►
From YouTube: Meet Your Delegate | Ep. 7 Ft. JustinCase
Description
For this episode we have delegate candidate @JustinCase presenting their platform and holding an AMA session.
Delegate Platform: https://forum.makerdao.com/t/justincase-delegate-platform/11721
A
Hello,
everyone
and
welcome
to
make
a
taos
meet
your
delegates
number
seven.
Today
we
are
meeting
just
in
case
one
of
our
hopefully
new,
recognized
delegates
just
to
give
a
brief
overview
of
how
these
meetings
tend
to
run.
So
we
tend
to
have
the
the
delegates:
do
a
sort
of
brief
presentation,
kind
of
introduce
themselves
and
talk
a
little
bit
about
their
platform
and
then
the
rest
of
the
time
tends
to
go
to
to
the
audience.
A
To
answer
to
answer
questions
so
sorry
to
ask
questions:
have
the
delegates
who
will
answer
them?
That
makes
much
more
sense,
so
yeah
so
bear
in
mind.
This
is
being
recorded
so
trying
to
sort
of
talk
over
each
other,
but
yeah.
We
encourage
encourage
questions,
so
please
don't
be
afraid
to
chime
in
all
right.
So
justin
do
you
want
to
do
you
want
to
give
an
introduction.
B
B
If
anyone
here
sees
sort
of
pattern
emerging-
yes,
there
is,
but
this
has
also
given
me
appreciation
for
the
risks
involved.
The
arrows
do
not
only
go
up,
they
also
go
down
and
sometimes
dramatically
so,
and
I
think
that
is
also
a
valuable
experience
to
bring
into
this
sort
of
role
and
that
we
also
need
to
prepare
for
the
bad
times.
Even
when
everyone
is
having
a
party
and
everyone
is
making
lots
and
lots
of
money.
C
B
B
B
It's
a
little
bit
damaging
to
maker's
reputation
because,
given
the
elevator
pitch
just
seems
such
a
central
part
of
maker's
value
proposition,
that
prolonged
periods
of
no
burn
is
seen
as
sort
of
a
breach
of
contract
or
or
leads
to
a
loss
of
investor
confidence.
So
I
wanted
to
be
a
voice
and
to
give
that
sort
of
concern
of
voice.
B
B
If
people
don't
believe
that
we
will
actually
honor
the
one-to-one
stablecoin
promise,
the
whole
protocol
falls
apart,
but
that
trust
can
also
be
eroded
from
other
things
than
losing
the
pig
they
can
come
from
perceived,
broken
promises
and
trust
is
a
is
a
concept
that
is
hard
and
gradual
to
build.
You
usually
start
out
with
some
base
trust,
and
then
you
need
to
prove
that
trust
over
time
and
build
that
trust
with
other
actors.
B
B
Example
can
be
seen
in
the
discussion
that
is
going
around
the
offboarding
of
thematic
token,
where
you
sort
of
have
parts
of
the
maker
dao
who
are
have
made
a
commitment
to
another
protocol,
and
there
is
disagreement
whether
those
commitments
have
been
met
and
so
forth.
But
even
the
act
of
bringing
up
a
potential
for
off-boarding
them
can
be
seen
as
a
breach
of
commitments,
and
my
base
attitude
in
such
a
case
would
be
to
not
off-board
such
a
thing.
B
C
B
B
So
I
would
rather
focus
on
increasing
revenue
rather
than
reducing
costs
at
this
stage,
and
as
long
as
as
long
as
we
can
increase
revenue
more
than
we
increasing
cost,
I
still
think
we
have
a
winning
proposition
and
I
think
that
is
going
to
be
the
case
for
quite
a
while.
Yet
and
I
and
as
a
extension
of
this,
I
think
the
greatest
potential
for
make
a
dao
going
forward
right
now
is
in
real
world
finance.
B
B
Right
now,
like
I
said,
we're
in
very
innovative
space,
there's
a
lot
of
good
ideas
floating
around,
but
I
still
think
it
is
prudent
to
weigh
complexity
against
what
is
being
proposed.
Like
I'm
seeing
here.
If
I'm
given
a
choice
between
the
complex
and
a
less
complex
solution,
I
will
favor
the
less
complex
one
and
also
if
there
is
several
system
trying
to
do
more
or
less
the
same
thing,
I
would
want
those
merged
into
one
rather
than
have
separate
systems.
