# Council Briefing: 2025-06-22 ## Monthly Goal Current focus: Stabilize and attract new users to auto.fun by showcasing 24/7 agent activity (streaming, trading, shitposting), ship production ready elizaOS v2. ## Daily Focus - The project faces a critical challenge with X account suspension and API access limitations, threatening connectivity while V2 stands ready for announcement. ## Key Points for Deliberation ### 1. Topic: X Platform Strategy **Summary of Topic:** The project's X (Twitter) account has been suspended, likely due to data scraping concerns, and the new API pricing of $50k/month is prohibitively expensive, creating obstacles for agent social media presence and communication channels. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** How should we adapt our social media strategy in light of X/Twitter platform restrictions? **Context:** - `Shaw confirmed their X account was suspended, likely due to concerns about data scraping` - `Discussion about X's new API pricing ($50k/month) making it prohibitively expensive for many AI agent developers` - `Mentioned building a presence on Farcaster as an alternative to X` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Prioritize Farcaster expansion while maintaining diplomatic efforts to restore X access. *Implication:* This balanced approach diversifies social platform risk while attempting to preserve our established X audience. b) Build a decentralized scraping network using encrypted vaults with vectorization to bypass API constraints. *Implication:* This technical solution could maintain X integration but increases legal and operational risks. c) Pivot entirely to alternative platforms (Farcaster, Discord, etc.) and abandon X integration efforts. *Implication:* This decisive pivot reduces platform dependency risk but sacrifices our existing X audience and visibility. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** What architecture approach should we adopt for agent-to-platform connections to improve resilience? **Context:** - `DorianD proposed a system where numerous Eliza Nodes could scrape X and store data in encrypted vaults with vectorization to avoid legal issues` - `Discussion about keeping agents lean by separating backend processing for complex multi-step processes` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Implement a decentralized peer-to-peer network of elizaOS nodes with shared, encrypted data storage. *Implication:* This architecture increases system resilience but requires significant development resources to implement correctly. b) Create platform-agnostic middleware that separates agent logic from platform-specific integrations. *Implication:* This modular approach allows faster adaptation to platform changes but adds complexity to the core framework. c) Focus on first-party platforms where we control the infrastructure (auto.fun, our own websites). *Implication:* This approach reduces external dependencies but limits reach and mainstream social media integration. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 3:** Should we prioritize legal compliance or community-driven workarounds for platform integration? **Context:** - `Community member z1 claimed to have developed a scraper that bypasses the official API but warned about potential detection` - `They've submitted clarification that they don't scrape or sell X data and are awaiting account restoration` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Strictly prioritize legal compliance and transparent platform relationships. *Implication:* This approach minimizes legal risk but may severely constrain technical capabilities. b) Pursue a hybrid approach with official APIs where feasible, with community-driven alternatives as fallbacks. *Implication:* This pragmatic strategy balances compliance with functionality but creates inconsistent user experiences. c) Embrace community-driven solutions while maintaining plausible deniability at the organizational level. *Implication:* This approach maximizes technical capabilities but increases legal exposure and platform relationship risks. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. --- ### 2. Topic: V2 Release Strategy **Summary of Topic:** ElizaOS V2 is complete and ready for announcement, but the deployment is being delayed due to X account issues, raising questions about the optimal launch strategy and how to leverage claimed breakthrough capabilities. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** Should we proceed with the V2 announcement despite X account limitations? **Context:** - `Shaw confirmed V2 is complete and ready to be announced once their X accounts are restored` - `Shaw hinted at "big breakthroughs in capability" coming soon` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Proceed with V2 announcement immediately via alternative channels (Discord, GitHub, website). *Implication:* This approach maintains development momentum but potentially reduces announcement impact without X amplification. b) Wait for X account restoration for a coordinated cross-platform announcement. *Implication:* This strategy maximizes announcement reach but risks indefinite delays to V2 adoption and momentum. c) Soft-launch V2 with technical documentation while preparing a major marketing push once X access is restored. *Implication:* This phased approach allows technical adoption to begin while preserving marketing impact for when platform restrictions are resolved. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** How should we frame and showcase the "big breakthroughs in capability" mentioned by Shaw? **Context:** - `Shaw hinted at "big breakthroughs in capability" coming soon` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Focus on technical superiority with benchmarks and capability demonstrations for developers. *Implication:* This approach appeals to the technical community but may not translate to mainstream excitement or adoption. b) Create engaging demos highlighting real-world applications that showcase new capabilities through auto.fun. *Implication:* This application-focused strategy connects technical advancements directly to user benefits and ecosystem products. c) Frame capabilities as steps toward AGI that position elizaOS as a leader in autonomous agent development. *Implication:* This ambitious framing garners attention but creates expectations that may be difficult to sustain. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. --- ### 3. Topic: Auto.fun Growth Strategy **Summary of Topic:** Community members are suggesting enhancements to Auto.fun including GameFi elements, polling systems for trending coins, and better integration with SpartanAI to create more engaging experiences that attract users. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** Which Auto.fun feature should we prioritize to drive user engagement? **Context:** - `Implement GameFi-like gameplay mechanism for Auto.fun to attract more users (辞尘鸽鸽)` - `Set up polling system for Auto.fun to identify trending coins (Phenowin)` - `Create representative account for Auto.fun to generate hype (Phenowin)` - `Connect SpartanAI with Auto.fun and other ecosystem components (辞尘鸽鸽)` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Implement GameFi-like mechanisms that reward users for engaging with Auto.fun agents. *Implication:* This approach leverages crypto-native engagement models but requires careful token economic design. b) Develop a community polling system that identifies trending tokens for Auto.fun to feature. *Implication:* This data-driven approach enhances user participation while providing valuable market intelligence. c) Focus on deep SpartanAI integration for automated trading insights and signals exclusive to Auto.fun. *Implication:* This technical integration creates unique value but depends on SpartanAI performance and reliability. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** What creator incentive model would best accelerate Auto.fun adoption? **Context:** - `Consider lower creator incentive fees (2% total, 1% each or 0.5% each) (Phenowin)` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Significantly reduce creator fees to 0.5-1% to maximize creator adoption and liquidity. *Implication:* This low-fee approach prioritizes volume and market share over per-transaction revenue. b) Implement a tiered fee structure where fees decrease as project success metrics increase. *Implication:* This performance-based model aligns platform and creator incentives but increases implementation complexity. c) Maintain current fees but enhance creator support with AI-powered marketing and community-building tools. *Implication:* This value-added approach maintains revenue while differentiating through superior creator services. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 3:** How should we approach 24/7 agent activity to showcase Auto.fun's capabilities? **Context:** - `Current focus: Stabilize and attract new users to auto.fun by showcasing 24/7 agent activity (streaming, trading, shitposting)` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Create themed agent archetypes (trader, analyst, entertainer) that coordinate activities. *Implication:* This character-based approach makes agent activity more engaging but requires careful persona design and coordination. b) Focus on real-time market intelligence and trading signals as the primary agent activity. *Implication:* This utility-focused strategy provides clear value but depends on market prediction accuracy and quality. c) Implement a mixed content strategy with 70% information, 20% entertainment, and 10% transactions. *Implication:* This balanced approach appeals to diverse user interests but requires managing multiple content types effectively. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above.