►
From YouTube: Governance and Risk Meeting: Ep. 29
Description
The theme for this call will continue to be 'Demand/Supply Imbalance'. Steven will talk a bit about what decentralized governance means to MKR holders. Rich will discuss the existing polling process, talk about where signalling starts, and provide a review of the existing life-cycle of a vote. Cyrus will review the State of the Peg and provide some analysis and solicit the community for next steps. We'll then spend the rest of the time in a general Q&A session.
Discussion Thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/mkrgov/
Podcast version: https://soundcloud.com/makerdao/sets/governance-and-risk
Transcripts (Delayed by 48 hours) : https://github.com/makerdao/community/tree/master/governance/transcripts
Governance and Risk Framework - Part 1: https://medium.com/makerdao/makerdao-governance-risk-framework-38625f514101
Governance and Risk Framework - Part 2: https://medium.com/makerdao/makerdao-governance-risk-framework-fc8939f3d4e9
Foundation Proposal: https://medium.com/makerdao/foundatio...
Governance and Risk Framework - Part 3: https://medium.com/makerdao/makerdao-governance-risk-framework-part-3-7a4c620f4077
Website: https://makerdao.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/makerdao
Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/MakerDAO/
Chat: https://chat.makerdao.com/home
Email: info@makerdao.com
A
There
we
go
hello,
everyone
and
welcome
to
the
Thursday
April
the
4th
edition
of
the
Scientifics
governance,
scientific
governance
and
risk
meeting
with
maker
Dow.
We
have
a
lot
of
people
on
the
call
today
and
we
have
a
lot
to
go
over.
So
I
am
going
to
speed
through
my
preamble
as
quickly
as
I.
Possibly
can
we're
enormously
interested
in
as
much
feedback
as
we
possibly
can
get
in
these
calls.
A
We
have
a
limited
amount
of
time,
but
we
have
a
standing-room-only
group
of
extremely
smart
people
in
here,
and
we
need
to
hear
from
you
guys
so
we're
going
to
speed
through
stability
fees,
we're
going
to
talk
about
the
peg,
we're
going
to
talk
about
some
analytics
and
we're
going
to
talk
about
risk
and
then
we're
going
to
open
it
up
to
a
Q&A
session
towards
the
end.
But
my
job
for
now
is
going
to
be
to
hand
it
over
to
Steven,
Becker
and
click.
B
You
very
much
firstly,
thank
you
very
much
everyone
for
joining
again,
just
to
recap
what
we
try
and
do
in
these
in
this
cold
is
cover
basically
three
themes.
I
know,
we've
heard
it
before,
but
this
is
something
we
can
just
get
used
to.
It's
a
lot
easier
to
to
understand
the
context
and
the
objective
of
these
calls.
The
first
is
the
first
themes
to
consider
and
that's
something
that
we
will
do
we
will
do
today
is
the
demand
and
supply
identification.
B
The
second
would
be
collateral
types,
collateral
portfolio
and
parameter
adjustments
with
respect
to
that
there
would
be
the
second
theme
that
we'd
be
looking
at,
and
the
third
would
effectively
be
exogenous
risk.
You
know
things
that
are
outside
the
system,
but
obviously
affect
us
directly.
These
calls
are
centered
around
those
themes,
because
I
believe
that
those
themes
cover
the
entire
spectrum
of
risks
that
we
need
to
consider.
So
again,
you
know
we
remain
focused
today
on
the
demand
and
supply
imbalance.
B
We're
gonna
have
a
look
at
where
we
are
with
respect
to
that
and
and
get
some
sense,
but
please
remember
that
you
know
decentralized.
Scientific
governance,
which
also
includes
the
stability
fee,
are
considered
and
facilitated
by
its
core.
But
ultimately
the
decision
is
made
by
mkay
our
governance.
This
is
very,
very
important
and,
to
keep
in
mind
the
governance
is
a
continuous
function,
so
please
be
involved
as
much
as
possible,
and
you
know
with
that
being
said,
I'll
hand
it
back
over
to
to
rich.
A
Yeah-
and
that
was
a
great
segue
actually
because
that's
precisely
what
I
want
to
talk
about
today,
the
governance
is
a
continuously
evolving
process
at
maker,
Dow
I'm
heartened
by
the
fact
that
every
time
we
go
through
the
process,
we've
improved
it.
One
of
the
things
that
we've
identified
over
the
community
helped
us
to
identify
in
the
last
call
was
that
we
need
to
understand
community
expectations
about
polling,
particularly
especially
with
the
variability
of
the
stability
fee
recently
and
our
renewed
attention
to
awards
the
maintenance
of
the
peg.
A
So
what
I
want
to
do
today
is
explain
a
bit
about
how
this
process
has
looked
in
the
past.
Talk
about
a
couple
of
the
challenges
that
we're
looking
at
and
I
really
want
to
get
as
much
input
from
the
people
here
about
how
they
would
like
to
see
that
process
changed
and
how
we
can
tighten
up
the
polling
and
the
executive
vote
mechanisms.
A
So
here
here's
the
the
general
picture
of
the
way
that
things
have
been
working
previously,
we
I,
we
have
a
community
call,
and
we
in
these
calls
we
talk
about
the
data
that
we've
seen.
We've
talked
about.
We
talked
about
the
look
at
the
data
and
trying
to
figure
out
where
the
market
is
going
to
be
in
the
future.
How
that's
affected
to
peg
in
the
past
and
some
next
steps
that
we
need
to
take.
