►
From YouTube: Governance & Risk Meeting #229 | March 9th, 2023
Description
*Governance & Risk Meeting No. 229*
March 9th, 2023
*Description*
_The Governance & Risk Meeting is an open, weekly MakerDAO forum for updates and discussions on the general operations and planned changes to the DAO._
*Agenda and Timestamps*
0:00 Intro, Guidelines & Agenda
2:01 Current Votes & MIPs – Overview
5:42 Voter Portal Security – Initiative Update
9:39 Maker Constitution – Discussion
*Links*
Weekly MIPs Update No. 128 – https://forum.makerdao.com/t/weekly-mips-update-128/20070
Polling – https://vote.makerdao.com/polling
Executive – https://vote.makerdao.com/executive
*Disclaimer*
_This communication is provided for information purposes only. The views and opinions expressed in this meeting are those of people involved and do not reflect the official policy or position of MakerDAO or any of its contributors, Core Units, or affiliates. This communication makes no representations about the enduring accuracy of the information or its appropriateness for a given situation. This content is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as legal, business, investment, financial, or tax advice. You should consult your own advisers as to those matters. References to any digital assets and the use of finance-related terminology are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute any recommendation for any action or an offer to provide investment, financial, or other advisory services._
https://mips.makerdao.com
https://forum.makerdao.com
https://chat.makerdao.com
A
All
right,
hello,
everyone
and
welcome
I'm,
really
excited
to
be
hosting
the
229th
governance
and
recall
here
at
make
a
dial.
My
name
is
Peyton
I
go
by
Pros
11
online
and
I
am
one
of
the
governance
faciliters
I'm
joined
by
a
bunch
of
awesome
maker
contributors,
other
ecosystem
actors
and
people
who
are
interested
in
how
the
maker
system
has
functioned
yeah-
and
this
is
our
weekly
Government
Center
School
you're,
a
first
timer.
This
might
be
new
So
I
entered
benefit,
but
reading
season.
A
Folks,
I'm
sure
you've
heard
this
review
before
this
is
an
open
call
right.
We
really
do
encourage
people's
participation.
Questions
comments
surfacing
debate
that
we
can
then
revisit
later
on
the
Forum.
So
a
few
ground
rules
that'll
help
us
achieve
that.
Let's
avoid
talking
over
one
another.
These
reactions,
such
as
the
race
and
feature.
Let
me
know
if
you
want
to
hop
on
the
mic
and
also
always
just
drop
your
question
and
comment
in
the
chat
and
I'll
try
to
work
it
in
when
conversationally
appropriate,
I'll.
A
Try
to
introduce
you
sometimes
I
forget,
sometimes
I,
don't
recognize
here,
Zoom
Avatar
name.
So
if
you
haven't
been
introduced
and
if
you
can
help
me
out
and
do
that,
that'll
make
it
easier,
but
for
people
that
don't
know
you
and
for
anyone
watching
later
on,
recording
and
yeah.
Please
really
do
ask
questions.
This
is
Meant
To,
Be,
An,
Open
goal
as
usual,
we'll
start
with
going
over
the
votes
and
what
is
happening
in
the
land
of
mips.
A
A
We
did
have
two
quick
little
weekly
polls
that
passed
one
for
the
ratification
Poll
for
Phoenix,
Labs
funding
and
the
other
for
decreasing
the
rocket
belief
just
parameter,
so
we
will
be
working
those
into
an
upcoming
executive
advocacy
below.
We
do
not
have
one
scheduled
for
next
week,
so
we're
probably
looking
at
the
22nd
on
on
those.
A
We
do
need
a
bit
of
help
I'm
passing
its
current
executive.
If
you
support
it,
so
do
take
a
look
at
that.
I've
got
the
long
list
of
changes
there.
Some
important
stuff,
including
budgets,
parameter
changes,
delegate
compensation
all
that
good
stuff.
There
was
around
50
000
mkr
supporting
last
type
check,
which
means
we
still
didn't
either
several
tens
of
thousand
Board
of
mkr
to
pass
it
before
that
can
go
on
chain
or
I
can
execute.
Rather
all
right.
That
is
enough
battling
for
me.
B
That's
correct,
hello,
everyone,
a
long
time
to
see
all
of
you
with
a
new
nips
update.
As
Peyton
just
mentioned,
we
had
on
one
short
notification
ball
for
the
Phoenix
Labs
initial
funding,
which
went
on
chain
and
Monday
in
closed
today
and
it
was
ratified
so
50
000
are
going
to
be
allocated
for
the
initial
Felix
labs.
B
Moving
on
the
performance
submission
window
closed.
Today
we
are
looking
to
have
18
I,
think
ratification
balls
going
up
on
Monday
and
running
for
two
weeks.
So,
let's
see
what
those
are.
We
have
a
MIP
4c2.
That
is
an
amendment
to
expand
the
facilitator
definition
to
allow
entities
building
of
that
one.
We
have
entities
applying
to
be
composed
materials
for
protocol
engineering
and
for
risk,
prototype
labs
and
ba
labs,
and
one
further
facilitator
onboarding
for
Rachel
to
facilitate
a
collateral,
Engineering
Services.
We
have
multiple
Community
budgets.
B
We
have
a
vault
setting
adjustment
proposal
for
me,
92.
That
is
the
web
that
on
boards
PSM
usdc
to
German,
we
have
MIP
101
through
me,
114,
which
make
up
the
medical
competition
map
said.
