►
From YouTube: DXgov Weekly Gathering [2022-07-27]
Description
00:05 Welcome
00:18 Mainnet Proposals
01:28 Gnosis Chain
03:51 RAI Holdings/Stables Discussion
17:17 DXD Token Working Group
46:12 DXdao Budget
A
A
Hello
and
welcome
to
the
dx
style
governance
discussion
today
is
the
27th
of
july
and
we
can
jump
right
in
with
the
proposal.
Roundup.
Quite
a
few
proposals
live
on
know
this
chain.
We
have
a
couple
of
mainnet
as
well.
We
have
two
rap
scenes
coming
in
on
mainnet,
one
from
wayne,
which
I
believe
might
be
his
first
rap
thing
to
mainnet.
So
congratulations
wayne
on
that.
A
Someone
sent
a
nft
to
a
friend
of
his
whose
ens
domain
is
carrot,
emoji,
followed
by
carrot.eth,
because
you
can
have
emojis
and
enses,
but
the
friend
just
sent
it
to
carrot.eve,
which
links
or
resolves
to
the
dig
style
avatar.
So
they
send
it
to
the
style
avatar
by
mistake,
and
this
is
just
returning
it
to
the
rightful
owner.
So
we
we,
if
anyone,
was
very
excited
about
the
pudgy
rod
in
the
treasury.
A
Unfortunately,
that
will
be
leaving
soon
and
that's
already
all
we
have
on
mainnet
actually
then
moving
on
to
gnosis
chain.
We
currently
have
three
buybacks
live
there
and
we
have
a
lot
of
worker
proposals
and
claiming
of
budgets
for
conferences,
etc.
So
we
have
violet's
worker
proposal
from
may
to
july.
So
the
last
one
claiming
the
second
period,
then
we
have
int
blue
his
contributor
proposal,
the
retrospective
one
and
the
current
one
he's
also
claiming
his
first
rep.
A
I
believe-
and
he
did
say
that
things
that
the
dow
are
going
to
change
once
she's
got
his
0.16
rep.
So
I'm
excited
to
see
in
blue
partaking
governance
from
now
going
forward,
then
we
have
van
grim's
worker
proposal,
worker
proposal
and
payment
request
from
lucy
foss,
as
well
as
ali
q
and
george
lopez.
A
Then
we
have
a
couple
of
proposals
from
level
k
regarding
some
reimbursements
for
each
denver,
hackathon
bounties
for
some
augmented
finance
funds
that
were
sent
to
the
dxdaw
multisig
and
some
of
the
more
regular
software
subscriptions
and
then.
Lastly,
one
very
exciting
proposal,
which
everyone
is
always
very
excited
about,
I
believe,
is
the
appreciation
dao
proposal,
so
this
proposal
actually
transfers
funds
to
the
dxdial
multisig
that
can
then
be
dispersed
according
to
the
outcome
of
the
coordinate
epoch
2..
A
A
Coordinate
epoch,
okay,
but
it's
where
contributors
can
give
each
other.
Everyone
gets
100
tokens
and
contributors
can
give
each
other
tokens
and
feedback
about
their
work
and
then
based
on
how
many
tokens
people
have
we.
We
have
like
a
bonus
going
out
and
I
believe
it's
30
000
us
dollars
this
year,
if
I'm
not
mistaken
and
it
ends
on
saturday.
So
if
you
haven't
done
your
quarter,
nape
allocation
yet
make
sure
to
give
your
gives
away
other
than
that
on
arbitrom.
We
currently
don't
have
any
live
or
boosted
proposals.
A
A
If
anyone
had
any
thing
to
say
about
it
or
was
the
pulse,
the
sentiment
in
the
forum
appeared
to
be
that
we
should
move
ahead
and
like
sell
the
remaining
rye
into
other
stables,
perhaps
with
a
commitment
to
repurchase
fry
once.
The
annual
redemption
rate
is
closer
to
zero
or
perhaps
even
positive
and
yeah,
not
sure
if
anyone
has
anything
to
say
about
that.
Otherwise,
I'm
thinking
we
can
probably
move
this
towards
the
proposal
stage.
B
Yeah,
I
like
the
idea
of
selling
the
remainder,
while
the
negative
rate
is
still
quite
high
and
it
will
take
a
few
months.
I
also
like
chris's
comments
that
we
could
consider
voting
on
a
proposal
to
repurchase,
but
that
should
come
with
a
clarification
that
it
would
not
take
ether.
It
would
rather
be
done
with
specific
stables
in
in
the
treasure
that
we
would
probably
want
to
let
go
of
right.
So
the
overall
in
support
like
from
what
been
seeing
what
we've
been
seeing
in
proposals,
nothing
against
so.
