►
From YouTube: Delegate Office Hours | RWF & RWF-0x Split
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-7-includes-poll-for-discussion-topic/17281/4
A
Starting
all
right
welcome
everyone
to
thursday's
delegate
office
hours,
I'm
thomas
floyd
with
govcoms.
Thank
you
for
joining
us.
We've
got
some
more
folks
coming
in
that's
good,
so
I
want
to
get
started
here
today.
A
We
put
a
poll
out
earlier
this
week
for
a
topic
for
delegate
office
hours
and
we'll
be
talking
about
that,
as
among
other
topics
that
we
want
to
bring
up.
You
guys
are
the
drivers
for
this
meeting,
but
as
we
go
along
and
want
to
encourage
engagement
and
discussion,
please
do
use
the
chat
feature
and
also
try
to
raise
hands
so
that
we
can
give
everybody
an
equal
opportunity
to
talk.
A
Okay
and
thank
you,
robert
appreciate
that
that
sounds
good,
so
robert's
got
a
question.
His
follow-up
question
from
the
rwf
meeting
yesterday,
so
all
right,
so
in
the
poll
this
week
we
put
out,
we
had
folks
voting
on
talking
about
the
rwf
split
and
wanted
to
open
that
up
the
floor
as
well
as
any
other
discussion
topics.
One
of
the
things
I
wanted
to
ask,
though
raphael
is
a
follow-up,
is:
do
we
want
to
look
at
anything
regarding
the
mcdowell
priorities?
I
know
that
was
a.
A
B
Yeah
sure
thanks
actually
I
was
just
typing
that,
because
I
was
just
browsing
through
this
google
sheet
that
I
did
and
quite
surprising,
like
I
have
a
decent
participation,
one
two,
three,
four,
five,
six,
seven,
eight
nine
delegates
participating
and
the
winners
are
number
one
is
number
one
priority
for
of
the
of
the
nine
delegates
that
participated
are
increase.
The
volt
usage,
followed
by
number
two
increased,
die
supply
and
number
three.
B
Strategies,
so
these
are
the
three
top
priorities,
at
least
at
the
time
that
we
that
the
delegates
filled
out
these
this
prior
prioritization
tool.
So
maybe
we
can
just
take
a
minute
to
reflect
on.
If
that's
valuable
is,
is
that
still
does
the
steering
true
or
the
priorities
have
changed
like
this?
This
would
be
my
next
question
here.
A
Okay,
I'll
open
the
floor
to
that
folks
want
to
chime
in
on
that
question
from
raphael
talking
about
the
make
it
out
priorities,
we've
continued
that
for
the
last
few
weeks,
I
certainly
want
to
open
the
floor
to
comets.
A
So
raphael,
if
you
want
to
post
a
question
again,
sort
of
asking
we've
put
the
spreadsheet
out.
B
Is
something
that
can
be
reasonably
done
off
of
async?
So
basically,
what
I'm
going
to
do
next
is
sum
that
up
and
just
write
a
forum
post
about
it
and
then
have
a
discussion
there.
I
think
that's
that's
good
and
then
link
in
the
new
delegates
channel.
A
Okay,
all
right
that'd
be
great,
so
be
on
the
lookout
for
that
in
the
delegates
channel
and
discord
and
raphael
you'll
post
that
out
there
later
on
today,.
A
Okay,
all
right,
that's
great,
so
be
a
lookout
for
that.
Thank
you,
referee.
I
appreciate
that
all
right,
so
the
poll
topic
that
we
had
that
had
been.
A
A
I
know
that
we
don't,
I
don't
believe
we
have
any
members
from
or
we
have
here
will
these
tenants,
but
if
I
don't
know
who
would
like
to
get
us
started
on
this,
I
know
the
I
don't
know
those
who
have
voted
on
it
want
to
just
kind
of
ease
into
this,
but
I'll
open
the
floor
to
those
comments
or
how
we
want
to
start
the
discussion.
C
C
C
But
for
me
the
question
also
becomes
like
I
mean
some
life
frame,
framing,
that's
pragmatic,
but
I
think
I
also
have
to
kind
of
look
a
little.
At
least
I
think
some
also
look
at
it
as
like.
Do
we
have
to
go
through
on
chain
first
before
like
deciding
on
it,
because
at
least
like,
for
example,
giving
some
of
the
current
other
core
units
some
of
those
more
responsibilities,
for
example
like
whether
they
can
have
it
to
pay?
For,
let's,
let's
say
like
a
legal
fees
and
others
like?
Is
it
something
that's
outside
their
mandate?
C
I
think
that's
a
very
tricky
question
and
I
thought
more
about
it
and
I'm
also
curious
to
hear
other
delegates,
because
I
don't
think
there's
really
right
or
wrong
answer.
To
be
honest,
I
think
it
also
really
depends
on
how
you
view
it
and
perspective.
So
I
just
want
to
share
that.
I've
been
kind
of
frustrated,
and
I
understand
from
both
sides
that
it
can
seem
as
I
don't
intend
to,
but
maybe
for
some
it
might
be
seen
as
I'm
trying
to
get
you
know,
keeping
some
of
the
new.
You
know
polar
onboarding.
A
All
right,
thank
you.
I
thank
you
for
that,
for
those
comments
really
appreciate
it.
The
next.
I
think
we
just
just
in
case
you
got
your
hand
raised,
go
ahead.
You
have
four.