Sorry
plus
me
102
seat
usb1,
which
is
going
to
be
bundled
in
the
ratification
pole
for
it
mid
one
O2
C2
sp1
is
an
amendment
map
that
introduces
a
large
number
of
changes.
B
Finally,
we
have
a
Monday
change
for
size
stream
motion
Services,
which
is
also
changing
its
name
to
sidestream
Automation
Services.
These
proposals
will
have
the
ratification
balls
going
on
sharing
on
Monday,
13
and
running
for
two
weeks
and
yep.
That's
it
for
me
a
shorter
than
usual
presentation.
I
hope.
You
all
appreciate
that.
Thank
you.
A
Awesome
much
appreciated
Pablo.
Obviously
it's
going
to
be
a
super
busy
polling
week,
starting
on
Monday
I.
Do
recommend
people
start
checking
out
both
as
soon
as
they're,
able,
if
they're
planning
on
voting
awesome
and
that
will
bring
us
into
our
initiative,
updates
really
happy.
Dennis
van
Ducks
agreed
to
come
on
I'm
such
a
short
notice
to
talk
about
some
updates
that
they
put
on
the
Forum
yesterday
Dennis
you
on
the
call
yeah
for.
C
A
C
If
there's
any
issue
at
all,
yeah
feel
free
to
reach
out
there
and
drop
some
information
and
then
yeah
technical
faults
will
be
will
be
around
shortly
to
help
so
ducks
and
Tech
ups
are
going
to
be
on
call
watching
that
channel.
Another
thing
that
we're
working
on
just
in
case
just
in
case
we
end
up
with
the
worst
case
scenario,
we're
working
on
some
documentation
on
how
to
manually
vote
using
etherscan.
C
So
in
case
the
voting
portal
is
unavailable
for,
for
some
reason,
we're
going
to
do
everything
to
make
sure
that's
not
going
to
happen,
but
in
case
that
happens,
know
that
also
makers
polling
system
is
is
on
chain.
So
you
can
interact
with
the
with
the
polling
contract
on
chain
and
then
you
can
submit
your
vote
and
then
that
vote
will
be
registered
on
the
blockchain.
C
Even
if
the
voting
portal
is
down
so
expect
that
post
to
be
shared
today,
we'll
share
it
in
this
forum
thread
that
Peyton
is
now
showing
on
your
screen.
We'll
also
drop
it
in
the
voting,
support,
Channel
and
we'll
make
sure
to
add
some
links
to
the
voting
portal
as
well.
For
future
reference
yeah,
that's
all
for
now.
A
Awesome
we
really
appreciate
the
update,
Dennis
and
I
know
this.
It
seems
dumb,
but
sometimes
it's
hard
to
find
channels
and
Discord.
So
if
you
are
looking
for
that,
it's
under
the
working
tab
and
the
channel
name
again
is
already
support,
so
huge
thanks
to
Dex
Tech
Ops,
all
the
collaborations
that
are
going
on.
There
really
really
appreciate
that.
Thank
you
making
sure
our
infrastructure
is
safe
and.
A
With
voting
for
for
polls
just
to
see
how
it
works
here,
etherscan
and
I
was
able
to
figure
it
out,
which
gives
me
high
hopes,
for
others
should
should
the
worst
case
scenario
happen,
but
yeah
obviously
we're
taking
all
the
steps
to
make
sure
that
people
can
vote
as
normal.
So
there
aren't
any
unexpected
hiccups
along
the
way.
A
A
A
Okay,
so
that'll
bring
us
to
our
discussion
segment
as
I
was
telling
those
of
you
who
joined
the
call
earlier
today,
not
sure
how
much
this
group
wants
to
discuss.
There
are
obviously
in-game
focused
calls
three
times
a
week,
usually
for
several
hours,
but
given
that
the
vote
is
about
to
come
up
and
kavalpa
is
always
answering
lots
of
questions
just
in
general
on
on
voting
matters,
we
figured
it
would
be
good
to
operative
space.
A
If
people
did
want
to
discuss
any
questions
they
solve
about
the
maker
Constitution,
that's
going
up
or
just
generally
any
any
kind
of
governance
related
points.
Obviously,
on
runes
in-game
calls
that's
kind
of
a
a
much
more
pointed
audience
right.
It's
a
group
of
people
that
are
gathering
to
hear
and
discuss
about
the
in-game
plans
through
through
the
decentralized
voter
committees.
A
You
know
our
job
has
come
out
is
to
kind
of
hold
the
space
of
the
neutral
Community
Outpost.
We're
getting
questions
answered,
we're
asking
questions
for
commenting
on
on
ways
you
you
are
noticing
how
the
the
protocol
is
operating,
and
maybe
you
want
to
a
more
insight
into
so
I
think
it's
important
that
we
offer
this
space.
A
Should
anyone
have
any
questions
about
the
maker
Constitution
or
anything
further
that
they
want
to
discuss,
but
I
also
do
understand
if
there's
a
lot
of
fatigue
around
the
subject,
but
hopefully
that
gives
you
some
idea
on
why
I
still
decided
to
go
forward
with
it
and
yeah
I
would
just
open
the
floor.
People
have
questions
if
they
want
to
make
statements
on
on
how
they
plan
to
be
voting
on
the
Constitution.
A
That
might
be
a
great
way
to
kick
off
a
topic
as
well,
but
yeah
I'll
sweep
the
floor
and
shut
up
for
a
few
moments
and
see
if
anyone
pipes
up
yeah
absolutely
seen
a
comment
from
trying
to
research,
one
of
our
recognized
delegates
about
talking
about
actual
next
steps.
Okay,
if
this
thing
were
the
best,
what
will
happen?