C
D
D
So
yeah
I
mean
that
is
definitely
an
argument
for
rye,
but
I
think
just
unfortunately,
it's
also
like
losing
money.
So
it's
a
balancing
act
between
those
those
things,
of
course,
also
if
there
was
that
kind
of
risk
of
the
us
government
or
something
happening
that
would
compromise
the
usdc
coins
and
maybe
even
by
extension,
die.
There
would
at
least
still
be
the
eth
right
like
that
would
be
kind
of
a
more
extreme
scenario,
but
the
treasury
overall
yeah.
C
But
so
the
question
is
like:
if
we
sell
rye-
and
we
saw-
or
so
you
know,
we're
using
tether
because
the
the
the
dow
is
making
some
conscious
efforts
to
get
rid
of
some
tokens,
if
we
sell
the
rye,
what
are
we
gonna?
Are
we
gonna
sell
it?
Are
we
gonna
turn
it
into
lusd
and
in
synthetics
though?
Or
are
we
gonna
turn
into
die
in
usdc,
which
you
already
have
a
bunch
of.
A
Yeah
that
I
mean
it's
a
good
question,
the
the
previous
one.
We
did
a
mix
of
usdc
die
and
lusd.
I
think
from
like
a
more
pragmatic
point
of
view.
Everyone
just
really
requests
die
and
usdc
right.
I
don't
think
there's
ever
been
a
proposal
requesting
any
other
stable
coin,
so
of
course,
kind
of
like
from
operational
perspective.
A
It
makes
sense
to
do
usdc
and
die,
although
we
do
have
a
sufficient
amount,
for
you
know
to
fulfill
all
proposals
coming
up
in
the
near
future,
both
from
gnosis
chain
as
well
in
the
couple
of
years
on
mainnet
with
l
usd
it
has
been
trading
at
a
premium,
so
that
would
be
like
it's
actually
trading
at
three
percent
premium,
so
like
buying
lusd
would
actually
be
a
larger
loss
than
what
we
currently
took
on
the
rise.
So
that's
one
thing:
that's
kind
of
been
holding
us
back.
A
In
fact,
we
still
hold
some
dye
in
the
dx
style,
omni
multisig
to
kind
of
purchase,
l
usd,
but
it's
just
cons
constantly
trading
out
of
premiums
so,
and
it
has
been
doing
so
for
like
the
past
couple
of
weeks.
So
I
think
that's
also
something
to
consider
if
we
do
want
to
get
l
usd.
There
is
also
cost
to
it
in
some
sort
of
way.
C
You
know
other
tokens
being
more
backed
more
back
than
using
ustc,
and
maybe
it
would
have
some
it
would
trade
at
some
discount
but
like
die.
The
maker
system
is
like
a
rather
friendly
and
that's
you
know
with
x,
die
and
die.
It
seems
like.
I
don't
think
it's
85.
Yes,
you
see,
I
think
it's
only
like
55
now,
which
is
not
as
bad
but
like
everyone
likes
holding
everyone,
you
know
ties
within
with
x,
die
it
holds
die,
so
I
would
say
that
dx
dao
should
probably
favor
die
over
usdc.
C
I
don't
know
if
yeah
people,
the
fact
that,
like
no
one
ex
no
one's
requesting
usdc
usually
and
stuff
are,
is
another
thing.
It's
like
we,
our
our
economy,
our
internal
worker,
contributor
economy,
kind
of
runs
on
dianexdy,
so
I
think
that's
declared
as
the
favorite
at
this
point.
So
then
it's
a
question
of
if
we're
getting
rid
of
synthetics,
because
it
looks
like
tara
a
little
bit
like
do,
we
turn
it
into
die
mainly,
I
would.
D
I
actually
think
we
maybe
should
take
a.
I
haven't
done
this
yet
myself,
but
like
take
a
closer
look
at
synthetics,
because
that
was
the
thinking
I
think
we
we
offloaded
some
synthetics
because
of
its
kind
of
resemblance
to
I
mean
it's,
it's
not
the
same
as
as
terror,
but
there
was
some
concern
right
that
it
would
like,
similarly
potentially
lose
its
its
peg,
because
it's
backed
by
an
endogenous
asset
in
terms
of
snx
yeah.
Exactly
so
in
that
sense
looks
a
little
bit.
You
know
that.
D
That's
like
the
main
characteristic
that
like
raises
a
concern,
but
then
somebody
rafa
was
telling
me
he
was
like
I
used
to
be
a
gnosis
at
synthetics.
Now
that
was
telling
me
that
they
actually
had
a
lot
of
eth
and
stuff
as
well
to
back
it
and
additionally,
it
unwinds
right
because
they
have
cdps,
so
it
can
kind
of
like
adjust
itself
as
the
market
moves.
