►
From YouTube: Governance and Risk Meeting: Ep. 98
Description
# Agenda
## Governance
- Richard Brown: General Q&A
- LongForWisdom: Governance at a Glance
- monet-supply & MakerMan: Vault Compensation Plan
## Smart Contracts
- Mariano Conti: Liquidations v1.1
## MIPs
- Charles St. Louis : Weekly MIPs Update
- Gov-Facilitators: Governance Cycle Review
## Risk
- Vishesh Choudry: State of the Peg
## Links
Governance and Risk Framework - Part 1: https://community-development.makerdao.com/governance/governance-risk-framework/part-one
Website: https://makerdao.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/makerdao
Forum: https://forum.makerdao.com/
Chat: https://chat.makerdao.com/home
Email: info@makerdao.com
A
A
We
have
a
jam-packed
agenda
as
usual
governess
at
a
glance
we,
so
we
have
the
the
mainstays
governance
at
a
glance.
Weekly
MIPS
update
government
cycle
review
a
state
of
the
peg.
We
have
a
presentation
from
the
smart
contracts
team
talking
about
some
of
the
tweaks
that
are
happening
to
the
liquidation
system.
That
is
going
to
be
interesting,
but
we
also
have
something
happening
today,
which
has
been
sort
of
on
a
slow
boil
for
a
long
time,
and
I
am
intensely
interested
to
you
here.
A
And
they've
done
a
great
deal
of
work
and
they've
worked
with
some
of
the
stakeholders
from
that
group
of
individuals
to
come
up
with
a
plan
about
how
the
protocol
could
compensate
those
zero
bid,
auction
individuals
they're
going
to
be
presenting
that
plan
to
us
for
the
first
time
publicly
or
at
least
in
audio-visual
form.
Today,
I
would
like
to
encourage
everyone
in
this
call
to
pay
very
close
attention
to
this.
This
is
a
momentous
event.
A
This
is
the
first
sort
of
completely
organic
organization
or
collaboration
of
ecosystem
actors
getting
together
to
affect
change
in
the
system.
We've
we've
had
it
on
a
smaller
scale
before,
but
this
is
this
is
sort
of
governance
in
action.
This
is,
we
talked
about
autonomy.
We
talked
with
the
agency,
the
ecosystem,
shaping
the
protocol,
and
this
is
probably
the
best
example
we've
seen
or
the
largest
most
significant,
possibly
I'm,
looking
for
superlatives
bubbly
well,
given
at
that,
so
please
yeah,
it's
a
it's
a
gala
of
research,
that's
being
presented!
Sorry,
that's
a
yes
use!
Yours!
A
That
is
my
framing
of
this
situation.
I'm
looking
forward
to
that
I
not
entirely
sure,
what's
in
it
as
well,
so
this
will
be
educational
for
all
of
us.
I
encourage
people
also
to
take
note
of
any
questions
they
might
have,
but
this
process
what
it
was
like
in
the
future.
The
implications
are,
and
let's
make
sure
that
we
get
some
of
these
things
asked
for
the
official
public
record.
B
B
So
as
rich
Bruce,
you
mentioned
money
supply
and
the
whole
conversation
working
working
group
have
posted
the
vote.
Compensation
plan
proposal
in
the
forum,
which
has
attracted
a
small
amount
of
discussion,
people
go
and
check
out
after
the
presentation.
You
know
when
you're
in
time
to
kind
of
read
the
details.
B
B
Then
we
had
a
user
haven't
seen
before.
Christ
got7
creates
a
thread
abouts
so
proposing
a
predictive
scoring
model
for
liquidation
risk.
I.
Think
so.
Kind
of
song
about
Hell
maker
might
use
a
credit
scoring
mechanism
to
kind
of
to
allow
people
to
borrow
it's
like
a
smaller
and
commercialisation,
very
sure.
Just
some
interesting
ideas
and.
B
B
The
consensus
parameters,
both
Quinn
census
results,
were
twenty
million
debt
ceiling
and
a
two
percent
risk
review.
So
there's
will
be
the
values
that
that
I
go
into
the
poll
for
a
yes
or
no,
that's
pretty
much
covers
OS.
You
know
what
lasting
and
the
second
set
of
community
create.
My
polls
and
I
one
change,
people
haven't
noticed,
and
so
kind
of
these
were
just
you
know
your
support
or
opposition
for
the
current
set
of
assets.
A
Alright,
thanks
for
that,
okay,
let's,
let's
actually
do
the
ball
compensation
presentation
now,
because
there's
I
wanted
I
want
to
give
quite
a
place
and
make
sure
we
have
enough
time
to
get
through
a
little
bit
so
I'm
gonna
hand
it
off
to
you
guys.
Who's
gonna
be
handling
the
presentation.
I
need
to
use
some
special
for
religious
I.
C
All
right,
and
is
everyone
able
to
see
that
all
right?
Okay?
So
this
is
the
initial
presentation
for
they've
all
compensation
plan
proposal
for
maker
governance.
Let
me
actually
go
back
a
slide
and
then
make
her.
Man
and
I
haven't
rehearsed
this
presentation
before
it's
a
Maker
man.
If
you
want
to
hop
in
at
any
point,
you
know
by
all
means
and
then
as
well,
if
anyone
has
any
questions
throughout,
please
let
us
know
before
getting
into
the
details.
C
We
have
a
quick
disclaimer
which
I'll,
let
everyone
just
kind
of
read
independently,
but
the
intention
here
is
just
because
we're
not
working
under
the
purview
of
like
the
foundation
or
another
corporation.
We
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
you
know
communicating
the
kind
of
limits
of
what
we're
we're
offering.
So
that's,
including
the
plan
document
itself
as
well.
C
C
C
All
right,
I'm
gonna
continue
moving
forward
and
this
is
a
maker
holder
declaration.
So
there's
actually
a
couple
parts
of
the
plan
I'm
going
to
be
presenting
here.
A
declaration
sort
of
explaining
make
holders
view
of
the
compensation
itself
propose
stages
for
voting
cadence,
as
well
as
other
action
items
that
we
need
to
get
done
and
then
the
appendices
section
there's
a
few
parts
there
there's
a
icebox
section
which
basically
is
stuff
that
we've
excluded
from
the
plan.
But
governance
could
decide
that
they
want
to.
