►
From YouTube: Open Decentralized Voter Committee | June 15, 2022
Description
The Voter Committee Calls are designed to invite MKR stakeholders to help the community agree on an overall top-down structure of categorizing the activities and strategic initiatives of the MakerDAOs decentralized workforce to create more specialized voter committees that cover each category.
More Information: https://forum.makerdao.com/t/decentralized-voter-committees-wednesday-and-thursday-9pm-cest-getting-real-edition/15777
A
Yeah,
so
I
said
today
was
going
to
be
exciting
and
pinging
a
whole
bunch
of
people
that
there
was
a
must
join
today,
because
you
know
quoting
myself,
things
are
gonna
get
real
and
that's
really.
My
objective
is
like
I've
been,
you
know,
we've
really
been.
You
know.
A
A
So
so,
there's
been
this
very
long
sort
of
preparatory
phase
that
I
think
has
been
a
really
good
approach
to
this
whole
sort
of
question
of
how
to
how
to
try
to
make
a
proposal
that
can
you
know,
sort
of
significantly
comprehensively
get
maker
in
the
right
direction
and
then
now
the
sort
of
you
know
you
have
this
sort
of
preparation
meets
opportunity
in
a
sense
or
maybe
more
like
preparation
meets
crisis.
I
guess
is
another
way
to
think
of
it,
because
we
now
have
this
disastrous
market
meltdown.
A
That
really
just
you
know,
calls
for
you
know
making
changes
and
and
adjusting
to
this
new
reality.
I
think
you
know
to
a
level
that
I
really
I
mean
I
expected
there
to
be
a
bear
market
and
a
crash,
and
so
on.
I
don't,
I
think,
the
sort
of
the
level
of
brutality
that
we've
seen
this
is
maybe
a
little
surprising
like
right.
Mkr
is
like
almost
begged
that
where
was
the
last
bear
market
right,
which
is,
which
is
surprising,
I
think,
or
at
least
for
me
unexpected.
A
It's
maybe
not
so
surprising,
but
basically
it's
clear
to
me
that
yeah
we
need,
we
really
need
to
take
action
and
then,
at
the
same
time,
what's
really
happened,
especially
the
last
couple
of
weeks,
as
I
really
started,
these
voter
committees
is
that
you
know
when
I
first
really
started
being
like
okay
time
to
sort
of
enter
a
new
stage
of
this
political
process
in
a
sense
right
of
trying
to
do
this,
voter
alignment-
and
I
imagine
basically
there
could
be
two
possible
outcomes,
so
one
could
be
that
you
would
get
a
kind
of
you
know
like
this
sort
of
a
polarity
of
some
sort
right.
A
So
you
have
two
groups
that
would
basically
have
different
perspectives
on
on
ways
to
move
the
the
project
forward.
So
I
would
create
a
kind
of
a
counter.
You
know
what
do
you
even
call
that
right,
like
an
anti,
maybe
not
empty?
That's
the
wrong
way
right,
but
there
would
be
some
kind
of
counterbalance
to
me.
I'm
pushing
one
direction
so
there's
gonna
be
some
kind
of
force
pushing
in
different
direction.
A
What
I've
what's
clearly
now,
the
case
you
know
is,
is
the
other
option,
which
is
that
there's?
Basically
it's
almost
like
the
more
I'm
trying
to
change
things,
the
more
passive
everyone
else
becomes
right.
So
there's
really
no
other
major
care
holders
that
we're
seeing
trying
to
sort
of
create
some
kind
of
narrative
or
even
appear
that
interested
in
in
making
significant
change
right,
which
I
think
is
is
I
mean
it
was
necessary,
no
matter
what,
but
now
we're
in
a
crisis.
A
So
basically,
now
it's
like
it's
really
time
to
to
to
do
something.
I
think
so.
A
I've,
basically,
I
mean
made
some
some
modifications
kind
of
to
the
to
the
the
view
of
the
plan
and
sort
of
the
steps
ahead,
and
so
on
that
that
are
sort
of
adapted
to
this
reality
of
basically,
it's
basically
that
I'm
the
only
active
voter
in
a
sense
right
like
and
increasingly
rather
than
and
me
becoming
more
active
rather
than
drive
more
activity.
A
It
actually
further
created
this
this
reality
of
almost
like
a
like
delegation,
in
a
sense
right
that
everyone's
sitting
back
waiting
to
see
what
I'm
gonna
come
up
with,
which
is
not
a
bad
thing.
I
think,
because
I
mean
I'm
the
co-founder-
and
I
have
a
lot
of
very
powerful
ideas
and
I'm
willing
to
basically
work
on
this
basically
full
time
for
free
and
with
the
right
decisions
and
with
the
right
actions.
We
can
turn
around
the
current
situation
right
into
a
huge
opportunity
and
take
some
really
bad
ass
action.
A
That's
gonna,
you
know,
write
the
history
books
of
what
happened
in
blockchain
and
define
someone
okay,
so
I'll
get
right
into
it
right
into
the
sort
of
high
impact
stuff
right.
So
you've
seen
this
slide
before
this
is
the
part
about
you
know.
What
we
need
is
this:
like
top
level
decision
making
group
right
of
different
stakeholder
groups
need
to
be
aligned
right,
so
so
the
voter
committees
is
this
new
thing
about,
like
empire
holders,
need
to
start
talking
right.
That
didn't
happen
before
publicly.
A
So
we
need
to
pay
people
to
delegate
their
votes
and
that's
going
to
make
the
delegates
super
powerful,
and
that
also
means
we
need
to
put
other
mechanisms
to
sort
of
put
a
check
on
them
just
because
of
how
much
x
we're
gonna
put
in
the
delegate
basket,
and
then
we
need
to
have
these.
A
You
know
this
is
the
sort
of
certain
core
units
that
are
specialized
in
sort
of
the
the
overall
administration
and
support
of
the
of
the
workforce,
and
we've
talked
about
strategic
finance,
ses
and
so
on
in
the
past.
There's
also
governance,
of
course,
another
example
of
this,
and
then
I'm
sort
of
flip-flopping
about
whether
to
add,
you
know
include
this
part,
but
basically
this
thing
about
getting
in
external
experts,
so
we
can
have
some
kind
of
process
that
can
be
kind
of
compared.
I
mean
it's
a.
A
A
I
don't
know
freaking
matrix
organization
to
blah
blah
some
other
corporate
thing
and
then
they
hire
in
some
management
consultants
right
and
then
they
do
all
the
blah
blah
blah
like
that,
and-
and
I
mean
I
actually
think
we
need
exactly-
I
mean
we
need
the
the
dao
version
of
that
right,
so
not
the
horrible
corporate
version
of
it,
but
we
need
sort
of
the
dao
version
of
getting
sort
of
the
yeah
like
the
decentralized
version
of
management
consultants,
which
is
something
called
organizational
design
experts,
and
so
I've
had
some
really
good
talks
about
this,
and
that's
really
you
know
so
I
think
I
have
some
very
high
potential
people
that
could
actually
make
a
huge
difference.
A
I
think
in
terms
of
making
it
actually
sort
of
a
proper
process
that
can
be
trusted
and
sort
of
validated,
but
the
most
you
know
significant
new
thing
of
this
nice
little
slide.
Is
this
thing
in
the
bottom
right?
So
I
was
also
I
was
considering
calling
this
team
and
game
or
something
like
that.
I
mean.
Ultimately,
this
is,
and
this
is
like
an
old.
You
know
this
is
a
actually
a
foundational
concept
in
the
end
game
plan
that
sofa
hasn't
really
been
described
too
much.
A
But
ultimately,
I
think
in
the
end,
like
the
best
word
to
use
for
is
basically
party
right,
even
though
it's
not
it's
definitely
not
to
be
compared
completely
to
like
a
political
party
from
the
real
world
because
of
the
very
simply,
you
know,
simplistic
scope
of
major
governments
in
dallas
right,
which
is
the
whole
point
as
well
of
the
of
the
in-game
plan,
but
basically
that
what
we
already
de
facto
have
is
basically
just
me
sitting
all
the
votes
and
trying
to
figure
out
how
what
do
people
want
essentially
right,
and
we
need
to
formalize
this
further
into
this
sort
of
the
shared
vision
of
of
the
end
game
party
right.
A
So,
like
a
group
of
people
that
call
you
know
that
explicitly
collaborate
to
try
to
to
carry
out
this
plan
and
right
in
this
context,
right
now
and
I'll
get
to
later,
because
I
mean
actually,
as
I
said,
on
the
forum
post
and-
and
you
know
elsewhere,
these
wednesday
calls
right
now
are
actually
not
about
the
end
game
plan
itself,
they're
about
sort
of
the
next
steps,
the
short
term
steps
that
I'm
basically,
you
know
pushing
as
the
active
mpr
voter.
A
But
it's
still,
you
know
this
is
still.
The
point
is
still
that
this
helps
on
one
hand,
this
helps
create
certainty,
but
the
other
you
know
we
it.
It
also
allows
us
to
create
a
lot
of
certainty
around
and
sort
of
create
a
sort
of
a
some
solidity.
Whatever
you
know
some
some
some
kind
of
of
whatever
solution.
A
I
don't
even
know
that's
a
real
world
word
outside
of
of
ethereum,
but
whatever,
without
getting
into
doing
something
like
a
signal
request
for
the
end
game,
sort
of
the
the
single
request
or
sort
of
a
preparatory
phase
towards
the
end
game
plan,
which
is
sort
of
planned.
As
one
of
these
like
steps,
that's
gonna
really
be
an
actual
decision
on
on
not
on
the
endgame
plan
itself,
or
rather
whether
we
should
sort
of
work
towards
it.
A
But
the
problem
is
that
there
are
so
many
parts
like
there's
so
much
complexity
to
the
in-game
plan.
That
still
needs
to
be
completely
detailed
right.
So
I'm
slowly
releasing
publishing
those
parts
and
tomorrow
I'll
publish
part
four
right,
but
all
those
things
need
to
be
be
completely
made
public
and
there
needs
to
be
some
additional
material
before
it
makes
sense
to
have
like
a
proper
vote
on
the
in-game
plan,
or
not
right.
A
So
so
the
in-game
party
is
more
this
concept
of
it's
not
actually
about
some
specific
plan
right
or
some
specific
process,
it's
more
like
grouping
together
and
basically
collaborating
explicitly
right,
and
this
is
also
where
it
gets
into
this
thing
about
delegates
right
because
I
mean
so
there's
been.
You
know,
there's
even
more
sort
of
strong
reasons,
including
various
well
basically
drama
and
and
other
this
kind
of
stuff
that
originally
really
set
me
off
on.
A
You
know,
taking
action
to
to
make
change
in
the
workforce
right
that
that
just
makes
it
you
know,
makes
it
necessary
to
really
have
the
you
know
like
send
very
clear
signals
right,
and
rather
I
mean
one
and
what
I'm
actually
I
mean
I'll.
A
I
guess
at
the
end
I'll
go
into
more
detail
exactly
how
I'm
gonna
go
ahead,
we'll
go
about
delegating
and
voting,
and
this
kind
of
stuff
right,
but
basically
with
with
the
exception
of
some
specific
people
that
are
considered
to
be
more
sort
of
external
and
and
coming
from
there
from
the
outside
of
the
dao.
A
I'm
basically
looking
to
only
delegate
my
votes
in
ways
that
sort
of
align
with
this
concept
of
the
in-game
party
right
and
so
I'll
I'll,
and
then,
as
on
top
of
that,
encourage
other
people
to
do
the
same
right
because
the
more
we
can
get
this
sort
of
alignment
and
certainty
around.
A
We
don't
you
know
we
don't
have
the
full
details
of
the
end
game
plan
we
can't
apply.
You
know,
prove
that
yet
and
actually
the
end
gameplay.
You
know
there
are
all
these
like
validation
steps
in
itself.
So
it's
not
necessarily
that
we
have
a
the
plan
as
described
with
metadata
and
all
that
stuff,
that's
not
necessarily
guaranteed
to
happen,
but
the
general
direction
of
what
I've
been
trying
to
do
this
process.
This
voter
committee
is
a
lot,
the
rest
of
the
stuff
that
I'm
describing
now
right.
A
We
need
to
have
a
we
need
to
have
a
way
for
people
to
signal
some
kind
of
general
support
for
that,
and
then
also
know
that
they're,
basically,
you
know
taking
steps
to
to
to
to
support
it,
basically
through
their
votes
right,
which
right
now
is
one
of
my
problems
with
the
delegates.
Is
that,
because
I
keep
learning
about
these
secret,
you
know
conversations
basically
like
this.
A
You
know
what
I
expect
out
of
delegates
right,
so
I'll
get
back
to
that
in
the
end,
but
right
now
I
just
want
to
further.
First
before
I
get
any
further
sort
of
what
are
they?
What
are
these
things
that,
I
think
really?
You
know
how
you
know
that
you
know
protestation
and
budgets,
which
is
the
main
thing
I
want
to
talk
about
today.
A
I
just
want
to
quickly
dive
a
little
bit
further
into
this
party
concept,
just
to
show
how
it
actually
fits
into
sort
of
this
overall
plan
and
and
it's
so
the
role
it
plays
in
de-risking
super
powerful
delegates
right.
A
You
know
down
the
path
of
sort
of
getting
the
ball
rolling
on
the
end
game
plan
right
to
the
or
sort
of
these.
These
general
plans
I'll
get
to
that
in
a
second
there's
kind
of
two
plans
in
a
way
that
I'll
describe
in
a
little
bit.
A
To
the
point
where
they're
kind
of
unstoppable-
and
maybe
you
remember
this-
slide-
picture
I've
used
in
various
places
of
kind
of
like
how
you
you
know
you
sort
of
you,
have
this
sort
of
launch
and
you
create
metadials,
and
the
metadata
sort
of
naturally
goes
to
the
the
endgame
state
right,
and
so
the
idea
is
once
you
have
that
irreversible
momentum
for
we're
going
in
to
a
sort
towards
sort
of
a
finite
end,
end
point
and
then
the
whole
point
is
to
deliberately
split
up
the
endgame
party
right.
A
So
we
you
know
because
it's
the
whole
point
is
we
need
to
have
decentralization.
We
can't
have
a
you
know.
We
can't
count
on
a
single
aligned
group
to
to
actually
work
in
the
long
run
right.
We
actually
need
a
multi-polar
situation
that
that
sort
of
provides
checks
and
balances
on
on
the
overall
governance
process
right,
and
so
the
re
I
mean
the
reason
yeah
so
like
the
way
that
it's
going
to
be
incredibly
powerful
and
important,
and
I
actually
think
like
fun
like.
A
I
think
this
is
one
of
the
most
I
mean
I
didn't
discover
this
like
this.
This
trick,
or
or
whatever
you
want
to
call
it
this
this
idea
until
until
much
later,
and
before
that
I
basically
I
was
completely
like
like
this-
is
one
of
the
biggest
issues
I
kept
running
into
is
like
this
is
a
this
is
a
giant.
This
is
a
contradiction.
This.
It
was
one
of
the
things
that
made
me
worry.
A
It
was,
even
you
know,
taos
were
even
impossible
right,
but
once
I
sort
of
discovered
this
trick
basically,
then
suddenly,
I
actually
think
it
really
starts
to
to
make
things
like
make.
The
whole
idea
of
like
an
actual
equilibrium
and
an
in-game
plan,
and
just
in
general,
making
dallas
workable,
becomes
actually
realistic
right
and
so
the
fundamental
problem
is
the
the
random
sticky
votes
right.
A
But
then,
what's
going
to
happen,
is
they're
going
to
open
up
some
kind
of
ui
and
then
they're
going
to
take
the
happy
path
right,
they're
going
to
click
whatever
the
first
thing:
they
can
click
to
get
their
money
basically,
and
maybe
50
of
them
will
actually
spend
a
few
brain
cycles
think
to
think
a
little
bit
beyond
just
click
whatever
the
first
thing
I
see.
So
I
can
get
my
money
right,
but
it's
still
only
very
limited
how
much
they
will.
They
will
bother
to
think
right.
A
Of
course,
some
people
will
like
do
tons
of
research
and
they
don't
even
say
I
mean
there
are
semi,
altruists
already
and
and
they're
critical
part
of
this
and
they
sort
of,
and
we
need
to
massively
empower
those
the
border
committees
and
so
on,
but
ultimately
the
bulk
of
sort
of
the
security
and
the
governance
power
comes
from
these
sort
of
very
you
know,
like
you
know,
people
that
have
got
a
lot
going
on
and
I'm
not
exactly
willing
to
volunteer
huge
amounts
of
the
time
or
energy
or
brainpower
to
the
the
dow
right.
A
So
the
solution
is
a
kind
of
you
know
just
trying
to
extract
sort
of
nuggets
of
decision
making
out
of
them,
or
you
know,
like
information,
knowledge
and
intelligence
out
of
them
and
picking
your
favorite
delegate
is
not
a
good
way
to
do
that
because,
well,
basically
I
mean
yeah,
it's
a
complete.
It's
all.
You
know
it's
not
even
for
me,
that's
sort
of
very
much
tracking
all
the
delegates
having
a
very
hard
time,
understanding
who's,
even
who's.
A
You
know
who's
who's,
the
right
people
to
to
delegate
to
basically
right
and
ultimately
there's
a
lot
of
of
things
that
be.
You
know
like.
I
have
a
lot
of
input,
that
is,
that
I'm
having
a
hard
time
sort
of
getting
through
as
well
right
and
and
and
what
we
can
you
know.
What
I
think
is
a
is
the
ideal
outcome
of
basically
providing
the
delegates
with
all
this
power,
but
then
also
controlling
how
they
use
their
power.
A
Is
that
you?
