►
From YouTube: Governance and Risk Meeting #111
Description
## Introduction
* @LongForWisdom: Hosting, Introduction, Agenda.
## Weekly Updates
* Governance - @Gov-Facilitators
* Smart Contracts - @Smart-Contracts
* Oracles - @Oracles
* Risk - @Risk
* MIPs - @MIP-Editors
## Procedural
* @LongForWisdom: MIPs Governance Poll Review
## Segments
* Mandated Actors: Collateral Onboarding
* Community Development: Badges - **Postponed**
* [Vishesh Choudry ](https://twitter.com/visavishesh): State of the Peg
## Discussion Topics
* Continued Peg Deviation
## Other Business
* General Q&A
* Final Reminders
## Links
Website: https://makerdao.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/makerdao
Forum: https://forum.makerdao.com/
Chat: https://chat.makerdao.com/home
Email: info@makerdao.com
Governance and Community Events Calendar:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar?cid=bWFrZXJkYW8uY29tXzNlZmhtMmdoaXBrc2VnbDAwOWt0bmlvbWRrQGdyb3VwLmNhbGVuZGFyLmdvb2dsZS5jb20
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Asking
kind
of
I
was
trying
to
start
discussion
on
why
people
are
so
afraid
of
unbacked
die,
which
is
kind
of
a
passionate
subject
for
some
and
prompted
some
passionate
responses,
but
yeah.
If
you,
if
you're
one
of
them
who
has
to
feel
strongly
about
for
or
against
magdalene,
I
would
suggest
leaving
a
message
in
there.
A
So
then,
we
had
a
poll
from
aaron
like
an
informal
poll
asking
what
we
should
do
with
system
surplus,
which
is
now
rapidly
growing,
again
kind
of
lots
of
lots
of
interesting
comments
and
we'll
see
the
poor
results
as
well,
where
we're
kind
of
gave
a
kind
of
brief
overview
of
what
the
community
thinks.
Winning
the
poll
by,
I
think
50
was
focusing
on
hiring
more
domain
teams
kind
of
indicating
a
kind
of
focus
towards
growth
among
the
community.
A
At
some
point,
it
would
be
useful
to
know
kind
of
what
the
costs
are
and
what
will
need
to
be
absorbed
by
the
dow
in
the
future,
and
then
we
had
a
it's
got
a
kind
of
risk-focused
discussion
from
primrose
talking
about
the
options
for
sort
of
unwinding,
stable
coin
exposure,
which
I
think
is
is
kind
of
quite
relevant.
Seeing
how
large
the
surplus
is
sorry
how
large
the
die
supply
has
grown
recently,
largely
with
stable
coins
as
backing.
A
Second,
consensus
wise
for
signal
requests.
I
kind
of
just
like
to
highlight,
when
I
posted
today
kind
of
on
behalf
of
the
mandated
actors
kind
of
the
aforementioned,
taking
a
more
flexible
and
transparent
approach
to
onboarding
collateral
kind
of
charles
made
up
charles
and
amy
made
some
posts
last
week
kind
of
talking
about
this
a
little
bit
and
kind
of
introducing
the
subjects.
This
is
kind
of
the
signal
to
determine
whether
we
follow
this
course.
A
So
I'd
encourage
everyone
to
vote
on
that
because
it
should
hopefully
have
like,
hopefully
have
a
significant
effect
on
on
kind
of
how
we
process
new
new
collateral,
hopefully
in
a
positive
way,
especially
a
little
light
on
signals
this
week,
which
is
kind
of
nice.
After
the
last
few
weeks
we
had
loads
one
other
one.
A
I
guess
one
other
thing:
I
wrote
a
post
highlighting
the
various
governance
processes
used
in
maker
dao,
and
I
imagine
most
of
the
people
on
this
call
are
familiar
with
them,
but
it
kind
of
gives
a
brief
overview
of
signal,
requests
and
declarations
of
intent
and
mips
and
why
there
are
three
different
processes
to
govern
things
and
what
are
the
benefits
of
using
each
one
and
then.
Finally,
I
think
david's
is
still
looking
for
people
to
join
the
summary
team
for
these
calls
and
potentially
others.
A
B
Yeah
sure
so
last
week
we
crafted
that
final
spell
and
got
it
out
and
it
we
increased
the
global
debt
ceiling
to
1.1
billion.
That's
pretty
noteworthy.
The
usdca
collateral
type
changed
to
400
million,
with
a
101
collateralization
ratio,
which
we
did
that
for
tusd
and
pax
usda.
So
all
of
those
are
101
percent.
B
B
B
So
we
had
a
couple
comments
on
that
and
then
he
updated
those
and
so
we'll
deal
with
that
next
week.
So
next
week,
we'll
probably
end
up
like
code
reviewing
that
module,
I
want
to
review
the
mip
21,
which
is
a
technical
mip
for
real
world
assets
and
maybe
see
if
we
can
flesh
that
a
little
bit.
