MakerDAO Open Decentralized Voter Committee, 20 Jul 2022

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Open Decentralized Voter Committee | 7.20.22 | Intro Launch Clustering & Transition

Description

Today's Decentralized Voter Committee Meeting will be about Part 7 of the Endgame Plan: Launch Clustering and Transition.

Following the post of Endgame Plan Part 5 which described the Pregame and Early Game Products in detail, Endgame Plan Part 5: Endgame Product Roadmap - Pregame and Early Game, which contain all of the technical requirement for launching the Endgame Plan and following up with powerful features post-launch

This DVC Meeting will focus on the more human aspects, including workforce and administrative aspects, such as budgets and the process of clustering and aligning teams to the different Launch MetaDAOs that will result in the greatest value created with the least disruption to the overall transition efforts.

This includes a preview of the broad scopes of existing clustering efforts I’m aware of in the ecosystem to date, which should facilitate a better understanding of the value proposition of the Launch MetaDAO tokens.

https://forum.makerdao.com/t/thursday-9pm-cest-endgame-dvc-meeting-launch-clustering-and-transition/16761

A

All right, uh thank you. Everyone for joining us for wednesday's uh dvc call I'm going to hand it over to roon. We've got a nice agenda for you today, so room go ahead and I've made your co-host hand it off to you.

B

Thank you, thomas, yes, and welcome to the in-game dbc call and a little bit later we'll be reiterating what all that stuff means, because it's been a couple of weeks since I was in one of these calls. So my experience in it now it's very important to to really just repeat all this stuff, but um what I want to really just uh like what you know. I'm gonna do my presentation later and we'll be gonna talk about a bunch of different topics.

B

As I also wrote in the post a while ago, that talked about growth, co-unit and um a couple of other topics. But first I think we should just hand it over to g finance, because they've actually prepared a presentation, and I just want.

C

B

Sure that we focus on that and have some q a related to that first, then we can get into the rest of the content afterwards. So over to you mark.

D

Awesome thomas, can you uh make me a coast pleased.

A

I certainly will just give you one. Second.

A

All right, you should be all good awesome.

E

D

All right, let me know uh if you guys can see.

A

Harlow's good good on my end here.

D

Awesome all right, so obviously you know budgets have been a very hot topic amongst the dow in the past few weeks and even months as the bear market has really uh started to grip the entire crypto ecosystem. So we wanted to spend some time today. You know briefly highlighting the dallas current financial position and updated for forecast and talk through a recommended path forward, an action plan for how we can start to you know, look at budgets holistically and allocate capital more effectively.

D

Just a brief legal disclaimer, as we love those in strategic finance, this presentation is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial investments. Legal regulatory or tax advice.

D

Please read the rest of the disclosure at your own leisure and speaking on. This call with me today are adrian, also known as adcb on the forum as well as conor, also known as pipgo on the forums and to discord.

D

So here's just a brief agenda of what we plan to review and discuss with the community today. First I'll walk through the dallas current financial position, then present our latest revenue and cash flow forecast and briefly discuss what paths we can take moving forward. Given the current cash flow forecast I'll then hand it off to adrian to discuss the recommended action plan, benefits of the proposed plan and potential concerns and mitigants of the plan.

D

Then conor will present the envision process. How we're thinking about kpis for core units and review an example of what that could look like then. Lastly, I'll wrap up with the timeline. Should the community decide it's in the best dow's best interest to implement the process and action plan.

D

So the dao has weathered the collapse of the c5 lenders and over levered crypto hedge funds extremely well. The resilience of the over collateralization smart contract model system has really shown in an otherwise dreary lending market. Now, looking at the trailing 12-month revenue, you can see ttm right here on the top right table.

D

You know we have a lot to be proud of as an organization. It was only you know two short years ago that it was quite hard to imagine.

D

You know the protocol earning over 100 million in revenue on an allies basis anytime soon, while there are reasons to be optimistic with the merge on the horizon and most of the c5 containing appearing to have worked its way through the ecosystem, uh we believe it is prudent to continue to hope for the best but plan for the worst until we start to see a meaningful stabilization in crypto lending. We believe it is appropriate for the dow to look to tighten its belt uh and manage spend judiciously.

D

The last two months of q2, our non-stable coin. Revenue uh collateral fell from 3.3 billion to 1.2 billion, resulting in 11 million in liquidation income, with only 1.05 billion in an unstable collateral locked in the protocol. The dow cannot reasonably rely on such income until markets meaningfully. You recover, I think you know best. We can hope for another 5 to 10 million in liquidation revenue if markets continue to deteriorate, but um I think you know that's not something that we should include in our forecasts.

D

As of the end of q2, the protocol's equity position remains strong at 98 million, especially in light of the recent recapitalization of our crypto vaults. Our capital risk has fallen from 44 million at the end of q2 to 5.6 million. As of today, giving the dow ample runway to fund operations.

D

Turning over to the revenue and cash flow forecast, we expect the dow to operate at a roughly 2 million dollar a month loss until we have nick 65 and our first arranger monitors up and running. Assuming we can onboard a second arranger in q4. We believe cash flow break even is achievable by q1 2023, with the key assumption being that there's no further deterioration in crypto lending markets die demand remains stable and core unit budgets and costs continue at the current run rate of about 3.3 million a month.

D

Onboarding such rangers are critical to maker down sustainability and return to profitability. We really believe that dash and prioritizing prioritize onboarding additional ranges to diversify the balance sheet and formalizing an alm framework and evolving it over time is more financial assets are tokenized will be extremely important for dye in the maker protocol this scale sustainably.

D

I recently listened to a a talk that spf gate gave and uh he is 100 convinced that you know all financial assets will inevitably be tokenized and regulatory waters, even in the us, are becoming more clear in that regard.

D

um So um you know on the chart. You can see how volatile the the protocol's revenue has been since the first coordinate was submitted for rfc uh we've overlaid measurements of psm revenue, assuming half of the psm was invested into u.s treasuries at three-year constant maturity.

D

Combining this with the protocol is lending revenue. You can see how significantly the protocol's revenue is smoothed out. You know representing this green line and those these estimates are quite crude relative to the work sub-zone alm and how we envision the future.

D

They highlight how resilient protocol could be in a future straight in a future state once the arranger model and foundation has built.

D

So, as I've mentioned uh on these calls before on various calls in various places, the dow has two paths, in our view, in front of itself with regards to how it can return to breakeven and improve coordinate transparency, visibility and accountability.

D

The first option is a broad base cut in this path. Cuts can be made quickly and measurement of such cuts cuts will be readily rarely available on chain. However, this treats all coordinates equally, regardless of performance are spent. In fact, accordions that have spent aggressively are rewarded, spend conscious core units are penalized.

D

Such an approach also risks cutting mission, critical activities, delays, delaying product launches option. Two is a tactical reallocation of capital, the pros of such an approach that we can allocate capital based on merit and the current market conditions. Budgets can also be viewed holistically and maker holders are able to prioritize how protocol funds are spent.

D

The downside to this approach is it'll, be more time consuming and new processes must be developed I'll now pass over to adrian who will review why we believe option two is the superior path moving forward.

F

Thanks mark, can you guys hear me correctly? Is the mic? Okay, so, on this page? We're basically talking about how our point of view is that option. Two is the recommended action plan that the dow should follow, though, here to underline the community, and the holders will ultimately and should ultimately decide on the approach?

F

What we're talking about with option. Two is essentially a capital reallocation framework based on core unit accountability as a key driver.

F

The aim for this framework is to begin a process that is transparent and fair able to adapt to various market environments and is ultimately accountable to token holders.

F

The elements of this process would be most likely for delegates who would essentially sort of drive the process, an initial capital allocation and selection of kpis for each of the different core units. An evaluation of how these kpis would be attained- and you know conor later on- will describe this process in a bit more detail, including some ideas on how to think through these.

F

These kpis then use this in the future state kpi attainment and budget requests to inform a capital, reallocation and then, as the process restarts over a shorter iterative budget cycle, a reallocation of capital and, if necessary, a reselection of kpis.

F

Once again, I think one of the key messages that I'd like to leave behind on this slide is ultimately will it will be up to the community and to hold their set aside on the approach.

F

So, to go into a little bit more detail of why we leave this uh this option on the next slide. If you don't mind, mark.

F

So to go into a bit more detail, why we believe uh this approach is beneficial for the doubt, despite the the length and the complexity of implementing it in practice is that it addresses key issues that numerous people in numerous parties in numerous ways people have identified with the status quo. These mostly orient around three specific concerns.

F

The first one is a lack of or perceived lack of, transparency and visibility into core unit activities.

F

Secondly, cu performance is difficult to evaluate, particularly for supporting core units that aren't necessarily revenue drivers and, finally, budgeting periods are not simultaneous, making it very hard to evaluate budget requests holistically.

F

So the dao has obviously made some progress on addressing some of these issues with what you might call patches, for example, but we believe that it would benefit from a broader process, with greater visibility into performance, greater accountability than maker holders and improved reaction times to changing market environments, rather than the enormous lag we are facing now to catch and react to changing market conditions.

F

So we've described in the past how the level of run rate spending that we're facing now is.

F

It has a sort of lag effect relative to when these budgets were approved and now we're sort of facing the same regardless of what the market does in the next six months, where we now risk making the exact same lagged decisions so on the final page to just touch upon concerns and or some some concerns that we anticipate, that will that will uh that people in the community will have on this process and then mitigate, but also important, to stress that you know it would be good to have this cold serve as a forum for discussion for any concerns that we may not have anticipated and to talk this through openly and so yeah we've tried to address some of these anticipated concerns.