You
know
you?
Don't
you
don't
just
pick
who
you
like
of
the
delegates
right?
So
you
get
this
random.
You
know
you
get
these
recognized
delegates,
you,
you
know
you're
clicking
on
the
the
voter
ui,
where
you're
gonna
get
paid
to
vote.
Then
you
get
this
random
list
of
delegates
and
then
you
get
the
top
random.
You
know
the
random
top
three.
A
You
got
you're
going
to
look
at
them
and
then
you're
going
to
pick
one
of
them
and
that's
when
you're
going
to
delegate
to,
but
in
practice
pretty
much
nobody
will
will
actually
sort
of
you
know
will
not
be
optimized
for
people
to
actually
make
a
kind
of
decision.
That
makes
any
sense
right
like
maybe
they
will
they'll,
probably
look
at
the
pictures
or
something
and
then
pick
the
guy.
A
But
with
this
party
approach,
and
simply
you
know
this
sort
of
simplified
decision
of
like
hawk
versus
dove,
for
instance
right
where,
basically,
you
know,
hog
means
more
burn
and
less
expenses
and
less
worry
about
long-term
growth
and
more
about
today,
whereas
dove
means
you
know,
davis
means
less
burn
and
more
expensive
and
more
focused
on
the
long
term
right
and
and
and
sort
of
going
from
today
to
the
long
term.
Right-
and
that
would
be
a
way
to
so.
A
Basically
the
simple
question
like:
should
we
increase
budgets
or
should
we
reduce
budgets
that
could
then
be
captured
in
this
like
incentivized
gamified
ui?
So
it's
like?
Oh
you
pick
a
guy,
and
then
you
basically
give
him
a
you
know
you
describe
whether
this
person
should
be
using
your
votes
to
increase
the
budgets
or
decrease
the
budgets
right
and
then
there
could
also
be
this
sort
of
middle
option
of
like
in
the
independent
you
know.
So
actually
it
really
just
becomes
like.
A
A
I
think
you
know
this
creates
a
completely
different
dynamic
of
delegates
right
where
they
are
not
no
longer
supposed
to
be
these,
like
political
leaders
that
get
a
bunch
of
power
and
then
have
to
make
big
decisions,
and-
and
you
know,
which
is,
I
think,
is-
is
actually
not
gonna
work
in
the
long
run.
A
But
basically
I
want
to
sort
of
begin
this
process
already
now
with
how
I'm
going
to
vote
like
delegate
my
mkr,
with
some
exception
exceptions,
but
anyway,
we'll
get
to
that
to
the
end,
and
actually
let
me
just
just
for
a
second.
Let
me.
A
You
know
I'm
kind
of
gonna
ruin
radio
this
for
the
most
part
right,
so
I'll
go
through
the
the
presentation,
then
we
can
have
more
of
a
discussion.
A
A
The
jet,
it's
I'm
assuming
idiot,
if,
if
you
go
to
the
bar
at
the
top
or.
B
A
One
monitor,
I
don't
see,
I
think.
A
A
Yeah
libertarian
party
coming
yeah,
I
love
that
that's
yeah,
so
I
would
really
support
I
mean,
so
I
think
at
this
point,
because
I
mean
I've
tried,
I've
been
sort
of
trying
to
to
you
know,
actually
activate.
Let's
call
it
activist
voter
behavior
right,
I'm
not
really
seeing
that
right,
but
I
think
no
matter
what
I
mean
some.
A
So
my
approach
is,
you
know
I
I
you
know
like,
like
you
know,
gather
as
much
support
into
this
endgame
party
as
possible,
but
I
think
developing
this
whole
concept,
like
a
sort
of,
is
a
consistent
approach
to
to
governance.
I
think
is
really
really
important.
So
so
I
would
love
to
see,
like
other
like
as
soon
as
possible,
see
these
sort
of
parties
emerging
right
and
then
in
the
that's
part
of
the
endgame
line
or
whatever,
then
we
can.
A
A
That's
consistent
with
the
voter
committees,
where
the
of
sort
of
the
people
that
basically
collaborate
to
to
create
this
sort
of
ideology.
Well,
it's
a
wrong
way
right,
but
this
like
line
of
thinking,
right
and
and
the
same
thing
goes
for
for
the
the
dove
party
whatever
so
you
have.
A
The
same
delegate
basically
have
two
different
delegate
contracts
and
then,
with
one
of
the
delegate,
contracts
they'd
be
voting
to
increase
budgets
and,
with
the
other,
were
voting
to
decrease
budgets,
and
all
of
that
would
be
legitimate,
even
if
they
sort
of
like
did
nothing
because
they
voted
equally
for
both
sides,
but
they
will
still
count
towards
their
their.
A
You
know
the
delegate
compensation
and
then
their
job,
essentially
because
they
would
be
you
know,
delegates
should
be
more
more,
almost
like
robots,
right
or
more,
like
automated,
like,
like,
like
pass-throughs,
that
are
trying
to
interpret
the
will
of
the
voters
as
much
as
possible
right
they
shouldn't
be,
like
you
know,
political
actors,
essentially
that
themselves
are
trying
to
to
implement
some
kind
of
agenda,
because
if
yeah-
because
I
mean
even
now,
I
think
it's
a
problem
because
there's
a
misalignment
of
incentives
right,
but
but
once
you
factor
in
random,
sticky
voting
from
voting
incentives,
it's
a
complete
disaster.
A
Yeah
so
mega
man
says
parties
don't
work
since
no
one
typically
holds
all
the
views
of
a
party
and
when
they
break
probably
with
apparently
blah
blah
yeah.
But
so,
like
I
mean
I
well
parties,
don't
work
right.
Well,
that's
how
all
politics
works
in
the
real
world
and
basically
the
way
it
works
is
that
there
is
some
kind
of
like
inside
a
party
itself.
You
have
a
process
that
sort
of
determines.
This
is
what
our
shared
position
is
right.
So
that's
so
basically
I
will.
A
I
will
you
know
I'll
show
how
it
works
in
a
moment
right,
because
I
will
I'll
basically
present
this
sort
of
position
right
from
my
end
game
party,
that
other
people
are
then
willing
to
like
welcome
to
support
right
or
disagree.
A
If
they
don't
agree
with
it,
they
can
simply
go
with
something
else,
but
they
think
the
critical
thing
is
whether
we
can,
whether
we
can
you
know
like
we
need
to
develop,
not
only
the
ability
to
try
to
agree
on
these
sort
of
static.
A
You
know
like
views
right,
but
then
also
how
to
then
collaboratively
improve
them
by
actually
having
people
that
actually
believe.
In
the
same
things,
right.
A
A
It's
like
you
have
you
know
economic
spectrum,
you
have
the
social
spectrum
and
so
on
right,
so
in
maker,
we're
gonna,
you're
gonna,
learn
from
the
way
that
how
what
are
we
seeing
in
reality,
but
we're
going
to
apply
that
to
something
much
more
narrow
to
try
to
create
a
system?
That's
almost
automated
right.
That
is
like
almost
mathematical
in
nature,
so
you
can
vote
for
higher
budgets
or
lower
budgets.
And
then
you
can.
I
mean
it.
A
And
yeah
I
mean,
I
also
think
like.
I
think
a
lot
of
people
would
agree
that,
in
the
end,
everything
that's
just
been.
What
we've
been
seeing
in
maker
really
does
look
a
lot
like
politics.
A
Right
like
it
actually
is
more
comparable
to
something
like
parliamentary
politics
and
government
and
government
funding,
and
this
kind
of
stuff,
rather
than
something
like
a
company
right
and
which,
in
hindsight,
I
think,
makes
sense
because
it's
like
a
company
falls
back
on
a
government
on
a
legal
system
when,
when
things
don't
go
according
to
plan,
but
in
the
dow
you
don't
have
that
fallback.
So
you
actually
build
the
entire
fallback
yourself.
A
Okay
back
into
the
full
screen,
so,
okay,
so
so,
then,
basically
the
idea
is
that
we
need
to
you
sort
of
you
know
like
so
the
voter
committees,
the
the
voters
that
actually
make
the
ultimate
decision
by
deciding
how
they
delegate,
which
party
they
sort
of
delegate
to
or
how
they're
going
to
influence
the
the
views
of
the
party
right,
the
views
of
the
voter
committee
right
and
so
and
by
the
way
so
like
a
party
you
can
sort
of
I'm.
A
Actually,
I
think
I
should
delete
it
yeah
so
delete
what
so
a
party
would
basically
be
like
multiple
voter
committees
that
cover
different
specializations
and
then
that's
sort
of
what
that
what
the
party
represents
right.
It's
like
a
consistent
view
that
you
apply.
You
know
we
want
to
reduce
budgets.
That
means
we
both
want
to
reduce
budgets
in
collateral,
onboarding
and
in
risk
and
in
marketing
and
right
or
maybe
it's
something
like
we
want
to
focus
on
technical
development.
A
So,
like
the
party
occurs,
when
you
have
these
consistent
approaches
across
multiple
voter
committees,
basically,
and
and
you
get-
and
you
ultimately
get
these
like,
then
you
get
multiple
versions
of
every
voter
committee,
essentially
right
that
has
its
own
process
of
okay,
let's
figure
out
what's
going
on
collateral,
I'm
voting
and
then
let's
figure
out
how
our
sort
of
direction
our
line
of
thinking
applies
to
that
to
the
current
data
right
and
so
that's
sort
of
you
know,
and
then
that's
where
the
delegates
and
the
supporting
core
units
and
then
maybe
also
the
organizational
design
experts
or
at
least
in
the
beginning
right
they
come
in
the
picture
of
like
providing
the
data
necessary
to
make
the
decisions
right
and
then
the
idea
is
ultimately
to
create
a
document.
A
Okay,
so
this
is
the
really.
This
is
when
the
other
part,
where
we're
really
getting
things,
are
really
getting
real
right.
So
basically,
my
aim
is
to
enforce
this
now
right
through
my
votes
and
and
I've
been
showing
this
list
for
a
very
long
time,
and
I've
been
asking
for
for
input
and
feedback
to
it
and
made
a
lot
of
of
small
changes
over
the
the
weeks
and
I'm
getting,
I
mean
some
decent
feedback.
A
I
think
right,
but
what
I've
more
often
found
is
that
most
people
they
just
sort
of
they
don't
implicitly
agree
with
it
without
really
considering.
This
is
actually
the
same
view
right,
and
this
is
also
where
I'm
going
to
ask
the
various
coordinates
to
to
add
some
information
in
just
a
second.
A
But
basically
you
know
so
I
think
it's
re
and
I
think
this
whole
you
know.
So
the
top
of
this
list
is,
you
know,
security,
maintenance
and
security
upgrades,
and
that's
basically,
I
think,
that's
already
how
it
works
right
that
this
is
always
the
top
priority,
but
I
just
think
it's
very,
very
important
that
any
plan
any
kind
of
direction
make
sure
to
reinforce
that.
This
is
still
the
case.
A
We're
not
gonna
we're
not
trying
to
rush
anyone
to
in
any
way
compromise
on
sort
of
the
basic
number
one
principle
of
of
the
dao
right
and
then
you
know
figuring
out
voter
committees,
delegates
parties,
you
know
like
supporting
core
units
that
sort
of
fixing
the
politics
fixing
the
governance
right
like
trying
to
optimize
that
and
get
beyond
these
freaking
close
groups
and
behind
the
scenes
drama
that
it's
just
com.
You
know
it's
simply
unacceptable.
A
At
this
stage
right
I
mean
with
the
the
kind
of
meltdown
we're
having
having
now
means
that
can
really
really
expect
me
to
react
very
forcefully
if
I
keep
running
into
that
kind
of
stuff
and
and
and
we
simply
need
to
create
a
structure
that
no
longer
this,
you
know
this
needs
to
to
play
out
in
some
kind
of
civilized
sort
of
public
fashion.
A
Right
and-
and
that's
I
think,
that's
that's
absolutely
critical
to
to
do,
and
without
that,
it's
like
we're
stuck
if,
if
we
gonna
have,
you
know
like
broken
politics
and
and
weird
behind
the
scenes,
interaction,
sort
of
being
the
thing
that
determines
what's
happening
and
and
the
way
you
find
out.
What's
going
on
is
is
by
interacting
with
that?
That's
that's!
That's
completely
unsustainable!.
A
And
then
there's
basically,
you
know
the
number
one
thing
I
think
is
like
and
it
yeah
the
top
priority
by
far
compared
to
anything
else,
is
we
need
to
get
profits
by
allocating
our
free
usdc?
It's
such
a
low-hanging
fruit
bond
rates
are
going
up
right.
A
We
have
some
some
at
this
point
sort
of
almost
like
classical
or
something
like
structures
at
this
point
right,
like
old
structures
that
we
know
work
for
this
stuff
and
yes,
I'm
not
gonna
actually
met
from
success,
capitalist
here
and
could
maybe
talk
about
it
very
briefly,
but
I
want
to
wait
a
little
bit.
Let's
just
just
want
to
go
through
the
the
rest
of
this.
Before
I
get
people
to
add
information.
A
Well,
that's
basically
I
mean
this
is
I
mean
I
think
if
we
can
get
just
a
one
percent
on
2
billion
right,
that's
20
million!
That's
already,
I
believe
more
than
our
current
income,
and
it
will
still
not
be
enough
to
make
us
break
even
so.
We're
like
horribly,
okay,
horrible,
that's
a
no
that's,
maybe
getting
a
little
bit
too
into
it,
but
we
it's
not
looking
very
good
right
now.
A
In
terms
of
what
we're
used
to
in
in
terms
of
sustainability
right,
if
you
accept
the
fact
that
you
cannot
count
liquidations
as
income
in
terms
of
trying
to
determine
whether
we're
operating
sustainably
because
liquidations
yeah
on
one
hand
they
they
can't
just
give
us
income,
but
they
destroy
growth
right.
So
they
don't.
A
They
don't
sustain
expenses
at
all.
They
actually
almost
do
the
opposite.
They,
like
give
you
a
kind
of
exit.
You
know
sort
of
like
yeah
right,
like
the
last
chance
to
to
get
some
value,
but
but
now
that
you're,
you
know
you
know
now
the
trajectory
is
going
the
wrong
direction
right
once
once
you
have
liquidations
happening.
A
And
then
we
need
to
deal
with
the
real
real
assets,
so
real
assets
is
like.
I
really
think
it's
both
the
greatest
source
of
like
unacceptable
drama.
Basically-
and
it's
like-
I
think,
it's
a
big
you
know
it's
like.
A
I
pushed
for
a
particular
direction,
real
assets
for
a
very
long
time,
and
I
think
ultimately,
it's
a
like
it's
a
failure,
sort
of
a
mistake
for
me
to
to
take
that
approach,
and
basically
the
government
bonds,
the
which
is
sort
of
the
obvious
way
to
approach
this
should
have
really
been
what
we
focused
on
from
the
start,
but
instead
we
went
down
this
path
of
like
complex
rebel
assets,
and
it's
not
it's
not
where
it's
not
delivering
the
results
that
we
want
to
see.
A
I
mean
it's
simply,
not
it's
not
working
as
expected,
so
I
think
it's
really.
First
of
all,
we
need
to
just
like
you
know,
freeze
everything,
we're
doing
right,
freezing
all
the
the
sort
of
expansion
of
activity
in
this
field
and
then
have
some
level
of
consolidation
and
sort
of
shoring
up
with
key
counterparties.
A
That,
basically,
you
know,
there's
a
bunch
of
names
for
like
counterparties
on
this
list,
that
I
basically
consider
to
be
counterparties
that
are
so
like
they're,
so
deeply
sort
of
in
the
system
already
and
then
many
of
them
I
mean
I
guess
sock
gin
is
a
weird
outlier,
but
for
the
other
ones,
they're
kind
of
like
counterparties
that
are
built.
A
You
know
that
I
mean,
from
my
perspective,
are
building
up
a
level
of
trust
that
makes
them
almost
comparable
to
core
units
in
a
sense
right,
they're
sort
of
a
part
of
this
bootstrapping
effort
of
the
you
know
of
maker,
and
I
basically
think
that
they
are
actually
what
I
want
to
see
as
sort
of
the
one
of
the
driving
forces
of
when
we
actually
try
to
do
complex
rival
assets
in
metadows.
A
If
we
ever
get
to
that
point,
but
then
actually
I
mean
and
then
yeah
so
then
we
need
to.
We
need
to
reduce
budgets.
I
originally
wanted
really
wanted
to
be
able
to
to
you
know
sort
of
like
make
the
the
promise
that
we.
B
A
We
could
keep
all
budgets
the
way
they
are.
We
could
keep
the
60
million
burn,
I
mean
60
million,
you
know
yearly
expenses
going.
A
I
don't
think
that's
possible
now,
like
I
think
the
market
has
tanked
too
badly.
For
that
and
and
it's
you
know,
the
priority
needs
to
be
to
survive
and
really
prepare
for
the
worst
and.
A
And
then,
with
that
we
can,
you
know
we
can
do
burn
right
and,
and
everyone
knows
this
is
a
good
time
to
burn,
because
the
prices
are
low
and
then
there's
this
like
the
compound
d3m,
which
is
like
the
only
other
like
thing
I
could
think
of
that
sort
of
that
I
just
know,
is
in
the
pipeline.
That,
I
think,
is
something
that's
that
makes
sense
to
put
on
this
sort
of
the
the
short-term
list
of
stuff
that
I
think
we
need
to
to
get
done
and
sort
of
make
sure
it's
prioritized
right.
A
And
so
then
the
idea
is,
you
know.
So.