I
think
that
lev
and
matt
rabinowitz
rabinowitzer
have
been
working
on
that.
So
it
looks
like
it's
it's
pretty
far
along.
B
A
B
C
C
C
We
had
a
bunch
of
white
listing
proposals,
so
we
had
one
from
ddex
for
the
btc
usd
oracle.
We
had
one
from
open
networks,
which
is
like
an
options
platform
that
was
actually
using
the
v1
oracles
that
we
shut
down,
and
so
they
were
kind
of
caught
out,
but
they
hadn't.
Let
us
know
that
they
were
even
using
it.
So
what
we
did
for
their
whitelisting
proposals
actually
wire
up
the
medianizer
v1
into
the
current
medianizer
v2.
C
C
This
is
for
their
new
ybtc
vault.
Essentially
you
can,
you
know
lock
up
btc
some,
some
kind
of
you
know
wrapped
btc
in
their
in
their
vaults.
It
would
go
and
open
up
a
vault
and
maker
lock
up
that
btc
borrow
die
and
then
use
that
die
to
earn
yield
and
the
yield
they
earn.
Then
is
converted
back
into
into
btc,
and
this
way
their
users
can
kind
of
earn
a
yield,
btc
yield
on
their
btc.
C
And
then
the
last
proposal
was
from
kyber.
They
have
some
kind
of
promo
token
that
they
use
as
kind
of
like
a
pseudo
stable
coin
during
their
hackathons,
and
they
need
the
the
eth
usd
oracle
for
for
pricing
that
so
so
they
did
a
wireless
proposal
as
well,
and
it
looks
like
that
one
passed,
so
that's
that's
kind
of
it
from
from
the
polling
vote,
governance
side
from
the
domain
team
side
in
terms
of
collateral
onboarding.
C
Last
week
I
submitted
the
the
onboarding
assessments
for
for
pax
g
and
for
for
yiffi
or
waifu
or,
however,
you
pronounce
it.
So
so
those
are
up.
If,
if
we
get
the
other
domain
teams
to
submit
their
onboarding
assessments,
then
we
should
be
able
to
do
these
two
pretty
soon,
and
I
think
that's
that's.
D
E
So
there's
still
ongoing
work
on
collateral
evaluations
on
our
site.
Bad
news
is
that
our
emergency
version
2
is
not
going
to
be
released
until
october,
which
might
be
a
bit
too
late
for
us
to
make
proper
lateral
evaluation
in
the
time.
So
instead
we
might,
we
might
do
another
asset,
some
other
one.
E
E
The
idea
is
to
unwind
stablecoin
exposure
and
charge
a
much
higher
fist,
and
then
we
are
charging
now
for
something
like
usdc
but
then
finally
yeah.
We
are
really
really
close
to
finalizing
the
new
rate
setting
approach,
so
this
will
be
posted
on
forums
probably
in
few
days
so
stay
tuned
and
that's
that's
it
from
our.
A
D
A
A
D
Okay,
so
this
week's
activity,
we
had
the
monthly
mips
governance
poll
published
on
monday
for
seven
proposals
that
passed
the
inclusion
poll
stage
and
they
ran
for
three
days
ending
today,
just
a
few
minutes
ago.
Really
so
the
monthly
mips
governance
poll
passed
with
the
following
results:
twenty
six
thousand
and
078
mkr
for
yes
and
zero,
no
votes.
So
that's
it's!
That's!
D
D
D
Well,
the
contents
of
it
will
be
rejected
and
on
thursday,
we'll
have
the
end
of
governance
cycle
review
summarizing
everything.
That's
happened
over
the
course
of
this
governance
cycle
and
opening
up
the
floor
for
feedback
questions.
Any
authors
who
want
to
propose
their
proposals
for
next
cycle
and
so
on.
D
In
the
world
of
collateral
onboarding
we
have
the
comp
link
and
lrc
collateral
types
moving
to
monday's
executive
and
the
september
collateral.
Onboarding
community
greenlight
polls
went
live
on
monday,
there's
15
of
them.
So
this
is
a
reminder
to
go
and
vote
to
express
your
feelings
towards
the
club
types
getting
added
and
indicating
to
the
domain
teams
that
you
think
they're
good
for
the
maker
protocol.
D
The
collateral
types
that
are
in
consideration
for
the
next
cycle
are
bal
pax
g,
wi-fi
and,
as
promoter
said,
eb
and
just
a
note
on
lend
it
was
pushed.
It
was
originally
planned
for
the
next
cycle,
but
given
that
the
migration
will
probably
be
delayed
a
little,
it
has
been
pushed
out
of
the
consideration
for
the
next
couple
weeks.
D
As
for
the
proposals
that
are
in
the
rfc
phase,
as
you
can
see
in
the
bolded
brackets,
these
are
all
the
proposals
that
are
eligible
for
october's
governance
cycle.
Whether
or
not
the
authors
want
to
propose
it
or
formally
submit
it
rather
to
the
cycle
is
up
to
them,
but
we,
it
could
potentially
be
a
very
busy
october
cycle,
so
I'll
send
a
link
for
my
mips
update
with
all
of
the
links
to
these.
