►
From YouTube: Governance and Risk Meeting: Ep. 70
Description
## Governance Segment
- Richard Brown: General Q&A
- LongForWisdom: ‘Governance at a Glance’
## Risk Segment
- Primoz Kordez: Migration Status
- Vishesh Choudry: State of the Pegs
## General Q&A
We'll open the floor for any questions about Scientific Governance and Risk.
Please join us and help shape the future of the MakerDAO.
## Links
- [Video/Voice](https://zoom.us/j/697074715)
- [Dial-in](https://zoom.us/u/acRbIMDvK)
- [Calendar](https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=makerdao.com_3efhm2ghipksegl009ktniomdk@group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/Los_Angeles)
A
Hello:
everyone
welcome
to
the
January
23rd
edition
of
the
scientific
governance
and
risk
meeting
maker
down.
My
name
is
Richard
Brown
I
am
the
head
of
Community
development's.
Here
we
are
going
to
talk
mostly
about
risk.
In
today's
call
we've.
We
have
lots
of
issues
that
we've
we
need
to
touch
on
in
these
things.
Governance
is
not
easy.
Coordination
is
not
an
easy
communication
understanding
what
it
is
we're,
what
kind
of
a
world
were
carving
out
is
enormous
ly
complex.
A
In
last
week
we
had
a
great
call
that
sort
of
was
a
perfect
example
of
that,
where
we
were
addressing
an
enormous
amount
of
a
she's
know.
Most
of
those
were
focused
on
governance,
and
so
I
want
to
pass
the
mic
to
risk
in
this
call.
I
start
talking
about
some
of
the
things
that
we
have
on
the
go
there
and
it's
that's
another
enormously
complicated
world.
We
have
migration
on
the
go.
We
have
some
significant
issues
we
should
probably
be
addressing
in
this
poll.
We
should
start
addressing
in
more
depth
in
the
future.
A
We're
at
this
point,
where
this,
this
machine,
that
we've
built
this
governance
machine
is
now
beginning
to
I'm.
Just
casting
around
for
analogies
here,
maybe
I'll
come
to
me
in
a
second.
It's
starting
to
work
very
effectively
is
the
analogy.
I
was
trying
to
get
to
so
the
I
we've
set
up
a
communication
channel
in
this
call.
We
set
up
channels
in
rocket
and
we
set
up
mechanisms,
or
we
set
forum.
A
People
like
long
for
wisdoms
and
Sam
and
numerous
others
have
stepped
up
to
work,
work
within
that
framework
and
build
out
guidelines
and
signaling
methodologies
and
have
these
deep
discussions
about
when
pull
starting
on
both
ends
and
how
we
pull
the
levers
that
we
have
available
to
us.
A
perfect
example
that
is
Sam
for
our
effort
to
get
ideas
are
spread
up
and
running,
which
has
been
great
for
us,
but
with
we're
starting
to
reach
a
certain
level
of
momentum
where
there's
a
fantastic
amount
of
things
happening
in
the
forum.
A
There's
lots
of
activity
lots
of
things
on
the
go
and
these
calls
are
going
to
become
far
more
targeted
towards
addressing
those
initiatives
and
iterating
on
them
and
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
can
make
sure
that
the
rubber
hits
the
road.
That's
the
you
know
what
I
was
looking
for
there
again
I
got
there
eventually,
so
got
to
figure
out
how
the
rubber
meets
the
road
and
take
all
these
initiatives
and
plans
and
proposals
that
are
showing
up
in
the
forums
and
get
them
on
change.
A
Basically
and
there's
gonna
be
a
lot
of
work,
they
have
this,
so
we
need
to
figure
out
how
to
alternate
between
those
two
worlds
of
risk
and
governance
and
eventually
make
sure
that
this
machines
controlling
the
rubber
is
running
a
fever
pitch.
But
for
the
today's
call,
let's
talk
about
risk
for
a
bit,
but
before
we
do,
I
am
going
to.
A
B
Yeah
all
right,
so
the
number
of
threads
this
week
we've
got
so
I-
think
we're
in
the
wrists
motorcycle
discussions
last
week
has
been
the
one
where
South
Mountain
from
source
Kurt
has
presented
some
information
about
the
source
code
algorithm
and
how
it
could
help
us
compensate
workers.
If
we
decide
we
want
to
do
that.
B
A
A
little
bit
can
you
can
you
give
us
like
a
brief?
This
is
absolutely
fascinating.
Right,
like
this
is
a
big
thing,
so
we
have
problems
in
increments.
We
have
civil
issues,
we
have
participation
issues
but
not
read.
Everybody
does
but
I
think
that
we're
actually
one
of
the
shining
examples
of
the
governing
system
that
actually
works,
and
so
those
problems
are
nice
tech
problems
to
have.
But
how
do
you
can
you
give
us
a
brief
recap.
Just
look
at
the
general
broad
strokes
of
what
reputation
and
governance
and
how
those
two
things
align.
I.
B
B
B
So
it's
kind
of
like
an
algorithm
for
I
guess
distributing
reputation
within
a
community
and
okay.
This
becomes
potentially
useful
for
governance
because
we
have
a
problem
where
the
governance
overhead
is
starting
to
become
quite
high
and
looks
to
only
get
higher
as
we
go
forwards,
and
if
we
want
people
to
to
continue
to
to
engage
at
that
level
that
we
might
start
requiring
them
to,
then
those
people
requires
some
sort
of
incentivization,
and
this
is
a
possible
solution
to
do
that.
I
guess.
C
A
He
said
reputation
as
a
reward
system,
but
the
reputation
itself
is
the
rewards.
I
think
there
is
an
enormous
lead.
Okay,
this
objection
right
because
we
want
people
to
engage
in
the
system,
so
essentially
the
more
people
engage
the
higher
their
reputation
becomes.
However,
that
gets
that's
measured
and
therefore
it's
it
becomes
like
a
weighting
system
like
this
person
is
obviously
highly
engaged
and
they've
done
a
lot
of
things,
and
so
maybe
I
should
read
this
proposal
more
seriously
than
it
would
have
done
otherwise
or
maybe
allocate
some
additional
time.
A
D
Good
I
can't
so
I've
gone
on
quite
a
bit
of
research
and
source
cred.
So
from
my
understanding,
it's
basically
like
a
toolbox
have
a
reputation.
We
did
care
a
new
system
of
communities
or
distributed
teams
and
they
basically
run
a
lot
of
a
modified
version
of
PageRank,
like
you
mentioned,
and
it's
on
like
a
contribution
graph
to
produce
like
credit
revision,
so
basically
source
credit.