The
whole
idea
with
this
like
focus,
objective
concept,
is
that
it's
it's
this
kind
of
trickle-down
approach
right
so
like
it's,
not
that
these
are
the
only
things
that
that
should
be
done
right,
but
it's
rather
than
today
we
have
the
coin,
that's
basically
doing
whatever
they
want
right
sort
of
following
various
processes
and
so
on,
but
they're
sort
of
opaque,
and
I
mean
they're-
actually
not
opaque,
but
they're
like
they're,
effectively
opaque
right
so
they're
possible
to
look
into.
A
A
But
there
are
certain
things
that
are
simply
like
you
know
that
are
that
are
that
that
must
be
done
to
make
sure
the
protocol
is
gonna,
succeed
right
and
not
just
like
waste
the
opportunity
and
or
even
dig
a
hole
for
ourselves
right
and
then
beyond
this
list,
then
you
can
basically
revert
to
sort
of
the
current
state
of
well
whatever
internal
processes
or
whatever
people
feel
like
doing
or
so
on
and
so
on.
A
Right
and
then
on
one
hand
then
that's
I
mean
that's
probably
just
a
good
approach
right
in
most
cases
because
for
the
most
part,
the
the
teams
are
actually
very
good
at
the
them
and
doing
stuff,
and
so
on.
It's
more
like.
We
have
no
idea
the
for
the
most
part.
We
don't
really
know
the
value
that's
being
created,
but
with
things
like
metadows
right
be
able
to
go
in
and
actually
pick
out
the
value
and
sort
of
bring
it
out
and
and
make
it
visible,
but
it
also
helps
us.
A
I
mean,
ultimately,
by
understanding
the
focus,
objectives
and
understanding.
What
are
the
resources
necessary
to
do?
These,
that's
also
going
to
help
us
inform
where
we
have
an
opportunity
to
reduce
budgets
right
and
then
I
think,
and
I
mean-
and
I
think
with
we
need
to
reduce
budgets.
We
need
to
reduce
head
count.
I
don't
think
that
there
is
it's
a
this
sort
of
tough
decision.
A
Tough,
you
know
reality
that
I
think
everybody
wanted
to
avoid
oddly
well,
actually
a
lot
of
people
have
been
calling
for
that,
for
you
know
well
pretty
much
forever
right,
but
at
least
for
my
from
my
part,
I
think
that
there's
you
know
well,
as
someone
that's,
you
know,
I've
been
I've
been.
A
I
was
the
ceo
of
the
mega
foundation
right
I
dealt
with
with
with
you
know,
reducing
hit
count,
and-
and
these
kind
of
you
know
reducing
expenses,
and
that's
just
always
it
you
know
it
gets
you
going
in
the
wrong
direction,
is
the
feeling
in
a
sense
right,
but
on
the
other
hand,
it's
sort
of
also
what's
like
at
this
point
with
with
the
crash
being
this
massive
and
this
sort
of
the
the
fact
that
this
actually
it's
kind
of
limited.
A
What
like
the
opportunity,
that's
available
to
us
in
a
sense
in
terms
of
like,
what's
the
what's
immediately
on
the
plate,
that
that
we
can
do
right
now
that
that
sort
of
makes
sense.
A
I
think
it's
a
very
it's
a
very
important
step
to
demonstrate
that
we're
able
to
do
and
basically
a
way
to
get
get
money
that
we
can
use
for
to
burn
him
here
instead
and
then
there's
a
whole
in-game
plan
and
I'll
get
into
that
in
a
second
and
sort
of
there's
sort
of
you
know
so
wednesdays
again
are
for
the
short-term
stuff.
So
that's
I've
sort
of
grouped
the
term
things
at
the
top.
A
In
a
sense
right-
and
then
I
have
these
like
end
game
in-game
plan
elements
at
the
bottom
here,
because
they're
a
little
bit
separate
in
a
sense,
but
basically
you
know-
I
think
you
know
so
then,
beyond
these
short-term
things,
then
it's
basically
a
matter
of
of
getting
into
getting
the
ball
rolling
on
the
end
game
which
step
one.
Is
this
thing
about
organizational
design
getting
experts
in
to
try
to
actually
influence
this
the
end
game
plan
and
really
have
a
sort
of
holistic
external?
A
You
know
work
done
on
trying
to
create
sort
of
a
proper
plan
right
and
then,
as
well
as
like
a
transition
plan,
change
management
all
this
stuff
for
how
we
would
try
to
to
reinvent
make
a
right
from
where
we
are
now
to
something
that
can
weather
the
storm
and
then
grow
like
like
crazy
and
take
all
the
whole
market
and
so
on
right
and
then
from
with
that,
actually
be
able
to
get
to
the
point
where
we
can
have
votes
and-
and
you
know
first-
have
this
sort
of
signal
request.
A
That's
more
like
a
vote
on
further.
You
know
doing
further.
A
What
do
you
call?
It
further
discovery,
a
sort
of
further
preparation,
and
then
eventually
you
know
the
actual.
You
know
mip
the
end
game
plan
launch
mip.
That
would
actually
be
sort
of
the
the
irreversible
or
near
irreversible
decision
on
setting
in
motion
the
gameplay.
A
But
I
I'll
go
down
here
then
I'll
just
go
back
and
say
I
just
want
to
like
really
clarify
this
thing
about
the
two
plans
and
the
two
and
the
end
game
plan
and
wednesday
and
thursdays
and
so
on
right.
So
it's
basically
my
opinion
that,
like
right
now
we're
somewhere
in
the
middle
of
these
two
things
and
that's
completely
unsustainable
and
doesn't
make
any
sense
right.
So
we
have
a
the
call
is
what's
making
us
money,
then
we
have
this
giant
workforce
and
we're
not
really
getting
like
we're.
A
A
You
know
streamlined
product
right,
which
I
call
rye
plus.
Basically,
so
it's
like
you
know
it's
like
right
but
like
in
between
maker
today
and
then
rye
right,
where
you
you
know,
I've
talked
about
this
before
right.
We,
this
is
the
stuff
pretty
much
the
stuff
we
already
have.
That
works
right
with
d3m
psm,
wbtc
eth.
A
If
you
and
then
there's
these
like
plus,
you
could
add,
you
know
the
ability
to
to
allocate
into
government
bonds
right.
That's
like
a
really
strong
but
relatively
simple
feature
that
is
like
providing
huge
amounts
of
value
and
then
potentially,
and
I'm
not
even
like
this-
is
something
in
the
past.
I
wouldn't
even
I
didn't
even
include
in
this
definition.
A
But
for
the
most
part
the
whole
point
is
that
that
we
want
to
avoid
the
situation
today,
have
sort
of
a
workforce
that
just
like
gross
and
an
uncontrolled
fashion
right-
and
you
have
these
like
huge
budgets
and
and
sort
of
unclear
such
you
know
like
ability
to
manage
the
the
growth
and
and
and
bureaucracy
that
sort
of
is,
is
it
gets.
A
You
know,
gets
bigger
than
the
community
in
a
sense
almost
right.
That's
that's
sort
of
the
the
the
problem
of
today,
where
it's
not
being
probably
managed
right,
so
anyways
right.
So
whether
or
not
we
end
up
doing
the
end
game
plan,
which
still
I
mean
for
me
right
now,
this
looks
very
likely
that
there's
there's
broad
support
for
that,
but
the
whole
all
the
information,
isn't
even
available
right.
So
we'll
get
more
information
as
we
try
to
create
the
end
game
party
and
so
on
right,
but
but
ultimately,
there's
still
there's
still
uncertainty.
A
A
If
it
fails
you,
we
basically
have
both
the
end
game
plan
as
well
right
because
that
the
first
one
sort
of
becomes
the
the
proof
of
concept
right,
but
no
matter
what
the
rye
plus
direction
fits
into
is
the
first
step
of
the
end
game
plan
anyway,
with
some
minor
caveats
where,
basically
the
big
difference
is,
you
know,
do
we
do
we
reduce
you
just
straight
up,
reduce
budgets,
or
do
we
rather
sort
of
transfer
resources
from
budgets
today
into
metadows
right?
A
So
so
that's
the
big
difference,
and
so
I
think,
no
matter
what
we
need
to.
Basically
reduce
budgets
in
all
cases
right
we
need
to
get
to
break
even
no
matter
what
we
do.
I
think
we
have
to
first
demonstrate
the
ability
to
get
the
break
even
and
but
then
I
think,
if
we're
going
for
the
right
plus
we
have,
then
we
want
to.
A
You
know,
immediately,
try
to
become
as
profitable
as
possible,
right
or
just
able
to
provide
a
good,
dsr
and
minimize
overhead
right,
whereas
with
within
game
plan,
we
want
to
then
sort
of
simply
operate
at
breakeven
or
maybe
even
eventually,
once
we
have
a
very
clear
plan,
an
idea
for
exactly
how
we
want
to
use
that
then
get
into
a
sort
of
a
an
actual
cash
burn
situation
right,
where
we're
burning
reserves.
Spending
reserves
to
do
this
like
push
for
for
massive
growth
right.
A
Okay.
So
now
I'm
gonna
just
call
out
some
people
right.
So
so
I
spoke
very
basically.
I
guess
I
basically
just
paint
and
very
briefly
spoke
to
premosh
and
robert
writes
a
risk
and
collateral
onboarding
and
what
I
basically
the
input
I
would
just
really
like
now
is.
A
Is
there
anything
else
comparable
to
the
compound
d3m
that
you're
seeing
right
now
that
you
think
are
sort
of
fits
on
on
on
the
list?
Basically
of
like
of
these,
you
know
like
something
that
would
fit
into
this.
You
know
the
rye
plus
model,
for
instance
right
of
the
or
the
the
the
core
of
the
the
metadata.
A
You
make
a
call
that
sits
in
the
center
of
the
metadata
paradigm
because,
like
I
said,
I
basically
want
to
and
I'll
get
to
that
in
a
second,
but
I
basically
want
to
try
to
you
know
enforce
this
in
the
sense
of
providing
clear
outcomes
where,
first
of
all,
if
we,
you
know,
use
yeah
well
I'll
talk
about
exactly
how
to
to
enforce
the
prioritization
right,
but
first
we
need
to
figure
out
what
should
be
in
the
list
of
things
to
paradise.
C
Roon,
I
guess
for
myself,
this
is
robert,
yes,
facilitator
ces!
This
is
the
question
is
valid,
but
I've
received
a
ping
in
discord
to
attend
or
someone
from
my
team,
and
I
would
love
to
answer
this
question,
provided
that
we
have
preparation
to
come
back
and
to
explain
some
very
specific
areas.
C
C
But
my
understanding
is
that
this
was
a
information
delivery
meeting
and
not
so
much
for
each
of
the
core
units
to
come
back
and
and
share
specifics
about
direction
or
or
modifying
the
focused
objectives.
So
you
know
anything
I
would
say
would
be
off
the
top
of
my
head.
I
would
prepare
to
be
well.
I'd
prefer
to
be
prepared
to
have
this
discussion
ex
considering
this
larger
group-
and
you
know
how
costly
this
meeting
is
to
run.
A
Yeah
looks,
I
think,
that's
that's
totally
valid,
but
I
basically
I
would
put
that
as
like.
It's
possible
there's
some
stuff,
but
you'll
basically
come
back
with
that
right,
so
I
mean
you
have
to
another
way.
To
think
of
it.
Is
that
what
you
know
what
if
I
immediately
begin
the
process
of
forcing
this
through
with
my
80
80k
plus
mkr
right
and
now
we
lock
down
what
can
we
onboard
right
and
then,
what's
you
know.
B
A
I
think
like
no
matter
what
we
want,
as
you
know
me
and,
and
everyone
wants
the
most
reasonable
governance
process,
so
we're
always
going
to
be,
of
course,
be
open
to
tuning
information
and
and
consider
that,
so
I
think
that's
really
that
that
should
be
the
case,
no
matter
what
right,
but
but
but
I
still
basically
interpret
that
as
this
list.
A
Basically
is
you
know,
unless
you
know
without
further
processing
right
now,
this
list
is,
is
probably
encapsulates
the
the
information
that's
publicly
available
right,
like
there's
no
sort
of
there's
nothing
that
sort
of
springs
out
in
that
sense.
Well,.
C
It
does
you
know
for
me,
it
would
be
a
matter
of
listing
what
is
on
the
table
and
then
taking
a
look
at
that
list
and
then
going
through
it
and
saying
this
is
this
is
off
the
table.
This
is
off
the
table,
so
so
we
we
all
have
a
shared
knowledge
of
what
is
being
worked
on
and
what
some
of
those
goals
and
objectives
are
given
what
we
believe
to
be
direction
by
the
community
and
common
knowledge,
also
within
the
community
so
presented
by
this
list.
C
I
would
say
if,
if
our,
if
our
strategic
objective
right
now
is
preservation
and
survival,
then
then
I
would
look
at
investment
activities
that
have
the
ability
to
generate
the
highest
return.
So
the
one
of
the
obvious
places
that
you
have
listed
here
would
definitely
be.
How
do
we
get
additional
yield
from
more
secure
instruments
that
are
potentially
in
the
traditional
financial
markets?
Okay,
so
that's
listed
here,
the
short
rwas,
that's
a
little
bit
more
challenging
because
there's
there's
been
a
lot
of
work.
C
That's
been
put
into
this
area
right
now
and
I
think
there
could
be
some
opportunities
for
us
to
continue
to
invest
in
this
area,
maybe
on
a
smaller,
more
focused
scale.
That
has
the
ability
to
generate
a
substantial
amount
of
dye
in
the
short
term,
because
myself
and
my
team
and
other
core
units
associated
with
that,
especially
with
the
stakeholder
alignment,
calls
that
we've
been
doing.
We've
been
trying
to
generate
we've
been
trying
to
understand
within
the
next
six
months.
C
A
Look
so
and
so
yeah
and
I
completely
agree
with
what
you're
saying
right.
That's
exactly
and
I
think
it's
sort
of
what
you're
describing
is.
This
is
a
natural.
This
is
how
it
should
work.
We
need
to
have
the
data
we
need
to
have
the
the
framework
how
to
think
about
it,
and
then
we
need
to
think
about
it,
and
then
we
need
to
make
decisions
based
on
that
right,
and
you
guys
hear
me.
D
Yes,
yes,
so
so
I
just
wanted
to
say,
like
concretely
we're
working
on
three
things
that
you
have
on
this
list
here,
so
we're
actively
working
on
the
mip,
65
monitalist
thing,
the
suction,
onboarding
and
hvb,
but
then
we're
also
working
on
a
lot
of
the
maintenance
and
security
things
that
that
you're
talking
about
roone
because
yeah
right
now,
these
map
21
deals.
You
know
very
manual-
needs
a
lot
of
the
basically
manual
intervention
from
maker
governance,
so
we're
trying
to
figure
out.
How
can
we
automate
this?
D
D
So
that's
another
concrete
thing
where
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
work
to
be
done
and
then
in
terms
of
the
opportunities
just
want
to
say
that
we're
an
engineering
team,
so
we
kind
of
rely
on
other
people
actually
sourcing
the
deals,
and
we
also
rely
on
some
direction
from
the
maker
community
and
that's
where
we
provided
these
six
guidelines,
because
I
mean
we
have
some
intel
on
what
we
believe
constitute.
You
know
minimum
viable
deals
just
in
terms
of
like
the
cost
of
implementing
them
and
cost
of
maintaining
them,
but
then
otherwise.
D
Community
will
greenlight
certain
deals
and
we'll
then
take
a
look
at
it
right.
So
I
mean
one
of
them.
Now
is
rocket
eth,
where
you
know
there
have
been
made
assessments
and
it's
up
for
paul
right
now,
but
yeah.
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
in
terms
of
opportunities,
we
think
of
opportunities
to
in,
like
an
engineering
way,
how
we
can
optimize
this,
how
we
can
make
it
better,
but
but
we're
not
out
approaching.
You
know,
banks
ourselves,
for
example,
so
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
that.
A
Yeah
thanks.
That's
thanks
context.
That's
great!
So,
and-
and
so
is
it
fair
to
summarize
that
basically,
what
you're
working
you
everything
you're
working
on
right
now
is
on
this
list.
There's
one
exception
which
is
rocket
heath,
it's
not
on
this
list
and
but
it's
it's
like
like
and
and
by
the
way
I
mean,
I'm
not
sure.
What's
I'm
not
sure
what
the
current
status
is,
but
I
think
if
that's
the
case,
sorry,
I'm
I'm
not
even
what
I'm
just
like,
I
think
rocket
is
a
good.
A
You
know
it's
not
on
this
list
and
it
happens
to
be
something
that
right
now,
as
I
understood
it,
someone
pinged
me
about
this
right
that
it's
running
into
it's
being
it's
been
downloaded,
which
I
think
is
the
kind
of
situation
we
you
know
we
want
to
avoid
right
that
we
want
to
get.
C
It
was
a
list
of
opportunities
in
the
quarterly
meeting
and
it
was
it
was
a
shared
meaning
by
multiple
core
units
and
on
that
list
there
were
a
variety
of
opportunities
that
that
multiple
core
units
and
a
lot
of
the
ones
that
are
customer
facing
or
partner
facing
we're
looking
at
to
identify
opportunities
with,
and
so
that
that's
another
source
that
would
be
useful
to
take
a
look
at.
C
I
don't
know
if
everyone
here
had
a
chance
to
either
attend
or
listen
to
that,
but
that
was
a
culmination
of
a
lot
of
people's
time
and
energy,
and
I
think
it's
it's
worth
consideration
it
to
take
a
look
at
that.
A
I
think
that,
and
also
I
was
sorry
I
mean-
I
think,
that
in
general
we
should
continue
this
like
I'll,
make
a
forum
thread
about
this,
and
we
can
discuss
this
all
I
mean
what
I
would
like
to
get
to
is
some
kind
of
like.