C
So
this
compensation
plan
constitutes
a
proposal
for
a
compromise
and
settlement
of
claims
for
involved
owners
in
respect
to
the
circumstances
under
lighting
the
vault
compensation
pool
passed
on
for
six.
No
action
taken
by
the
person
is
drafting
or
implementing
the
plan,
either
previously
or
in
connection
with
this
compliment,
compliment
construed
or
deemed
as
an
admission
of
truth
or
falsity.
C
Basically,
we're
not
going
to
read
through
the
rest
of
this,
but
we're
trying
to
convey
to
the
public
and
develop
holders.
That's
this
is
kind
of
an
exceptional
circumstance
and
we
don't
want
to
create
an
expectation.
That's
these
sort
of
claims
are
going
to
end
up.
You
know
falling
on
Baker
holders
in
the
future,
so
we've
included.
Let.
D
Me
add
one
thing,
because
I
wrote
it
in
the
forum
post.
Okay,
so
go
to
the
end
of
this.
This
is
the
part
where
it
sticks
right.
The
person's
drafting
or
animate
implementing
the
plan
have
no
and
the
maker
holders
have
no
obligation
to
issue
any
compensation
and
it's.
This
is
a
volunteer
plan,
operated
solely
at
your
discretion
and
there's
nothing
in
here
that
says,
if
you
agree,
did
want
to
do
it
that
you
actually
will
execute
it.
I
mean
we're
literally
very
clear
about
this.
This
is
an
optional
plan.
D
Everybody
opts
in
the
governance,
Hopson
hey.
We
want
to
do
something
and
reach
out.
Walt
holders
can
opt
in
by
going
yay
or
nay
to
terms
and
compensation.
It's
it's
pretty
simple,
but
this
is
the
the
Lea
gate.
We
had
some
legal
look
at
this
and
came
up
with
something
that
looked
good,
but
the
final
point
is
that
and
that's
where
we
can
stop
and
we'll
move
on
yeah.
C
Definitely
I
think
it's
I
think
it's
important
to
include
this.
You
know
we
don't
want
to
create
expectations
that
end
up
not
being
something
that
we're
going
to
be
able
to
follow
through
on
in
the
future.
So,
just
being
super
clear
about
you
know,
kind
of
where
maker
holders
feel
they're,
their
rights
and
responsibilities
are
moving
on
to
the
next
section
here.
C
So
this
is
I'm
just
going
to
kind
of
walk
through
the
proposed
stages
of
this
compensation
plan,
because
it
is
going
to
involve
some
governance
action
and
then
also
just
additional
sort
of
project
management
and
development
work
as
well
so
first
phase
as
we've
kind
of
sketched
it
out
as
the
current
state
phase
zero.
Where
were
we
have
developed
a
plan
of
action
for
handling
compensation,
presenting
it
to
governance
and
getting
feedback
here,
as
well
as
in
the
forums?
C
C
So
that's
primarily
why
we
included
the
the
ice
box
section,
it's
stuff
that
when
we
were
drafting
the
plan
we
thought
of
as
potentially
questions
that
governance
might
want
to
decide
on.
But
in
our
you
know,
opinion
it
was
simpler,
just
to
kind
of
narrow
the
scope
of
the
governance
voting,
but
that
would
be
probably
the
course
of
action.
If
this
this
plan
fails
to
gain
support
now,
assuming
that
it
does
gain
enough
support
from
maker
holders,
we're
gonna
be
moving
on
to
phase
one
we're
just.
B
C
That's
fair
yeah.
There
hasn't
been
a
whole
lot
of
discussion
in
the
forum
post
as
well,
so
I
almost
I
would
love
more
feedback,
and
you
know
people
catching
our
blind
spots
before
we
move
forward.
So
yeah
I'll
I'll
scratch
this
when
I
post
the
the
deck
but
yeah,
we
can
push
it
another
week
or
two
as
long
as
needed.
C
Once
we
get
the
governance
pool
up
and
assuming
that
it
does
pass
phase,
one
we're
gonna
be
doing
two
main
things.
So.
Firstly,
we
need
to
do
a
governance
poll
to
determine
the
calculation
method,
which
we
call
that
method
in
reference
price
for
determining
compensation
which
next
slide
I'll
I
have
like
some
more
info
about
that
and
I'll,
probably
let
maker
man
pop
in
as
well.
C
Parallel
to
that
the
compensation
itself,
it's
gonna
need
to
be
distributed
to
vaults
via
a
smart
contract
and
then
also
based
on
you
know,
verified
data
about
who
suffered
what
losses
and
what-have-you.
So
in
parallel,
while
we're
getting
governance
to
pull
on
this
info
or
this
question,
we
are
also
going
to
be
trying
to
put
out
for
tender
some
of
that
development
work.
D
Is
let's
put
it
back?
I'll
take
over
the
next
section
Darren
we
talked
about
the
compensation.
I
came
up
with
two
different
methods:
the
tab
one
I
was
hoping.
I
could
just
run
across
everybody
and
give
a
total
number
possible.
It's
the
data.
Isn't
there
and
so
we're
kind
of
back
to
there's
two
ways
you
can
look
at
this.
You
can
look
at
it
from
the
borrow
perspective
which
I
call
the
tab
and
what
happened
with
them.
D
It's
like
is
that
the
price
on
the
day
it
happened
that
we
pick
or
the
price
on
the
day
we
finally
executed
or
an
average
of
those
was
kind
of
an
idea
and
then
I
had
the
tab
change
in
relation
to
collateral
change,
because
when
I
started
looking
at
these
numbers,
even
for
like
the
guy
who
self
liquidated
and
saved
the
system,
probably
half-a-million
dyatlov's,
you
know
fall
to
two
eight
eight.
You
know
he.
Basically
you
look
at
him
and
it
kind
of
works
out
for
him
too.
D
D
C
Narrative
version
of
how
this
would
be
calculated
so
starting
off
by
figuring
out
what
percentage
of
the
collateral
they've
already
gotten
back
and
then,
whatever
the
you
know,
collateral
return
percentage
that
maker
voters
choose
you
take.
You
know
what
they've
already
received
back
subtracted
from
that,
and
then
that
is
how
you
figure
out
the
percentage
of
the
collateral
that
they
they
are
gonna,
be
getting
from
yeah
sure.