A
We
hashed
that
out
of
bits,
we
shared
graphs
and
then
we
are
wrestling
with
this
idea
of
coming
to
a
consensus
for
signaling
in
these
calls
and
I
think
that
there's
still
some
ambiguity
there.
At
least
there
is
in
my
mind
and
the
bully
that
we've
done.
That
previously
is
we've
decided.
As
a
group
or
the
community
has
come
to
us
and
said
we
need
a
poll
and
we
need
to
discuss.
A
Three
weeks,
Larry
is
spending
a
great
deal
of
time
and
effort
trying
to
audit
that
process
to
figure
out
exactly
how
many
steps
are
involved
with
determining
that
there
is
something
that
needs
to
be
addressed
by
the
community
and
ultimately
having
a
vote
and
then
publishing
results
of
those
votes
and
I
have
a
document
here
that
we've
been
playing
around
with.
That
shows
that
there's
around
thirty
seven
individual
steps,
handoff
steps
from
determining
that
we
should
do
something
to
actually
doing
it
and
then
publishing
the
results.
A
B
A
Video
talking
about
it
on
Twitter,
setting
up
a
reddit
thread
to
discuss
the
issues,
maintaining
the
polls
having
a
call
both
the
results
of
that
poll
and
then
having
an
executive
vote,
then
publishing
the
results
of
those
executive
votes
anyway.
So
that
was
a
long-winded
explanation
of
some
of
the
challenges
that
were
we're
trying
to
address
in
side.
A
The
organization,
and
one
of
the
things
we've
begun
to
discover
is
that
for
this
for
maker
data
to
remain
the
foundation
to
remain
flexible
enough
to
facilitate
these
votes
in
a
reasonable
time
period,
it
seems
like
seven
days,
is
probably
the
sweet
spot
for
us,
and
so
the
thing
that
we're
thinking
about
is
we
as
a
as
a
group
as
a
community,
determined
that
there's
a
change
to
the
stability
fee.
That's
required
and
we
set
up
a
poll
to
figure
out
what
the
community
thinks
that
change
should
be.
A
We
wait
for
them
to
signal
their
changes
over
the
course
of
two
days.
I
think
is
probably
a
number
that
we
can
start
off
with
as
a
baseline.
Then
we
have
a
call
to
review
that
community
signal
and
then
the
next
day
we
have
an
executive
Oh,
probably
be
on
Friday
and
we'll
weights.
Traditionally,
I
think
that
we've
seen
this
takes
like
10
or
12
hours
for
the
community
to
stake
their
maker
on
one
side
or
the
other
of
an
executive
hook,
which
is
really
nice.
A
And
then
that
gives
us
the
opportunity
to
spend
the
next
week
either
evaluating
the
effects
of
that
change
or
potentially
having
another
poll.
And
so
here's,
where
some
of
the
ambiguity
comes
in
or
some
of
them
the
complexity
comes
in.
We
need
to
determine
whether
we
are
all
comfortable
with
this
wait
and
see
periods
after
these
polls
or
whether
it
would
be
better
to
do
something
new
and
that
that
new
thing
would
be
the
possibility
of
having
continuous
polling
and
that's
that's
an
option
that
I
want
to
put
in
front
of
the
community
right
now.
A
And
what
I
really
would
like
to
hear
today
from
the
community
is
some
of
their
suggestions
and
some
of
the
feelings
and
some
of
the
reasoning
behind
what
kind
of
cadence
they
would
like
to
see
for
these
polls
and
what
kind
of
ranges
we
would
present
and
how
often
maybe
maybe
and
leave
it
there,
because
I
know
that
was
a
bit
of
a
data
dump
but
I'm
sure.
There's
people
on
this.
C
A
Sure
yeah,
let
me
give
you
some
context
there.
So
the
thing
that
we
need
to
work
on
internally
and
externally,
I
guess,
is
agility
and
velocity
on
accepting
signals
from
the
community
and
right
now,
there's
limited
to
it
earlier,
but
there's
so
many
different
steps
and
processes
involved
to
get
a
new
poll
in
from
the
community
that
it
sort
of
involves
no
doing
the
same
work
every
week,
which
is
owners
so
there's
another
option
on
the
table
and
that
option
could
be
to
every
Monday.
A
So
one
of
the
questions
I
wanted
to
put
in
from
the
community
was
this
idea
that
if
we
do
have
a
weekly
poll,
it
could
provide
a
range.
So
anything
from
you
know
negative
x
basis,
points
to
positive
and
X
basis
points
and,
judging
by
community
interest,
the
state
of
the
ecosystem
and
the
peg,
we
can
watch
for
signals
that
other
people
want
to
go
up.
They
want
to
go
down
or
they
want
to
stay
the
same.
C
That's
that's
clear
to
me
the
good
question
in
there
I
mean
it
does
get
quite
complex
once
so.
If
it's
50,
50
50
bits
up,
50
bits
down
thumbs-up
thumbs-down
once
a
week
or
stay
constant,
three
options
seems
like
enough
to
consider
on
a
weekly
basis
having
a
sliding
scale
or
that
could
be
you
know
as
high
as
but
we've
gone
as
high
as
four
and
all
the
way
to
negative
four
percent
changes
each
week
and
then
deciding
how
big
that
range
is
on
on
a
week
to
week.
C
A
And
those
are
some
of
the
questions
that
we've
been
wrestling
with
as
well,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
people
understand
that
I'm
not
proposing
anything
I'm,
reiterating
some
options
here
and
there
so
there's
pros
and
cons
of
each
side.