I
would
like
to
put
out
like
a
really
strict
criteria.
Right
of
saying
look.
We
only
want
to
think
about
collateral.
That
is,
I
mean
the
way
I'm
thinking
about
it.
Right
now
is
that
I
think
the
compound
d3m.
A
That's
that's
like
that's
clearly
to
me,
something
that
that
is
in
the
area
of
this
is
this
is
an
opportunity
right,
whereas
there
are
other
yeah
I
mean
you
know
immediately.
We
can
get
into
all
sorts
of
random
real
assets
that
I
think
it's
like
I
mean
I'm.
You
know
I
get
bombarded
with
new
real
world
asset
pitches,
and
at
this
point
I'm
saying
hard.
A
No,
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna
actually
like
vote
it
down
right,
like
I'm
actually
in
in
this
complete,
you
know
against
any
kind
of
of
real
asset
expansion,
a
complexity,
expansion
or
any
kind
of
like
weird
small
collateral
onboarding.
Anything
like
that
right,
I
want
to
create
this
very
high
bar
and
then
once
we
can
discuss
both.
What
should
be
the
you
know,
is
it
something
like
you
know,
100
million
debt
ceiling
minimum
or
what
is
it
right?
A
What's
the
requirement,
but
first
try
to
figure
something
on
that
out
and
then
start
to
look
at.
Where
do
we
see
things
that
could
could
fit
that
or
something
like
that
right
and
then,
if
we
see
those
things
they're
like
this
is
a
this
is
a
something
that's
it's
a
something
like
a
compound
d3m
right.
It's
something
that
we
definitely
need
to
get
done
right
that
we're
going
to
be
using
in
the
long
run.
C
Yeah,
and
can
I
can
I
provide
my
view
since
you
called
me
out:
yes,
please
yeah,
so
I
yeah,
so
I
can
cover
the
crypto
collateral
part
since
that's
what
we
cover.
C
Here's
the
thing
like
we
went
through
the
list
of
erc20
tokens
like
we
went
through
the
list
some
time
ago,
and
you
know
if
you
just
look
at
what
we
onboarded
in
the
last
system.
Six
months,
we
onboarded
two
collateral
and
we
all
boarded
six
collateral.
C
If
you
look
at
lux
last
12
months,
we
onboarded,
I
think
something
like
eight
collaterals
and
we
all
boarded
most,
I
think,
like
18
of
collaterals,
so
we're
not
really
adding
that
much
and
you
know
there's
a
reason
for
it.
First
of
all,
there's
the
you
know,
let's
say
second-tier,
erc20
tokens
they're,
just
simply
either
not
liquidity
enough
for
it
or
there's
just
questionable
demand.
C
If
there
is
some
demand,
these
are
mostly
smaller
users,
which
tend
to
use
other
compound
because
they
prefer
cross-collateralization,
because
if
you
hold
trc20
token,
you
obviously
also
hold
ether
until
you're
gonna
collateralize
it
all
together.
So
this
is
already
where
we're
making
kind
of
fails
or
is
not
in
the
best
position.
C
The
third
thing
is
that
they're
oracle
costs
as
well.
So
you
know
you
need
to
meet
at
least
30
million.
Maybe
the
number
is
now
much
lower,
but
you
know
you
need
to
have
decent
demand
and
we
haven't
seen
much
so
the
only
case
where
something
like
this
happens
or
happened
was
matic.
You
know
it's
kind
of
a
bilateral
deal
and
they
needed
something.
But
if
you
look
like
this
here,
it's
really
not
much
to
add
and
we've
entered
the
list.
C
If
we
can
somebody
mute
jc.
Okay,
if
you
cover,
if
you
look
at
d3
amps,
I
have
more
expectations
towards
this
one,
just
simply
because
it's
the
most
agile
type
of
collateral,
we
can
turn
it
on.
We
can
turn
it
off.
It
helps
us
with
aml
and
it's
the
most
responsive
and
yeah.
It's
simply
probably
the
most
interesting
tool
that
we
discovered
in
last
year.
What's
out
there
compound
d3
and
for
sure
it's
now,
six
months
since
we
discussed
adding
it.
Hopefully
this
happens
now
soon.
C
C
Fuse
was
one
example,
but
fuse
is
currently
you
know
disabled.
So
we
cannot
do
that.
One
trufy
and
maple.
Those
ones
might
be
interesting,
but
you
know
if
you
look
at
the
list
of
borrowers
and
maple
and
trufy.
These
are
all
the
institutions
that
are
now
heavily
under
stress.
It's
not
undermined
demand.
Real
world
asset
is
handling
it,
but
you
know
it
might
be
pretty
risky
to
go
into
that
at
this
moment.
C
What
else
was
I
gonna
say
yeah?
I
you
know
to
end
this.
What
I
would
say
it's
really
hard
to
see
something
in
the
short
term.
L2
obviously
have
has
a
lot
of
upside.
So
I'm
not
sure
why
that's
not
on
the
list.
So
that's
something
that
I'm
curious
about,
and
the
third
thing
that
I
want
to
say
here
is
that
maybe
you
know
something
pops
up
like
it's
really
hard
to
say
it
right
now,
but
like
dream
was
something
we
introduced
last
year.
C
What,
if
there's
some
kind
of
technology
or
something
that
that
can?
Actually
that
has
some
demand,
so
you
know
just
one
example
of
such
you
know
it's.
It's
maybe
a
bit
extreme
and
I
don't
want
to
cover
it.
But
I've
been
talking
with
nick
what
if
he
had
medianizer
worlds
right,
walls
that
use
midianizer
as
a
price
and
they
have
certain
criteria
and
you
use
it
only
with
reputable
users
or
something
like
that.
C
Yeah,
I'm
just
talking
out
of
my
mind,
but
you
get
the
point,
there's
something
that
comes
in
next
few
months
and
it
becomes
interesting
such
as
d3m.
Nobody
talked
about
d3m
until
november
last
year,
and
now
it's
quite
interesting
technology.
A
Yeah
all
right,
thanks
for
that
promotion
and
so
yeah.
B
A
Mean-
and
I
think
I
mean
I
think
we
even
had
a
short
conversation
before
this
call,
where
I
think
you
said
something
like
yeah
compound
d3m
and
you
sort
of
express
this
view
to
me
as
well
right
that
which.
A
A
You
know,
ethan
and
wbtc
is
sort
of
the
only
thing
we're
really
seeing,
and
let
me
just
first
answer
well,
so
you
mentioned
two
things
right,
l2
and
then
I
didn't
get
it
exactly,
but
you
were
talking
basically
like.
We
can
also
innovate
like
some
kind
of
innovation
right
and
so
the
thing
about
this
sort
of
what
I
think
is
so
important,
but
like
in
general
about
you,
know
to
how
you
want
to
prioritize
in
a
dial
right
where
everything
is
is
public
and
transparent.
A
A
It's
like
it's
the
most
important
major
development
to
happen
to
the
the
protocol
right,
but
it's
also
something
where,
like
I
would
be
very
worried
about
putting
any
kind
of
prior
like
priority
on
that
that
isn't
more
along
the
lines
of
okay.
Here
are
your
resources,
and
then
you
can
use
this
resource.
However,
you
see
fit
including
trying
to
do
some
l2,
but
the
reality
is.
A
I
mean,
as
far
as
I
understand,
there's
not
like
it's
a
lot,
it's
very
complex
right
and
and
my
outside
view
on
l2,
and
I
don't
want
to
get
into
that.
The
whole
debate,
but
basically
my
outside
view
is
that
it's
it's
really
not
like.
It's
really
something
we
want
to.
You
know
get
when
it's
ready
and
and
really
manage
our
expectations
about,
and
for
this
thing
about,
let's
innovate
right,
that's
that's
again,
something
where
basically
in
general,
I
think
that's
not
I
mean.
A
So
let
me
just
you
know.
Let
me
go
down
to
this
right,
so
so,
basically
anything
about.
Let's
do
some
innovation
right,
that's
something
like!
Basically,
I
don't
think
in
any
circumstances
that
actually
doesn't
fit
into
y
plus.
I
think
right
so
right,
plus
this
approach
of
like
let's
just
we
have
stuff
that
works.
Let's
just
do
that.
A
I
don't
see
any
reason
to
like
experiment
with
something
in
that
model
right.
We
we
could
watch
other
guys,
do
it
somewhere
and
then
we
could
eventually
implement
it
or
maybe
we
could
just
count
on
whatever
other
to
do
it,
and
then
we
just
d3m
the
army
or
something
like
that
right
and
in
the
endgame
plan.
That's
really,
obviously
exactly
what
you
know
m0
would
be
for,
for
instance,
right,
let's,
you
know
which
actually,
you
know
tomorrow
right.
A
I've
also
called
premarch
right
to
join
the
call
tomorrow,
because
I
want
to
talk
about
how
let's
get
real
about
some
of
the
stuff
risk
is
doing
also
and
how
we
can
really
try
to
actually
empower
that,
but
also
by
making
this
very
clear
distinction.
We
have
this
call,
and
it
does
these
very
conservative,
large
steps
of
really
solid
stuff
that
we
know
the
outcome
of
and
then
the
metadatas.
A
A
Now
I
want
to
talk
about
real
assets
with
will,
so
will
I've
been
talking
quite
a
lot
too
in
the
past
right
because
I
mean
yeah,
I
mean,
as
you
know,
I've
been
complaining
about
real
assets
for
quite
a
while
right.
So
so,
and
ultimately
I'm
not
really.
I
wouldn't
really
blame
anyone.
A
I
could
basically
blame
myself
because
I'm
the
one
that
ultimately
set
the
direction
that
sort
of
led
us
to
where
we
are
now
of
focusing
on
these
complex
real
asset
deals
that
turn
out
to
be
extremely
overhead
intensive
and
create
sort
of
all
this,
like
political,
entanglement,
almost
right-
and
we
already
had
some
of
the
first
like
you
know
the
first
red
flag,
when
I
I
basically,
which
is
how
I
basically
came
in
and
and
try
and
and
tried
to
well
well.
A
Ultimately,
right
I
proposed
will
to
on
board
as
a
facilitator
in
the
first
place,
because
I
was
really
unhappy
with
the
kind
of
the
development
the
direction
I
was
seeing
of
how
rival
asset
was
was
happening
right
and
then
now
reach
the
point
where,
okay,
it
simply
doesn't
work.
It's
what
I
would
say
right
so
and
what
I
want
to
so
so
and
and
that's
kind
of
like
I
mean
I'm,
not
I'm
I'm
actually
not
like
I'm
like
it's
you.
A
I
cannot
be
convinced
otherwise,
at
this
point
like
the
people
that
believe
otherwise,
they
either
don't
have
insight
into
the
level
of
kind
of
politics
and
and
drama.
Basically,
that's
happening
with
rebel
assets
in
maker,
or
they
believe
it
should
just
be
more
centralized
and
so
those
perspectives.
A
They
may
think
that
it's
realistic
to
to
keep
doing
what
we're
doing,
but
anyone
that's
not
doesn't
fall
into
those
buggers.
It's
it's
like
you
know
from
my
perspective,
that
is
sort
of
a
let's
call
it
like
a
party
line
right,
so
I'm
I
will
never
be
convinced.
Otherwise,
at
this
point,
I'm
completely
you
know,
and
I
will
use
my
entire
voting
power
to
basically
to
to
deal
with
it,
because
I
think
it's
like
it's.
A
You
know
it
makes
my
mkr
unsellable
to
have
a
broken
reable
assets
going
on
in
maker.
Basically,
so
I
can't
even
escape
right.
My
only
choice
is
to
try
to
fix
it
anyway.
So
what
I
want
you
know
so
I
just
want
to
and
and
by
the
way
guys,
if
you
think
that
this
is
you
know,
so
I've
talked
to
will
in
advance
by
the
way
right,
because
I
was
like
talking
about
like
look.
We
can't
have
all
this
behind
the
scenes
stuff
dictating
everything
right,
so
we
I've
had.
A
I
have
had
conversations
with
will,
but
we,
basically
you
know,
made
it
very
clear:
I'm
gonna
disclose
we
had
these
conversations
right.
We
almost
like
talked
about
okay,
so
in
public.
This
is
my
position
right
and
now
I
need
to
try
to
to
how
do
we
try
to
you
know,
sort
of
make
that
active
in
a
sense
right
through
the
labors
of
governance
in
a
sense
right?
So
then
you
know
so
we
have
to
talk
about
it
publicly
right.
A
We
can't
there's
information
here
that
that
simply
can't
be
kept
in
secret
back
room
conversations,
especially
ones
that
are
that
pretend
they
don't
exist
in
the
first
place
right.
You
know
it's
com
having
a
private
conversation
and
then
disclosing
it
and
sort
of
disclosing
the
critical
points,
including
me
talking
about
you,
know:
freezing
the
the
rebel
ass
activity.
A
I
want
to
hear
from
will
first
then
we'll
hear
from
tj,
but
it's
really
evening.
D
Yeah,
I'm
I'm
here
so
so.
Actually
I
on
on
the
approach
on
the
approach
here
just
to
thank
for
for
context,
and
I
think
for
for
everyone's
for
everyone's
benefit,
because
this
there's
quite
a
bit
of
like
history
into
how
rwas
have
been
have
been,
have
been
provided
actually
to
to
dow
or
have
actually
been
avoided
through
the
dow.
So
we
we
started,
I
think
our
our
road
of
actually
rwas
with
a.
D
I
would
say
like
more
like
a
startup
approach
like
well,
I
mean
in
the
in
2021
with
particularly
like
in
the
the
first
stages,
with
quite
a
few
centrifuge
assets,
all
different
types
of
of
asset
classes
actually
being
avoided,
and
and
and
it
was
a-
I
think
it
was
a
bumpy
road,
but
it
was
actually
that
road
that
was
probably
a
necessary
one
to
be
to
be
traveled,
because
we
we
were
trying
to
do
something.
D
I
guess
something:
novel,
something
that
didn't
have
the
full
understanding
and
the
full
understanding.
I
think
of
of
all
the
risks
that
would
come
in
working
with
a
external
protocol
or
an
intermediary
protocol
to
do
that,
and
we
started
we
actually
with
the
essentially
the
the
vision
which,
I
think
is
still
relevant
of
of
organization
of
everything
and
that
organization
would
actually
solve
would
actually
solve
all
of
our
problems
because
we
come.
D
You
know
we
come
from
a
crypto
native
and
launching
native
background
and
that's
the
world
that
we
that
we
understand-
and
this
was
actually
that
kind
of
a
very
first
version
of
it.
D
So
we
did
that
in
a
very
kind
of
like
say,
like
yeah,
a
very
start-up-ish
way
of
trying
to
bring
some
value
into
the
protocol
and
that's
probably
the
very
the
whole
first
generation
of
of
of
reward
assets
right
mostly
most
of
them
centrifuge,
but
also
a
few
others
in
that
in
that
group,
particularly
six
success
capital
and
then.
A
Will
can
I
just
go
ahead
yeah.
Can
I
just
like
try
to?
I
just
want
to
make
a
little
bit
more
specific
right.
So.
D
A
B
D
Is
the
point
that
actually
coming
towards
comes
to
actually
towards
the
realization
that
the
things
that
we
were
doing
like
in
terms
of
if
you
based
on
traditional
traditional
securitization
of
assets,
it
was
not
the
best
practice
right
at
the
point
in
time
and
and
it
was
a
realization-
I
think,
a
common
realization
for
everybody?
It's
not
it's
not
about
assigning
assigning
assigning
blaming
to
anyone.
It's
just
that.
D
Actually,
the
mental
model
has
has
evolved
towards
it's
it's
hard
to
do
this
and
we
we
need
to
try
to
do
it
to
do
it
right
and
to
try
to
do
it
in
as
a
trustless
fashion
as
possible,
and
that's
what
actually
got
us
to
this
generation
of
these.
I
think
some
of
the
ones
that
actually
are
mentioned
here
so
when
sock
chain
came
came,
came
to
make
her.
D
What
they
were
seeking
is
to
do
part
of
it
with
that
kind
of
like
trustless
respect,
because
there
is
no
chain
or
chainization
of
of
their
covert
bonds
or
securities
in
and
and
part
of
it,
part
of
it
is
still
actually
of
chain
you
know,
is
to
have
like
reward
contracts,
and
things
like
that.
A
A
They.
I
consider
those
to
be
kind
of
you
know,
they're
so
close
to
finishing.
They
have
you
know
an
hvb,
that's
also
rebel
asset
co,
which
is
greg
who's,
a
a
maker
foundation,
sort
of
a
long-term
community
member
correct.
Then
there
is
monetizing
success
capital.
They
can
deliver
government
bonds,
we're
pretty
much
out
of
time.
So
maybe
you
won't
even
get
to
hear
from
that.
Unfortunately,
then,
there's
centrifuge,
which
is
like
also
like
this
long-time
community
member-
that's
been
working
realizes
forever.
Then
panto,
that's
sort
of
my
that's
someone.
A
I've
been
been
supporting
quite
a
lot,
but
have
no
stake
or
whatever
you
know.
My
angle
on
those
guys
are
basically
that
they
have
a
really
good
deal
and
it's
clean
money.
It's
it's
a
solar
panel
financing,
which
means
in
this
context
of
the
whole
thing
basically
doesn't
work,
but
let's
try
to
shore
it
up.
So
at
least
we
can
make
some
kind
of
you
know.
What
do
you
call
that?
Can
we
make
it
not
look
like
a
complete?
A
We
do
some
damage
control,
basically
being
able
to
pay
off
a
little
bit
on
clean
money
and
then
also
positioning
some
valuable
counterparties.