F

Here we should discuss any others. You know, will strategic finance pick my kpis? Will strategy finance determine my kpi attainment? No clearly it's way outside of my our mandate. It has nothing to do with how a dao should operate.

F

The aim here is to empower delegates and to empower the discussion between delegates and each use facilitator to align on these kpis and then ultimately pass this over.

F

To the token holder, who is ultimately the bug holder, uh there may be concerns around, for example, the ability to execute this process in the next two months, but here we're willing to partner with all of the necessary uh stakeholders, delegates core unit facilitators members throughout this process, whether it's you know thinking through kpi selection or just doing excel spreadsheets or making presentations or talking things through here, we'd like the strategic finance to be seen as a resource for the town um and then, of course, the question: will there be an increased time requirement for coordinated facilitators to maintain and report on kpis?

F

The idea of these kpis should be that they are simple and easy to measure.

E

C

You know here we can.

F

Do our best to help or assist with reporting, obviously, in the future, these kpis may be integrated with future tooling, like the one that cis is working on, for example, um but yeah. So I I presume there may be broader concerns than just these foreign. I think before we get into those, it will be helpful to discuss how we envision this process to work specifically, and for this I'd like to invite uh connor, who some of you may have met already to go into this process in a bit more detail.

G

Hi, everyone connor. I go by pepco on the forums so talking through the proposed budgeting process. We were focused on two of the main issues. uh Firstly, it's difficult for delegates to weigh trade-offs between two different budget proposals, because they're not being simultaneously proposed and then the second main issue that we saw was it's very difficult to match all these non-simultaneous budgets that all aggregate up to a specific number to a targeted spend that the delegates have agreed upon.

G

If we have a particular profitability target in mind, um so we're we're thinking about a three-step process. uh The first step would be the budget proposal process here, the cus would propose budgets, lay out their operating activities, strategic goals and kpis, and basically allow delegates to understand the capital trade-offs that they would be making in a lower higher budget scenario. With this particular cu, and it's important here that the ceus categorize, the spend between baseline, I.e, like lights on, spend and growth spend so that the delegates can understand.

G

Are we potentially cutting submission critical activity, or are we just backing off on a new revenue item that that could be generated and as part of this uh process, the cs are essentially promising to deliver some sort of operating or financial result uh to the dow in return for a capital allocation? So this is getting sort of similar to the metadow idea and thinking about how we would manage those. The second stage of the process. uh Delegate evaluation is probably the most important.

G

So here the delegates have two main goals: they're trying to match the total budget ask to the targeted, spend level so, for example, if all the budgets that are proposed roll up to 35 million, but we've decided, we only want to spend 30 million. The delegates need to figure out where to make up that gap across all the the different cu budgets and the delegates also need to prioritize the trade-offs that are involved in these capital allocation decisions.

G

So thinking about how much more revenue or how much more profit a specific uh piece of capital could generate, and also the risk associated with that. So in a future state we'll be able to see which cus have actually performed against what they said they were going to do, and this will help delegates understand how risky a potential capital allocation could be and then the final stage of this process, the delegates would propose back to the cus a different capital allocation.

G

Taking all this in mind, uh with the goal of hitting our targeted, spend and being able to remain profitable. If that's, what we choose to do and then the cus would then respond with new targets, um essentially new promises uh back to the delegates and back to the uh protocol, with their number now in mind.

G

um So to talk about the kpis. If you don't mind moving on to the next slide, the way we think about key performance indicators or kpis for core units is essentially they allow delegates and maker holders to simply understand the progress of a cu against its own goals.

G

So cus will have an active and basically the lead role in generating and creating their own kpi set, and what they're really doing is showing to the protocol and showing to the delegators what's important and what they should be judged upon uh later in their budgeting process, we've laid out some criteria for effective kpis below, as well as some example kpis on the right, we're thinking very broad, very high level kpis that are easy to measure.

G

So we don't have too much operational load on the different cus and delegates will also assist core units when they're developing these kpis to confirm that the targets that are reasonable both to the the core unit and the protocol and to start we're recommending only three high-level kpis one short term and two longer term goals, basically so that the the community and the protocol and all the delegates understand what each core unit is working towards and uh why we are allocating them capital in our budgeting process.

G

And then, if we go into the next slide, we have an example budget ask. So this is very high level, but we're using strategic finance as an example. What kpis would look like so on the left? We have some some of the strategic goals and operating activities just to keep people up to date with what we're actually focused on and then on the right. We have kpis that really capture some of those activities and goals so, for example, uh having psm bond revenue uh in calendar year 23 with uh mark as an owner.

G

Let's say we set a target of 10 million and this is 30 of our weight. This could be used to generate a score card to think about how well we lived up to our goals, stable coin launch treasury management and then also just day-to-day tasks, so, for example, development of ongoing financial reporting analyses and for each of these the kpi type should match how we would measure it.

G

So, for example, uh ongoing financial reporting is very difficult to measure quantitatively and perhaps here the delegates would put us into a high medium-low category uh based on how well they feel we've lived up to what we said we were going to do and then on. The next page is an example of after the kpi period is complete. How delegates would review each core unit's kpi score card just to understand how they've lived up to some of their goals?

G

um I've already mentioned that delegates will have input input for the kpi attainment, whatever the metric is qualitative, but ideally, as many of these as possible will be quantitative and we can build a report to help measure those- and I think the most important thing and what maybe, in closing, why kpis are important, is they're going to help the delegates and also the broader maker holders, really understand uh where the best place is to deploy more capital will be in the future.

G

Unfortunately, we don't have this data, so we're gonna have to bootstrap it, but we think it's uh a good step in the right direction, but that'll I'll hand it back to mark.

D

Thanks connor I'll quickly wrap up with a timeline of what this could look like and we can discuss and have some q a regarding the whole presentation, so um obviously, with any new process to be put in place, there's going to be a time investment needed to do it right. So, if you know the delegates community felt that this process was worth moving forward, you know we look to publish a post tomorrow on the forums to you, know, inform the broader community and allow the cus to have a few more weeks to prepare.

D

um You know a budget using a template. You know breaking out the baseline investment requests to spend and uh the contingency scenarios um the the following week. You know see facilitation delegates will start to align based on their um kpis that conor outlet outlined, and then um you know a few weeks after that. We'll have public calls with each cu and delegates to present the new budgets. You know really going through the baseline spend what quarians have for investment requests and uh their contingency scenarios.

D

We haven't broken out like this and in the next step it will really uh make it much easier for us to consolidate and then categorize and prioritize all the different spend requests.

D

So if the dow wants to operate at a break, even as you know, the maker holders have indicated, then you can quite easily you know start with the baseline and then you know cut all the contingencies or you can start cutting from the baseline or different investment requests.

D

But this gives uh the delegates maker holders an opportunity to look through and be like. Hey, like you know, pe has an investment request, that's above their baseline. That we think is super valuable. We want to allocate that capital we're going to. You know, cut someone else's baseline here to ensure we still operated breakeven and that's what we're looking to do by going into this level of detail and based on these, you know, aggregated budgets.

D

The delegates- and you know, certainly strategic finance- can help out uh where needed uh will independently develop an alternate budget allocation in response to the envisioned. You know, budget cap and overall, you know cash flow goals for the organization.

D

You know the the goal here is to have something that will pass with the broader community and shortly after that, delegates present the proposals to the community, and then it is submitted into a mip. Following that the facilitators align with the delegates on the new goals based on the finalized budgets. Some budgets may be, you know, increased some may be decreased and the budgets and kpis should be. You know, aligned to ensure that you know someone had their budget cut, 20 or 30 percent. They may need to adjust their uh goals and kpis to reflect.

D

um You know the the resources that they have available, what they can achieve so that we will open the floor for q a um and uh happy to take questions thanks. Everyone and thanks uh roon, for giving us the forum to discuss.

B

Thanks everyone yeah, I mean I mean this is definitely a little bit different than uh what I expected, um but I think I mean, but I think it's really cool like I'm really. This is a. This is a significant progress. In terms of the I mean a more sort of uh systematic framework and thinking around. How can we actually intelligently do this and I completely agree with this whole, this whole approach of like look. We cannot just um like it.

B

You know it's not it's not a good approach to simply make some kind of flat cut across the board. You really need to actually dive in and understand, kpis and think about what are we even doing, which is pretty much what I've been saying since the beginning right, but now we're starting to see this kind of stuff in a little bit more sort of a concrete way.

B

So I think a way. What I would like to do next is: I think we have we, let's have a q, a sort of just like talking about this plan in isolation. Basically, um and then you know, let's do that for another 15 minutes and then following that, I will talk about basically and the bigger picture and then especially how to combine this um within game plan right how to sort of make all this stuff tied together.

B

Because that's me, like that's sort of the one issue with this right, is that this is sort of something that's being presented in isolation and, of course, in practice, there's a lot of other moving parts that basically um are going to need to all interact with each other.

B

um But but I think it's really useful to just consider this in isolation at first, just as a to sort of be able to actually be focused and try to get a sort of understanding.

B

So with that, um let's see what people got with questions and input.

H

uh Hi this is code night. I I think the proposal is good. I did want to touch on that. Doesn't really address uh me and ippy have proposals up to consolidate. I guess some of the marketing cus and not just and have them, I guess all under growth, and I wanted to see where people feel about that.

B

Yeah, so um that's what I'm planning to talk about later right that was sort of that was sort of the the focus of this call. um When I made the when I made the forum the first place, but I think we should, let's, let's discuss that separately from sort of the the this framework and this um sort of process itself, because we'll definitely get to that and that's sort of I mean that's the more actionable and more sort of concrete discussion point today.

A

uh We had a couple of hands raised, um I think uh layer, first and raphael.

