►
Description
Introducing two of the proposed delegates for MakerDAO Governance, Monet-Supply and Nick Cannon.
Maker Forum: https://forum.makerdao.com/
Maker Chat: https://chat.makerdao.com/
Delegate UI: https://vote.makerdao.com/delegates?network=mainnet
Host - LongForWisdom
Forum - LongForWisdom
Chat - LongForWisdom
Monet-Supply:
Delegate Platform - https://forum.makerdao.com/t/monetsupply-delegate-platform/9545
Forum - monet-supply
Maker Chat - monet-supply
Twitter - MonetSupply
Nick Cannon
Nick Cannon Delegate Platform - https://forum.makerdao.com/t/gauntlet-delegate-platform/9675
Forum - inkymaze
Chat - inkymaze
Twitter - inkymaze
Bio - https://gauntlet.network/about/
Gauntlet:
Webiste - https://gauntlet.network/
MakerDAO Auction Assessment - https://maker-report.gauntlet.network/
A
Hello,
everyone
and
welcome
to
the
make
a
dao
meow
delegates
meeting
number
three
getting
the
right
meeting
name
is
important
yeah,
so
yeah
we've
had
two
of
these.
So
far
with
a
couple
of
our
recognized
delegates,
we
have
another
two
of
our
recognized
delegates
or
are
soon
to
be
recognized
delegates
this
week.
So
this
week
we
have
money
supply
and
we
have
gauntlets
so
yeah.
A
For,
for
those
who
don't
know
the
structure
of
these
meetings,
is
we
give
each
of
the
delegates
sort
of
so
they
got
half
an
hour.
They
can
spend
a
little
bit
of
time
sort
of
presenting
their
position
and
then
it's
got
an
open
q,
a
for
anyone
who's
here
to
ask
questions
and
these
meetings
will
be
recorded
and
put
on
on
youtube.
B
All
right
so
yeah,
my
name,
is
money
supply.
A
little
bit
of
background
about
myself.
I
have
been
in
crypto
since,
like
early
2020
maker,
dow
was
the
first
community
that
I
kind
of
landed
in
and
it's
it's
stuck,
it's
kind
of
where
I
feel
at
home
most
in
crypto,
despite
having
some
other
engagements
here
and
there
so
yeah.
B
B
We
are
pretty
much
breaking
even
on
like
a
cash
basis
right
now,
but
we
we
need
more
talent
and
more
core
units,
as
time
goes
on,
so
that
the
expenses
are
going
to
be
growing.
And
then
we
also
have
non-cash
expenses
for,
like
core
unit
maker
token
investing.
So
we've
gotten
really
big
in
the
past
year.
But
I
still
think
that
we
need
to
scale
up
to
kind
of
reach
a
point
of
self-sustainability.
B
And
with
that
being
said,
I'm
not
too
concerned
with
breaking
even
now.
If
we
can
make
you
know
sound
investments
that
lead
to
more
growth
and
kind
of
more
self-sustainability
in
the
future.
I
think
it's
it's
okay.
If
we
have
negative
cash
flow,
if
we
need
to
even
like
sell
tokens
into
the
market
in
some
cases,
I
think
that's
all
right.
B
B
B
People
won't
try
to
kind
of
undermine
maker,
dow
to
eke
out
a
profit
or
push
their
own
competing
product.
Or
what
have
you
and
I
think,
there's
you
know
a
lot
of
like
interesting
products
and
services
that
we
can
offer
with
others
where,
if
we
partner
up
we,
we
can
kind
of
have
like
a
force
multiplier
effect,
where
we
don't
necessarily
need
to
build
everything
in-house.
We
don't
need
to
do
everything
ourself.
B
B
You
know,
however
much
vested
interests
are
going
to
want
to
keep
us
down.
I
think
that
gives
us
like
a
huge
advantage
and
a
lot
of
like
safety
against
regulators
so
yeah,
I
think
that's
that's
an
important
element
and
then
just
kind
of
on
like
a
sort
of
organizational
level.
I
think
we
have
to
like
make
sure
that
values
are
greater
than
than
value
and
what
I
mean
by
that.