I
think
that
that
provides
some
good
perspectives.
A
So
that's
that's
how
I
view
this
like
you
know
so,
and
then
what
I'm
so
my
opinion
is
basically
that
in
ry
plus
there's
no
room
for
any
of
this
stuff
right,
plus
it's
just
bonds
at
most
complex
realization,
it
doesn't
work,
it
doesn't
make
sense
in
that
context,
right
it's
governance,
intensive
right
and
in
the
endgame
plan,
it's
the
reformer,
dials
right,
so
because
it's
governance
intensive
you
need
these
like
bulky
governance,
heavy
specialized
dials
that
only
do
readable
assets
right
and
that
entirely
set
up
for
that,
and
then
I
what
this
list
to
me
really
represents
is
these
are
the
these?
A
Are
the
people
that
I
think
can
you
know
the
community
can
can
trust
to
play
this
like
critical
genesis
role
in
in
trying
to
to
see
the
sort
of
the
the
bureaucracies
and
the
culture
and
the
governance
flow
of
these
reformer
doubts
right.
So
what
I
want
to
know
from
from
you
will
is
like.
Do
you
think?
There's
some
I
mean.
Are
you
working
on
something
not
here
or.
D
I
can
I
can
I
can
cover,
what's
what
is
the
closest
okay,
so
the
on
the
on
both
side,
gen
and
hvb?
These
are
the
the
closest
one
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
delivery,
so
shock
chain,
majority
of
the
work
actually
has
already
has
already
been
complete.
These
minor
minor
sign-offs.
D
Actually
that
needs
to
come
from
from
the
from
from
from
structure
and
front
section
inside
and
and
and
also
likes
to
relate
to
like
a
contractor
contractual
things,
but
the
credit,
the
credit
work
and
more
than
90
percent
of
the
contractor
work
has
already
been
done
there.
So
that's
really
less
less
inning
of
it.
D
The
hvb
is
probably
the
next
one
that
is
closest
to
delivery,
so
the
risk
the
risk
negotiations
have
hap
like
the
commercial
negotiations
have
happened,
the
risk
assessment
has
been
provided
and
the
technical
assessment
over
it
has
already
already
been
done
in
draft,
and
now
it's
going
through
review.
Bando
is
much
earlier
in
the
process.
Is
it
the
very
initial
diligence
pieces
of
it?
So
I
couldn't
comment
right.
A
It
looks
like
will.
Let
me
stop
you
stop
you,
because
actually
I'm
not
so
what
I'm
interested
in
knowing
is
kind
of
like
I
asked
robert
and
he
was
caught
by
surprise,
but
by
that
basically,
but
is
there
something
that's
sticking
out
on
this
list?
That's
missing
like
one
of
the
objects
right.
We
don't
want
to
burn
bridges
with
very
high
value
counterparties
at
this
level.
A
I
I
would
consider
these
here
to
all
be
they're
what
I
consider
at
sort
of
a
level
that
is
at
the
point
where,
even
though
we
actually
don't
want
to
do
these
kind
of
deals,
we
do
them
as
kind
of
damage
control.
Maintaining
these
relationships.
Could
you
add
any
like?
Do
you
think
that
there's
some
kind
something
missing
from
this
list.
D
These
contact
parties
that
have
have
engaged
the
team
and
have
been
working
towards
a
mip
six,
but
but
that
actually,
they
haven't
yet
submitted,
actually
a
application
or
a
proposal
per
se
on
the
public
forum.
Yeah.
A
So
that's
not
I
mean,
and
so
basically
that
doesn't
that's
not
comparable
to
any
of
this
stuff
right
so
like
we
need
yeah.
That's.
A
D
The
other
obvious,
or
at
least
more,
I
guess
widely
know
is-
is
the
investigation
work
that
is
currently
going
on
with
with
maple
and
trufy,
but
in
that
sense
so
probably
a
little
bit
of
a
little
bit
of
what
both
robert
and
and
and
primos
mentioned.
These
are
experimental
in
their
approach.
So
the
way
that
I
actually
categorize
things
is
like
between
experimental
and
experimental
and
scalable
repeatable.
D
If
you
will,
I
would
say,
structure
and
hiv
are
likely
being
the
second
bucket
once
they
are
done
like
repeatable
experimental
is,
you
know
you
have
other
layers
of
risk.
A
Okay,
all
right,
thank
you
will
I
just
want
to
add
on
this
on
the
truefy
side.
Right.
Is
that
so
what
I
think
is
like
what
at
this
point,
what
I'm
you
know,
whether
it's
right
plus
or
it's
in
game
plan,
but
what
I
want
to
very
strongly
push
for
is
that
we
basically
we
take
this
approach
of
sort
of
freezing
real
assets,
shoring
up
and
sort
of
damage
controlling
what
we
got
and
then,
even
though
I
think
mabel,
I
don't
think,
mabel
and
trufy
are
good.
A
I
don't
think
they
are
they're
suitable
collateral.
Basically,
but
I
think
the
model
they
follow.
The
d3m
model
for
real
assets
is
very
that's
the
right
approach.
I
think
right,
that's
something
that
could
potentially
work
in
right
plus
and
could
definitely
work
in
the
in-game
plan,
so
that-
and
so
this
is
what
I've
discussed
with
will.
Is
that,
like?
I
basically
think
that
the
real
world
asset
team
should
completely.
A
You
know
it
should
sort
of,
like
re
restructure
significantly
towards
research
like
because
we
don't
really
want
to
be
doing
more
of
what
we're
doing
right
now,
because
it
doesn't
work
right,
we're
better
off
putting
that
money
into
bonds
and
instead
what
we
want,
I
believe,
right
what's
best
for
us,
is
basically
trying
to
lay
the
groundwork
from
for
reforma
dials
and
the
end
game
plan
and
how
that
very
complex
structure
of
a
kind
of
a
an
actual.
A
You
know
multi-layered
governance,
structure
of
the
core
and
the
oversight
at
the
core
and
then
d3ms
into
metadows
that
do
the
actual
liberal
asset
deals
potentially
d3ms
to
these
other
maple
type
platforms
right
that
can
that
can
fulfill
the
clean
money
requirement
and
all
these
other,
you
know,
like
sort
of
screening,
approaches
that
we
would
take
right.
A
So
I
just
yeah,
so
I
think
I
mean
so
that's
really
how
I
I
I
you
know
after
having
really
been
involved
with
ripple
asses
and
dealing
with
it
for
a
very
long
time
now.
I
basically
consider
that
to
be
sort
of
that's
how
we
we
salvage
it
essentially
is
we
we
step
back
from
it.
A
Then
we
do
a
lot
of
research
and
basically
understand
just
how
much
of
a
crazy
challenge
it
is,
and
then,
by
preparing
properly,
we
can
try
to
jump
back
in
the
fray
and
then
in
the
process.
What
are
you
know
what
you
know?
One
of
the
main
things
I
want
to
try
to
push
for
is
to
significantly
cut
the
budget
of
of
the
real
world
finance
coordinator
right.
So
that's
the
biggest
budget
right
now.
A
As
far
as
I
understand,
and
I
think
it
can
be
significantly
reduced
and
basically
I'll
you
know
my
you
know,
my
plan
is
ultimately
to
get
will
to
propose
some
kind
of
you
know
like.
I
will
put
some
kind
of
pressure
almost
in
a
sense
right
of
theoretically
the
the
the
threat
of
just
sort
of
the
governance,
reducing
the
budget
manually
right.
A
What
do
you
call
that,
like
randomly
almost
right
and
then
that
pressure
is
then
like
a
very
clear
incentive
for
will
to
you,
know,
be
creative
and
coming
back
with
some
kind
of
proposal,
and
what
can
we
do
to
really
cut
down
the
scope,
the
budget,
the
the
spend
right,
but
in
a
way
that
isn't
just
sort
of
stupid
and
and
random
right,
which
is
how
it
would
happen
if
I'm
just
trying,
if
I
just
say,
cut
the
budget
by
90
or
whatever,
80
or
whatever
right
like
the
point
is
to
to
discover
some
kind
of
method
that
we
can
use
to
actually
get
core
units.
A
B
Thanks
ryan
yeah,
I
mean
just
a
few
questions.
We've
never
spoke
so
I'd
kind
of
just
love
to
hear
your
opinion
on
some
things
that
we're
doing
at
rwa
and
I
suppose
the
budget
in
particular.
So
are
you
familiar
with
how
our
budget
is
broken
down,
but
what
the
different
parts
of
it
are.
A
I'm
familiar
with
the
most
of
it
is
legal
costs
yeah
and
basically
I
think
it's
really
important
to
switch.
You
know
so
so,
as
with
everything
in
it
well
yeah
right,
everything
now
has
to
be
ultra
dumbed
down,
and
it's
all
about
intentional
value.
It's
all
about,
looks
and
the
superficial,
so
I
think
in
all
cases
this
whole
thing
around
legal
budgets
and
so
on.
We
need
to
find
some
kind
of
creative
way
to
like
one
one
idea.
A
I've
had
is
that
you
would
you
we
would
centralize
all
those
with
a
supporting
coin
of
some
kind
to
create
some
kind
of
shared
fund.
That
is
that's
the
pile
of
legal
expenses
for
all.
You
know:
sort
of
excess
legal
expenses
for
all
core
units,
some
kind
of
approach
that
doesn't
look
like
you
have
single
core
units
with
the
with
massive
budgets.
A
B
Has
a
giant
bug
that
to
me
sounds
incredibly
reasonable.
I
just
wanted
a
very
high
level.
Right,
like
I
don't
know,
will
will
would
know,
but
you
know,
70
material
amount
is
reserved
for
legal
and
if
it's
not
spent,
it
gets
returned
right,
but
I
agree
completely.
Like
you
know,
the
goal
at
real
world
finance,
at
least
in
my
view,
is
not
to
continue
to
lean
on
existing
trusted
commercial
and
legal
structures.
B
That's
not
what
we're
here
for
right,
but
there
are
some
deals,
some
of
which
that
are
on
your
list
here,
sock,
gen
and
hvb
that
have
unique
strategic
value
to
building
the
real
world
asset
protocol,
the
future
that
we
all
want
to
see
right.
So
sock
gen
is
legitimacy.
It's
a
regulatory
hedge
hvb
is
scaled.
It's
turnkey
also
regulatory
hedge.
I
don't
know
why
pando's
on
the
list
and
then
centrifuge
is
not
an
asset
right.
It's
an
implementation.
It's
tokenization
rails,
I
mean
centrifuge,
is
helping
us
build
the
real
world
asset
protocol.
B
I
think
in
a
lot
of
sense
there
a
lot
of
stuff
has
been
missed.
In
communication,
I
mean
even
something
like
the
metadows
right
like
what
we're
hoping
to
build.
Are
these
scaled
wholesale
opportunities
for
rwas?
We
don't
want
to
build
a
bloated
credit,
underwriting
team
and
onboard
all
these
little
assets
and
try
to
understand
everything
and
be
experts
at
everything
right.
We
want
to
like,
ultimately
build
these
external
units,
extensions
of
maker
in
the
real
world
that
use
our
opportunistic
cheap
cost
of
capital
to
go,
be
experts
of
what
they
do
right.
B
That's
the
ave,
d3m
ave
you're
better
at
borrowing
than
we
are
here's
this
money,
that's
kind
of
what
we
want
to
do
for
for
real
world
assets
right
and
and
and
monitors
being
on
this
list
too.
Like
many
of
this,
we
we
agree
with,
and
I
think
you're
actually
not
missing
very
much.
There's
one
notable
huge
established
hedge
fund
that
wants
to
do
business
with
us
and
if
we
kind
of
close
off
business
to
them,
then
I
think
that's
kind
of
a
signal
to
market
like
we
gotta
be
very
clear
about
what
we
want
here.
B
If
we're
cutting
down
rwa
now,
which
is
fine
right,
we're
going
into
into
a
bear
market,
we
need
to
ensure
we're
doing
things
correctly,
leaning
into
the
right
initiatives
cutting
fat
where
we
can
but
make
no
mistake,
we're
sending
a
signal
to
the
market
that
we're
not
really
a
long-term
player
in
that
space.
As
long
as
you
recognize
what
that's
doing,
that's
fine,
but
I
think
there's
a
difference
between
saying
look.
We
could
be
in
an
18-month
bear
market.
B
How
do
we
ensure
we
survive,
cut
definite
expenses
or
decide
that
rwa's
future
is
going
to
be?
Is
going
to
be
cucked?
I
think
we
just
need
to
be
super
super
clear
about
what
we're
trying
to
get
done,
and
I
would
encourage
you
to
spend
more
time
with
kind
of
the
core
units
that
have
lived
inside
of
this
dow.
You
know
for
for
years
day
in
day
out
that
may
have
a
vision
of
the
future
and
that
actually
might
understand
their
underlying
businesses
and
their
verticals
better
than
you
might.
A
A
A
A
This
is
where
we
translate
things
into
sort
of
voter
terms
in
a
sense
but
yeah,
like
I
mean
I've
considered
all
this
I've
definitely
considered
the
consequences
of
of
you
know
ending
complex
real
assets
from
the
maker
call,
but
I
I
think
that
it's
I
I
think
that
it's
I'm
not
worried
at
all
about
counterparties,
because
the
way
we
get
counterparties
in
the
first
place
is
to
close
deals.
I
think,
but
that
being
said,
I
think
something
like
I
mean
some
specific
lo,
you
know
low-hanging
fruit,
really
good
opportunities.
A
That
could
I
mean
that
I
speak
specifically
the
thing,
the
re.
The
reason
why
I
have
this
list
the
way
I've
got
it
is
because
I
consider
these
to
be
like
I'm
not
worried
about
the
underlying
deal,
because
I
don't
like
any
of
the
deals
right.
I
don't
like
complex
real
assets
in
the
maker.
Call
it's
the
counterparty.
That's
interesting
right.
So
centrifuge
is
the
counterparty.
A
Pando
is
a
counterparty.
Well,
hvp
is
actually
isn't
right.
It's
it's
real
acid
co,
so
maybe
I
should
have
put
that
there
in
a
sense,
stock
gen
is
like
a
weird
outlier:
that's
like
they
only
they
sort
of
they
interact
with
the
maker.
You
know
they
interact
through
the
core
units,
so
that's
actually
the
wrong.
A
That's
not
a
good
counterparty,
in
my
view,
right,
but
modest
house
and
sticks
as
capital
they're.
Also,
these,
like
independent
counterparties,
right
where
you
have
this
structure
of
facilitators,
counterparties,
voters
and
then
facilitators,
sort
of
in
or
well
coordinates
right,
facilitating
the
interaction
in
that
way.
So
that's
just
I
just
wanted
to
to
just
like
quickly
go
with
that,
but
now
I
really
want
to
now
we're
getting
over
time.
B
A
Then
we
can
go
back
into
having
some
more
discussions.
Definitely
I
think
today
is
a
day
is
completely
fine
to
get
over
time
just
want
to
get
the
get.
A
Why
can
I
get
the
slides
done
so
this
is?
You
know
I
made
this
world
map
before
I've
made
various
iterations
of
the
this
sort
of
so
called
world
map
in
the
past.
I
just
wanted
to
show
this
is
sort
of
my
latest
iteration.
Of
this
thing,
we've
talked
ab.
You
know
this
is
especially
built
like
this
is
kind
of
a
dow
toolkit
centric
view
of
the
world.
A
So
this
is
a
stuff
where
you
want
this
massive
bureaucracy
running
each
of
these
things
right
with
multiple
co-units
working
together
in
various
ways,
but
then
also
like
a
clear
sort
of
kind
of,
like
almost
like,
like
a
funnel
of
information
to
the
voter
committees,
ultimately,
where
you
can
and
that
then
actually
sort
of
fold
up
into
specialized
voter
committees
right
and-
and
I'm
I'm
showing
this
now,
because
this
is
how
I
want
to
basically
begin
to
use
these
calls
and
sort
of
one
by
one
use
the
calls
to
focus
on
each
of
these
things
over
time.
A
Right.
So
eventually
we
can
have
robot,
you
know,
prepare
and
and
then
and
premarch,
and
they
we
can
have
a
focused
talk
specifically
about
decedras
collateral.
We
can
talk
about
protocol
features
and
l2
and
so
on,
right
and
really
develop
ways
to
to
write
to
like
divide
the
complexity
of
the
dow
into
these
different
groups
and
then
know
that
if
we
go
through
the
list,
we've
now
covered
everything
and
there's
nothing.
A
We
forgot
to
cover
right,
that's
the
point
of
having
a
world
map,
and
then
I
ended
up
in
this
like
weird
awkward
thing
of
like
primary
scope
maps
and
these
special
scope
maps
that
are
kind
of
awkward,
but
I
I
couldn't
figure
out
how
to
fit
them
into
sort
of
more
broad
or
more
consolidated
categories
without
getting
weird
outcomes
yeah.
A
I
just
wanted
to
show
that,
because
this
is
I'll
make
sort
of
a
road
map
kind
of
plan
right,
a
timeline
where
basically
I'll
be
you
know
I'll,
be
getting
into
focusing
the
different
calls
on
on
different
aspects
of
these
things
as
we
develop
it
further-
and
I
guess
I'll
put
this
on
forum
and
like
we
can
have
some
cool
cool
discussion
on
forum
about
this
and
then
there's
this
toolkit
thing.
I
talked
about
that
last.
A
You
know
in
the
context
of
decentralized
workforce.
Basically
this
idea
that
this
is
how
we
can.
We
can
truly
sort
of
build
the
scope
maps
into
how
the
coin
is,
what
fundamentally
function
by
having
them
operate.
Using
software
that
are
built
around
those
scope
maps
right,
so
we
can
sort
of
have
a
kind
of
form
that
influences
the
function.