I

Hey guys uh it's frank, uh we have delegate, um I have a question with regards to lagging and leading indicators. How do you determine what's lagging? What's leading uh from you know each coordinates perspectives and also, how do you measure?

I

um How do you quantify? How do you measure um it's? In other words, like I'm having a hard time, understanding like like 3f delegate, is the support of the endgame vision right.

I

So I would imagine that the dow does need to move in that direction where we're going to measure it based on the end game plan. uh Well, how do you guys think about that that I'm trying to get as far as measurements are concerned.

G

Do you mean like, if you have certain strategic goals that, like each cu needs to accomplish for the end game plan to go into practice? How would you incentivize them.

G

um Do you want me to take this adrian? I mean, I think whatever the kpi should be, who is should be high level enough that it's not necessarily gameable, um but if, for example, one of the end game plan items is we have to launch a new token in order to have these liquidity mining pools that exist between the dow and the different metadatas, then you could have development and launch of this specific token, as like a binary, did you hit it on this state or not type kpi.

G

We answer your question.

I

Sorry mark, if you guys, could just expand on the lagging and need uh kpi and the difference, and how do you quantify it.

D

So I'm not sure exactly what you mean by lagging leading indicators. Those are usually you know reference as it relates to economic data. You know we're looking at kpis, uh you know people setting goals, short-term and long-term goals and having a way to both, you know quantitatively and qualitatively assess whether those goals have been achieved, and I think you know a lot of it's going to come down to you know aligning between the facilitators and the delegates.

D

You know the facilitators, you know, incentivized to you, know, softball their goals and the delegates are, you know, kind of theirs that check to push back on them and make sure that the core units are being ambitious enough and are achieving enough for you know what the team is being funded at and just to you know briefly touch back on as it relates to endgame plan. You know. Obviously, goals can be.

D

You know specific to that plan as well. If you know the, let's say that the end game plan is like ratified into a mip, you could have you know all your goals related to that game plan. If that's what the dao and delegates want to prioritize, um so in any event, uh you know as connor briefly, you know touched on in his presentation.

D

You know this can, I think, uh also work with metadows, where you are going to need some sort of way to have metadows, hold them accountable and have incentive alignment. You know such that there are, you know, let's say, there's some sort of revenue share business model with you know deco, for example, or some sort of d3m integration.

D

You know there's gonna have to be. uh You know, kpis and different ways to quantitatively assess the success of such a partnership.

F

And then also keeping the number of kpis limited, I think, is an important feature of how you think about this process, to avoid scope creep and to and to really focus measuring on things that are achievable in the immediately short time frame of the next budget cycle. So if the endgame plan, for instance, is 12 months out, but the budget cycle is sixth, maybe it doesn't make sense to put in an end game plan kpi yet, but on the next one right. So this also helps core units keep focus on what their mandate is.

F

Keep focused on driving against business objectives, regardless of methadone's endgame plan when the implementation takes place or what the governance structure looks like and also liberates. Hopefully, the core units to really focus on on their mandates.

I

Yeah I was uh referring to a short, short-term, kpi and uh long-term kpi, um but uh yeah uh thanks for the uh for the answer, and I guess I um what I was trying to as far as measuring I was.

I

I was trying to indicate or ask that you know in order to have effective kpis right, there should be a common vision and a common uh belief of the dialogue in itself right because we got to decide what's the most important kpis uh and what I mean by short-term, lagging versus uh in the long-term um yeah. So, um but I think I know where you guys are- are trying to stay with this. So thanks for that.

J

um Yeah, I would like to know like what time frames these kpis would be evaluated at, and um I think that the devil is really in the details here, like what I love about it is that it's kind of objectivizing the way car units are evaluated, which is great but then like picking these kpis, I think, is a formidable challenge and, of course, like frank said, they should reflect the overall strategic goals of the dao.

J

So I I think it's an amazing proposal and and and good, but I think the the ongoing discussion would be really interesting there, but just like from what time frames are you looking at and um what happens if a car unit doesn't um misses the kpis?

J

Is that like a binary thing, mis didn't miss or hit, or is it like? A percentage like achieved 90 achieved 110.

G

So maybe maybe to answer your second question. First, this comes out of the back and forth between uh the delegates and maker holders and the and the cu that is going to propose the budget. So, for example, in in our example like stable coin treasury management management strategy by q422, it would be agreed upon in advance that this is either going to be true or false.

G

Did we generate this revenue subject to a dust limit, for example, and then the attainment determination is all or nothing, but if, for some reason, the delegates and maker holders and the cu thought that it would make more sense to have a categorical or some sort of numerical attainment model there. Then they could do that as well. I I do agree with you that the the devil is in the details and we also have an issue with aligning the different kpis of every single core unit to the overall goals of uh the dow.

G

I think this process actually helps with that, because what you'll see is every core unit comes to you with their goals and then, as part of the the process where the delegates and maker holders repropose a new budget that hits the spend criteria back to the cus. They can also have a discussion where they say: hey we've discussed together and we don't necessarily think that your kpis are aligned with where we we or the total amount of uh maker holders wants to go.

J

And? What's the time frame that you that you're evaluating at it's like a hard six months and then a year? Because.

G

I think six months makes sense.

J

G

Given just that, ideally, you can get to a more stable revenue base where you don't have to reevaluate this every six months, but we've had swings in contribution margin or contributed profit of almost 80 million bucks. um So you almost have to reevaluate it more often.

J

I think that that's kind of what I think is is another like. What's worrying me is that sometimes you have these bear markets like like now, but then, if you are fortunate enough to have some type of um of buffer, I think that's basically the best time to spend. If you know what you want to spend on right like to achieve your goals, because you have less noise and less competition in a way. So I think this this yeah.

J

It will be really interesting to see like how these kpis interact and I'm really looking forward to this discussion. I think this will be incredibly valuable, because this discussion will be on a very hard and objective basis and not be emotional and personal, and so I think we will come to um to conclusions much quicker at least that's what I hope.

A

All right, thank you, um be mindful of the time, uh but I think we've got chris had his hand up and then we come maybe come back to do for a second and then um chris. Yes,.

K

Thanks, I guess where I'm a little confused on this is. It seems like it's treating delegates like a like a kind of centralized team that is supposed to come to consensus amongst itself on issues um without anything without any votes or formal votes or on chain votes.

K

Nothing until it looked like on the other page, you had nothing until the final mip, which is supposed to contain the budget that delegates reach some kind of consensus on, and I just want to make sure I had that right, because if that's the case, I I think that um it's sort of it's kind of turning delegates into like a core unit in a way right where delegates are supposed to reach consensus without uh going outside and actually going through governance and stuff like that, and I would think that we'd probably want to take a step back and look at that and try to avoid that from happening, because the way it seems set up now is delegates would just come together, come up with something voted in themselves once the mip is put up.

K

Am I right in the way I'm looking at it, though, or maybe I'm missing something.

G

I I would think about it a different way, so um the discussions where you have a delegate or a group of delegates talking to a ceo or you have different delegates coming together and saying this is what all the proposals look like.

G

What's the best way to allocate capital uh those wouldn't be closed to anyone, anyone could join those. It would be fully permissionless. It's just the realism that these delegates together could push through a budget if they all agreed on a budget. So, yes, other holders can join. But ultimately, if you get consensus among the delegates, you essentially have consensus among the protocol at that point. So this is not to exclude anyone.

K

Like what, if you don't reach consensus like what are the rules around? What consensus means? You know, like that's the kind of stuff that we like delegates, would then be forced to make up their own rules about what that consensus would look like, and it seems like that's something that governance should play a role in.

B

Yeah, I don't think, uh let me let me cut in now and because, let's call this the end of the the q, a I mean what's about to happen right now, as you can also use we're about to just rabbit hole deep into this whole question, which I actually think is like it's very relevant right, because what we're starting to sort of bum into now is what I mentioned earlier, that this plan is sort of proposed in isolation.

B

But suddenly, when you sort of reach the edges of it, you start to extrapolate all sorts of stuff, including this whole question of, what's like how decisions even made in the dao and this whole, and that that goes back to this thing that I that I think everyone is very clear about, is that we need a kind of constitution and we need some sort of common set of rules right, which is something that the in-game plan has has.

B

uh You know is sort of focused on and also every other sort of major um proposal um that we've seen right, including also hasu's proposal recently.

B

um So I just want- I mean so I can actually come with a bunch of like input to to.

B

I mean that that that pretty much that really um uh like touches on some of these things- and I think just first of all- I think it's I mean I think it's very important to recognize that exactly the question like exactly what chris is sort of getting at here is a such a insanely fundamental question, basically, because we can't just sort of talk about budget sort of operationally as if, like oh, let's just figure out, let's get some budgets done.

B

Let's get some stuff done, like the the reality is whatever happens, next becomes sort of the constitution right, so whatever gets put in place now is what else defies and what ends up sort of running the the project forever and any kind of like temporary solution to you know, make the decision or something that that's just put in place until something better comes along.

B

K

In effect, be the thing that.

B

Ends up running the protocol forever right, if we're not very careful about how we we design all these things, and so um luckily the in-game plan is very much focused on sort of all the you know all the practicalities of these surrounding questions right. So what what I'm going to do now is.

B

Share this, like slightly changed um slideshow. After of the the slides that we usually you should be going through um and then hopefully we can get into like. We can sort of have this discussion again a little bit, but then first of all get a bit into this whole question of like budgets and politics, budgets and governance, security and so on, decentralization and then also get into growth.

B

And this sort of specific question of the events core unit and the the moment, the the initiative to try to cut spending on that or merge it or similar.

B

B

Okay, so um yeah.

K

I mean this is.