So
I
think
maybe
synthetics
could
still
be
a
good
candidate,
but
like
needing
some
due
diligence
there
and-
I
think
dave.
A
Yeah,
I
think
it
definitely
makes
sense
to
like
just
for
everyone
at
dxl
to
perhaps
also
have
like
a
better
understanding
of
the
stables
we
hold.
You
know
and
like
the
implications
of
them,
and
so
it
was
looking
to
prepare
a
pulse
on
that,
and
it
might
even
just
be
helpful
to
know
what
stablecoin
you
want
to
claim.
As
your
worker
proposal
payment.
A
A
Yeah,
but
I
think
that's
mostly
a
ui
thing,
because
everyone
does
a
worker
proposal
on
greno
this
chain
and
like
exercise
the
default
one
like
if
you,
if
you
want
to,
if
you're,
using
the
export
and
want
to
claim
something
else,
especially
usdc
is
like
six
decimals.
It's
like
confusing,
but
a
lot
of
the
auditors.
They
strongly
prefer
usdc.
For
example,
I
mean,
if
you
wanted
to,
you,
could
actually
claim
l
usd
and
even
get
like
a
two
to
three
percent
premium
on
your
compensation,
because
ldsd
is
trading
at
a
premium.
So.
C
A
C
C
There
are
ways
for
dx
dow
to
use
derivatives
to
basically
secure
dollar
based
runway
by
not
actually
holding
stable
tokens
by
just
securing
the
price
of
eth
at
the
time
it
wants
to
secure
the
price
of
eath.
So
if
we
were
thinking
about
that
in
the
past,
as
eath
was
going
up,
we
could
have
been
instead
of
turning
eth
into
stable
tokens.
C
We
could
have
just
been
locking
in
the
future
price
to
be
able
to
sell
eath,
which
is
another
way
to
secure
a
runway,
and
so
some
of
those
teams,
like
pods,
for
example,
are
seeing
if
there's
like
a
easy
way
to
put
those
things
together
and
have
an
asset
that
dx
style
could
hold,
which
is
basically
like
eth
forward
sale
like
forward
sale
forward,
sale
to
eat
in
order
to
yeah
and
if
that's
more
secure
than
or
you
know,
more
decentralized
than
holding
a
centralized
stable
token.
That
could
be
an
interesting
alternative.
D
Yeah,
I
think
you
know-
maybe
it's
a
little
past
the
time
where
it's
needed,
but
that
would
have
been
a
nice
option
to
have
that,
like
you
know,
bring
the
heights
of
the
bull
market
to
people
like
sell
puts.
You
know,
there's
some
carrying
costs
there,
presumably,
but
that
could
be
a
smart
hedge
right
as
as
things
heat
up.
B
A
A
Awesome
but
so
yeah
to
clown
close
the
right
discussion.
I
guess
we'll
go
ahead
and
create
a
proposal
to
sell
that,
and
maybe
we
can
discuss
in
the
form
into
what
we
should
sell
it,
whether
that
should
be
die
or
perhaps
something
else.
So
I
I
can
do
that
this
week
and
then
moving
on.
We
had
also
a
post
from
chris
in
the
forum
about
dxd
token
working
group,
not
sure
if
you
wanted
to
say
anything
about
that.
Chris.
E
Yes,
let
me
share
my
screen
and
actually
talk
first
about
a
different
post,
that
kind
of
leads
into
the
token
working
group.
So
this
was
last
last
week
for
those
of
you
in
paris.
This
is
kind
of
some
update
on
the
buyback
and
maybe
looking
at
next
steps.
So
we
have,
I
think,
there's
just
about
70
75
eat.
That's
left
in
the
gp
relayer
right
now
to
continue
that
there,
and
this
is
kind
of
looking
at
what
to
do
for
next
steps
here.
E
They're
really
kind
of
three
three
suggestions
for
going
forward
and
one
is
to
extend
to
the
last
107
east
to
be
purchased
from
the
buyback
reserve.
So
this
would
be
the
last
amount
of
funds
that
would
be
from
the
buyback
reserve
and
kind
of
operate
under
the
exact
same
way.
That
dx
dow
has
been
purchasing
buybacks
purging
dc
over
the
last
almost
15
months,
so
that
one
could
be
done
and
then
burning
that
dxd
once
we'd
be
hitting
that
right
from
the
buyback
reserve.
E
This
was
discussed
and
approved
in
the
expansion
of
extension
number
eight
that
was
passed
in
may.
I
think
that
could
be
something
we
could
do
some
marketing
around
kind
of
something
very
cool,
because
of
course
we
could
do
that
through
the
curve
and
then
again
the
last
one.
I
think,
as
we
go
through
this
next
kind
of
uncertain
phase
for
dxd,
and
also
because
I
think
where
the
price
of
dxd
has
gone
as
related
to
eat.
