►
From YouTube: Know Your MIP | MIP40 (Budget Framework) Amendments
Description
Forum Post: https://forum.makerdao.com/t/amended-mip40-important-information-for-core-units/15450
⬇ About ⬇
In the latest development in the ongoing discussion about Core Unit budgeting, MIP40 defines a framework for managing and modifying Core Unit budgets and has been amended with several substantial changes.
Some primary changes include:
- Budget Submission Windows: Budget Submission Windows is a new aspect of Core Unit budgets outlined by MIP40. Budget requests can only be submitted quarterly in March, June, September, and November.
- Budget Start and End Dates: Budgets now have a maximum duration of 12 months and cannot start later than three months after being formally submitted.
- Budget Composition: Budget requests are now required to provide more specific details
A
Hello-
everyone
pablo
here
from
alpha
welcome
to
the
11th
episode
of
know
your
mip,
the
series
where
we
go
in
depth
on
maps.
We
are
back
after
the
longest
hiatus
yet
and
for
this
episode
we
have
adrian
a
dcv
from
strategic
finance
with
us.
He
is
one
of
the
authors
of
a
recently
ratified
amendment
that
introduced
big
changes
in
meepori.
The
myth
that
defines
how
coordinate
budgets
are
to
be
handled
know.
A
A
Adrian
instead
is
going
to
be
walking
us
through
the
mip
and
through
the
process
of
putting
a
budget
together
under
the
new
framework.
If
you
have
questions
before
the
presentation
or
during
the
presentation,
please
raise
your
hand
or
use
the
chat
adrian.
Thank
you
for
being
here
I'm
going
to
ask
one
single
opening
question
that
I
think
is
useful
for
context
after
that,
it's
all
yours,
okay.
So
the
question
is:
what
was
the
motivation
for
this
amendment.
B
So
this
coin
cited,
I
think,
with
a
period
of
so
let's
take
a
quick
step
back.
The
whole
concept
of
core
units
and
maker,
indeed
being
a
a
profitable
bank,
is
actually
relatively
new.
I
think
we
lose
sight
of
the
fact
that
of
how
quickly
this
has
happened.
But
if
you
look
at
the
past
performance
maker
has
a
billion
dollar
business
is
only
is
maybe
not
even
a
year
right
so
and
then
the
core
units
less
than
that.
Even
so.
B
They
were
complaining
that
they
had
to
face
a
lot
of
budget
modification
requests.
A
lot
of
people
face
the
particularly
for
budget
increases.
There
are
a
lot
of
questions
regarding
the
motivation
for
these
and,
overall,
I
think
the
the
previous
mid-40
process,
while
suitable
for
maker
in
a
smaller
state,
I'd,
probably
make
her
probably
outgrown
it,
because
it
provided
perhaps
too
much
openness
and
flexibility
in
what
might
constitute
a
a
budget
request.
So
the
motivation
was
to
get
something
changed
quickly.
B
So
I
think
in
trying
to
help
the
the
person
who's
formulating
the
budget
request.
Hopefully
we
we
minimize
these
these
two
types
of
errors,
and
you
know
maker
governance
cycles
being
what
they
are.
Now
it's
starting
right,
the
the
so
maker
governance
approved
of
our
of
our
proposal.
It
was
enacted
and
now
we're
entering
a
period
where
there
will
be
what
appear
to
be
more
requirements
to
people
writing
budgets.
B
C
B
And
last
but
not
least,
I
think
there
was
also
we've
also
added
some
requirements
to
take
into
consideration
what
happens
in
the
event
of
an
off-boarding.
So
in
here
we
we
worked
with
tim,
who
was
reviewing
the
the
for
off-boarding.
You
know,
following
a
chaotic
core
unit
off-boarding,
I
think,
being
able
asking
budget
proponents
to
take
into
consideration
what
might
happen
and
what
they
would
do
in
the
event
of
an
earthquake
ahead
of
time
is
probably
something
good
to
ask
of
people.
C
B
Yeah,
I
hope
I
hope
this
answers
the
question
a
bit
long-winded,
but
but
I
think
this
this
speaks
to
the
motivation
of
changing
this,
and
ultimately
I
mean
the
changes.
There
are
not
that
many
changes
we'll
walk
through
some
of
the
bigger
ones.