C

B

Idea for today's decentralized world committee was that this would be the first time where we would focus where we'd have a community that sort of focuses on a specific scope, but then, of course, in practice, once you decide well, let's focus on a specific scope. You don't have to.

B

You know, discuss what the hell does, that even mean and what's a decentralized voter committee, and so uh you know so. Ultimately, of course, this is still going to be this more sort of meta, metaphysical, sort of meta type of voter committee and conversation as we've been having the whole time along because it's just so much stuff to still align on and just reach a mutual language like we can even use to communicate with, um but fundamentally right. These meetings are about having the actual voters organized to understand and influence the governance process and.

K

Actually, very specifically,.

B

Prevent this failure mode of the delegates running the show right, because that's that is the delegate to becoming sort of a group that runs the dao is basically um like: that's how a dial fails, either through regulation, regulatory crackdown or through corruption- and I want you know- I won't talk about that more today, but in I think, it'll be actually next week.

B

I will actually really get into this because I'll be talking about dial theory and this whole challenge of corruption and what a whole spark and all this like human complexity that makes dao so much more challenging and difficult than we think, especially in the long run, um but there's just one thing: I just really want to um go over. You know, as we usually usually show this right, the four focus objectives. I've tried to sort of really cut down this list. I usually have at different lengths.

B

I just want, because I mean there was just as we were going through this um budget uh overview right then I just want to hear anyone's got some input of like because there was this talk about like cutting uh mission, critical um uh initiatives.

A

B

A

B

If we just leave aside uh the obviously the um you know, shouted vault engines and makers upon these sort of major features that have been worked on by the developers, which is a little bit different than other sort of you know, initiatives and projects and so on. I basically want to hear what, if there's like just hear input about what are people's opinions about uh the current sort of mission, critical initiatives like let's say we start cutting budgets?

B

What is it, what are people afraid that we're going to be uh slowing down sort of stopping um especially stuff? That's not on this list.

I

I think I think, from uh from a delegate's perspective, um you're kind of slowing down someone who's in business development right. So, if they're out here, hustling and they're talking to whatever winter mute starkware- and you know they don't have an objective, they're going to be afraid to go in and maybe try to close a deal with someone like starkware as an example.

I

um So I think that's the problem when you just have this objective uh as a business development and someone who enjoys sales myself, uh it would kind of like make me hesitant to be. You know, ready to go close, a deal with some kind of institution or something as an example. So yes, just some thoughts. I have.

B

Cool um anyone else I mean so they basically disrupt deals and business development.

C

Wait, but how would cutting budgets like affect? I don't. I don't think that makes sense like cutting a budget wouldn't affect like closing a deal for business development.

B

I looked so and I actually think that that's one uh sort of uh I mean I want to.

A

B

Want to answer this uh separately, but first I just want to hear if there's any kind of sort of high level.

A

I mean I'm what.

E

I'm really trying to fish for is basically.

B

Get some kind of sort of facts to the surface of stuff in the dow that's going on that should be on this list.

L

From from my perspective representing pe, I think there's a lot of work on layer twos. I know it's not on not on this list. We have a conversation next week to start talking about what the phasing and what the roadmap of that looks like. So uh I you know, maybe that's something we can come to at a later point in time to talk about the road map and the timing of it. But I'd expect at some point that to be an item.

L

That would uh be quite a significant piece on this list, or at least up for discussion.

B

Yeah, I I did mention that earlier that I consider that sort of separate, because it's sort of been actually I'll get to that later, but why there there's I mean, there's a there's, a difference between development of the protocol itself and then sort of upper like dow operations.

B

I would ask okay yeah.

L

Yeah that makes sense.

B

Just but but I mean I just tried to caveat that upfront right, like yeah the pro you know that, let's let's consider that separately because that's that is sort of a I mean.

C

In a sense, you I mean.

B

Obviously, also in the in the context of budgets, you'll be slowing down and so on, um developments but uh yeah, but.

C

B

It's just there's a there's. This there's this kind of um finite nature to major developments right. That means that you can sort of think of it differently as as compared to sort of running operational budgets that are supposed to basically provide some kind of a positive return on the money that you're spending, um okay, anyone else. Otherwise, let's move on and then I'll just quickly respond to the frank and the bd question.

J

Is getting profitable would it would not also mean just having more people use vaults, so we kind of generate more stability fees.

B

You're talking about.

J

Like the the threat put a point.

B

J

B

Let me change that as well so like, and what do you call that sort of iterate on the budgets I'll just call it whatever the kind of discussion we're having now right? um Well, look! So I just let me just answer. Let me just talk. Let me just talk about what frank just mentioned right of interrupting bt.

B

So basically, I think I think what you, what you're mentioning frank, is something that, um from my like, it doesn't even like it is not even an activity that a dow can even have basically what you're talking about, because you're talking about some kind of um you know private deal essentially, which the reality is.

B

If you do like, we already know very clearly that regulators consider that kind of I mean an entity that that sort of has uh direct relationships with with other entities and have like representatives doing I mean that that's going to be considered a company right, then that there's already sort of a lot of um existing examples of that's I mean something like business, development and and this you know exactly these kind of like closing deals, this whole approach.

B

It's simply like it's simply not viable um with like it like. It is like it assumes this a broader context, which is that maker basically becomes a legal entity which, at this point is as far somewhere basically impossible, because that would require kyc and die, which is technically impossible.

B

So there's, like a I mean so we're we need to you, know we're in a situation where we've been going, we've been we've been in this complexity spiral we've been going down, 100 different paths and we've sort of gotten used to doing that stuff, but a lot of the stuff we're doing right now, like there's a lot of it, that we have to really rethink and the in-game plan and sort of the the bear market.

B

All this stuff is sort of an opportunity to sort of to you know to rethink all these things right and then figure out once we sort of uh you know have a look at the reality of where we are and what we can be doing and what we should be doing.

B

And then how can we more effectively apply our resources right, apply our workforce and so on, um but.

C

I mean I just think like.

B

I would basically say that uh so once again, leaving aside this whole thing about key, um you know pro sort of core protocol features. I think basically, the only thing I would consider critical right now is the whole bond thing. I mean there's really not like of everything else that we're doing it's.

B

You know there I mean there's just not really some kind of major. um I mean, of course, I'm hoping that we'll find some amazing new, we'll have some some rabbit in the head, and someone comes out and talks about some kind of major thing.

B

That's on the horizon for us right, because that does occasionally happen omega right, that there's some crazy new feature or concept of something being developed, um but I mean the reality is, and this goes back to sort of one of the things you know one of the early um you know parts of sort of the end game plan. Introduction right is that so we have this protocol, call that's, making all the money and doing all the work essentially um and it's quite limited.

B

How much of the workforce right now is you know is, is actually like contributing like building something similar to that or building on that or or building. You know, sort of contributing something. On top of that, and most of it is sort of trying things that go beyond it, so it's sort of operating in this sort of undefined space. Beyond of what we, even what do? We, even you know, know that we're we're doing right and what do we even have in terms of protocol um and.

K

It just it's a you know like.

B

It really speaks to it's not just about like we should not just be thinking about reducing budgets or changing budgets or something somewhat something like that right.

B

It's actually a lot more about the kpis themselves, as in like the results themselves, what the hell we've been doing, right, uh I'll and I'll um I'll be talking about that in terms of ry plus a bit later um so so this, I think, is actually really relevant for the you know, if you keep the current the presentation, we got just got from sushi finance in mind right, so this is sort of a core aspect of the in-game plan. Right is that we want to.

B

We need to simplify and we sort of need to understand what the hell's going on governance and how can voters interact and where should they be interacting right, and so one of the key outputs is the concept of the world map, which is this complete list of.

B

You know the things you need to understand that are going on that you need to be aware of, and that basically have a sort of an executive summary, um and this is something I've been developing. This for many months now right I've been doing.

B

We talked about this on the calls for for a long time, and it was somewhat iterating it a little bit, but basically it I've arrived at this um uh structure, where you guys have two scope like two types of scopes, as I call them right, you have these primary scopes, which are very, very uh deep right.

B

So there's a lot under the hood in each of those right and then the supporting scopes, which are basically stuff, that sort of falls a little bit outside the primary scopes and then also sort of have this sort of cross pollination in a sense right that a lot of this this uh this stuff on the bottom applies to all of these different things, but it can't exactly contribute with one specific of them, and the idea is then that eventually we need to have calls like this right.

B

A call like this should be focusing on one of these subjects essentially, and then all the people relevant for that should be joining the call and the voters that are relevant for this should be joining right from the particular dvc. So you have voters, basically uh organizing and then having the ones that that you know organizing around some kind of common concepts such as the hawks or the doves or whatever.

B

The the um the overall kind of of uh perspective is um and then basically having the ones that that are able to to bring that that perspective to to a specific scope, actually show up at the dvc and then have all the other key actors in place um right. So, and so that's this idea that basically voters have to be involved right. So you can't have so. Basically the delegates can't run the show alone like they have to have. Voters involved, and I think the way that I want to enforce that the way I'm proposing.

B

Basically, we directly make that happen is that we, um you know that we change the way that delegates are compensated from being something about like voter participation or something like that. But instead it becomes uh dvc participation and then dvcs are defined specifically as as um groups and calls basically with actual voters like independent voters right so delegates simply cannot operate, or rather a delegate cannot be sort of a professional and get get a salary in the post-endgame world.

B

If they're not constantly interacting with voters, if they're not able to actually get voters to sort of show up, which requires really simplifying. What's going on in governance and turning it from the sort of frustration of today, where you don't really know, what's going on into some kind of much more um so convenient.

K

And even almost like gamified.

B

Or at least interesting and and sort of uh empowering process right, that's that's the outcome that we basically need.