Individual
members
of
the
community
can
earn
reputation
defined
specifically
by
the
community
or
community
leaders,
and
they
get
compensated
for
the
value
they
bring
to
the
system.
D
A
Because
you're
creating
it's
the
same
thing
of
it
falls
into
the
same
general
bucket
of
listen
sense
of
others
and
voting
somehow,
and
then
the
question
becomes
out
here:
are
people
here
to
make
good
decisions
for
this
and
secure
the
system
and
stabilize
the
bag?
Are
they
here
to
make
50
cents
to
vote
each
time,
the
above
trend?
So
how
do
you
separate
those
two
and
that's
the
conversation?
We
have
a
lot
in
these
calls
like.
How
do
we
increase
participation
and
for
this
lurking
question,
the
back
of
my
mind
is:
is
participation
really?
A
It
is
that
our
primary
goal,
participation
like
do
we
need
to
once
we
have
a
thousand
people
voting
every
week.
Is
that
in
itself
a
good
thing
or
is
that
just
one
of
a
hundred
different
data
points
to
figure
out
whether
we
have
healthy
governance
or
not,
and
the
reputation
thing
too
is
it
makes
me
nervous,
like
it's
fraught
of
parallel,
it's
kind
of
like
Krypton.
In
a
way
the
word
either
it
can
be
a
tool
for
freedom
and
autonomy
and
self
agency,
or
it's
the
greatest
dystopian
record-keeping
mechanism.
A
Everything
lies
by
men
and
when
you
combine
a
blockchain
with
reputation,
I
get
slightly
nervous
about
what
the
implications
of
that
might
be,
particularly
so
what
happens?
Some
genius
comes
along
too,
so
this
is
interesting.
Look
I'm
a
kurd
adds
up
to.
Let
me
just
fix
all
of
our
problems,
but
I
can't
get
in
because
I
don't
have
a
badge
and
enough
points.
You
know
that
kind
of
stuff
makes
me
super
nervous.
I.
C
Think
the
quality
of
the
contributions
is
a
really
important
thing
to
source.
Cred
thing
is
kind
of
like
just
one
one
piece
of
the
puzzle,
as
I
think
everybody
in
that
thread
kind
of
it
could
be
a
good,
maybe
measure,
of
a
person's
engagement
in
our
community.
Over
time
like
you
could
see
for
like
a
year,
you
know
this
person
probably
deserves
some
more
reputation
than
your
contributions.
C
A
C
So
something
that
I
wanted
to
point
out
is
that
in
the
forum,
something
that
I
really
like
that
I've
been
seeing
is
that
we
have
like
owners
of
signal,
request,
threads
rekindle
and
new
threads
or
even
like
something
Derek
did
last
week.
He
he
summarized
all
of
the
sort
of
the
whole
point.
Around
single
collateral
die
global
settlement.
D
C
A
The
obviously
like
we've
said-
or
you
pointed
out
like
this,
is
not
going
to
be
the
criteria
potentially
for
people
to
engage
in
the
system.
Just
yet
another
data
point
I'm,
I
I
go
back
and
forth
on
the
value
of
that
data
point,
would
you
even
be
it's
an
interesting
thing?
Is
that
cool?
But
the
other
thing
that
I'm
concerned
about
too
is
that
well,
it's
it's
pre-filtering
in
incentivization,
there's
all
kinds
of
things
tied
up
into
reputation.
One
of
them
is
the
corollary
of
that
is.
A
Do
we
want
to
particularly
incentivize
people
that
are
driven
by
this
sort
of
gamification
of
reputation
like?
Is
that
necessarily
a
quality?
It's
good
governance
required
it's.
These
are
all
super
complicated
questions.
I
love!
It,
though
something
we're
gonna
have
to
figure
out.
The
reputation
is
the
things
missing
right.
We
don't
have
identity
on
the
blockchain,
so
we
need
something
it's
a
shorthand
for
that,
unless
we
until
we
do
or
unless
that
happened
reputation
is,
is
something
that
fills
that
gap
of
prominence.
C
A
D
Yeah,
no,
it's
cool.
I'll
pollute
the
thread
with
that
idea,
but
like
actually
thinking
it
through,
so
you
can
evaluate
it
as
as
an
example
where
it's
more
meant
to
be
fun,
but
people
can
actually
they
did
Co
you
yeah
yeah.
Well,
no,
they
destroyed
it
before
they
actually
deploy
the
token.
So
now
there
actually
is
a
token
on
aetherium.
You
can
trade
it
it's
on.
You
swap
so
yeah.
A
E
E
F
A
E
A
F
A
To
talk
about
too,
because
the
seven
this
has
been
happening
more
and
more
over
these
causes
that
we
seem
to
be
having
two
different
calls
going
on.
One
is
the
chat
column,
one
is
the
people
talking
call
and
I
want
to
try
and
move
those
things
back
into
a1
again.
So
if
there's
interesting
things
happening
in
the
chat.
C
C
A
Those
are
both
two
very
interesting
discussions
and
the
gasless
think
ties
into
incentivization,
or
at
least
we're
reducing
of
friction
too,
which
is
an
interesting
discussion
and
we
have
developers
here
and
maybe
they
can
talk
about
this
or
even
inform
us
if
there's
movement
heading
in
any
of
those
directions,
I'm
reasonably
sure
that
I've
been
involved
in
discussions
about
leveraging
real
ayres
to
actually
smooth
the
process
and
potentially
cover
gas
or
subsidized
gas
in
our
ecosystem.
I'm
not
entirely
sure
where
those
discussions
land
yet
don't
be.
A
B
B
D
Yeah
for
me,
it's
not
so
much
the
cost,
it's
sort
of
like
there's
a
lot
of
synchronous
waiting
like
you
have
every
week
you
have
to
go
back.
Wait
like
10
to
20
seconds
per
vote
for
it
to
load.
Then
wait
on
the
blockchain
stuff
like
that.
So
just
any
way
to
make
that
quicker,
I
think
would
help
yeah.
We
spent
asking
the
UX
stuff
to
address
like
and.
A
D
G
Yeah
rich,
so
we've
got
it
on
the
backlog,
I've
I've
just
got
to
say
and
look
at
yeah
what
else?
We've
got
a
prioritize
in
that
space
because
there's
a
few
different
things
that
we
can
look
at
with
regards
to
UI
UX
components
and
how
we
speed
it
all
up,
which
couldn't
also
include
a
redesign
of
the
governance
app
as
well.
