►
From YouTube: Delegate Office Hours | Project Based Budgeting Proposal
Description
The Delegate Office Hours call is hosted by the Governance Communications Core Unit in collaboration with Recognized Delegates of MakerDAO.
The call aims to bring together all delegates and discuss recent events, governance activity, and other domains relative to governance and delegation.
https://forum.makerdao.com/t/delegate-office-hours-6-includes-poll-for-discussion-topic/17123
A
There
we
go:
okay,
welcome
everybody
to
the
delegate
office
hours
here.
Thank
you
all
for
joining
us.
We've
got
quite
a
crowd
here
today,
and
so
let
me
go
ahead
and
finish
admitting
a
lot
of
folks
here
and
so
yeah,
my
name
thomas
floyd,
with
golf
comms
again.
Thank
you
for
joining
us
today,
the
delegate
office
hours.
We
were
going
to
be
focusing
on
the
project
based
budgeting.
Thank
you
for
juan
ses
for
joining
us
here
today
to
talk
about
that.
A
We
put
our
poll
out
earlier
in
the
week
and
it
looks
like
we've
got
this
a
great
topic
to
discuss.
I
know
that
we're
also
going
to
be
discussing
this
on
our
gnr
call
after
this,
but
that
that's
what
we're
going
to
be
focused
on
here
today
and
during
the
call,
I
certainly
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
good
engagement.
A
Please
use
your
chat
function
feature
so
that
and
and
your
raised
hand
feature
as
well,
so
that
we
can
get
everyone
involved
if
you
have
any
questions
along
the
way
with
that
said,
I'd
like
to
hand
this
over
to
juan
and
juan
is
going
to
talk
to
us
about
project-based
budget
reallocation.
We've
got
his
slides
up,
hope,
everybody
can
see
them
and
I
will
let
juan
go
ahead
and
and
take
it
away.
A
But
before
that,
let
me
let
me
just
let
me
also
add
too,
that
we
want
to
be
mindful
of
time,
and
so
we've
got
the
gnr
call
at
the
top
of
the
hour
and
so
we'll
get
going
here
so
juan.
Thank
you
for
joining
us.
If
you
will.
B
B
So
one
of
the
things
that
we
noticed
lately
is
that
the
conversations
are
very
much
around
the
people
instead
of
of
the
of
the
projects
or
the
things.
So
we
came
up.
So
this
is
a
collaboration
of
a
lot
of
people,
but
we
came
up
with
the
project-based
budgeting
to
to
help
guide
these
conversations
and
to
give
some
voice
back
to
the
mkr
holders,
so
I'll
just
go
quickly
through
the
slides.
B
Let
me
know
if
there's
any
questions
or
something
is
not
something-
that's
not
clear
and
we
can
hopefully
clarify
that,
but
basically
what
mcare
holders
want
is
value
right.
So,
ideally,
that's
that's
what
the
the
governance
should
produce.
So
it's
vote
towards
the
creation
of
of
value,
and
we
have
always
the
three
legs.
So
the
first
one
is
capital.
Second,
one
is
workforce
and
the
third
one
is
work
on
the
capital
side.
B
On
the
workforce
side
maker
task
care,
though,
about
getting
the
best
teams
to
delivering
the
the
high
quality,
so
attracting
good
developers
should
be
important
as
well,
and
also
enabling
this
top
talent
to
contribute
to
contribute
immediately,
meaning
that
they
are
able
to
come
and
start
working
on
something.
Instead
of
dealing
with
a
lot
of
bureaucracy
focusing
on
work
and
on
the
work
side,
we
already
saw
this
with
the
with
rooney's
proposal.
It
has
his
proposal.
B
There's
this
will
to
do
works
towards
less
complexity,
get
better
measurements,
so
the
kpis
initiative
from
strategic
finance
came
up
and
take
steps
towards
a
future-proof
solution.
So
in
this
case
we're
thinking
about
how
can
we
prepare
also
to
to
be
endgame
compatible?
If
that
was
what
the
end
care
holders
want.
B
So
with
that
in
mind,
there's
this
important
question
that
we
cannot
answer
as
of
today,
which
is
how
much
is
is
maker
spending
on
the
protocol
and
how
much
is
it
spending
on
the
dow-
and
this
is
extremely
important,
because
one
thing
is
directly
producing
value
and
making
the
protocol
better
with
features
with
integrations
with
the
uis,
with
a
lot
of
different
things
and
the
other
one
is
like:
how
much
are
we
spending
in
running
the
dow?
B
B
So
that's
a
that's
a
very
important
question
that
we
should
always
keep
in
mind
and
with
that
said,
how?
How
do
we
identify
the
work
and
and
how
do
maker
dao
is
able
to
fund
the
work
so
first
of
all
identifying
it
and
then
finding
it?
That's
that's
quite
important.
B
So
if
we
were
to
imagine
this
or
to
explain
how
maker
works
to
someone
that
has
no
clue,
this
is
probably
what
they
would
imagine
it's
like.
Okay,
so
the
maker
holders
have
some
kind
of
vision,
potentially
competing
missions,
let's
not
get
into
that
at
least
not
yet,
and
they
will
be
directing
the
the
work
right
so
game
care
holders
or
the
delegates.
B
In
this
case
they
will
be
the
ones
that
are
directing
the
work
or
change
it
through
project
or
through
any
type
of
of
way
of
of
deciding
which,
which
works
should
be
funded
and
that
work
should
produce
the
value.
B
So
this
is
a
bit
what
the
dream
is
or
or
what
maybe
it
should
be,
and
what
we
find
nowadays
is
that
the
tools
available
to
them
care
holders
to
control
the
work
or
the
value
being
produced
are
four
well,
it's
actually
two
one
of
them
is
the
the
mipset
mid-3940
and
41,
and
I
have
a
huge
responsibility
there
and
the
other
one
is
is
the
55,
which
was
the
the
special
purpose
fund,
so
the
the
first
one
is
really
about
approving
or
so
onboarding
or
off-boarding
core
units,
with
some
kind
of
a
statement
or
a
vision,
and
this
potentially
has
a
budget
allocated
to
it
with
a
facilitator.
