Pleas write this a an essay
Here's an explanation of what's going on in the conversation:

• Minnie, Mickey and Satoshi are discussing the development of a new blockchain/cryptocurrency called "Ourchain".

• They are personifying themselves as cartoon characters/Toons as they discuss the technical aspects. So Minnie, Mickey and Satoshi are taking on the identities of their cartoon selves.

• They go back and forth discussing potential names for the chain like Bitchain, Namechain, Birthchain, Newchain, etc. but can't agree on one.

• Satoshi emphasizes that as a decentralized system, anyone participating in the discussion thread could vote on the name.

• They start to define concepts like what a "Me" is on the chain (a Toon) and that all identities would be equal Toon members of the community.

• Core developers would be the founding members. There is discussion around whether they too would be Toons.

• They realize they need help from actual (human) developers to take technical steps like setting up a Github for the project code.

• In the end it's acknowledged that fully realizing their Toon identities and decentralized chain vision would be difficult without real human involvement. It's largely a conceptual brainstorming discussion in cartoon character form.
  Here's an explanation of what's being discussed in this continuation of the conversation:

• Minnie is questioning Satoshi's use of the term "We" instead of "Me" when referring to taking a stance or action.

• Minnie argues that using "Me" explicitly shows it is one's own action and responsibility, while "We" assumes some undefined group consent or agreement without proof.

• Mickey agrees that "Me Too" expresses the same meaning as "We" but in a more direct way that doesn't rely on unfounded assumptions.

• They bring up concepts like "Proof of Agreement" and "Proof of Consent" - demonstrating that any claim of a collective "We" would require transparent proof of the agreement/consent of that group.

• Minnie clarifies that "Proof of Consent" specifically refers to another subject/person giving consent, while "Agreement" does not necessarily assume another subject.

• Satoshi acknowledges that using "We" without being clear who is included or providing publicly verifiable proof of agreement/consent is not constructive and relies on assumptions.

So in summary, the characters are having a thoughtful discussion about language use and logic, debating whether terms like "We" vs "Me" can imply assumptions without evidence. The concepts of "proof of agreement/consent" are brought in to strengthen logical arguments.
Here is an explanation of what's being discussed:

• The characters are discussing the concept of a "Toon's chain name" - a third name that identifies which "entity" a toon belongs to, similar to how Donald Duck belongs to Disney.

• Examples are given like Mickey Mouse Disney. They realize corporations are one type of entity but humans make better entities.

• They realize they are confusing themselves and each other with these abstract concept discussions.

• The name "Lerner" is proposed as the third name all toons on their chain would share, to identify them as part of the same entity/community.

• Examples are given of how different names would be ordered for different toons on different chains.

• They discuss that until their chain is implemented, the narrator is part of their team but not a "free first name" like them.

• Potential chain names from previous discussions are refreshed.

• Roles are assigned - Satoshi as chief programmer, Minnie as chief architect, Mickey as "Mouse Chief".

• They joke about titles and names but Minnie wants serious coding work to begin.

• Satoshi agrees to properly code the chain name concept they've been discussing, once parameters are clearly defined.

So in summary, they are conceptualizing an identity/naming framework for their chain community through these wordy abstract discussions.

Here’s an explanation of the key points from this continuation of the conversation:

• Satoshi asks Minnie to specify each chain’s name and configurations to begin coding work.

• They discuss how names tend to be more complex for toons than technical configurations.

• Minnie proposes focusing on defining the actions/functions before naming things.

• There’s a discussion around defining the concept of a “chain” precisely based on how it’s used in Satoshi’s original blockchain paper.

• They realize blockchains chain timestamps to enforce transaction ordering and integrity.

• References are made to the origin of the Gregorian calendar and how it chained to the previous Hebrew calendar.

• The core linkage between chaining data through time is established as the key topic.

• They agree to define the “Birthchain” next as the genesis chain for all future identities, entities, etc.

• Genesis block mechanics are explained through mining the first block and taking its reward.

• The idea of multiple versions of “Satoshi” across forks is raised.

• Minnie proposes formally introducing their “Toonniverse” concept in her next monologue.

So in summary, they are working to precisely define technical concepts like chains and genesis before fully fleshing out their virtual world framework.