E
C
E
D
E
Point
is
to
like,
if
you
were
talking
about
compensation
here
about
people
who
you
know
decided
to
open
CDP's
using
aetherium
as
collateral.
The
really
important
thing
is
okay,
so
recovery
is
important.
We
should
explore
all
paths
on
how
to
to
get
that
money
back
I
mean
if
we
could,
we
can
contact
the
zero
bidders
and
just
say
hey.
D
Wait
a
second.
Let
me
give
an
example,
so
an
example
is
coinbase.
Had
you
know,
there's
a
little
price
drop
right
because
my
my
wife
pointed
this
out
she's
like
who
are
we
to
say
what
the
right
auction
was?
Who
are
we
to
say?
That's
the
auction
system.
It
worked
the
way
you
could
debate
the
way
it
worked
right.
The
same
thing
happened
to
coinbase.
What
did
they
do?
They
ate
those
losses
and
make
people
whole,
but
that
was
their
choice.
Right,
I'm.
A
D
A
Has
a
point
here
and
it's
something
that
the
community
can
dig
into
I
think
there's
something
to
be
explored
here
and
it's
not
a
value
judgment.
It's
an
exploration.
So
if
the
community
is
interested
in
aligning
on
some
efforts
to
fill
in
the
other
piece
of
the
puzzle,
I
don't
see
anything
stopping
them
from
doing
that.
So
this
is
a
conversation
that
can
be
continued
in
the
form,
particularly
probably
in
forum
post,
that
is
related
to
this
threat.
A
I,
don't
think
I,
don't
imagine
it
takes
much
time
analysis
to
determine
exactly
where
all
these
funds
ended
up.
So
it's
worth
exploring,
but
I
would
really
like
to
focus
on
the
actual
details
in
these
slides
before
we
start
diverging
into
philosophy
of
a
blank
and
could
one
and
you
lost
maybe
I'm
Annette.
Can
we
get
back
to
it?
What
phase
one
is
all
about,
because
this
is
essentially
the
meat
of
the
matter
right
leg
worth
what
the
numbers
are
and
how
they're
how
they
get
divided?
It.
D
Yeah,
let
me
try
this
a
bit
moaning
so
basically
remember
I
calculated
this
nominal
return
and
the
liquidation
ratio
and
the
fee
basically
determines
the
nominal
return,
and
you
can
look
at
the
aux
and
stuff
and
just
determine
where
you
think
auxins
were
good
and
where
you
think
they
were
bad
and
then
what
you
want
to
do.
So
you
just
use
the
collateral
deficit
as
the
as
the
relevant
means
of
dealing
with
the
zero
vote.
However,
you
want
to
classify
the
vaults.
D
Take
your
pick
and
then
I
had
done
some
work,
that
you
could
also
look
at
it
just
from
their
tab.
Change
like
if
they're
liquidated
their
tab
goes
to
zero
and
all
the
collateral
goes
up
for
auction
and
you
can
look
at
it
from
that
perspective
as
well
and
just
compensate
with
respect
to
tab
and
that
actually
works
out
in
my
mind
when
I
think
about
it
as
a
maker
hold
or
much
cleaner
concept
of
like
what
I'm
trying
to
do
here.
Why
it's
a
separate
issue,
but
those
are
the
two
ways
to
do
it.
C
Yep,
so
this
I'll
post,
the
slides
as
well
and
then
this
next
page
also
has
some
kind
of
more
numerical
examples
of
like
what
those
different
options
would
look
like.
So
this
is
vault
2288,
whose
self
liquidated
this
is
vault,
23,
34,
38
34,
who
was
liquidated
at
auction
and
then
just
to
go
back
to
recall
what
those
different
a
be.
C
Oh
gosh,
a
B
and
C
options
and
D
were
so
it's
the
nominal
collateral
return
and
then
the
price
on
Black
Thursday
same
and
the
price
on
basically
the
future
date
when
the
compensations
awarded
the
average
and
then
the
the
tab
method.
So
then,
if
you
look
back
at
what
the
numbers
would
be-
and
this
is
assuming
that
price
on
Black
Thursdays
a
hundred
and
then
price
the
day
that
we
award,
you
know
an
issue,
the
compensation
is
240.
C
You
can
see
what
the
relative
numbers
would
be,
so
it
does
have
a
big
impact
which
option
we
choose
here.
If
we
choose
the,
you
know:
option
B,
which
is
using
the
East
8th
price.
You
know
whenever
we
actually
issue
the
compensation,
that's
more
than
likely
gonna
be
a
lot
more
than
the
other
options.
C
On
the
other
hand,
vaults
who
you
know
they
might
have
expected
to
receive
some
of
their
8th
back.
So
if
we
pay
them
out
according
to
the
price,
you
know
on
Black
Thursday,
it
might
not
seem
as
fair
to
them.
So
it's
it's
definitely.
You
know
probably
the
biggest
single
decision
that
governance
has
as
part
of
this
process
is
what
method
we're
going
to
be
using
to
calculate
the
claims
so
just
to
clarify.
So
this.
A
C
D
A
C
A
Know
what
let's,
because
we
have
to
you
guys-
have
been
deep
in
the
weeds
for
a
long
time,
and
so
90%
of
this
is
assumed
as
rogue.
But
let's
clarify
what
self
liquidated
versus
auction
means.
So
there's
there's
actually
no
I'm
sure
we
understand
what
auction
is.
But
can
you
talk
a
bit
about
what
self
liquidated
yeah.
C
It's
so
I
think
in
the
case
of
bought
2288
but
kind
of
all
of
them.
They
we
got
like
paged
on
Black
Thursday,
with
their
price
alerts
for
eath
or
what
have
you
and
then
they
you
know
either
just
wanted
to
avoid
the
liquidation
penalty,
or
maybe
they
realized
that
the
the
auctions
were
not
working
as
intended.
So
then
they,
you
know
basically
panic
bought
back
their
die
at
really
high
prices.
Panic
sold
their
eath
just
to
be
able
to
you
know
basically
close
out
their
levers
themselves
to.
A
D
A
And
I
just
want
to
be
clear,
though,
so
we
have
this
category
of
people
call
itself
liquidated,
so
these
people
that
completely
bought
East
on
the
open
market
to
close
up
their
positions
or
it
does.