B
So
what
we're
saying
is
a
core
unit
comes
up
with
a
dream:
they
want
money,
they
want
to
build
value,
and
we
say
yes,
we
should
we
should
give
them.
We
should
give
them
the
budget
or
not
based
on
if
we
like
or
not
the
mandate,
and
if
we
like
the
people
behind
that
and
the
other
one
is
the
special
performance
fund
which
is
largely
being
unused.
So
there's
there's
another
topic
to
consider
there,
but
what
what
this
situation
creates?
B
That
the
workforce
is
between
em
care
holders
and
the
work
is
that
the
core
unit
works
almost
as
a
black
box,
so
it
has
full
control
over
the
work
being
done,
including
prioritization
features,
maintenance,
keeping
the
lights
on.
So
everything
that's
being
done
goes
through
a
co-unit
and
the
core
unit
is
the
one
that's
deciding
what
should
be
done
or
not.
B
B
So
you
get
this
these
weird
things
and
conversation
where,
on
the
one
hand,
you
have
people
being
frustrated
because
they
don't
get
enough
enough
say
in
the
direction
and
on
the
other
hand,
you
have
core
units
that
are
looking
for
this
type
of
direction
and
cannot
really
find
it.
We
can
speak
about
the
mip
13,
which
is
the
declaration
of
intent,
but
this
is
not.
This
doesn't
not
truly
work
as
it
works
today.
It's
more
like
yeah
should
make
her
work
on
this.
Yes,
no
should
it
be
a
priority?
B
Yes,
no,
but
it's
never
clear
how
the
implementation
would
work.
So
so
that's
not
really
a
tool
form
care
holders
to
to
have
a
say
on
this,
and
with
the
with
this,
with
this
black
box
or
core
unit
in
the
middle,
we
get
two
types
of
of
markets
with
different,
with
different
conversations
where
the
value
is
not
really
measured.
B
So
in
the
bull
market
example,
if
bm
care
holders
want
to
fund
some
cool
new
project
because
they
think
that
it
might
bring
value
the
way
it
works
is
that
we
find
another
community
to
do
that.
B
So
there
have
been
in
the
past
some
some
delegates
and
I'm
potentially
thinking
about
ultra
shoopy,
it's
one
of
them,
but
several
have
have
brought
up.
Should
we
review
what
the
current
teams
are
doing
and-
and
usually
the
comment
is
like
man-
this
is
a
growth
market.
We
should
be
thinking
about
growing
and
not
cutting
costs.
So
again,
the
conversation
is
not
about
measuring
the
value
or
how
things
are
being
done,
but
instead
of
should
we
grow
or
not,
which
is
not
exactly
what
what
measuring
the
value
is
about.
B
So
this
is
the
bull
market
example
right.
It's
like
oh
just
fun,
more
more
core
units,
let's
throw
money
at
the
problem
and
hopefully
something
will
stick
and
something
will
work
and
then
nearly
well.
I
don't
know
how
many
months
ago
now,
but
so
the
market
shifted,
revenues
went
down,
and
this
is
a
bit
what
happened
he's
like?
We
should
cut
all
the
budgets.
Let's
do
it
now
we're
going
bankrupt.
This
is
the
worst
thing
in
the
world.
B
How
do
we
do
it
and
if
a
core
unit
comes
and
say
hey,
we
have
this
really
cool
project.
We
think
that
it
brings
a
lot
of
value
to
to
maker.
The
answer
is
like
no
right
now:
it's
not
the
time
we
want
to
cut
budgets.
The
uncertainty
is
hurting
the
the
workforce.
B
What's
going
to
happen,
we
need
to
break
even
so
there's
all
these
conversations
that
are
are
really
happening
and
again
the
mcat
holders
have
no
way
of
directing
the
work,
it's
more
like
more
workforce
or
less
workforce,
and
they
potentially
do
almost
what
they
want.
B
So
the
current
conversation
as
I
was
mentioning
it's
a
bit
like
this,
it's
amcar
holders
being
frustrated
that
value
is
not
being
produced
and,
on
the
other
hand,
you
have
core
units
being
like.
Well,
we
don't
have
a
clear
vision.
We
don't
even
know
what
you
want.
We've
been
mandated
with
our
map39.
We
said
we
were
going
to
work
on
this,
we're
working
on
this.
B
So
what's
your
problem,
so
so
yeah,
what
we're
proposing
and
a
bit
where
this,
where
we
believe
that
this
should
shift
the
conversation
is
to
actually
have
projects
so
the
way
it
would
work
we'll
speak
in
the
during
the
implementation,
but
the
the
vision
should
actually
direct
projects
that
are
proposed
by
the
core
units
and
any
core
unit
could
come
and
propose
a
thing,
and
if
there
is
a
core
unit
that
does
not
want
to
contribute
on
the
project.
B
Whoever's
leading
that
project
would
be
able
to
go
outside
and
and
fund,
or
look
for
the
for
the
expertise
needed
to
deliver
that
so,
for
example,
someone
wants
to
build
the
dashboard
and
the
mkr
holders
think
that
that
dashboard
is
very
important.
This
project
would
be
voted
higher,
so
it
will
go
higher
in
the
list
and
if
a
core
unit,
let's
say
they
want
to
work
with
data
inside
score
unit
and
data
inside-
does
not
work
to
work
on
that,
because
they
feel
that
it's
not
a
priority
for
them.
B
This,
the
project
manager
from
this
project
could
be
like.
Okay,
I'm
going
to
go
to.
I
don't
know
some
external
party
and
I'm
going
to
make
them,
provide
the
data
and
I'm
going
to
deliver
the
project.
So
what
we'll
end
up
with
is
actually
the
amcareholders
funding
the
value
through
a
much
more
direct
relationship
than
funding
the
the
workshop.
B
A
B
I
don't
know
do
if
you
want
to
hop
in
the
mic
to
add
more
color
to
that
question
or
where
we
should,
or
I
can
try
to
answer,
but
I
would,
I
would
argue,
almost
the
opposite.
