►
From YouTube: Governance and Risk Meeting #128
Description
## Introduction
* @LongForWisdom: Hosting, Introduction, Agenda.
## Weekly Updates
* Governance - @Gov-Facilitators + Contributors
* Smart Contracts - @Smart-Contracts
* Oracles - @Oracles
* Risk - @Risk
* Real World Finance - @SebVentures
* Operational Support - @operational-support
* Community Development - @Anna
* MIPs - @MIP-Editors
## Procedural
None this week!
## Segments
None this week!
## 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
B
A
Are
probably
fed
up
with
me
saying
this
at
this
point
so
yeah
as
usual,
we've
got
a
bit
of
an
agenda
to
get
through
and
we've
got
some
updates
from
from
people
at
maker,
land
and
yeah
I'll.
I
guess
I'll
just
do
the
usual
preamble.
If
you
have
comments
or
want
to
interrupt,
please
do
we'd
like
to
hear
from
people.
Please
don't
be
shy.
A
A
A
Speaking
of
executives,
last
week's
executive
has
now
passed
past
a
little
late
on
thursday
wait
till
this
thursday.
Earlier
today,
so
we
saw
a
little
bit
less
participation
than
usual
in
both
the
executive
and
the
polls,
presumably
because
the
crisis
of
gas
on
the
ethereum
network
is
now
kind
of
huge.
A
So
that's
something
we'll
be
kind
of
keeping
an
eye
on
going
forwards
like
we're,
starting
to
get
a
little
concerned
about
the
prices
and
impact
on
voting
and
probably
other
parts
of
the
maker
protocol
as
well.
But
I
have
to
worry
about
waiting.
So
I
spoke
to
us
about
contracts
briefly
this
week
about
some
like
possible
emergency
measures.
We
could
take
if
we
start
having
problems,
so
there
should
be
avenues
we
can
like
look
into
if,
if
it
does
get
sort
of
unconsciously
unconscionably,
which
is
comforting.
A
A
So
so
the
kind
of
doing
the
whole
knowledge
transfer
thing.
We
need
to
get
redundancy
in
the
governance
domain,
which
is
good
documentation
continuing
to
move
forward.
Slowly,
I'm
going
to
try
and
emerge
some
psm
documentation
soon,
so
we
can
link
to
it
in
some
of
the
upcoming
polls
regarding
the
psmps
and
then
just
find
a
reminder.
The
governance,
core
units,
mipster
proposals
are
up
on
the
forum
and
I
would
appreciate
if
people
could
read
them
and
give
any
feedback
that
they
have
like
it's
not
like.
A
C
Absolutely
hello,
everyone
another
fine
week
on
the
forum
start
off
with
a
little
three-point
summary
here,
we're
hoping
it
would
happen
before
the
meeting
but
died
supplies
just
short
of
2
billion
right
now,
so
pretty
exciting
got
about
18
and
a
half
million
to
go
to
hit
that
number,
so
maybe
it'll
happen
during
the
meeting.
If
it
does
you'll
see
me
celebrating
over
here.
C
One
exciting
thing
for
the
last
week,
though,
is
ethan,
did
pass
that
billion
dollar
mark,
which
is
super
exciting.
First,
first
of
our
vault
types
to
have
over
a
billion
of
die
drawn
against
it,
and
likewise
the
peg
is
still
looking
really
solid
at
v
wap
sitting
around
1.001
and
I
posted
a
little
chart,
I
guess
of
all
right
trying
to
get
better
about
providing
that
for
a
link
to
governments
at
a
glance,
but
provided
a
little
chart
there.
C
C
As
far
as
active
discussions
on
the
forums
go,
we
got
a
great
one
on
a
pre-mip
discussion
about
a
psm
flapper
andy
from
the
risk
team
brought
this
one.
It's
basically
a
proposal
talking
about
using
the
usdc
that
comes
in
from
our
psm
to
buy
back
and
burn
mkr
tokens
and
another
cool
discussion.
That's
going
on
is
minting
new
die
to
offset
lost
eye.
A
new
user
came
in
and
posted
about,
having
sent
about
10k
die
to
to
a
contract,
address,
obviously
isn't
gonna
ever
be
restored.
C
Unfortunately,
so
discussing
the
possibility
of
of
minting
die
in
in
these
objectively
lost
situations,
so
go
in
and
weigh
in
on
those.