One
of
them
is
an
engagement
exhaustion,
which
is
something
that
we
need
to
seriously
consider
that's
not
everybody
is
going
to
be
prepared
to
keep
track
of
the
market,
and
you
know
signal
you
know,
set
aside
time
every
Monday
to
do
the
research
and
signal
appropriately.
A
That
kind
of
thing
has
a
tendency
to
have
some
significant
commitment
drop
off.
The
pro
side
of
this
kind
of
an
idea,
I
think,
is
that
we
don't
need
to
coordinate
efforts
to
respond
every
time
we
see
the
market
deviating
or
the
pegged
Navy,
and
there's
that
lag
time
that
we've
been
dealing
with.
Does
it
take
a
week
for
us
to
determine
that
something
needs
to
be
addressed
it
can
we
turn
it
around
in
a
day?
Does
it
take
two
weeks?
Those
are
some
of
the
things
were
worried
about
which.
D
Do
and
if
I
thoroughly
kind
of
a
wrench
in
this
whole
thing
at
the
moment,
because
it
seems
like
there's
a
huge
constant
and
you
know
rightfully,
so
it
is
one
of
the
major
mechanisms
like
dependency
or
go-to
for
the
stability
fee
and
the
more
I've
thought
about
it.
The
more
I
come
to
the
idea
that
we
might
want
to.
D
D
Because
we've
seen
the
supply
changes
but
haven't
seen
that
follow-through
to
order
quantity
and
execution
on
the
exchanges
so
like
something
that
randomly
came
to
a
head
was
like
having
an
auction
for
people
who
hold
a
maker
to,
like
quote,
unquote
trade,
some
of
their
maker
as
an
incentive
to
give
CDP
holders.
It.
D
Know
this
is
just
something
there's
tons
of
different
things,
though,
that
I'm
saying
like
yes,
that
specific
example
certainly
seems
complicated,
because
there's
a
lot
of
infrastructure
would
have
to
build
and
think
about.
But
the
general
point
is:
the
stability
fee
might
not
be
sufficient
to
drive
the
conversion,
and
thus
the
price,
appreciation
and
tracking
that
that
I
think
the
community
is
going
for
yeah.
A
I
love
it
actually
everything
you
said
so
I
think
that
we
probably
share
some
ways
of
thinking.
So
I
think
we
all
know
that
crypto
is
not
rational
market
is
not
rational.
People's
responses
to
it
are
not
rational,
and
so
there
there's
definitely
a
concern
too,
because
there's
something
to
be
considered
with.
A
Do
we
just
expose
this
lever
that
any
sort
of
panicked
a
group
of
people
can
just
start
signaling
for
based
on
whatever
the
market
did
that
day
right,
and
you
also
touched
on
this,
this
idea
that
we
were
I
think
as
a
group
becoming
more
and
more
familiar
with.
Is
that
there's
no
immediate
cause
and
effect
between
instability,
P
change
and
the
way
that
the
market
reacts
or
the
way
that
the
inventory
responds
to
those
things?
D
F
Can
you
guys
rich?
Can
you
specify,
if
you're
thinking
of
this
more
there's
like
a
long
term
problem
in
solution
or
something
that
you
want
to
implement
right
now,
because
you
know
it
just
seems
like
for
now,
like
whatever
we
have,
whatever
extra
work,
we
have
to
do
to
bootstrap
or
get
things
going.
You
know
not
really
a
big
deal
like
I,
don't
see.
Builder
apathy
is
a
huge
issue
right
now,
because
everybody
is
kind
of
engaged
you
thinking
more
of
trying
to
find
like
I
mean
the
obvious.
There's
a
lot
of
talk
about
like.
F
Why
can't
we
just
do
an
automated
change
to
the
stability
for
every
week,
by
whatever
I
mean?
That's,
not
you
just
just
I
think
we
should
be
clear
on
the
core
thinking
long
term
or
we
perceived
it
to
be
an
issue
today
and
we
need
to
cut
down
those
37
steps
today
because
we're
running
into
issues
with
actual
you
know,
managing
things.
A
Well,
those
are
all
great
questions,
and
so
let
me
clarify
one
thing:
I'm
not
proposing
anything
I'm
trying
to
condense
and
refine
the
ideas
that
I've
been
seeing
in
chats
and
socials
and
Twitter's
I
think
there's
something
to
be
discussed
here
about
a
continuous
pull
I'm,
not
sure
whether
that's
a
good
idea
or
not.
That's
what
I
want
this
this
my
next,
this
block
of
time
that
we've
allocated
in
the
call
to
start
exploring,
I'm,
not
sure
I.
Those
are
great
points
like
this
picture
that
we
see
ourselves
in
right
now.
A
It's
not
the
picture
that
we're
always
going
to
be
in
the
market
shifts
the
avocado
pie
comes
out
all
kinds
of
things
change,
so
maybe
the
cognitive
overhead,
cognitive
load,
a
weekly
poll,
is
potentially
worse
than
the
lack
of
flexibility
with
having
to
wait.
Two
weeks
before
the
next
poll
comes
along
or
we
can
have
I,
don't.
D
Know,
but
it
seems
like
this
is
also
just
you're,
always
gonna
run
into
this
problem
of
you
might
be
using
the
old
fed
analogy.
You
know
pushing
on
a
rope
where
you
can
do
all
of
these
things
excellently.
You
can
create
this
whole
infrastructure
for
the
stability
fee
changes,
but
then
the
stability
fee
changes
don't
have
the
impact
that
you
want
them
to
have
on
the
target
price.
So
I
think
like
if
you're
gonna
spend
a
lot
of
resources
right
now.