I
would
argue
that
when
you
have
this,
a
lot
feels
like
micromanagement,
because
the
core
units
came
with
a
with
a
mission
and
vision
statement,
and
now
you
want
them
to
work
on
a
project,
because
you
think
that
that
creates
value
for
for
maker.
B
So
the
mechanisms
that
am
care
holders
have
are
actually
this.
This
micro
management
conversations
where
it's
like
you
do
this
or
you're
off-board
it
pretty
much,
and
we
can
discuss
about
that
later.
But
when
you,
when
you
try
to
give
direction
to
a
co-unit,
it's
a
pretty
much
all
or
nothing
deal
same
thing
when
a
core
unit
proposes
something-
and
we
saw
this
in
the
past
where
accordingly
wanted
to
grow.
Eventually,
we
we
ended
up
splitting
the
the
budgets
into
business
as
usual
and
growth.
B
I
don't
know
if
those
were
the
exact
names
so
bear
with
me,
but
the
conversations
are
much
more
all
or
nothing
conversations
instead
of
saying,
okay,
this
is
what
we
want.
These
are
the
priorities.
This
is
the
budget
that
we
have
that
might
change
from
time
to
time.
So
I
would
argue
that
this
is
actually
less
of
micro
management,
because
the
the
direction
it's
it's
clear.
So
what
what
am
care
holders
want
built
is
absolutely
clear
in
a
ranked
list
instead
of
having
to
go
coordinate
by
core
unit.
B
Why
is
this
not
getting
done
or
because
it's
blocked
by
this
other
core
unit?
So
these
are
things
that
would
not
happen
or
that
we
believe
we
would
happen
less.
At
least
in
this.
In
this
scenario,.
C
The
theory
here
is
that
there's
frameworks
improvements
as
well
as
tool
improvements.
So
I
believe
what
do
is
hinting
at
is
that
there
may
be
more
ability
or
opportunities
to
impact
the
workforce
and
it's
a
little
bit
by
design.
But
we
believe
that
the
framework
presented
here
is
robust
enough
that
the
micro
management
aspects
of
the
opportunity
to
manage
the
workforce
would
be
more
impactful
and
result
in
less
of
the
micromanagement
that
we're
seeing
today.
B
Yeah,
so
if
there
are
caps
in
the
number
of
projects
you
value
okay,
so
let's,
let's
jump
into
the
implementations,
because
I
think
that
a
lot
of
these
questions
will
cease.
We're
supposed
to
be
centralized
and
independent
in
reality,
we're
all
dependent
upon
each
other.
The
guideline,
the
guiding
mips
for
independence
in
order
for
this
to
work
with
3940
need
to
be
modified
yeah,
absolutely
they
would
need
to
be
modified
robert.
B
So
let's
go
to
implementation
and
potential,
except
so
this
is
a
bit
how
it
would
work
so
right
now,
core
units
should
pro
projectify.
I
don't
know
without
the
word
their
activity,
so
it
for
for
most
of
coordinates.
I
think
this
would
be
a
fairly
easy
task,
so
it's
pretty
much
saying.
Okay,
this
is
the
time
we're
spending
on
this
is
roughly
how
much
these
resources
cost.
B
So
this
is
pretty
much
how
much
the
project
costs
right
now,
so
it
would
be
you'll
be
a
good
exercise
to
do
regardless.
I
think
that
koreans
should
do
it
internally,
but
also
once
you
do
this,
you
can
actually
see
how
much
each
thing
costs
and
you
can
potentially
discover
that
some
projects
are
much
more
expensive
than
we
believe,
and
maybe
we
should
not
be
working
on
them
or
or
yeah.
B
We
should
because,
and
care
holders
really
really
want
them,
so
the
step
one
would
be
projectifying
all
the
the
activities
that
we're
doing
and
in
this
activities,
if
there's
an
activity
as
robert
was
we're
mentioning
that
there's
dependencies
and
it
should
be
worked
on
by
several
core
units,
then
you
can
include
it
here
and
what
what
you
need
is
not
really
I
I
need
robert's
korean,
for
example.
To
do
this
specific
work.
You
just
need
the
specific
work
and
a
market
price
to
be
able
to
to
projectify
something.
B
If
robert
doesn't
want
to
collaborate
with
you,
because
he
doesn't
like
you
for
example,
then
that's
a
that's
a
different
conversation
and-
and
you
should
not
block
the
whole
thing
or
robert
should
not
be
able
to
block
the
whole
work
being
done
if
he
doesn't
want
to
to
work
on
it.
So
this
will
be
completely
voluntary
and
core
units
are
more
than
encouraged
to
to
actually
collaborate
with
each
other,
but
but
the
the,
but
it's
up
to
the
core
units
to
con
to
collaborate
or
not
with
each
other.
B
It
wouldn't
be
forced
a
bit
like
it's
happening
today
by
the
mkr
holders,
where
they
need
to
say,
hey
core
units
x.
We
actually
need
you
to
review
this
or
to
produce
the
assessment
on
this,
so
it'd
be
more
more
open
in
that
sense,
so
that
will
be
the
step
zero
a
bit,
then
the
step
one
would
be
defining
the
the
project.
I
already
saw
an
initiative
by.
I
think
it
was.
B
B
What
we
were
thinking
of
is
that
we
could
have
different
types
of
budgets
with
different
types
of
permissions,
so
a
budget
could
be
absolute,
for
example,
for
protocol
operations
or
keeping
the
lights
on.
We
would
need
this
amount
of
of
dye,
or
it
could
also
be
a
percentage
of
revenues
or
a
percentage
of
the
surplus
buffer
or
having
another
buffer.
So
there's
a
lot
of
things
we
can
do
to
to
actually
be
able
to
to
play
with
different
things.
B
So
you
can
imagine
that
something
like
a
marketing
moonshot
should
only
be
used
if
we
have
a
lot
of
die
available
and
the
market
is
doing
really
well,
because
that
experiment
is
potentially
less
sure
or
there's
less
success
to
to
be
taken
from.