B

In my opinion and again, I will be I'll, be getting into the whole concept of the spark and why you must have grassroots community involved and why um you know a bureaucracy that suffers a principal asian problem, but is not regulated and has no legal obligations always will corrupt over time, which is why you always must have the actual principles involved in a dao, because it's not a legal entity.

B

But basically right. The idea is that we have the delegates and then there's a new term here, which is councils which I'm going to update soon on all the in-game playing documents right. But.

E

C

E

B

Used to be called supporting core units with a small small modifications, um but really modified so that it starts to really fit uh very closely, was gonna, be very somewhat analogous to um the council model proposed by uh hasu a while back um with the main difference that they're they're meant to be. You know redundant and decentralized.

B

So, instead of having a single council like you used to have a lot of councils, and then you have a council for something such as growth or something like that right show up at the dvc calls related to growth, and you get this interaction between delegates and voters um and uh and then the councils, and then this concept of the scope map, so basically the the overview um which would include the kpis as well that we were just talking about right. So um so I think I mean so to the point I made earlier right.

B

The kpis ultimately have to come like they have to come from the professionals right. They have to come from the people that are working in in growth or any other area and then basically be be sort of um you know, adopted and and then modified over time by the first of all the the councils and then also the delegates, the professionals right and then all the way down to sort of the voters that are the least professional, but that ultimately have to be able to follow along in in some shape or form right.

B

So we have to be able to simplify stuff enough to reach that point where voters can actually be. You know, voters can sort of be involved in understanding what are the kpis, and why are these things, the kpis and more broadly sort of understand? What are the results that benefit us right, because again, they must be involved in this process. They must actually be able to to understand that it's running properly, because if they don't.

K

B

It's going to stop running properly, based on again what I call dial theory which I'll get into in the future.

B

B

Yeah- and this is I mean so so this is just this- is basically this slide. Basically, oh, I think something's missing there scope as the yeah that was supposed to be there so I'll, just read it out loud, the missing stuff right, so scope as sort of this universal uh line. Item right. So that's the scope. Is this concept that um everything else sort of is is structured underneath right, so core units councils, kpi frameworks um budgets, like all of this stuff sort of ultimately fall under this sort of overall concept of scope?

B

Which again, um is you know this, like the world map, which is called the world right like everything that maker is, is then just like a list of scopes and the scopes? They contain everything else right um and then this is the sort of the role breakdown um that I see in like how- and this is this is where basically, I think a lot of this I mean in the in the short run.

B

I think the the process that was that was outlined by strategy finance. I think that's actually very, like that's a very um like. I think it's quite actionable right and it sort of fits to exactly what we've got going today, but this kind of like this kind of drawing here. Obviously we need to to process it a lot more, but this kind of of um sort of endpoint is what I think we need to.

B

Actually, um you know execute towards basically and how we should approach budgets now, and that is because, in the endgame, from sort of the in-game perspective right, there's like two end games, there's one where we have the metadows and we have high complexity and high budgets and high resource consumption. That then results in exponential.

B

You know mega growth right and then we have the other outcome, which basically means well. You know we're gonna, pretty much cuddle. You know we're gonna, cut everything that isn't absolutely fundamentally core right, which is this right plus, which I'm now renaming to a simple symbol die, but so, in that context there's basically no like, like I mean there, basically uh isn't really anyone that wants to keep the status quo right. I mean at this point: that's been that's been very clearly.

B

um You know, like demonstrated basically right, that there's a there are different proposals for sort of how to how to organize in a way that's different from the from the status quo right, but like the current sort of the having the the budget we have today and the the the sort of the structure of the workforce that we have today isn't gonna like there.

B

There actually is no point in trying to just incrementally incrementally sort of improve that if there's not some kind of greater, um you know thinking.

E

Behind it that.

B

Then digs into this core concept of restructuring, putting a constitution in place really start figuring out. What the hell are we doing right, um yeah and again this is sort of the end game.

B

uh The end game plan right the metadata paradigm of what does it? What would what does the world look like and and what you you know where do sort of the different parts of the the budget and this whole process go right. So the idea is basically, you got these councils that and, of course, to the left of the councils.

B

You could say: that's where all the voters, the delegates, um the the dbc calls and so on, they have them right, but then in the workforce itself you basically have the councils and and by the way I think this is pretty. I mean this is pretty if you sort of squint.

B

This is actually quite similar to the um the uh like the the structure proposed by hasu right, except with one key difference being that that now you have a council for each um scope rather than having sort of a single central council, but then that's I mean the single central council proposed.

B

Did also basically have like it had council members that are represented each scope or something similar to each scope right and now, I'm basically proposing that you have you just instead of having a single member that specializes in something you have, and then you have an entire council, basically that specializes in those areas, you just have a.

B

K

B

Councils right and the councils are then run by the governor, dallas right, so they're run by metadatas um and and that's basically really important. Because then you don't have like a bunch of people that are sitting on a council in a dow and have to deal with that issue. But instead it's a much more sort of abstract down to dow kind of um setup. Right.

B

J

B

Like the the point is that we need for each scope, we need people that specialize in the framework itself the kpis themselves, understanding, what's going on understanding, what are the results, we're getting out of it and then separate from those we need. Then the people like that that basically had actually received the budgets that negotiate with counterparties with these budgets right in terms of getting the work actually done, and that also have these um you know, have these governance privileges. So that's basically the coordinates and that's so in the in the past.

B

I was I sort of I really um you know. I split this up between what I call supporting for units, administrative coordinates and contributing coordinates, and this is actually the same thing. It's just with some different um naming right and then core units basically remaining pretty much what they are now with one big difference being that then they're run by metadata sort of attached to metadata. So again, it's not companies that are directly interacting with maker.

B

It's it's entire dial that will then run multiple core units, so you have sort of a smaller set of counterparties. You're dealing with from the maker governance perspective, but then the key part to this is, and- and I mean this goes back to also- this concept of like kpis often are just promises.

C

E

B

A supplier in a sense right, so I think that's basically where I mean that's, where the only way the decentralized workforce can possibly sort of remain efficient and sort of survive in the long run is, if you have this kind of open free market, you know decentralized process where, essentially you have.

B

um You have bitters right that say something like we can onboard this collateral with blah blah terms, and then someone else says well, we can do it with some different terms, um and then you have some kind of you know you have this, you know so so that's basically you know you have the core units basically doing in you know a so-called rfp right, so they're saying something like hey.

B

We would like to deploy a shot at vault engine on menace, right, which is an l2, and then you have these metadows that specialize in getting this work done and they have the resources sitting with them internally, right and they're. They can then go and be like okay. We can do it, for you know, we need five million dollars and we'll do it in six months right and then another one says well we'll we only need three million.

K

B

We'll do it in three months and then you basically have a kind of I mean you. You can look back at some of the council and the framework created an overall strategy and use that to guide the decision of which um bit to pick right and then the critical sort of um you know. Nuance is, of course, that these kinds of proposals I mean these kinds of interactions of.

B

We want something done someone's telling us they can do it and they're saying they need this much money and they need this much time right like you need to be able to hold them to that promise, and that is one of these key purposes of the metadows themselves. Right, because they're collateralized they have governance themselves. um They basically have the ability to actually um provide the same kind of kind of you know like guarantees and the same kind of interaction as you get with.

B

When you know in the real world, when you do a you know, as you know, I mean a contract essentially right, an.

K

B

With the scope of work and deliverables and terms, um you know like basically when, when you when you, when.

L

B

Deals like with with supplies in general right where you need something you need to receive. Something then, um like you, can you know you actually can rely on the promises that are made to you because of the legal system, um and- and we don't have that today in maker right and that's one of the big um issues I mean in particular.

B

I think one of the really sort of interesting, uh although this is a bit sort of meta right, but one of the one of the the ways that this really manifested itself was how early on right, the core units had, I mean a big part of the whole coordinate pitch- was decentralization and sort of. um You know this like commitment to the dao as being super decentralized and so on that was sort of what we, what um what people are really committed to early on right and then what we've seen over time is in practice.

B

The thing is decentralization is really really pain in the ass right. So over time you get this sort of trend towards.

B

You know like it's not really that practical, like it's, not really that great um from the perspective of the people doing the work and- and we you know, we need it. So we need some kind of mechanism to hold people basically to to to their promises of look. We want transparency, we want decentralization and so on, but and as we can see, if you don't have that, if you don't have some kind of actual way to you know, you can't basically rely you. Can you can't just rely on on promises right in a like even.

C

B

In uh you know, in the world where today would make it where we're still very early, we're still very, very high trust situation. um We still have seen these very clear examples of of how you, just you know it's not as simple as um we can just all trust each other. We can just count on people in this community right. The reality is sort of the opposite, especially in the long run right. In the long run, we should expect sort of proper byzantine behavior, as it's called right.

B

So so that's really I mean that's the this sort of um this three uh sort of you know three parts of the whole of the scope, also the way that the work actually gets done in a particular scope right, and so this could be growth, for instance.

B

Right is that you have this sort of you have the overall framework, then you have sort of the people that basically, in a sense, represent maker when it comes to actually picking the the suppliers in a sense, and then you have actual suppliers that are organized or structured in such a way that they can actually interact with a dow. In a safe way, meaning they can have collateral, there's a way to to enforce promises, and so on um yeah.

B

So so now I want to get to talking about you know, so we can really sort of look at this sort of abstract um view here and then we can talk about.

B

um You know, specifically the growth scope and how you know, like really sort of just think about that for a moment, and then also specifically think about um this question of the growth coordinator, the med score unit, and how something of that you know should look like in a way that makes sense in the in the long run right, um and so one thing is, I mean, I think that this is one of the key things that was sort of identified in this discussion.