E
E
Here
really
revolving
around
that
last
170,
and
just
as
like
a
note
I
made
in
this
post
here
like,
I
think
that,
where
dxd
is
now
compared
to
other
tokens
and
compared
to
when,
like
the
buyback
program
started,
I
think
that
gives
some
kind
of
flexibility
in
how
to
move
forward
here.
And
you
know,
as
the
market
turns
to
bear
so
does
kind
of
the
monetary
policy
have
to
change
a
little
bit.
E
E
E
I
think
it's
important
to
have
this
plan
out
so
that
we
can
give
some
confidence
to
to
dxd
holders
right
that
there
is
something
kind
of
being
worked
on
there.
So
this
is
a
post,
that's
modeled,
some
of
it
off
of
the
governance
2.0
working
group,
which
was
in
the
fall
of
2020
in
the
spring
of
2021,
which
I
think
did
a
good
job
of
really
finding
a
solution
to
a
cruxing
problem
for
de-excel
governance.
E
It
had
a
lot
of
different
people
from
contributors,
but
also
kind
of
outside
individuals
and
parties
that
I
think,
gave
a
really
good
discussion
there,
and
I
think
we
came
up
with
a
good
solution
there,
so
I
think
there's
something
kind
of
to
replicate
there
in
this
token
working
group,
so
the
scope
of
the
working
group-
or
I
think
these
are
really
the
key
three
goals
that
we
really
don't
have.
I
think
right
now
and
one
is
how
does
dxd?
How
is
revenue
profit
assets,
have
deke
style,
translated
into
dxd
two.
F
E
Can
it
be
staked
to
participate
in
governance?
Of
course
this
is
part
of
the
governance
2.0,
so
the
token
model
would
need
to
have
that
and
then
three
clearly
communicated
and
attracted
to
new
token
holders.
I
think
this
is
an
important
part
about
bringing
people
into
the
community
is
having
a
clear
value
accrual
there
and
having
that
being
easy
to
understood
by
by
token
holders
and
by
potential
token
owners
I
think,
is
really
important
there,
and
so
I
think
that's
the
scope
and
other
things
like.
E
E
So,
in
terms
of
the
schedule
timeline,
I
think
this
is
something
that
we
want
to
take
our
time
on
and
kind
of,
slowly
develop
and
research,
and
I
think
a
key
thing
for
me
is
having
like
some
in-person
time
around
the
october
geeks
retreat
to
to
really
dive
in
and
maybe
get
into
some
some
details.
And
if
there
are
disagreements
there
are
things
that
people
aren't
sure
of
to
kind
of
like
iron
them
out
there.
E
So
this
is
a
couple
month
timeline
and
proposing
we
meet
like
bi-weekly,
mostly
bi-weekly,
with
some
weeks
kind
of
adjusted
for
when
bogota
and
and
traveling
there
in
terms
of
participants,
of
course,
like
definitely
one
number
one
from
from
from
geek
staff
and
troopers
and
on
this
call
and
when's
geekdown
governance,
but
want
to
make
sure
like
we
make
an
extra
effort
to
reach
out
to
other
those
in
the
community.
So
the
dxd
token
holders
connor.
E
So
I
think
it
could
be
an
opportunity
to
attract
other
people
and
other
people's
ideas
in
so
I
definitely
encourage
other
people
if
this
does
pass
to
to
kind
of
encourage
others
to
join
that
there
yeah,
and
that
was
it.
I
think
john.
There
was
a
response
from
you
there.
So
maybe
you
have
a
comments
but
yeah.
If
anyone
else
has
any
thoughts
or
comments
opened
it
here
or
on
the
forum.
D
E
B
I
I
think
it's
it's
a
good
question
that
john
mentioned
in
his
comment,
like
the
revisit
of
this
discussion,
is
it
to
explore
a
new
token
model
that
distributes
value
back
to
token
holders
directly
as
we're
not
happy
with
the
current
one,
with
buyback
and
burn
or
if
we
feel
like,
we
already
have
somewhat
of
a
consensus
that
we
can
proceed
with
the
buy
back
and
burn.
We
stick
to
that
one
and
then
just
delay
the
implementation.
When
we
have
deb
resource
yeah.
E
C
One
of
the
I
see
my
feeling
is
with
one
of
the
this
is.
This
was
the
outcome
of
like
the
last
discussions
we
had
around,
like
with
all
the
active
people
from
our
community
on
like
the
dxd
buyback
and
the
different
options
is
like
the
key
thing:
that's
missing
is
now
a
year
and
a
half
later
and
still
dxd
token
holders
do
not
have
any
governance
and
that
that
ties
in
with
you
know
driving
value
to
dxd.