So
there's
there's
a
bunch
of
things
we
need
to
pull
together
into
a
roadmap
and
and
that
as
Sam
as
mentioned
is
definitely
one
of
them.
A
G
A
A
B
Other
other
threads
sweet
is
that
Planet
X
and
described
some
of
the
Pacific
governance
overheads
in
maker
and
how
it's
said
to
increase,
which
I
got
to
mentioned
already.
It
was
some
discussion
Arana
and
he
shared
them
like
some
diagrams,
which
were
quite
quite
grim.
It's
always
in
the
expansion
of
work
hands
out,
and
we
also
had
in
other
threads,
where
Adam
was
asking
about
how
exactly
executive
votes
work.
It's
kind
of
a
couple
of
times
has
popped
up
a
couple
times.
B
C
A
C
B
B
A
The
DSR
spread
super
interesting
because
it
well
for
all
kinds
of
everybody
here
should
know.
That's
interesting.
The
thing
that
we
haven't
discussed
yet,
though,
is
the
implications
of
whether
if
this
thing
works
or
not,
then
what
do
we
do
because
part
plan,
Part,
B,
I,
guess
of
this
and
Sam
feel
free
to
jump
in
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong?
Is
that
this
sort
of
frees
us
up
from
them
from
the
pain.
D
A
Heartache
of
having
to
do
this
pull
every
week
right,
so
it's
entirely
possible
that
the
DSR
spread
allows
us
to
begin
thinking
about
how
often
the
DSR
spread
it
needs
to
be
loaded
on
her
pulled
off
floor
right.
So
Sam,
do
you
have
some
thoughts
of
offense,
or
is
this
just
something
we're
gonna
figure
out
over
the
course
the
next
month
or
two?
Whether
we
need
to
keep
on
doing
this
weekly?
Oh
yeah,.
D
So
I
was
just
planning
on
having
it
run
weekly
for
a
bit
and
then
I
figured
this
would
happen.
It
would
like,
like
it's
like
99.5%
consensus
on
0.25
percent.
So
it's
a
pretty
clear
signal
to
me
that,
like
everybody
wants
the
DSR
to
follow
the
stability
fee
least
that's
how
I'm
interpreting
it
so
yeah
I
was
just
planning
on
letting
that
run
for
a
few
weeks
and
if
it
kind
of
keeps
up,
then
yeah
I
think
we
can
probably
reduce
the
frequency
all.
A
A
B
B
So
summary
so
yeah
one
oh
yeah,
so
the
sed,
shut
down
and
summary
and
discussion
of
parameters,
that's
set
up
I
think
we're
not
entirely
sure
what
the
plan
going
forward.
Business
I
think
Erin
is
gonna,
try
and
coalesce
that's
into
some
sort
of
one
chain
poll
or
like
a
final
poll,
but
I
guess
currently
we've
at
a
stage
where
we've
summarized
that
but
haven't
moved
forward.
Yet
so
I
guess
look
look
out
for
that
in
the
future.
A
A
It
requires
deep
thought
and
deep
insight.
It's
going
to
be
one
of
them
after
I,
don't
know
how
you
want
to
rank
it,
but
after
the
launch
of
MTD,
this
is
gonna,
be
like
maybe
the
second
biggest
thing
the
ecosystem
does.
So,
let's
think
about
this
very
carefully
people
have
opinions.
They
want
to
know
how
the
protocol
is
gonna
shake
out.
They
need
to
be
familiar
with
plans
around
the
shut
down
of
NC
para
SED.
So
please
review
that
forum
thread
and
speak
your
mind.
B
Thing
I
said
I
think
I
think
there's
some
questions
about
whether
the
like
on
the
use
of
the
tax
parameter
that
we
just
don't
need
to
clear
up
so
I
think,
hopefully
we're
going
to
signor
breasts
about
the
tanks.
A
There's
governance
issues
and
there's
also
risk
issues,
there's
developer
issues,
and
so
there's
lots
of
issues
involved
with
that.
So
we
need
to
that's
your
it's
okay,
thanks
for
bringing
that
up.
So
that
would
be
like
the
third
most
important
thing.
That's
going
to
be
happening
in
the
next
one.
So
please
dig
into
those
discussion,
threads
shut
down
and
the
issues
around.
What
do
we
do
with
outstanding
fees
in
shutdown
center.
C
A
E
Lots
of
interesting
changes
in
a
monetary
policy
size
stability-
if
you
went
up
to
nine
percent
last
week
and
looks
like
this
week,
loaded
up
to
the
MCD
dice
to
eat
stability
fee
is
eight
percent
and
I
guess
so
that
means
the
DSR
will
be
seven
point:
seven:
five
percent
right:
I'll,
let
vishesh
research
is
going
to
talk
about
some
statistics
and
then
pretty
much
will
present
some
stuff
after
they
talk
about
it.
After.
E
E
A
A
A
H
Okay,
so
last
week
we
saw
pretty
heavy
migration
flow.
We
also
cross
the
100
million
die
mark
about
eight
minutes.
I
was
migrated,
but
the
dice
is
like
she'll
increase
for
about
12
million,
which
means
additional
four
million
died
was
was
minted
in
in
a
week.
We
also
saw
sign
Ventura
starting
to
accumulate
last
week.
At
one
point,
there
was
about
six
million
sigh
deposited
and
then
actually
the
second
largest
acid.
The
CDP
used
it
for
repayment
of
its
depth,
which
was
said
about
five
million.
H
This
particular
CCP
that
migrated
I
used
this
I
liquidity
and
use
decided.
It
was
actually
the
one
I
showed
last
week.
If
you
remember
when
I
said,
there's
one
CDP
doing
most
of
the
signing
during
the
migration
and
I
said
that
probably
these
CDP's
are
going
to
be
the
last
ones
to
migrate
them.
Now
the
whole
theory
thing
was
kind
of
destroyed.
H
It
seems
this
CDP
changed
his
mind
could
also
got
worried
because
of
potential
tax
implementation
or
limited
solidity.
We
were
we
were
actually
debating
about
last
week
this
week,
I'm
I
prepared
some
stats
from
Macau
which
are
not
all
related
to
migration.
Some
some
of
them
are,
but
if
I
did
they
might
be
useful
for
making
our
governance
the
material
is
going
to
show
Nexus
was
prepared
for
Spencer
Nunes
newsletter,
called
our
network.
H
H
So
the
first
insight
was
trying
to
compare
by
landing
across
secondary
landing
platforms
and
comparing
it
also
with
with
DSR.