A
Wait
was
that
all
the
all
right,
so
that
was
the
last
slide
yeah,
so
I'm
gonna
go
back
to
the
yeah
this
one,
the
important
one
again,
so
I
just
want
to
quickly
talk
about
this.
You
know
this
whole
enforcement
thing.
I
was
talking
about
right,
so
how
do
I
actually
make
this
stuff
a
reality
right
so
well.
So,
first
of
all
what
I
will
be
doing
after
this
call
right
is.
A
I
will,
I
will
un-delegate
a
huge
amount
of
mkr
I'll
set
up
my
own
shadow
delegate
for
this
special
occasion.
Basically,
and
then
I
will
be
so
temporarily
I'll
be
putting
a
huge
amount
of
mkr
into
my
own
shadow
delegate.
Just
so
I
can
support
you
know,
so,
I'm
not
impacting
the
security
of
the
protocol
as
I'm
doing
this
right.
But
basically
I
mean
not
that
you
know
not
that
there
was
any
possible
time
for
this
right.
A
You
know
a
critical
part
of
this
whole
process
right
and
that's
one
of
the
things
I
really
want
to
start
focus
on.
You
know
focusing
on
getting
sort
of
driving
people
in
line
for
that,
and
that's
where
this
you
know,
that's
where.
Basically,
this
end
game
party
thing
comes
into
play
right,
because
I
will
do
some
kind
of
process.
I
guess
on
the
forum
of
basically
identifying
the
delegates
that
I
mean
I
mean
that
that
I
think
in
the
long
run
right,
the
party
idea
means
you
don't
have
to.
A
Actually
you
know
you
just
have
to
intellectually
be
able
to
sort
of
deconstruct
a
particular
perspective
right,
so
you
can
have
multiple.
You
can
both
be
a
hawk
and
a
dove
and
you
can
sort
of
emulate.
What
does
it
mean?
What
do
they?
The
doves,
want?
What
do
the
hawks
want
right
in
the
short
run,
you
know
I'm.
You
know
obviously
particularly
interested
in
in
delegates
that
actually
align
with
the
plan
and
sort
of
the
overall.
A
A
Yet
right,
but
it's
possible
to
have
sort
of
an
opinion
about
the
direction
right
and
then
this
you
know
this
this
as
well
right
which
really
provides
a
sort
of
a
broad
concept
of
like
we're
sort
of
stressed
straddling
this,
and
we
need
to
pick
one
or
the
other
and
actually
both
are
acceptable
outcomes.
But
doing
nothing
is
not
acceptable
right
and
even
people
that
can
provide
input
to
this
right
is,
I
mean
I've
had
the
best
input.
I've
had
so
far
came
from
delegates.
A
So
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
value
still
to
be
contributed
from
the
delegates
right
and
I
think
really
getting
the
right
group
together
is
gonna.
Gonna,
have
a
big
impact
and.
B
A
Very
helpful
right
to
help
us
to
get
to
this
next
stage
of
things
getting
real
right,
but
so
then,
basically
once
I've
and
then
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
sort
of
slowly.
This
is
what
I
realized
right.
It's
the
right
approach
to
this
is
that
I
will
slowly
redelegate
my
boats
over
the
next
multiple
voter
committees
based
on
sort
of
seeing
them.
You
know
seeing
the
the
stuff
I
would
like
to
see
from
delegates
and
basically
having
this
kind
of
feedback
loop.
A
Where
I
will,
I
will
try
to
teach
the
delegates,
basically
how
I
think,
the
role
that
I
think
they
should
be
playing
in
this
kind
of
you
know
in
this
kind
of
let's
go
all
the
way
back
right,
this
kind
of
lineup
right
of
getting
all
these
different
actors
together.
A
And
even
including
the
getting
these
external
experts-
oh
yeah,
I
didn't
even
get
to
that,
but
I
we
actually
don't
have
time
for
that.
So
I
won't
even
cover
that
now
I'll
cover
that
at
some
other
point.
A
But
then
my
plan
is
basically
to
use
a
signal
request
to
to
sort
of
you
know
to
like
create
well
to
enforce
these
these
prioritizations
right
and,
of
course,
you
can
actually
enforce
you-
can
sort
of
really
enforce
it
either
right,
but
obviously,
like
a
signal
request
becomes
this
very
serious
signal.
A
That's
one
of
the
things
I
immediately
noticed
is
that
it
doesn't
matter
that
I
get
on
a
call-
and
I
talk
about
this
and
that
and
I
have
whatever
tons
of
mpr
and
so
on
and
other
people
and
also
show
they
have
him
well,
actually,
we
haven't
had
anyone
sort
of
prove
their
mpr
stake
yet
right,
but
we've
had
this
credible
signal
from
clear
voting
majority
of
active,
mpr
sort
of
agree
and
well
consent
to
certain
things
right
that
I'm
basically
trying
to
push.
A
But
that's
still.
What
I
found
was
that
this,
basically
that
doesn't
really
impact
core
unit
behavior,
because
they're
operating
based
on
these
more
formal
signals
right
where
signal
request,
is
a
good
sort
of
first
step
right.
So
that's
something
I
want
to
very
quickly
create
a
single
request
that
formalizes
this
list
further
and
actually
makes
it
sort
of
like
this
is
the
for
instance
right
we
will.
A
It
will
formalize
that
anything
that
is
not
on
the
list
that
is
not
already
being
like.
I
mean
if
it
gets
prioritized
above
stuff
on
this
list
that
could
have
been
done
is
guaranteed
to
fail
right.
So
you
can
sort
of
force
resources
to
go
towards
the
stuff
that
actually
is
useful
and
then
from
there
move
towards
actually
doing
making
mips
out
of
out
of
some
of
these
things
right
some
of
these
concepts
and
yeah,
I'm
not
I'm
not
entirely,
I
mean
I
actually.
I
think
I
would
like
to
in
this.
A
I
think
what
would
be
a
particularly
useful
is
to
have
people
that
are
already
you
know,
aligned
with
with
the
the
plan
right
or
well
aligned
with
the
sort
of
the
not
with
the
plants
the
plant
itself,
because
there's
no
such
thing
as
sort
of
a
plant
itself
right,
but
but
have
this
sort
of
general
alignment
with
me
and
and
willingness
to
collaborate
with
me
on
this,
but
also
potentially
delegates
that
simply
they
may
not
actually
agree
but
they're
willing
to
play.
This
kind
of
you
know
this
kind
of.
A
This
kind
of
role
right
so
where
they
simply
receive
mkr
to
to
to
sort
of
execute
on
a
particular
strategy.
The
downside
with
that
is
right
now,
because
you
can't
have
multiple
delegate
contracts,
so
the
system
isn't
set
up
for
that.
That's
it's
not
as
as
as
ideal
as
someone
who's.
Simply
a
will.
You
know
if
they
were
good
if
they
were
to
pick
a
single
strategy
only
they
would
simply
pick
the
end
game
party,
essentially
right.
A
That
becomes
a
problem
when
you
have
when
that's
not
actually
your
preferred
strategy,
but
it's
the
one
that's
going
to
give
you
a
lot
of
votes,
but
then
you're
now
you're
eliminating
the
possibility
for
basically
representing
all
the
strategies
that
you
also
think
are
valid
right,
but
in
all
cases
I
mean
I'm
I'm
willing
to
delegate
to
to
all
of
these
directions
right,
and
I
mean
all
of
these
different
cases.
A
The
main
thing
that
I
want
to
see
is:
I
want
to
see
serious
action
on
this
front
right.
I
really
we
really
need
to
you
know
this
needs
to
be
the
moment
when,
when
we
take
it
seriously
right
and
we
especially
like
very
quickly-
I
think
then
what
will
happen
soon
is
if
we,
if
we,
if
we
show,
if
we're
proper
and
serious
enough
about
this,
then
what
will
start
happening
is.
We
will
see
this
natural
movement
towards
figuring
out.
How
can
we
cut
down
the
budgets
right?
A
How
can
we
preemptively
be
creative
about
saving
money,
basically
in
the
core
units,
so
that
it
doesn't?
You
know
so
that
that
a
sense
of
trust
can
be
created
that
we're
gonna
enter
a
phase
of
budgets
going
down
on
their
own
right
rather
than
governance
has
to
push
really
hard
on
for
it
to
happen
right.
A
So
there's
this
kind
of
impact
and
the
best
way
to
to
have
it
happen
in
this
more
you
know
automatic
fashion
right
of
this
preemptive
fashion
is
to
just
really,
you
know
show
that
that
the
we're
gonna,
you
know
we're
ready
to
take
action
right.
Just
like
this.
This
thing
I
was
talking
about
earlier
with
real
finance
of
basically
a
kind
of
a
dummy.
A
draft
proposal
to
reduce
a
budget
can
be
used
to
basically
force
out
a
voluntary
proposal
in
a
sense
to
reduce
the
budget
in
a
more
sensible
way.
A
Okay,
so,
let's
actually
before
okay
before
we
open
up
for
the
delegates,
let's
open
up
for
it,
I
should
have
done
this
at
the
start.
But
let's
I
want
to
hear
any
regular
mkl
holder.
I
guess
some
of
you
are
used
to
this
this
whole
spiel
by
now.
But
basically
I
want
to
hear
yeah,
let's
hear
if
there's
any
kind
of
you
know
someone
who's,
not
who's,
got
no
dog
in
the
race
right
who's,
simply
an
mkl.
A
C
A
Who
do
you
say
mark
marquette?
A
Can
you
just
write
anyone,
so
can
you
just
write
it
instead,
so
everyone
like
I'll,
call
out
sort
of
people
and
then
others
I
would
like
it
if
they
just
wrote
it
because
I
want
to.
I
want
to
sort
of
keep
the
focus
on
the
yeah
on
the
well
right
now.
I
really
I
just
let's
see
right,
but
right
now
I
just
want
to.
Let's
just
have
a
moment
of
silence.
A
You
know,
let's
have
a
moment
where
anyone
who's
a
name,
just
a
regular
care
holder,
just
come
in
with
literally
anything,
especially
what
you
want
to
do.
What
you
want
to
see
differently
or
something
like
that
right.
That's
the
really
the
kind
of
input
I
would
like
to
get
at
this
stage
like
something
I
mean,
especially
if
anyone
that
has
some
kind
of
opinion
on
this
list,
that's
a
regular
encounter.
That
would
be
amazing
to
to
get
any
kind
of
input
like
that.
A
Okay-
okay,
let's
hear
from
mark,
I
see
that
that's
for
people
yeah.
C
Thanks
rooney,
I
just
wanted
to
see
if
you
had
a
timeline
in
mind
for
reducing
budgets
and
getting
back
to
you
know:
profitability
sensibly
on
a
cash
flow
basis
rather
than
non-cash
basis.
C
But
if
you
can
clarify
on
those
couple
points
and
our
team
has
already
started
drafting
up
five
10
20
contingency
plan
cuts-
and
you
know,
if
there's
not
another
plan
on
the
table
and
we're
looking
to
take
serious
action
in
the
near
term.
We're
happy
to
you
know,
share
that
with
the
community.
If
that's
something
that
you'd
be
interested
in.
C
A
This
is
how
how
oh
what's
happening
here.
This
is
how
carbon
is
supposed
to
to
function
so
yeah
I
mean
no.
So
that's
a
that's
a
good
question
like
that's,
and
I
would
entirely
ask
you
that
question
basically
so
like
I'm
not
in
like,
but
at
this
point
I'm
not
focused
on
you
know,
I
I
don't
have
the
you
know
the
knowledge
or
even
the
interest,
to
sort
of
really
worry
about
the
specifics
of
this
basically
right.
A
Instead,
what
I'm
focused
on
is,
I
want
to
create,
let's
call
the
political
momentum
for
that
happening
right,
but
the
I
think
the
most
important
like
I
would.
I
think
the
most
important
thing
is
to
get
you
know,
input
from
you
and
facili.
You
know
facilitators
in
general,
I
mean
maybe
in
a
a
process
of
of
you
and
and
it
could
be
scs
right,
interacting
with
the
facilitators
interacting
with
the
decentralized
workforce
and
and
creating
some
kind
of
you
know
getting
some
feedback.
Some
consensus
around
like
there's
some
obvious
risks.
A
Right
like
you,
don't
want
to
move
too
fast.
You
don't
wanna.
There's
certain
things
you
wanna,
you
know
really.
You
know
just
consider
and
well,
and
I
have
actually
something-
I
guess
I
should
have
mentioned
this
earlier
right
because,
but
I
think
a
lot
of
people
would
have
thought
this
and
been
like,
be
very
worried
about
this
thing
right,
but
I
think
basically
we,
you
know
no
matter
what
in
terms
of
you
know
so
I've
been
talking
about
this.
You
know
we
can.
A
If
we
can
reduce
the
scope
and
and
reduce
the
prioritization,
then
that
can
help
us
understand.
Where
can
we
reduce
budgets
right?
But
if
one
thing
I
think
is
like
an
absolute,
maybe
maybe
not
absolute,
you
know
truth
or
sort
of
principle
right,
but
it's
a
very
strong
principle.
Is
that
no
matter
what
we
always
want
to
maximize
engineering
talent
right?
So
even
if
we're
like
you
know
reducing
budgets,
we
may
you
know
it's
kind
of
like
you
want
to.
You
want
to
sell
high,
buy
low
right.
A
This
might
no
matter
what
be
the
time
to
try
to
increase
our
our.
You
know.
You
know
developer
workforce
and
just
in
general,
anything
like
a
developer
talent.
I
just
think
it's
like
you
know.
That's
like,
like
developer
headcount
of
people
that
actually
you
know,
obviously
especially
in
smart
contracts,
but
also
just
more
like
there's
this
I
mean
I
know
from
my
foundation
days.
A
There's
this
clear
sort
of
almost
like
a
you
know
like
different
types
of
talent
that
is
crazy,
difficult
to
get,
and
we
happen
to
have
quite
a
lot
of
the
sort
of
the
very
the
the
very
valuable
stuff
that
is
difficult
to
get,
and
we
I
want
to
absolutely
hold
on
to
that.
So
I
just
want
to
say
that
that's
sort
of
you
know
the
main
thing.
A
The
main
opinion
I've
got
but
beyond
that
I
think
basically
like
what
I
think
we
I
mean
now
there's
all
these
questions
like
are
we,
you
know
cutting
fat
on
a
crash,
diet
or
surgically
and
so
on,
right,
and
I
think
what
would
be
really
great
is
to
see
different
options
right,
see,
different
outcomes.
A
That's
one
thing
right,
then,
once
we
get
a
step
like
and
I
think
there's
like
so
so
I
think
there's
like
two.
There
are
like
two
overall
approaches
to
this
right,
so
I
think
the
first
one
is,
I
see
a
lot
of
people
talking
about
fat
and
I
don't
like
that
term.
I
I
wish
we
could
you
know,
I
don't.
I
think
we
should.
I
don't
like
it
that
we're
talking
about
cutting
the
fat.
So
please
don't
use
talk
about
it
like
that,
but.
A
You
know
there
is
this
kind
of
you
know.
There
are
like,
let's
call
the
low-hanging
fruit
right
of
budgets
that
can
be
reduced
scopes
that
can
be,
you
know,
like
reduced
and
and
and
removed
in
certain
cases
that
it's
kind
of
like
it's.
You
know
it's
almost
like
this.
It's
this
nest,
you
know,
like
I
mean
early
on
when
the
coin
has
started
right.
I
had
this.
I
predicted
that
what
would
happen
is
we
would
have
this
explosion
and
massive
growth,
and
then
you
will
naturally
have
some
of
that.
A
It's
it's
just
like
with
the
the
crypto
markets
right,
you
get
a
lot
of
good
coins.
Let
it
get
a
lot
of
bad
coins
as
well
right,
and
you
can't
just
you
can't
tell
the
difference
when
everything's
going
up
it's
when
things
are
going
down.
That's
when
you
have
the
opportunity
to
sort
of
figure
out.
What
is
it
really?
We
want
to
do
right
and-
and
I
think,
no
matter
what
we
have
to
undergo
that
process
of
like
seeing.
A
Where
can
we
really
sort
of
stop
doing
things
that
turns
out
it
turns
out?
It
just
doesn't
make
sense
that
we
do.
We
should
be
doing
them
like
at
all,
pull
up
air
whatever
we
shouldn't
be
doing
them,
but
that
we,
we
ended
up
doing
it
in
the
bull
market,
because
we
were
sort
of
getting
too
excited
right
and
now
we're
we
would
calm
down,
and
we
we
call
them
enough
to
to
identify
those
things
right,
and
so
anything
like
that.
A
I
think
this
is
the
opportunity
to
identify,
try
to
identify
that
right,
and
I
don't
know
if
that
makes
like.
Maybe
it
turns
out
that
an
approach
to
that
would
be
something
like.
Oh,
you
can
just
cut
all
budgets
by
10,
and
then
people
will
figure
out
all
the
things
that
are
not
actually
really
that
important
and
they
will
all
disappear
automatically
right
or
whatever
that
that's
just
something.
I'm
like
that's
sort
of
the
first
line
of
like.
A
I
think
that
there
must
be
an
opportunity
to
to
reduce
the
budget
right
and
we
got
a
60
million
dollar
budget.
There
must
be
some
of
that.
That
can
just
be
yeah,
but
it's
just
like
we
should
so
in.
C
Our
in
our
budget,
40
amendment,
that's
exactly
why
we
put
in
a
requirement
to
have
core
units
think
about
and
disclose
how
they're
going
to
do
a
5
or
10
percent
contingency
reduction
above
in
their
budget,
so
coordinates
are
already
looking
at
this
and
doing
their
budgets
for
next
cycle
should
already
have
these.