So
that's
that's
what
we,
what
we
what
we
envision
and
then
the
other
thing
is
that
this
budget
could
have
different
permissions.
B
So
the
example
here
is
that
if
we
define
a
budget
to
maintain
or
to
keep
the
lights
on
for
the
protocol,
this
budget
potentially
should
be
able
to
actually
sell
mkr
or
to
mint,
mkr
and
sell
it,
because
this
is
extremely
important
for
maker
to
keep
going.
B
You
can
see
how
other
types
of
budgets
wouldn't
have
this
many
permissions,
and
you
know
it
would
only
give
die
if
the
protocol
was
doing
well,
as
as
mentioned.
A
A
I
know
there
was
I
just
want
to
mention
in
the
chat
is,
I
think,
adrian
says,
can
definitely
see
how
an
overall
budget
cap
can
cater
to
either
a
workforce
or
project
view
absolutely
yeah.
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
comment
on
that.
B
No,
I
think
adrian
is
already
right.
I
think
that
we
do
need
to
define
budget,
regardless
of
which
approach
we're
taking,
so
the
the
workforce
view
might
might
need
a
budget
as
well.
I
I
actually
think
it
does
so
not
having
a
budget
is
a
bit
like
shooting
in
the
dark.
You
don't
even
know
what
what
you're
dealing
with
so,
I
think
it's
extremely
important
yeah.
A
D
Yeah,
so
no,
it
seems
to
me
from
talking
to
the
ceos
that
they're
primarily
relying
on
like
full-time
workers
right
now,
and
it's
hard
to
pin
them
on
budgets
because
they'll
be
like
well
we're
struggling
to
attract
or
retain
talent
or
whatever
at
this
number.
But
that's
not
like
a
hard.
D
D
B
Yeah,
no
yeah,
the
the
short
answer
is
no,
and
the
way
this
would
work
is
that
a
court
unit
would
so.
For
example,
I
spoke
with
with
patent
the
other
day
and
he
said,
like
man,
I
have
so
many
good
ideas
for
for
doing
new
stuff,
but
right
now
we
don't
know
whether
to
ask
for
a
for
more
of
a
budget
in
gov
alpha.
We
feel
that
it's
a
bit
tone-deaf,
so
what
govalva
could
do
is
set
up
a
project
saying
we
want
to
work
on
this
and
you
could.
B
I
imagine
I
don't
know
a
team
like
like
pe
saying,
like
we
have
these
20
things
to
work
on
like
what
do
you
want
us
to
work
on
so
potentially
they
would.
They
will
start
filling
the
projects
until
all
the
projects
get
filled
or
resourced,
and
this
would
also
be
a
signal
like
hey.
We
need
more
developers
or
or
we
need
less
right,
but
maybe
be
actually
needs
more
developers,
because
mkr
holders
value
a
lot
going
into.
B
I
don't
know
a
new
blockchain
right,
so
yeah
makers
should
be
on
solana.
We
we
need
rust
developers
now
we
don't
know
today
that
am
care
holders
have
no
way
of
signaling
that
so
it's
more
like.
Oh
maybe
we
should
create
a
solana
core
unit.
So
again,
the
conversation
today
is
like
is
solana,
coordinator
idea
or
not
compared
to
it
would
be
good
to
do
research
about
this
and
and
see
and
scale
it.
So
right
now
we're
going
with
this
core
unit
approach,
where
it's
it's
not
only
all
or
nothing.
B
It's
like
okay.
We
need
to
actually
hire
people
for
something
that
we
don't
know.
If
it's
going
to
work
or
not
a
project
could
be
research.
If
this
is
worth
it
or
how
much
effort
would
it
be
or
even
doing,
tasks
that
are
maintenance?
That
should
be
a
project
as
well.
B
B
B
Maybe
maybe
the
forum
needs
more
moderation,
so
we
should
increase
that
budget.
So
what
we're
doing
with
this
is
making
everything
very
explicit
and
helping
the
mcat
holders
choose
what
needs
to
go
there
and
not
instead
of
discussing.
Oh,
this
core
unit
is
not
producing
enough.
It's
a
bunch
of
guys.
I
don't
know,
there's
a
lot
of
examples
to
draw
from.
B
If
you
go
to
the
forum
so
so
yeah,
the
short
answer
is
we
believe
that
a
coordinate
should
be
able
to
produce
enough
projects
to
let
them
care
holders
choose
if
you,
if
your
projects
are
not
getting
funded,
then
that
should
be
a
good
signal
that
you're
not
producing
the
value
that
the
protocol
wants
at
the
moment.
E
E
In
other
words,
if
you're
not
supporting
the
the
end
game
and
you're,
not
looking
to
decentralize
die
beyond
what
it
is
today,
which
obviously
needs
to
get
decentralized
a
hell
of
a
lot
more
then
you're
saying
that
some
of
these
teams
should
not
be
funded.
Correct.
B
B
So
if,
if,
if
there's
the
perception
that
a
core
unit
is
not
working
on
valuable
things,
what
happens
today
is
that
that
core
units
get
gets
defunded,
maybe
a
little
piece
of
what
they
were
doing
was
valuable,
but
right
now
it's
all
or
nothing.
They
lose
the
whole
budget.
We
saw
this
in
the
past.
There
are
a
couple
proposals
up
there
to
the
same.
I
don't
know
if
that's
the
the
approach
that
the
am
care
holders
want,
because
then
you
need
to
think.
B
Okay,
there
are
all
these
tasks
that
were
actually
useful.
Maybe
I
didn't
like
90
or
70
or
even
30,
but
you
need
someone
to
to
take
care
of
those
things
who's
going
to
take
over.
Is
it
this
other
core
unit?
Should
we
then
shift
the
budget?
Should
we
give
them
more
budget?
So
right
now,
if
there's
a
project
that
a
community
is
doing,
that
project
would
have
the
budget
available
and
they
would
be
able
to
to
fund
it.
E
Got
it
so
assuming
the
end
game
goes
to
a
vote
somewhere
around
october
and
it
does
get
approved
by
mkr
token
owners.