Now
we
know
that,
with
the
introduction
of
DSR,
the
the
landscape
for
landing
became
much
more
competitive
maker
Dow
actually
overtook
the
number
one
spot
from
from
compound,
and
this
was
also
because
compound
implemented
DSR.
H
So
all
of
the
unutilized
I
at
compound
goes
now
into
DSR,
and
that's
why
I
counted
in
in
in
DSR
this
this
value,
the
market
share,
significantly
decreased
for
dy/dx
and
there's
the
the
red
line
here
divided
the
X
had
almost
13
million
by
supplied
in
the
middle
of
the
summer.
Now
it
has
only
I
think
less
than
3
million
compound
at
all-time
high.
They
had
40
million
dye
supplied
from
from
lenders.
H
Now
they
have
a
bit
beloved,
twenty
million
died
are
supplied,
so
the
market
share
of
secondary
platforms
is
decreasing,
and
that's
mainly
because
make
her
down
now
has
DSR,
and
it's
also
because
make
it
out
before
couldn't.
Actually
the
secondary
lenders
could
easily
compete
with
make
a
bow,
because
if
you
think
about
it,
they
could
easily
middle
it
right.
The
this
stability
FileMaker
doll
was
20%.
H
The
the
black
line,
the
dotted
one,
actually
shows
total
deposits,
so
we
can
close
the
SR
as
well
versus
total
supply.
You
can
see
that
we're
not
actually
at
all-time
high.
Currently,
although
you
know
dye
deposits,
dye
landing
is
at
all-time
high
and
that
that
could
be
actually
partially
explained
by
the
fact
that
there
are
still
a
lot
of
size
supply.
That's
pretty
much
unutilized
on
landed
markets
right.
H
Those
lenok
markets
are
pretty
much
dead
and
this
could
be
the
all-time
high
reached
in
the
summer
sausage
spent
by
by
this
13%
yield
right,
even
though
the
yield
currently
looks
looks
okay.
You
shouldn't
forget
that
during
the
summer
you
could
achieve
13%
yield
on
secondary
lending
platforms
and
that's
why
a
lot
of
dye
was
actually
supplied
and
deposited
from
the
savers.
H
It
wasn't
high
edits,
or
ten
million
so
about
80
percent
decrease
as
well
on
borrowing
cited
dy/dx
compound
again
close
to
50
percent
decrease
of
borrowers
there
and
again
this
you
know:
high
market
share
of
maker
Dow,
actually
increased
market
share
of
maker
Dow
is
again
consequence
of
you
know.
Low
fees
that
Mehcad
are
is
currently
offering
and
more
specifically
low
spread
that
make
a
bow
is
also
an
offering
currently
and
secondary
lenders
cannot
really
compare.
H
I
always
said
that
the
spread
is
actually
the
crucial
one
for
the
crucial
factor
that
that
says
how
much
land
in
core
borrowing
might
happen
on
secondary
platform.
If
there's
less
spread,
we
should
see
less
competitive,
less
competitiveness
from
secondary
lenders
and
if
you
again
see
the
black
plan,
so
we
chose
the
ratio
between
secondary
long
some
secondary
platforms
versus
loans
on
maker,
Dow,
actually
total
supply
of
maker
down.
You
can
see
the
ratio
is
really
low
and
it
really
shows
that
McDowell
actually
is
dominating.
Currently
the
third
inside.
H
H
Nothing
changed
nothing
yeah,
actually
only
one
thing
changed
the
thing
that
I
dimension
at
the
beginning,
the
share
of
that
increasing
so
sheriff
CDP's,
who
are
still
meeting
by
it,
decreased
because
one
large
CDP
closed
its
position.
Otherwise
everything
stayed
pretty
much
the
same.
The
depth
represented
by
CDP's,
who
were
totally
inactive
during
the
immigration
period,
is
still
almost
half
of
the
depth
and
again
we
need
to
monitor
this
going
forward,
especially
now,
since
psy
stability
fears
at
9%.
H
Site
liquidity
I
mentioned
this
couple
of
times
that
it's
it's
really
low.
This
is
data
borrowed
from
Alito.
There
is
only
250,000
site
rated
per
day
on
average,
and
mostly
just
in
two
platforms.
Unity
opened
khyber
unit,
swap
liquidity
for
size.
Three
times
is
lower
than
for
psych
and
then
per
die
and
I
think
this.
This
is
actually
becoming
a
serious
problem.
For
some
there
are
many
Cassidy's
who
want
to
deleverage.
H
If
you
know
there's
not
enough
solidity,
immigration
contract
or
if
markets
become
even
more
shallow
than
than
they
are
now,
and
these
can
be
particularly
problematic
when,
when
enterprise
is
crashing
right
when
when
those
hippies
want
to,
you
know,
increase
the
collectivization
ratio,
but
they
cannot
do
anything
if
they
don't
get
sy
immediately.
So
we'll
see
how
this
develops.
H
H
There
is
one
notable
increase
here
in
the
in
the
middle
of
December.
That
was
when
compound
implemented
ESR,
so
all
of
the
unutilized
I
just
switched
the
SR
and
at
the
beginning
of
the
December,
when
the
rate
was
increased
from
two
to
four
percent,
you
could
also
see
a
bit
of
spike
in
buying
the
SR,
although
at
that
time,
if
I
remember,
most
of
the
trading
were
also
migrating
to
die.
H
So
it's
not
you
shouldn't
really
come
I
mean
hard
to
say
what
correlation
here
was
because
of
the
rate
or
because
of
the
migration,
and
then
the
last
increase
from
four
to
six
still
the
same
pace
of
die
being
clocked
in
DSR
until
the
last
week
when
we
saw
a
bit
of
outflow,
but
it
was
one
larger
outflow,
not
sure
why
it
happened
could
also
potentially
be
that
you
know
some
users
are
just
migrating
actually
switching
from
the
i2
eater,
because
there
was
a
bit
of
bullish,
Hunt
sentiment
or
maybe
just
some
other
reason.
H
That's
because
I
I
noticed
that
there
was
a
lot
of
die
minting
since
New
Year
and,
of
course,
the
source
effects
utilization
right,
because
the
Authority
ization
is
died,
locked
in
DSR
vs.,
died
supply
and
because
the
I
supply
was
growing
so
massively
we
can
see.
The
DSR
utilization
is
actually
back
below
40
percent,
where
it
was
before
the
rate
increased.
So
that's
that's
interesting
to
see
this
DSR
utilization
should
be
always
measured
and
taken
into
account
when
we
decide
for
for
rate
changes
either
for
stability
for
DSR.