I
think
the
introduction
of
a
budget
window
is
probably
one
of
them,
probably
the
biggest.
But
beyond
that
I
mean
fundamentally,
the
structure
is
essentially
the
same.
All
we're
doing
is
adding
a
few
requirements
around
the
type
of
information
that
budget
requests
should
have
beyond
that.
A
B
B
B
B
If
that's,
okay
with
people,
what
do
you
guys
think
that's
good,
but
I
do
want
to
make
this
I
mean
yeah.
I
didn't
yeah,
there's
no
point
in
doing
a
powerpoint
presentation
about
about
this.
I
feel
like
it's
probably
more
worthwhile
to
go
through
it
and
have
a
live
discussion
and,
more
importantly
before
I
before
I
start,
I
mean
this
is
all
just
going
to
be
quite
intro
right,
but
if
anyone
in
the
core
units
or
delegates
needs
help
reviewing
a
budget
proposal
or
writing
a
budget
proposal,
writing
a
budget
modification
request.
B
B
I
think
what
we're
going
to
do
is
sort
of
start
going
through
some
of
the
key
changes
and
talk
a
little
bit
live.
And
here
I
encourage
your
engagement
in
case.
There
are
further
questions
or
if
there
are
any
conclusions
and
apologies
again
for
the
dog
in
the
background,
it's
quite
bored,
so
we're
going
to
walk
through
the
main
components
of
a
budget
written
under
the
mid
40
requirements.
B
So
here
the
first
one
is
that
we're
trying
to
give
a
little
bit
more
scope
to
what
a
budget
constitutes
right.
So
there
are
mid
processes
for
enacting
a
core
unit
with
a
mandate,
and
then
the
budget
should
serve
to
bring
to
life
and
mandate
with
financial
resources
drawn
from
top
to
that.
To
that
extent,
anything
that's
shorter
than
three
months
or
longer
than
12
months
probably
doesn't
fit
into
this.
I
struggle
to
see
what
sort
of
budget
should
exist
that's
longer
than
12
months.
B
You
know
this
may
or
may
not
be
people's
views,
but
I
think,
having
a
budget
at
the
very
least
having
a
budget
reviewed
once
a
year
doesn't
seem
like
too
much
of
a
bother
for
the
workers,
and
it
seems
like
a
reasonable
time
frame
under
which
to
review
the
performance
of
equipment
and
anything
shorter
than
that.
Probably
if
it's
a
you
know
a
different
type
of
mip
proposal.
C
C
B
On
the
one
hand,
the
you
know,
the
the
whether
a
mandate
is
suitable
or
not
for
the
dow
should
be
resolved
in
the
mid
related
to
the
mandate
for
that
core
unit.
But
whether
or
not
the
financial
resources
that
are
being
planned
to
execute
that
mandate
are
suitable
should
be
evaluated
in
the
context
of
a
budget
request.
So
you
can
have
a
reasonable
court.
You
know,
with
a
good
mandate,
have
an
unreasonable
budget.
D
Yeah
so
since
some
folks
on
the
call
who
were
commenting
on
the
forum
aren't
here
I'll
just
I'll,
take
the
point
of
information
opposite
side
of
that,
I
think
operational
efficiency.
I
think
reductive
is
a
great
phrasing,
but
I
think
folks
are
a
little
nervous
in
any
operational
context,
to
sort
of
show
their
work.
D
B
Yeah,
no
definitely
I
mean
yeah.
Of
course
there
was.
There
was
some
nervousness
around
this
oriented
around
the
perception
that
a
purely
support
function,
I
think
mostly
honestly
oriented
around
a
so-called
support
function
and
whether
they
would
be
able
to
demonstrate
roi
or
whether
otherwise
metric
or
you
know,
are
some
people
delivering
value.
B
Even
though
you
can't
really
quantify
it
here,
we're
trying
to
draw
a
definitive
line
and
say
that
yes,
support
units
can
drive
values,
they
do
drive
value,
and
this
is
the
opportunity
to
firstly
for
the
writer
of
the
core
unit
budget
proposal
to
reflect
on
how
that
value
is
brought
to
them
and,
secondly,
to
also
demonstrate
that
this
budget
will
achieve
study
and
you
can
think
of
ancillary
non-related,
whatever.