This
include
groups
of
people
that
attempted
to
rescue,
but
we're
also
liquidated
at
some
point
during
that
process.
One.
C
C
D
C
Yeah
and
that's
that's
part
of
the
ice
box
as
well,
is
you
know
whether
or
not
we're
going
to
include
them?
So
if
you
know,
if
people
have
thoughts
that
they
don't
think
they
should
be
included,
you
know
it's
certainly
not
my
opinion,
but
but
yeah.
It's
definitely
open
for
discussion
and
we
can
clarify
further
in
the
thread
or
the
forum
going
to
the
next
slide
here,
so
that
that
encompasses
phase
one
where
we
chose
the
compensation
method
and
then
put
out
some
of
the
development
work.
I
don't
mean
in
the
future
for
for
quotes.
C
C
Any
any
unused
funds,
of
course,
are
going
to
be
going
back
to
governance,
which
will
describe
a
little
bit
farther
forward
so
yeah,
well
how
the
government
is
pulled
to
determine
the
compensation
percentage
and
then
from
here
once
we
already
have
sort
of
quotes
for
the
necessary
development
work
that
we're
gonna
need
to
do
to
create
the
compensation
contract.
We're
gonna,
put
a
on
chain
pull
up
and
then
a
executive
vote
to
request
funding
for
that
development.
Work.
I
know
that's
just
recently.
C
It
is
gonna,
be
a
hundred
percent
necessary
to
do
that
to
make
this
plan
work.
There's
there's
no
getting
around
it.
So
you
know
any
anyone
who
who
does
have
reservations
on
this.
You
know
definitely
make
your
your
thoughts
known
in
the
forum
as
well,
and
you
know
any
ideas
about
how
we
can
help
governance
feel
safe
about
moving
funds
out
of
the
protocol.
So.
F
A
A
Second,
question
or
observation
you
mentioned
briefly
at
the
end
of
the
slide
previously
about
the
compensation
of
the
work
that
went
into
doing
all
this
evaluation.
Did
you
or
doing
this
that
I
want
to
make
sure
that
that's
not
lost
right,
because
you
guys
don't
have
a
horse
in
this
race?
I'm
assuming
and
you
put
in
a
significant
amount
of
work
here.
So
are
you
guys
gonna
be
compensated
as
well.
C
A
C
D
D
C
Yeah
I
think
you
know,
and
it's
of
course
you
know
government
or
governance,
it's
up
to
them,
whether
they
approve
it
so
and
then
the
end
of
phase
2.
So
once
we've
gotten
funding
approved
and
issued
for
the
development
work,
that's
where
we,
you
know,
basically
get
down
to
business
and
develop
and
then
audit
a
mechanism,
so
the
smart
contract
for
dispersing
compensation
to
users.
C
We
have
some
more
specs
on
that
in
a
little
bit
as
well,
so
this
I
mean
this
is
one
bullet
point,
but
this
may
well
take
awhile,
so
I
think
I
would
just
kind
of
note
that
you
know
it
could
be.
You
know
awhile
from
phase
2
to
phase
3
before
we're.
Actually,
you
know
we
have
a
working
contract,
that's
safe
and
ready
to
put
funds
into
now
phase
3
once
we
do
have
the
smart
contract
created
and
ready
to
go
again.
C
C
C
C
C
Any
eath
faults,
they're
gonna,
be
already
like
sort
of
pre
coded
into
the
contract,
with
whatever
their
amount
is
based
on
the
method
and
percentage
pools
earlier,
so
they'll
just
be
able
to
go
to
either.
You
know
interact
directly
with
a
contract
or
go
to
a
website
to
claim
it'll
be
simple
for
them
and
then
for
other
individuals
for
individuals
who
self
liquidated
or
bat
vaults
who
were
auctioned.
C
They
aren't
going
to
be
pre
coded
into
the
contract
to
receive
funds,
so
they
will
need
to
submit
details
of
their
vault,
their
claim
within
30
days
to
a
forum
thread
and
then
the
compensation
review
team.
The
working
group
is
going
to
be
manually,
reviewing
those
and
determining
based
on
the
the
method
and
the
compensation
percentage
determined
by
maker
voters
how
much
each
one
of
those
vaults
will
receive.
C
You
know
the
flip
side
of
the
flop
auctions
earlier
is
that
if
there
is
a
bunch
of
surplus
that
comes
back,
it
could
lead
to
immediate
flap
auctions,
which
may
or
may
not
be
a
good
thing
depending
so
yeah
it
phase
four.
Basically,
once
once
the
compensations
been
claimed,
then
maker
governance
just
takes
all
the
germanium
funds
back.
I
know.
C
Maker
man
had
put
this
in
the
forum
post
on
the
plan
as
well,
but
there's
a
good
possibility
that
you
know
only
maybe
like
fifty
percent
of
whatever
the
approved
compensation
is
gonna,
be
claimed
by
vaults,
or
you
know,
certainly
less
than
a
hundred
percent.
So
that's
something
to
bear
in
mind
as
far
as
the
total
cost
as
well.
C
So
this
is
just
kind
of
a
page
like
the
TDLR
version
of
that
whole
compensation
process
and
then
the
appendices
sex
sections.
These
are
just
kind
of
like
additional
add-on
parts
of
the
plan.
The
icebox
these
are
different.
You
know
potential
questions.
That's
we
didn't
include
as
poll
votes
or
stuff
that
we're
posing
to
maker
voters,
but
potentially
maker
governance
might
want
to
vote
on
these.
You
know
if
they
decide
that
the
plan
isn't
really
fit
for
purpose.
As
of
now
so
I
encourage
everyone
to
just
kind
of
consider.
C
Smart
contract
specifications
I'm
just
gonna,
skip
over
that,
but
there's
a
github
link
in
the
plan
which
Joshua
had
had
made
kind
of
specifying
what
we
need
the
contract
to
do
any.
You
know
any
feedback
people
have
to
offer
on
that
would
be
appreciated.
Just
speaking
for
myself,
I'm,
not
super
technical,
so
people
with
more
experience
about
this
would
definitely
love
to
hear
your
thoughts
and
then
lastly
working
group
payment.
C
So
as
of
about
a
week
and
a
half
ago,
we
had
about
a
hundred
hours
tally.