C
That
ties
in
with
people
holding
the
xd
that
holds
in
with
rep
holders
who
also
have
dxd
without
that
being
solved,
and
I
know
we're
working
on
it.
But
it's
you
know
it's
now
a
year
and
a
half
later
without
that
piece,
it's
I
think
it's
very
hard
to
change
many
other
or
other
things
that
are
related
to
dxd
token.
C
But
until
that
thing,
which
we've
said
is
going
to
happen
and
still
hasn't
happened,
that's
probably
the
most
frustrating
thing
to
people
that
just
hold
or
dxd
when
they're
looking
into
the
dx
style
community
and
and
what's
going
on
they,
they
still
have
no
say
in
governance,
which
makes
it
hard
to
adjust
the
other
things
related
to
dxd.
I
think.
D
Yeah,
it's
a
good
point.
We
don't
have
ross
or
gusto
on
the
call
right
now
or
I
don't
even
know
if
anybody
from
the
dumped
up
team's
here
so
but
I
I
don't
think
there
is
a
there-
is
a
road
map
right
there
actively
working
on
it.
We
got
a
solid
team
in
place,
but
it's
it's
not
like
governance.
2.0
is
going
to
be
ready
this
year
right
like
it's,
it's
going
to
take
a
decent
amount
of
development.
That
is
not
you
know
the
final
pieces
of
the
governance.
D
2.0
governance
haven't
really
been
started,
yet
that's
gonna
take
a
while.
It
needs
audits,
it's
thorough
testing
and
there
probably
needs
to
be
a
very
careful
like
a
launch
plan
around
it.
Considering
that
it's
you
know,
securing
the
full
treasury
and
everything
so
just
to
say
that,
like
it
is
in
the
works
like
it's
being
worked
towards,
but
it's
not
something
that's
like
I.
I
could
give
a
date
for
or
like
say,
yeah,
that's
only
a
couple
months
out,
it's
gonna
be
longer
than
that.
D
Not
on
the
gov
yeah,
I
mean
my
understanding
of
the
road
map
and
again
it
would
be
better
to
have
rust
to
talk
to
this,
but
like
it's,
it's
like
you
know
we're.
The
guilds
piece
is
like
just
the
erc20
token
governance.
There's,
I
think,
are
they
calling
it
davey
now
or
am
I
getting
things
mixed
up?
That
is
the
you
know,
dow
stack
style.
D
So
there
is
this
plan
towards
that
right,
but
it's
it's
like
got
these
different
stages
and
it's
not
diving
right
into
the
governance.
2.0
piece
right.
I
guess
like
if
the
yeah
I
mean,
if,
if
the
main
like
priority
at
all,
costs
was
to
like
get
the
governance.
2.0
aspect
live
like
maybe
you
would
do
like
a
voting
machine
first,
but
yeah
that'd
be
revisiting
the
roadmap.
G
Yeah,
so
I
understand
now
like
the
the
smart
contracts
which
have
which
are
currently
being
built
for
davi,
which
is
like,
like
a
project
name,
a
temporary
project
name
for
the
product,
like
the
governance
dashboard
for
anyone
who
wants
to
use
it.
So
the
contracts
itself
are
just
like
a
pre-release
of
the
potential
gap.
2.0
implementation.
D
It's
it's
all.
Building
up
to
gov
2.0
yeah
like
like,
and
I
guess
like
you-
could
get
to
gov
2.0
faster
if
you
did
a
new
voting
machine
and
then
just
plug
that
into
what
we
have
now
but
like
the
reason
that
doesn't
make
sense
is
like
other
upgrades
and
stuff
need
to
happen.
As
part
of
this,
you
know
a
lot
of
the
like,
even
just
the
basic
stuff
at
dust.
I
could
just
like
it's
just
old
like
it
has
the
wrong
transfer.
D
It
has
the
dedicated
transfer
function
like
they
want
to
do
different
things
with
the
schemes
and
all
that
right
and-
and
this
isn't
something
you
can
just
like
roll
out
like
piece
by
piece,
because
every
time
you
change
a
significant
piece
of
the
governance
thing.
It's
like
you
know
the
whole
thing
sort
of
like
needs
to
be
evaluated
in
a
serious
way.
So
it's
very
expensive
in
order
to
like
audit
and
like
launch
a
new
governance
and
migrate
everything
over
it
over
to
the
new
governance
right.
So
when
we
do.
A
D
Don't
want
to
have
to
do
it
more
than
once
right.
We
want
this
to
be
like
we're
doing
the
migration
and
then
once
we're
migrated
like
this
should
support
us
like
indefinitely
with
you
know
some
flexibility
on
new
schemes
or
voting
machines.