C
You
know
areas
in
mind
where
they'd
be
the
first
to
cut,
and
you
know
we're
happy
to
present
a
few
different
options
with
the
community
and
I
think,
there's
two
there's
basically
two
different
approaches:
there's
broad-based
cuts
that
don't
really
target
any
particular
core
unit,
but
more
target
everyone
across
the
board
and
certain
types
of
spend
activities
and
then
there's
more
surgical,
like
cuts
where
we
really
try
and
understand
value
created
versus
cost,
where
we're
separating
like
profit,
centers
and
cost
centers
and
understanding
the
value
that
each
coordinate
individually
brings
to
the
table.
C
Something
that
you
know
a
you
know,
performance
evaluation
would
be
critical
for
so
you
know
we're
happy
to
share
more
detail.
You
know
either
through
a
call
or
on
the
forum
or
whatever
medium
you'd
feel
would
be
appropriate.
A
Yeah,
I
think
that
we
can
like
we
can
follow
up
on
that
in
in
some.
You
know
so
so
like
this
is
like
there's,
obviously
a
lot
to
it,
and
it's
great
to
have
you
know
supporting
core
units
of
experts
that
can
that
can
sort
of
right
that
can
exactly
play
the
role
of
alongside
the
delegates
help
me
and
help
the
other
active
mpi
community
members
figure
out.
What's
there
what
are
even
the
options
and
then
what
do
we?
A
Overall,
I
basically
see,
like
you
know,
there's
two
very
different
end
points
depending
on
whether
we
you
know
we
want
to
get
into
sort
of
this
preparation
stage
where
then
can
plan
and
then
eventually
even
execute
the
in-game
plan
right,
and
so,
if
we
take
that,
if
we,
if
we
do
go
in
that
direction,
then
we
actually
want
for
the
most
part
to
just
keep.
You
know
like
like
keep
all
the
talent
we
can.
Basically
because
the
end
game
plan
requires
tons
of
talent
and
actually
sort
of
wants.
A
A
So
so
you
don't
wanna,
you
know
you
don't
like
you
want
to
keep
budgets
going,
but
then,
eventually
you
wanna
take
those
like
take
a
lot
of
those
resources
and
take
a
lot
of
the
you
know
the
people
that
the
right
people
for
that
that
basically
are
are
using
those
resources,
and
then
you
sort
of
send
them
off
into
the
metadows
for
some
of
them
right
while
others
they
then
become
these.
You
know,
like
results,
guarantee
managed
co-units
in
the
maker
core
itself
right,
but
so
that's
the
kind
of
I
mean.
A
So
that's
the
outcome
where
we
actually
don't
really.
We
want
to
optimize
where
we
can
and
want
to
try
to
improve
and
and
and
sort
of
take
our
take
this
opportunity
to
to
see
if
we
can
reach
break
even
but
we're
not
sort
of
like
entering
a
phase
of
streamlining
and
optimizing
for
for
efficiency
of
the
system
right,
we're
keeping
a
lot
of
of
of
bulk
a
lot
of
of
of
you
know,
cards
up
or
sleeve,
basically
because
we're
gonna
use
them
as
we're
gonna
set
up.
A
You
know
we're
gonna
bootstrap
the
metadose
right,
but
if
we
go
in
the
rye
plus
path
right,
then
we
want
to
really
really
aggressively
wind
down.
I
think
right,
there's
a
lot
of
stuff
that
that
simply
don't
fit
into
that
future.
I
think
right
because
it's
all
about
figuring
out
what
do
we
really
need
right
to
make
this
relatively
similar
construct
just
run
itself.
A
Yeah,
let's
get
to
delegates,
let's
get
to
yeah
all
right,
just
in
case
go
ahead.
D
All
right,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak.
I've
been
following
these
meetings
since
you
started
them
and
in
some
ways
has
been
a
little
bit
frustrating
as
a
delegate
to
sort
of
not
be
able
to
voice
our
opinions
on
things,
because
I
think
a
lot
of
the
things
that
you're
bringing
up
in
this
plan
is
thoughts
that
you
will
find
that
many
delegates
are
actually
already
harboring
and
have
been
trying
to
push
the.
D
In
that
direction,
through
their
voting,
but
the
vote
distribution
has
been
such
that
votes
hasn't
fallen
out.
That
way,
so
at
least
for
my
own
part,
the
way
you're
describing
at
least
the
overarching
plan
here
with
the
endgame
plan
and
the
prioritization
list
you're
setting
up
this
just
fits
exactly
into
where
I've
been
trying
to
push
this
for
the
past
at
least
few
months,
because
the
kind
of
jam
we're
in
right
now
it's
it's
been
a
process
like
we
didn't
start
out
unprofitable.
D
It's
been
the
descent
since
at
least
back
in
november,
so
trying
to
rein
in
costs
and
trying
to
refocus
on
projects
that
that
are
more
profitable
and
trying
to
keep
complexity
down
is
something
that
somewhere
else,
I've
already
been
trying
to
do
so.
I'm
I'm
happy
to
stand
behind
the
list
that
you're,
presenting
and
I'll
have
to
stand
behind
the
endgame
plan.
D
My
only
real
concern
is
if
we
can
get
the
voter
committees
up
and
running
because,
as
we
have
seen
in
these
meetings,
the
hardest
demographic
to
get
to
the
table
are
the
mkr
holders
and
the
voter
committees
are
essentially
dependent
on
the
mkr
holders.
So
so
I
think
that
is
one
thing
we
probably
have
to
work
on
and
how
to
incentivize
empty
car
holders
coming
in
and
work
on
the
water
committees,
but
but
the
grand
strategic
direction.
Here
I
think
it's
it's
very
necessary
and
I
fully
support
it
and
I
yeah
well.
D
I
think
mickey
man
can
do
the
other
point,
but
some
other
budgeting
thing
is
maybe
not
so
dire
as
it
looks
at
first
glance
as
well
I'll
ask
the
mic
to
make
a
man.
B
Thanks
justin,
so
I'm
gonna
set
aside
my
comments
on
in-game
and
voter
committees
and
just
the
whole
grand
plan,
because
you
know
we're
trying
to
address
an
issue,
and
last
week
I
was
in
you
know
this
meeting
and
basically,
what
popped
out
from
strategic
finance
is
this
idea
that
you
know
we're
we're
talking
about
budgets
and
cutting
expenses?
I
was
the
first
one
when
I
saw
numbers
of
what
we
were
giving
and
what
way
everything
was
working
to
go.
B
Look
we
need
to
just
have
a
way
to
rein
this
in
which
led
to
mip
40,
which,
as
far
as
I
can
tell,
doesn't
have
an
option
to
actually
lower
a
budget
okay.
So
let's
set
that
aside,
the
point
is:
is
that
we
have
budgets,
we
just
got
numbers
from
strategic
finance
that
says
that
our
cus
basically
are
holding
on
to
15
or
16
million
die
right
now.
B
Hey,
we
got
to
cut
back,
we
got
to
do
this.
We
got
to
do
that.
Yet
we're
not
even
really
looking
at
a
strategic
plan.
We
still
don't
have
a
strategic
group
in
place.
We
haven't
even
really
had
a
meeting
as
far
as
I
know,
between
delegates
and
maker
holders
and
whatever
other
parties
right,
and
so
you
know
I
kind
of
want
to
pull
some
of
this
down
to
real
earth.
B
It's
why,
when
I
did
a
proposal,
so
I
have
a
plan
which
was
segregate
all
the
new
stuff
that
we
want
to
do
into
a
maker
3
and
just
focus
on
what
we
need
to
do
to
make
maker
2
run
efficiently.
You
know
I
called
it
ongoing
just
how
we
do
business.
What
does
it
cost
segregate
the
growth
stuff
and
do
that
quarterly?
B
B
Not
when
I
look
in
these
meetings,
they're
driving
through
with
their
agendas
and
they're,
just
hoping
they
get
through
governance,
what
they're
working
on,
because
if
they
don't
then
they're
gonna
have
to
shelve
it
until
they
do,
and
so
there's
a
real
mismatch
going
on
here,
not
just
in
budgets,
but
in
just
how
we're
allocating
strategy
and
focus
right.
And
then
we
have
the
grander
plan
in
visions
like
my
vision
for
maker
30
and
make
your
teal
end
game
right.
B
B
We
put
a
pretty
clear
goal
on
rwa
and
bonds
right
and
doing
the
d3ms
for
for
compound
and
and
and
some
of
the
other,
like
teleport
right,
the
wormhole
that
we
have
very
clear
things
that
that
our
cus
are
working
on,
that
we
can
move
forward
on
now,
while
we're
addressing
all
the
other
stuff
in
the
background,
so
that
we're
all
together
on
kind
of
what
we
need
to
focus
on
and
what
is
the
long-term
future
and
segregate
that
accordingly,
I'm
going
to
make
one
last
comment:
roon.
This
is
kind
of
specifically
to
you.
B
So
you
know
I'm
a
maker
holder.
I
don't
hold
much
maker
you're
the
whale
in
the
room.
This
idea
that
you
know
when
I
saw
governance
at
some
point
we
had
it
was
frank
with
like
26
000
maker
delegated
right,
which
is
great,
I
don't
mind
a
person,
but
it
really
dominated
governance
so
that
it
was
that
it
took
four
people
to
basically
overrule
frank
on
anything
and
if
you're,
the
big
maker
holder-
and
you
want
to
direct
things-
that's
great
do
it.
B
You
know
I'm
willing
to
step
aside
and
let
you
direct
with
your
maker,
because
you
have
that
stake
right
and
all
with
my
little
stake
vote
as
as
I
see
fit,
but
this
idea
of
this
radical
shift
in
governance
again
and
how
it's
going
to
change
the
politics
to
drive
an
agenda.
I
have
real
concerns
about
because
it's
it
kind
of
throws
everything
up
in
the
air
and
governance,
not
just
delegates
and
delegate
compensation.
I
don't
really
I
care
about
that,
but
I
don't
give
a
about
that.
B
I
think
it's
important,
but
for
me
personally,
it
doesn't
matter
for
other
people.
It
does.
B
So
they
can
follow
it
and
people
can
choose
to
invest
or
not,
invest
right.
It
just
makes
it
so
much
simpler.
You
know,
which
is
why,
when
I
look
at
metadials
and
all
this
stuff,
I'm
just
like
my
god-
we're
going
to
make
this
more
complicated
to
do
what
to
to
serve
five
whale
maker
holders
with
governance
and
complicate
ceus
in
terms
of
how
many
people
they
have
to
talk
to
and
educate
about.
B
What's
going
on,
I
see
that
maker
could
actually
be
much
simpler
if
the
whales
actually
took
the
drains
and
worked
cooperatively
and
maybe
hired
some
consultants
right.
I'm
happy
to
consult
with
you
guys
and
give
you
my
views
and
feedback
right
and
then
just
drive
governance
straight
up.
It
would
be
much
simpler.
A
And
much
more
straightforward,
so
I'm
done
yeah
all
right.
Thanks
yeah
I
mean
well
so
yeah
I
mean
I
mean
I
definitely
agree
with.
I
definitely
disagree
with
with
some
of
your
points,
but
I
mean
I
think
your
last
point
is
like
you're
completely
right
right
that
that-
and
this
was
the
big
mistake
in
a
sense
right-
that
we
thought
decentralization
would
emerge,
but
it
didn't
right.
You
don't
get
this.
You
have
voter
apathy
in
practice
right.
A
Verto
committee,
right
that
what
happened
was
that
we
got
this
weird
broken
feedback
loop,
where
mk
holders
weren't
even
looking
out
for
their
own
interests
right.
So
that's
what
you
could
look
at
the
current
situation
is
that's
really
what's
happened.
Is
there's
been
a
been
a
strategic
meeting
between
me
and
the
whales
they'd
you
know
they're,
not
they
don't
really
care
right,
they're,
not
deeply
enough
they're
not
willing
to
to
take
any
kind
of
action.
So
no
one
really
is
for
that
matter.
Right
I
mean
the
people
that
really
are
there.
A
I
mean
there's
some
various.
I
don't
know
for
some
reason,
groups
that
that,
for
whatever
reason,
don't
want
to
publicly
talk
about
what
they're
trying
to
push
right
there's
effectively,
nobody
that's
willing
to
try
to
actually
publicly
activate
or
influence
the
direction
of
governance.
A
Beyond
you
know
the
sort
of
the
the
you
know
like
ayami,
all
right,
he's
sort
of
the
poster
boy
for
these,
the
grassroots
empire
holders.
Right,
I
don't
think
he's
even
at
this
meeting,
he's
been
to
two
quite
a
few
of
them
right,
but
there
there's.
There
are
people
like
him
and
and
other
sort
of
small
small
holders
right.
A
That,
and
my
impression
is
that
just
like
vcs
right,
mostly
they
either
either
have
no
input
or
they
they
agree
and
sort
of
basically
support
the
direction
that
I'm
trying
to
lay
out
right,
and
so,
like
I
mean,
if
you
disagree
with
endgame
plan
you,
you
can
try
to
gather
support
for
some
kind
of
alternative
right,
but
yeah
I
mean
I'm
at
this
point.
A
I'm
you
know,
I'm
convinced
that
it's
really
not
only
is
it
a
great
plan
for
like
it's,
not
just
something,
that's
going
to
fix
our
current
issues
right,
but
it's
tapping
into
some
kind
of
primordial
power,
essentially
right
that
that
can
take.
You
know
it's
not
just
gonna
be
taking
maker
as
a
stablecoin
to
a
different
level
right,
but
it's
really
gonna
unleash
some
kind
of
of
laden
power.
A
We've
got
with
our
governance
and
this
whole
thing
about
it
being
complicated,
because
that's
what
what
that's
sort
of
the
main,
like
that's
a
lot
of
criticism
of
god
in
many
places
right.
The
thing
is
that
exact
criticism
is
exactly
the
way
people.
That's
the
response.
People
had
to
the
die
stable,
going
in
the
first
place
right
like
so.
It's
a
very
complex
interaction
between
many
different
moving
parts
but
they're.
A
Ultimately
they
all
they
all
need
to
be
there
if
it's
going
to
work
and
it's
going
to
run
itself
and
it's
going
to
survive
in
a
downturn
in
a
political
crisis-
and
you
know
like
weird,
you
know,
regulatory
action
or
all
these
like
crazy
edge
cases,
we're
gonna
have
to
deal
with
if
we
want
to
we're
gonna
have
a
system
that
we
will
allow
to
ossify
and
then
just
run
the
the
way
it
it's.
A
You
know
once
it's
ossified
it's
going
to
run
the
way
where
it
is
forever
right,
because
that's
exactly
what
we
I
mean,
that's
what
we
need,
because
we
can't
keep
depending
on
me
voting
right.
So
we
have
to
do
voter
incentives.
That
means
we're
going
to
massively
impart
delegates.
Then
we
have
to
put
checks
and
balances
around
the
delegates.
That's
just
going
to
even
further
sort
of
dig
in
and
solidify
and
ossify
the
the
whole
structure.
A
And
so
then
the
structure
has
to
you
know
like
it
would
be
it
would.
It
would
be
killing
the
protocol
to
ossified
into
some
kind
of
broken
political
paradigm
right.
A
That's
also
why
it's
like
I
mean
like
I
don't
you
know
I
would
sell
my
mkr
if
the
current
status
quo
was
was
was
ossified
right,
so
there
was
no
way
to
change
the
the
way
things
currently
are
right.
So
we
just
have
these
sort
of
ever-expanding
budgets
basically,
but
I
wouldn't
even
consider
it
sellable
right.
I
don't
think
that
you
could
it's
too
it's
too
complex.
It's
like
it's
a
it's
a
very
yeah
like
it's,
a
very
weird
situation.
A
A
But
yeah,
okay,
so
thanks
for
that
input,
let
me
just
read
a
few
see
if
there's
some
interesting
comments
here,
it's
been
some
pretty
crazy
chat
chatting
going
on
that.
I
definitely
haven't
been
able
to
follow
all
that.
A
Yeah
like
right,
okay,
so
right
as
long
as
five
whales
control
the
the
majority
of
active
amcara,
they
control
the
system.
That's
that's
the
whole
point
right
and
the
only
way
to
deal
with
this.
The
solution
to
this
is
voter
incentives
right,
so
we
can
get
decentralized
voter
activity
right
and
then,
if
we
put
voter
incentives
in
place,
we're
gonna
get
these
super
power
delegates
that
have
random
sticky
voting.
A
You
know
sort
of
yeah
right,
that's
powering
them
basically,
and
that
means
we're
going
to
ossify
and
we're
going
to
have
to
put
the
checks
and
balances
in
place.
That's
going
to
prevent
that
from
just
you
know,
morphing
into
centralization
right,
because
that's
what
happens
if
you
don't
have
an
equilibrium
that
actually
is
decentralized
right.
A
So
that's
that's
exactly
the
case
right
and
then
I
would
love
it
if
someone
else
could
come
with
like
a
better
plan
that
works
even
better
right
and
there's
two
options.
Right,
I
mean
sort
of
I
mean
I'm
not
I'm
not
trying
to
say
that
the
end
game
plan
is
the
only
way
to
make
maker
work.
Basically,
there's
another
way
there
is
this
simple
way
right
of
just
making.
It
really
really
really
really
simple.
A
So
the
current
governance
as
it
works
today,
can
actually
handle
the
system,
because
it's
just
simple
enough,
but
it
would
also
be
like
a
waste
of
potential
right.
It
would
be,
you
know,
losing
an
opportunity
to
really
you
know,
take
it
to
the
next
level,
which
is
really
what
the
in-game
plan
does
right.