D
The
allocation
of
those
resources
shouldn't
necessarily-
and
this
is
just
I
thought
I-
could
certainly
be
wrong
and
not
you
know
convinced
of
this
underway,
but
this
is
just
we're
on
that
right
now.
The
allocation
of
those
resources
right
now
should
probably
be
better
spent
on
understanding
how
the
market
is
acting
with
respect
to
dine
CDP
closures
and
borrowing
and
wallet
movements
and
leverage
and
all
this
stuff.
So
we
have
a
better
picture
to
frame
this
discussion
in
yeah.
F
And
that's
that's.
Something
were
actively
working
on
we've
put
together
a
small
but
dedicated
group
of
community
volunteers
to
form
some
sort
of
our
volunteer
risk
group
working
on
kind
of
sourcing
data
curating.
It
open
sourcing
it
for
the
community.
We're
engaged
with
a
couple
analytics
firms,
couple
chain,
analysis,
firms,
kind
of
paint,
the
overall
picture
of
dye
and
what
it's
being
used
for
you
know
demand
supply
everything
about
CDP's.
F
E
A
We're
gonna
segue
almost
immediately
the
next
minute,
it's
here
into
the
presentation
from
Cyrus
and
then
then
we'll
get
into
that
so
I'm
not
sure
that
we're
going
to
buy
a
clear
consensus
or,
and
the
cadence
rates
and
the
utility
of
continuous
polling
right
now,
but
what
I
want
to
do
is
I'm
going
to
post
a
link
into
the
chat
here.
This
is
the
discussion
for
this
call.
That's
I'll
be
posting
the
transcripts
in
the
in
the
audio
and
video
of
the
call
too
as
well.
A
F
A
I
agree
and
then
we're
iterating
a
bit
on
the
process
and
in
the
future,
we'll
be
having
these
discussion
threads
dare
to
prior
to
these
calls,
where
we'll
do
a
better
job
at
actually
explaining
exactly
what
the
call
is
going
to
be
about
giving
people
an
opportunity
to
do
some
research
and
forms
in
the
opinions
before
we
get
here
and
then
we'll
have
the
call
and
then
we'll
continue
the
discussion
in
the
thread.
Hopefully
they
don't
give
us
a
everyone,
an
opportunity
to
prepare
and
formulate
some
ideas
ahead
of
time.
A
Okay,
so
I'm
gonna,
let
that
go
there.
So
to
recap
we
as
a
group,
we
need
to
figure
out
how
we
handle
signaling.
How
do
we?
What
signal
do
we
use
to
determine?
We
need
a
signal,
so
what
I
mean
by
that
is
how
do
we've
as
a
group,
as
a
community
figure
out
that
it's
time
for
us
to
have
governance
poll,
and
how
does
that
governance
poll
get
kicked
off
and
what's
the
cadence
of
that
poll?
And
so
those
are
all
outstanding
questions
right
now.
A
F
F
Think
people
were
feeling
pretty
good
when
we
were
on
the
last
call,
but
then
I
think
immediately
after,
like
it
kind
of
started,
weakened
again
back
down
to
the
96
range
and
they
think
you
know
bit
disappointing
for
sure.
And
then
you
know.
Last
2-3
days
we
had
some
fairly
extreme
market
volatility,
which
you
know
provided
some
interesting
provided
some
interesting
things
to
think
about.
F
Well
kind
of
hard
to
see,
but
we
did
see
some,
you
know
significant
higher
volume
with
the
market
volatility
and
it's
definitely
kind
of
hovering
in
the
98
in
the
98
cent
range.
So
let's
look
at
the
CDP
stuff
and
then
we'll
come
back
to
that
in
a
moment.
So
a
couple
things
we
saw,
you
know
this
huge,
pink
bar.
Obviously
we
saw
a
lot
of
white
activity
as
the
market
rallied
as
people
were
basically
taking
profits.
F
Guess
you
know,
Tuesday's
huge
rally,
kind
of
pushed
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
speculators
to
close
out
and
take
profit.
That
being
said,
we
did
also
see
a
significant
number
of
draws
as
well,
so
the
total
reduction
in
dye
over
the
last
few
days
wasn't
actually
anything
meaningful
kind
of
balanced
out.
Over
the
past
week,
we've
seen
fairly
stable
dye
supply.
That's
that
yellow
line.
You
know
so
I
mean
for
me.
F
F
D
Speaking,
what
would
you
expect
people
to
do
at
different
I?
Don't
know
if
you've
studied
this
or
not
at
like
different,
daily
or
weekly
price
chains,
percentages
on
ether
like
because
I
can
see
the
story
going
full
circle
where
you
have
like
one
one
part
of
it.
You
know
basically
like
starting
over
so
like
price
goes
up.
People
want
to
close
out
positions,
but
at
the
same
time
you
have
people
believing
the
price
will
continue
to
go
up,
so
the
open
positions
are
there.
F
I
mean
that's
like
a
incredibly
complex
question
and
I
think
drawing
a
comparison
from
I,
think
BitFenix
and
bit
max
all
right.
No
BitFenix
definitely
posts
they're
kind
of
long
versus
shorts
statistics
and
I
know
those
have
been
heavily
studied
over
time
and
people
are
always
trying
to
figure
out
at
various
price
points.
Are
people
going
to?
F
F
You
know
the
price
points
where
they
enter
and
exit
into
positions
is
not
very
predictive,
in
my
opinion,
so
I
think
trying
to
guess.
Okay,
if
it
goes
from
160
up
to
200,
that's
gonna,
you
know
inspire
people
to
cover
or
go
to
lover
up
long,
even
more
I
think
is
gonna
be
fairly
difficult,
if
not
impossible.