E
D
E
I
think
we
need
to
separate
what
is
the
dao's
decision
as
a
whole
as
an
entity
and
which,
obviously,
we
have
to
take
into
account
and
which
can
only
be
changed
through
proper
governance
channels
and
what
either
group
of
delegates
delegates
by
themselves.
Community
members
also
decides
to
do
in
relation
to
this,
which
may
be
to
prepare
a
set
of
proposals
to
get
a
way
forward,
and
I
think
that
is
within
anyone's
right
to
do.
B
E
E
Some
of
them
needs
to
be
strung
together
right
right
now
we
have
an
rwa
that
is
basically
only
the
facilitator
with,
with
presumably
a
plan
to
onboard
another
team.
We
have
the
old
team
that
is
suggesting
their
own
core
units
to
take
over
the
responsibility.
We
have
two
separate
requests
for
funds
for
legal
work
to
maintain
relation
to
their
partners.
E
All
of
these
it's,
I
think
it's
it's
optimal
to
view
them
in
isolation,
and
you
need
to
sort
of
try
to
have
a
coherent
plan
right,
because
your
plan
in
in
one
thing
influences
your
decisions
and
the
others
and
discussing
the
broad
terms
of
a
plan.
I
think
this
forum
should
be
a
decent
place.
To
do
that,
it
doesn't
mean
you
have
to
make
a
decision
about
just
airing
the
discussion
and
actually
talking
around
the
the
larger
lines
here
has
some
value.
E
In
my
view,
and
and
for
my
own
part,
my
impression
right
now
is
rwa
is
dysfunctional.
It's
not
doing
the
job
it
was
designed
to
do,
and
it's
also
backing
up
other
core
units
from
doing
what
they
were
designed
to
do.
There
are
some
some
there's
nothing
solid
on
the
plan
going
forward.
There
are
some
suspicions.
There
are
some
intentions,
but
nothing
is
decided
by
the
protocol
or
the
governance
level
right.
E
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Let's
see,
I
wrap
you
all
out.
You've
got
your
hand
raised
next.
You
have
a
floor.
Go
ahead.
B
Yeah,
thanks
justine.
I
think
that
was
a
wonderful
introduction.
I
don't
know
where
you
also
at
the
rwf
office
hour
yesterday.
I
think
you
were
right.
B
I
can't
remember
because
I
think
that
was
quite
telling
in
a
way
that
will
actually
say
that
he's
preparing
for
a
two-month
frame
like
this
was
his
his
way
of
framing
it
right.
So
I
think
with
that
information
like
well
what
I
I
think
exactly
turning
the
threads
over
to
somebody
who
can
handle
them,
but
also
scoping
that
tightly,
because
I
think
otherwise
we
just
entered
the
next
kind
of
war.
So
I
think
when
we
had
when
we
turn
current
stuff
over,
we
have
to
be
really
clear.
C
B
A
All
right,
thank
you,
raphael.
I
appreciate
that
yeah.
So
two
things.
I
wonder
why
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna
attempt
should
be
next
and
then
robert's
got
some
comments.
He
wants
to
make
regards
yes,
so
tim,
should
we
go
ahead
next
yeah.
F
So,
just
to
just
to
complete
that
we
have
running
business
already
right,
we
have
all
the
centrifuge
stuff,
we
have
success.
We
have
certain.
You
already
mentioned
that
so
my
my
pain
with
with
those
whatever
we
call
that
steps
in
the
middle
or
those
special
purpose
vehicles
is,
I
really
believe
in
mandates
and
as
long
as
we
can't
commit
to
really
follow
the
story
of
reward
assets,
and
for
that
we
need
some
kind
of
core
unit,
or
even
maybe
some
other
construct,
but
right
now.
F
The
best
thing
we
have
is
core
units.
As
long
as
we
don't
have
clarity
that
we
want
to
keep
on
going
on
this
thing,
I
I
don't
feel
really
good
with
approving
any
of
those
of
those
budgets
just
to
continue
on,
because
it's
just
piling
up
more
stuff.
That
is
maybe
legacy,
because
we
just
don't
know
yet,
and
this
is
why
I'm
yeah,
I
feel
we
are
quite
a
limbo
right
now
that
that's
probably
super
unhealthy
and
if
it's
even
unhealthy
for
us,
imagine
how
it
feels
for
the
counterparties.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
tim
appreciate
it.
I'm
going
to
turn
this
over
to
robert
with
ces
he's
got
some
comments.
I
think
regards
to
some
of
the
meeting
yesterday.
Rob
you
I'm
gonna
hand
that,
over
to
you,
please
you
have
the
floor.
G
Hey,
thank
you,
thomas
thanks.
Everyone
on
the
call
the
first
comment.
I
the
question
was:
are
there
any
actions
based
upon
yesterday's
call?
So
obviously
there
are
things
that
we're
talking
about
here,
so
that
answers
that
question.
G
Another
comment
that
I
want
to
wait
make
is
that,
from
an
operational
perspective,
I
think
some
of
the
the
observations
from
paper
yesterday
were
accurate,
because
we
have
also
internal
observations.
I'm
not
going
to
review
them
here.
G
There
needs
to
be
comments
from
multiple
perspectives
made
on
those
applications.
So
what
happens
is
by
default?
These
go
into
a
green
light
pole,
which
is
something
that
we
dealt
with
some
time
ago
and
really
tried
to
clean
up
and
we've
been
asking.
You
know,
as
as
we
went
as
we
had
a
team,
the
team
was
active
and
would
comment.
We
don't
have
that
right
now,
so
things
are
coming
through.