Let's
have
a
core
unit
that
makes
bread.
B
Like
I'm
sure,
it's
nice,
everyone
likes
bread,
it's
supporting
everyone's
moral,
but
it's
not
really
directly
related
to
the
business
of
the
dying.
I
think
it's
it's
a
it's
a
very.
If
you
take
this
productive
lens,
you
can
very
quickly
see
that
maybe
a
bakery
core
unit
is
not
the
it's
not
the
most
suitable,
so
yeah,
sorry
to
bring
it
I
mean.
Maybe
it
is.
D
A
more
specific
example
that
would
actually
work
is
like
grants
right,
so
grants
are
one
of
those
things
where
you're
extending
funds
in
the
hope
that
people
come
back
and
return
something.
But
you
know
life
happens,
things
go
south
and
so
realistically
did
this
improve
operational
efficiency
is
quite
fuzzy,
and
you
know
luckily,
we've
seen
some
other
doubts
like
optimism
comes
to
mind
where
the
impact
is
more
important
than
like
the
direct
hard
numbers
of
it.
D
B
If
you
think
of
the
events
core
unit,
for
example,
it's
clearly
mostly
linked
to
the
potential
for
revenue
growth,
but
it's
very
second
order.
So
you
know
in
the
event
of
a
if
they,
if
they
want
to
do
more
events,
they're
going
to
have
to
show
that
doing
more
events
will
eventually
result
in
the
potential
for
revenue.
C
B
But
at
least
it's
related,
so
you
can
sort
of
see
that
yes,
having
a
die
event,
will
eventually
you
know.
Eventually,
someone
may
use
die
because
they
went
to
a
die
event
right
or
they
were.
They
went
to
a
hackathon
that
was
sponsored
by
maker
or
something
so
yeah.
I
think
here
I
I
don't
know
if
I
should
jump
to
examples
or.
E
Just
want
to
pipe
in
john
perry
here
for
those
you
don't
know
me,
I'm
the
facilitator
for
events,
so
yeah
great
you're,
actually
like
talking
and
bringing
this
up,
because
it's
that's
been
one
of
the
questions
when
I've
been
looking
at
this
new
mip.
With
that
section
saying
you
gotta
demonstrate
actual
financial
benchmarks
or
value
events.
It's
one
of
those
things.
It's
a
more
of
a
pr
type
thing.
We
can
kind
of
say
people
came
out.
We
attracted
talent
towards
a
dow
attract
attention.
Maybe
some
vaults
were
open.
E
C
B
And
it's
clear
that
it's
not
going
to
be,
you
know
a
percentage
right
every
time,
but
maybe
in
any
case,
it'll
be
near
impossible
to
demonstrate
a
percentage
number,
but
what
we're
aiming
to
do
here
is
really
tie,
and
so
one
thing
is
on
the
mandate
of
the
core
unit
and
the
other
thing
is
on
the
on
the
way
that
that
core
unit
is
planning
to
spend
those
funds
right.
So
in
the
in
in
the
case
of
the
events
example,
I
think
one
thing
that
was
strong
from
their
budget
request.
B
You
know
outside
of
the
mandate,
which
should
probably
be
left
to
the
discussion
on
whether
the
events
core
unit
minded
is
suitable
for
that
when
it
comes
to
the
spending
of
the
quarters
unit
or
how
that
spending
is
planned.
I
think
what
john
did
quite
well
was
to
show
like
look.
These
are
the
benchmarks.
This
is
how
we
think
we
should
spend
it.
You
know
we
have
experience
doing
blah
blah.
This
is
the
right
way
to
do
it.
C
B
B
So
yeah
the
intent
is
yeah,
so
yeah
fully
aligned
like
it's.
No,
it's
never.
It
may
never
be
a
pure
percentage
number,
but
if
you
find
a
way
to
tie
it
to
how
successfully
you're
going
to
invest
those
funds
to
execute
the
mandate
of
your
core
unit
and
tie
those
titles
to
the
value
results
of
that,
I
think
it'll
be
just
easier
for
everyone.
D
Yeah,
just
to
echo
that
point
and
speak
to
a
specific
as
a
delegate
from
that
perspective,
part
of
the
reason
events
actually
provides
value
is
by
reducing
the
work
of
other
people
who
want
to
put
those
on
in
the
first
place
right,
which
means
they're
taking
money
from
their
salaries
or
their
units
or
they're.