Total
I
was
proposing
a
rate
of
compensation
of
50
diapered,
our
you
know
seems
pretty
pretty
reasonable,
maybe
even
cheap
for
professional
services.
But
it's
you
know
it
is
up
to
the
discretion
of
maker
voters.
I
think
you
know
I
think
none
of
us
in
the
working
group
we're
doing
this
first
and
foremost
to
be
paid.
C
So,
but
you
know
that
being
said,
I
think
it's
it's
good
to
just
set
a
precedent
of
paying
for
work
so
based
on
this
amount
of
time.
In
that
pay
rate,
it's
about
five
grand
of
costs
so
far,
and
then
we
still
need
to
determine
the
cost.
For
these
additional
items,
but
you
know
I
expect
it
would
be
a
very,
very
small
portion
of
the
total
amount
of
approved
compensation
that
gets
voted
through.
You
I
think
that
is
it
so
I'm
gonna
stop
sharing
my
screen
here
and
then,
if
anybody
wants
to
discuss
I.
A
Well,
people
are
collecting
their
thoughts.
I
just
want
to
thank
you,
I'm
an
exploit
and
maker
man
and
anyone
else
whose
name
I'm,
not
forgetting
that
may
have
contributed
to
the
effort.
But
so
it
was
a
tremendous
amount
of
work.
I
encourage
people
to
also
dig
into
the
actual
the
full
document
and
the
forum
thread
as
well.
A
F
Want
to
thank
them
because
they
did
a
great
job
on
it,
and
my
only
question
is
I'm.
Okay
with
everything.
My
question
is,
instead
of
doing
flop
auctions.
Why
can't,
we
just
say,
agree
to
amount
and
then
it's
in
your
dependencies,
but
like
icebox,
they
just
do
it
over
time.
As
the
system
makes
money
cuz
the
system's,
not
making
any
money
right
now
and
then
we
do.
F
C
Maybe
we
don't
need
to
be
as
hesitant
with
issuing
equity
as
as
we
we
think
we
do
necessarily
like
compound
just
voted
to
dilute
themselves
by
like
80
percent,
and
there
I
mean
it's
not
not
like
a
direct
embarrassin
but
I,
don't
know,
I
think
it
would
end
up
just
feeling
stingy
to
the
vault
owners.
If
we,
you
know
basically
just
said
alright,
we'll
get
to
it
when
we
get
to
it.
Bees.
C
F
Want
do
you
want
MKR
to
be
trading
$100,
but
that's
blunt,
that's
why
I
feel
have
to
do
the
way.
The
conversation
will
be.
Probably
my
guess
is
like
two
million
dollars
and
then
they
go
and
you
cotton.
You
makers
trading
like
for
threatening
right
now.
If
this
gets
through
governance
through
cell
they'll
sell
into
it
and
they'll
dump
it
and
they'll
bid
on
it.
When
they'll
bid
on
the
flop
options,
they'll
drive
it
down
to
buying
the
flop
auctions.
A
There's
there's
always
a
spectrum
for
these
things,
so
it's
obviously
worth
exploring
and
maybe
even
a
model
of
what
we
have
doing.
No,
it's
first
of
all,
people
have
to
vote
on
which
of
these
levels
of
compensation,
they're
interested
in
I,
think
and
then,
after
that's
potentially
scheduling,
there
seems
like
there's,
there's
a
pile
of
options
that
people
who
are
cleverer
than
I
could
come
up
with
it
would
minimize
impacts
to
the
ecosystem.
It's
an
interesting
discussion
and.
A
Something
that
we
need
to
understand
sooner
rather
than
later,
because,
like
I,
think
I've
touched
on
this
in
numerous
times,
but
for
true
agency
to
occur,
there
needs
to
be
some
method
of
funding
for
the
actors
that
are
seeking
to
control
their
own
destinies
to
find
their
activities.
Now,
how
that
happens,
we
still
don't
have
a
clear,
clear
selection.
A
We
talked
about
for
14,
that's
not
going
to
get
us
beyond
helping
the
people
that
did
the
work,
but
at
some
point
there
needs
to
be
a
process
to
pay
for
things,
and
this
seems
like
the
the
instigator
to
make
sure
that
we
get
to
a
plan
that
actually
works.
This
is
going
to
be
a
very
interesting
couple
months,
so
it's
ten
minutes.
At
the
top
of
the
hour,
we
have
a
significant
number
of
things
to
get
through
yeah
I'm,
just
going
to
ask
people
again
please
this
is
this
is
really
interesting
stuff.
A
It
has
impacts
on
our
ecosystem
as
it
affects
on
our
culture.
Yes,
impact
on
perception
of
the
foundation
externally,
and
it
has
impacts
on
people
that
engaged
with
our
ecosystem
as
well
and
suffered
a
loss.
So
there's
lots
of
things
to
be
discovered
here.
So
please
engage
with
this
process
enjoying
the
forum
discussions.
I
am
going
to
move
things
along
though
Charles
do
you
want
to
talk
about
the
MIPS.
G
The
important
thing
to
note
is
that
the
executive
vote
has
the
four
day
limit
as
of
Monday,
and
the
proposals
can
only
move
to
the
accepted
status
if
the
executive
vote
passes
within
that
day
limit.
So
this
is
a
reminder
to
go
and
vote
they're
still
approximately
11,000
Karen
needed
to
pass,
but
yeah.
As
for
today's
business
after
my
update,
rich
and
long
are
going
to
do
the
governance
cycle
review,
which
is
this
time
to
summarize
and
discuss
June's
governance
cycle
with
the
community.
G
We
can
also
use
it
to
discuss
any
upcoming
activity
for
the
governance
cycle
in
July,
which
includes
any
potential
submissions.
I'll,
definitely
use
some
of
that
time
to
take
a
moment
to
speak
briefly
about
a
new
myth,
submission
plan
for
July
that
we've
been
working
on
and
the
formal
submission
period
for
the
July's
governance
cycle
is
July
8th.
G
The
poles
are
for
gauging
the
sentiment
around
adding
lend
Matic
packs,
G,
Blanc,
enj
and
W
Katie
I.
Do
want
to
note
that
if
the
amendment
mips
the
past
this
month,
exec
are
ratified.
The
commune
green
light.
Poles
will
start
in
the
third
week
of
government
cycle
and
and
at
the
end
of
the
governance
cycle,
as
opposed
to
carrying
over
to
the
next
month
cycle.