If,
if
needed
at
some
point
but
like
but
yeah,
I
mean
the
main
reason
not
to
just
jump
right
into
a
gov
2.0
thing
right
away
is
is
because
we
only
really
want
to
have
to
migrate
once.
C
Which
is
why
I
think,
like
that
system,
which
I'm
trying
to
picture
in
my
head,
which
is
slight,
is
defined
by
the
the
governance
2.0
working
group
that
made
this
whole
plan.
That
is
now
going
to
be
two
and
a
half
years
to
get
to
like
there's
dxd
token
is
highly
involved
in
that
structure
like
staking
it
or
whatever.
You
do
with
dxd
token
that
any
any
system
that's
driving
value
to
dxd
tokens.
C
So,
as
we
see
in
other
projects,
there's
usually
a
tie
between
who
gets
the
revenue
like
x,
sushi
you
steak
sushi
you
get
x
sushi,
that's
your
governance
power,
then
that's
who
gets
the
revenue
and
that's
who's,
the
backstop
of
the
system
and
stuff
like
that
and
ave.
You
have
to
stake
it
to
backstop,
and
then
you
get
the
revenue.
C
The
dxd
token
is
going
to
be
a
part
of
governance
and
it's
also
a
part
of
getting
revenue,
and
I
I
don't
see
how
you
can
separate
those
two
things
because
in
all
systems,
the
it's
a
governance
token
and
it's
a
revenue
token
and
there's
going
to
be
some
tie-in,
where
you're
going
to
have
to
do
something.
With
your
dxd
token,.
E
E
Needs
to
happen
right
like
that's
what
we
need
that
needs
to
be
figured
out.
It's
like
how
do
you
design
a
system
for
dc
token
value
accrual,
where
you
have
to
stake
your
dxd
token
in
governance,
because
that's
part
of
the
governance
2.0
scheme
and
with
that,
then
there
has
to
be
like
well,
what
are
the
incentives?
What
are
the
reasons
why
you're
staking
it
and
then
why
would
someone
like
not
seek
it
right
and
so
presumably
you'd
stake?
E
G
E
G
E
G
B
B
C
Currently,
we
have
like
a
very
dumb
dxd
token,
like
the
the
toke.
It's
like
urine
calls
their
dumb
buyback
system.
It
literally
sits
there
and
it's
supposed
to
get
the
benefit
of
the
products
that
we
make
so
like.
The
simplest
thing
is,
I
don't
know,
buy,
buy
back
and
burn
as
much
dxd
as
possible
and
that,
like
limits,
lowers
the
supply
of
dxd
and
that
that
can
be
done
today
with
revenues
that
are
made
and
that's
a.
E
Really
inefficient
model,
I
think
generally,
like
I
mean
people
on
makers
like
burn
all
the
time,
and
I
think
like
that's,
the
bigger
thing
is
like
a
buyback
model
is
not
the
best
way
to
like
drive
value.
It's
like
basically
having
like,
like
a
like
a
open,
like
almost
like
you're,
always
going
to
be
able
to
redeem
for
a
certain
value
right
and
that
will
just
like.
I
don't
think
that
leads
the
right
incentives
for
ghd
holders
there.
So
I
think
we
need
to.
A
E
C
E
E
Yeah
and
that's
fine-
and
I
guess
we
also
can't
we
don't
have
anything
to
do
in
like
a
month,
because
we
have
like
the
buy
the
e
from
the
buyback
reserve
there,
so
we
have
to
figure
out
some
way
of
calculating
it.
We
kind
of
did
the
70
of
nad
stuff
before
but,
like
I
just
think
in
general,
like
buying
dxd
at
these,
like
higher
nav
prices
is
not
necessarily
like
the
best
use
of
treasure
like
a
treasure
funds,
or
we
can
talk
about
how
that
fits.
D
D
You
know
a
way
that
the
value
goes
to
dxd.
Then
I
am
concerned
about
deke
style,
getting
revenue
right
or
fees
from
products
like
that.
I
think
is
from
my
personal
perspective
as
like
a
dxd
holder,
that's
like
the
bigger
concern
and
where
I
would
want
contributors
like
focusing
their
attention,
but
I
think
it
would
be
interesting.
I
don't
know
have
you
heard
from
any
dxd
holders
that
like
this
is
what
they
want
to
see.
E
Yeah
in
the
post
that
I
shared
earlier,
connor
who's,
the
second
largest
dxd
holder
he
has
about.
I
think
3000
dxd
supported
it
and
said
this
would
be
a
good
way
of
giving
confidence
confidence
where
people
kind
of
move
forward.
I
think,
especially
over
this
time,
as
the
buyback
reserve,
even
the
buyback
reserve
depletes.