Is
that
like?
Why?
Why?
Why
are
we
participating
in
maker?
Now?
B
I've
got.
You
know
plenty
of
opinions
on,
like
other,
more
small
scale,
stuff
impacting
the
dao
which
we
can
get
into
later
and
then
just
a
brief
section
on
conflicts
which
I
don't
know
I
might
have
like
among
the
most
listed
out
of
anybody
just
because
I
get
my
hands
in
a
lot
of
places,
but
I
work
for
the
make
a
risk
team
get
paid
by
maker
dow.
B
B
I
also
work
with
tally,
which
is
a
governance
like
front
end
interface,
so
I
have
some
like
employee
stock
stuff
with
them,
and
I
don't
see
that
as
likely
being
a
conflict.
I
I
think,
if
anything
tally,
you
know
wants
to
figure
out
how
we
can
support
maker
dow
and
like
get
more
people
and
more
visibility
into
the
governance
space
here,
but
worth
calling
out
investments.
You
know
a
bunch
of
crypto
tokens.
If
you
want
to
check
you
can
see
them
in
my
ens
account.
B
That's
pretty
much
everything
and
a
couple
private
investments,
one
into
ldo
tokens,
which
is
the
governance
token
of
lido
dow,
so
that
might
have
like
some
potential
for
conflicts.
You
know
again,
I'm
you
know
committed
to
making
sure
that
that
doesn't
cloud.
My
judgment
and
you
can
see
those
in
my
ens
and
the
the
terms-
are
public
and
then
also
in
rabbit
hole,
which
is
like
a
kind
of
like
a
crypto
learning
quest
platform,
which
I
don't
really
think.
B
There's
much
conflict
there,
but
worth
calling
out
and
then
beyond
that
I
I
do
various
like
work
with
other
protocols
so
most
notably
compound
and
uniswap,
I'm
on
their
grants,
program
committees
and
then
I'm
like
a
big
voter
for
those
protocols
as
well.
So
I
think
in
most
cases
it's
it's
not
really
too
much
opportunity
for
conflict,
but
definitely
something
for
others
to
be
aware
of,
and
something
that
I'm
going
to
be.
B
B
C
Keep
firing
classy,
you
can
both
in
terms
of
growing,
to
die
supply,
but
also
be
aware
of
regulators
and
and
kind
of
working
with
them
to
a
certain
extent
there.
So
how
do
you
feel
about
real
world
assets?
That
maker
like?
Are
there
different
ways
you
want
to
see
prioritized
or
for
cautions
that
that
you
feel
you'll
be
acting
on
as.
B
Yeah,
I'm
trying
to
get
more
and
more
familiar
over
time
with
with
how
maker's
handling
them.
I
think
so.
I
I
have
like
a
bit
of
like
a
trad
five
background.
I
worked
at
like
a
fintech
blender
for
several
years
before
I
got
into
crypto
one
thing:
I've
learned
is
you
can't
rely
on
borrowers,
providing
you
info
honestly.
B
So
I
think
that's
I
I
know
the
real
world
finance
team
is,
you
know
digging
in
a
lot,
but
I
would
be
concerned
that
you
know
anytime
that
we're
taking
a
borrower
at
face
value.
That's
that's
an
opportunity
for
them
to
take
advantage
and
there's
you
know
strong
incentives
for
people
to
lie,
and
I
think
maker
has
like
relatively
less
recourse
than
if
we
were
just
like
a
bank
and
we
could
like
bring
a
case
against
somebody
for
bank
fraud.
So
that's
a
concern
of
mine.
B
I
also
need
to
wrap
my
head
around
what
you
know.
What
sort
of
constitutes
someone
just
permissionlessly
using
maker,
dow
versus
like
having
a
customer
relationship
with
some
of
these
originators.
It
seems
like
if
we
are
taking
on
customers
versus
just
you
know.
Basically,
releasing
software
and
hey
anybody
use
it
that
there's
some.
B
B
B
B
B
B
We,
you
know
have
like
not
that
huge
of
exposure,
and
I
think
the
general
idea
is
that
we're
gonna,
you
know
scale
it
up
as
we
grow
more
confident
in
the
way
it
works
and
I
think,
b
protocol.