This
improves
the
flow
of
the
overall
kalila
onboarding
process.
So
as
a
reminder
again,
it's
important
to
get
this
in
to
improve
the
efficiency
of
the
MIPS
process
for
Clairol
onboarding.
G
The
last
point
I
want
to
make
is
that
the
MIPS
form
subcategory
had
an
update.
So
the
proposal
ideas
category
where
community
members
can
post
and
discuss
any
proposal,
ideas
to
improve
maker,
the
protocol
or
governance
system
has
a
new
entry
by
Andy
McCall
and
it's
for
adding
a
pool
to
prioritize
collateral
applications
and
I'll
just
share
it
in
B
chat
as
well.
If
he
is
on
the
call
feel
free
to
mention
it,
but
I
don't
think
I
saw
him
so
you'll
have
to
just
look
at
the
forum
post.
G
A
B
Accepting
that
ended
up
being
everything,
except
for
the
accepting
into
the
governor
cycle
that
end
up
being
everything
except
for
the
mid
12
proposals,
because
they
didn't
contain
all
the
domain
work
that
was
required
to
make
novellas
with
a
niche
process.
So
obviously,
as
joe
said,
that's
not
being
pursued
under
the
weekly
cycle
for
this
month.
B
B
So
of
the
nice
mate
we
ended
up
with
six
going
in,
which
is
like
a
reasonable
rate,
which
is
cool,
so
I,
thought
of
interesting
to
briefly
have
a
look
at
the
amount
of
maker
voting
in
the
various
polls,
comparing
like
the
first
governor
cycle
to
the
second.
What's
this
discount
one,
so
we
had
one
submission
in
the
first
month
and
seven
well-nigh
submissions.
B
B
How
was
again
this
this
one
fight
last
month
we
saw
the
amount
of
makeup
waiting
in
the
second
poll.
The
government's
poll
bundle
was
any
like
around
for
4k
off,
okay,
guys
4k
five
great
the
first
month
for
the
second
month,
so
they're
kinda
indicates
that
again
my
coders
are
kind
of
finding
that
less
important
or
less
impactful
I
wish
to
encourage
them
to
vote
in
it,
because
if
it
gets
voted
down
on
the
stage,
then
doesn't
continue.
It's
potentially
a
signal.
B
That's
that
make
holders
view
that
poll
as
surplus
to
requirements
or
too
much
effort
and
that
make
sense
so
there's
something
keep
an
eye
on
and
I
kind
of
continue
keeping
track
of
like
how
much
makers
waiting
in
the
government
cycle
house
it
goes
forwards
in
terms
of
next
next
month's
July
chars
can
have
already
discussed
briefly,
and
there
are
currently
two
MIPS
in
RC
and
crystal
comments.
That's
preparations
for
and
the
dark
fix
mechanism,
I
don't
leave
either.
These
are
gonna
be
submitted
for
next
cycle.
B
Yeah
like
like
at
this
stage
we
kind
of
look
what
open
the
kind
of
conversation
a
little
bit
and
sort
of
ask
how
we're
on
how
everyone
felt
the
governor's
cycle
has
been
going
a
little
bit
of
technically
ended
successfully.
Yes,
I
guess,
but
if
anyone
has
any
comments
or
anything
now
would
be
a
good
time
to
you.
G
A
H
And
this
can
also
to
the
forums,
but
it
is
something
really
quick
that
we're
gonna
propose
for
the
next
monthly
governance
cycle.
So,
as
you
know,
when
we
did
the
flop
oxygens,
some
of
them
got
stuck.
So
we
discovered
that
there
is
a
small
bug
in
the
in
the
flopper
contract
and
during
that
we
also
realized
that
the
three
different
option
contracts,
the
flip
flap
and
flock
for
collateral
debt
and
service
actions.
They
require
double
liquidity
when
interacting
with
them
certain
cases.
H
So
we
are
going
to
well
that
is
already
fixed
and
tested
and
formally
verified,
as
well
as
the
the
flopper
with
the
the
stuff
that
our
auctions,
so
we
plan
on
fixing
those
in
the
next
governance
cycles,
so
that
would
imply
deploying
new
versions
of
all
of
these
contracts,
and
you
know,
since
this
is
a
change
that
impacts
everybody
running
a
keeper
or
you
know,
defi
saver
with
their
UI
is
to
be
clear.
The
only
impact
is
that
they
would
need
to
point
to
muse
my
contracts,
so
nothing
in
the
interface
changes.
H
H
A
Now,
thanks
for
the
update
we're
at
the
top
of
the
hour,
let's
do
a
state
of
the
peg
and
it
was
an
action-packed
call
yeah.
So
we
have
the
opportunity
to
do
a
Q&A
session
as
well
at
the
end.
So
if
people
won't
stick
around,
please
do
we
usually
like
to
hang
out
for
at
least
30
minutes.
If
there's
a
lot
for
chat
about
so
we'll
see
how
long
that
lasts.
Alright
bashang
headed
up
to
you
for
I,
think
you
said.
I
I
I
Unless
those
annuities
you
decide
to
change
what
their
plan
is
or
unless
the
debt
ceiling
gets
moved
ba
t.
So
this
obviously
had
come
down
a
bit
in
the
last
few
days
and
it's
sort
of
obvious
why?
But
we
can
go
into
that,
but
it's
not
a
huge
margin
to
begin
with.
So
it's
not
like
this
was
seeing
heavy
utilization
to
start
us
DC.
I
I
This
was
some
refinancing
to
compound
and
then
basically
it's
just
been
a
slow
but
steady
increase.
Since
you
know
it
dipped
back
down
about
a
week
ago,
and
it's
still
sitting
at
you
know
around
one
hundred
and
sixteen
billion
died
for
me
so
just
to
kind
of
touch
on
what
this
all
means.
In
the
context
of
the
peg,
basically
trading
volumes
have
been,
you
know,
somewhat
light,
but
still
sustained,
so
kind
of
a
moderate
trading
volume
and
the
dye
price.
I
The
the
these
trades
have
been
executing
at
was
in
the
past
higher,
and
then
it
had
come
down.