A
G
So
just
a
quick
update
of
what's
new
since
last
week,
so
this
is
the
same
guy
Eve
Viwa
price
graph
with
the
trading
volume
as
well.
So
just
as
Cyrus
had
mentioned
at
the
beginning
there
there
have
been
some
spikes
in
trading
volume
in
the
last
couple
days,
which
is
good
to
see
the
other
interesting
thing
which
I
noted
when
I
just
sort
of
looked
at
eath
price
as
well,
is
that
that
volume
actually
kind
of
seems
to
track
a
little
bit
with
the
fluctuations
in
eath
price
and
II
it's.
G
G
So
you
know
you'll
note
that,
as
the
eath
price
has
kind
of
come
up
a
bit
and
held
steady
in
the
past
month
or
two
what's
interesting
is
the
supply
has
not
changed
that
much
but,
as
you
can
see
here
on
the
transaction
volume
graph,
which
was
what
cyrus
was
alluding
to
a
second
ago,
though,
the
supply
has
not
changed.
Much
there
was,
you
know,
huge
spike
in
transaction
volume,
which
is
from
my
understanding
from
a
big
kind
of
offsetting
effect
of
people
doubling
down
on
drawers
and
wipes
respectively.
G
So
I'm
not
sure.
The
reasoning
behind
that,
in
terms
of
perhaps
people
who
were
long
on
eat,
are
just
sort
of
upping
their
amount
of
leverage,
and
then
people
who
are
kind
of
worried
about
the
stability
fee
or
starting
to
feel
some
of
the
pain
of
keeping
large
outstanding
debts
decided
to
sort
of
take
some
of
those
profits
and
pay
down
their
debts.
And
then
what
rich
was
mentioning
a
second
ago
in
terms
of
the
interest
rates.
G
So
what's
interesting
is
we
can
see
the
compound
interest
rate
had
come
up
a
little
bit
in
the
last
few
days,
but
really
not
as
much
of
an
increase
as
I
would
have
expected
me
zoom
in
here
for
a
second,
so
you
can
see
it.
It
had
up
ticked
a
little
bit,
but
really
not
the
level
of
increase.
That
I
would
have
expected
to
see
which
is
interesting.
G
I
know
there
was
some
discussion
on
the
chat
in
this
call
about
looking
at
this
compound
interest
rate
as
somewhat
of
a
guiding
factor
for
how
much
we
should
be
increasing
or
decreasing
the
stability
fee.
By
and
and
I
know,
there
were
some
discussions
last
week,
around
sort
of
the
dye
pour
and
all
that,
and
and
that's
a
topic
that
I'm
sure
we'll
explore
a
little
bit
further.
G
But
it
is
interesting
that,
unlike
in
the
past
this
time,
when
we
sort
of
jacked
up
the
stability
fee,
there
was
not
a
huge
change
in
the
compound
interest.
The
other
thing
was
the
loan
volume
was
really
interesting
in
the
past
week
or
so
so
there
was,
you
know,
a
sort
of
slow
and
steady
increase
in
the
amount
of
dye
being
supplied,
which
I
think
does
tend
to
make
sense
with
the
increasing
eath
price.
G
But
the
borrow
volume
also
spiked
before
we
saw
a
tremendous
increase,
which
was
kind
of
interesting
in
the
sense
that
there
was
an
impact
on
demand.
I
think
that
this
is
an
indicator
of
so
even
though
I
kind
of
expected,
the
increase
in
the
stability
fee
to
have
somewhat
of
a
dampening
effect
on
demand,
as
well
as
a
dampening
effect
on
supply,
both
had
seemed
to
kind
of
run
up,
which
was
another
sort
of
unexpected
data
point,
not
much
to
say
in
terms
of
the
distribution
of
drawers
and
wipes
and
bytes
respectively.
G
Actually,
it's
been
fairly
well
distributed
for
the
past
couple
months,
not
very
many
bytes,
as
you
can
expect,
but
that's
mainly
as
a
function
of
eath
price
and
then
the
sizes
of
the
CDP's
that
we've
been
seeing.
Some
of
these
white
transactions
on
have
actually
been
fairly
well
distributed.
There
was
a
little
bit
of
kind
of
clustering
of
some
big
CDP's
that
had
wiped
down
some
debt,
but
really
not
enough
of
a
skew
to
really
make
any
conclusions
off.
A
G
A
F
F
So
you
know
if,
if
there's
an
assumption
that
you
know
with
the
current
stability
fee,
we're
not
going
to
see
any
significant
deviation
from
this
rough
88
million
dye
supply,
then
potentially
all
we
need
to
do
is
just
kind
of
soak
up
the
static
excess
reserve
so
basically
trying
to
soak
up
whatever
is
needed
to
get
from
98
cents
to
a
dollar,
potentially
that's
a
relatively
fixed
number.
So
under
that
context,
you
was
recommending
very
small
and
steady
I
think
0.5%
stability
fee
increases.
F
E
But
I
think
we
should
all
like
come
to
consensus
on
this
call.
Hopefully,
that,
like
we,
may
need
to
be
a
little
bit
more
aggressive
with
with
rates
just
looking
at
who
the
company
who
the
competition
is
and
what
they're.
Currently
you
know
what
the
borrowing
costs
are
for
people
using
those
platforms.
F
Yeah,
that's
a
great
point
and
that's
definitely
something
where
we've
talked
about
looking
at
both
kind
of
the
OTC
lending
desks,
but
also
margin
rates
across.
You
know
various
exchanges,
that's
actually
a
stuff.