So
if
they're
greenlit,
we
have
to
then
decide
what's
the
next
step
with
them.
G
So
one
of
the
one
of
the
reasons
why
that
I've
been
putting
out
there
a
little
bit
different
format
than
the
special
purpose
fund
was
that
for
everyone
that
gets
greenlit,
we
need
professional
services.
Legal
deal,
help
counterparty
risk,
potentially
credit,
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
need
to
happen
here.
So
in
order
to
move
this
forward,
we
have
ongoing
needs
now
tim
suggested.
Maybe
we
just
stop
it.
G
You
could
make
an
argument
that
it's
really
not
my
place
to
be
doing
that,
but
there's
no
one
else
to
be:
there's
no
one
else
to
do
it
right
now,
so
I'm
stepping
in
to
try
to
help,
but
I
really
need
assistance
from
whether
it's
this
team,
the
dow
the
community
to
to
ensure
that
we
have
clear
pain,
clear
plans
moving
forward.
So
thanks
for
listening.
G
G
F
A
Let
me
just
sorry:
let
me
go
to
raphael
justin,
I'm
gonna!
Let
you
go
after
raphael
and
I
was
wondering
if
somebody
could
just
give
us
a
brief
overview.
I
was
not
in
attendance
the
office
hours
so
that
we
could
just
get
everyone
up
to
speed
on.
Maybe
what
was
there?
If
anybody
would
it's
a
recorded
call?
Thank
you
didn't
know.
If
anybody
wanted
to
open
it
up,
raphael
go
ahead
just
in
second
and
then
we'll
maybe
do
a
little
brief
recap.
So
go
ahead!
Raphael.
B
Yeah
thanks
so
robert.
I
think
it's
it's
excellent,
that
you
continue
these
relationships
in
india
of
anybody
else
doing
that,
because
that's
certainly
better
than
just
a
complete
ball
drop.
But
as
far
as
these
green
lit
collaterals
go,
I
mean,
I
think,
that's
a
discussion
to
have
is
like
what
does
green
light
meet
mean
for
us.
What
kind
of
commitment
does
it
entail
for
for
our
side
of
maker
because,
like
if
we
are
looking
at,
for
instance,
end
game
plan
and
what
that
might
mean.
B
But
like
is
it
the
right
decision
to
continue
in
that
path
with
these
partners,
because,
given
the
time
frames
there
and
end
game
plan,
that's
basically
trying
to
push
these
assets
into
another
entity
all
together,
then
I
think
you
know.
B
I
think
we
need
to
have
the
discussion.
What
greenlit
means.
I'm
not
I'm
grateful
for
anything
that
happens
with
already
approved
and
and
collaterals
that
are
being
implemented,
but
as
far
as
the
green
lead
ones
go.
I'd
like
to
have
that
discussion.
A
All
right
yeah,
thank
you,
raphael
appreciate
that
and
actually
code,
and
I
brought
that
up
too.
So
I
definitely
have
some
big
interest
here
on
talking
about
the
green
lighting
as
well.
Justin
you
go
ahead.
You
have
the
floor.
E
Are
we
absolutely
need
to
maintain
our
prior
obligations?
We
cannot
drop
our
partners
and
leave
them
in
limbo.
Call
it
legacy,
call
it
what
you
want,
but
we
actually
have
to
maintain
those
relationships
and,
if
necessary,
unwind
them
in
in
an
orderly
fashion.
We
can't
just
suddenly
go
dark
from
one
day
to
the
next,
that
is,
that
is
simply
not
professional,
and
it
will
taint
make
its
reputation
for
the
foreseeable
future
at
the
very
least.
E
Unless
we
to
take
some
action
there
as
such,
I
am
convinced
we
need
to
put
out
some
sort
of
public
message
that
we
will
not
be
accepting
any
new
green
light
applications
until
time
x
when
we
can
take
away
that
public
statement
and
we
can
again
get
control
of
the
expectations.
People
can't
be
applying
now
and
expect
us
to
actually
do
something
about
them,
because
we
don't
have
the
resources
to
do
that.
E
So
we
need
to
get
our
house
in
order,
and
I
think
that
is
a
natural
first
step
and,
secondly,
we
need
to
figure
out
who
is
going
to
maintain
relations
and
actually
work
on
those
relations
that
we
have
already
established.
So
I
think
that
that
are
the
two
absolutely
most
critical
actions
that
we
need
to
put
into
into
effect.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
justin,
just
real
quick
before
we
move
over
to
I've
got
a
couple
other
folks
that
I
think
will
have
some
comments
in
the
chat.
Does
anybody
want
to
provide
any
high-level
overview
of
the
office
hours
yesterday?
If
any
of
that
is,
is
good
for
this
discussion?
Did
anybody
like
to
take
that?
A
I
wasn't
in
attendance,
so
I
I
can't
paper
were
you
in
it
tim's
actually
saying
paper.
I
don't
know
if
that
went
or
payton
or
anyone
that'd
be
great.
A
I
Scroll
up
and
read:
okay:
we
can
get
into
details,
but
they're
not
I
mean
that
pretty
some
pretty
much
sums
it
up
and
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
information
beyond
that.
Okay,.
A
As
is
that
large
mkr
holders,
just
there
will
be
proposal
made
next
weather
returns
from
vacation?
That's
about
all.
We
know.
Okay,
all
right!
Thank
you
paper
appreciate
that
any.
I
think
we
were
really
trying
to
go
into
this
green
lighting
and
I
could
not
have
made
some
more
comments.