There's,
obviously
a
a
huge
chunk
of
of
change
that
gets
implemented
but
kind
of
the
the
most
immediate
effects?
A
I
I
would
say,
is
kind
of
the
suspended
enough
of
the
previous
governance.
Paradigm
right,
like
the
the
main
effect
of
in-game,
is
to
say:
okay,
no
more
mips.
Instead,
we're
gonna
go
through
these
Scopes
we're
gonna
fund
things
like
this,
and
this
is
how
it's
gonna
happen
or
several
core
units
right.
They
have
budgets
that
are
that
are
going
up
if
in-game
passes.
Basically
instructs
Governors
facilitators
to
to
ignore
all
the
other
ones
that
might
pass,
but
in
game
itself
does
have
several
line.
A
Item
funding
items
so
in
terms
of
what
happens
immediately,
is
probably
sorting
that
out
getting
those
all
into
an
exec
and
making
sure
that
the
dictated
funding
streams
are
are
available
for
for
people
that
need
them,
but
kind
of,
like
I,
said
the
the
main
shift
in
in
terms
of
the
community.
Like
you
go
from
having
one
set
of
rules
for
how
you
apply,
government
changes
to
do
anything
and
we
can
spend
quite
a
while
detailing
those
but
I
think
that's
at
least
high
level.
A
What
what
the
most
important
thing
to
grasp
is
is
that,
if
in
game
passes
both
the
mips
that
are
going
up
with
it
as
well
as
eucharists
our
future
proposals
in
this
case,
we'll
we'll
be
dictated
through
the
Scopes
rather
than
through
the
map
zero
framework
that
people
are
used
to
I've,
seen
some
good
questions
in
chat.
Did
anyone
want
to
vocalize
those,
if
not
I'm,
happy
to
read
them
out.
D
Yeah
so
I,
you
know
I
think
as
a
community.
We
need
to
look
at
the
state
of
the
industry
right
now.
The
ecosystem,
and
it's
just
it's
not
much
happening
I-
think
there
was
a
second
there.
We
felt
that
there
was
a
little
bit
of
momentum
going,
but
now
you're,
seeing
just
you
know
outside
of
what
happened
with
silvergate
the
last
24
hours.
It
just
I,
just
don't
see
any
attraction
to
the
ecosystem
happening
even
being
at
East
Denver.
D
All
great
things
happening
a
lot
of
stuff
on
zero
knowledge
proves
which
you
love
to
see.
You
know
CK
EVMS,
galores,
I
can't
even
count
them
anymore,
so
I
think,
since
we
are
in
crypto
winter
and
maybe
perhaps
we
might
have
gotten
a
little
gullible
over
the
last
30
days
that
we're
gonna
work
our
way
out
of
it
and
interest
rates
are
going
to
finally
calm
down
and
stay
flat,
or
at
least
retract.
D
Maybe
this
is
just
the
time
to
make
the
pivot
and
embrace
the
maker
Constitution
as
something
that
is
going
to
help
us
go
to
the
next
phase
of
decentralized
finance.
And
if
that's
pertains
to
what
the
maker
Constitution
is
asking
for
this
endgame
ecosystem
of
sub-dials
and
ecosystem
actors
that
are
going
to
yell
together
and
build
a
bunch
of
ecosystems
all
over
the
place.
D
That's
going
to
allow
community
members
of
maker
doubt
to
go
outside
of
the
Dow
and
even
work
for
someone
like
what
have
you
ABC
protocol
and
still
participate
in
the
maker,
thou
and
game
ecosystem.
I
mean
that's,
that's
just
huge
like
we
could
do
two
things.
We
could
stay
stagnant
and
just
wait
and
wait
and
hope
that
you
know
money
comes
back
into
D5,
but
I
just
don't
see
it.
D
Man,
like
the
the
doors,
are
just
closing
everywhere
and
it's
time
to
iterate
on
what
was
built
already
in
2020
2021,
and
just
do
it
better
and
just
make
it
more
more
friendlier
and
hopefully
get
some
of
that
that
real
world
money
to
come
back
to
to
defy
the
way
it
was
starting
to
gain
that
Traction
in
2021.
You
know,
I
was
reading.
I
was
reading
today,
an
article
on
how
fixed
rate
protocols
were
going
to
be
the
next
big
thing.
D
E
Oh
yes,
and
thank
you
in
a
prank
for
your
comment.
I
do
want
to
also
touch
on
the
part
that
Frank
mentioned.
You
know,
being
united
I.
Think
it's
very
important
to
kind
of
understand
that
being
united.
You
know
it
doesn't
mean
that
you
have
to
be
the
same
person
right.
The
idea
of
you
know
people
with
the
different
ideas,
maybe
some
deeper
ideals,
but
they
unite
in
the
poor.
A
I
did
see
a
thread
and
you're
asking
like
how
exactly
the
implementation
will
happen,
given
all
the
dictated
and
like
budget
changes
like
stream
authorizations
all
that
stuff
and
yeah,
we
are
kind
of
fully
expecting
to
split
it
into
multiple
execs,
like
we'll,
obviously
see
when
it
comes
down
to
it
exactly
what
is
possible,
but
you
know
part
of
the
intangible.
The
difficulty
with
with
governance
facilitating
is
when
Governor
says
hey.
We
want
to
do
all
this
stuff,
and
then
you
have
a
limited
team
that
can
actually
code
that
stuff.
A
You
have
to
negotiate
like
okay.
