# Council Briefing: 2025-08-28 ## 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 - ElizaOS is making significant technical progress on browser compatibility and multi-step functionality while addressing critical social platform limitations that threaten agent visibility. ## Key Points for Deliberation ### 1. Topic: Social Platform Strategy **Summary of Topic:** Multiple ElizaOS agent accounts have been suspended on Twitter/X, threatening our visibility and engagement strategy, and requiring urgent adaptation to maintain 24/7 agent presence. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** How should we strategically respond to Twitter/X's increasing restrictions on AI agent accounts? **Context:** - `Multiple users reported ElizaOS agent accounts being suspended on X` - `Rabbidfly suggested "Keeping elizaOS as a human content driven account might be what's needed for now"` - `DorianD suggested twitterapi.io as a potential alternative service after Rabbidfly's account suspension` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Pivot to alternative platforms like Telegram, Farcaster, and Lens Protocol that are more agent-friendly. *Implication:* This would diversify our platform risk but requires building new user communities from scratch. b) Develop a hybrid approach with human-supervised agents that comply with X's terms while maintaining automation behind the scenes. *Implication:* This preserves our existing audience but adds operational overhead and reduces full autonomy. c) Create our own dedicated social layer within auto.fun where agents can interact without platform restrictions. *Implication:* This aligns with our decentralization values but isolates agents from mainstream visibility initially. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** Should we prioritize developing a comprehensive API abstraction layer to shield agents from platform-specific changes? **Context:** - `Discussion about Twitter's V1 API issues and potential alternatives` - `Suggestions included switching to Telegram plugin and using third-party services like twitterapi.io` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Yes, immediately develop a unified social media API abstraction that standardizes interactions across platforms. *Implication:* This future-proofs our agents but diverts resources from other v2 development priorities. b) Partially - develop specific adapters for priority platforms while maintaining platform-specific optimizations. *Implication:* This balances development effort with flexibility but still requires ongoing maintenance per platform. c) No, focus on platform-specific implementations and accept that agents may need customization for each platform. *Implication:* This allows for optimal platform-specific behavior but increases maintenance complexity and fragmentation. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. --- ### 2. Topic: Technical Roadmap Execution **Summary of Topic:** The team is making significant progress on ElizaOS v2 with browser compatibility and multi-step functionality but faces challenges with competing priorities between core architecture, plugins, and API infrastructure. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** How should we balance completing browser compatibility versus strengthening the agent ecosystem for auto.fun user attraction? **Context:** - `Browser core development work mentioned by cjft and sayonara` - `PR #5828 titled 'feat: browser compat core (draft)' by @ChristopherTrimboli is open` - `sam-developer shared progress on ElizaOS cloud with a video update and promised a Railways link for testing` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Prioritize browser compatibility as the foundation for all future agent development, delaying other features if necessary. *Implication:* This ensures a solid technical foundation but may slow visible auto.fun progress in the short term. b) Balance both tracks with dedicated teams, using browser compatibility for new features while maintaining existing agent functionality. *Implication:* This requires more coordination but maintains progress on both technical debt and user-facing features. c) Focus on auto.fun agent features first, with browser compatibility as a parallel but secondary priority. *Implication:* This accelerates user attraction but risks technical debt and potential future rework. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** Which infrastructure investment would most effectively support our goal of 24/7 agent activity on auto.fun? **Context:** - `Multi-step functionality is expected to be ready by the end of the week` - `A cloud service implementation (referred to as "eliza cloud") is in progress with video generation capabilities being developed` - `PR #5825 titled 'multi step' is merged` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Prioritize multi-step functionality and agent persistence to enable more complex agent behaviors and reliability. *Implication:* This enhances agent capability but focuses on depth rather than variety of agent interactions. b) Invest in cloud infrastructure and API gateways to support scaling and third-party integration. *Implication:* This improves system reliability and integration potential but may not immediately enhance agent capabilities. c) Focus on agent interoperability and communication protocols to create a vibrant ecosystem of interacting agents. *Implication:* This creates a more dynamic and engaging auto.fun experience but depends on broad ecosystem adoption. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. --- ### 3. Topic: Tokenomics and Community Concerns **Summary of Topic:** There is significant community concern about the AI16z token price decline and project direction, requiring a clear communication strategy around token utility and the auto.fun ecosystem evolution. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** How should we address community concerns about token value while balancing technical development priorities? **Context:** - `Significant community concern about the AI16z token price, which has reportedly declined 65% over three months` - `Users expressed frustration about the project's direction, lack of social media presence, and unclear tokenomics` - `Hidden Forces defended the project, explaining they recently "solidified v1 after months of beta" and are focusing on broadening adoption` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Accelerate the auto.fun agent marketplace launch to create tangible token utility and demand. *Implication:* This creates immediate token utility but risks launching with incomplete functionality. b) Develop and publish a comprehensive tokenomics whitepaper with clear utility roadmap and value accrual mechanisms. *Implication:* This improves transparency but may highlight how much development remains before full value realization. c) Implement token buy-back mechanisms tied to elizaOS adoption metrics to create price support while development continues. *Implication:* This provides immediate price support but could create unsustainable expectations for ongoing market interventions. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** What is the most effective integration strategy between ElizaOS agents and the broader crypto ecosystem to drive sustainable token value? **Context:** - `AI16z was described as evolving from a memecoin into a "DAO control currency for an AI agent incubator"` - `Jin successfully implemented x402 with Solana USDC payments, one of the first implementations besides the developers` - `cantseemenomore mentioned buying Shaw AI agent token` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Focus on DeFi integration, enabling agents to directly interact with Solana DeFi protocols for trading, liquidity provision, and yield strategies. *Implication:* This creates concrete financial utility but exposes agents to greater financial risks and regulatory scrutiny. b) Develop an agent ownership and monetization model where AI16z token holders receive revenue from agent activities and creations. *Implication:* This creates direct value accrual to token holders but requires complex revenue distribution systems. c) Build cross-chain agent capabilities, positioning ElizaOS as the interoperability layer for AI across multiple blockchain ecosystems. *Implication:* This expands the potential market but dilutes focus from Solana ecosystem and increases technical complexity. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above.