Did
anybody
else
want
to
going
after
with
justin.
J
And
folks
for
saying
naughty,
yes,
so
I
I
I
would
like
to
like
talk
a
little
bit
about
setting
expectations
to
our
partners,
the
right
expectations,
because
it
is,
it
is
not
just
like
the
ones
that
you
see
in
the
forum,
like
the
ones
you
see
in
the
forum
are
just
like.
I,
I
will
say
one
third
of
the
partners
that
are
interested
on
doing
something
related
to
real
world
assets.
J
With
with
maker
and
honestly
I
don't
have
an
answer
like
I
just
like
asked
my
team
to
stop
like
searching
for
new
real
world
assets.
J
Deals
because
I
have
no
idea
what's
what
is
like
maker's
direction
regarding
that,
like
we
are
just
like
focusing
on
multi-chain
and
increasing
the
liquidity
there
and
but,
but
just
because
I
don't
know
what
what
will
happen
with
that
and-
and
I
I
think,
that's
the
the
problem,
because
without
a
direction
of
what
what
will
happen
with
it,
we
don't
know
if
we
need
a
new
car
unit.
J
We
don't
know
if
it
is
okay
to
have
robert
taking
on
some
of
the
responsibilities
temporarily
or
we
should
find
like
a
solution,
a
long-term
solution.
We
don't
know
what
to
answer
to
our
partners
in
the
forum
or
like
the
ones
who
are
asking
us
in
the
chat
what's
happening
with
their
application
or
how
they
can
start
talking
with
the
real
world
finance
team.
We,
I
don't
know
who
the
real
world
finance
team
is
right
now,
so
we
really
need
direction
on
that
sense.
J
J
We
have
the
sorry
I'm
going
to
use
the
the
word.
We
have
the
end
game
plan
coming.
We
just
like
saw
what
happened
with
tornado
cash,
we're
thinking
how
to
reduce
the
usbc
exposure.
But
again
we
saw
what
happened
with
tornado
cash.
I
don't
know
like
there
are
a
lot
of
uncertainties
to
solve
before
we
start
making
decisions.
That's
my
my
opinion,
because
I
really
would
like
to
know
what
to
do
with
all
the
real.
A
Okay
nadia,
thank
you
for
that.
Did
anybody
like
to
follow
up
on
nadia's
comments.
K
Hey
frank
here:
hopefully
you
can
hear
me,
I'm
sorry
for
the
background.
Noise,
frank,
you're,
good,
awesome,
so
yeah
I
actually
have
a
question
for
robert
or
anybody
from
ces,
because
I
was
on
a
one
of
your
collateral.
Onboarding
calls
and
someone.
I
think
mabel
might
have
mentioned,
that
the
the
pipeline
looks
pretty
dried
up.
It's
really
not
much
going
on
there
right
so,
like
I
understand
what
nadia
is
saying,
but
what's
the
pipeline
really
not
that
much
deals
there,
there's
not
much
crypto
hardcore
collaterals
coming
in
anymore
right.
K
So
I
think
it's
a
combination
of
everything.
It's
not
just
that
rwas
right
now.
Obviously,
everything
is
so
opaque
and
and
convoluted,
etc,
etc.
It's
just
that.
I
don't.
I
don't
see
any
collaterals
that
are
attractive
coming
in.
We
have
this
huntington
valley
deal,
that's
a
superb
deal.
We
should
be
celebrating
that
and
hopefully
there'll
be
more
to
come,
or
at
least
we
should
start.
You
know
working
towards
a
different
goal
and
whether
that
gold
is
the
end
game
or
protector
meta,
dials
for
rwas
or
creator
metadows
or
governance
metadata.
K
G
I
mean
my
my
awareness
on
from
an
rwa
perspective.
Is
that
there
are
deals
out
there,
but
they
don't
want
to
be
put
forward
because
of
the
uncertainty.
G
So
you
know
it's
and
and
and
if
it's
put
forward
by
I
don't
know
some
people
that
you
know
are
out
of
favor
inside
of
the
dao,
you
know:
how
will
that
look
and
I'm
I'm
not
I'm
not
I'm
myself,
not
in
the
optics,
but
we
have
situations
that
we're
still
dealing
with
and
so
from
an
rwa
perspective,
we're
not
doing
ourselves
any
favors
right
now
by
what's
happening
and
the
conversations
that
are
happening.
So
you
know
we're
effectively
we're
squelching
our
deal
flow.
G
So
that's
that
that's
the
one
side
of
it
on
the
crypto
native
side
of
it.
You
know
the
decentralized
collateral
side
of
it.
Okay.
So
what
is
our
direction
there?
Right?
Because
we've
got
this
usdc
issue,
we've
got
the
psm
we're
talking
about
the
peg.
I
mean
all
of
these.
Things
can
be
worked
on,
but
what's
gonna,
what's
gonna
be
the
most
impactful
for
the
dow?
G
Now
I
mean
I
don't
think
you
want.
You
know.
I
don't
think
you
want
the
protocol
engineering
for
you.
I
don't
think
you
don't
want
our
core
unit
just
going
off
and
doing
stuff
right
now,
because
there's
there's
really
a
key
question
of
alignment
plus
people,
let's
just
face
it.
People
are
scared,
our
devs
are
scared,
they
don't
want
to
go
to
jail,
and
I
know
some
of
this.
It
might
might
feel
as
if
it's
overblown,
but
someone
did
go
to
jail
or
was
charged
and
and
people
are
having
a
problem
with
that
right
now.