You
know,
to
the
extent
that
the
dow
decides
to
move
forward
with
that
a
similar
setup
will
make
sense.
You
know
making
sure
the
exposure
is
small.
We
can
kind
of
test
and
learn,
see
what
breaks
see,
what
the
risk
factors
are
and
then
only
increase
scope
when
we,
when
we
have
more
confidence.
A
All
right,
so,
if
no
one
else
has
one,
then
I
guess
I
will
jump
to
one
from
the
from
the
list
see
I'm
curious,
like
you
know,
in
the
future,
like
the
the
portfolio
of
assets
that
backs
die
like
where
do
you
see
like
that
break
like
how
do
you
see
that
breakdown
looking,
I
guess
right
in
terms
of
between,
like
real
assets,
between
like
decentralized
assets
between
potentially
centralized
stable
coins
of
various
types
like
I
guess
what
would
you?
What
do
you
want
to
see
for
that?
B
Yeah
great
question:
I
think
that
I've
sort
of
like
shifted
a
little
bit
over
the
past
year,
where
I
think
that
having
a
portion
of
centralized,
stable
coins
really
increases
dye's
stability
and
utility
in
important
ways
like
being
able
to
just
take
dye
and
then
bridge
it
to
fiat
without
huge
slippage,
and
you
know
crazy
sort
of
like
this
whole
process
is
really
valuable
and
that'll
help
us
with
onboarding
real-world
assets.
That'll
help
us
with
people
being
actually
able
to
use
dye
in
their
daily
life
for
like
non-crypto
non-financial
purposes.
B
So
I
would
be
happy
to
see
you
know
long
run,
maybe
like
10
to
20
of
centralized
stable
coins
or
other
kind
of
like
highly
liquid.
You
know
basically,
convertible
to
fiat
ish
assets.
I
would
like
to
see
you
know
in
that
bucket
I'd
like
to
see
a
lot
more
diversification
of
counterparties.
So
the
fact
that
it's
like
all
usdc
right
now
is
not
good.
I
and
I
you
know,
in
fact
I
think
uscc
has
like
kind
of
the
weaker
legal
situation
about
like
what
what
investments
they
make
versus
other
options.
B
B
Yeah
there's
one
risk
that
the
centralized
financial
system
could
just
totally
rug,
pull
us,
but
then
there's
another
risk
that
you
could
have
like
a
you
know:
70
down
daily
candle
and
just
you
know,
wreck
the
entire
crypto
lending
ecosystem,
the
leverage
system.
So
you
know,
I
think,
for
now
it's
it's
kind
of
our
best
way
to
rebalance
away
from
too
much
stable
coins,
but
in
the
long
run
I
I'm
assuming
that
it'll
probably
be
like
maybe
half
of
our
collateral
base.
B
If
that
and
I
tend
to
think
that's
okay
like
even
if,
like
even
in
a
situation
where
the
government
like
kind
of-
does
pull
the
rug
on
on
maker
dow
like
unless
the
entire
u.s
banking
system
has
collapsed,
the
end
users
die
holders
should
still
be
able
to
get
their
money
back.
You
know
the
u.s
is
a
system
of
laws.
B
They
might
say
that
maker
is
illegal
and
you
know
needs
to
be
shut
down,
but
they
would
have
a
very
hard
time
saying
all
of
the
individual.
You
know
users
of
maker
dow
deserve
to
get
wiped
out.
So
I
think
that
you
know
a
balance
of
centralized
and
decentralized
assets
is
good
and
then
the
yeah,
the
the
remainder
to
real
world
assets,
but
I
think
that
we're
just
so
young
in
the
space
that,
like
all
of
our
counterparties,
are
gonna
kind
of
know
how
this
stuff
works
better
than
us.
B
D
Yeah,
I
can
jump
in
so
I've
asked
all
the
candidates
up
until
now
about
their
thoughts
on
pay
for
delegates
and
political
party
like
the
potential
formation
of
political
parties.