What
would
be
the
first
step
to
get
this
off
the
ground?
Obviously
you
know
this
has
to
be
approved
also
by
mk
token
owners,
but
how.
E
Playing
into
the
end
game
and
getting
core
units
to
buy
into
being
a
part
of
a
meta
dow-
and
you
know,
I
think
I
think,
a
lot
of
core
units
don't
understand
that
metadows
are
clusters
of
core
units
that
might
be
doing
the
same
thing
right.
A
good
example
of
that
is
the
events
core
unit
that
probably
should
be
working
with
growth,
strategic
happiness
that
should
be
working
with
growth,
etc.
So
can
you
kind
of
walk
us
through
that?
Assuming
the
end
game
does
get
approved
in
the
next
two
or
three
months.
B
Yes,
so
the
so
a
metadata
potentially
is
a
group
of
a
lot
of
or
or
hermes
another
way
we
see
it
is
it's
that
it's
several
projects
together,
so
you
can
see
core
units
a
b
and
c
collaborating
together
in
these
five
projects
to,
I
don't
know,
get
into
the
asian
market.
B
So
this
would
be
a
very
good
step
in
the
right
direction
because
it
would
already
get
us
into
the
collaboration
and
the
and
are
making
sure
that
we're
working
on
things
that
add
value
instead
of
just
throwing
a
bunch
of
people
together
that
might
or
might
not
collaborate
and
then
see
what
happens
so
so
yeah
a
group
of
core
units
could
work
together
almost
continuously
and
propose
projects
together
and
then
m
care
holders
would
choose
what
to
do
or
or
what
not
to
do,
but
yeah
in
as
next
steps
we
do
have.
B
We
want
to
to
explore
a
lot
more,
how
the
the
the
dcvs
would
work
and
how
they
would
vote
and
how
this
would
actually
yield
the
ranking
of
the
project.
So
we
have
it
as
a
to-do
list
to
to
explain
it,
make
it
more
clear
and
and
potentially
come
present
in
in
one
of
the
meetings.
B
B
So
in
this
case
the
budget
was
500,
there's
only
one
budget
for
simplicity
purposes,
and
there
are
these
four
projects
that
were
proposed.
B
So
I
mean
that's,
that's
pretty
much
it
right
like
we.
We
say
we
have
a
certain
budget.
We
have
all
these
projects,
we
we
rank,
vote
them
based
on
importance
and
then
we
we
get
some
products
funded.
B
We
still
need
to
define
things
as
the
timelines,
because
you
do
want
to
be
able
to
to
predict
if
you
need
to
to
lock
people
or
not.
If
you
need
to
hire
more
or
not
so
those
are
a
lot
of
details
that
are
extremely
important
and
that
we
need
to
discuss
further,
but
but
that's
that's
potentially
it's
how
how
the
prioritization
process
would
work
can
so
yeah,
as
I
was
mentioning
things
that
are
still
to
define
the
periods.
B
It's
it's
quite
important
to
to
get
the
good
trade-off
between
flexibility
for
the
m
care
holders
and
stability
for
core
units.
So
potentially
we
could
do
like
a
three-month
rolling
rolling
budget,
so
you
would
vote
for
projects.
So
let's
say
in
in
the
first
of
january.
You
would
know
if
you
have
the,
if
you
have
the
budget
or
if
your
budget
was
approved
to
start
in
in
april,
so
three
months
could
work,
but
then
yeah,
I
think
we
should.
B
We
should
potentially
have
a
deeper
discussion
on
how
to
do
that.
Then
there's
reporting,
dashboards
and
measurements
again,
going
back
to
the
kpis
or
to
the
or
to
the
dashboard
that
scs
is
building.
It's
extremely
important
that
this
is
very
transparent
and
very
easy
to
navigate
form
care
holders
and
delegates,
because
that's
this
is
what's
providing
the
value,
and
this
is
how
we're
our
yeah
measuring
the
value.
B
We
will
also
need
to
work
on
the
on
the
templates
to
produce
a
project
so
right
now
the
closest
thing
that
we
have
to
a
project
is
the
spf,
which
is
the
special
purpose
fund,
and
today
I
suggested
to
to
cut
to
actually
add
milestones
in
the
in
the
fund
that
she
was
requested
requesting
to
to
make
sure
that
she's
achieving
or
what
she
wants
to
achieve
and
and
then
we
can
compare
to
to
what
the
group
has
achieved
or
not,
then
still
to
define.
B
The
bonuses
are
quite
important,
so
retention.
Maybe
we
should
have
like
a
retention
project
and
say,
if
you're,
a
talented
maker
developer.
This
is
the
fund
so
that
you
don't
live
same
thing
for
any
type
of
of
skills,
same
thing
for
performance.
I
know
that
growth
is
using
performance
bonuses,
so
that
could
be
interesting.
Then
we
also
started
discussing
an
automation
bonus.
B
So
if
you
make
something
that
provides
value,
if
you
make
a
project
that
was
providing
value
automatic,
you
could
potentially
get
the
equivalent
of
mkr,
for
I
don't
know
the
next
year
or
so,
because
you
potentially
saved
the
protocol
a
lot
of
money
and
then
yeah
other
types
of
of
benefits
and
and
finally
any
type
of
governance
mechanisms
like
should
we
add
any
exceptions,
should
aim
care
holders
be
able
to
to
yeah
just
make
decisions
faster.
If
you
need
it,
let's
say
we
need
to
work
extremely
urgently
on
something
like
that.
B
And
and
yeah
the
the
last
step,
it's
a
profit
or
it's
the
advantages,
which
is
that
the
m
care
holders
would
actually
choose
directly
the
projects
that
are
forwarding
their
vision.
B
We
would
uncover
a
lot
of
non-value
added,
so
if
accordion
comes
up
with
a
lot
of
projects
that
do
not
get
funded,
this
means
potentially
that
game
care
holders
were
not
interested
in
getting
them.
Today
we
are
paying
for
those,
even
if
we
don't
want
them.
So
this
would
be
a
great
exercise
to
to
do
admin
tasks.
This.