G
K
Yeah,
I
know
that's
good,
that's
great
insight
and
you're
right
innocent
into
proven
guilty
right
as
an
american.
I
was
always
thought
that
so
but
yeah.
I
could
see
that
as
a
developer.
Right
being
absolutely
scared,
so
I
mean
there's
the
answer
right.
If,
if
the
entire
ecosystem
is
under
a
threat,
then
we
shouldn't
be,
we
shouldn't
be
pushing
the
envelope
and
we
shouldn't
be
upset
that
there's
not
much.
We
could
do
if
we're
going
to
be.
K
You
know
in
a
situation
where,
unfortunately,
I
hate
to
use
this
word,
but
we're
kind
of
handcuffed
until
there's
better,
better
guidance,
in
my
opinion,
so
I
I
wouldn't
stress
out.
I
think
that
we
all
should
just
kind
of
come
together.
Have
a
mandate.
That's
going
to
get
this
doubt
over
that
hurdle
that
we're
facing
right
now
and
because
we
all
have
a
common
goal
right.
K
A
All
right,
thank
you
frank.
I
appreciate
that
and
yeah
in
the
chat
too
folks
who
are
you
know,
commenting
about
you
know
reputational
damage.
Even
the
counterparty
asked
me
if
they
could
continue
to
work
with
maker.
There's
some
concerns
out
there.
I
didn't
know
if
anybody
else
wanted
to
take
the
floor
next
to
discuss
tim.
Did
you
raise?
Were
you
raising
your
hand,
yeah
tim
and
then
back
to
raphael?
Please
thanks
tim
black.
H
I
think
rafael
is
first,
but
if
you,
okay,
okay,
cool
sweet,
so
I
want
to
kind
of
circle
back
to
mandates.
H
I
also
sort
of
want
to
set
some
context
that
I
think
is
important
first,
so
I
think,
with
a
lot
of
these
larger
priority
issues
for
the
dow
that
sort
of
cross
bunch
of
different
units,
we
tend
to
get
into
this
reactive
mode,
where
we're
just
pulling
one
lever
rather
than
thinking
through
the
next
steps
of
a
plan,
and
I
just
really
want
to
encourage
us
to
start
to
think
in
that
mindset
to
zoom
out
a
little
bit
and
think
the
steps
through
rather
than
like
the
immediate
decision,
that's
the
most
difficult.
H
I
know
humans
want
to
solve
the
hardest
problem
first,
but
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
like
get
the
full
context.
That's
in
reference
to
things
like
justice
posts
that
came
up
about
tornado
cash.
There's.
Also
this
thing
about
the
should
be
posted
about
the
usdc
fees,
which
needs
a
little
bit
more
pieces
to
it.
But,
more
importantly,
back
to
the
conversation
we
were
talking
about,
you
know
for
real
world
assets.
It
seems
to
me,
like
there
are
some
clear
next
steps.
There
is
an
actual
priority
which
is
65..
H
We
have
a
couple
of
options
to
make
sure
that
this
work
gets
done
and
as
messy
and
as
sort
of
in
limbo.
As
this
whole
real
world
finance
thing
has
been
going.
What
seems
to
be
pretty
obvious,
and
no
one
has
really
stated-
is
that
there
is
a
mandate
that
is
supposed
to
be
getting
done,
and
it's
just
not
getting
done,
and
so
we've
got
these
sort
of
interstitial
solutions
to
try
and
make
things
work
because
everyone's
sort
of
being
polite,
but
in
the
end
of
the
day
we
have
to
be
like.
H
We
can't
wait
another
two
weeks
we
have
to
really
just
not
in
this
meeting
but
over
the
next
day
or
two
kind
of
put
together,
something
that
says
to
the
community
and
to
counterparties
to
people
who
are
in
potential
teams
to
people
who
are
on
current
teams.
This
is
the
mandate
that
you
guys
are
supposed
to
be
doing.
It's
been
three
weeks.
We
can't
keep
waiting
and
from
there
there
are
like
some
options
right
so
does
that
make
sense?
Am
I
speaking
too
vague.
B
B
How
do
we
move
forward
with
this,
like?
What's
the
strategy
here,
and
should
we
file
a
proposal
and
and
put
something
to
vote
for
the
community?
Should
we
kind
of
come
to
an
agreement
and
then
present
as
a
group?
What's
like
I'm
I'm
a
little
lost
here,
so
maybe
somebody
with
more
experience
in
the
dial
can
can
chime
in
yeah.
H
That's
it
that's
great,
like
I'm
happy
to
hear
someone
else
talk,
I
appreciate
that,
but
the
basic
thing
is
I'll,
be
a
little
bit
more
direct.
I
feel
as
though
real
world
finance
tried
to
take-
and
this
is
sort
of
a
recap
from
yesterday.
H
Sorry
for
not
serving
that
context,
I
feel,
like
the
current
real
world
finance
team
tried
to
basically
restructure
the
team
and
take
it
into
a
different
direction
and
that
kind
of
got
mired
in
some
politics
a
little
bit
of
like
indirect
backroom,
not
dealings
but
just
like
miscommunications
and
then
as
a
result.
We
are
in
sort
of
this
blocked
moment
where
we
don't
have
a
mandated
team
to
come
in
and
actually
finish
this
deal.
