## Thoughts on the Meta-DAO Discord

> And I've come up with this phrase I use internally that I made up. So one day I'll have to write a definition of it, but I call it liquidity quality. And I tell entrepreneurs, “I care way more about that than I do how broad you are. We can use venture dollars and growth playbooks to go broad if the fires burning bright. And so how do you get this liquidity quality high?” And Jeremy (the Yelp founder), being at those nightclubs in San Francisco and people being super passionate and their review frequency being high, that caused the quality of the experience, even though it was in a very small area.

> And so I very frequently run into entrepreneurs who think they need to expand to 10 cities really quickly to raise their A or their B or whatever. And I'm like, “No, if you have like incredible unit economics and growth metrics in a single city where it's obvious that your playbook's working and things are spinning and things are getting better and you're basically having network effects, that's way more interesting.

Bill Gurley, Benchmark Capital

### Goals

I am trying to attract a *small, highly-engaged group of contributors* to the Meta-DAO. In other words, I prefer 'inch wide, mile deep' to 'inch deep, mile wide.'

There are situations where it makes sense to go after a wide audience, such as when you've already built products and are now in the process of marketing them. *The Meta-DAO is not in that stage of its lifespan, and it needs highly-engaged contributors to build the products that will make the Meta-DAO successful.*

### Signal density = engagement

I expect that most people use Discord in a similar way to me. This usage pattern consists of:
1. having 1-3 servers that you actively read, or at least a few channels in those servers that you actively read. for me, this is the Meta-DAO's Discord and 'Solana Tech'
2. having 1-100 servers that you only occasionally participate in, usually only opening them if you have a specific question or if you're tagged

It seems to me that people select which servers end up in bucket #1 based on **signal density**. That is, what is the probability that if I open this server on a given day, I will find the chatter interesting or relevant to me?

So our goal should be to maximize the signal density for the type of person we want to attract.

### Some bullet-point tangible thoughts

- Do we really need a gm channel? is 'gm' a particularly intereresting insight?
- Do we need a separate general and proposal channel? Shouldn't everything be discussed, other than questions, be potential actions that the Meta-DAO could take?
- IMO, it doesn't make sense to split the dicussion into the forum-style. It just diffuses attention. It should feel like a conversation, where everyone is talking about the same thing at once, instead of a tree that forks out in a bunch of different directions.
- If someone needs the rules channel to tell them what to do, they probably don't belong in the Meta-DAO.

#### Proposal:

I propose that we
1. axe the gm and the rules channel
2. consolidate the #general and the proposals channels into a single channel: #talk. if we feel like there's too much to discuss in a single channel, we can just create another thread of execution: #talk-2.
3. add a channel where people can ask quesitons, called #ask-questions or something like that
4. moderate with an iron fist, pruning messages that dillute the server's signal density