H
Some
extra
counted
that
was
not
included
in
newsletter.
Another
metric
might
be
useful
for
determining
shutdown
is
analyzing.
The
remaining
side
wallets.
So
not
the
CDP
is
just
the
holders
and
there's
thousand
more
than
thousand
wallets
that
hold
more
than
intense
I
and
that
were
not
active
for
more
than
a
year.
So
these
wallets
represent
5.2
million
sigh,
that's
about
20%
of
the
supply
and
the
average
inactivity.
H
I
weighted
it
by
side
value.
Is
it's
almost
18
months,
so
we
have
5
million
sigh
held
by
addresses
that
haven't
interacted
for
18
months
and
the
top
top
10
inactive
addresses
called
more
than
2
million
sigh
I
think
the
largest
holder
is
450,000,
so
I
hold
450,000
son.
It
could
be
that
some
amount
of
debt
is
lost
hard
to
tell,
but
something
to
keep
an
eye
on
in
the
future
to
see
how
this
this
matrix
develop
migration
flow.
H
You
can
see
this
balance
of
migration
contract,
six
million-
that
was
five
days
ago,
I
think
and
then
the
second
largest
CDP
took
it
and
migrated
actually
closed
instead
and
then
the
last
the
last
metric
just
trying
to
compare
on
chain
activity
of
dye
versus
psych.
Historically,
these
are
the
daily
active
addresses,
so
dye
currently
has
about
2,000
daily
active
addresses,
which
is
a
bit
below
the
long-term
average.
H
F
So
we're
talking
about
small
deviations
and
there's
a
lot
of
discussion
in
the
rocket
rats
and
I
think
on
Twitter
about
just
how
much
it
had
deviated
and
whether
that
was
you
know
significant
enough
to
to
increase
civility,
which
you
know,
people
will
then
go
ahead
and
act
on
anyway.
So
you
know
we've
seen
those
fee
changes
come
through,
but
they
were.
They
were
very
small.
You
know
in
the
grand
scheme
of
things
in
terms
of
the
overall
price
deviation
you
can
see
here.
F
At
the
end
of
the
day,
though,
there
are
moments
where,
and
if
you
look
at
the
larger
time
scale,
there
will
always
be
moments
inside
ayat,
cetera,
where
you'll
have
a
short
run
up
or
a
short
run
down
in
price,
but
I
think
taking
that
slightly
longer
time
scale.
Views
is
usually
a
good
lens
to
look
at
and
a
lot
of
times.
Those
kind
of
short
dips
can
be
driven
by
trading
activity,
more
than
stability
fees
and
I
think
this
is
not
a
new
discussion
around.
F
What's
the
role
of
monetary
policy
levers
and
the
impact
on
the
price
versus
the
price
having
its
own
sort
of
externally
market
driven
fluctuations,
and
then
us
kind
of
thinking
and
triangulating
that
those
fee
changes
are
causing
those
price
changes,
and
so
that's
again,
probably
a
thread
to
revisit
in
a
more
statistically
driven
numerical
context.
So
either
that
happens
on
these
calls
or
I'll
find
on
in
written
form.
F
That's
probably
a
good
discussion
topic
as
well,
so
yeah
but
long
story
short
die
volume,
weighted
average
price
pretty
much
at
PEG,
very,
very,
very
slightly
below
middling
amount
of
trading
volume
cholesterin
for
hours.
Sigh
trading
volume
is,
you
know,
as
promotion
alluded
to
slightly
lower
than
it
had
been,
and
then
globally.
Obviously,
it's
very
very
well
and
the
volume
weighted
average
price
is
shockingly
pretty
close
to
peg,
despite
the
drying
up
of
liquidity,
and
that's
just
something
a
touch
on
this.
F
Well,
real
quick
is
unit
swap
die
maker
and
say
lady,
so
die
die
liquidity
really
only
about
2.8
million.
So
why
I
would
say
globally
speaking
compared
to
the
total
dice
planets
out
there
and
compared
to
what
you
might
see
for
some
other
assets
pretty
low
and
then
the
unit
trading
volume
is
on
the
lower
end
compared
to
some
of
the
other
places
where
diet
rates.
F
So
that's
also
something
it
considers
how
much
of
the
trading
is
happening
on
places
like
Eunice
WAP,
where
there
is
that
liquidity
pool
versus
Oasis
and
dy
DX
and
dy
DX
is
really
I,
think
since
MCD
launched
and
since
the
last
month
or
so
picked
up
in
the
share
of
titrating,
that
happens
there
I
but
yeah,
so
psy
liquidity
even
lower,
though
surprisingly,
the
multiple
four
died
aside.
Liquidity
is
fairly
small
compared
to
the
total
amount
of
diet
being
traded
versus
I.
F
Think
as
we
start
to
talk
about
more
risk
oriented
stuff
and
what
happens
in
the
event
of
auctions
and,
what's
you
know
the
various
appetites
for
printing
MPR
and
and
sewing
it
off,
and
what
would
price
XP
versus
you
know,
MKR
burn
and
projected
revenues
and
stuff
like
that.
I
think
that's
a
really
interesting
topic
area,
but
is
sort
of
under
talked
about
so
probably
just
something
to
put
on
people's
radars
yeah.
F
So
in
the
longer
time,
skill,
though
so
seven
days
die
trading
activity,
pretty
solid
at
like
25
26
million
and
then
again
the
average
for
that
seven-day
period
is
just
very,
very
slightly
below
one.
Other
thing
touch
on
was
just
I
was
looking
at
the
you
know,
collateral
and
debt.
So
hopefully,
I
got
two
graphs
here
will
start
to
add
more
back
as
we
go
for
tracking
just
the
total
amount
of
collateral
over
time
for
MCD
vaults
and
looking
at
when
major
changes
in
collateral
event
happens.
F
F
F
This
is
basically
coming
back
to
a
corollary
of
what
we
used
to
look
at
for
drawers
and
wipes
since
MCD
vaults
work
slightly
differently,
they're,
not
really
exactly
drawers
and
wipes
anymore,
but
I,
basically
just
started
segmenting
out
which
transactions
are
increases
in
debt
and
collateral
versus
decreases
in
that
collateral,
I'm
trying
to
show
all
those
spikes.
So
we
have
like
a
frame
of
comparison
that
we
understand
from
the
SCD
days,
so
yeah
I
was
just
sort
of
looking
at
how
the
amount
of
debt
collateral
fluctuates
over
time.
F
I'll
go
ahead
and
pull
the
prices
and
I
time.