If
you
have
ideas,
we
do
have
a
number
of
signals
from
this
week.
The
first
two
I
want
to
highlight,
because
they're
they're
ending
soon
or
just
got
extended
first,
one
being
pramosh
brought
the
second
set
of
the
instant
access
module
debt
ceiling
parameters
for
a
whole
host
of
other
assets.
That
poll
is
supposed
to
end
tomorrow.
C
C
Likewise,
it
looks
like
we're
just
extended
the
poll
on
raising
the
eath,
a
line
given
that
we
only
had
about
20
21
participants
this
morning
like
to
see
that
number
up
there
a
little
higher
as
far
as
new
polls
go.
Hexanot
sam
brought
us
a
couple,
really
cool
ones,
the
first
one
being
signaling
for
what
the
community
feels
the
fee
should
be
on
the
flashmix
module
that
still
hasn't
come
out
yet
on
chain,
not
executive,
thanks
along
sorry
about
that.
C
And
finally,
our
last
signal
I
want
to
highlight
is
alexis
brought
a
signal
to
turn
down
the
debt
ceiling
of
the
stable
coin
vaults
to
zero
a
couple
options
in
there,
also
for
just
starting
with
usdc
that
one
is
set
to
expire
a
week
from
today,
so
another
one
you
probably
want
to
get
in
there
and
give
your
opinion
on
anyway.
That's
all
from
me
in
the
forums.
C
A
Yeah,
thank
you
very
much
pros
yeah.
If
you're,
not
any
questions
or
more
comments
on
things
on
the
forum
feel
free
to,
let
us
know
one
thing
I
was
kind
a
couple
of
people
mentioned
in
the
chats
the
other
day
that
are
having
trouble,
keeping
track
of
some
of
the
signal
requests
that
have
gone
up
recently.
D
So
those
are
the
sort
of
alternate
collateral
types
for
f,
a
and
wbtc,
so
different
different
parameters.
Those
are
both
interesting
because
we
don't
already
have
a
collateral
assessment
for
those,
so
maybe
we'll
use
this
opportunity
to
actually
get
a
collateral
assessment,
technical
assessment
for
each
of
those
and
then,
as
far
as
collateral,
to
covan
we're
hoping
to
get
mip21
in
on
friday.
So
we're
we're
very,
very
close
to
that.
D
D
We
had
some
minor
updates
to
the
rfc
and
we
made
some
sort
of
small
enhancements
to
liquidations2o
on
a
separate
branch
right
now,
which
are
just
like
gas,
optimizations
and
stuff.
But
they're.
The
auditors
are
still
continuing
to
work
on
on
the
like
main
sort
of
code
frozen
version,
so
so
that
work
continues
and
we
sort
of
met
with
them
and
been
working
with
them
as
well
and
then
for
mip
21.
D
Lev
has
looked
at
some
of
those,
I
think
we're
still
waiting
on
maybe
an
opinion
from
lev
about
one
of
our
changes
and
also
from
will
and
we're
looking
at
the
unit
tests
and
integration
tests
to
just
sort
of
finish
that
up,
so
that
we
can
deploy
it
on
friday
to
covan
matt
you're
on
the
call
I'll
just
mention
we'll
we'll
do
the
the
testing
of
the
conduit,
probably
sometime
on
friday
and
then
for
mip
22.
There
is
an
outstanding
pr
there
that
we
have
to
review.
D
It
was
some
changes
made
to
that.
We
had
suggested
and
we
just
we're
still
like
cooking
with
fire
on
mit
21,
so
we're
we're
pushing
through
on
on
that
and
then
we'll
flip
over
to
map22
for
security
work.
There
was
some
defining
of
the
security
roadmap
and
the
mission
statement,
and
also
documenting
like
a
tutorial
for
formal
verification
and
there's
a
a
couple.
Defcon
spills
we
have.
These
are
our
spells
in
case
you're,
unfamiliar
they're
spells
that
we
use
in
case
of
emergency.
D
We
get
them
all
pre-deployed
and
ready
to
go.
We
have
to
make
some
updates
to
those
and
we
need
to
add
the
uni
v2
die
usdc
to
that.
Actually
we're
going
to
make
a
different
change.