D
D
The
nip
17
weekly
debt
ceiling
adjustments-
I
was
taken
over
by
planet
x
and
he
recently
posted
a
newer
version
of
it
in
the
forums.
So
please
go
and
check
that
out
and
then
lastly,
there
was
a
new
proposal
rip24
for
an
emergency
response
and
if
john
is
on
the
call,
he
may
give
a
brief
update
after
I
finish
this
to
explain
what
the
purpose
of
it
is
and
how
it
looks.
D
So
the
active
discussions
that
are
still
happening-
I
repeat
this
every
week,
but
it
seems
like
people
have
a
lot
to
say
about
these
topics.
Are
the
debt
ceiling,
instant
access
module,
the
governance
chief
contract
redesign,
which
ultimately
ties
into
potential
vote
delegation
solutions
and
then
the
liquidation,
2.0
redesign
as
well.
D
D
So,
what's
changing
well,
the
initial
plan
is
to
oh
well.
The
proposed
plan
is
to
suspend
the
usage
of
mips
8
10
11
12..
Now,
if
you're
not
familiar
with
all
those
proposals,
it's
domain
green
light
where
the
domains
effectively
let
the
community
know
which
assets
they
want
to
work
on.
Lib10
is
related
to
oracle
solutions
to
collateral
onboarding,
but
also
for
white
listing
and
onboarding
light
feeds.
D
D
So
by
having
a
weekly
cycle,
this
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
collateral
types
are
going
to
be
onboarded
every
week,
but
without
having
strict
deadlines,
the
domain
teams
can
work
on
the
solutions
in
batches.
So
let's
say
they
work
on
a
bunch
of
solutions
over
the
course
of
one
week
and
then
the
next
week
they
can
onboard
a
couple
or
x
amount
if
the
solutions
are
ready.
So
it
may
not
be
every
week,
but
it
allows
them
to
have
more
flexibility
around
the
whole
solution
side
of
things.
D
The
change
also
includes
providing
a
public
collateral,
onboarding
prioritization
framework,
so
this
is
with
respect
to
all
the
assets
that
have
been
greenlit,
giving
them
a
score
based
on
varying
risk
and
benefits,
and
so
on.
So
that
is
in
progress,
and
it's
currently
being
worked
on
by
the
domain
teams
deciding
what
metrics
to
consider
for
this
prioritization
framework
and,
of
course
the
framework
can
change
over
time.
It's
just
the
current
active
way
it
is
shaped
will
be
to
optimize
for
the
current
state
of
collateral,
so
it
it
involves
iterative
improvements.
D
So,
in
summary,
the
newly
proposed
cloud
onboarding
process:
it
begins
with
the
mipsix
application
pros
of
the
forums
and
after
two
weeks
a
community
greenlight
poll
will
be
put
up
and
published
for
the
last
two
weeks
of
the
government
cycle.
So
those
two
steps
do
not
change
at
all,
but
after
that
is
where
the
changes
come
in.
D
So
the
domain
teams
will
then
use
the
prioritization
framework
to
determine
which
assets
to
onboard
to
the
protocol,
and
it
will
be
publicly
viewable
by
anyone
in
the
community
to
see
how
these
scores
are
aligning
for
the
collateral
types
and
then,
after
that,
the
domain
teams
will
put
together
their
assessments
as
usual
and
they'll
be
published
to
the
forums.
But
it
will
not
be
bundled
up
in
a
mib
12
proposal
and
submitted
to
the
monthly
cycle.
D
So
that's
how
it
differs,
and
then
a
governance
poll
will
be
put
up
on
a
monday
of
a
weekly
cycle
containing
those
assessments
for
everyone
to
to
review
before
voting.
And
lastly,
if
that
poll
passes,
an
executive
vote
would
go
up
on
their
friday
to
ultimately
project
or
accept
those
cloud
types
to
the
protocol.
D
Yeah,
so
it's
not
a
permanent
change,
it
can
change.
Over
time
I
mean
the
the
current
process
is
really
optimized
for
a
long-term
state
of
cloud
onboarding
which
takes
a
lot
longer
for
review
and
when
the
system
is
ultimately
healthy
and
run
well
by
the
yeah
nothing's
permanent
but
yeah.
So
we
can
change
based
on
the
needs
of
mkr
holders
and
how
the
mandators
feel
with
respect
to
cloud
onboarding.
D
A
A
F
D
So
the
prioritization
framework
will
be
well
we're
still
figuring
out
the
details
of
where
it
will
be
hosted
and
maintained,
but
you
can
think
of
it
as
a
public
spreadsheet
with
all
the
collateral
green
light
assets
with
scores
next
to
them,
based
on
the
different
metrics,
which
will
also
be
there
to
see.
So
that's
how
it
will
look,
and
I
think
it
is
a
question
of
maintenance
on
how
much
time
it
will
take
the
domain
teams
to
do
that.