Looking
for
funds
in
that
way,
when,
realistically
speaking,
professionals
who
run
av
events
should
probably
be
the
team
running
those
things
right,
regardless
of
whether
we
should
be
doing
it
in
the
first
place,
which
is
a
whole
separate
thing.
D
G
G
G
John,
you
know
I
wouldn't
leave
that
out
either,
which
is
like
that's
going
to
be
very
hard
to
follow
and
demonstrate,
like
kind
of
the
value
that
other
core
units
or
other
parts
of
the
dow
are
able
to
extract
for
their
own
mandates
because
you
had
the
vet
and
maybe
they
attended.
Or
you
know
there
was
a
awareness
brought
that
helps.
You
know
everyone
execute
on
what's
on
their
plate,.
E
B
You
know
a
simplistic
and
stupid
case,
but
you
know
protocol
engineering.
You
could
say
they
derive
revenue,
but
obviously
it's
more.
If
we
take
this
sort
of
operational
lens,
it's
obviously
much
more
profitable
for
maker
to
have
an
onboard
team
of
developers
than
it
is
to
subcontract
them
through
an
agency
or
whatever,
which
might
be
more
suitable
than
if
maker
were
one
one
hundredth
of
the
size,
and
I
think
you
could
take
this
lens
to
many
of
the
so-called
support
functions
and
and
very
quickly
see
that
highest.
B
There's
actually
a
there's
actually
a
demonstrable
reduction
sort
of
opportunity
costs
from
consuming
resources
that
are
tied
up
doing
other
things
and
then
just
pure
service
efficiency
like
number
of
hours
times.
The
rate
for
having
an
in-house
person
is
just
less
than
having
it
outside
of
the
outside.
Of
that.
F
B
So
there
was
a
bit
of
there
was
a
bit
of
back
and
forth
on
this
and
I
think
a
lot
of
the
nervousness.
Hopefully,
a
lot
of
the
nervous
business
is
dissipated.
I
here
I'd
like
to
sort
of
again
restate
to
the
extent
that
any
writer
of
a
core
unit,
budget
proposal
or
modification
request
wants
to
even
just
sound
off
ideas
and
we've
had
a
few
of
these
conversations
with
different
facilitators
from
core
units
that
were
like
hey.
How
does
this
sound
because
they
started?
You
know
on
the
back
of
the
the
budget.
B
Request
runs
that
happens
for
february
and
march.
They
started
proactively
thinking
about
hey.
How
do
we
frame
our
value
proposition
to
the
down?
They
were
eager
to
sort
of
go
through
the
specific
examples
and
and
just
talk
over
those,
and
you
know
what
I
found
actually
was
that
there
was
very
little
input
that
that
the
strategic
finance
team
could
have,
because
they
just
thought
about
it
very
carefully
and
very
systematically,
and
I
think
that's
that's
the
aim
to
show
that
thinking.
C
B
Roadmap
and
objectives,
I
think,
is
quite
linked.
It'll,
obviously
be
linked
to
the
investments
and
the
timings
of
those
investments.
Most
of
realistically
most
of
the
investments
of
the
power
are
going
to
be
in
just
plain:
contractor
costs
right
in
sort
of
salaries
and
head
count,
expenses
other
than
like
events,
strategic
happiness,
maybe
branding.
B
B
If
you
invest
in
12
months
of
people
at
the
end
you're
going
to
get
x
and
then,
of
course
you
know
things
might
derail,
things
might
go
faster
or
slower,
but
at
the
very
least
you
have
a
benchmark
to
have
that
discussion
with
in
at
the
end
of
the
budget
term,
when
it's
time
to
renew
or
or
stop
and
move
on
or
increase
or
decrease,
or
whatever
it
is
maybe
having
as
a
sort
of
clear
road
map.
I
think
is
quite
important
to
this
effect.
C
B
Contingency
planning
is
another
new
thing
that
we
introduced,
because
there
was
a
lot
of.
There
was
a
lot
of
discussion
on
those
no
sort
of
first
quarter.
Budget
request
related
to
people
starting
to
get
nervous
about
the
market.