I
guess
I
just
want
to
back
up
and
taking
in
a
little
bit
of
a
different
direction,
like
I
think
clone
for
wisdom
has
done
a
really
good
job
of
outlining
the
potential
benefits
of
implementing
delegation
in
the
posts
that
have
gone
up
in
the
forum.
D
B
I
guess
yeah,
like
the
you
know,
the
biggest
risk
I
see
is
that
delegates
have
the
power
of
you
know
voting
tokens
in
a
certain
way,
but
they
don't
actually
have
the
direct
financial
stake
of
all
those
tokens.
So
you
know,
theoretically,
it
might
make
more
sense
for
people
to
cut
like
side
deals
where
they're
getting
paid
for
something.
B
B
So
I'm
not
exactly
sure
how
that
risk
is
mitigated.
I
think
you
know
it's
kind
of
uncomfortable,
but
like
a
lot
of
it
kind
of
relies
on
people
valuing
their
reputation,
and
you
know
stuff
like
that.
That's
kind
of
intangible,
where,
like
any
at
least
the
way
I
personally
feel
about
it,
is
like
any
sort
of
like
weird
side
deals
that
someone
could
cut
with
me
like.
I
don't
need
the
money
and
I
would
prefer
reputation
and
respect,
but
it's
yeah.
I
think
it
is
it's.
B
But
yeah
I
would
just
encourage
anyone
who
is
a
delegate
like
you
know,
don't
be
afraid
to
like
ruffle
ruffle
some
feathers.
Try
and
do
it
nicely,
but
you
know
as
long
as
you're
really
resolute
about
just
speaking
your
minds
and
like
not
kind
of
doing
like
quit
pro
quo
like
I'll.
Take
it
easy
on
you.
If
you
take
it
easy
on
me,
then
then
most
of
the
kind
of
issues
that
I'm
seeing
could
be
avoided.
E
A
We
move
on
if
anyone
has
anything
yeah,
so
I
guess,
do
you
have
any
thoughts
or
sort
of
opinions
on
like
scaling
like
the
dow
itself,
like
the
organization?
Is
there
anything
you
think
we
should
be
doing
better
or
with
we're
currently
doing
we're
currently
doing?
Well,
I
guess
or
anything
we
can
improve
and
all
this
sort
of
stuff.
B
I
think
that
would
be
like
a
great
point
of
growth
and
then
I
think,
also
being
able
to
like
attribute
like
sort
of
finances
on
a
more
granular
scale.
Like
we
know.
Okay,
you
know
such
and
such
core
unit
is
taking
this
much
money
and
you
know
each
fault
type
or
what
have
you?
We
can
kind
of
attribute
how
much
revenue
it's
getting
but
being
able
to
like
attribute
costs.
B
You
know
a
lot
kind
of
more
specifically
like
okay:
what's
the
cost
of
onboarding
a
collateral
type,
what's
the
cost
of
maintaining
a
collateral
type?
And
then
we
can
kind
of
get
an
idea
of
like.
What's
our
break-even
point
for
each
individual
like
business
line
or
service
that
we're
offering,
I
think,
that'll
be
really
valuable.
So
yeah,
maybe
like
also
like
more
of
like
a
just
dedicated
finance
department
which,
like
real
world
finances
or
asset
core
unit,
has
been
kind
of
taking
that
under
their
wing.
A
B
A
B
Yeah,
I
I'm
slowly.
I
took
some
time
off
of
messages,
but
I'm
slowly
catching
up,
so
I
would
say
just
get
at
me
in
the
like
maker
chat
or
use
the
forum
direct
messages,
twitter
messages
you
can
try,
but
I
am
like
not
good
at
responding
to
those
so
and
yeah.
I'm,
hopefully
gonna
catch
up
and
be
more
available
in
the
maker
message
mediums.
A
Perfect
all
right,
well,
yeah
huge,
thank
you
to
your
money,
thanks
for
coming
on
and
doing
this
looking
forward
to
see
how
things
go
in
the
future,
all
right.
So
that
brings
us
to
to
our
second
perspective,
recognized
earlier.
I
suppose
so
that'll
be
gauntlets.
Do
you
guys
have
a
presentation
or
anything
you
wish
to
share?