What
are
we
going
to
prioritize
first
and
then
you
also
have
block
limitations
if
you
are
doing
a
whole
bunch
of
complex
actions
which
unfortunately
tends
to
be
the
case
any
time
you're
you're
messing
with
with
streams
that
already
exist
in
the
wild,
because
yeah
they're,
just
all
sorts
of
things
that
can
happen
between
when
you're
planning,
to
write
it
and
and
when
the
spell
actually
gets
executed.
Then
I'm
sure
PE
could
detail
better
than
I.
A
F
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
thank
do
for
those
comments,
because
I
think
that's
I
think
that's
going
to
be
really
important,
because
this
is.
We
expect
this
to
be
a
really
contentious
vote,
and
you
know
we
it's
no
secret.
We
will
be
opposing
it
and
be
working
to
get
others
to
oppose
it
as
well,
but
we
do
share
Do's.
Do
thoughts
that,
regardless
of
the
outcome,
people
should
should
move
on
right.
So
we
think
this
is
an
unworkable
Constitution.
We
think
it's
bad
like
there's.
A
Thanks
paper
and
I
will
say
his
governance
facilitator.
That's
something!
That's
always
been
really
incredible
to
me.
It's
witnessing
just
how
much
faith
and
the
government's
vote
to
exist
in
the
community
right.
It
makes
it
much
easier
to
operate
governance
when
when
people
are
very
willing
to
to
trust
the
process-
and
you
know
honor,
the
results
so
really
appreciate
commitment
son
on
both
sides
to
that
fitting
into
it.
The
likely
controversial
vote.
A
High
risk
of
fatigue
on
the
subject,
but
we
do
want
to
give
the
space
for,
for
those
that
want
to
take
it
so
yeah,
we'll
give
a
call
that
if
no
one
says
anything
for
a
few
minutes
we'll
go
ahead
and
end
the
call.
But
if
there
are
questions
concerns
things
you
want
to
talk
about
before
the
vote
starts
this.
This
is
you
know,
there's
this
there's
a
TVC
call
later
today,
but
after
that
the
vote
goes
live
on
Monday
in
less
for
two
weeks.
D
Yeah
I
kind
of
kind
of
wanted
to
mention
that
I
did
hear
a
couple
of
dials
and
while
in
East
Denver
are
also
have
also
I,
can't
remember
the
names
I
apologies
for
that,
but
have
have
already
instituted
Constitution.
So
this
is
you
know.
This
is
not
something
groundbreaking
here.
That's
happening
and
while
I
agree
with
paper
that
the
constitution
might
not
be
perfectly
written
or
the
eyes
are
dotted
the
teaser
crossed,
there
is
ways
for
you
to
ratify
it
and
MIP
102
is
still
going
to
be
around
right.
D
So
a
lot
of
things
that
are
going
to
initially
not
be
correct
or
align
with
the
mission
statement
of
the
Constitution
can
can
be
ratified
later
on.
So
I
I'm
not
worried
about
that,
but
just
wanted
to
point
out
that
and
maybe
Peyton,
maybe
you
remember
some
folks.
You
met
out
there
but
I'm
pretty
sure.
There's
a
couple
of
them
that
in
the
last
three
to
six
months
of
Institute
have
implemented
I
should
say
a
constitution
into
their
dials.
So
this
is
not
groundbreaking
whatsoever.
In
my
opinion,.
A
Yeah
I
am
literally
not
sure
on
the
timing,
but
we
did
they're
the
cool
governance
Meetup,
where
it
was
like
entirely
focused
on
on
constitutions.
Right
then
how
to
fill
fill
a
good
one
like
what
they're,
based
on
we
heard
some
feedback
from
like
bankless.
Was
there
talking
about
how
you
know
the
Constitution
has
and
and
hasn't
served
served
them,
but
yeah.
It
does
seem
to
be
a
growing
theme
among
a
lot
of
organizations
just
to
have
kind
of
a
supreme
thing
to
describe
it.
G
Thanks
Peyton
hi
everyone,
I
I,
just
wanted
to
encourage
those
who
are
deciding
on
the
vote
to
think
about
the
many
many
many
people
who
are
not
necessarily
participating
vocally
in
the
debate
so
I
know.
A
lot
of
this
has
been
framed
as,
like.
You
know
what
roon
has
done
and
seizing
control,
and
then
the
whales
and
what
whales
are
afraid
of
losing
their
influence
and
I
I
just
want
to
give
a
shout
out
to
all
the
hours
that
have
gone
into
this
moment
and
people
who
are
unseen,
who
who
actually
have
contributed
to
shaping?
G
What's
coming
up
for
the
vote
and
that
to
vote
against
the
Constitution,
and
many
of
you
know
that
acre
vest
was
very
combative,
voted
against
anything
to
do
with
endgame
at
every
turn.
Last
year
we
even
started
to
abstain
during
we
just
threw
a
tantrum
and
we
stopped
voting.
You
know
all
our
participation,
metrics
tanks,
and
we
you
know,
all
of
that
so
I
hope
it
I,
don't
know
if
it
means
anything
to
those
who
are
opposed
today.
G
I
just
want
to
say,
you
know
obviously
I
get
that,
but
I
also
think
that,
where
we
are
now
in
March
of
2023,
a
lot
of
people
have
left
the
community.
You
know
the
ones
who
are
left
just
personally
want
to
applaud
you
and
for
those
who
want
to
vote
against
the
Constitution.
You
know
to
Frank's
point:
there's
there
there's
a
mechanism
to
just
continue
to
make
the
more
granular
changes
of
the
things
that
one
may
think
are
broken.