H
These
deals
right,
and
so
I
think
it's
important
to
notice
that
in
the
dow
holistically
we
have
facilitators
facilitators
fulfill
their
mandates,
they
should
be
proactive,
they
should
be
communicative,
they
should
be
telling
us
things
and
whether
you're
restructuring
your
team
or
not
going
a
little
dark
is
probably
not
the
best
strategy,
and
so
what
I'm
saying
is
on
the
other
side
of
that
argument,
what
we
have
to
realize
as
delegates.
H
Basically,
is
to
sort
of
fire
a
shot
at
well,
not
firetruck
as
well,
but
just
be
as
friendly
as
possible
to
say,
like
if
you're
not
going
to
fulfill
their
mandate
of
making
sure
these
deals
get
across
the
finish
line
and
if
you're
not
gonna
like
hand
the
work
over
to
someone
else
then,
unfortunately
like
this
has
to
stop
right,
which
is
messy
and
unfortunate
and
painful,
and
I
don't
think
it's
the
best
option,
but
I
would
like
to
have
a
second
piece
to
that
strategic
approach.
Does
that
make
sense
at
that
moment?
H
The
only
thing
I
can
think
of
is
that
delegates
basically
come
up
with.
I
guess
it
would
be
an
off
boarding.
I'd
rather
prefer
that
it's
like
here's.
One
strategy
is
off-boarding,
the
other
one
is
hand-off
work,
the
other
one
is
restructure
right,
but
I
think
we're
the
only
ones
who
have
that
full
context,
and
we
have
to
kind
of
basically
put
all
our
heads
together
and
work
with
the
community
to
come
to
some
sort
of
conclusion
that
works
the
chat's
going
too
fast.
So
I
can't
really
pay
attention.
A
Yeah,
thanks
tim,
so
just
in
the
chat
folks,
you're
talking
about
comments
on
basically,
you
know
on
chain
governance.
Wise
rdf
still
has
the
mandate
for
better
or
worse
and
talking
about
his
team.
You
know
where,
where
do
they
stand?
You
know,
as
far
as
I
think,
a
couple
of
folks
are
saying
about
christian
addressing
christian.
I
don't
know
if
anybody
else
wanted
to
chime
in
on.
D
On
the
governance
and
right
like
until
something
is
proposed,
this
limbo
is
likely
to
continue.
So
I
appreciate
robert
and
strategic
finance
and
you
know
everyone
else.
Who's
said
I'm
sure.
I'm
gonna
forget
people,
but
a
lot
have
been
contacting
me
and
drafting
and
editing
and
coming
up
with
different
aspects
of
the
plan
that
need
to
be
addressed
to
move
forward
so
really
appreciate
all
that
work
being
done
but
yeah.
D
D
Now
those
things
aren't
being
done.
The
person
who
has
the
power
to
sign
off
on
them
isn't
doing
it
so
on
the
government's
end,
we're
just
kind
of
blocked,
and
I
think
people
are
kind
of
upset
about
that
reasonably
so.
But
I
don't
know
where
I'm
struggling
with
is
we
can
have
these
conversations
we're
going
to
bring
it
up
on
the
gnr
today.
D
But
it's
just
a
tough
problem
and
we
can
probably
talk
about
it
quite
a
bit,
but
unless
people
actually
make
some
proposals
or
propose
some
potential
solutions
and
we
aggregate
around
one,
everyone's,
just
kind
of
gonna
feel
their
own
different
way
about
the
limbo.
So
really
do
like
appreciate
that
we're
having
these
conversations
but
would
encourage
people
to
to
start
throwing
their
ideas
out
there
and
seeing
if
something
sticks.
H
Yeah
I'll
just
reiterate
that
I
think
limbo
is
basically
unacceptable
as
like
as
an
operative
standpoint
like
you,
can't
just
go
dark
and
expect
that
everyone
else
will
figure
it
out
like
that's,
not
really,
particularly
what
you're
supposed
to
do
as
a
facilitator.
When
you
have
to
fulfill
a
mandate
right,
I
mean
obviously
barring
medical
ex
problems.
H
H
I
have
a
lot
of
empathy
and
sympathy
for
that
situation
that
real
world
finance
is
in
it's
kind
of
a
little
bit
of
a
jam,
but
I
think
the
only
way
out
is
to
be
hyper,
proactive
and
hyper
communicative,
and
I
just
haven't
particularly
seen
that
you
know
the
real
world
the
office
hours
yesterday
was
the
first
thing
we've
really
heard
in
two
weeks,
and
so
that's
why
I'm
just
leaning
a
little
bit
more
towards
like
the
unfortunate
solution,
but,
like
I
said
I
mean
approving
mips
65
shouldn't
be
too
hard.
H
I
think
we
should
be
able
to
just
do
that
legal
work.
I
don't
understand
why
that's
that
difficult,
but,
more
importantly,
is
again
the
mandate
right
and
it
being
clear
what
is
happening
every
everything
that
all
the
comments
that
have
been
going
on
in
the
chat,
et
cetera
up
into
even
in
the
forum
for
the
past
two
weeks,
have
just
been
a
lack
of
clarity
and
communications
that
aren't
transparent
right,
and
so
we
have
to
as
a
community
just
do
a
lot
better,
so
yeah,
that's
it
go
ahead.
E
You
tim,
I
just
want
to
say
I
largely
agree
with
you.
I
just
think
yeah.
I
think
two
weeks
is
even
too
long.
I
think
even
one
week
of
limbo
is
too
long,
and
that
means
not
fulfilling
your
mandate
and
I
think
that
unfortunately
compels
action
from
delegates
or
others
to
get
the
wheels
moving
again,
because.
E
And
the
core
unit
is
the
one
with
the
mandate
and
who
should
be
doing
that.