No.
F
A
F
So
with
those
in
mind,
we
will
broadly
seek
to
provide
insights
into
those
quantitative
decisions
with
a
focus
on
market
risk.
That's
the
core
competency
of
gauntlet
and
while
that
might
seem
like
a
small
box
or
a
tight
framework
to
think
around,
this
is
a
financial
platform.
This
is
a
financial
currency,
and
this
touches
a
lot
of
things.
F
It
will
be
situational
if
we
we
do
or
don't
weigh
in
of
why
that
extension
should
be,
should
occur
or
will
occur,
but
one
of
the
hide
you
know
be
a
bit
more
proactive
about
that
because
sometimes
when
those
situations
do
occur
or
when
those
votes
do
come
up
or
proposals
do
come
up,
it's
better
be
ahead
of
them.
As
we've
found
in
the
past
previous
delegate
positions,
we've
had
on
other
protocols.
F
What
else
should
I
highlight,
as
I
mentioned,
we'll
look
to
support
any
sort
of
measure
that
maximizes
risk
adjusted
protocol
income
through
parameter
changes,
onboarding
collateral
and
other
means
die
is
a
currency
and
things
that
affect
this
currency
and
the
platform
mkr
more
broadly,
should
be
considered.
You
know
with
this
lens
almost
always
top
of
mind,
we'll
also
look
to
support
measures
that
don't
materially
impact
the
risk
of
insolving
depth
of
the
protocol.
F
Conflicts
of
interest.
Gallant
obviously
works
with
a
number
of
other
protocols
that
some
may
be
considered
competitors.
Some
definitely
are
not,
but
we
will
continue
to
deploy
the
platform
on
other
protocols
and
valves.
We
currently
hold
various
token
positions
outlined
in
the
delegate
platform
and
probably
will
do
so
going
forward
right
now.
F
Scotland
is
a
company
holds
no
nkr.
Personally,
some
of
our
investors
definitely
do
in
a
gauntlet
capacity.
I
guess
I
personally
sit
on
the
grounds
down
the
compact
grants
program
as
well
as
a
reviewer.
This
is
sort
of
a
temporary
position.
I
don't
foresee
this
affecting
my
my
viewpoint
or
my
capacity
helping
coordinate,
gauntlets
a
delegate
platform
for
maker,
but
I
wanted
to
call
that
out
as
well.
We
are
also
an
active
delegate
of
compound
and
venus
swap,
and
that
was
brief,
but
happy
to
field
any
broader
questions.
G
G
F
A
So
I
guess
I
have
a
question,
maybe
sort
of
more
more
specifically
for
for
you
guys
and
then
you're,
based
on
your
platform
than
in
general,
but
so
you
obviously
mentioned
how
you
would
sort
of
abstain
from
votes
that
you
thought
were
sort
of
recharged
or
sort
of
you
know.
People
were
sort
of
caring
a
lot
about
right.
A
F
A
good
question:
the
subset
is
much
bigger
than
you
think
I
think
there's
only
been
a
single
digit
number
of
proposals,
we've
actually
abstained.
You
know
one
example
top
of
mind.
Was
the
unit
swap
retroactive
for
the
proxy
contracts,
where
we
felt
like
that
the
community
should
decide
that
you
know
how
to
reason
about
that,
but
there
was
no
real
ad
value
ad
that
we
thought
we
could
bring
to
that
conversation
for
the
most
part,
we're
quite
heavily
active
in
all
of
those
proposals.
F
C
Good
question
as
it
relates
to
like
presence,
I
guess
like
first
off
like
how
do
you
plan
to
communicate
your
your
reasoning
for
votes
to
to
the
maker
community
and
second
off,
like
how
much
participation
can
we
expect
from
you
at
general
maker
calls
or
or
otherwise,
from
from
the
gauntlet
team?
I
guess
more
than
you
specifically.
F
Yeah,
we
definitely
want
to
be
more
proactive
or
more
active
in
community
calls
and
in
the
forums
as
it
relates
to
you
know
all
the
new
assets
you're
bringing
on
in
real
world
or
otherwise
tough
to
quantify
how
many
hours
that
might
be
we're.