We
have.
We
have
data
for
some
of
that
already
just
haven't,
found
a
way
to
output
it
yet
yeah
this
great
point.
We
definitely
should
be
looking
at
stuff
like
that,
though,
on
a
weekly
basis.
So
to
be
clear,
are
you
saying
we
we
do
need
your
in
your
opinion.
A
Want
to
jump
in
super
fast
and
just
comment
on
that
Chris,
one
of
the
things
that
we've
been
wrestling
with
for
a
while.
Now
is
this
concept
of
forward
guidance
and
and
if
we
begin
to
have,
if
we
set
out
a
regular
schedule
of
increases
over
a
period
of
you
know,
X
weeks
or
we
just
the
community
determined
that
this
is
going
to
keep
on
happening.
A
D
H
H
We
will
it's
gonna,
be
it's
tough
for
us
to
keep
it
at
one,
but
I
think
that
if
we
move
the
stability
fee
up
further
I'm,
Christa
dying
so
degree
and
everything
but
like
we
agree
on
this
in
terms
of
going
on
and
increasing
it
at
a
1%
or
1/2
percent
rate
for
the
next
couple
weeks,
I
think
we
should
do
that.
So
that's
what
I
don't
for
what
my
opinion
is.
F
H
Got
hinted
at
it,
but
if
we
did
get
above
one
in
some
venues
on
on
the
move
up,
so
when
people
wanted
to
go
and
liquidated
their
when
they
wanted
to
get
a
get
either
a
that
came
and
immediately
lifted
to
get
it
a
die.
So
that
happens
and
because
we
were
on
because
died
is
on
really
thirty
venues.
You
really
have
its
illiquid
on
that.
H
There's
no
venue,
that's
really
one
out
yet
and
because
of
that,
if
you
want,
if
a
person
wants
to
get
out
of
a
million
die
or
really
quarter
million
died,
they
really
have
to
lift
up
and
they
lift
up
the
one
and
that's
what
causes
the
spikes
temporary
spikes
up
come
on,
but
I
have
seen
like
there's
plenty
of
bids
down
at
ninety
eight
cents,
ninety
seven
cents.
So
on
the
on
the
OTC
front.
But
that's
that's
what
over
the
past
week,
that's
was
haven't
happened.
H
Yeah,
this
is
Matthew
and
I've
done
a
lot
of
market
making
over
the
last
half
years,
though
mostly
on
earth
to
die
and
before
that
Oasis.
What
what
I've
seen
since
February
is?
We've
never
really
had
even
moments
where
died
was
trading
over
dollar
compared
with
the
centralized
exchanges,
coinbase,
Pro
and
and
cracking
the
price
has
pretty
much
always
been
for
the
last
two
months.
It's
always
been
below
a
dollar
basing
that
on
the
eath
price,
that's
very
different
than
what
we
saw
in
November,
December
and
January.
H
So
at
this
point
we
know
there's
a
really
large
inventory
of
died
in
the
hands
of
market
makers,
including
the
maker
maker
market
makers,
too.
There's
an
extremely
large
inventory
and
I.
Think.
Probably
all
the
market
would
like
to
reduce
the
inventory
of
dye
that
they're
holding
in
exchange
with
things
like
ether
and
other
stable
coins,
so
I
think
we
need
to
be
fairly
aggressive
and
not
just
do
like
quarter.
H
E
A
Okay,
so
I
kind
of
circles
us
right
back
to
kind
of
what
I
was
talking
about.
The
top
of
the
meeting
is:
how
do
we
start
a
signal
for
two
to
get
a
signaling
pole
out
there
and
I'm
still
kind
of
wrestling
with
that
idea,
but
I
think
that
we
can
maybe
experiment
with
some
of
these
ideas.
So,
like
I've,
been
watching
the
chat
intermittently
and
I've
seen
things
from,
let's
be
slow
and
steady,
we
have.
We
need
an
aggressive
change
in
order
to
fix
this
thing.
A
It's
it's
very
confusing
from
my
uneducated
perspective,
because
I'm,
no
financial,
genius
and
so
I
don't
have
insight
into
the
reasoning
that
goes
behind
some
of
these
suggestions
and
that's
that's
kind
of
where
I
get
confused,
I
think
so
figuring
out.
What
what's
the
bar
needs
to
be
I.
Think
when
we
do
these
changes
is
something
we
need
to
consider.
As
a
group
I
think
we
should
raise
the
fee.
Beak
is
probably
not
going
to
be
a
super
compelling
answer
rate.
A
D
And
so,
if
you
want
to
put
in
place
like
a
system
of,
we
are
going
to
do
a
3%
increase
every
single
week.
Until
this
happens-
and
you
set
that
expectation,
you
will
very
likely
get
a
supply
significant
during
a
decrease
in
supply.
It
might
overshoot
a
dollar
and
you
might
overshoot,
but
if
that
is
the
goal,
then
I
think
that
you
there's
some
lessons
that
are
from
the
Fed.
Well,.
F
I
think
we
have
been
trying
to
signal
that
for
actually
a
month
and
a
half
now,
except
instead
of
saying
you
know,
there's
a
community,
we
might
do
something
every
week,
I
think
it's
maybe
even
closer
on
the
order
of
every
two
weeks.
Just
because
of
the
way
our
governance
process
works
and
kind
of
trying
to
let
the
market
absorb
our
changes,
but
I
mean
would
have
been
fairly.
Can
you
know
that
it's.
D
The
the
consistency
has
been
there,
but
the
aggression
has
not
been
there.