So
we
can
do
this
as
collateralization
ratios
over
time,
but
yeah,
the
the
big
spikes.
So
there
is
it's
interesting
large
quantity
of
collateral,
added
and
removed
on
the
16th
and
then
some
collateral
added
on
the
18th,
large
quantity
of
that
added
and
removed
on
the
16th
and
then
large
quantity
of
that
added
on
the
18th.
So
that's
insurance,
that's
interesting
and
that's
sort
of
what
translates
into
the
rate
of
growth
of
this
line
so.
F
F
E
Do
you
guys
have
any
thoughts
on
so?
Do
you
guys
have
any
thoughts
on
sila
quiddity
as
it
relates
to
potentially
thinking
about
emergency
shut
down
Versailles,
because
I
think
both
you
guys
mentioned
in
your
presentations
that
sila
quit
he's
been
dropping
like
such
as
the
Eunice
hawk
volume
and
so
on
any
thoughts
on
when
it
reaches
some
sort
of
danger
level
where
it's
no
longer
say
I
mean
if
couldn't
even
figure
out
a
certain
point.
When
CDP
donors
are
it's
basically
you're
impossible
for
them
to
migrate
over.
F
H
For
it,
I
think
it's
always
going
to
be
possible.
It's
just
a
matter
of
price
I.
Think
the
zone
is
going
to
be
some
market
makers
who
will
issue
sigh,
but
then
the
thing
is
they
might
just
charge
more
than
in
the
future.
Then
now
right,
especially
now
because
sighs
the
build,
if
he's
going
to
be
9%
and
those
guys,
knowing
that
they
might
wait
a
few
months,
so
perhaps
they
will
charge
extra
percent
for
for
selling
that
dye.
E
F
I
mean
I
guess
it
depends
right
on
a
question
of
what's
your
goal.
So
if
the
goal
is
to
you
know
protect
users
from
being
exposed
to
a
certain
price
impact
like
I'm,
not
sure
if
forcing
migration
will
ever
really
necessarily
protect
them
from
that,
so
yeah
I
mean
to
just
eliminate
extra
overhead
and
managing
the
system
is,
from
my
vantage
point,
like
the
only
goal
that
I
could
see
here
in
terms
of
forcing
shutdown.
F
So,
in
that
sense,
like
yeah,
you
were
my
guess
is
gonna,
be
that
liquidity
and
trading
volume,
like
though
there
have
been
very
slight
decreases,
I
mean
it's
more
or
less
leveling
out
to
like
some
kind
of
bottom,
like
levels,
steady,
state
and
I.
Imagine
that
would
persistent
and
wouldn't
drop
significantly
further.
So
in
that
sense
there.
E
Was
always
this
implicit
context
that
governance
would
protect
users
from
these
big
price
movements?
Okay,
cuz,
I,
guess?
The
line
of
reasoning
was
that
if
the
price
were
to
jump
to
like
105,
for
example,
then
potentially
in
like
an
emergency,
global
settlement
would
be
called
right.
So
we
were
trying
to
do.
Governance
is
trying
to
do
what
they
could
to.
G
H
So
just
quit,
man
I
think
we
need
to
focus
on
on.
You
know
when
ether
is
crashing,
that's
the
time
when
people
really
want
to
buy
sigh
and
especially
CDP's,
who
want
to
the
leverage.
So
we
need
to
see
what's
going
to
happen
on
those
occasions
we
usually
saw
a
spike
inside
and
by
boat,
but
now
with
Lila
quility
being
cruelly
drained,
the
spike
might
be
even
higher,
so
we'll
see
how
it
goes,
but
then
I'm
afraid
those
events
might
cost.
You
no
sight
rating
much
about
one
right.
E
B
So
one
thing
I
wasn't
say
is
potentially
it's
we
should
have
or
should
have
or
should
have
a
signal
poll
for
whether
we
should
shut
down
based
on
liquidity
rather
than
like
directly
like
the
pecs
deviation,
because
in
ideal
circumstance
right,
we'd
shut
down
before
the
pike
deviate.
Some
people
get
screwed,
so
yeah.
F
Well,
I
guess:
that's
kind
of
a
point
is
so
pretty
is
so
low
at
this
stage
that
you're
kind
of
in
that
risk
area
and
you're
sort
of
waiting
for
a
price
event
in
eath.
That
causes
a
negative
outcome
for
people
that
are
gonna,
be
trading
sigh
and
so
that's
that's
kind
of
where
you're
at
and
I
just
based
on
the
numbers
that
don't
imagine
that
the
could
be
drying
up
significantly
further,
it's
already
very
low,
so
it
I
don't
know.
F
F
At
this
point,
I
don't
think
an
additional
10%
drop
in
liquidity
is
like
a
super
likely
to
happen
in
like
the
next
couple
weeks
or
be
going
to
make
a
huge
difference
in
the
price
impact
in
the
event
that
something
significant
happens
with
eath
overnight.
I
think
that's
just
going
to
be.
The
primary
driving
factor
is:
when
is
there
a
crash
or
run
up
beneath.
D
So
another
thing
with
these,
like
shutdown
scenarios,
are
these:
assuming
that
we're
going
to
implement
some
sort
of
Taxation
to
ding
the
CDP
holders
who
stay
through
or
are
we
just
forgiving
the
stability
fees
in
this
situation?
Yep.
E
So
looks
like
there's
at
least
three
things
we
need
to
figure
out.
One
is
what
is
the
decision
mechanism
for
the
community
agreeing
to
implement
the
emergency
shutdown?
One
is
the
lag
time
from
when
that
decision
is
made
to
actual
hard
date,
and
then
third
is
kind
of
the
technical
implementation
of
it.
E
E
B
D
E
C
C
E
E
Yeah
I
mean
it's:
it
I
think
that
would
help,
but
addition,
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that
there
is
like
that.
Maybe
you
or
Derek
can
put
together
like
a
written
thing
as
well,
that
we
can
share
and
the
chance
in
the
in
the
forums,
because
as
far
as
I
know,
there
isn't
like
a
very
clear
written
proposal
on
how
everything
would
work.
Yeah.
I
That
Derek's
forum
post
is
based
on
a
really
tiny
mini
post.
I
did
on
rocket
jet,
so
so
I'll
get
like
a
quick
one
minute
to
minute
rundown,
and
then
maybe
we
can
put
something
more
substantial
together
for
for
next
week's
government.
It's
called
so
essentially
what's
happening
technically.
Is
that
there
is
another
fee
parameter
called
tax
that
you
can
levy
on
CDP's.