G
G
So
that's
my
plug
for
maybe
seeing
something
very
surprising,
which
is
all
of
those
who
are
thinking
of
voting
against
actually
unifying
and
saying.
Okay,
we
hate
this,
but
we're
voting
for
it
because
we're
voting
for
the
work
that's
gone
into
it.
We're
voting
for
coming
together
as
a
project
and
that
that
show
of
strength
and
unity
is
gonna.
You
know
accrue
much
much
more
value
in
the
short,
medium
and
long
term
than
a
kind
of
pyrrhic
victory
of
you
know
wrecking
the
whole
project.
That's
brought
us
to
this
point.
F
I
think
the
time
for
that
passed
we
have
this
is
a
constitution.
Let's
make
no
mistake,
it
was
written
by
one
man
who
holds
a
lot
of
maker
and
has
continued
by
you
know
more
than
10
million
dollars
worth
of
maker
ahead
of
this
vote,
rather
than
seeking
out
support
from
other
maker
holders.
The
chance
to
compromise
was
in
the
past.
I
would
love
to
return
to
an
environment
where
compromise
is
possible,
but
the
signals
have
been
consistently
that
it's
his
way
or
the
highway,
and
that
is
you
know.
F
F
All
these
things
will
be
filled
in
next
month,
right
as
opposed
to
here's,
a
random
number
I'm
going
to
throw
down
because
I
think
it's
it's
a
round
number
or
it's
the
one
I
think
should
be
it
and
then,
after
things
break,
you
can
try
to
push
through
proposals
that
will
fix
these
things.
Some
things
some
things
are
like
Humpty
Dumpty.
They
can't
be
put
back
together,
paper.
G
G
I
have
offered
to
sit
down
with
roon
like
why
that
that
is
also
challenging
framing
in
which
to
sort
of
offer
an
alternative,
and
so
I
I
just
wanted
to
I
mean
I
I
acknowledge
all
of
what
you're
saying,
but
I
I
want
to
push
back
a
little
bit
on
the
idea.
I
get
the
dictator
thing
and
the
roon
radio
thing
I
mean
I've
been
critical
about
that
as
well,
but
we
also
a
part
of
that
Dynamic
that's
occurred.
Is
that
a
lot
of
people
just
really
cannot
speak
out
like
the
Dynamics.
Are
too
political?
G
You
know
Community
participatory
conversation,
so
that
so
I
I
just
want
to
make
that
point
and
and
and
really
try
and
speak
or
or
highlight
that
there
are
voices
here
and
there's
been
work
done
and
contributions
made
and
it's
not
visible
and
it's
it's
been
made.
I
think
you
know
other
comments
yesterday
in
the
call
retro
speed
presentation
at
East
Denver,
which
is
you
know,
I,
think
really
articulated
well
like
the
damage
that
the
politics
have
done
and
the
silencing
effect
that
it's
had
and
that's
like.
That's
not
only
roon.
G
That's
also
I
think
the
way
the
recognized
delegate
program
has
unfolded
as
well,
so
I
just
think,
there's
just
many
more
opinions
than
than
we
can
even
hear,
because
it
just
would
be
unwise
and
unsafe,
as
we've
seen
for
people
in
the
workforce
and
that's
primarily
who's
here
right
as
Frank
was
speaking
about
the
crypto
winter.
We're
in,
we
don't
have
too
many
people
around
who
are
just
here
for
fun.
We
have
the
people
who
are
here
kind
of
working
and,
and
so
then
that
leaves
folks
like
us
and
then
there's
there.
H
So
I
wanted
to
address
kind
of
the
big
issue.
I'm.
Seeing
with
this
constitution
in
the
discussion
is,
there's
a
lot
of
focus
on
us
on.
How
does
this
affect?
You
know
delegates?
How
does
this
affects
the
use
and
not
and
it's
taking
away
Focus
from
how
it
affects
the
protocol?
Like
you
know
when
roon
talked
about
or
when
paper
just
talked
about,
you
know
we
have
these
Partners
who
are
going
to
be
getting.
You
know
having
Partnerships
that
are
seriously
damaged
by
these
placeholder
parts
of
the
Constitution.
H
H
A
A
To
decentralized
Collateral
there's
a
number
of
changes
that'll
happen
to
real
world
assets
collateral
as
well.
You
know
all
sorts
of
things
that
are
kind
of
Uncertain.
They
stung
on
how
the
vote
goes
and
and
how
much
is
worked
into
the
proposal
that
just
kind
of
caused
me
to
reflect
on
the
core
unit
side
that
a
lot
of
people
have
been
struggling
and
complaining
about
that
uncertainty
as
well,
because
it's
this
idea
of
like
if
people
know
what
the
rules
are,
then
they
can
cohort
and
play
with
the
rule.
A
But
in
a
time
when
rules
are
changing,
it
becomes
a
lot
harder
to
to
trust
that
there's
people
going
to
be
followed
through
afterwards.
No
I
appreciate
that
comment.
So
nine
and
kind
of
made
me
reflect
about
like
operationally.
Like
you
know,
maybe
there
are
a
few
things
we
can.
We
can
do
better
in
any
big
big
governance
vote,
but
particularly
the
the
uncertainty
I
think
took
a
toll
on
on
all
stakeholders
with
this
one.
A
Did
I
see
a
good
question
from
water
I'll
get
to
in
a
moment,
but
did
want
to
bring
up
the
GNR
on
Patrick
I
mentioned
that
earlier,
and
it
kind
of
came
up
again
in
the
chat
with
kyonga's
comment.