For
example,
I
can
you
look
at
those
rate
hikes
that
Volker
did
in
the
early
80s
to
get
us
out
of
the
inflationary
expectation
spiral
that
started
at
ramping
up
with
commodity
prices
at
the
end
of
the
70s
you'll
see
like
he?
Basically
there's
not
a
penalty.
He
just
went
pedal
to
the
metal.
D
He
raised
short-term
interest
rates
to
unimaginable
levels
like
twenty
four
and
a
half
percent
on
a
three-month
Treasury
bill,
like
that's
a
bonkers
number,
looking
back
at
it,
but
that's
what
was
quote-unquote
needed
to
get
the
market
expectation
aligned
with
that
we
can
get
them
in
line.
So
the
consistency
is
definitely
there
in
terms
of
the
signaling,
but
the
aggression
might
be
able
to
be
ramped
up
and
the
consistency
of
that
expected
aggression.
A
So
we're
coming
up
on
ten
minutes
left
and
I
really
want
to
leave
this
call
with
some
kind
of
a
sense
of
direction.
So
let
me
recap
some
of
the
options
that
we're
talking
about
right
here.
We're
talking
about
the
community
sets
an
expectation
for
X
percent
increase
over
Y
weeks,
and
that
is
strong
forward
guidance
for
the
rest
of
the
ecosystem.
To
understand.
That's
one
option.
A
The
second
option
that
we're
talking
about
is,
we
present
basically
a
weekly
poll
with
a
range
of
options,
and
we
allow
people
just
to
find
what
level
they
are
interested
in
and
and
deal
with
the
proconsul
associated
with
that
response
or
that
process.
A
third
option
is
that
we
can
sort
of
continue
along
the
path
that
we've
been
going
down,
where
we
try
to
identify
a
need,
and
then
we
get
a
poll
up
and
running
as
soon
as
possible
once
we
get
some
kind
of
a
general
consensus.
A
So
those
are
the
three
options
that
we're
looking
for.
I,
don't
know
how
we
we
do
signalling
to
figure
out
which
signaling
method
we
want
like
do
we
want
to
do
like
plus
ones
in
the
chat
we
want
to
have
impassioned
speeches
by
people
with
microphones?
Do
we
want
to
continue
this
discussion
in
the
maker
gov
thread
and
what
are
people
thinking
like.
D
C
So
maybe
a
China
nah,
no
it's
like
if
this
is
just
my
sense
of
it,
is
that
the
stability
fee,
when
you
start
seeing
the
die
price.
Excuse
me
the
die
supply,
not
really
changing
up
and
contracting
and
expanding
but
more
or
less
staying
static,
and
we
reasonably
believe
demand
is
materially
lower.
You
know,
as
we
talked
about
a
couple
weeks
ago,
maybe
it's
70
million.
We
need
to
raise
the
stability
fee
to
the
point
where
we
have
a
linear
reduction
in
that
dye
supply
not
exponential
like
carrying
it,
a
large
cooking
tray
of
water.
C
It's
really
easy
to
tip
it
over.
If
you
just
make
too
much
of
it
shift
off
you
just
don't
want
to
have
an
exponential
contraction
of
the
supply
right.
That's
the
Riyadh,
my
mind's
eye.
Why
it's
important
to
just
have
a
constant
cadence
of
50
bits,
50
basis
points
100,
whatever
the
number
is,
but
it's
really
the
target
of
getting
those
two
to
two
mesh
but
linearly
that.
D
Is
an
excellent
answer
to
the
question?
Thank
you.
So
basically,
we
want
to
avoid
the
conversion
of
a
linear
to
exponential
change
in
supply
decreases.
So
in
that
sense,
then,
yes,
something
where
you
say:
you're
signaling
to
the
market.
That
would
be
much
more
along
the
lines
of
Bernanke
Powell
Yellen,
where
you're
looking
at
saying
this
is
what
we're
going
to
do.
We
are
100%
committed
to
this
set
of
actions
until
this
happens
and
set
that
expectation
and
then
follow
through
with
that
expectation.
Every
week
kind
of
thing.
C
From
my
perspective,
I
have
no
worry
whatsoever
that
we
only
get
as
far
as
far
as
overshooting
the
the
price
of
dye
and
we
move
up,
or
we
have
a
significant
contraction
in
dye
supply
and
we
move
up
above
$1
I
mean
these
market
makers
have
been
out
there
accumulating
tons
of
dye
for
months
now.
The
worst
thing
that
happens
in
my
mind,
is
we
overshoot
temporarily
the
$1
mark.
Is
they
get
compensated
for
doing
so,
which
doesn't
sound
like
a
bad
outcome
to
me,
but
that's
just
my
perspective.
A
D
If
you
subscribe
to
the
don't
overshoot
and
don't
risk
exponential
decreases
and
supply
philosophy,
if
you
believe
I
can't
remember
the
name
of
the
person
who
just
spoke
placeholder
conference
room,
if
you
believe
the
placeholder
conference
room,
then
you
would
definitely
do
the
opposite.
You
would
say:
let's
do
five
percent
this
week,
five
percent
next
week,
five
percent,
the
week
after
until
we
see
X,
that's.
H
Well,
the
market
makers
are
sitting
on
an
enormous
inventory
of
die
right
now
and
that
they
have
not
been
able
to
offload
any
of
that
dye
for
a
dollar
for
two
and
a
half
months
now,
even
even
with
spikes,
they
haven't
been
able
to
offload
it.