Turning
and
seeing
budget
increases
probably
related
to
the
sort
of
lag
effect
that
I
discussed
earlier,
and
here
we're
asking
people
to
be
just
proactive
and
related
to
this
contingency
planning
as
part
of
the
structure
of
the
myth.
B
B
B
And
yeah
so
fingers
crossed
also,
but
the
idea
is
that
these
should
work
and
having
them
in
a
ranked
stacked.
Ranking
order
should
allow
a
bit
more
granularity
on
the
decision-making.
From
the
delegate
point
of
view,
where
often
the
comment
from
the
delegate
was
I
like
the
work
you're
doing,
I
just
don't
believe
you
need
five
new
people
to
do
it.
B
Sure
so
so
in
the
instance
of
for
so
in
our
own
case
in
strategic
finance,
we
had
a
budget.
We
have
a
budget
request
with
an
increase,
quite
a
significant
one,
around
40
that
we
released
to
the
government,
and
we
could
tie
this
increase
in
the
budget
to
just
hiring
new
people
right.
We
know
in
the
past
few
months
of
working
that
we're
stretched
on
on
capacity
and
bandwidth
here
and
there
and
having
additional
resources
would
help
us
fulfill
our
mandate,
notably
in
like
accounting
or
whatever
in
our
thinking
around.
That
planning
is
purely
related.
B
More
hours,
extra
hard
little
things
will
take
longer
the
budget,
the
whatever
the
double
entry
accounting
project
that
we're
working
on
will
just
take
longer,
and
I
think
communicating
this
up
front
through
the
budget
request
is
just
helpful
to
show
because
it
it's
a
dispassion,
it's
a
dispassionate
decision.
Right,
it's
up
to
governance
to
decide.
Do
you
want
to
invest?
Do
you
believe
that
the
value
of
having
one
additional
accounting
person
is
worth
the
incremental
expense?
If
not,
then
you
know
this
is
the
outcome,
but.
B
It's
more
yeah,
I
think,
starting
from
the
business
planning
and
then
working
towards
the
impact
on
the
budget
is
probably
how
you
would
be
able
to
see
this
and
then,
in
the
case
of
like
a
contingency
and
bear-
and
you
know,
downside
scenarios-
you
just
have
to
be
quite
ruthless
and
look
at
where
you
can,
where
you
can
cut
the
most
or
where
you
can
cut
first,
you
know
for
us
it's,
for
example
our
own
comp
for
us.
It's.
B
You
know,
software
services
that
we
maybe
will
take
us
longer
to
do
without
them,
but
we
can
eventually
still
get
things
done.
So
again,
it's
going
back
to
this
point
on
on
planning
on
what
the
business
would
look
like
if
you
had
just
less
resources
and
then
trying
to
work
from
there
and
seeing
what
the
impact
would
be-
and
you
know
there's
some
people.
B
If
I
remember
well,
I
think
there
was
a
discussion
around
oh,
but
this
will
just
mean
that
people
will
pat
the
budget,
but
hopefully
the
idea
is
that
if
you
do
try
and
trick,
you
know,
gain
the
system
and
pad
the
budget
and
have
a
their
case.
That's
that's
really
nice
and
then
you
know
stack
on
top
of
that.
B
It
should
become
obvious
to
the
delegates
and
to
the
governance
reviewing
it
that
hold
up.
Maybe
you
don't
need
this
much
money
for
your
brains,
right,
like
or
conversely,
if
they
do
believe
the
story,
then
you're
tied
to
those
results,
like
maybe
you
weren't
expecting
to
have
that
budget
increase
approved
and
now
you
have
to
deliver
against
it
and
if
you
don't,
then
your
health,
those
results.
F
B
B
I
think
unrelated
to
this.
I
think
any
any
sort
of
substantial
increase
in
fixed
costs
probably
should
have
a
variance
analysis
of
where
those
changes
come
from
right.
So
you
know
you
explain
that
this
cost
is
tied
to
having
x
new
people.
This
cost
is
having
is
tied
to
having
whatever
new
computers
and
again.
The
intent
here
is
to
just
facilitate
the
conversation
between
governance
and
the
core
unit
budget
proposal.
It's
like
do
you
really
need
these
people,
or
could
you
use
more
people
right?
F
B
Delegates
can
take
if
they
get
five
budget
requests.
