Hi allā¦grateful to be here as well as being new to this space. Just by way of relationality to my commentsā¦.I am joining here as a 35 year community organizer both in the US and for the last 25 in my adoptive country of Costa Rica where I currently reside. In addition to thisā¦I and the initiatives I help to steward have formed relationships over the last 5 years with many of the coordination partners listed in the above document. So it is through these lenses and life ways that I share this feedback. And I want to just start by thanking each and all of you who contributed to the drafting of this document and all of the foundational work done to even bring this vision to the tableā¦I am inspired daily by all of the amazing work being done globally and locally to bring us into coherence and alignment with life 
.
My main critique I feel it is useful to share with you regarding the roles proposal is that the world of crypto/web3/blockchain is for all intents and purposes illegible to the vast majority of people of place who are engaged in regenerative action. Even for those who sense the potential that this ecosystem offers regarding sovereignty, equity and values aligned affiliationsā¦the obstacles to entry are significant. I just wonder if having only digitally native representatives in the leading organizations category can do anything to help erode this obstacle? How might we ensure that non-digitally native ways of accessing and using this infrastructure will be represented in decisions related to deployment of vision, tools and collaboration. It seems important to have representatives in shaping these priorities that have a diversity of worldviews. Just curious if this has been discussed within the development of this regen coordination model?