That
is
like
another
change
that
didn't
feel
as
important
in
the
grand
scheme
of
things,
but
it's
probably
super
relevant
to
this
audience
that
one
of
the
things
the
Constitution
does
as
well
is
kind
of
gets
rid
of
this.
A
This
weekly
governance
and
risk
call,
and
that's
because
instead
it
will
be
the
Scopes
people
who
are
actually
strategizing
and
trying
to
come
together
and
discuss
what
should
be
done,
but
that'll
kind
of
be
holding
the
calls.
Obviously,
what's
really
cool
about
a
decentralized
org
is
like
we
can
still
hold
the
GNR.
A
If
we
wanted
to
write
it,
it
may
not
be
an
official
one,
but
if
community
members
want
to
get
together
and
talk
about
all
the
issues
every
week
like
there's,
there's
no
stopping
you,
but
it
does
kind
of
remove
that
formal
requirement.
That's
okay,
the
governor's
facilitator
and
all
these
other
people
have
to
come
and
make
announcements
and
do
that
sort
of
thing
for
for
the
GNR,
it's
worth
kind
of
like
calling
that
out
and
implementations
there
too,.
A
A
Cool
so
yeah
that
is
kind
of
the
hard
part
of
the
question
that
Mom
points
out.
It's
like
the
day
of
the
day,
depending
on
what
role
you
take,
It's
Gonna,
Change,
quite
a
bit,
but
for
roon's
perspective,
I
I
would
kind
of
provide
that
he
sees
this
as
kind
of
like
pushing
the
day-to-day
to
be
in
game
Focus
right,
whereas
like
right
now
we
had
the
the
like
pretty
pretty
game.
I
guess
we
could
call
it
now
vote
back
in
October
that
kind
of
said.
A
I
My
question
nicely
relates
to
the
specific
values
of,
for
example,
the
parameters
that
are
in
the
scope,
Frameworks
I
would
guess
it
is
specifically
those
that
cause
concern
in
the
in
the
short
term
so
for
those
I
I
think
you
know.
In
any
case,
there
is
too
much
in
the
Constitution
and
the
scope
Frameworks
to
implement
everything
from
day
one.
I
So
priorities
will
have
to
be
set
anyway
and
an
easy
way
to
alleviate
the
concerns
might
be
to
Simply
focus
on
the
the
high
level
framework.
First.
Have
those
cbc's
convene
have
their
subcommittees
convene
do
another
read
through
of
the
of
the
scope,
Frameworks
and
then
before
the
individual
scope.
Frameworks
are
implemented.
I
I
have
another
vote
to,
for
example,
tweak
those
parameters
that
are
problematic
as
yeah
I
guess
it
depends
on
how
you
interpret
what
what
the
mkr
vote
means
like
whether
you
can
do
that
or
not,
but,
as
I
said,
like
the
the
Practical
reality
is
that
it
will
have
to
prioritize
anyway,
and
so
why
not
change
like?
Why
not
start
with
the
with
the
correction
mechanisms
first
and
then
apply
already
one
round
of
that
to
the
individual
parameter,
values,
I
think
yeah
I
think
it
will
be.
I
A
I
think
that
is
a
cool
approach.
I
think,
like
all
else
being
equal,
we've,
probably
approach
it.
The
same
way
we
do
today,
which
is
like
okay,
let's
look
at
what
governance
is
approved.
Let's
work
at
what
work
is
done
and,
let's
look
at
you
know
what
interactions
is
left
of
the
work
that
that
still
needs
to
be
done.
A
You
know
and
and
the
reality
at
least
in
terms
of
how
we
in
the
past
process
complex,
like
a
need
for
Change
Would,
potentially
be
to
have
a
an
elected
facilitator,
say:
hey
MK
are
governance
voted
for
this?
We
should
Implement
XYZ
first
and
that's
what
I'm
recommending
first
I
think
the
responsible
facilitator
framework
kind
of
mirrors
that
to
to
a
certain
extent,
so
at
least
my
Approach
would
probably
be
oh
if
I
was
not
giving
anything
else
by
mkr
holders
would
be
to
approach
the
scope.
A
Say:
hey
your
scope.
You
know
addicted
because
all
this
works
needs
to
be
done,
and
this
will
all
be
done
at
once
and
if
not
like
what
needs
to
be
done
first,
but
I
think
if
we
we
could
have
a
higher
level
input
of
the
correction
mechanisms
like
you
were
talking
about
water,
though
it
would
certainly
be
a
more
effective
way
to
to
roll
it
out,
because
otherwise,
we'll
just
be
rolling
out
whatever
is,
is
ready
first,
which
tends
to
be
the
the
stuff.
A
G
A
G
G
Similarly,
I
think
with
the
core
unit
office
hours.
You
know
that
forum
for
questions
discussions,
I,
don't
see
any
reason
that
has
to
change.
But
what
I
see
is
that
the
cbcs
are
designed
to
host.
You
know
whatever
the
number
is
12
meetings
a
month
or
something
like
that
and
that
to
whoever
was
commenting
that
we
spent
all
this
time
talking
about
kind
of
the
high
level
political
things,
and
we
don't
get
to
some
of
the
details.
Often
in
these
meetings
in
the
substance,
that's
in
my
mind
what
the
Constitution
solves.
G
G
People
who
want
to
do
business
with
the
Dow
are
attending
those
meetings
and
I
think
that
the
big
gap-
and
we
talked
about
this
a
little
bit
yesterday
in
the
call
Long
proposed,
like
you,
know,
the
coordination
of
some
of
the
legwork
and
heavy
lifting
of
of
keeping
track
of
the
calls,
depending
on
who
someone
is
in
the
ecosystem
like
where,
should
they
have
a
Converse
join
the
conversation
about
this
or
that?