We're
going
to
we're
going
to
detect
whether
or
not
they're
the
stable
coin
is
even
there
and
then
and
fix
those.
So
those
will
be
deployed.
D
E
So
right
now
I
mean
we
are
focused
entirely
on
these
real
world
assets
and
then
some
of
the
other
things
that
have
been
voted
in
it
would
be
nice
to
be
able
to
focus
some
efforts
on
l2
research.
I
know
some
other
teams
inside
of
the
foundation
have
been
doing
some
some
research
on
it
as
well,
but
I
don't
know
if
we
can
announce
anything
yet
so
we
don't.
E
H
H
One
is
that
we,
we
have
been
doing
some
research
and
thinking
about
ways
to
to
deal
with
the
fact
that
there
are
many
l2
solutions
and
there
are
many
ways
of
integrating
with
those
l2
solutions,
and
it
might
not
be
clear
for
regular
users
like,
which
are
the
official
quote-unquote
integrations,
which
are
not
the
official
maker
integrations
and,
of
course,
that
that
kind
of
trust
issue
comes
with
security
implications
which
led
us
to
believe.
That
would
be
good
if
the
community
would
have
an
evaluation
framework
to
yeah.
To
do.
H
In
particular,
I'm
not
going
to
give
too
much
details
about
that
one,
because
I'm
not
sure
what
the
communication
strategy
is
of
the
team
that
is
involved,
but
I
just
want
to
mention
that
it
is
happening.
So
this
is
a
much
more
practical
approach
where
we're
looking
into
the
nitty-gritty
details.
Not
just
the
high
level
strategy
aspect
and
yeah,
I
would
expect
results
from
those
or
like
at
least
discussion
starting
on
the
forum
yeah.
A
H
If
there
are
any
other
initiatives
or
people
with
an
idea
of
how
we
can
approach
this,
then
you
should
definitely
go
ahead
and
and
continue
to
work
on
that,
regardless
of
the
work
that
is
happening
within
the
foundation,
I
can
assure
everyone
that
we
don't
have
all
the
answers
at
the
moment.
So
there's
a
lot
of
input
that
we
can
get
and
the
feedback
and
ideas
from
the
community
so
don't
hold
back.
G
Yeah,
so
again
repeating
what
I
said
and
echoing
vouchers
and
brian's
comments,
I
think
that
this
is
something
the
governance
would
pay
for.
It's
it's
a
matter
of
organizing
the
the
budget
getting
it
approved
and
having
a
facilitator
and
a
core
unit
organizing
it,
but
I
think
it's
already
doable
and
we
should.
We
should
definitely
think
about
doing
it.
A
I
So
I
think
those
are
going
into
the
executive
into
tomorrow's
executive,
not
looking
forward
to
that,
because
each
of
those
contracts
is
going
to
cost
like
400
bucks
to
deploy.
You
know
that's
just
kind
of
how
the
world
works
right
now:
kind
of
crazy
in
terms
of
assessments,
we're
working
on
the
the
cf
drop
assessment,
we're
working
on
rap
btc,
die
assessment
and
a
few
other
ones.
I
So
I
think
I
think
that'll
be
cool
for
us
to
kind
of
get
a
little
bit
of
experience,
working,
how
working
with
sarkware
functions
and
behaves
and
what
kind
of
the
benefits
and
drawbacks
are
there.
So
so
we
are
kind
of
experimenting
with
l2.
You
know
once
once
optimism
gets
going.
Maybe
we
can.
We
can
look
a
little
bit
in
that
direction
as
well,
because
I'm
sure
we'll
have
customers
of
the
oracles
who
are
going
to
be
transitioning
to
to
l2
as
well.
I
I
I
The
other
thing
is
we
should.
I
think
water
brought
this
up
earlier,
but
we
should
probably
be
talking
about
ways
to
mitigate
gas
usage
for
the
oracles.
It's
really
crazy
right
now.
I
think
for
those
of
you
who
didn't
read
a
comment
or
coming
up
on.
If
the
current
gas
prices
continue,
it
would
be
16
million
a
year
just
for
gas
prices
right,
which
is
absolutely
insane.
I
So
I
I
think,
there's
there's
some
things
that
we
can
do,
but
we
need
to
kind
of
decide
as
a
community
what
we're
willing
to
do
and
what
we're
not
so
right
now
we
update
most
assets
on
a
kind
of
one
percent
threshold.