I
But
the
other
difference
is
that
during
global
settlement
the
the
debt
is
used
right,
and
so
the
reason
that
stability
fees
are
forgiven
during
a
global
settlement
is
because
they
haven't
accrued
on
the
debt.
That's
not
the
case
for
tax
now,
from
a
game
theory
perspective.
Once
you
turn
on
tax,
it
is
completely
suboptimal
for
anyone
to
pay
back
their
CDP
right,
because
not
only
would
you
be
paying
the
accrued
stability
fees
that
you've
amassed,
but
you'd
also
be
paying
these
this
additional
tax.
I
You
know
for
whatever
period
of
time
it's
been
it's
been
running,
so
really
the
only
two
times
the
any
kind
of
fee
will
be
paid
is
either
before
you
implement
the
tax
or
during
global
settlement,
where
someone
has
resigned
themselves
to
just
paying
tax
and
not
paying
the
stability
fees.
So
what
I
want
to
emphasize
is
that
this
is
not
a
technical
issue.
This
is
really
a
commes
issue.
I
You
need
to
effectively
say
hey.
This
is
tax.
This
is
what
it
does,
and
this
is
the
date
that
it's
going
to
happen,
and
you
have
to
be
very
very
loud
about
that.
So
everyone
who
is
you
know
banking
on
not
paying
their
sibility
fees
realizes.
The
context
are
at
the
game,
theoretic
situation
that
they're
in
and
will
pay
back
their
their
stability
fees.
A
Can
I
see
it
question
again
and
that's
order?
Let's
make
some
bruschetta
20
can
only
talk
to
you
but
I'm,
trying
to
wrap
my
head
around
how
I
don't
know
fish
equitable,
maybe
not
accurate,
so
I'm,
a
large
folder
I
have
50,000
and
fees
and
attacks
the
community
move
over
the
tax
is
the
tax
designed
to
somehow
reach
parity
with
what
my
feet
would
have
been
by
the
time.
A
I
Is
a
very
big
stick?
It
is
not
a
there
there's
a
slight
here's
what
you
have
to
do
right,
if
the,
if
you
make
sure
that
the
tax
ends
up
becoming
equivalent
to
the
stability
piece,
then
there's
still
no
incentive
for
anyone
to
bother
paying
their
stability
fees
right
because
it's
like
I
may
as
well.
Just
pay
the
tax
whatever
and.
I
Work
all
right,
and
then
you
don't
have
the
supply
crunch
from
sigh
right.
What
people
paying
you
know
over
it
all
are
trying
to
obtain
side
to
close
their
positions
right.
So
in
order
to
make
tax
effective,
you
really
have
to
make
sure
you
like
hammer
it
down
for
lack
of
a
better
term
to
be
more
than
the
stability
fees.
I
The
other
thing
here
is
that
that
I
want
to
bring
up
is
that
the
period
that
tax
is
running
right.
We
just
said
that
it's
completely
suboptimal
for
to
pay
back
your
civil
TVs
after
you've
implemented
the
tax
parameter
right.
So
this
is
not
you
don't
change
it
and
then
let
it
run
for
like
two
months
or
a
month
or
something
a
period
that
tax
runs
can
actually
be
very,
very,
very
small
in
my
opinion,
but
maybe
we
should
have
some
more
discussion
over
that
now.
I
I
So
when
you
apply
a
tax
parameter
right,
that's
not
really
going
to
be
taken
into
account
and,
and
that's
that's
an
issue,
and
so
instead,
what
I
feel
like
we
should
do
is
set
the
tax
parameter
based
off
of
basically
profiling,
the
largest
CD
piece
and
and
how
right,
how
long
they've
been
open?
How
much
stability
fees,
unpaid
stability
fees,
they've,
crude
and
then
set
the
tax
parameter
based
off
of
you
know,
whatever
profile
the
majority
of
those
fit.
I
E
E
I
I
I
So
so
for
the
community
plan
for
global
settlement,
I
I
say
this
is
how
you
communicate
it.
You
say
this
is
phase
zero
of
global
settlement.
You
know
on
this
Nate,
let's
say
I'm
just
throwing
randomly
throwing
it
out
there,
but
March
31st.
You
know
this
is
when
global
settlement
starts
and
phase
zero
of
global
settlement
is
at
you
implement
tax,
and
you
have
to
be
right.
Like
I
said
before,
you
have
to
be
super
super
loud
and
definitive
about
this.
That
this
is
the
day
like
you
are
you.
I
A
Think
it's
it's
going
to
be
very
important
that
the
community
has
this
discussion
to
figure
out
what
what
their
ultimate
goal
is.
Is
it
to
clawback
these
fees?
Is
it
to
incentivize
migration?
Is
it
to
turn
up
the
fire
under
what
three
large
holders
and
like
accept
the
collateral
damage
of
everybody
else
that
happen
to
be
bystanders
or
is
it
lets
you
reach
some
kind
of
equitable
there's.
I
A
parody
there's
one
other
thing
that
needs
to
be
taken
into
account
is
the
fact
that
the
tax
that
is
paid
it
does
not
go
to
mkr
holders.
It
doesn't
go
to
that
pool.
It
actually
goes
to
path
holders.
And,
ironically,
since
the
largest
path
holders
are
the
largest
CDP
owners,
you
know,
there's
a
very
real.
You
know
amount
that
you
get
back
from
the
amount
that
you
actually
pay
in
tax.
So
when
we're.
E
I
A
B
A
E
I
I
It's
the
path
that
is
collected
for
tax
right
is
burned
right,
so
then
D,
so
you
lose
as
a
CPP
owner.
You
lose
a
good
chunk
of
your
path,
but
the
path
that
you
do
keep
the
ratio
to
eath
now
has
increased
substantially.
So
you
get
a
lot
more
eath
back
on
your
path,
not
as
much
as
you
owed
in
tax,
but
a
good
chunk.
I
I
B
B
I
B
C
I
So
going
for
what
you
said
long
for
wisdom,
I,
don't
think
you'll
ever
get
a
hundred
percent
participation
in
this,
but
I
do
realize
that
the
right
it's
more
of
an
80/20
type
of
rule
here,
where
the
amount
of
very
very
large
CDP's,
with
on-page
stability
fees
is
quite
a
small
number
right
so
trying
to
profile
their
situation
and
tailoring
tax
towards
them.
I
think
is
kind
of
what
we
should
be
aiming
for
here.
Maybe.
B
I
mean
this
is
the
thing
like,
so
the
people
have
a
lot
of
CDP's.