A
Okay,
any
other
delegates
want
to
chime
in
some
more
oh
and
by
the
way,
something
I
didn't
get
to
talk
about
before,
but
basically,
as
I
understood
it
from,
I
think,
was
just
in
case
right.
A
So
but
you
know
so
I
just
want
to
to
hear
from
you
now
so
you're,
basically
interested
in
this.
You
know
being
like
representing
this
in-game
party
or
whatever.
We
call
it
right,
but
basically
so
will
you
you
know.
So
what
what?
A
So
it's
sort
of
safe
in
a
sense
right
to
to
to
delegate
you,
knowing
that
the
behavior
is
gonna,
be
that
behavior
is
gonna
fit
into
what
we
want
in
in
terms
of
what
we
discuss
in
the
voter
committees.
A
So
I
don't
know,
maybe
you
I
mean
you,
don't
have
to
necessarily
respond
to
that
now,
just
in
case,
but
then
I
think
I
will
we'll
follow
up
on
a
forum
thread
and
really
discover
this
further
and
then,
ultimately,
I
will,
I
will
be
looking
to
to
hopefully
gather
a
list
as
long
as
possible
list
of
delegates
that
are
that
want
this
and
then
begin
delegating
to
those.
In
addition
to
the
the
short
list
of
delegates
I,
where
basically
I
you
know,
I
fall
back
into
this
old
pattern
of
just
randomly
delegating
right.
D
I
think
it
wants
a
response,
your
call
there.
My
initial
thought
is
that,
and
you
were
kind
of
going
at
this
fairly
early
station
today.
I
think
a
decent
parallel
is
political
parties
right.
I
have
a
little
bit
of
experience
running
that
in
the
real
world,
and
these
other
committees
sounds
to
me.
They
kind
of
function.
D
How
a
a
local
party
would
work
like
in
a
day-to-day
operations
like
you
set
a
meeting,
should
discuss
issues,
and
then
you
have
certain
representatives
of
that
grouping:
go
out
and
and
fight
the
course
and
and
argue
the
course
in
in
a
community
hall
or
in
other
forms
where
you
need
to
state
your
case.
So
I
think
that
can
be
a
starting
point,
at
least
to
get
these
kind
of
voter
committees
together
and
get
the
interest
parties
together
and
and
and
push
this
agenda.
A
Yeah
I
mean,
if
you're
interested
in
that
right,
then
I
also
would
want,
and
you
and
others
then
we'd
also
begin
playing
the
you
know,
we'd
plan
the
meetings
together
right
because
that's
actually
how
I
see
like
in
the
long-
and
I
think
we
talked
about
in
the
past.
In
the
long
run,
we
would
expect
the
voter
committees
and
the
parties
actually
be
run
by
the
delegates
as
a
kind
of
service
to
the
voters
in
a
sense
right.
A
A
Of
course,
in
the
short
run,
the
problem
is
we
have
this
weird
setup
where
I'm
the
I'm,
the
major
active
voter
and
I'm
the
one
sort
of
getting
the
ball
rolling
in
the
first
place
right,
but
yeah
like
that
sounds
the
fact
that
you
have
that
experience.
That
sounds
really
cool.
So
if
you're
interested
in
that,
that
would
be
great
and
anyone
else
that
also
wants
to
be
a
part
of
that
will
be
welcome
to
at
least
join.
A
C
B
C
For
me,
I
think
the
the
whole
issue
of
decentralization
is
just
really
key
because,
like
I've
been
researching
a
lot
of
about
legal
stuff
of
the
house
in
the
last
weeks-
and
I
just
feel
that
that
this
level
of
decentralization
and
decentralization
means
decentralization
of
control
is
key,
and
so
what
I
really
like
about
the
iron
game
plan
with
the
metadaos
is
that
you
actually
have
a
decentralized
structure,
and
that
can
never
be
the
case
if
it's
one
entity
that
does
it
all
that
is
de
facto
controlled
by
like
a
handful
of
entities,
and
even
if
you
incentivize
voters,
the
control
is
still
in
your
hands
it,
it
doesn't,
leave
it
so
either.
C
A
I
don't
really
understand,
looks
what
you're
saying
I
mean
when
we
talk
about
incentivizing
voting,
we're
talking
about
you
get
paid
metadata.
You
know
you
have
to
lock
up.
You
know
right.
It's
like
this
ui
right,
you
have
some
mpr
tons
of
you
know
like.
I
actually
only
have
what
is
it
eight
percent
or
so
of
the
the
total
supply
of
mpr
right?
That's
circulating,
supply
vapor,
but
all
the
other
freaking
92
percent
they're
not
doing
right.
A
There,
they're
not
active
in
in
governance
because
they
got
no
reason
to
so
we're
going
to
stop
paying
them
to
be
active
in
government
and
then
when
they
go
in
and
they're
like
trying
to
get
the
money,
because
they
would
like
some
money.
They
see
some
kind
of
interface
like
this,
and
then
I
mean
in
the
short
run.
We
can't
even
be
anything
like
this
right,
but
maybe
in
the
short
run
it
would
be
something
like
right.
We
would
have
some
delegates
that
would
just
be
like
here's,
a
recognized
delegate.
A
Then
we'd
have
some
like
here's,
an
endgame
party
delegate,
so
you
sort
of
know.
Okay.
This
is
the.
If
I
want
that,
I
want
runes
stuff,
then
I
can
delegate
to
them
and
some
might
be
some
other.
You
know
dues,
libertarian
party
delegates
or
something
like
that
right
and
then
they
delegate
to
those
and
then
they're,
never
gonna,
freaking,
look
back
they're,
just
gonna
get
their
money
they're.
A
Never
ever
you
know-
and
this
is
how
we
get
this
like
buildup
of
random
sticky
boats,
and
then
we
deal
with
those
through
the
terms
and
so
on,
but
there
like
there's
some
issues
with
that
as
well
though,
but
the
point
is
we
want
it
like.
If
people
get
paid
a
decent
yield
to
vote
right,
let's
say
the
let's
say
we
generate
a
whatever
five
percent
yield
on
mkr
sort
of
a
five
percent
per
value
of
the
the
total
market
cap
per
year.
A
Right
then,
if
we
get
a
situation
where
only
thirty
percent
actively
vote,
then
we
get
we're
talking
about
a
15
yield
on
mkr
right.
So
it's
going
to
be
like
some
really
like
there's
going
to
be
some
really
serious
incentive
in
play
right
as
long
as
we're
giving
enough
money,
people
will
absolutely
delegate,
and
so
the
problem
is
not
going
to
be.
Are
we
going
to
get
voter
participation
because
we
will
get
voter
participation?
The
problem
will
keep.
It
will
be
random,
sticky
votes
like
that.
A
Any
cool-
oh
I
like
I
just
wanna,
talk
about
this.
Why
don't
we
slash
inactive
mkr
instead
of
paying
them?
Yeah
would
be
great
if
we
could
do
that
right,
because
it's
way
more
tax
efficient
right,
then
there's
no
freaking
tax
on
getting
income
and
you
even
get
a
loss
if
you're
not
voting,
so
you
like
you,
get
to
tax
harvest,
but
the
reality
is.
You
know
intangible
value
right
like
people
you
people
want
to
get
stuff,
they
don't
want
to
lose
stuff.
It's
really
that
simple
right.
A
So
the
end
game
plan-
and
I
haven't-
got
this
party,
but
has
some
crazy
designs
to
just
absolutely
maximize
the
the
benefits
you
get
from.
You
know
from
like
the
real
governance
participation.
Where
not
only
do
you
do
you
delegate
and
so
on,
but
you
you
do
a
long-term
lock-up
into
the
system,
so
you're
really
sort
of
putting
skin
in
the
game
that
that
helps.
You
go
that
extra
mile,
because
you're
really
locked
in
right.
A
A
You
know
we
wanna
ways
to
push
people
that
little
extra,
so
they
hopefully
will
think
a
little
bit
more,
even
dealing
with
them
with
the
efficiency
and
and
the
attacks,
and
that
kind
of
stuff
is
even
a
part
of
the
very,
very
long
run
yeah
and
that's
some
pretty
pretty
advanced
stuff
but
appropriate
for
a
plan
that
attempts
to
you
know
that
basically
tries
to
say
this
is
the.
This
is
what
it
will
ever
amount
to
right.
We'll!
A
If
we
cannot
get
the
big
vcs
voting
and
delegating,
then
what
we
actually
can,
I
think,
like
I
mean
they're
happy
to
do
it
that
are
super
slow
about
it
and
they
don't
have
any
really
opinions.
A
But
if
we
make
some
simplified
political
parties
for
them
to
to
support,
then
they
likely
will,
but
I
mean
most
likely
it's
almost
certain
that
right
now,
if
you
go
and
ask
sort
of
their
average
vc
of
whatever
they
will
simply
support
me
right
like
this
is
what
they
like
is
a
founder,
making
some
moves
or
whatever
that's
I
mean
they're,
not
really
in
it,
for
the
decentralization
you
know,
so
so
they're
not
exactly
gonna,
be
pushing
for
you
know,
for,
for
I
mean
what
they
would
really
like.
A
In
my
experience,
is
they
just
want
some
kind
of
fiduciary
setup?
Good
news
is
I'm
pushing
for
this.
You
know
I'm
specifically
pushing
towards
the
reality
where
I
can't
push
for
anything
anymore
right,
because
we
also
fire
around
a
paradigm
of
incentivized
voting
and
and
yeah
a
balance
of
power.
A
And
one
thing
I
want
to
by
the
way
one
thing
I
want
to
mention
about
the
voter
committees
and
the
funds
right,
so
what
I've
noticed
is
we
can't
like
we
cannot
get
funds
to
participate
in
actively
in
governance
to
the
extent
where
they
will
come
and
give
their
opinions
on
on
the
voter
committee,
for
instance
right.
So
what
I've
found
is
that
they'll
do
it,
but
they'll
do
it
only
because
they
get
some
like
they
will
be.
A
They
will
come
to
a
voter
committee
to
pitch
some
kind
of
portfolio
company
or
something
like
that.
So
they
have
some
kind
of
you
know:
they'll
not
come
to
a
meeting
and
talk
about
stuff
and
try
to
figure
out
what's
best
for
us
as
mkr
holders
and
for
anything
specific
it's
just.
Never,
you
know
they'll.
Do
it
sort
of
vaguely,
maybe
of
saying
like.
Oh,
we
like
stability
or
something
like
that
right
or
they'll.
A
Do
it
because
there's
some
kind
of
specific
benefit
they're
trying
to
get
out
of
maker
rather
than
to
embody
them
care
holders,
but
in
practice
what
is
almost
certain
is
they
will
react
to
problems
right
and
so
this?
A
What
I've
realized
is
that
this
is
interesting,
hypothetical
dynamic,
where
you
can
basically
have
these
lurkers
at
the
voter
committees
right
that
don't
actually
like
pledge
to
mkr
and
show
this
voter
committee
has
x
amount
of
mpr
and
so
on,
right,
which
is
how
they're
supposed
to
function
right.
This
versus
the
show
we
have
a
bunch
of
mkr
and
we
want
to
push
for
x,
y
and
z
right.
A
But
what
you
can
do
is
you
can
have
actually
like
grassroots
mpr
people
right.
So
people
with
relatively
small
amounts
of
npr's
npr
can
be
at
voter
committees,
then
interact
with
the
delegates
representing
the
employers
as
a
whole
and
even
get
compensated
for
that
with
sort
of
a
relatively
small
compensation.
So
it's
kind
of
like
a
sweet
spot
of
compensation
for
voter
committee
attendance,
where
it's
so
low
that
you're
not
going
to
try
to
do
similar
attacks.
A
A
I
mean
real,
but
also
symbolic
reward
for
that
right
and
then
what
you
get
is
a
situation
where
the
the
the
funds
they'll
be
sort
of
just
lurking,
they'll
just
be
letting
the
the
grassroots
and
care
holders
actually
steer
the
the
situation
in
terms
of
giving
the
feedback
to
the
delegates
that
the
delegates
then
use
to
figure
out
what
are
the
positions
of
the
different
parties
right.
A
But
then,
if
some
kind
of
thing
happens
right
where,
like
something's
wrong,
there's
been
some
kind
of
you
know
like
a
meta
like
a
in
the
end
game
plan.
Right
it'll
be
some
kind
of
metadata
penalty
question
right
where
some
core
unit
or
whatever
some
you
know.
Maybe
it's
corruption,
maybe
it's
negligence
or
whatever,
something
where
some
kind
of
consequence
has
to
happen
so
that
the
feedback
loop
works
so
that
the
problem
doesn't
happen
again
and
then
the
small
scale,
mpl
holders
they'll
be
sort
of
incentivized
to
actually
participate
and
figure
figure.
A
It
out
kind
of
right
and
insanity
check
that
all
the
information
is
coming
out.
So
we
can
figure
out
where
the
problems
are
happening
right
and
then
you'll
have
the
hedge
funds
and
so
on.
They'll
never
actually
actively
participate,
but
they'll
listen
in
it'll.
It's
it's
sort
of
a
you
know,
because
the
voter
committee
is
optimized
for
information,
that's
relevant
for
mkr
holders,
specifically
right.
So
then
they
can
actually
react.
They
can
sort
of
gather
the
data
and
react.
C
Yeah,
hey
it's
frank:
yeah,
I'm
a
proponent
of
the
end
game
party,
everything
that
is
a
priority
on
that
list,
pretty
much
from
supporting
centrifuge
back
in
the
days
to
monitor
success,
capital,
two
montelus,
I've
done
it
on
my
own,
even
without
being
a
delegate.
So
the
only
thing
I
think
on
that
list
right
there
that
I.
C
To
not
use
the
dss
kiln
right
away,
I
think
it's
a
it's
a
magical
tool,
I'm
excited
to
use
it
down
the
road
and
the
reason
I
say
that
is
because
you
know,
as
far
as.
C
Experience
of
being
in
finance
is
that
you
know
a
lot
of
these
companies
that
do
it
when
things
are
going
well
and
they
burn
a
lot
of
that
cash
that
they
have
in
their
balance
sheet
end
up
with
nothing
when
you
get
into
a
cycled
cycle
that
we're
experiencing
right
now.
B
C
B
C
Huge
fan
of
it
for
years
and
in
the
last
seven
eight
months,
yeah
I've
taken
a
step
back
on
that,
but
switching
gears
real
quick.
I
just
want
to
say
that
you
know
I
get
out
on
the
field
a
lot.
What
I
mean
by
that
is
I
get
out
and
meet
people,
and
we
get
nothing
but
compliments
as
a
dao.
I
think
we
are
the
leading
model
for
decentralized
governance,
and
it's
it's
a
beautiful
thing
when
you
hear
from
other
people.
C
So
let's
just
not
forget
that
you
know
whatever
party
you
decide
to
join.
C
I
think
that,
as
long
as
we
continue
that
trend,
then
you
know
it
gets
me
excited
every
day
to
wake
up
and
and
give
this
give
this
a
a
shot
right.
A
Thanks,
frank,
okay,
so
yeah
it
sounds
like.
A
You're
interested
in
being
an
official
in-game
party
delegate
or
whatever
that,
whatever
how
that's
gonna
shake
out.
But
then
what
that
means
is.
A
You
know
I
can
delegate
to
you
and
others
that
want
to
you
know
others
can
delegate
to
you
as
well
and
then
we'll
sort
of
work
out
internally
right,
whether
like
because
there's
a
bunch
of
you
know,
there's
a
you
have
a
long
discussion
about
something
like
should
we
do
burn
or
whatever
right
and
ultimately
it's
up
to
the
you
know
as
a
like,
it's
up
to
the
voters
to
to
figure
out
what
they
want
right,
but
it's
also
important
that
they
have
all
the
information
to
make
the
decision
available
to
them
and
it's
important.
A
They
all
heard,
and
it's
important.
It's
not
just
me.
You
know
like
bulldozing
through
some
decision
right
I
mean
I
could
in
theory,
but
it
wouldn't
be.
It
wouldn't
be
beneficial
to
me
right,
it's
more
important
to
have
the
proper
discussion
and
I
think
in
terms
of
like
how
to,
but
I
mean
in
the
end,
you
need
to
have
some
kind
of
commit
right.
You
need
to
be
able
to
basically
see
be
like
this
is
our
position,
and
this
is
what
we
go
ahead
with.
A
You
need
some
kind
of
internal
process
figuring
that
out
and
that
basically,
I'm
I'm
happy
to
dive
further
into
that.
A
Yeah,
I
just
see
the
the
comment
that
maker
is
the
most
decentralized
and
well-run
dao,
which
is
totally
true,
because
everyone
else
is
even
worse
than
us
right,
which
is
kind
of
incredible
to
imagine
right.
But
that's
that's
the
state
of
early
crypto
right.
That's
how
you
know
how
crazy
early
we
actually
are.
A
I
mean
yeah
and
then
also
to
frank's
and
and
on
this
point
right
that,
ultimately,
it
is
absolutely
amazing
what
we
accomplished
and
especially
what
we
can
accomplish
with
the
right
moves
from
here.
Everything
is
truly
sort
of
playing
right
into
our
hands.
A
All
right,
okay,
guys,
I
think,
it's
time
to
end
it.
A
I'm
gonna
freaking,
I'm
gonna
copy
paste
the
entire
chat,
because
it's
just
been
crazy,
the
amount
of
talking
in
there.
So
I
want
to
read
all
that
later.
A
Thanks
for
the
good
call
and
I'll
be
following
up
in
various
forum
threats
and
then
we'll
I
will
see
you
tomorrow
tomorrow,
we
are
we're
talking
about
metadose.
So
all
right,
all
right
cool,
see
everybody.