This
kind
of
cut
off
here
I
can
go
back
to
show
a
little
bit
of
an
expanded
timeline
here,
but
basically
the
peg
had
come
back
up
to
about
a
dollar
one
after
dipping
down
a
bit
lower
and
then
it's
just
kind
of
slowly
and
slowly
gotten
closer
and
closer
to
the
the
one
dollar
mark.
Since
then,
it's
a
little
bit
messy
analogous
and
heartily
partly
that's
explainable.
I
I
Basically,
you
know
that
peg
had
jumped
up
at
the
time
that
he
dipped
and
then
it
basically
had
kind
of
leveled
out
kind
of
like
the
air,
slowly
deflating
for
a
tire,
as
the
eath
price
held
kind
of
steady
in
that
range,
and
then
the
eath
price
jumped
back
up
again
and
then
basically
the
leveling
accelerated
and
then
eath
price
dipped
again
and
the
dye
price
did
not
particularly
rise
during
that
timeframe.
So
that's
an
interesting
note.
I.
I
It
just
it
really
didn't
cause
a
huge
shift
in
market
behavior
and
I
there,
but
also
it's
good
to
keep
in
mind
that
during
this
same
time
frame
there
was
a
little
bit
more
dye.
That
was
minted,
but
also
significantly
more
dye
has
been
supplied
on
to
compound
in
that
same
time
frame,
so
that
does
effectively
also
pull
away
from
the
circulating
spy.
So
it's
interesting
to
note
that
you
know
if
you
look
at
you
know
the
time
frame
of
the
increased
montañés
from
June
15th
up
to
you
know
today.
I
D
Vishesh,
take
your
mouse
back
to
like
june
12th
and
and
see
the
first
step
there.
The
the
peg
actually
went
down
just
like
it's
doing
on
the
first
step
here
it
was
the
second
dip
see
it
bounced
up
right
to
june
14th,
and
then
it
went
down
again.
That's
when
we
really
got
the
spike
well.
I
So
if
you
noticed
like
basically
it's
all
relative
as
well
right,
so
eath
had
been
running
up
from
200
all
the
way
to
240
and
then
they're
they're
these
fluctuations,
but
they're
also
small
in
comparison
to
the
large
movement.
So
this
can
sort
of
be
seen
as
everyday
fluctuation.
Then
there's
this
initial
and
it
had
kind
of
elevated
right.
It
was
a
238,
Oh,
2:46
and
then
came
back
down
to
234,
but
in
the
grand
scheme
of
things
this
can
just
be
seen
as
a
fluctuation,
and
you
know
at
that
point.
A
D
F
I
D
I
It's
sometimes
helpful
to
look
at
where
the
larger
trades
are
happening,
because
those
tend
to
move
these
prices
more
and
basically
a
lot
of
them
are
happening
around
peg.
Even
when
the
price
was
elevated
and
the
eath
price
was
elevated
and
then
basically
it
started
to
come
down.
I
think
people
at
this
point
are
still
unsure
about
what
he
was
doing
and
then
started
to
come
down
further.
That's
when
people
are
sort
of
like
oh
and
that's
when
some
of
the
dye
purchasing
occurs
is
it's
also
it's
not
just
about.
I
Eath
is
making
a
downward
movement.
It's
about.
Eath
is
making
a
downward
movement
that
appears
to
be
sustained
and
that
that
movement
is
going
to
potentially
cause
liquidations.
I
think
those
are
those
are
the
moments
when
people
start
to
buy
back
die
in
order
to
protect
their
positions,
so
yeah
anyways
I,
don't
want
to
belabor
that
point
too
much,
but
you
know
it's.
I
It
basically
snapped
back
into
this
traditional
inverse
relationship,
except,
what's
interesting
to
note,
is
in
the
last
few
days
it
kind
of
broke
from
that
a
little
bit
has
been
coming
down
anyways
and
that's
a
bit
odd.
Considering
that
there's
also
been
large,
you
know
chunks
of
dye
that
have
been
funneled
straight
into
compound
supply.
Now,
if
we
look
at
the
borrow,
the
amount
of
compound
borrow
has
increased,
but
not
as
much
so.
I
A
I
The
quote-unquote
yield
firm
increase
like
as
far
as
how
it
affects
dye.
That's
the
effect
that
I'm
sort
of
talking
about
it's
a
bit
the
result
of
what's
happening.
There
is
a
bit
contrary
to
what
you
might
expect,
because
you
know
what
we
effectively
saw
was
yes,
there's
more
borrowing
on
compound,
but
there's
also
more
supplying
and
the
supplying
is
outpacing
borrowing.
So,
theoretically,
for
the
moment,
it's
as
if
there's
effectively
a
higher
interest
rate
for
supplying
on
compound-
and
we
know
what
happens
in
those
situations,
because
that's
something
we've
seen
before
right.
I
So
comp
is
effectively
another
unit
of
account
where
people
are.
You
know,
earning
a
yield
for
this
behavior,
and
so
that
could
economically
be
thought
of
as
being
equivalent
to
you
know,
an
increased
interest
rate,
and
so,
if
you're
earning
a
higher
supply
rate
on
compound
people
tend
to
you
know
if
it's
high
enough
mint
dye
and
supply
straight
into
compound,
which
appears
there
is
a
small
amount
of
that
going
on,
but
also
generally
keep
positions
open,
continue
to
lever
up
and
then
basically
choose
to
eat
any
stability
fees
or
any
dye
premiums.
I
In
order
to
get
access
to
those
yields,
that's
the
kind
of
stuff
that
we've
seen
in
the
past
from
dying
users.
So
the
interesting
thing
to
note
there
is,
even
with
all
that
going
on
what
you
would
traditionally
expect
is
the
die
price
to
run
up,
but
it
hasn't
in
that
same
time
frame.
So
that's
what
I
think
is
a
bit
interesting.
There.
I
I
What
that
would
potentially
do
I
think
is
just
reduced
the
amount
of
borrow
and
the
amount
of
supply
on
compound.
So
it's
not
really
clear
how
that
would
affect
dye
if
at
all,
they
may
not
have
an
impact
on
the
peg.
If
those
effects
are
symmetric,
if
they're
a
symmetric,
yes,
it
could
have
an
effect
one
way
or
the
other,
but
as
it
stands,
it
appears
to
be
somewhat
symmetrical.