B

Right was that if you're looking at sort of the world map right like this sort of total list of like things we should be considering, like events, simply should not be um its own thing right, like you, shouldn't have like events as something you do alongside uh onboarding collateral or something like that right. It's simply it's a subset of something else. Right, um which I think is, is why um I mean we have. This is one of the issues we have with the coin in general right, and this is really something we need.

B

This will be an extremely useful process to go through um also sort of as a part of the whole budgeting and budget iteration, right and consolidation, and um to basically just think about the scopes and then think about how to sort of reduce complexity. How to fold co units into these into these scopes, basically, and possibly in.

C

B

Context also, um you know figuring out how we should be changing the scope. So maybe this isn't the final list. After all, right um and it's, and by sort of having getting hands-on work done, we may really start to to have a better um uh understanding, and then I just bolded finance here, because what we're talking about now, which is like I mean well, what I expected we would have we would talk about to a greater extent, would be something like would be this sort of specific question of what should it?

B

Actually, what should actually look like what sort of a reasonable way to think about overall growth, budget and events, budget and results? We expect out of the events and so on right.

K

And that's where so, you know you also.

B

Have like um the entire sort of supporting scope of finance is is relevant for that right, and you could also say that potentially this operations and internal communication thing, which, which um is something I'm proposing, basically represents a merger of scs some parts of what scs is doing, and the govcom, for instance, or.

E

K

Like legal research right.

B

That there is this whole question of um I was. I was talking about earlier right. This whole question like doing deals and and the business development function and how that itself can can. uh You know actually be unviable like something that you simply are not able to do as a dao without creating an unacceptable risk, and so I mean so I mean I think this is basically what what I wanted to get to right is. Let's just talk very broadly about.

B

I call the growth scope map right. So basically, what is the kind of language of like what is even we want out of like marketing events, uh business development or whatever? We call it right, even though, obviously old-school business development simply isn't like it's a it's a you know, it's a dead end, basically um for especially for maker core right and.

K

Just sort of in you know in.

B

The long run, what do we envision? We would be spending money on for um like that, relates to basically getting growth and- and I just want to start out by saying like when I think- about growth and this stuff- I mean to me one thing: it seems very clear and sort of- um maybe not necessarily no brainer but but sort of something.

B

Definitely that's worth it to to consider it's just things like advertising and marketing campaigns and pr campaigns, and this whole thing of, like um you, know, yeah doing google ads or doing a freaking sponsorship of arena. Whatever you know, all this stuff, we've seen encrypt already right that, I think, is sort of the.

B

um I mean that's to me what what seems like one of these really obvious um situations.

K

Where you can sort of figure out that.

B

If we spend like, if we spend x amount of money on, let's say ads, and we get y customers in that, then start to use our product and then they generate stability. You know c stability, fees and those are higher than x. Then we're good to go right. I mean that's, that's sort of the basic thinking of like ultimately we're spending money on something that like something like this. We need to think about like what's the what's the outcome, we want to see right and how is it worth it to spend the money right like?

B

How does that guide? The decision that we make to to spending that money in the first place and.

A

C

I'm not sure if even.

B

If we even have someone from from growth here from the growth coordinator, but I think that would of course be very relevant to get some input from them. But I'm I'm really talking about very high level right, because we're not talking about the growth core unit right now, we're talking about the growth scope map right. We're talking about this sort of um almost like a constitution for for growth in a sense right, which.

C

Again, growth, I mean I'm just using.

B

The word growth- maybe I should have picked a different word, but um growth is not analogous to the growth coordinate. Growth is a abstract concept. That is basically this. Isn't you know this is the extent of like where we're looking.

C

B

All these things right in the world map that goes under what we call growth, um whereas the growth coin is very specific. You know single point where we we had a bud of you, know: budget anchor and people taking action, and so okay go ahead.

B

Anybody wants to give somebody, but.

M

Hi, this is mariano from from growth, room and yeah. I mean the the situation related to the growth of the protocol, not the core unit. uh It's something like especially, I wouldn't say. Difficult rates are like a.

K

M

Situation right: this is something that we've been researching in our team since the foundation times in which the protocol doesn't have uh a front end right. So it's kinda yeah difficult to do, for example, advertising and do call to actions, because those call to actions needs to be um needs to be to I mean activated by by a partner right, and that is why bd comes to play business development right.

M

We, we need to have a lot of different partners, aligned that if we are making advertising online, advertising uh needs to be perfectly coordinated with the partners right and- and this also happens that dilutes our brand- and this is something that we are seeing now with the brand team right or even what happens at the events right. That probably a lot of people know that, but they do not relate that to make her down that's kind of weird right.

M

So the growth it's uh something pretty similar to. uh Let's call it like a pharmaceutical company in which they don't sell the products directly to the users, but they have to do it through a pharmacy or something, and they have medical representatives to to to distribute the product to these pharmacies right and to push that into uh into that last mile of users. This is the same thing that we are doing with with partners. Right I mean we could say g5 saver, we could say oasis, we could say instant up.

M

Those are kind of like the pharmacies right and with this, what we need to do is to push our product, and this is where it became like kind of uh um a special situation in which we need to develop the product for them. What what do we? What do I mean by this? It says: okay, what new promotion can we make in your front end for people to choose, to use, die right or to choose to open a vault right, and then you have to negotiate with these people because they say hey.

M

You know we are protocol agnostic. We cannot give maker dial so much attention. We like also have it. We like also compound or whatever right uh so that is why sometimes, the strategy of growth for a decentralized protocol that doesn't have a front end.

M

It's something that it's pretty slow right and it's kind of capital intensive right and I mean taking the example again of the advertising, all the advertising. We cannot do advertising.

M

If, if we try to do online advertising, we need to give some bash it to the uh to the people that is developing the front end right and they have to do the advertising, and we need to check that that advertising fulfills at least one of our objectives, it's that okay, I mean at least put a dialogue on it or make a lot of it and talk about that right, and that is why, for example, right now from royal korean, we are preparing the mip 60 to just for the website, because um it is at least it is very weird for us to have a website that is not being updated right.

M

This first first first thing. The second another thing is that I don't like how all the information, sorry, how all the information on the protocol is distributed elsewhere, let's say, for example, die stats or make or burn.

M

I would like all that type of information, including our website, right and then start to kind of go to selling our products there I mean not having um a fully fledged front end of the maker to smart contract, but at least I think that we need to get together and first of all have a an agreement on what the product is of maker down. This is something that sorry community.

M

I keep telling these things like three years ago, but we are not agreeing on what is the product right and and for me that is a huge, huge mistake in our website. We talk about dye and- and- and I don't know if diet is our product right again- I don't know if that's our product- maybe it's something else. Maybe it's false favorite, it's the psm, maybe I don't know there's like a lot of things to talk about, but the idea for growth.

M

I believe that we should start like with the foundation and that foundation right now, for me, it's the website, and then we can do all the some sort of different strategies up on that right, I mean call to action solely advertising and I don't know sports advertising whatever. It is right.

M

um I believe that first of all, we should be very clear what to promote as a protocol uh and and and what is the commercial aspect of it right, because one thing could be promote what the protocol can do as a product or promote what the protocol it's in its internal working, it's an inner working right. I mean all this whole thing around metadatas and and all that kind of steps right um same, for example, for events.

M

People. That knows me knows that I don't like crypto events, I mean they are really cool. You get to know the people you handling out in the forums in crypto, twitter or whatever, but it's all always the same people. It's always the same people and that's not bringing new customers to the protocol. For example, I would love to not go to any global or ecc and go to events that are banking events, money lending events that are like much more forward, thinking right and and and try to bring new people into the ecosystem right.

M

But I mean that's just my opinion right um and again from a commercial aspect related also to well, for example, for uh suaves. um I think that we have to be very clear what it's? What? What are the things for the inner working of the dao and what are the things that are like a commit commercial aspect of the doubt.

N

Yeah I want to to have something else like like in a general aspect: the growth scope map should be like how we increase that demand and supply, and uh whenever we think about the demand, we think about like what mariano said through partnerships, because we don't have a front end and dive by itself. It's it's just like any other stable point, so we need like people to develop, use cases around the eye and that's what we do with our partners, the other. uh The other part is uh the supply side.

N

So how do we increase the supply side? And that is like, through new collaterals, through institutional vaults, through uh having multi-lateral dye on side chains, layer tools that also, of course, help us with the demand.

N

So that is, that is what at least we at growth are thinking about, and and and that is also why it's important that to think and- and I think like some of you have had mentioned in the chat- that if we think about kpis, we have to like coordinate between core units, because, if I think about let's say okay, I want to like increase the amount of votes that have like more than uh that mean more than 100 million by how we can do that through institutional votes, how we can do institutional votes well, we need protocol engineering support.

N

We need a strategic finance support we need uh to like create a new product. We also have to talk with oasis or deep by saver to create a front end for the partners.

N

We need to talk with firefox and all the custodials to allow an api to like have access to that a new service, and I think that in the end, well, I I guess, because metadatas are just like an idea, but maybe that could be like a metadata like the result of all all of these interactions between career units converted into a product and with a specific audience, to help to grow the maker core.

N

um So that's that's how how we see it events and swag and um that it's relevant and that is grow that helps to the growth of the protocol in different ways.

N

Brand recognition uh also recruiting also partnerships wanting to know more about maker, respecting the brand positioning, but also it doesn't have to be always with parties like events could be through hackathons uh through, as mariano said, like being in different events, not necessarily crypto events, um like uh I don't know like paying for advertising on the mainstream media. So events you could like think about that in different ways. So that's that's like. I think how we should think about growth for the protocol.