This
is
an
important
topic
that
came
up,
there's
a
lot
of
admin
that
we
do
and
how?
How
do
we
optimize
that?
B
Should
the
dao
have
like
central
services
as
several
companies
do?
Maybe
that's
something
to
explore,
and
the
last
good
point
is
that
it
allows
for
competition.
So
as
we're
mentioning,
if
there's
a
project,
that's
that's
covering
something,
and
someone
believes
that
they
can
do
a
better
job.
They
can
always
propose
it
and
then
it's
up
to
them
care
holders
to
to
decide
and
how
to
how
to
move
forward.
B
So
yeah
call
to
actions
next
tuesday
we'll
be
having
our
office
hours
to
discuss
this
more
in
depth,
any
type
of
feedback
or
or
questions
or
anything.
We
really
appreciate
them.
We
already
started
getting
a
lot
on
the
on
the
forum
post
and
it
helps
us
at
least
map
the
territory
and
understand
what
we
don't
know,
which
is
a
lot
then
work
with
the
delegates.
I
think
that
this
is
a
great
first
step.
B
I
would
love
to
hear
from
more
of
you
guys
what
you
think
if
this
would
be
useful
or
not
and
and
potentially
get
to
to
a
closer
decision
and,
as
as
frank,
was
saying
once
we
align
it
more
with
the
endgame
plan,
we
would
like
to
to
come
and
present
at
a
dvc
meeting
to
see
how
this
could
be
a
step
in
that
direction,
so
so
yeah,
I
have
an
actionable
summary
of
how
things
could
start
moving
forward,
we're
in
the
feedback
stage
at
the
very
very
beginning,
then,
potentially
a
signal
request
or
a
map
13..
B
This
is
something
that
I
want
to
discuss
with,
go
alpha
and
the
delegates
and
then
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
we
mapped
that
we
that
we
would
need
to
do
to
to
get
this.
This
done
so
yeah.
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
any
questions
team
black
is
saying,
have
a
lot
of
feedback.
So
that's
great.
A
Yeah
juan
thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
Well,
it
was
great.
Actually
raphael
had
his
hand
raised.
So
I'm
going
to
give
floor
of
a
raphael.
H
Yeah,
so
thanks
one,
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
love
about
the
proposal,
but
what
I
think
is
lacking
in
the
on
the
slide
about
what's
what's
to
do
is,
I
think,
thinking
about
prior
setting
priorities.
H
You
need
some
some
deeper
thought
and
especially
like
how
you
arrive
at
these
priorities
like
how
is
that
voted?
How
is
that
then,
like
interfaced
with
capabilities
of
that
we
see
on
budgets
and
and
so
on
and
so
forth?
So
I'd
love
to
to
have
that
like
added
to
the
list
that
we
think
about
how
to
set
priorities,
which
you
know
is
like
one
of
my
favorite
topics.
B
B
How
how
does
it
delegate
crash
division
and
make
it
more
explicit,
and
we
we
kind
of
put
that
initiative
on
hold
while
we
were
working
on
this,
but
but
yeah
it's
it's
super
important
both
for
for
contribute
or
for
delegates
to
actually
show
how
what
their
vision
is
and
in
a
more
actionable
way
right,
because
the
vision
maker
should
grow
is
not
very
telling,
it
could
mean
anything
maker
should
go
all
in
on
real
world
finance
is
something
makers
should
only
do
bonds
is
something
else,
so
a
delegate
could
actually
by
ranking
this.
B
These
projects
should
actually
be
quite
clear
what
their
visioning
is,
and
it
would
be
much
better
than
this
core
unit.
Yes
or
no,
that
doesn't
tell
you
a
lot.
It
could
be
that
the
legacy
believes
that
this
is
a
crucial
part
for
for
some
other
master
plan,
but
then,
if
other
core
unit
that
was
also
needed
doesn't
get
allowed,
then
what's
happening.
B
The
advantage
with
the
with
projects
is
that
it's
very
clear:
it's
like
you
either
it's
the
project
gets
done
or
doesn't
get
done
because
it's
fully
funded
or
not
so
so.
We
believe
that
this
will
shift
the
conversation
towards
that
and.
H
B
Yeah
absolutely
and
something
that
we
explicitly
left
out
and
we
didn't
want
to.
We
didn't
want
to
make
the
model
more
complicated
to
understand,
but
we
will
put
it
on
the
on
the
plan
with
the
dvc,
but
is
that
potentially,
what
we
want
to
do
actually
is
not
even
ask
for
for
four
projects,
but
you
as
a
delegate.
What
you
want
to
say
is
this
is
what
I
believe
makers
should
look
like,
and
then
the
projects
would
be
like
a
like
an
answer
to
these
requests
for
proposals.
B
So
you're
saying:
let's
build
this
feature
and
then
any
project
could
come
and
be
like.
Okay,
I'm
going
to
do
a
research
on
on
the
feasibility
or
I'm
going
to
actually
build
it
or
I'm
going
to
launch
on
testnet
six
months
from
now.
So
so
that's
that's
something
that
we
believe
that
would
be
quite
powerful
as
well.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
juan
appreciate
that
still
open
the
floor
to
anybody
any
other
questions
that
delegates
we've
got
some
facilitators
here
today.
Let's
see
if
anybody
wants
to
go
next.
B
So
makerman,
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
jump
on
the
mic
or
you
can
read
it
out
loud,
but
yeah
makerman
is
commenting
on
the
on
the
cadence.
Some
things
can
only
be
cycled
so
fast
when
you
start
project
with
a
contractor
and
then
decide
they
are
failing
to
perform.
B
So
so
that's
that's
actually
super
important
and
that's
why
the
the
templates
for
creating
the
project
will
also
be
very
important,
because
these
are
the
tools
that
vm
care
holders
have
to
to
judge
the
performance
again,
as
of
today
there's
absolutely
no
tool.
You
might
have
some
kind
of
of
a
road
map.
After
the
mc40
amendments,
the
the
budgets
have
a
more
concrete
roadmap,
but
it's
not
explicitly
clear
what
success
is
or
not
so
so
yeah.