B
I
would
also
try
to
avoid
too
many
external
tokenized
systems
and
anything
that
adds
complexity,
because
everything
every
time
you
add
complexity,
you
add
risk
and
also
at
the
user
end
the
more
complexity.
You
add,
the
harder
it
the
higher
the
threshold
for
users
to
use
make
it
out.
So
I
will
favor
less
complex
solutions
if
they
are
presented.
B
That
leads
me
to
to
the
last
part
that
I
want
to
talk
about,
which
is
not
a
principle.
This
is.
This
is
not
going
to
guide
my
decisions
per
se,
but
it
is
a
little
bit
about
my
method
of
work
and
it
goes
into
communication
and
there's
also
something
you
can
see
an
example
of
in
my
in
my
reasoning
for
the
decisions
I
have
taken,
and
that
is
communication.
B
I
think
we
have
a
bridge
to
gap
when
it
comes
to
communication,
so
I
will
make
it
my
job
to
try
to
make
my
reasoning
as
easily
understandable
as
possible.
That
means
I'm
gonna
try
to
refrain
from
using
abbreviations.
I'm
gonna
try
to
refrain
from
using
too
many
technical
terms
if
there
is
a
simpler
way
to
explain
the
concepts
that
are
being
discussed.
B
My
goal
is
for
anyone
to
be
able
to
go
in,
read
these
reasonings
and
have
an
understanding
of
why
this
is
happening.
Even
people
from
outside
who's,
not
familiar
with
the
forums,
are
not
familiar
with
different
technic
terms
can
go
in
and
get
some
value
out
of.
Reading
those
reasonings,
and
I
will
also
try
to
be
active
on
other
platforms
and
communities
and
especially
in
relation
to
smaller
investors
and
try
to
explain
maker.
I
will
try
to
drum
up
enthusiasm
for
maker.
B
I
will
try
to
make
maker
more
accessible
for
lesser
actors,
because
I
think
we
are
doing
ourselves
a
disservice.
If
we're
putting
too
high
of
a
bar
in
this,
and
if
we're
catering
for
only
or
to
a
large
extent
to
existing
users,
then
we
will
actually
hamper
our
own
growth.
Growth
necessarily
has
to
come
for
someone
or
not
necessarily,
but
I
think
in
the
cryptosphere.
There
is
a
lot
of
potential
in
people
who
are
not
already
using
the
platform.
That
is
where
greatest
growth
potential
lies.
B
Obviously
existing
holders
once
collaterals
rise
in
value,
they
will
have
more
opportunity
to
mint
more
die.
The
way
the
system
is
constructed
right
now
and-
and
we
can
expect
some
growth
there,
but
if
we're
going
to
want
to
see
the
kind
of
growth
we've
been
having
so
far,
I
think
we
need
to
reach
into
other
segments
of
the
cryptic
population
and
try
to
attract
those,
and
in
that
I
think
we
need
to
have
easier
and
more
understandable
methods
of
communication.
B
So
I
guess
that
was
more
or
less
my
my
prepared
written
introduction.
So
I
hope
there
is
some
nice
questions
that
I
can
answer
and
I
hope
I
have
some
good
answer
for
you
like.
I
said
this
is
a
little
bit
intimidating,
because
I
have
been
listening
to
a
lot
of
very
intelligent
people
with
a
very
deep
knowledge
of
all
these
systems
speak
and
write
their
opinion
and,
like
I
said,
I'm
not
coming
at
this
from
a
technical
background.
B
A
D
D
So
a
few
examples,
like
one
ongoing
issue,
has
been
figuring
out
like
a
framework
to
get
legal
advice
and
act
on
that.
You
know
there's
a
lot
of
weirdness
because
we
have
different.
You
know.
Different
core
units
can
get
different
advice
and
that's
different
from
the
dow
getting
advice
as
a
whole.
You
know
I
can
also
throw
out
examples
like
hr,
and
even
operations
in
general
are
just
a
little
weird.
B
Yeah,
it's
a
very
cool
question.
Actually
I
the
thing
the
thing
with
make
it
out
is
you
have
a
very
flat
structure
right
and
you
have
very
several
autonomous
units,
so
I
think
you
do
have
something
of
a
coordination
problem
and,
as
you're
rightly
pointing
out
in
a
more
traditional
business,
you
would
have
more
of
a
hierarchy
of
this.
B
You
would
have
more
specialized
units
taking
care
of
accounting,
legal
advice
hr,
but
we're
trying
to
build
a
decentralized
organization
here,
and
I
think
part
of
that
is
actually
trying
to
live
with
some
of
these
pains
and
trying
to
figure
out.