B

So I'm just writing some um notes. Do you think this is? Is um a good.

C

Representation of what you just said, what do you.

B

Think there's some yeah, I mean overall, it's like we've talked about website and like ads all that stuff marketing goes on the website effectively and then.

N

B

About how you can use it.

N

I think you have also to include, I don't know how like products, because like, for example,.

B

N

But not just it's like institutional votes on the supply, but like an integration with a wallet is a product on the demand side or having that integrated integrated in exchange is, is like a service, a new service that we offer to our users, so yeah integrations yeah.

B

And then I just want to I mean then, what's really important to to to again sort of remember this context is we have to really um you know, sort of enforce and take seriously that these things have to be decentralized, which means a bunch of sort of practical stuff right, but for instance, you can't have the I mean in the long run.

B

We can't do deals as we used to basically, um so we would think it means that's something I mean we don't have time for that now, but that's something we think about like what does it mean? What does integrations mean in the context of we're not doing like deals right, but rather we need something, that's decentralized whatever. That means that's something that is yes well.

M

For, for example, for example, something that I've been talking with defy saver, it's I mean we said we had a call saying: okay, guys, I I want more people to open a boat and use device, saver right and one of the ideas that we have is we said. Okay, can you guys create a smart contract uh and and have a front end to that smart contract on your website, in which any user that opens up makerbold and issues between, I don't know, 20k to 100k?

M

They can have um a cashback right that this smart contract will provide as soon as this is it open right and the the dow actually can found can fund this smart contract without growth in the middle right. So you can see, for example, if the dao approves to give. I don't know 100khz. This is a smart contract.

M

It's a smart contract with monitor, who is open, uh opening a vault in d5 saver and will provide a cashback to it right I mean that is a kind of decentralized uh type of integration and and and it's some form of marketing right. It means cashback and it's a a form of promotion right, uh but uh going back again to two events. In I mean in my eyes, events are like the worst thing in terms of bringing new users.

M

The most expensive I mean it is a personal opinion in my eyes, it's like the worst thing related to the cost and the cost of yeah of leads per per per user in in that regard,.

N

um For I think, also and- and uh I I've been talking with with moneta and and uh pre motion actually last week during the protocol engineering site, we thought about the liquidity, because if we are capable to increase the liquidity on layer, 2s and side chains, if we are like the stablecoin, with more liquidity everywhere automatically, we will have a lot of integrations. So that's a way to like think about how we can how we can get these integrations in a decentralized and permissionless way by raising increasing the liquidity everywhere.

N

We're thinking now doing it by by rewards uh uh like in the beginning. We thought about doing it through through maple or trufy and on a d3m, so that that that may be a one way to do it, but also, if we do it through through rewards, we could like just uh have agreements with other house or even like the protocol itself, and uh giving these rewards uh and doing airdrops to like all the wallets with with eye or increasing uh the rewards on the lp's paired with die. Things like that.

M

Yeah I mean also, as adrian said, on the chat dsr. We have a killer app and we are not using it right. I mean, I know it's difficult to provide yield, but that's the truth.

B

Cool, do you um uh do you have any other sort of overarching like high level points like something you would add on on this like list here or something like that?.

B

But just some last piece of information I should I should um you know, integrate in what I'm already.

M

Yeah, I don't know, I don't know if this is the place to talk about this. This is something related to what I post a couple of weeks ago, related to the other stellar coin, and I said that we should develop other things too, such as other forks or compound forks or dydas. I mean we had oasis debts at some point, for me was amazing, an amazing product and at some point that will bring a lot of growth too.

B

All right, okay, so I mean um so I think. First of all, I think this is really useful uh sort of very quick um brainstorm. Almost right- and I would I like, I think, like in a sense what what this really was was like a very sort of a cornerstone of trying to create a scope map of like how to even talk about what's going on with growth. What's the stuff that matters right, like here's, some people that that know something about it providing some information to to.

B

I mean to me as a voter and other voters who who hopefully um view this uh somewhat similar or otherwise, would sort of be interested in actively trying to right to sort of engage on this um area right, but so, basically, um in.

K

B

The context I mean I'll just like scroll back a little bit so.

K

In the context of like this.

B

um Yeah unfinished slide mariano.

C

And nadia sort.

J

B

As a council here right, so people that actually have the the professional experience and so the specialization then talking about, what's the what's the what's, the big deal right um and that's really sort of like, I think I see this sort of trinity of like you have the the council like the the the full-time sort of specialists, then you have the delegates that are not. You know, they're, not as specialized right but they're, also like full-time and governance, and then you have the voters themselves.

B

Basically, um you know uh try just trying to basically figure out what's going on, so that they can make the decisions ultimately.

N

Arun, I just like thought like it's not right. I don't know if we have like right now, a car unit doing it, but but I think another part of growth. It will be the community like we, we kind of do it with discord.

N

uh We kind of do it with with twitter, but uh but I guess, like we don't have a a career unit or a strategy around how to develop the community like community as thai or vault users community, as uh developers uh working on new products on top of maker, uh and and that includes that it was something that we had in the foundation like localized groups in different parts of the world like doing meetups and education. So maybe another part of growth could be education.

N

That again, is not it's it's out of the scope of a growth core unit, but people think about about it that maybe that should be included in in the in the general growth scope.

B

Yeah absolutely so um I just want to um to basically talk about, because I mean there's a lot of stuff.

B

You guys mentioned sort of a lot of sort of brainstorming stuff, so that actually fits into different parts of the in-game plan and in mo like and I'll just go over that, like some specific examples, and because I think it's like a really good, I think it's a very useful data point because, basically and there's a lot of the things you're talking about that to me- are so important that they have a sort of a higher you know, they're not considered.

B

um You know something. That's in a scope map there's, consider something sort of above a scope right. They they're part of the scaffolding, almost the skeleton of the gameplay itself, and then, after that, we'll just do a little bit of q. A. I think I think, it'll be really useful for people just um just go back and forth a little bit on on this, with um with nadia.

C

B

Mariano um but anyway, so first there was this whole. There was this. You know you started talking about new products right and the the example of the institutional vault, and then we got into this whole. This whole universe of, like look sometimes to chase opportunities to grow demand or supply die.

B

It involves this massive coordination effort right, we're talking about protocol engineers, we're talking about um you, know getting getting in touch with counterparties and and so basically that and you know and then the um as you also said right, then that's that's obviously, once you start digging into that. It very much sounds like something like this is this sounds very complex.

B

This sounds something like you're like a metadata to do right and that's completely sort of how I you know my thinking around this right there, like there's a lot of the like all this sort of react like reactive and sort of flexible and opportunistic um sort of type of growth.

K

That is something that fundamentally just isn't.

B

Suited for the the maker call, uh because it's too slow basically right, it's too it's good! It's too busy! It's too slow! It can't and you can't do those things in a way where embryo holders actually know what's going on, and then they become unviable because of dow theory right that then, at that point it simply it it causes it sort of breaks. The fundamental feedback loop that empty holders actually have to be the ones that make the decision right, um but the solution is metadatas right and actually very concretely.

B

I mean I um m0 right. So one of these launch metadatas that I'm proposing right that the endgame plan would basically launch with these three proof of concept metadata, which is m0 and one of them two where and one of them, two they're doing rebel assets. M0 is a so-called creator dao, which is a sort of a little bit more um sort of a new concept, but basically like it's exactly a dow like an a a protocol and a decentralized organization that combines the ability to develop technology and then the ability to do.

C

B

And business and and integrations right so m0 would be- I mean, likely, would sort of take over the whole concept of institutional vaults right and and see if it's possible to to actually make it happen and steve it's possible to do it in a way. That's decentralized, um using it as a specialized governance process and so on um and.

K

Then, if it fails, if it.

B

Fails, but if it succeeds, then that's like a I mean, that's one of these really cool aspects of the in-game plan that you can now you can sort of wrap.

B

You know a token, essentially around an initiative like institutional vaults and basically attract the kind of governance participants that are interested in basically trying to figure out how to make decentralized institutional vaults work right, because now we can try to do it in a in a small small setting of an individual metadata that focuses on just that and a few other things basically um and then there's the um there was this cash back rapture.

B

I actually put that as a bullet point here, but actually cash back and rev share something, I think is so fundamental to the end game plan that that actually falls under the the ecosystem, supporting scope um in um in like uh in the nba plane, and I think it's probably not been described yet in any of the posts that have been written. But basically I mean they'll, be I'll. It'll be very described in a lot of detail tomorrow, because it's a fundamental piece of like um I mean the meta house.

B

I mean that's already been sort of described for a long time right, the metadatas themselves they operate fundamentally around, they have a front end and they get a ref share on that front end. But you also want to push that out to third parties right. We also want oasis to have that kind of deal. We also want devices, but other kind of thing on instagram, assuming that they follow some kind of I mean, there's some.

B

You know they sort of fit into the the the sort of the box of the the kind types of ecosystems we want to actually be driving our growth.

B

But I just think that's like a really that's another important point to make right that, like this is such a fundamental piece like a rev share, is just such a powerful tool that um I don't think it should even be like. Like I mean, the growth aspect of red share is simply encouraging people to sign up for it right, but there there needs.

B

There are multiple sort of pieces in in place, and it's just such a yeah fundamental thing that that it's, I think, it's sort of it's a really um like a sort of a cornerstone piece of of a growth approach, and then there's, of course also then there's the die savings rate uh and this sort of the ability to directly incentive. I mean just straight up sort of by users right in that sense, by providing the right rewards and that's where I think like.