But
those
details
are
still
being
figured
out.
B
B
You
know
we
just
would
enjoy
the
agility
to
be
able
to.
You
know
really
ramp
up
and
get
more
collaterals
added
week
by
week.
There's
also
a
weird
kind
of
flow.
I
don't
know
if
you've
ever
done
any
sort
of
engineering,
but
to
sort
of
prep
something
to
work
on
it
and
then
finish
and
then
get
randomized
onto
something
else
for
a
few
weeks
and
then
have
to
come
back
at
the
end
of
the
cycle.
Is
it's
really
hard
to
get
all
of
that
state
sort
of
back
in
your
head?
B
G
Maybe
I
can
comment
on
the
on
the
collateral
call
so
yeah.
Yesterday,
yesterday
we
had
stanley
and
mark
from
other
presenting
their
their
token.
Their
meep
application
is
on
the
nip
six
applications
on
the
forum
and
we
also
had
tyler
and
cameron
winklevoss
from
gemini
with
the
rest
of
the
team,
the
team
of
from
gemini.
So
I
think
eric
and
marshall.
G
If
I
remember
correctly
very
interesting
call
you
can
you
can
check
the
video
it's
already
on
the
forum
and
gala
is
working
on
the
notes
next
week
september
30th
we're
going
to
have
the
real
world
assets
working
group
meeting.
So
if
you
guys
can
meet
sebastian
and
lucas
and
well
matthew
ravinovitz,
please
feel
free,
there's
already
a
working
group
in
the
forum.
G
I
think
amy
just
posted
the
link
on
the
chat
about
the
very
interesting
positions
with
the
with
the
target.
So
ideally,
everyone
can
help
to
to
reach
these
goals,
and
then
there's
there's
also
the
the
forum
post
from
charles,
explaining
all
the
modifications
that
he
just
summarized.
So
they
are
they're
quite
interesting
as
well,
and
then
please
vote
in
the
signal
request
that
that
was
posted
by
long
signed
by
all
the
the
well
the
domain
teams.
I
guess
that's
it
from
me.
A
A
I'm
guessing
it's
busy,
so
we'll
come
back
to
later,
all
right
cool,
I
guess
on
the
procedural
side,
yeah
just
doing
the
mips
governance
poll
review
that
charles
mentioned
earlier,
as
shaw,
said,
the
mip
poll
the
met
the
bundled
nipple
passed
with
a
fairly
healthy
amount
of
maker
on
it.
So
I
don't
think
there's
any
reason
not
for
it
not
to
continue
to
executive
next
next
week.
So
sorry
that
it's
continued
the
executive
on
monday
to
be
specific,
so
yeah
expect
that
on
monday.
A
All
right,
what
do
we
got
next
yeah?
So
we
guess
we
kind
of
discussed
this
a
little
bit
already,
but
I
can
add
down
a
segment
to
kind
of
discuss
the
collateral,
onboarding
changes
in
more
detail.
So
if
anyone
kind
of
does
have
more
questions
about
that,
I
guess
that'll
be
kind
of
a
good
time
to
go
over
them.
We
kind
of
heard
from
from
christmas
michael
jacks,
like
nick.
Do
you
want
to
kind
of
give
a
brief
kind
of
statement
on
how
to
affect
oracle's
or
well?
C
I
I
mean
it's
not
just
oracles
in
particular
right:
it's
the
yeah
yeah,
the
entire
collateral
onboarding
process,
I,
but
I,
but
I
think
oracle's,
just
a
little
bit
unique
in
that
when
in
in
in
terms
of
kind
of
how
the
work
scales
right.
So
the
the
biggest
thing
with
the
oracles
is
not
actually
implementing
the
the
code
for
for
every
unique
asset.
It's
it's
not
insignificant
work,
but
that's
not
the
majority
of
the
work.
C
The
majority
of
the
work
is
then
compiling
that
kind
of
into
a
package
right
for
for
the
new
oracle
kind
of
infrastructure
testing
that
extensively
you
know
before
we
feel
comfortable
rolling,
something
that
out
into
into
production
and
then
the
actual
deployment
right.
You
know
you
have
to
consider.
You
know
we
have
20.
I
believe
26
feeds
right
and
each
of
those
needs
to
update
individually,
and
you
know
for
for
for
some
of
them
right.
They
they
need
more
time
than
others
right.
C
They
they
need
some
heads
up,
they
need.
Sometimes
they
need
help
troubleshooting.
So
there's
a
really
big
kind
of
time
penalty
to
kind
of
going
through
that
process
multiple
times
multiple
times.
Multiple
times
right,
so
the
the
best
way
to
really
do
it,
which
is
what
we've
been
doing
right,
is
to
batch
kind
of
multiple
into
the
same
cycle
right.
So
if
you
implement
multiple
assets
right,
then
you
only
have
to
incur
the
testing
and
the
deployment
penalty
once
so.