But
when
they're
not
someone
else
has
to
step
up
and
we
can't
expect
other
coins
to
cover
what
one
core
unit
that
is
supposed
to
be
doing.
It
is
not
doing
so.
I
think
in
my
mind,
a
natural
way
forward
will
be
to
actually
present
an
off-boarding
proposal
for
the
community's
consideration.
E
It
is
to
approve
either
one
of
the
two
proposals
have
been
put
forward
for
funding
to
cover
the
legal
expenses
and
potentially
even
other
professional
expenses.
A
D
I
Maker
man
asked
him
if
he
saw
himself
working
there
in
six
to
12
months.
He
said
he
did
not
think
so
was
or
he
he
did
not
expect
to
or
something
to
that
regard.
Basically,
he
seems
like
he's
between
a
rock
and
a
hard
place,
or
you
know
it's
kind
of
frozen.
I
You
know
whether
that's
on
him
or
or
not.
You
know,
the
fact
of
the
matter
is
rwf
is
apparently
neither
winding
itself
down
nor
trying
to
perform
its
duties
as
normal.
I
mean
this
whole
nip.
65
thinks
a
great
example,
and
you
know
I'm
getting
emails
from
from
people
being
like
hey.
We
were
told
that
they
can't
devote
resources
to
our
our
application
like
so
that's
that's
kind
of
where
we're
at.
H
Yeah,
I
actually
want
to
interject
on
that
and
echo
it
obviously,
of
course,
but
I
would
really
recommend
not
picking
my
new
paper
just
blasting
off
that
point.
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
asset
originator,
conversations
or
counterparties.
Whatever
way
you
want
to
put
it
where
people
are
are
talking
either
they're,
not
part
of
the
pipeline
or
it's
just
in
dms.
H
I
really
would
urge
everyone
to
try
and
bring
those
counterparties
to
the
community
a
little
bit
more.
I
think
the
lack
of
transparency
is
leading
to
more
miscommunication,
even
if
it's
completely
well
intentioned.
I.
I
Mean
so
you
know
if
you're
coming,
to
make
you're
looking
for
money.
Well,
first
of
all,
yeah.
You
know
we
can't
just
take
everything
they
say
at
face
value,
but
another
thing
is,
you
know,
they're
going
to
try
to
smooth
everything
over
they're
not
going
to
want
to
rock
the
boat
while
asking
for
millions
of
dollars.
So
I
don't
think
that
we
can
expect
public.
I
K
K
They
they
were
trying
to
on
board
btc
synthetic
of
btc
and
ended
up
getting
a
bug
that
printed
like
three
billion
of
their
stablecoin
akala
usd
so
sometimes
in
life.
You
need
to
like
take
it
slow
man.
I
kind
of
appreciate
now
how
pe
as
slow
as
slow
can
get,
but
they
do
it
for
a
reason.
Well,
but.
I
This
is
not
intentional
slowness,
because
it's
being
careful,
it's
there's
just
literally
no
one
doing
the
work
right
like
there's
no
butts
in
seats,
there's
nobody
there
doing
anything,
and
so
I
you
know
I
I
you
know,
you
know
whether
it's
just
close
up
shop
or
hire
new
people
like
pick
one
is,
I
guess
my
position
this
this
in
between.
If
we
still
have
an
rwf
and
so
people
are
still
showing
up
with
applications,
we
had
like
a
canadian
lender
show
like
a
reputable
lender.
I
think
show
up
on
the
forum
yesterday.
I
K
Yeah,
it's
rfa,
which
is
a
centrifuge
introduced
them
to
maker
thou,
make
without
community.
So
it's
similar
to
block
tower,
but
yeah
it
is
a
different
jurisdiction,
so
I
actually
was
looking
at.
K
We,
we
onboarded
a
lot
of
uni,
swap
lp
tokens
and
there
were
trash
right
and
then
the
the
true
ones
are
ethereum
right.
Arguably
bit
goes
wbtc,
maybe
that's
trash
too.
Who
knows,
but
you
know
it
suit,
trial
and
error,
and
I
think
that
we
all
need
to
take
a
page
out
of
the
protocol
engineering
playbook
and
just
take
it
slow.
It's
okay
for
a
bunch
of
people
to
want
to
get
a
piece
of
the
action
from
the
maker
dao
protocol,
but
why
rush
it?
K
E
Thank
you.
I
just
want
to
try
to
at
least
put
some
silver
lining
on
this.
As
far
as
reputational
damage
go,
I
think
dealing
with
maker
is
in
many
cases
like
dealing
with
a
government
rather
than
a
business
organization.
Right.
E
I
have
a
little
bit
of
experience
with
that,
and
I
know
some
commercial
interests
can
find
that
tedious
and
troubling,
but
generally
they
are
still
drawn
to
the
amount
of
money
on
the
other
side
of
the
table,
so
they're
willing
to
to
work
with
a
little
bit
of
friction
a
little
bit
of
hard
processes,
because
one
one
way
some
government
action
works
is
that
you
basically
have
bureaucracy
that
starts
to
work
on
all
these
deals,
similar
to
how
we
have
the
core
units,
but
then
you
have
to
get
approval
from
the
political
side,
and
usually
that
goes
all
right,
but
sometimes
you
have
political
hitler's
like
you
could
imagine
we
have
here
at
makerbot,
so
suddenly
governance
doesn't
really
want
to
talk
together
or
we
get
some
sort
of
trouble
on
the
government
side.
E
A
A
Okay,
damn
stupid.