But
in
my
mind
you
know
the
big
boost
in
you
know,
compensation
or
the
view
for
this.
G
These
newly
resourced
delegates
is
that
that's
your
opportunity
to
add
the
most
value
which
is
actually
attending
these
meetings
and
that
in
this
new
structure,
we
can
finally
kind
of
depoliticize
and
some
some
of
the
some
of
the
Dynamics,
and
instead
you
can
have
people
a
little
bit
more
aligned
who
want
to
talk
with
each
other
and
there's
more
subcommittee
groups.
Zero.
In
on
issues,
then
they're
proposed,
like
detailed
solutions
that
are
presented
in
a
context
like
that's.
The
huge,
also
I,
think
win
for
this
structure.
G
Is
that,
instead
of
being
like
reactive
to
like
all
the
stuff
that
just
flies
at
us,
and
then
we
really
can't
get
a
view
of
how
different
proposals
maybe
should
relate
with
one
another.
You
know
with
the
Scopes
you're
constantly
needing
to
see
every
proposed
change
in
a
kind
of
context,
and
so
the
delegates,
in
my
mind,
are
going
to
be
absolutely
crucial,
because
the
conversation
that
happens
in
all
the
subcommittee
meetings
would
be
like
the
mkr
representatives
and
people
wanting
to
do
business
with
the
Dow.
G
You
know
they're
not
going
to
understand
the
structure
or
like
where,
where
their
objectives
need
to
fit
within
the
framework,
and
so
that,
in
my
mind,
is
the
new
role
for
the
delegates.
It's
it's
not
to
broker
deals
or
like
help
Outsiders
position
themselves.
It's
just
literally
to
like
provide
that
service.
It's
a
very,
very
different
model,
but
I
I
think
it's
incorrect
to
say
like
suddenly,
the
delegates
have
nothing
to
do
and
can't
talk
to
anyone
they're,
just
not
to
be
these
sort
of
external
power.
A
E
There
were
some.
You
know,
questions
about
like
how
active
they
can
be
because
I
also
looked
at
the
clause
about
them.
They
cannot
be
culturally
active
in
like
in
a
certain
way,
but
I
think
that
at
least
within
CBC
you
can
still
voice
them
and
I
think
it's
very
important
for
delegates
to
be
critical.
If
needed.
You
know
within
those
TVC
right
because
I
think.
That's
especially
you
know.
If
you're
working
together,
then
usually
you
don't
want
to
give
you
know,
give
those
Critters
away.
E
A
Any
other
kind
of
reinforce
some
of
the
comments,
at
least
how
kadafa
is
interpreting
it
right.
It's
like
hey
delegates
are
mandated
to
attend
a
lot
of
these
meetings
with
other
ecosystem
actors.
So
it
seems
that
the
text
is
saying
that
any
non-public
communication
is
is
what's
being
banned
rather
than
like
Public,
Communication
and
mandated
calls,
but
yeah
well,
I'm.
Sure
the
the
like
kind
of
neat
thing
about
the
the
arbitration
scope
is
like
eventually
like
a
case
law
will
just
develop,
because
these
challenges
will
happen
right.
A
People
will
say:
hey
no
I
went
to
challenge
like
it
says
quite
clearly,
here.
No
interaction-
and
this
is
an
interaction,
so
make
a
ruling,
and
then,
unlike
now,
where
does
a
good
job
at
least
like
publicly
announcing
like
when
we
we
make
judgment,
calls
right,
I
like
to
think
that
we
do
a
good
job
of
at
least
saying
they.
You
know
who's
irritated
with
you.
A
You
might
see
why
we
decided
the
thing
that
we
did,
but
there's
no
like
developing
case
law,
there's
no
like
kind
of
body
of
work
other
than
an
Institute
from
a
memory.
So
that's
at
least
one
one
side
of
of
my
job
or
where
I
see
a
potential
Improvement
in
in-game,
where
they
scan
from
a
Wilder
Warner.
Take
it
away.
H
I
H
A
I
think
I
saw
a
good
question
in
here
from
yeah
from
fig
asking
how
many
people
will
pay
a
conclusion
with
a
DA
when
this
bathroom
hard
question
the
answer
perhaps,
but
if
people
want
to
share
their
personal
feelings,
that
would
be
welcome.
I
can
say
from
the
gov
outside
right:
I
have
been
hearing
from
from
multiple
sites,
but
a
lot
of
people
are
are
kind
of
like
happy
that
it
is
coming
to
a
vote
right.
A
Just
the
the
album
finally
have
some
clarity
of
like
okay,
there's,
there's
a
vote
by
this
date.
We'll
know
if
this
is,
you
know
who
we're
truly
leaning
in
and
committing
to
this
or
not
so
I
would
say.
Well
that
doesn't
mean
you.
You
can't
also
be
disclosed
into
anything
that
way
the
general
feedback
I've
been
getting.
Is
that
people
kind
of
feel
like
it?
You
know
this
has
been
going
on
for
a
while,
so
there
will
be
some
relief
and
finally
having
a
vote.
E
Yep
sorry
I
just
want
to
give
a
comment
that
I
don't
think,
there's
any
illusion
about
it.
To
be
honest,
because
I
think
that
we
have
realized
that
we're
here
to
in
a
healthy
protocol,
we
never
thought
that,
for
example,
the
treasury
belongs
to
us
right.