They
can
take
each
of
the
five.
They
have
the
same
format,
they
have
the
same
rows,
they
can
just
put
them
side
by
side
and
they
can
look
at
okay,
such
and
such
is
spending
this
much,
and
this
is
what
the
head
count
cost
is,
and
this
is
their
hardware,
and
I
think
there
were
a
lot
of
comments
from
delegates
regarding
the
inability
to
do
a
comparison.
B
Now,
it's
obvious
that
some
core
units
won't
necessarily
have
exactly
these
charts
of
accounts
and
there's
no
hard
requirement
to
stick
to
these.
I
think
events
is
another
great
example
right,
so
you
know
there
are
some
expenses
and
events
that
don't
happen
in
any
other
coordinates.
So
obviously
they
need
to
be
called
out
separately
and
they'll
have
their
own
category,
but
that's
immense.
So
it's
sort
of
understood,
I
think
most
other
core
units
are,
could
basically
be
summarized
in
this
chart
of
accounts,
which
is
essentially
that
of
a
service
business.
I
guess.
C
B
Then
the
submission
windows,
I
think,
was
another
yeah,
so
the
submission
period
was
another
source
of
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
on
the
on
the
rfc.
In
the
end,
we
so
we
asked
for
a
lot
of
opinions
and
in
the
end
we
defaulted
to
the
delegate
view,
which
was
that
they
don't
want
to
see
10
budget
requests
every
month
and
what
this
in
practice
does
is
just
force
a
little
bit
more
planning
and
it's
related
to
the
fact
that
a
budget
can
have
a
minimum
of
a
three-month
window
for
operations.
B
C
B
It
also
said:
yes,
it's
known
up
front
and
it
ties
to
every
other
sort
of
characteristic
of
the
of
the
request
here.
I
think
the
core
units
wanted
more
flexibility.
The
delegates
wanted
more
windows,
so
we
opted
at
the
end
of
the
day.
It's
the
day
they
get
to
make
most
of
the
governance
decisions,
so
yeah.
D
Also
chime
in
on
behalf
of
maker
holders
as
well,
like
you
know,
the
eventual
hope
of
governance
is
that
it's
just
delegates
doing
all
this
right.
It's
that
casual
mkr
holders
come
in
and
they
choose
to
participate
as
well.
So
if
it's
in,
like
a
known
window
and
a
cycle
that's
easier
to
jump
onto,
I
think
it
just
adds
more
clarity,
so
yeah.
B
I
think
this
budget
window
introduces
the
cooling
off
period
that
allows,
for
this
lag
effect,
to
sort
of
settle
down
and
really
have
a
think
through
of
what
the
planning
process
should
be
for
the
activities
of
that
to
you
similar.
You
could
say
that
similar
on
the
downside,
if
he
dumps
to
500-
and
you
know,
there's
a
new
core
unit
that
can
help
fix
it
or
something
it
also
allows
them
to
cool
off
periods,
see
what
the
environment
really
is
like
and
then
design
for
that.
Instead
of
just
planning
half-past
early
throughout
the
year.
B
H
I
Hey:
okay:
there
we
go.
It
works,
yeah,
hey
so
just
to
work
on
this,
let's
say
so.
My
current
budget
finishes
on
april.
So
I
mean
that
means
that,
in
a
normal
situation,
I
will
be
preparing
my
new
budget
in
february.
I
would
be
submitting
at
the
start
of
march
much
it
would
be
the
frozen.
The
other
request
for
comment
at
the
end
it
gets
frozen
and
then
it
finally
gets
voted
in
april
and
then
finally
gets
executed
at
the
start
of
may.
I
F
B
I
I
B
B
You
would
expect
that
from
there
you'd
I
mean
it.
May
it
may
not
even
change
year
on
year
right
like
so,
if
you,
if
you
roll
your
budget
for
like
on
a
12-month
basis
just
every
year,
you're
gonna
have
to
do
it
in
january,
prepared
in
january,
send
it
to
the
forum
in
february
and
go
through
the
governance
process
in
march
in
for
four
sort
of
implementation
at
the
beginning
of
may
right,
unless
you.
I
Yeah
yeah,
I
could
technically
reduce
it
even
more
and
just
kind
of
short
just
so
if
I
want
to
reset
a
specific
month
going
back
to
the
windows,
I
feel
like
this
like.
