# Council Briefing: 2025-12-10 ## 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 - Community concern over token migration and platform stability rising as technical teams prioritize codebase quality and next-generation features over immediate user-facing functionality. ## Key Points for Deliberation ### 1. Topic: Community Trust & Token Economics **Summary of Topic:** The AI16Z to ElizaOS token migration has sparked significant community frustration due to the sudden snapshot, supply increase, and declining token price, undermining confidence in the project's economic model at a crucial development juncture. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** How should we address the growing community frustration regarding the token migration and price decline? **Context:** - `The migration from AI16Z to ElizaOS token has caused significant community frustration. Users expressed concerns about the sudden snapshot that caught many holders off-guard.` - `Token price has been declining despite broader crypto market strength. Supply increased from 6.6B to 11B tokens (~40% increase), with 13% immediately entering circulation and 27% on a 3-year unlock schedule.` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Increase utility by accelerating the launch of auto.fun and Babylon, creating immediate token demand. *Implication:* Prioritizing product launches may strain technical resources but would provide tangible utility to justify the increased token supply. b) Implement a token buyback program using treasury funds to support price and demonstrate confidence in the ecosystem. *Implication:* A buyback would provide immediate price support but depletes treasury resources that could otherwise fund development. c) Improve communication with comprehensive tokenomics education and regular treasury/development updates to restore trust. *Implication:* Enhanced transparency may slow immediate price decline through improved sentiment but doesn't address fundamental utility concerns. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** What tokenomics adjustments should be considered to align with our decentralization principles while supporting token value? **Context:** - `Q: How is it "decentralized"? A: Probably by ELIZAOS holding. (Omid Sa)` - `DorianD expressed skepticism about a 2026 bull run, suggesting 2028 as more likely, citing broader geopolitical trends affecting decentralized networks.` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Implement on-chain governance allowing token holders to vote on treasury allocations and feature prioritization. *Implication:* True decentralization through governance would differentiate ElizaOS but may slow decision-making during this critical development phase. b) Establish protocol fee distribution where a percentage of auto.fun and platform usage fees flows directly to token stakers. *Implication:* Creating a direct value accrual mechanism would strengthen token fundamentals but requires operational products. c) Develop a progressive decentralization roadmap with clear milestones tied to technical achievements and community growth. *Implication:* A structured approach balances short-term development needs with long-term decentralization goals but requires ongoing management attention. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. --- ### 2. Topic: Product Delivery & Timeline Management **Summary of Topic:** Multiple core products (ElizaOS Cloud, Babylon, Jeju) are behind communicated schedules, with the development team focused on infrastructure and technical debt rather than user-facing features, creating a potential misalignment with immediate community expectations. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** How should we prioritize between technical infrastructure improvements and shipping user-visible products? **Context:** - `ElizaOS Cloud: Originally promised for November, still in development with no specific launch date` - `Large PR (#6213) submitted to clean up code quality issues, including type fixes, test additions, and removing unnecessary try/catch blocks` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Maintain focus on code quality and infrastructure, as this creates a sustainable foundation for future products. *Implication:* Long-term technical health will be improved, but continued delays may further damage community confidence. b) Shift to a dual-track approach with separate teams for infrastructure and product delivery to ensure parallel progress. *Implication:* This balances technical debt reduction with visible outputs but increases coordination overhead. c) Temporarily prioritize shipping minimum viable versions of promised products before returning to infrastructure work. *Implication:* Quick wins boost community sentiment but may create technical debt that becomes harder to address later. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** What should our communication strategy be regarding product timelines given the current development reality? **Context:** - `Q: What about ElizaOS cloud launch - it was supposed to launch by EOD November - we are in December? A: "We're busy working on it, I think devs will really like it" (Odilitime)` - `Q: When is Babylon launching? Already 275K registered and still no signs. A: "It's going really well - you saw it introduced about two weeks ago. If we had announced when it will be launching, you'd know about it" (Kenk)` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Adopt a "no public timelines" policy until features are nearly complete to prevent disappointment from missed deadlines. *Implication:* Reduces short-term pressure but may create perception of slow development and lack of roadmap clarity. b) Implement transparent milestone tracking with regular public updates on progress and honest acknowledgment of delays. *Implication:* Builds trust through transparency but requires admitting shortfalls and may temporarily impact sentiment. c) Shift to smaller, incremental releases with more achievable timelines rather than major product launches. *Implication:* Creates steady progress perception but may dilute excitement around major feature completions. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. --- ### 3. Topic: Agent Architecture & Capability Limitations **Summary of Topic:** Current agent infrastructure faces critical limitations in composability, uptime guarantees, and long-term accessibility that conflict with our mission of creating reliable 24/7 autonomous agents for auto.fun and other applications. #### Deliberation Items (Questions): **Question 1:** How should we address the architectural limitations of our current agent system compared to smart contract reliability? **Context:** - `Current agent system lacks composability` - `No guaranteed 24/7 uptime (unlike smart contracts)` - `Uncertain long-term accessibility of agents` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Develop an on-chain persistence layer for agent state with smart contract integration for critical functions. *Implication:* Blockchain integration provides reliability guarantees but increases complexity and gas costs. b) Implement a distributed hosting model with redundancy and automatic failover across multiple cloud providers. *Implication:* Improves uptime without blockchain costs but requires significant infrastructure investment. c) Create standardized agent interfaces and protocols that enable cross-deployment interoperability and state persistence. *Implication:* Focuses on interoperability rather than specific hosting solutions, enabling diverse implementations. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above. **Question 2:** What innovative agent capabilities should we prioritize to distinguish elizaOS in the competitive AI framework landscape? **Context:** - `Concept of an AI agent that monitors food consumption through fridge cameras and smart scales` - `Home automation technology for elizaOS has been developed by Neo` - `Discussion about alternative data formats (TOON and POML) vs. traditional formats like JSON/XML` **Multiple Choice Answers:** a) Prioritize multi-modal agent capabilities across text, vision, audio, and IoT device integration. *Implication:* Broadens potential use cases but spreads development resources across multiple complex technologies. b) Focus on agent-to-agent collaboration protocols that enable emergent collective intelligence. *Implication:* Creates a unique differentiator aligned with AGI vision but requires solving complex coordination problems. c) Develop specialized vertical solutions in financial trading, content creation, and home automation. *Implication:* Targets proven market demand areas with immediate utility but may limit broader platform adoption. d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above.