B

Not only should we like not only do we need to have the dye savings rate activated because that's just such a big differentiator to have a positive return on a stable coin and sort of this risk-free yield. But what's really cool in the endgame plan? Is that because we can yield farm metadata tokens to die users, and we can basically, we can make it exclusive right, so you either choose the dice savings rate or you choose to yield metadata tokens.

B

Then what that actually means is that the yield that we can provide on the metadata tokens can actually boost the die savings rate right because you, basically, if not you know, if you get a higher yield on on the farming metadata tokens where you die, then more users are going to switch over to that, and that means you can now offer a higher tie savings rate, knowing that not all of the users will be taking advantage of it right.

B

So you could even be doing a one-to-one like you could have a die savings rate, that's equivalent to um what maker is earning on its collateral and it would still be profitable because not every outstanding die would be taking advantage of that of the die savings rate. So.

K

This I mean, I think it's another.

B

Another really crucial piece and- and I mean I think all of these um you know all of these uh facts- are sort of important to consider in the context of what exactly is the sort of the growth scope map itself like what are the the workforce supposed to be doing right, because I mean a lot of these. Things should really be sort of built in at the high at the top level. Right, um okay, I mean we're over time, but let's just uh see, if there's any more final thoughts about this.

N

I I would like to understand, like after we define the scope map. What's next.

B

um So uh like in the conte in the end game plan, I mean this is something I'll be talking about tomorrow, but we're sort of um like so and like there's like so in the indian plane like you, can't really define the scope map before you have on board of the council, essentially right so and and we're not really supposed to like we, you know we need to take it slow.

B

We can't do all these these things at once, so um the whole concept of like creating these new these councils and this sort of new type of this core unit that has greater sort of balance of power and separation of powers. That is not really meant to happen until um later on in the indian plane.

B

Actually right so that's you know, so we're not going to launch the governor of metadaws initially simply because it relates to kind of sort of a fundamental governance reorganization, but basically um so so it would sort of happen in reverse, in the sense that we would first launch the creator dials and the reform analysis that do the actual work right. So so in you know in this.

B

In this context, right so the the created house and reformat house actually what's kind of funny- is this actually fits to sort of the exact sort of this is what the launch of um in-game plane looks like right, that there's going to be six mega dials two two created outs, two reform allows and two governor dallas right and then what we and we create the created house and reformed us first, um but initially they focus on their standalone uh operations right.

B

So they're not gonna, be sort of interfering in a sense with the the governance of of maker itself and operating maker itself. So maker itself would keep running with the same kind of um framework as today, which is you just have a core unit right, you don't have a council, but then once we get the government house up and running, then basically we get this council together. The council I mean the council would then propose the first actual sort of canonical version of the um the scope map and then once that's in place.

B

That's when you can then start to you know that can be then be used for to have core units engage with create a house and reformat us um to actually do work right. So I mean just some some random example right. You could have a uh you. Can you put in place this growth scope map and, of course, like we iterate like we, we've been having conversations about it for a year at that point, or even two years at that point, um and then it it it both.

B

Has that aspect you know it has uh like. um You know, advertisement campaigns in like billboard, advertisement campaigns or something like that right and then you have a basically a co-unit that that, basically, you know receives the budget and have you know our you know basically commit to execute on this.

B

This element of uh let's do some real world billboard advertisement campaigns and then they basically go out and um and and ask them. I mean we'll ask all the amenities, but particularly the reformed house, because they're sort of the obvious choice to do this right, because they're, the they're, the the dows that interact with the real world, and then they get these these bits from the reformer, diaz and let's go and do a billboard advertisement campaign and ultimately, which one they they choose. First of all, then gets gets.

B

You know that's guided by this framework and the scope map, but also whether or not the work that then actually gets delivered. Whether that is actually I mean whether that has delivered the result that was promised or not, and if it hasn't delivered the result. That was probably not that's where it gets into this concept of the results guarantee that basically maker has like uh make her sort of overpaying for services for metadatas, because mega girls has a right to. Basically, um uh you know levy a penalty in case.

B

uh What the metadata promised would happen didn't actually happen, and that- and I mean how that actually, you know how that plays out in reality is something it's so important that you have as much clarity as possible in the scope map. So that's really like in the end. That's what the scope maps I'm really really going to be so concerned about is like what does it mean to say, I'm going to do x and then fail to do that and what should be the consequences of that like? That's. That's really!

B

um That's how it gets sort of very concrete right in these conversations like it's basically about giving meredith clarity around what is it like? What kind of promises are safe for them to make because they know that if they fail to hit it, what exactly does it mean right and as as much as possible?

B

You want to avoid this sort of unknown outcome where, if something had you know we're not really sure exactly what's gonna happen and- and we might be in a situation where maker will react much more like major governance will react much more um severely to some kind of shortfall than what the metadata expects.

B

Not sure, if that is, uh that makes sense. If that's two sort of deep into uh meta.

K

B

Down to dow interactions, but uh but yeah, like I mean we, it's not like, we can define the scope work in the like the scope map in the short run and use that sort of meaningfully. We can use it abstractly right. That means useful in general as a conversation right, but the actual sort of way it's used concretely in the in-game plan is it is, is something that only really goes into false attack. Actually, the later stages of its its implementation.

B

Okay, let's just go through all the last everyone's got the hand up. Now, let's go through that and then let's call it.

E

All right so since we're over time doesn't make it quick, but I do think that we should talk about like strategic happiness as as well as events and also I'm curious about some of my feedback or um in a comment from nadia and the growth team. About like what the team thinks about potential merging or as well as like runestone. You know as well, because this.

C

Call was supposed.

E

To also cover that, but I think that we might not have enough.

A

Time so I just want to cover that.

B

N

I don't know rooney if you want to talk about that, but if, if you want like, we can spend a couple of extra minutes to to talk about it or yeah tomorrow, I don't know it's up to you.

B

Yeah I mean, I actually think I think. Let's not, I don't. I don't think I mean we it's meaningful to sort of get into concretely the question of how we sort of practically.

B

uh You know like um right, like what what's the actual sort of the yeah the practical question around this, but I think in the theoretical question, um like sort of from a theoretical perspective right, I really think it's like a matter of of um you can sort of think about what kind of activity goes into, what kind of of a box right, and so actually so, let's look at you know, so we can look at this thing.

B

We just wrote here right like what's the what's the growth, what's up, what are growth coordinates supposed to be doing right um and basically we create. We have this little scope map, that's saying: well, we want some website stuff. We want some events stuff and we want some integration stuff right and then so. The idea is basically that we define that sort of to the left right and then we have coordinates and they receive budgets, and then they go out and negotiate and make it happen, basically by interacting with the meta dials right.

B

That, then, are then are they the entities that can actually deliver the work? So basically, in that context, I just you know like. I think it should be obvious that events needs to fall under, um like you know, like a coordinate, that's operating in the growth um scope right and then you could actually I mean in theory, you could have an advanced coordinate like you could have an event like you could have a coordinate that basically um operates in the growth scope, but then just specializes in events only right, but no matter.

K

B

What you want is this, like you know what I call you know: separation of powers right or whatever balance of power like you want someone who basically represents maker who, whose job is to execute and interpret the framework to then go out and and sort of understand. What do we do?

B

You know what's the objective, what are we trying to get you know and then figure out who's going to deliver it and then negotiate and pick the pick the best counterparty to do the work right from the men of the house and- and you know, and so.

C

B

Just sort of very I mean, I think I also wrote this on the on the forum right, like sort of a very, very.

B

Sort of basic way to think about what it actually should look like it's something like what currently exists at the as the events. Coordinate should actually be getting a budget from the growth coil right like the growth quantity should have the budget, and then the question is: is the is the events? Would they then like? Would they eventually be what the growth coin is going to spend their money? What would they do differently if they're, the ones sort of um responsible for the overall um you know like like executing based on the scope?

B

That's been defined, so you sort of separate right, like who's who's representing maker, basically in terms of what we want to see happen and sort of advising governance and what actually to take and then who's doing the work.

B

um But then the actual process of that- let's not get into that now um and let's take let's take one more question: if there's anything else and then let's, let's call it.

B

I'm trying to figure out how yeah it looks like there's no hints right, so I think we're good um yeah. If there's nothing else, I mean I I had a. I had some more stuff I wanted to to get into. Like a I mean, I really wanted to get into this whole thing about, like symbols, die in game versus metadata in game, but basically, um what I think is just I mean I just one very quick thing: that's just important to keep in mind is basically that, um from the perspective, like I mean yeah,.

K

B

You know in the from the in-game perspective, these are basically the two outcomes we need to consider right. So that's what what I said in the beginning that like um we need to fit in whatever we think about budgets need to fit in into one of these two outcomes in the context of the of the in-game dbc right and basically, obviously we I mean that might change based on on a very sort of clear sort of collaborative approach of like digging into what are these two.

B

You know what does these two outcomes look like and then how could be modified with better ideas but sort of fundamentally taking a different approach that doesn't start with? With I mean it doesn't start from the same first principles that would you know that would require a completely different dvc right, because that would be sort of an entirely sort of competing vision. Basically, um but again, I think it's been super helpful and useful to get this this budget plan and I'm definitely gonna work on.

B

How can we, how can we view it in the context of each of these two outcomes and especially in the sort of the metadata and the clustering process, and all this good stuff that is ultimately gonna help us like try to sort of reinvent.

K

B

The organization works to to something that's going to be super powerful long run all right.

B

So with that, let's call it a two two hours, dvc um yeah a little bit over time as usual, but uh thanks for showing up again and uh tomorrow, we've got another really big and important one where we will actually be digging into to the same kind of stuff and really moving on from here.

B

All right thanks everyone. I think we can start the recording all right.

A

Thank you for joining us, we'll hope to see you tomorrow. Thanks.