So
they
have
a
lot
of
dye
that
they
can
supply
for
a
dollar
a
dollar
dollar
1
$1
to
do
I'm
not
really
worried
that
we're
gonna
have
some
catastrophic
situation
where
dye
trades
for
a
buck,
25
I,
just
don't
think
that's
likely
to
happen.
D
I
G
D
I
Sorry
I'll
continue
so
anyway.
So
the
point
is:
is
that
you
know
there
there
is
the
ability
to
print
if
dye
was
over
$1
for
too
long
people
would
start
printing
dye,
assuming
that
they
would
go
back
at
$1
or
below
$1.
But
right
now,
from
my
point
of
view,
it
seems
like
we
should
be
defending
dye
holders,
because
you
know
as
a
memory
system,
we
have
to
protect
them
and
people
holding
dye
these
market
makers.
They
don't
they
don't
have
an
exit.
E
F
Laughter
I'm,
assuming
aftermarket
makers,
have
all
their
inventory
Sokka
sure
sure.
That's
not
that's
not
an
overshoot.
In
my
mind,
an
overshoot
would
be
is
if
market
makers
are
able
to
unload
all
their
dye
and
then
it
goes
above
$1,
which
is
you
know,
that's
what
would
happen
if
we
see
some
sort
of
exponential
closure
of
CDP's
I
mean
it's
not
it's.
It's
the
same
problem
in
the
other
direction.
I'm
just
saying
we
have
to
be
somewhat
careful,
I
think.
I
Part
of
the
problem
is
this
idea
that
7.5
percent
is
really
high
or
even
10
percent
is
really
high
when
we're
seeing
that
the
market
on
other
exchanges
other
platforms,
the
person,
the
rate,
is
so
much
higher
than
what
makers
offering
so
I
think.
That's
the
bias
that
we
have
to
get
our
heads
that
7.5
percent
is
high,
it
might
not
behind
me.
Maybe
18%
is
high
I
just.
C
Think
they're
totally
uncorrelated
I,
don't
think
we
should
look
at
them
like
that.
I
think
we
just
need
a.
We
need
to
work
towards
getting
supply
and
demand
to
match
and
right
now
we
don't
know
what
the
exact
demand
number
is.
We
all
would
appreciate
there's
too
much
supply.
The
question
is
how
we
do
how
we
deal
with
it.
Well,.
E
The
only
opinion
is
that
the
I
think
the
demand
question.
Is
it's
pretty
pretty
easy
to
answer
right
like
there's,
there's
market
makers
who
are
are
looking
to
like
acquired
I
to
to
make
markets
across
the
port?
So
it's
really
just
like
playing
market
makers
that
are
creating
the
demand
so
like
like
it's
there's,
it's
not
like
you
can
go
out
and
you
could
pay
your
rent
and
die.
It's
not
like
you
can
use,
die
and
auger
right
now.
It's
just
all.
E
A
Really
fast
because
we're
at
the
top
of
the
hour
and
we're
gonna
start
losing
a
lot
of
people,
I
think
that
there's
a
compassion
discussion
happening
here
and
I'm
happy
to
keep
on
going
for
the
people
I
want
to
stick
around.
But
let's
leave
some
next
steps
here.
Those
two
options
on
the
table
that
I've
managed
to
record
so
far.
It's
which
type
of
poll
are
we
going
to
initiate
immediately
and
then
there's
a
discussion
about
whether
aggressive
action
is
warranted
or
whether
slow
and
steady
action
is
warranted.
D
A
As
well
sure,
that's
a
good
point,
so
it's
not
everything
in
the
world
is
binary,
but
the
point
I
want
to
make
is:
let's
continue
this
discussion
in
that
registred.
That
I,
just
like
this
and
I,
think
the
an
interesting
bound,
lower
bound
or
upper
it's
an
interesting
time
limit.
Is
that
we'll
have
we'll
finish
the
discussion
there
and
then,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we'll
figure
out
what
the
community
feels
the
next
step
is
for.
A
B
Yeah,
that's
the
one
thought
that
if
you
guys
consider
the
fact
that
everyone
had
really
great
ideas,
the
real
challenges
in
this
loss-
you
know
Rich's
point-
is
we're
making
all
these
points
from
we've.
Obituaries
I've
been
making
a
point,
we're
making
all
these
points
from
almost
like
a
centralized
point
of
view
where
we
better
start
thinking.
How
do
we
apply
this
from
a
decentralized
point?
That's
the
essence
of
this.
B
So
that's
the
real
challenge,
I
mean
I,
don't
think
any
of
you
guys
have
a
problem
with
the
DiMasi
economics,
the
concept,
all
that
is
actually
there,
and
it
really
is
very
subjective.
Its
ability
to
presents
us
in
a
decentralized
framework
that
allows
us
to
get
a
sort
of
robust
conclusion,
and
the
other
thing
too
too.
You
know
you
know
effectively
keep
in
mind.
Is
the
momentum
of
this
discussion.
You
really
get
pushed
from
this
coal
and
to
riches
link
that
he's
put
into
the
chat.
B
A
All
right,
Thank,
You,
Steven
I,
am
fine
with
hanging
out
for
a
while
to
see
if
this
conversation
wants
to
continue
but
I
think
I'm
going
to
stop
recording
because
it's
already
a
lot
asking
people
to
review
an
hour
every
week.
So
thanks
everyone
for
showing
up
thanks
for
the
amazing
questions
and
comments.
As
always,
I'm
going
to
be
posting
an
audio
and
video
link.
Soon
the
transcript
will
be
up
in
about
24
hours
and
I'll
provide
a
summary
in
that
discussion
thread
that
I've
been
promoting
in
the
chat
as
well.