So
every
time
the
price
changes
by
one
percent.
You
know
we'll
update
and
then
we
have
certain
assets
right
for
very
large
vaults,
so,
for
example,
eth
and
and
rap
btc,
that
are
on
a
much
stricter
interval.
It's
a
half,
a
percent
right.
I
So
so
it's
that's
kind
of
crazy
right
now
right.
So
what
are
some
things
we
can
do?
Well,
we
could
up
the
threshold,
for
you
know,
assets
that
don't
see
much
usage
to.
You
know
a
three
four,
maybe
even
five
percent
threshold,
so
that
would
cut
down
on
the
cost
significantly
right,
but
risk
would
also,
you
know,
need
to
be
consulted
right
because
you
know
there's
technically
with
with
the
existing
collateralization
ratios
right.
I
You
know
if,
if
the
oracle
price
doesn't
update,
that
can
be
like
a
five
percent
discrepancy
right
to
the
the
actual
trading
price.
So
that's
that's
something
to
take
into
account.
Another
alternative
right
is
that
we
just
start
delisting,
some
of
the
some
of
the
vaults
that
just
aren't
seeing
much
usage.
I
I'm
personally
not
a
big
fan
of
that
approach.
Right
we've
spent
a
lot
of
time.
Integrating
these
assets-
and
you
know
just
because
they
don't
see
any
usage-
now-
doesn't
mean
that
things
can't
just
suddenly
start
to
to
become
very
popular
right
like
I'll.
Give
you
an
example
right
with
the
with,
with
things
like
like
yield,
farming
right,
that
type
of
gamification
made
some
assets
all
of
a
sudden.
You
know
very
popular
right
on
on
compound,
for
instance,
right
with
with
comp
farming.
I
I
I
It
may
actually
not
be
worth
it
if
you
don't
have
enough
prices
you're
trying
to
update
at
a
single
point
in
time.
So
there's
there's
no
real
magical
bullet
here
you
know
it's
it's
not
like.
So,
for
example,
I
can,
I
can
assure
you
chain
link-
is
spending
probably
just
as
much,
if
not
more
than
us,
because
they're
they're,
not
very
gas
efficient.
F
Yeah,
okay,
sorry,
sorry
long
nick
I
got
a
quick
question
and
gonna
switch
a
little
bit
of
the
gears
here
and
not
concentrate
on
gas.
So
much,
but
you
know
I
was
listening
to
this
podcast
about
one
of
my
favorite
subjects.
Lately
nfts
and
they
had
iraq,
the
artist
and
trevor
mcfady's,
I
think,
is
his
last
name
who
invented
that
that
girl
robot
little
little
mckillah.
I
think
I
don't
know
something
like
that.
Anyway,
she's
got
like
three
million
instagram
followers
and
well.
F
I
I
mean
I
love
that
there's
rumors
about
us,
you
know
being
the
first
to
do
anything,
usually
we're
like
the
last
to
do
anything.
So
that's
sounds
like
our
public
image
is
flipped,
so
that's
cool,
but
in
terms
of
how
do
you
price
an
nft,
I
mean
that's
a
difficult
problem.
Right
I
mean
most
nfts
are
very
illiquid
right.
The
potential
for
manipulation,
if
you
only
have
one
exchange
right
wherever
this
is
being
traded,
is
just
massive
right.
I
You
know
without
experiencing
the
slippage,
so
I
would
say
it's
very
tricky
to
to
price
nfts
right
in
a
way
that
that
can't
be
manipulated
and
I'd
say,
the
risk
to
the
system
is
also
quite
high,
because
you
know
what
is
the
like.
Like
nfts
are
kind
of
trending
right
now,
and
I
think
that's
great,
you
know
we
need
to
have
more
use
cases
on
ethereum.
Besides,
just
finance
right
finance
can't
be
the
only
thing.
I
The
the
underlying
value
of
these
things
is
extremely
questionable
right.
They
can
be
really
fun,
it
can.
But
you
know,
let's,
let's
take
a
crypto
punk
as
an
example.
Right
now
you
know
they
had
a
price
spike
and
they're
all
kind
of
trading
around.