If
the
problem
was
that
we
had
too
many
budgets
ongoing
at
the
same
time,
wouldn't
the
windows
make
it
worse,
because
I
I
again
it's
not
like
we're
going
to
have
here
we're
assuming
that
we're
going
to
have
the
same
amount
of
core
units.
Let's
say.
D
D
D
I
don't
share
that
view
personally,
because
I
think
we're
improving
this
system
over
time.
That's
my
own
personal
opinion,
but
putting
them
into
a
window
does
create
a
bottleneck,
but
with
a
standardized
process
behind
it,
then
it
actually
is
a
little
bit
easier
to
go
through
them
all
and
not
one-to-one.
Compare
them
but
have
like
a
framework
to
work
through.
Does
that
make
sense.
G
Just
like
focusing
you
know
so
the
shifting
gears
it's
so
much
easier
to
like
okay
and
even
if
it's
intense
volume,
it's
like
this-
is
all
I'm
doing
and
yeah
getting
in
this
head
space
and
then
it's
over,
for
you
know
a
quarter
and
then
get
back
into
that
intense
mode
than
having
to
kind
of
like
it
just
kind
of
popping
up
asynchronous.
You
know,
just
sort
of
all
the
time
continuously
is
much
more
difficult
to
manage,
so
I
I
prefer.
I
work
better
that
way.
B
Yep,
that's
yeah,
that's
the
diagonal
and,
I
think,
also
from
a
just
from
a
structural
planning
perspective
coming
back
again
to
this
point
of
the
fixed
costs.
It's
it
also
allows
you
to
evaluate
what
the
impact
of
all
of
these
new
budget
requests
or
any
of
the
budget
requests
that
governance
decides
to
approve
will
be
on
maker.
It
just
makes
things
a
bit
more
predictable
and
easier
to
manage
rather
than
having
them.
B
You
know,
protocol
engineering
one
month,
then
the
whatever
fixed
cost
one
the
next
month
and
it's
just
much
much
harder
to
go
through
a
planning
for
the
protocol
as
a
whole.
That's
my
view
anyway.
I
I
tend
to
show
the
view
in
this
instance.
I
can
see
how
it's
annoying,
because
for
the
core
unit,
because
it's
you
know
you
have
to
just
time
your
request,
but
you
have
to
time
your
requests
anyway
for
governance
right,
you
have
the
submission
windows.
You
have
the
things
the
days
the
dates.
I
I
I
It
felt
like
because
there
were
a
lot
of
other
co-units
asking
for
a
budget
that
we
like
no
one's
paying
attention
to
us
until
after
the
frozen
period
and
then
they're
like
oh
yeah,
by
the
way
we
we
gotta
look
at
data
insights
here
like
I
would
expect
that
if
we
don't
have
windows-
and
let's
say
we
have
two
budgets
per
month,
then
there's
more
time
allocated
to.
Let's
say
in
my
scenario
where
we
do
have
a
discussion
during
the
during
the
request
for
a
comment.
I
G
G
From
a
review
perspective,
kind
of
having
a
a
better
view
over
a
consistent
period
of
time,
and
so
when
it
comes
time
to
review
the
budgets,
we're
all
more
literate
and
have
fewer
questions
that
could
you
know
overshadow
to
your
point.
You
know
the
attention
that
everyone
really
deserves
in
the
debate
period.
D
To
be
okay,
so
two
points
there,
the
first
one
is.
I
hear
you
on
the
signal
to
noise
for
teams
right.
This
happens
in
every
grouping
of
people,
I'm
not
going
to
say
organization,
because
dows
are
fuzzy,
but
realistically
speaking,
once
you
have
about
100
full-time
equivalent
people
working
at
something,
you
need
to
build
better
systems
right,
and
so
this
might
be
the
opportunity
to
sort
of.
D
I
guess,
recommend
some
of
the
conversations
that
have
been
happening
around
clustering,
so
having
maybe
a
couple
of
delegates
that
are
there,
but
it's
also
an
opportunity
to
be
proactive
as
a
core
unit
and
say:
hey.