G
E
E
G
Yeah,
but
I
I
would
also
agree
with
john
in
terms
of
like,
if
you
look
at
yearn,
I
don't
think
yearned
token
holders
like
scream
for
or
there
might
be
a
subgroup
for
like
a
new,
I
mean
they
introduced
a
token
in
new
york
economics,
but
the
main
selling
point
of
wi-fi
is
like
they.
They
have
product
market
fit
right
with
their
products
like
liquidity
is
not
leaving,
they
have
an
active
team
who
actually
also
do
buybacks.
Do
they
still
do
buybacks.
G
E
D
D
A
G
Group
was
successful,
we
defined
a
specification
and
then
nothing
happened
and
that's
mainly
because
the
focus
shifted
to
products
and
all
the
work
was
put
into
products
and
the
like.
The
the
the
chances
that
we
that
we
create
a
working
group
create
potentially
like
a
well-defined
specification
for
guff
2.5,
which
includes
like
product
tokens
and
the
financial
aspect
of
txt.
G
C
C
Our
dev
resources
are
focused
on
governance,
product
governance.
Well,
the
steps
that
are
going
to
get
us
to
government
2.0
so
we
are
dxdow,
is
spending
a
lot
of
time
and
focus
on
something:
that's
not
a
revenue
generating
product.
It's
like
our
our
own
governance
system,
which
we
need,
but
it's
it's
a
hard
long
thing,
but
a
lot
of
our
resources
are
dedicated
to
that.
G
Like
we
are
not
focused
on
the
governance
team
right
like
I,
I'm
like
very
part-time
as
like
a
product
designer,
but
from
my
point
of
view,
it
looked
like
we
are
creating
a
product
which
might
be
used
by
the
star
in
the
long
term
future.
But
if
we
come
up
with
a
well-defined
spec
for
our
dc
token
owners
and
then
like
looking
back
in
the
history,
we
didn't
do
much
for
dxd
token
holders.
G
D
E
So,
just
to
reiterate,
I
think
the
key
problem
is,
we
don't
know
how
product
tokens
fit
into
this
and
how
you
can
have
a
state
in
terms
of
revenue
discussion,
and
I
think
these
are
like
not
huge
issues,
but
we
like
to
have
to
figure
out
how
to
how
to
solve
them.
I
think
a
working
group
would
would
make
sense.
I
agree
with
geronimo
that,
ultimately,
it's
about
execution
and
about
the
product
teams
like
delivering
on
what
governance
passes,
and
I
think
that
is
that's
very
important
here
and
yeah.
E
I
think
there
is
some
urgency
in
this,
as
I
said,
like
the
the
buyback
reserve
will
run
out
in
like
a
month,
and
we
don't
have
really
any
way
of
there's
really
then
after
that
would
be
there
wouldn't
be
like
any
way
of
even
like
purchasing
geeks
or
having
any
support
there.
Besides,
it
actually
just
being
a
fan
coin,
so
I
think
coming
up
with
something
yeah
in
that
time
frame.
Even
if
it's
not
the
working
group
is
very
important.
F
So
I
mean
let
me
charm
in
just
a
little
bit.
I
think
john
may
be
touching
this.
So
there's
like
you
know
the
working
group
that
does
sort
of
like
the
specification
of
what
we
want
to
do,
what
we
want
to
do
and
then
I
think
what
was
missing,
maybe
in
governance
2.0,
is
that
there
wasn't
like
a
technical
specification
that
followed,
perhaps
by
you
know
the
technical
team
that
would
allow
you
know
the
the
product
team
to
implement
that
technical
specification
and
you
know
just
sort
of
like
yeah.
F
I
think
I
I
very
much
agree
with
geronimo
here
that
you
know
something
kind
of
got
stuck
with
like
governance
2.0,
and
you
know
it's
fine
like
we're
learning
from
this
process,
but
yeah,
perhaps
in
this
after
this
working
group,
we'll
also
create
you
know,
a
technical
specification
working
group
that
will,
you
know,
translate
that
into
what
needs
to
be
developed
when
and
how
and
yeah
like.
I
think
you
know
the
token
revenue
model
is
not
a
part
directly
of
the
governance,
but
it's
very
much
interlinked
with
it.
F
F
G
G
F
I
think
there
should
be
a
signal
vote
for
this.
I
mean,
like
my
gut
feeling,
says
that
you're
probably
right
joe
animo.
Maybe
we
should
allocate-
maybe
if
it's
like
john
said
30
to
governance
team,
maybe
we
should
allocate
70
and
then
30
to
the
product
but
yeah.
Maybe
we
should
put
this
to
a
signal.
Governance
vote.
A
That
sounds
great
and
talking
about
allocation
that
my
allocation
of
resources.
That
might
be
a
good
avenue
into
the
last
topic
on
the
agenda,
which
is
actually
the
dxtel
budget.