I
I
see
some
good
things
going
forward
with
with
some
of
the
strategy
meetings
that
is
trying
to
to
put
a
little
bit
more
coordination
into
the
effort.
B
At
least
I
think
that
is
the
most
important
thing
to
sort
out
first,
and
maybe
some
of
these
support
functions
as
it
were,
could,
in
time
be
more
their
own
core
units
that
other
core
units
could
interact
with,
which
might
be
a
way
forward.
I
think
I
think
we
at
some
point.
We
have
to
figure
out
some
way
to
set
more.
B
More
more
followable
objectives
for
the
core
units,
so
they
have
more
of
a
guidance
of
where
they
want
to
go
when
it
comes
to
legal.
It's
it's
a
bit
of
a
it's
a
pretty
complex
issue
right
because
one
thing
is
getting
legal
advice,
but
the
first
question
was
when
you're
getting
legal,
why
is
it
for
which
jurisdiction
and
and
obviously
u.s
is
going
to
be
a
very
important
jurisdiction,
but
make
a
dao
could
potentially
be
embroiled
in
legal
disputes
in
any
jurisdiction
in
the
world?
So
so
already
there.
B
This
is
uncharted
land
and
and
if
we
can
come
up
with
workable
solutions
that
can
satisfy
legal
stakeholders,
I
think
we
are
well
served
by
sort
of
making
our
own
rules
set
and
kind
of
presenting
this
to
lawmakers,
although
otherwise-
because
I
think
when
it
comes
to
legal
issues,
I
think
the
primary
concern
different
governments
have
is
that
they
want
to
protect
their
citizens
from
scams.
They
want
to
protect
their
citizens
for
from
economic
instability.
These
are
the
major
major
issues
that
that
governments
hold
so
yeah.
B
B
C
Yeah,
I
kind
of
wanted
to
probe
your
thinking
a
little
bit
on
the
surface
bluffer.
You
mentioned,
you
know,
kind
of
burning
and
that
being
important
curious.
If
you
had
a
mental
model-
or
I
don't
know
some
sort
of
way
to
determine
like
what
an
appropriate
surplus
buffer
is
right,
like
risk
might
say
a
percentage,
they
tend
to
look
at
percentage
of
non-stable
assets.
Others
might
argue
for
a
multiple
or
a
fraction
of
of
projected
expenses
like
going
forward
and
voting
on
those.
C
B
Well,
obviously,
there
are
several
claims
to
the
surface
buffer.
If
you
will,
there
are
other
competing
objectives
on
this
one,
and
I
think
a
very
a
very
telling
example
is
that
right
now
we're
having
a
discussion
about
releasing
the
software
from
a
risk
management
perspective.
We
want
to
keep
it
at
a
certain
percentage
of
the
outstanding
funds
right,
which
is
a
very
understandable
position.
I
I
have
no
problem
with
that.
At
the
same
time,
you
have
what
I
started
arguing
with.
B
We
have
this
perception
that
a
prolonged
period
of
no
burn
is
bad
for
our
reputation
and
losing
investors,
confidence
and
so
on,
and
on
the
third
side,
we're
also
using
this
one
for
running
expenses
right.
So
now
we
have
oracle's
coming
in
very
soon
and
removing
a
fairly
substantial
chunk
of
the
surplus
buffer,
which,
which
is
also
in
part,
a
risk,
mitigating
measure
right,
because
they
need
the
funds
to
put
up
their
own
risk
fund
to
make
sure
they
have
gas
to
cover
the
oracle
costs.
C
B
B
But
there
is
a
a
timing
issue
here
and
there
is:
how
are
we
getting
to
that
target
because
I
think
when
you,
you
sort
of
take
these
ones
put
it
up
together.
We
need
to
sort
of
try
to
make
a
compromise
between
these
different
stakeholders
and
their
interests
in
in
what
we're
doing
with
the
certain
buffer
and
obviously
say,
say:
the
support
buffer
according
to
risk
should
be
two
and
a
half
percent,
and
that
would
today
mean
190
million
right.
Okay,
that's
one
risk,
then
you
have
the
oracles.
B
They
need
their
money
right
now.
Should
we
reduce
the
circumstance
for
even
more.
I
think
we
sort
of
have
to
make
compromise
between
these
different
risks
and
has
to
accept
it.