A
team
currently
of
24
majority
of
people
are
developers
or
data
scientists
and
that
team's
growing
quite
rapidly.
You
know,
infrastructure
in
and
around
all
of
d5
is
something
we're
you
know,
keeping
top
in
mind.
F
A
lot
of
people
are
using
cdp's,
as
you
might
imagine,
not
just
you,
and
we
still
think
about
that
constantly
how
it
affects
player,
twos
and
bridges,
and
things
of
that
nature.
So
maker
is
definitely
top
of
mind.
We,
I
think,
you'll
find
myself
probably
coordinating
the
majority
of
our
communications,
usually
trying
to
digest
what
data
scientists
and
developers
say
into
a
more
human,
readable
format
for
the
most
part,
whether
it's
heat
maps
or
analytics.
So
it
makes
sense
to
the
rest
of
us
layman's,
but
that's
what
we
can
definitely
commit
to
right
now.
C
F
F
So
if
you
want
to
wonder
like
how
does
gauntlet
broadly
reason
about
real-world
assets-
or
you
know
assets
with
this
sort
of
market
cap
or
something
like
that,
not
to
say
we
won't,
you
know,
make
a
situation
by
situation,
judgment
call
and
analysis,
but
it
might
be
helpful
for
people
to
understand
our
platform
more
broadly
and
we'll
try
to
get
that.
You
know
more
public
as
as
we
make
that
a
bit
more
robust.
G
Yeah,
it's
really
interesting.
I
I
find
it
so
interesting
that
there's
delegates
that
are
proposing
themselves
as
individuals
and
then
there
are
delegates
that
are
proposing
themselves
as,
like
you
know,
a
team
like
gauntlet.
You
know,
maybe
the
individual
who's
actually
doing
the
vote
changes,
but
the
background
you
know,
like
expertise,
insight
and
work
that
you
guys
do
will
definitely
improve
the
quality
of
your
activity.
So
so
thank
you.
I
just
want
to
express
that
gratitude
for,
for
you
guys
putting
up
a
delegate
platform
yeah.
Definitely.
A
F
So
there's
like
parts
of
that
which
are
qualitative
right,
like
community
brand
building
expansion
and
growth
of
dye,
which
we
will
you
know,
broadly
abstain
from
that
part
of
it,
but
the
other
part
of
it,
which
I
think
should
be
taken
or
weighed
heavily
in
any
sort
of
consideration,
is
like
how
does
this
risk
the
core
protocol
like?
What?
What
risk
does
it
add
to
the
insolvency?
What
risk
does
it
add
to
the
dice
supply,
et
cetera,
et
cetera
and
all
of
those?
F
How
quickly
you
can
change
risk
parameters
or
something
like
that
right,
and
we
definitely
have
opinions
in
the
around
that,
as
those
change
protocol
to
protocol
are
quite
different,
but
should
it
affect
how
risk
is
managed
we,
whether
it's
you
know
just
in
solidity
contracts?
We
will
definitely
be
weighing
in.
C
F
F
F
H
You
can
hear
what's
an
expanding
die
to
other
layer
ones,
part
one
part
two
about
gradual,
decentralization
right.
So
if
we
get
20,
I
should
say
less-
maybe
five
gauntlets
to
be
the
top
five
maker
delegates.
How
do
you
think
that
would
bold
when
it
comes
to
gradual
decentralization,
as
some
people
are
asking.
F
Yeah,
I
hate
to
be
a
broken
record
or
roll
back
up
to
the
top,
but
quantitative
risk
management.
We
we
analyze
all
protocols
or
layer
ones
and
there's
an
opportunity
because
we've
called
it
a
a
company
and
a
platform
think
about
you,
know
servicing
and
helping
projects
and
protocols
on
those
layers.
So
a
lot
of
that
decision
making
has
been
done
or
is
consistently
updated.
As
you
know,
solana
and
polkadot
and
other
ecosystems
start
to
evolve.
Hopefully
we
can
bring
some
of
that
work.
A
F
F
Is
there
a
risk
of
centralization
or
colluding?