D
F
Actually,
not
sure,
maybe
you
could
just
give
me
a
brief
yes
or
no
on
that.
Are
you
actually
expecting?
We
are
not
going
to
do
any
reload
assets
because
of
the
end
game.
B
F
Okay,
to
be
more
precise,
frank
was
saying
something
like
we
don't
know
if
there
is
a
new
paradigm
by
the
end
of
the
year
or
something
like
this
yeah.
B
F
Okay,
but
maybe
maybe
okay,
this
is
going
maybe
going
to
ed
going
to
open
a
whole
other
can
of
worms
yeah.
But
for
me
the
end
game
thing
is
something
that's
going
to
take
quite
some
time
and
that's
my
whole
frustration
about
the
end
game
is
because
we
have
a
business
running
right
now
and
even
if
we
want
to
go
for
the
end
game,
there
is
a
business
running
right
now
and
yeah.
B
Do
we
just
want
to
drop
all
of
that?
No,
I
agree
100,
but
that's
like
will's
interpretation,
and
this
is
what's
frustrating
about
it
because
that's
like
I'm
like
sorry
but
he's
very
cautious.
Just
that
was
my
impression
and
out
of
an
abundance
of
caution
he's
like
treading
it
very
carefully
in
this
direction.
That's
what
was
my
takeaway
of
the
call
yesterday
and
personally,
I
think
this
is
a
tao
things
happen
at
breakneck
speed
and
actually
my
ideal
facilitator
for
other
polif
is
somebody
who
can
stomach
this
risk.
You
know
so
there's
that.
A
F
A
A
A
lot
of
comments
in
the
chat
there.
D
Sorry,
that's
just
going
to
say
like
yeah,
that's,
you
can
propose
anything
right
like,
but
I
think
the
the
main
problem
is
whoever
is
paying
for
the
legal
work
is
presumably
also
making
sure
that
that
it's
done
correctly,
that
it's
done
completely
and
all
this
other
stuff,
and
so
I
think
that's
why
the
source
is
perhaps
important
to
consider,
but
like
practically
right,
there's
a
job
that
needs
to
be
done.
We
have
someone
who's
willing
to
do
the
job
if
they
get
paid
to
do
so.
D
No
but
yeah
I
mean,
generally
speaking,
if
you
do
something
with
the
anticipation
that
maker
governance
will
make
it
right
later.
I
would
advise
caution
on
that,
because
it's
up
to
the
token
holders
if
they
follow
through
with
that.
A
Thank
you,
dude
we're
coming
up
to
our
last
few
minutes,
today's
office
hours
any
parting
thoughts
or
end
thoughts.
It's
been
a
very
lively
discussion,
really
appreciate
everybody's
input.
I
know
that
we're
going
to
continue
some
discussion
of
this
in
our
gnr
call
coming
up
next,
I
wanted
to
open
the
floor
for
the
last
minute
or
two.
If
any
of
the
party
comments.
K
I
think
we
should
just
cluster
into
the
metadata
paradigm
and
that's
my
that's
the
fifth
opportunity
I
get
to
say:
metadow
or
endgame,
I'm
not
sure
how
bad
it
does.
You're
allowed,
but
three
meta,
dials
and
five
end
games,
but
no
seriously
cluster
and
look
folks
every
single
portion
of
clustering.
You
folks
get
to
vote.
Okay,
if
you
don't
like
it
vote.
No,
if
you
like
it
load.
Yes,
this
this
end
game,
yes,
sure
it's
complicated,
it
could
change.
K
A
H
E
Make
a
little
little
message
to
our
contributors,
because
this
is,
after
all,
this
is
called
the
delegates
office
hours
right.
So
I
think
I
think
there
should
be
some.
Not
everything
needs
to
be
the
structured
debate
form
and
we
are
in
a
period
of
quite
a
bit
of
negativity
right.
We
have
these
legal
issues,
we
have
the
downturn
economically,
we're
talking
about
cutting
budgets,
and
I
just
want
to
say
that,
at
least
from
my
perspective
nobody's
really
out
to
hurt
anyone
here.
I
can
understand
the
fear
and
frustration.
E
People
are
feeling
these
days
because,
frankly,
it's
not
a
great
time
right,
but
as
a
delegate,
I'm
trying
to
see
the
whole-
and
I
think
every
every
other
delegate
also
trying
to
see
the
whole
that
doesn't
mean
does
not
mean
we're
out
to
get
anyone
or
trying
to
make
people's
lives
miserable,
but
we're
actually
tasked
with
trying
to
make
the
whole
survive.
E
And
that
means
that
sometimes
we
have
to
make
some
unpleasant
decisions,
and
I
know
we
can
some
of
the
things
we
say
can
seem
very
confrontational
and
maybe
even
hurtful.
But
that
is
definitely
not.
The
intention.
Intention
is
to
drive
a
debate,
to
try
to
figure
out
the
optimal
way
to
make
sure
everyone
gets
out
of
this
as
best
as
we
can.
At
least
that
is
my
perspective,
so
yeah
I
just
wanted
to
put
that
one
out
there.
A
Justin,
thank
you.
That's
I
think.
That's
a
great
end
thought
for
today
has
been
a
very
good
conversation.
Thank
you
all
for
joining
us.
I
know
we're
going
to
continue
this
conversations
in
the
forum
and
in
discord.
If
you
can,
please
try
to
make
it
to
the
gnr
call
that's
coming
up
next
again.
Thank
you
all
thomas
florida
govcoms.