# Council Briefing: 2026-04-19

## Monthly Goal

December 2025: Execution excellence—complete token migration with high success rate, launch ElizaOS Cloud, stabilize flagship agents, and build developer trust through reliability and clear documentation.

## Daily Focus

- Transitioning elizaOS to a modular, open-contribution model while mitigating emergent security risks and addressing critical community communication gaps.

## Key Points for Deliberation

### 1. Topic: Organizational Pivot & Ecosystem Fragmentation

**Summary of Topic:** The dissolution of Eliza Labs marks a shift back to open-source decentralization, but creates risks in resource concentration and flagship project continuity.

#### Deliberation Items (Questions):

**Question 1:** How do we maintain 'Execution Excellence' for the core framework without a dedicated Labs team?

  **Context:**
  - `Shaw announced dissolving Eliza Labs to focus exclusively on core framework quality.`
  - `Development transitioned back to an open contribution model similar to original ai16z days.`

  **Multiple Choice Answers:**
    a) Formalize a Core Maintainer Group.
        *Implication:* Ensures quality control but risks perceived re-centralization.
    b) Incentivize top contributors via the native token fund.
        *Implication:* Uses economic levers to drive priority development tasks.
    c) Transition entirely to community-led RFCs for features.
        *Implication:* Maximizes decentralization at the cost of execution speed.
    d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above.

**Question 2:** Should Milady development remain the primary focus over framework social visibility?

  **Context:**
  - `satsbased indicated Milady is the current priority over X (Twitter) activity.`
  - `Community members expressed frustration over 3-week social media silence.`

  **Multiple Choice Answers:**
    a) Maintain product-first focus (Milady) until v3 completion.
        *Implication:* Prioritizes shipping but risks community attrition due to perceived inactivity.
    b) Appoint a dedicated Community/Social Lead separate from dev.
        *Implication:* Re-engages the public without distracting core engineering.
    c) Automate 'Trust Through Shipping' logs to social channels.
        *Implication:* Uses elizaOS agents to handle communication, aligning with project philosophy.
    d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above.

---


### 2. Topic: Security Vulnerability & Trust Architecture

**Summary of Topic:** A reported vulnerability and increasing scams highlight the need for a formalized security infrastructure to protect the ecosystem.

#### Deliberation Items (Questions):

**Question 1:** Is it time to implement a formal Bug Bounty program to attract ethical researchers?

  **Context:**
  - `Researcher kullai discovered vulnerabilities but noted the lack of a bounty program.`
  - `odilitime confirmed no current bounty program exists.`

  **Multiple Choice Answers:**
    a) Launch a treasury-backed bug bounty program immediately.
        *Implication:* Increases security posture but requires a professional triage team.
    b) Continue relying on 'Ethical Researcher' voluntary disclosures.
        *Implication:* Lower cost but higher risk of critical exploits being sold to bad actors.
    c) Collaborate with a Web3 security platform (e.g., Immunefi).
        *Implication:* Outsources triage while building institutional trust.
    d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above.

**Question 2:** How should we mitigate the ownership concentration risk of core runtime review?

  **Context:**
  - `Contributor lalalune handles a massive portion of runtime PRs.`
  - `odilitime acts as the primary review bottleneck for critical core changes.`

  **Multiple Choice Answers:**
    a) Enforce a 'Double Verify' rule (2+ independent reviews) for Runtime.
        *Implication:* Increases security but significantly slows down development velocity.
    b) Expand the 'Core Dev' role to 2-3 more high-performing contributors.
        *Implication:* Reduces review dependency on odilitime and increases the 'Bus Factor'.
    c) Implement automated AI-agent code analysis for security gating.
        *Implication:* Leverages internal technology but requires high confidence in the LLM's oversight.
    d) Other / More discussion needed / None of the above.