Yes
like,
let's,
let's
not
like
sugarcoat
that
have
we
seen
that
or
have
we
been
broached
that
on
other
platforms
or
other
platform
or
protocols
where
we're
delegates?
No,
we
try
to
do
as
much
as
possible
out
in
the
open,
whether
it's
forum,
posts
or
arts,
or
you
know
all
of
our
proposals
or
try
to
get
ahead
of
comments
and
criticisms
as
best
as
possible,
not
always
perfectly,
but
I
think
to
monet's
spy's
point.
A
All
right,
yeah!
Oh
thank
you
for
frank,
here's,
the
mic,
it's
not
so
good
yeah!
I
think
we
saw
another.
The
question
in
the
in
the
sidebar,
which
is
one
curt,
asked
on
the
maker
chat
the
other
day
like
what
is
that?
What
do
you
feel
the
purpose
of
make
a
dao
is:
what
is
the
purpose
of
make
it
out
to.
A
We
have
some
questions
about
maybe
coming
back
to
something
we
sort
of
alluded
to
before.
So
obviously
you
talked
a
lot
about
the
quantitative,
quantitative
risk
stuff
which
is
great
and
sort
of
how
that
kind
of
concerns
on
boarding
assets
like
spreading
to
other
ones
and
things
and
that's
like
and
that's
and
that's
been
great.
A
So
I
guess
my
question
is
more.
You
know
so
there's
a
lot
of
sort
of
internal
dow
things
that
happen
as
well.
It's
like
it's
like
sort
of
as
well
the
stuff
that
like
affects
the
protocol
right.
So
so
one
of
the
big
things
right
is
like
onboarding
core
units,
so
we've
onboarded
bunch
of
core
units
over
the
last
few
months.
A
You
know
we're
still
getting
proposals
coming
in
so
it
looks
like
we're
going
to
continue
to
you
know,
vote
on
on
onboarding
other
core
units.
So
I
guess
is
that
an
area
where
gauntlet
will
abstain
as
you've
kind
of
described
or
is
that
something
you
guys
will
attempt
to?
I
guess
quantifiably,
analyze
and
sort
of
figure
out
how
valuable
those
core
units
are
to
the
protocol.
F
A
E
D
All
the
delegates
questions
about
yeah,
I
guess
I
kind
of
repeat
my
question
from
earlier.
I
saw
the
delegates
on
other
calls
their
opinions
on
pay
for
delegates
and
the
potential
development
of
political
parties
in
maker.
Dow.
Do
you
see-
and
I
guess
you
know
where
I'm
coming
from-
is
just
thinking
about
potential
risks
that
might
come
with
the
introduction
of
delegation
like
I
see
a
lot
of
potential
benefits,
certainly,
but
I
think
there's
some
risks
to
keep
an
eye
towards
as
well,
so
how.
F
Not
particularly
working
with
other
delegates,
but
on
our
own,
as
I
sort
of
alluded
to
previously,
is
internally
we're
building
out
policies
and
guidelines
of
like
generally.
This
is
what
we
do
for
acid
onboarding
generally.
This
is
what
we
do
for
ltv
changes
generally.
This
is
what
we'll
do,
and
then
that
gives
us
a
you
know:
high-level
heuristic
framework
to
where
we
then
can
kick
off
modeling
and
where
we
go
so
it
helps
us
gen
or
generally.
F
We
abstain
from
these
kinds
of
votes
and
the
more
we
can
a
build
that
out
internally
and
then
make
that
externally.
Focused
people
can
hold
our
feet
to
the
fire
and
make
that
a
bit
more
predictable
in
our
platform,
and
then
you
know
votes.
We
will
participate
in
or
abstain
from
or
something
like
that.
Have
we
seen
a
person
or,
as
gauntlet,
have
we
seen
political
parties
form
in
and
around
other
protocols
or
we
do
do
we
think
that's
a
risk
in
the
short
run.
Probably
not
you
know,
it's
definitely
possible
right.