B
We
think
that
the
evaluating
the
performance
should
be
there,
even
if,
if
the
project
based
budgeting
doesn't
go
through,
it's
the
the
mid
40
with
the
with
the
road
map
is,
is
quite
useful
right.
I
think
that
it's
that
the
mi
40
with
the
amnesia
is
a
bit
of
of
this
idea,
but
not
pushed
forward
enough,
so
so
yeah
and
the
other
thing
still
a
good
idea,
even
if
more
details
need
to
be
done,
yeah.
No,
absolutely.
B
I
think
that
the
the
the
details
will
be
the
hard
part
and-
and
it
will
be
very
important
to
to
get
those
right,
but
we
need
to
to
agree
that
this
is
a
good
idea
before
building
a
huge
machinery,
so
so
yeah.
I
appreciate
the
the
comments.
C
Yeah
and
real
quickly
to
build
on
one's
point.
There
too,
I
think
a
clear
example
of
how
that'll
manifest
in
the
dow
is
how
budgets
are
implemented
today
in
the
core
unit
model,
some
use,
an
auditor
wallet,
some
go
direct
to
an
operational
wallet.
Some
have
different
functions
of
their
core
unit
defined
into
separate
wallets.
C
We
imagine
that
we'll
see
similar
best
practices
that
are
created
for
the
various
project
roles
that
will
be
required,
like
maintenance,
being
separated
from
development
being
separated
from
more
marketing
experiments,
and
each
of
those
will
somewhat
organically
and
more
so
intentionally
be
driven
to
a
best
practice
that
could
potentially
be
applied
to
set
in
stone
that
this
is
how
the
dao
is
going
to
run
experiments
or
it
could
be
more
loose
to
account
for
the
different
things
that
maker
man
was
also
bringing
up
about
how
some
teams
may
be
failing
more
initially
on
and
protecting
against
over-investing
in
an
immature
workforce,
but
still
wanting
to
give
people
a
chance.
C
B
Yeah
adrian,
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
hop
on
the
mic,
I
think
it's
it's
a
good
point
and
you'll
probably
express
it
better
than
than
myself.
I
I
So
the
principle
in
some
sense
is
like
the
maker
token
holders.
The
agents,
in
today's
view,
are
the
facilitators,
I
suppose,
and
then
and
then
eventually
the
collaborators
and
the
tension
is
that
the
core
units
necessarily
have
more
information
than
the
token
holders
when
it
comes
to
making
day-to-day
decisions.
I
B
Yeah
absolutely
yeah.
E
Oh
sorry,
let
me
comment
on
that.
I
think
I
think
from
a
dow
perspective
right-
and
I
think
sometimes
we
tend
to
forget
that
this
is
a
dao.
This
is
a
decentralized
autonomous
organization
right
run
by
folks
that
could
be
living
in
nairobi.
Kenya
for
all,
I
know
so,
yeah
sure
delegates,
community
members,
npr
token
holders,
as
has
said,
don't
have
time
to
be
following
the
day-to-day
operations.
E
So
I
think
you
got
to
give
the
benefit
of
the
doubt
to
the
folks
who
do
do
the
grind,
or
here
every
single
day
trying
to
learn,
and
even
even
if
there's
like
a
non
governance,
mining
some
of
the
source
cred
in
the
forum,
you
kind
of
gotta
give
them
the
benefit
of
that
right,
because
the
only
way
we're
going
to
build
a
dow,
a
true
decentralized
autonomous
organization
is
if
there
is
no
black
box
and
that's
why
I'm
a
big
proponent
of
the
end
game
right,
because
we're
trying
to
somehow
some
way
solve
the
riddle
of
not
having
a
black
box.
E
Where
you
know,
delegate
a
and
delegates
c
and
d
have
no
idea
what
core
unit
abc
is
doing.
So
that's
the
point
I
was
trying
to
make
with
the
with
the
example
of
agents.
You
know
it's
very
hard
man
to
to
build
a
dao.
I
totally
get
your
point
of
view,
but
I
think
some
of
us
tend
to
forget
that
this
is
a
dao.
It's
a
dao!
Let's
just
remember
that
we're
in
a
dow
you're
free
to
go
about
wherever
you
want
in
the
world
and
be
a
part
of
this
now
yeah.
I
But
then
I
think
so
whether
it
come
in
my
this
is
just
my
view
whether
it
comes
to
the
end
game
or
the
core
unit
or
the
project,
or
what
have
you
we're?
Not
there's
only
like
we're
not
going
to
invent
a
new
type
of
interaction
between
humans
like
to
an
extent
a
lot
of
these
things
have
been
tried
before
the
hours
are
relatively
new,
but
then
there
are
examples
of
organizations
in
the
past
that
have
been
more
or
less
decentralized.
I
know
kibbutz's
is
one
example,
and
they.
B
I
G
I
E
I
E
I'll
give
you
a
quick
example,
because
I
know
maker
man
has
his
hands
up
his
hand
up,
but
there
there's
a.
There
is
an
individual,
I
won't
say
whether
their
core
unit,
member
or
they're,
an
mkr
token
owner
or
just
a
community
member
but
they're
like
attending
every
single
call,
every
single
office
hours
and
they
point
to
something
out
to
me
I'll,
never
forget,
which
is.
If
I
worked
at
a
company-
and
I
was
working
for
some
department,
all
I
would
care
about
is
my
coworkers
and
my
boss.
E
I
wouldn't
care
what
abc
core
unit
or
cdf
core
unit
is
doing
or
what
the
value
of
dye
or
maker
is
or
die
is
peg.
So
this
is
a
different
realm
that
we're
trying
to
build
here,
and
I
think
all
of
us
just
need
to
kind
of
you
know,
give
it
a
shot
yeah.
Maybe
it's
been
done
before
I
don't
know.
If
it
has,
you
say
it
has,
but
let's
give
it
a
try.
Man
before
we
just
throw
up
the
white
flag
and
go
back
to
centralization.
I
A
F
Yeah,
I
was
just
gonna
ask
juan:
do
you
think
this
is
just
gonna
create
more
work
for
cus
overall
right?