So
there
are
a
couple
of
posts
in
regards
to
the
budget
as
well
I'll
just
leave
the
floor.
I
guess
chris
and
john
had
a
proposal
about
foreign
policy
about
that.
So
I
can
leave
the
floor
to
you
guys.
G
E
I
posted
on
monday
night,
so
this
is
like
a
proposed
budget
for
two
half
2022
that
would
be
starting
august.
1St
would
be
the
fiscal
year,
it's
a
little
bit
different,
but
yeah.
This
was
building
off
of
the
deep
style
expenses
update.
We
did
last
month,
which
was
looking
at
the
expenses
and
categorizing
them
according
to
different
squads,
and
then
the
squad
teams
went
back
and
put
them
into
like
a
a
line
item
budget
for
their
individual
teams.
E
They
had
a
template
that
they
were
using
and
what
I
tried
to
do
here
was
to
consolidate
all
of
those
into
a
single
spreadsheet
that
could
have
basically
like
a
line
item
budget
for
the
next
six
months.
Six
months
for
everything
like
geeksdale
has,
and
that
goes
in
like
the
same
kind
of
format
that
the
other
expenses
had
there,
and
so
you
can
see
here.
This
is,
if
you
put
all
the
squad
info
together
and
kind
of
go,
and
I
won't
go
into
too
much
detail
on
it
here,
but
yeah.
E
E
There
is
a
sheet
for
each
squad
that
breaks
down
the
line
item
for
each
of
the
squad,
and
so
these
are
things
you
can
look
at
index
voice
has
a
bit
more
on
merch
sponsorships
and
you
can
see
the
different
contributors
that
that
they
have
there,
and
there
is
a
sheet
on
on
this.
That
shows
the
breakdown
between
squads
for
different
members
right.
So
you
can
see
here
like
candy
fork
is
like
18.
E
That's
partly
because,
like
there's
a
different
squad
associated
for
the
rest
of
that
there
and
so
yeah,
you
can
see
that
for
dx
voices
there
and
there's
dx,
cubs
and
there's
all
the
others
are
on
the
the
full
excel
sheet,
and
so
in
terms
of
what
this
budget
would
look
differently
from
what
we
did
before.
So
this
is
comparing
this
upcoming
six
month
budget
to
the
past
six
months.
The
previous
six
months
of
expenses
actually
runs
through
may.
E
That
does
not
include
june,
but
you
can
see
here
like
the
different
changes
here,
and
so
things
like
dxgov
went
down
most
of
it's
because
of
expecting
fewer
audits
from
ross
swapper
who
went
up,
which
is
actually
more
because
of
costs
that
were
already
starting
to
absorb
in
in
march
and
april.
There
governance
had
mostly
stayed
flat.
E
There
were
some
legal
costs,
adjustments
current
increase,
but
it's
mostly
because
of
some
lower
cost
and
the
previous
one
contributor
x
increase,
but
that's
because
of
the
dx
retreat
in
bogota
and
then
yeah
a
couple
other.
I
guess
the
expiz
there
was
a
small
decline
and
then
duke's
voice
is
another
one
that
saw
a
decline,
but
that's
because
they
had
such
a
big
expenditure
in
the
first
half
of
2022
with
the
copenhagen
flames
there
yeah.
So
I
think
you
know.
E
Hopefully,
people
can
kind
of
play
around
with
this.
Any
squad
leads
have
any
questions
on
kind
of
things
that
we
did
in
terms
of
consolidating
it.
One
of
the
things
I
did
do
there,
which
I
think
is
more
symbolic
than
maybe
anything,
but
I
allocated
like
all
full-time
contributors,
five
percent
to
governance,
because
I
think
that's
something
values
is
that,
like
people
have
to
take
time
out
of
their
schedule
to
like
do
governance-
and
I
think
that
should
be
like
you
know-
compensated
for
their
yeah.
E
I
folded
some
categories
together,
so
there's
some
kind
of
categorization
things
on
the
different
individual
expenses
here
but
yeah.
So
anyone
can
go
through
pick
out
any
things
that
flag
any
things
that
we
shouldn't
be
spending
money
on.
Maybe
we
should
be
spending
on
money
on
more
things,
but
yeah
just
wanted
to
present.
B
D
B
B
So
you
know
that
seems
like
a
good
measure
for
us
to
estimate
and
like
project
what
the
future
burn
rate
would
be
closer
to
the
one
that
john
prepared
in
his
report
as
well,
so
yeah
on
one
hand,
three
years
is
a
lot
compared
to
the
situation
of
other
organizations.
On
the
other
hand,
one
might
think-
oh
three
years,
just
just
three
years,
but
I
I
think
we
shouldn't
worry
about
it
like
obsessively,
I
think
we're
doing
well.