C
Switching
to
this
kind
of
more
weekly
ad
hoc
cycle
for
collateral
onboarding,
I
think,
will
on.
On
the
one
hand,
I
think
it
makes
it
easier
in
terms
of
say,
the
risk
teams
and
the
smart
contracts
teams,
because
they
don't
necessarily
have
to
get.
You
know
something
done
say
by
a
certain
date,
the
beginning
of
the
month,
right
to
be
able
to
get
it
into
the
the
monthly
cycle,
but
from
an
oracle
perspective.
It
doesn't
actually
help
us
that
much
because
we
still
don't
have
the
flexibility
of
you
know
every
week.
C
Just
oh,
you
know
we
feel
like
doing
this
asset
this
week
right
in
and
getting
that
immediately
done
it.
The
the
changes,
just
don't
give
us
that
flexibility,
because
the
testing
and
deployment
cycle
are
basically.
You
know
three
week
things
now
that
being
said,
given
that
we
don't
have
the
arbitrary
dates
anymore
by
which
we
have
to
decide.
Okay,
you
know
this
month
we're
going
to
do
x,
y
and
z.
C
B
Again,
I
can
add
one
thing
to
that,
which
is
that,
while
all
that
work
is
happening
for
oracle's,
you
know
risks
and
risk
and
smart
contracts
can
work
on
things
like
the
fb
collateral
type,
because
we
already
have
an
oracle
for
that,
so
that
that
also
will
free
up
our
ability
to
work
on
these.
You
know
if
we
know
where
block
by
oracle
is
going
through
this
process.
We
can
maybe
prioritize
in
that
in
that
window
of
time
you
know
different
different
ilk
types
that
will
have
slightly
different
parameters.
E
F
Yeah,
so
just
the
simple,
simple
explanations
for
for
a
dummy
like
me
right,
I
put
together
a
mid-six
application,
for
I
don't
know
pickles,
that's
a
bad,
that's
a
good
example!
Maybe
bad
example,
and
then
I
put
another
one,
an
mid-six
for
I
don't
know
coinbase
token,
let's
say
right,
so
the
application
goes
on
the
forum
later
on
who's
who's,
gonna
determine
whether
pickles
or
coinbase
token
is
a
plus
or
a
negative
c,
or
triple
c
rated.
Who
determines
that
and
then
how
like
how?
F
C
So
so
so
that's
the
thing,
we're
basically
saying
it.
It
can't
just
be
two
weeks
right.
The
time
just
from
if
I
started
today,
working
on
this
to
having
an
oracle
in
production
is
three
weeks
right.
So
essentially
in
terms
of
agility
of
oh
there's,
a
new
token
that
came
out
today.
How
quickly
can
we
onboard
that?
That's
it?
It's
not
changing
in
terms
of
oh
we're,
magically
more
productive,
where
the
time
you
know
benefits
we're
getting
are.
Are
the
the
time
benefits
we're
getting?
C
For
then
going
in,
you
know
actual
on-chain.
You
know
changes
by
the
end
of
the
month
right.
So
if
you
miss
that
deadline
right,
if
you're
you
go,
if
the
deadline's,
the
fifth
and
you
get
in
on
the
sixth
right
currently,
then
you
have
to
wait
two
months
right.
Instead
of
just
that
one
month,
so
that's
where
the
the
time
is
kind
of
being
gained,
it's
not
being
gained
on
all
of
a
sudden
we're
magically
more
productive
from
from
the
technology.
Throughput
kind
of
side.
G
Yes
and
to
add
to
to
that
nick
something
that
charles
was
mentioning
is
the
the
collateral
onboarding
framework.
So
ideally,
we
can
have
a
transparent
way
of
showing
where
the
different
resources
from
the
different
teams
are
being
allocated
in
terms
of
getting
as
much
as
we
possibly
can
or
as
fast
as
possible.
So,
ideally,
this
framework
will
will
show
a
clear
path
and
a
clear
way
to
to
say
we're
going
to
focus
the
energy
or
the
bandwidth
on
on
this
on
these
collateral
types
and
again
circling
back
to
amy's
post.
C
Sure,
and-
and
I
mean
to
to
that
point-
I
I
completely
agree
right:
if
you
want
more
collateral
types
right,
you
just
need
to
onboard
more
domain
teams
right
and
since
now
we
have
this
grant
program
right,
the
domain
teams
can
be
can
be
funded.
So
so
that's
really
the
the
best
avenue
for
the
communities
right.
Finding
people
who
are
who
are
qualified,
who
will
do
high
quality
work?
C
You
know
maybe,
at
the
beginning,
there's
more
of
a
trial
period
where
kind
of
the
existing
domain
teams
kind
of
you
know
validate
a
lot
of
their
work.
You
know
to
make
sure
it's
like
high
quality,
but
essentially
yeah,
just
onboard
more
domain
teams
and
you'll
get
more
throughput
of
of
collateral
onboarding.
So
it's
it's
really
simple.