C
A
A
D
D
The
broadside
us
here
that
I
don't
know
just
they're
thinking
about
I
have
really
digested
it,
but
it
looks
like
it's
just
really
driving
a
Rea
engine
seeking
engine
in
a
weird
way
that
doesn't
seem
to
be
normal
from
a
money
supply
perspective
and
I
can
think
it
through
and
take
advantage
of
it,
but
then
thinking
about
all
the
implications
of
it
like
so
you
know
kind
of
like
with
you
know,
Cyrus
or
somebody
with
risk.
Is
there
any
risk
here
on
on
this
stuff?
This
is
the
only
thing
else.
A
I
Well,
yeah
there's
two
separate
questions
there.
One
is,
how
does
this
effect
die
and
how
does
this
affect
lending
markets?
The
second
one
we
need
another
one
I
would
call
it
over.
But
how
does
this
affect?
I
I
mean
at
the
moment,
like
I
said,
the
impact
on
die
appears
to
be
balanced.
There
is
a
lot
of
open
interest
on
both
sides
there.
So
like
I
said
so.
The
simple
question
was:
is
there
risk?
The
answer
is,
of
course,
can
we
necessarily
pinpoint
how
that
risk
could
mess
with
dye
markets
very
unpredictable
right
now?
I
But
the
point
is
there
is
a
lot
of
open
interest
on
both
sides.
So
if
something
changes
with
those
rates
so
that
it
becomes
more
asymmetrical,
then
yes,
it
could
have
a
significant
impact
on
dye
peg
in
either
direction
right,
so
if
it
becomes
vastly
more
profitable,
for
example,
it's
not
necessarily
a
particularly
realistic
example,
but
if
it
becomes
vastly
more
profitable
to
supply
dye
on
compound
than
it
is
to
borrow
dye
on
compound,
then
obviously
you're
gonna
see
you
know,
liquidity
for
for
dyed
dry
up
until
such
time
as
it
becomes.
I
You
know
not
so
profitable
anymore,
and
then
you
just
see
a
surge
of
liquidity
and
the
peg.
You
know
flip
flops
the
other
way
and
then
vice
versa
is
true
if
it
becomes
much
more
profitable
to
borrow
than
it
is
to
supply.
So
the
point
is
I
think
it
just
adds.
Yes,
a
degree
of
PEG
risk,
in
particular
a
degree
of
dependency
on
the
profitability
of
those
behaviors.
On
compound,
as
you
know,
that's
the
impact
that
secondary
lending
markets
have
always
had
on
dye.
I
You
know
whatever
is
profitable,
is
going
to
initially
either
dry
up
liquidity
or
dump
a
bunch
of
dye
onto
the
market,
and
then
the
vice-versa
is
going
to
be
true
once
that
profitability
dries
up
so
it
it
seems
either
way
poised
to
do,
and
these
kinds
of
yields
don't
tend
to
like
last
so
either
way.
It
appears
to
add,
like
a
potential
for
instability,
that.
D
Was
what
I
was
gonna
say
is,
if
you
just
think
about
it,
if
you
doubled
the
amount
of
opposing
force,
you
kind
of
doubled
the
amount
of
volatility
loosely
speaking
or
and
whatever
you
know,
the
pressure
of
volatility,
so
maybe
that's
all
we're
gonna
see,
is
just
a
higher
volatility
on
the
peg.
So
anybody
with
died
that
wants
to
you
know,
take
a
short
and,
along
in
the
right
places,
might
do
healthier,
oh,
but
in
turn
the
other
thing
was
those
in
terms
of
vault.
Like
we've
seen
the
bat
faults
drained.
D
I
know,
I
pulled
my
now
just
to
throw
in
the
compound
to
suck
this
count
thing
down
as
much
as
possible,
but
and
take
advantage
of
it
right,
but
then
I'm
wondering
if
they
switch
it
to
ass.
Is
it
gonna
start
pulling
us
out
I
mean?
Is
there
a
vault
risk
of
kind
of
like
losing
our
market
because
somebody's
got
a
better
gig?
You
know
think
I'd
think
of
it
from
all
sides
right.
It's
not
just
the
die
risk.
It's
like
what
does
it
happen?
D
I
There
are
potentially
two
very
different
types
of
users:
engaging
integrated
four
types
of
behavior,
and
that's
that's
important
to
note
it's
like
just
because
maker
is
one
system
doesn't
mean
that
all
users
are
all
collateral
types
for
the
same
types
of
users,
I
mean
in
fact
you
see
the
exact
opposite.
The
types
of
users
that
are
using
the
USD
C
collateral
are
very
different
from
the
types
users
that
use
the
eath
collateral
and
I
would
imagine.
I
The
same
is
true
that
the
other
point
is
yes,
the
bat
collateral
supply
I
forgot
to
mention
that
that
was
I
wanted
to
talk
about
was,
you
know,
significantly
reduced
in
the
last
week
or
so,
but
it
wasn't
particularly
large
to
begin
with.
So
you
got
to
ask
yourself
like:
are
you
really
gonna
judge
that
on
a
percentage
basis
or
a
nominal
basis,
like
four
hundred
thousand
dollars
worth
of,
that
is
potentially
not
necessarily
a
very
large
movement?
So
you
know
there's
a
question
of
how
much
to
really
read
into
that.
D
Yeah,
it
was
just
I
mean
it
was
just
a
note
right,
I
agree
with
you.
The
bat
size
I
wasn't
too
concerned
about
then
I'm
like
well.
What
if
that
starts
happening
with
us,
I
didn't
have
any
good
feeling
that
it
would
because
there's
so
much
of
the
net
deposited
on
compound.
It
was
just
kind
of
a
general
question
of
like
how
it
was
driving
behavior,
because
I'm
seeing
I'm
making
adaptations
to
it.
I
was
already
a
compound
user
and
I.
Remember
I
posted
Robert
and
his
chat.
D
A
A
Turning
the
compensation
initiative
or
the
desire
for
a
compensation
plan,
it's
actually
turning
it
into
a
plan
coming
up
with
a
project
plan
in
obscurity,
largely
by
yourselves,
is
a
thankless
task.
It's
onerous,
of
course,
a
lot
of
deep
insight
and
a
lot
of
research
and
I
would
like
to
thank
you
on
behalf
of
the
entire
ecosystem
for
the
work
that
you
guys
did.
It's
really
appreciated.