F
F
We
are
incorporated
in
delaware
and
we
have
revenues
and
things
of
that
nature
if,
if
political
interests
sort
of
side
track
that
we'd
be
very
concerned
personally
from
revenue
perspective
or
a
product
perspective
or
scaling
perspective,
and
would
probably
you
know,
step
away
this
delegating
or
and
having
delegation
platforms
is
quite
secondary
to
the
core
focus
of
the
business.
But
we
think
it
helps
grow
the
ecosystem
and
that's
why
we
participate
in
it.
A
So
maybe
for
people
who
sort
of
you
know,
I
guess
are
less
familiar
with
gauntlet
and
what
you
guys
do
to
the
extent
you
can.
Can
you
sort
of
briefly
sort
of
go
over
what
it
is
that
you
do
for
revenue?
I
guess
like
what
do
you?
How
do
you
make
profits
like
you
know,
and
do
you
think
any
of
these
things
you
know,
will
conflict
with
with
voting
and
make
it
out?
I
guess.
F
Yeah
so
as
a
risk
management
platform-
and
you
know
we
do
parameter
optimization
for
trading
fees
and
token
emissions
as
well.
For
you
know,
for
example,
decentralized
exchanges.
We
find
that
as
objective
as
we
can
get
or
as
as
we
can
make
our
models
as
objective
as
possible,
we
can
reduce
any
concerns
for
conflicts
of
interest.
F
Devi
is
far
from
zero
sum
and
as
we
want
to
see,
as
I
mentioned
previously,
we
definitely
want
to
see
these
platforms
grow
and
and
protocols
grow,
and
we
can
work
with
competing
platforms
for
the
reasons
that
we're
not
making
these
subjective
claims
or
trying
to
make
claims
of
what
the
growth
strategy
of
compound
should
be
or
unit
swap
or
maker.
Diodes
should
be
so,
hopefully
that
helps
disentangle
a
little
bit
any
sort
of
conflicts
of
interest.
A
So
I
guess
say
yeah,
so
thank
you.
That
was
those
that
was
helpful.
I
I
guess
maybe
just
sort
of
paint
hypothetical
right,
because
obviously
you
did
some
work
for
the
maker
protocol
before
right.
You
know,
so
I
guess,
would
you
be
incentivized
to
vote
to
do
things?
That's
the
maker
protocol
might
employ
you
to
audit
right.
F
F
Yeah,
no,
no,
no
firm
stance
on
anything.
We
sort
of
take
everything
situational
as
it
comes.
We
know
the
protocol
is
growing
quite
fast
with
the
rest
of
deep
eye,
and
hopefully
it
can.
You
know,
help
touch
on
or
help.
You
know
provide
that
lens
that
I
sort
of
highlighted
in
the
core
values
to
you
know
the
focuses
going
forward.
A
D
Well
yeah:
this
might
be
a
little
bit
in
the
weed.
So
if
you
want
to
pass
over
it,
please
feel
free,
but
I'm
curious.
So
I
I
have
a
vague
picture
of
how
you
can
apply
the
financial
modeling
and
stuff
to
like
system
parameters
and
things
like
that.
But
could
you
describe
how
you
might
apply
the
modeling
to
issues.
F
F
A
lot
of
those
protocols
are
also
considering
you
know,
risk
admin
roles
where
there's
functions
for
fast
and
slow
pass
of
governance.
Whether
if
there's
large
protocol
upgrades
that
you
know
drastically
change
how
the
protocol
functions
or
new
assets
come
on
board,
or
something
like
that,
that
would
be
an
obvious,
slow
path,
but
maybe
something
like
an
ltv
change
or
something
small.
Should
a
market
risk
arise,
or
we
see
something
like
that.
That
would
maybe
warrant
a
faster
path.
F
You
know
still
through
a
multi-sig
or
something
like
that
or
or
a
smaller
party
to
be
able
to
change
things
much
quicker.
We
definitely
like
to
weigh
in
on
those
decisions
we
have
opinions
of.
You
know
how
you
can
de-risk
the
protocol
based
on
governance,
especially
in
and
around
those.
So
hopefully
we,
as
you
know,
maker
and
the
community
and
the
protocol,
consider
those
in
development
just
more
broadly,
we
can,
you
know,
add
that
lens
and
opinion.