F
D
G
A
What's
you
know,
spending
some
time
to
kind
of
figure
out
like
the
potential
impact
of
the
various
like
options
for
like
of
like
the
various
collaterals
which
you
can
and
then
kind
of
figuring
out,
like
you
know
how
difficult
that
collateral
type
would
be
to
onboard.
You
know
how
much
time
we
can
expect
it
to
generate.
A
You
know
kind
of
figuring
out
some
kind
of
like
really
sort
of
high-level
metrics
of
like
to
try
and
figure
out
whether
it's
like
how
worth
it
is
to
spend
time
on
it,
which
will
be
what's
in
that
prioritization
framework,
which
is
public
and
then
I'll
kind
of
feed
into
like
a
kind
of
a
ranking
of
in
theory.
What
is
the
kind
of
the
just
kind
of
bang
for
the
time
buck
right
for
the
domain
teams.
A
H
H
So
the
general
sense
from
this
is
a
tremendous
amount
of
issuance
from
stable
coins.
People
are
still
willing
to
pay
four
percent
fee
for
a
short
time
there.
There
were
instances
where
people
were
willing
to
pay
50
for
ustcb,
though
that's
more
of
a
short-term
usage,
and
then
you
have
even
small
amounts
willing
to
be
issued
from
mana
at
12,
but
it
seems
that
for
the
stable
coin
usage
it
doesn't
seem
to
make
a
huge
impact.
H
What
the
stability
fee
is
obviously
at
50
that
calculus
changes
quite
a
bit,
but
when
we're
talking
about
you
know,
four
to
12
percent
doesn't
seem
to
be
a
huge
deterring
factor.
We've
actually
seen
a
lot
more
issues
lately,
so
how
does
that
translate
for
the
peg?
So,
basically,
what
we've
seen
in
the
last
week
is
a
comparatively
flat
peg
around
the
dollar,
one
obviously
moments
of
movement,
but
with
the
eth
price
being
relatively
flat
or
falling
a
bit
during
that
time
frame.
H
H
So
if
we
look
at
the
usdc
pairs,
so
uscc
in
that
same
time,
frame
was
basically
echoing
that,
with
decreased
variability
of
some
of
those
prices,
some
smaller
volumes
as
well.
We
had
around
the
15th
and
the
19th
was
large
volumes
traded
on
swerve
and
that
was
partly
associated
with
those
yield
farming
opportunities,
which
is
what
was
driving
a
lot
of
that
trading
volume.
So
since
then,
it's
basically
resumed
trading
heavily
on
curve.
H
And
then,
if
we
look
at
like
where
some
of
this
capital
is
obviously
a
massive
amount
of
die
issued
is
still
being
utilized
for
farming
wanted
to
revisit
a
slightly
older
stat,
which
was
the
amount
that
was
being
supplied
on
compound.
So
this
free,
you
know
when
this
all
kicked
off
was
a
massive
share
of
what's
going
on,
that
has
definitely
in
nominal
amounts
risen,
but
in
terms
of
the
percentage
of
the
dye
supply,
that's
sitting
as
excess
supply
on
a
compound.
H
This
is
actually
still
a
smaller
percentage,
because
you
know
it's,
you
know
roughly
280
million
excess
dye
that's
sitting
on
compound,
but
now
that
we
have
a
die
supply
of
900
million
on
a
percentage
basis.
Compound
is
accounting
for
a
smaller
amount
of
where
that
die
is
sitting,
and
then
we
have
basically
large
amounts
that
have
been
supplied
supplied
to
those
yield
farmers.
I
got
a.
H
Balancer
et
cetera,
sorry,
maurice
so
in
terms
of
what
that
ends
up
translating
to
in
terms
of
the
vaults
that
are
issued
from
these
positions.
So
basically
for
eth,
we
have
you,
know
those
few
largest
vaults,
accounting
for
a
very
large
percentage
of
the
overall
die
supply.
So
if
you
look
at
say
the
top
three
volts,
you
know
you
have
one
for
40,
mil
one
for
31,
13
and
13..
H
So
on
a
collateralization
basis,
these
these
largest
vaults
were
at
a
lower
collateral
percentage
the
previous
week.
So
basically,
what
we
saw
was
with
you
know,
rebalancing
collateral
against
movement
of
these
price.
Those
collateralizations
of
a
few
of
the
largest
positions
did
improve,
though
a
couple
of
them
were
basically
unchanged
and
then,
overall,
what
we
saw
was
the
total
collateral
pool
actually
got.
H
You
could
argue
riskier,
because,
even
though
it's
more
leveled
out
between
150
200
and
300
percent
collateralizations
prior
there
was
a
smaller
bucket
that
was
150
percent
to
200
collateralized.
So,
basically,
there
are
more
risky
positions,
but
some
of
the
largest
vaults
are
just
as
risky
or
less
risky
than
prior.
So
it
just
kind
of
flattened
out,
though
the
overall
risk
was
increased.
So
what
that
means
in
terms
of
these,
you
can
see
it
in
these
liquidation
walls.