Do
you
think
this
imposes
a
burden?
That's
my
first
question.
Second
question
is:
is
kind
of
a
double,
so
it
was
really
three.
How
are
you
going
to
handle
a
test
case
here
and
what
sort
of
performance
metric
are
you
going
to
use
to
determine
whether
it's
better
or
worse,
right?
You
know,
frank's
comments,
kind
of
apply
to
some
extent,
but
that's
the
real
issue
and
I
harp
on
this.
B
B
B
So
for
us,
it's
relatively
easy
to
say,
we
are
working
on
this
and
it's
a
matter
of
saying:
okay,
how
much
time
we
we
considered
where
they
were
that
were
working
on
each
project,
each
contributor
and
then
yeah.
B
You
potentially
have
other
types
of
activities
that
you're
doing
that
are
not
being
represented,
so
there
will
be
for
sure
some
some
work
to
go
there
and
then,
if
you
want
to
come
up
with
more
projects
going
back
to
the
gov
alpha
example,
so
a
goal,
for
example,
is
peyton
was
saying
like
I
have
all
these
ideas
that
potentially
might
get
funded
by
by
the
by
the
am
care
holder.
So
how
do
I?
How
do
I
manage
that?
B
So
it's
it's
up
to
to
him
to
actually
come
up
with
with
these
ideas
and
make
sure
that
he
kind
of
tries
to
to
make
them
into
a
project.
I
don't
think
that
it's
easy.
I
think
that
it's
a
skill
that
we
will
need
to
learn
and
to
improve
with
time.
Maybe
it
will
be
painful
in
the
beginning
to
change,
but
I
think
that
the
rewards
outweighs
the
the
struggle
right
and
again.
B
I
think
that
if,
if
we
manage
to
provide
enough
templates
and
enough
guidance
enough
examples,
potentially
helping
them
in
the
beginning,
it
will
be,
it
will
be
better
in
the
long
term
and
it
won't
be
that
hard.
So
how
do
we
know
that?
It's
better?
That's
that's
tough
right!
So
should
we
switch
the
whole
thing
and
then
be
like
oops,
let's
roll
back,
I
I
don't
know
if
we,
if
we,
if
there's
a
way
of
making
it
more
okay,
we
will
start
with.
B
I
don't
know,
half
the
core
units,
I
don't
know,
maybe
take
volunteers
or
the
m
car
holders
can
can
actually
choose
them
and
be
like.
We
want
these
core
units
to
to
explicitly
say
what
they're
working
on.
I
don't
know
it's
that
that's
a
that's
a
hard
one.
We
were
actually
first
getting
feedback
to
make
sure
that
we
developed
the
implementation
plan
more
in
depth
instead
of
just
creating
this
super
plan
that
gets
dead
on
arrival.
So
so
this
is
a
bit.
B
A
All
right,
thank
you.
We
just
won't
be
mindful
automatically.
We've
got
a
gnr
call
here
at
the
top
of
the
hour.
We've
got
a
few
minutes
left
I
got
tim
has
got
his
hand
raised
and
then
we'll
we'll
wrap
it
up.
G
All
right:
well,
I
was
just
going
to
take
the
hands
out
because
we
need
time
for
a
break,
but
I'll
just
say
that
this
is
really
exciting.
I
think
that
there's
a
lot
of
potential
here
that
is.
G
Will
help
the
dow,
I
think,
in
a
lot
of
different
ways,
a
lot
of
our
sort
of
current
issues
that
we
sort
of
see.
There
are
also
a
lot
of
concerns
I
sort
of
have-
and
I
think
so
does
some
of
the
other
delegates
who
brought
them
up
on
the
chat.
So
it's
good
to
remind
ourselves
that
we're
at
the
beginning
stages
of
evaluating
this,
and
so
I'm
hoping
to
bring
some
feedback
to
the
proposal,
but
just
to
put
it
on
voice.
G
G
So
I
look
forward
to
discussing
those
on
other
calls,
because
now
is
definitely
not
the
time
to
pop
that
genie
out
of
the
bottle,
but,
like
I
said,
I
think
the
opportunity
for
collaboration
and
transparency
increases
as
long
as
we
set
really
great
guide
guide
posts,
and
I
think
we
can
do
that
in
this
framework,
more
so
than
core
unit
budgets,
which
is
why
I
find
it
exciting.
So
I
yield.
B
Yeah,
I
fully
agree
and
just
to
be
clear
of
the
way
we
work.
We
love
these
challenges.
Maker
manager
keeps
them
coming.
What
we
do
is
we
just
write
them
down
and
and
we
park
them
until
we
actually
find
a
way
of
putting
it
into
the
framework,
and
then
we
know
that
that's
something
that
we're
not
forgetting.
B
So
I
had
this
conversation
with
rooney
couple
days
ago,
maybe
a
week
ago,
but
I
showed
him
this
and
he's
like
yeah,
but
you
do
need
to
retain
people,
so
it's
like
okay,
maybe
a
project
with
retainer
would
would
work.
So
that's
I
think
that
the
feedback,
even
if
it's
if
it
sounds
bad,
we
it
actually
makes
the
framework
or
the
proposal
stronger.
So
we
really
appreciate
it
thanks.
Everyone.
A
Yeah
thanks,
everyone
really
appreciate
all
the
great
feedback.
Thank
you
to
ses
for
the
presentation
today.
I
think
you
guys
will
also
be
on
the
gnr
call
as
well.
Just
a
reminder.
I
think
we
put
the
link
out
where
we
can
continue
this
discussion
out
on
the
forum.
I
think
retro
and
juan
also
put
their
discord,
handle
information
out
there,
so
you
can
reach
out
to
them
again.
Thank
you
all
for
joining
us
today.
This
is
recorded
and
should
be
out
tomorrow
and
again.
A
We
will
also
have
this
posted,
probably
by
tomorrow,
on
the
forum
and
really
appreciate
it.
Thank
you
all
for
joining
us
and
we
will
see
you
all
very
soon.
Thank
you.