Obviously
they
have
presumably
have
a
large
amount
of
assets
right
like
like,
even
if,
if
it
hits
like
smaller
CTP,
if
we
get
well
like
the
large
Skippy's
to
migrate,
but
like
a
20%
of
the
smaller
ones,
doing
that
still
hits
them
like
proportionately
compared
to
their
assets
that
still
hits
them
absolute
value
is
lower,
but
proportionately,
assuming
their
assets
is
roughly
yeah.
I
I
I
What
everyone's
gonna
be
trying
to
run
out
the
door
right,
but
the
alternative
is
that
we
have
the
current
situation
right,
where
you're
not
going
to
have
any
of
the
large
holders
you
can
attempt
to
pay
back
any
of
their
fees.
D
I
B
I
I
D
E
E
It
charges
some
amount
to
all
Peth
holders,
but
then
it
just
distributes
that
back
to
the
same
path
holders
but
you're,
saying
in
a
and
the
lower
ratio
or
in
a
different
proportion.
So
what
I'm
saying
does
it?
Does
it
kind
of
redistribute
an
even
amount,
or
is
there
some
portion
that's
taken
out
and
sent
somewhere
else
or
used
for
something
else
to
actually
implement
a
penalty.
I
D
B
I
Mean
that
that
would
actually
help
them
to
an
extent
right
because
from
a
game
theory
point
of
view,
if
you're
trying
to
incentivize
people
to
pay
back
their
CDP's
before
tax
is
implemented,
if
they're
banking
on
getting
back
some
proportion
of
of
their
eath
through
the
path
reimbursement
factor
and
now
everyone
piles
them
on
path
right.
That
makes
their
situation
worse.
So
yeah.
D
B
C
C
E
A
Agree
that
what
I
think
that's
a
great
perspective
to
take
and
I
think
the
other
thing
too
is
I.
Don't
I'm
hearing
options
to
solve
a
problem,
I'm
not
sure
that
everybody's
talking
about
the
same
problem,
so
that
that's
something
that
could
be
explored
as
well,
as
is
the
idea
that
we
need
to
have
people
migrate?
Is
it
because
the
community
wants
those
fees
back?
Is
it
because
the
community
wants
to
burn
MKR?
A
C
Maybe
the
goal
can
be
summarized
in
the
effective
winding
down
and
deprecation
of
do
that.
You
need
to
make
sure
that
or
leaving
side
rather
than
piling
in
and
so
from
a
game
theory
perspective.
You
have
to
solve
the
feet
issue,
because,
if
you're
getting
away
with
the
fees-
and
you
know
it's
not
it's
very
clear
that
you
might
be
getting
away
with
the
fees
wait,
that's.
A
C
A
I'm
coming
back
to
is
that
there's
there's
certain
the
level
of
sour
grapes
very
like
nobody
wants
to
see.
Somebody
else
get
off
scot-free
when
we
open
in
our
fifties
diligently,
but
there's
also.
We
don't
want
to
encourage
people
to
game
the
existing
system
that
we're
trying
to
shut
down.
We
also
want
to
ensure
that
the
system
kind
of
hues,
if
closely
to
the
design
of
it,
was
set
up
before
originally.
A
F
Mean
I
was
just
saying
earlier:
all
that
you
see
is
what
I
was
just
saying
earlier,
that
that
was
the
point
was
what
what
is
the
point
of
what
you're
trying
to
do?
What's
the
goal
here
and
like
it,
my
point
earlier
was:
if
the
goal
is
to
protect
against
you
know
some
kind
of
potential
peg
deviation
and
die
to
protect
die
holders
from
you
know,
price
events,
we're
sorry,
I
mean
sighs.
F
Specifically,
then
I
don't
know
if
you're
necessarily
solving
that
problem
with
you
know,
having
like
liquidity,
cut
off
et
cetera,
for
you
know
forcing
migration,
but
if
now
we're
sort
of
talking
about
a
different
point
of
if
your
goal
is
to
prevent
people
from
getting
off
scot-free
for
trying
to
cleverly
work
around
paying
fees,
that's
a
different
goal,
and
and
now
you're
talking
about
a
slightly
different
problem.
So
I
understand
agree
with
you
that
it's
important
to
define
what
are
you
doing
and
why
are
you
doing
it?
F
A
Yeah
I
think
we're
probably
missing
fish,
so
let's
figure
out
why
this
thing
is
going
to
happen
and
then
I
guess.
My
second
concern
here
is
modeling
out
the
potential
implications
of
each
one
of
these
decisions.
Right
that
it's
not
going
to
be
a
simple
thing:
you
try
to
squeeze
one
side
of
this
ecosystem,
it's
very
very
difficult
to
predict
the
impact
that
it
has
on
other
areas,
so
that
I
can
offer
nothing
more
than
weak.
A
F
G
But
to
that
point
Primo's
last
week
you
shared
Excel
spreadsheet
that
was
had
the
top
100
CDP's
and
a
breakdown
it
included.
The
accrued
fees,
percentages
of
fees
and
debt.
Would
it
be
possible
to
have
an
updated
spreadsheet,
because
what
I
started
looking
at
last
week
was
what
you
had
There
and
then
I'm
trying
to
illustrate
tax
at
hypothetically
day,
one
day,
two
as
a
percentage
of
accrued
interest
and
what
that
would
look
like
across
the
CDP's
and
trying
to
come
up
with.
G
A
G
A
It's
a
curtain,
horror
situation
right
like
so
agreeing
that
we
all
have
this
sense
of
urgency
and
something
has
to
be
done.
I'm,
not
sure
that
that's
that's
the
case.
Yes,
I
was
some
exploration
and
some
like
formalization,
like
this
aggregate,
all
the
thoughts
that
people
have
into
a
talk
and
we
can
start
debating
and
then
pull
us
before.
We
know
where
it
is
that,
were
you,
the
ecosystem
wants
to
do.
I
think
is,
can
set
us
down
a
path
that
we
might
have
wanted
to
be
on
in
the
first
place,.
H
H
A
Joining
me
at
this
point,
so
we've
had
a
very
interesting
discussion:
I,
don't
want
to
lose
the
thread
great,
so
Derek
and
Co
will
be
coordinating
some
kind
of
a
doc
with
pre
mush
and
we'll
bring
whatever
resources
the
foundation
can
can
bring
to
this
conversation,
but
I'm
intensely
interested
that
the
it's.
Ultimately.
This
is
the
community's
decision
and
it's
a
big
decision,
so
I'd
love
to
see
the
community
get
involved
and
make
themselves
heard.