H
So
basically,
at
an
eath
price
of
280
bucks,
you'd
expect
80
million
die
to
be
liquidated,
which
that
corresponds
to
you
know
basically
a
few
of
your
largest
vaults
at
230
bucks.
This
is
where
a
lot
of
those
smaller
vaults
come
in,
so
you'd
have
a
150
million,
basically
die
liquidated
underneath
price
of
230
and
then
just
to
touch
on
the
wbtc
vault.
So,
basically,
you
know.
Obviously
a
tremendous
amount
of
the
wbtc
collateral
positions
are
150-200
collateralized.
H
I
should
move
these
goal
posts,
so
we
can
look
at
the
smaller
increments,
but
what
you
can
see
is
they're,
basically
170
percent
collateralized
for
the
the
largest
few
positions,
which
accounts
for
just
a
massive
chunk
of
the
total
percentage
supply,
because
what
you
basically
have
is
you
know
three,
four,
five
large
faults
that
account
for
almost
well
a
huge
chunk
of
the
wbtc
dietitians
and
at
a
price
of
like
8
900
you'd,
basically
see
60
million
of
that
liquidated.
So
that's
that's.
H
We
have
a
similar
situation,
basically
with
the
pax
vaults
at
30
million.
So
there
is
a
discussion
here
around
the
general
trend
for
the
week,
which
is
the
dye
supply
is
basically
been
in
large
part
monopolized
by
stable
coins.
So
that's
that's
just
something
to
be
aware
of,
and
for
the
community
continue
discussing
to
decide
what
level
of
that
binary
risk
we're
comfortable
with
underwriting.
H
A
H
Yeah
so
with
the
with
the
liquidations
turned
off,
though
there's
there's
kind
of
a
mechanical
process
that
will
be
interesting
to
resolve
in
the
event
that
those
prices-
let's
say
you
know,
there's
some
disruption
in
how
pax
works
or
how
usdc
works
and
there's
a
discount
on
the
market.
Now
for
for
those
assets,
you
basically
have
a
massive
amount
of
under
collateralization
all
at
once,
even
though
the
liquidations
are
not
actively
being
undertaken.
H
F
H
H
By
and
large,
my
sense
is
that,
when
somebody's
chasing
a
700
or
1000
percent
yield,
they
aren't
sitting
there
saying
okay.
Well,
do
I
have
to
pay
two
percent
per
year
or
four
percent
per
year
six
percent
per
year,
like
I
don't
think
that
that's
necessarily
the
calculus,
so
I'm
not
sure
that
the
stability
fees
would
have
a
significant
impact.
I
wouldn't
expect
them
to
have
a
significant
impact
on
the
amounts
issued
from
stable
coin
vaults,
especially
considering
we're
just
talking
about
stupid,
stupid
amounts
of
supply
issued
chasing
stupid
percentage
yields.
H
I
think
a
four
percent
fee
is
kind
of
negligible
in
that
equation.
So
if
you
want
to
try
to
raise
that,
you
know
as
a
method
of
figuring
out
whether
there's
an
impact,
I
just
don't
expect
there
to
be
a
significant
impact
and
then
there's
a
question
of
like
well.
How
much
risk
are
you
actually
underwriting
with
a
basically
binary
failure
case
on
a
you
know,
400
million
dollar
dipole.
Like
that.
H
That
question,
I
think,
is
basically
an
answer.
That's
probably
a
lot
higher
than
what
the
current
percentages
are.
So
if
you're
going
to
set
stability
fees
simply
from
a
purpose
of
appropriately
compensating
for
risk,
you're,
probably
talking
a
lot
higher
than
what
the
costs
are
right
now
I
mean,
even
if
you
look
at
eth
right
at
zero
percent,
consciously
everyone
can
sit
there
and
say
it's
not
zero
percent
risk
so
yeah
as
far
as
what
percentages
to
set
them
to.
H
H
Well
and
that's
definitely
like
okay.
Well,
let's
say
you
had
a
10
fee
and
let's
say
you
had
a
large
vault
that
accrued
fees
that
basically
drove
its
collateralization
lower
below
the
line.
Then
at
what
like?
How
do
you
want
to
resolve?
There's
a
there's,
a
completely
non-theoretical
scenario,
where
how
you
want
to
resolve
the
liquidation
of
those
vaults,
given
that
liquidations
are
turned
off.
B
I
I
mean
for
what
it's
worth.
I,
I
think
we'll
probably
discover
a
reasonable
price
now
with
the
box.
So
if
we
wanted
to,
we
had
to
unwind,
I
think
we
could.
You
know,
turn
liquidations
on
ingest.
You
know
15
million
into
the
into
liquidations
and
then
turn
liquidations
off
again.
That
sort
of
thing
I
I
think,
there's
a
big
paradigm
shift
here,
though
I
I
don't
even
think
it
makes
sense
to
talk
about
stability
fees
with
the
cr.
B
This,
though
I
mean
people
are,
are
just
going
to
walk
away
from
these
vaults
like
they'll,
get
their
one
percent
and
they'll
they'll
abandon
it.