We
haven't
gotten
enough
comments,
I'm
just
going
to
go
and
ask
people
in
public
channels
if
they
want
to
take
some
time
to
come
and
talk
through
the
budget
to
see
if
there's
anything,
we're
missing.
D
The
other
point
is,
from
the
voting
perspective,
there's
been
a
lot
of
instances
of
people
offering
comments,
those
comments
being
softly
absorbed
and
then
the
vote
proceeding
anyway.
So
like
the
ability
to
actually
really
have
the
feedback.
Integrated
comes
at
this
point
where
you
basically
have
to
either
rubber
stamp
something
or
just
say
no,
which
leads
to
kind
of
a
rock
and
a
hard
place
for
anyone,
any
mkr,
holder
or
delegate
right.
D
So
it's
a
bit
of
a
two
things
at
once,
but
some
possible
solutions
are
definitely
adding
in
extra
time
and
then
specifically
seeking
advice
to
to
get
that
review
because
yeah,
it's
as
someone
who's
got
a
mip
amendment
up
not
having
feedback
is,
is
kind
of
the
worst
place
to
be
so.
I
hear
all
those
concerns.
G
Yeah
I
want
to
co-sign.
I
always
am
pleased
to
get
a
mention
in
a
post
like
at
recognize,
delegate
or
because
there's
you
know
so
much
flow.
So
no
one
should
feel
shy
from
my
perspective
about
tagging
myself
or
you
know,
I
can't
speak
obviously
for
all
the
delegates,
but
so
far
I
don't
want
to
like
open
up
a
can
of
worms
here,
but
so
far
I
found
it
helpful
when
different
court
unit
leads
have
pinged
us,
and
sometimes
I
think
that
happens
from
gov
alpha
as
well.
When.
A
B
I'm
available
off
the
whole
as
well
right,
one
to
one.
I
think
this
is
where
I
can
maybe
be
of
more
use
for
specific
questions
or
or
anything
before
we
go.
I
didn't
I
did
want
to
jump
on
a
point
that
I
alluded
to
so
hopefully,
at
the
time
of
the
next
cycle,
we're
able
to
we'll
see
how
it
goes.
You
know
at
the
we
also
have
to
improve
things
incrementally
and
at
the
time
of
the
next
budget
window.
I
think
your
point
is
a
very
good
one.
B
You
know
kang
and
tim
have
made
some
good
comments.
Hopefully,
the
batching
of
korean
and
budget
requests
will
allow
them
to
really
focus
on
the
budget
requests
and
to
drive
through
them
and
and
address
them
with
comments
and
feedback
and
values
in.
If
they
don't,
then
you
know
that
will
will
problem
solve
at
that
point.
C
B
Yes,
so
final
point:
on
the
return
of
funds,
we've
also
introduced
a
requirement
to
return
funds.
In
most
instances
we
can
assume
we
can
give
the
benefit
of
the
doubt
and
assume
that
everyone
is
a
good
faith.
The
return
of
funds
is
more
of
a
balance
sheet
management
decision.
Then
it
is
a
sort
of
formal
oversight.
B
Then
it
is
a
sort
of
formal
oversight
of
whipping
the
the
core
units
core
units
that
have
lumpy
expenses
with
a
predictable
timing
can
obviously
say
and
not
return
the
funds
because
they
clearly
need
their
funds
at
a
specific
time
and
beyond
the
the
threshold
of
these
sort
of
three
months,
but
internally
in
strategic
finance.
We're
calling
this
part
of
our
equity
and.
C
B
A
Cool
thank
you
eddie,
and
we
are
three
minutes
away
from
the
top
of
the
hour
if
people
feel
this
was
valuable
and
are
interested
in
a
second
part
to
this
new
year
map,
we
can
organize
that.
But
for
the
moment
I
want
to
thank
everyone.
I
want
to
thank
you
adrian
for
the
walkthrough
and
please,
let's
keep
the
discussion
going
in
the
forum,
particularly
in
this
thread
that
I'm
going
to
share.
A
Here
and
before
closing-
and
let
me
remind
you
that
we're
having
another
know-
your
map
know
your
map
number
12,
with
tim
black
on
tuesday
14th
at
17
utc,
I
think
it's
going
to
be
about
the
coordinate,
affording
process
amendment
yep,
that's
great
yep,
so
thank
you
very
much
everyone.
Thank
you.
Adrian.