Like
you
know,
it's
are
you
supposed
to
use
for
the
protocol
and
then
you
know
the
owners.
E
You
know
themselves.
I
know
that
maybe
there
were
some.
Maybe
you
know
members
that
maybe
misunderstood
that
way,
but
it
was
never
supposed
to
be
right
and
then
I
think
that
that's
the
same
for
vision,
the
vision
is
like
sure
we
can
maybe
help
with
it,
but
at
the
in
the
end
of
the
day,
it's
really
the
orders
that
present
such
vision
and
they're
also
the
ones
that
you
know
both
form
and
I.
Don't
think
that
that's
the
part
that
we
had
been
losing
about.
I
Oh
yeah
I
did
not
mean
to
have
my
hand
raised,
but
since
no
one
else
is
talking
can
read
out
my
comments
anyway,
so
I
so
going
by
the
schedule.
I
think
that
gives
something
very
practical
to
work
with,
and
one
way
of
that
we
could
go
about.
This
from
a
practical
point
of
view
is
to
see
the
first
round
of
CBC
subcommittee
meetings
as
an
exploration
of
the
given
scope
framework
where
just
general
concerns
and
questions
are
collected,
and
then
in
the
second
round.
I
The
next
quarter
to
prepare
for
the
first
or
by
the
second
round.
I
have
the
the
first
like
concrete
strategy
prepared
with
the
with
the
changes
to
the
framework
and
then
after
those
changes,
are
voted
through
implement
the
the
actual
rules
of
the
scope
framework,
and
that
would
be
an
example
of
having
the
correction
mechanism
play
out.
First
with
I
think
somewhat
reasonable
timeline,
because
it
gives
12
weeks
12
weeks
of
preparing
any
any
practical
strategy
to
to
be
voted
on.
I
So
that
might
be
a
very
practical
way
of
approaching
it,
and
yeah
for
me,
like
I,
also
feel
that
there
is
a
huge
like
a
mismatch
between
the
way
that
the
mips
process
is
supposed
to
be
very
explicit,
then
exact
and
the
reality
that
the
only
way
to
to
interpret
the
the
myths
that
are
currently
presented
is
in
a
that's
in
a
way
more
pragmatic
fashion
and
I.
But
I
just
think.
A
I
think
that's
good
feedback
and
gives
us
something
to
to
maybe
grab
onto
because
I
think
that's
fairly
consistent
with
well
at
least
some
of
what
roon
has
right,
because
the
ecosystem
actors,
our
ecosystem,
the
incubating
ecosystem
actors,
I
believe,
is
the
correct
game.
People
that
we're
going
to
fund
through
the
ecosystem
scope,
for
instance,
if
the
Constitution
is
approved,
all
of
those
would
go
up
to
the
road
individually,
so
I
I
do
think
you
know
there
is
perhaps
like
a
hair,
more
desire
for,
like.
J
J
Essentially,
what
was
the
old
pigeon
stance,
which
is
now
something
different,
but
with
mips-
and
this
is
something
I've
said
before
as
well-
you
know
they
aren't
things
that
you're
supposed
to
rehypothecate.
After
the
fact
you
know,
if
you
don't
agree
with
what
a
MIP
says,
you
should
be
voting
against
it.
You
know
you
shouldn't
you
shouldn't
be
saying:
oh
we'll
we'll
pass
the
met
and
then
we'll
try
and
you
know
smooth
out
afterwards.
J
J
The
example
of
the
incubating
EC
system
actors
is
a
specific
portion
of
the
ecosystem
scope
and
is
the
only
instance
in
the
in
the
entire
lipset,
where
there's
a
specific
part
which
says
we
should
we
will
vote
again
on
all
of
these
things
and
again
that
was
intentional.
So
so
there's
clearly
been
thought
given
to
this
idea
of
we
can
re-hypothecate
and
reconsider
these
things
after
the
MIT
passes
and
when
that's
intended
by
the
order
to
apply
that
has
been
specified.
J
J
A
A
A
Yeah,
it's
gonna
be
a
little
bumpy,
I.
Think,
no
matter
how
we
do
it
then
you'd
say
I'm,
pretty
sure
I
speak
for
Patrick
and
myself
when
I
say
like.
We
appreciate
the
community's
trust
and
kind
of
putting
us
in
the
position
to
you
know,
be
governance,
facilitators,
and
this
is
certainly
a
hard
test
that
we
we
feel
we're
up
for
and
really
open
to
feedback
on
many
ways
we
can
be
doing
it
better.
A
All
right,
this
honestly
started
a
pretty
good
conversation.
From
my
perspective,
one
that
went
longer
than
I
was
perhaps
anticipating
I'm,
noting
that
we
do
typically
wrap
up
within
the
next
15
minutes.
So
if
there
are
other
points,
if
you
feel
like
we've
glossed
over,
something
in
chat
that
you
would
like
to
make
sure
it
makes
it
onto
the
recording.
Now
would
be
your
chance
to
do
so.
Any
last
questions,
comments
or
concerns.
Let's
get
them
into
this
and
yeah
before
we
head
on
with
the
day.
A
As
always,
we
appreciate
all
the
participation
you
guys
showing
up
and
having
these
conversations
is
what
makes
them
make
your
community
such
a
wonderful
place
to
be,
let's
continue
them
in
the
Forum
and
on
chat,
and
please
do
reach
out
to
if
you
have
any
feedback
from
today's
show
thanks.
Everyone
we'll
be
back
same
time
same
place
next
week
at
least,
and
look
forward
to
chatting
them
bye.
Everyone.