So
really
this
is
going
to
come
down
to
maker
dow
deciding
to
turn
liquidations
on
for
these
particular
collateral
types.
Whenever
we
go
below
peg,
I
would
argue
we
probably
don't
even
want
stability
fees
on
these,
because
that
just
is
gonna,
because
the
fee
accrual
will
will
push
them
under
collateralization
quicker.
B
F
In
and
say,
one
thing
is
that
those
fees
can
be
a
little
misleading
because
we
put
a
fee
on
it.
They
start
to
accrue
into
the
surplus.
So
on
paper
you
know
it
looks
like
there's
a
large
surplus,
but
in
actuality
no
one's
ever
going
to
cover
those
fees
and
they're
just
going
to
turn
into
bad
debt
upon
liquidation.
F
H
F
B
F
Well,
yeah,
I'm
just
trying
to
close
the
loop
right.
I
think
there's
an
additional
problem
like
if
usdc
were
to
go
into
liquidation,
like
the
the
nice
thing
about
having
that
usdca
vault.
Is
it's
a
way
for
you
know
if
you,
if
an
ether
option
happens,
you
buy
the
e,
if
you,
let's
say
theoretically,
sell
it
on
coinbase
for
usd
you
take
that
usd
and
you
convert
it
to
usdca,
and
now
you
you
can
mint
more
die.
F
That's
where
I'm
having
a
little
trouble
understanding
like
what
are
the
implications
of
that?
Well,
let's
try
to
think
through
it,
so
your
market
maker
you
buy
in
an
auction
some
usdc
by
giving
die.
So
now
you've
got
usdc
and
what
are
your
options?
You
can
sell
it
on
the
market
for
dye.
You
can
put
it
back
into
a
usdca
vault
and
generate
some
dye
under
the
assumption
that
you'll
be
able
to
unwind
that
position
over
the
coming
days
or
weeks.
A
E
Yeah,
that's
that's
the
idea.
I
mean
you
wouldn't
be
liquidating
those
walls
and
doing
this
recycle
because
you
would
be
just
having
the
same
usdc
same
use
this
exposure,
so
you
should
be
doing
this
when
die,
price
falls
and
demand
trends
a
bit
and
then,
when,
once
you
acquire,
you
see
it's
easier
for
you
to
buy
die
because
there's
no
push
anymore
on
the
demand
side.
C
This
should
be
helped
quite
a
bit
because
you
can
kind
of
do
effectively
do
like
a
rollover
where
right
you,
basically
flash
as
long
as
you
have
debt
ceiling
right
and
you
have
liquidations
2.0
enabled
you
can
kind
of
just
say,
borrow
usdc
or
pax
or
tusd
right
borrow
some
dye
liquidate.
One
of
the
vaults.
B
Lies
so
so
my
intuition
on
this
is
that
it's
like
all
of
it
like
I
at
this
point,
I
don't
see
why
you
would
maintain
a
usdca
vault
at
all.
I
would
take.
I
would
take
the
maximum
amount
of
usdc
I'd
put
it
in
I'd.
Take
the
max
amount
of
time
against
it
and
with
a
four
percent
accrual
in
the
very
next
block,
it
would
take
itself
into
uncollect
under
collateralized
and
ready
for
liquidation
like
right
now
it
just.
I
just
don't
see
the
value
in
in
holding
it.
B
C
Is
200
that
makes
the
most
sense
right
because
it's
completely
profitable
to
take
the
maximum
amount
of
leverage
possible
right,
as
long
as
die
is
above
the
dollar
one
peg,
which
the
reason
that
you
know
the
uscc
debt
ceiling
you
know
keeps
growing
by
you
know,
x,
amount
of
million
per
day
is
as
soon
as
we
tick
over.
You
know
a
dollar
and
one
someone.
Does
this
this
flash
loan
transaction
to
knock
it
back
down?
C
H
B
B
Yeah,
I
like
the
idea
that,
if
we're
under
collateralized
on
usdc
b
that
we
can
test
a
liquidation
there,
we
can
also
we
don't
have
to
just
turn
liquidations
on
and
see
what
what
happens
with
15
million.
We
can
craft
a
spell
that
that
does
the
liquidation
and-
and
you
know,
and
do
a
few
that
way
just
to
see
what
it
would
look
like
in
the
auctions.
So.
E
I
just
just
want
to
mention
one
thing,
so
it's
not
completely
true
that
those
vaults
are,
you
know,
all
of
them
are
just
going
to
be
unwinded
right.
So
just
imagine
like
there's
there's
50
million
diamonds
tomorrow
from
some
cool
asset
I
can
say
which
one
but
let's
imagine
the
price
would
go
below
one
on
one
and
the
vault
owners
who
supposedly
abandoned
their
world
would
of
course
buy
it
right
below
one
or
one
they
would
buy
it
and
they
would
close
their
wall
because
they
would
get
some
additional
money
back
right.