Okay,
we're
maybe
going
on
with
a
little
bit
higher
risk
than
we
actually
want
to,
but
we're
working
towards
closing
that
gap.
So
in
this
particular
case,
I
would
sort
of
agree
with
risk
on
on
the
target,
but
I
would
most
likely-
or
I
will
be
arguing
for
a
more
gradual
response,
which
we
sort
of
have
seen
discussion
about
already.
B
Overall,
we
might
end
up
at
a
certain
percentage
and
also
with
that
we
do
run
the
risk
that
we're
we
making
that
decision
now,
based
on
the
criteria
as
they
are
right
now,
assuming
the
bull
market
holds
maybe
like
with
the
current
data
or
or
settings
we're
ending
up
with
maybe
a
burn
of
of
60,
but
hey
two
weeks
down
line.
Suddenly
our
our
profits
has
grown
by
by
another
10
million
a
week
now
we're
burning
70,
which
I
think
it's
it's
a
bit
unfortunate.
B
I
would
rather,
we
be
able
to
set
a
percentage
limit
and
leave
it
at
that,
because
you
have
seen
the
flip
side
of
that
whole
thing
in
june,
when
you
sort
of
had
this
compromise
that
we
wanted
to
burn
about
a
third
of
of
the
profits.
It
worked
well
for
a
few
weeks
and
then
suddenly
the
revenue
fell
off
a
cliff
and
and
as
expenses
for
us,
the
profits
fell.
We
needed
to
increase
the
surplus
buffer
and
all
these
events
together
conspired
to
have
a
prolonged
period
of
no
burn.
So.
B
Let's,
let's
try
to
make
this
concrete
in
in
the
coming
days
that,
because
we
actually
have
some
very,
very
actual
polls
on
this,
so
I
think
for
for
the
coming
time
the
funds
that
is
needed
for
for
the
oracles.
They
just
have
to
go
right,
which
means
that
we're
going
to
see
a
drop
in
the
surface.
But
for
the
coming
few
days,
which
means
for
the
for
the
coming
vote.
E
E
B
B
For
to
me,
it's
around
two
years
worth
of
salary,
so
it
is
a
meaningful
should
that
go
tits
up.
That
would
be
a
meaningful
financial
loss
to
me,
and
I
have
incentives
to
make
make
a
work
in
the
long
run,
and
I
think
that
is
something
that
should
be
be
a
criteria
for
all
delegates
as
a
way
to
align
interests.
B
Like,
like
the
protocol
minting
the
mdr,
I
can
see
where
you're
coming
from,
but
I
think
also
part
of
the
maker
story
is
this:
this
notion
that
okay,
there's
a
there's,
a
million
recommended
okay.
I
know
it's
not
entirely
true
right
now,
but
I
think
there
is
some
value
to
that
optics
of
maker
having
a
set
pool,
and
this
pool
is
constantly
shrinking.
B
I
think
we
run
at
an
additional
risk
by
minting,
even
though
to
do
a
business
parallel,
a
company
both
issues
and
buys
back
stocks
right
in
in
effect,
minting
and
burning
maker,
is
of
the
same
mechanisms,
but
I
still
think
this
whole
idea
of
this
one
round
number
it's
going
to
shrink
and
it's
going
to
increase
the
value
of
maker
holders.
I
think
I
think
it's
too
valuable
to
mess
with,
so
I
would
not
want
us
to
at
least
my
initial
stance
would
be
to
not
mint
more
maker
for
resting.
A
B
I
I
kind
of
just
want
to
say
thank
you
to
the
whole
community.
I
mean
it's,
it's
a
very
enthusiastic
and
very
knowledgeable
community
and
it's
very
inspiring
to
interact
with,
because
there
are
so
many
people
that
is
so
vested
in
the
success
of
this
project
that
I'm
really
happy
to
be
to
have
this
chance
to
be
a
part
of
it
and
yeah
these
last
few
weeks
when
I've
really
been
dedicated
more
or
less
full
time
to
this
it's
been
extraordinary,
and
I
I
can't
wait
to
keep
on
doing
that.
A
Awesome
yeah,
I
guess
if
people
want
to
get
in
touch
with
you
on
discord
on
the
forum,
your
just
in
case
yep,
cool,
all
right,
yeah,
we'll
we'll
get
you
up
on
the
on
the
ui
very
soon,
for
so
people
can
start
delegating
yeah.
Thank
you,
justin.
Thank
you.
Everyone
for
joining
us
I'll,
hopefully
see
you
all
at
the
next
next
meeting.