I
think
like
ten
thousand
dollars
at
a
minimum,
or
something
like
that,
which
is
super
awesome,
but
let's
say
the
market.
You
know
crashes
and
goes
to
a
bear
market
in
six
months.
I
What
are
crypto
punks
worth
when
people
are
not
feeling
very
rich
when
people
are
very
risk
off,
is
a
crypto
punk
still
going
to
be
10
000?
I
highly
doubt
it.
I
think
you
just
go
back
to
seeing,
like
you
know,
a
thousand
dollar
or
five
hundred
dollar
crypto
punks
and
you
know
that's
gonna,
be
it's
gonna,
be
very
sudden.
It's
not
like
a
smooth
kind
of
process,
and
that
makes
it
very
difficult
in
terms
of
both
pricing
and
in
terms
of
liquidation
risk.
F
Yeah,
that
makes
sense,
and
and
even
if
nftx
does,
their
sort
of
like
hedge
fund
vehicle
of
a
bunch
of
different
nft
collections
and
I
think
blackpool
2
of
state
dao,
they're
gonna
do
the
same
thing.
They
already
bought
this
zambape
if
you're
into
soccer
from
psg,
they
paid
a
hundred
and
something
thousand
for
it
right,
so
that
that
also
wouldn't
work
in
the
short
term
right,
nftx.
I
C
F
F
I
A
J
J
So
hopefully
it
will
either
change
status
this
week
or
be
combined
into
a
another
map
that
has
already
been
proposed
from
alexis
in
terms
of
rfc.
We
have
a
total
of
33
actually
34
now,
because
david
just
updated
another
amendment
map
in
our
in
the
rfc
stage,
which
is
incredible
just
to
see
the
progress
we've
had
over
the
past
couple
months
and
the
community
activity
is
just
really
heartwarming.
J
J
J
It's
essentially
just
an
extension
on
the
psm,
with
leveraging
usdc
via
die
using
cdy
vmip33,
the
maker
price
stability
module,
which
allows
governance
to
defend
an
mkr
price
by
pre-allocating,
die
to
buy
at
that
predefined
level.
By
governance,
we
have
the
pretty
well
known
keg
streaming:
payments
module
the
34
by
sam.
This
proposal
provides
that
smart
contract
implementation
for
streaming
payments
to
maker
and
mip
35,
which
is
that
psm
combined
mixed
exposure
with
the
addition
of
farming
capabilities.
On
top
of
it.
J
J
Outside
of
that
mipset,
we
have
42,
which
is
a
proposed
compensation
for
make
it
our
contributors.
I
believe
this
is
by
andrew
andrew
bourbon,
and
it
proposes
to
pay
contributors
partially
and
timelocked
mkr
to
increase
value,
returned
to
contributors
and
align
their
interests
with
the
core
principles
of
maker
dow
myth.
43
is
the
term
lending
module
proposed
by
alan,
I
believe,
from
yield,
and
it
is
a
maker
module
to
buy
and
hold
tokenized
fixed
rate,
fixed
term
loans
to
maturity,
to
encourage
fixed-rate
lending
market.
J
J
We
have
mip
48,
which
is
also
new,
and
it
is
about
streaming
payments
via
the
keg
module
which
I
mentioned
earlier.
So
it
describes
how
to
use
the
keg
and
the
method
for
streaming
data
various
addresses
at
a
defined
rate
and
lastly,
for
mips
we
have
myth
49,
which
is
governance,
rewards,
and
this
proposes
the
creation
of
governance
awards
that
would
allow
the
amcare
community
and
holders
for
locking
their
mtr
tokens
and
governance
and
grow
rewarded
for
it.
J
J
Then
there's
a
a
bunch
of
core
unit,
onboarding
proposals
for
governance
and
risk,
so
onboarding
a
core
unit
budget,
onboarding,
the
core
unit
itself
and
the
coordinate
facilitator
onboarding
formally
for
both
the
risk
and
governance
teams,
as
well
as
the
real
world
finance
team.
So
these
are
proposed
by
a
long.
J
And
yeah,
due
to
the
lack
of
space,
I
wasn't
able
to
do
shorts
like
tldrs
of
these
proposals,
but
I
can
link
to
them
in
the
forums
after
this
now.
In
terms
of
premium
discussions,
we
have
a
couple
new
ones,
mostly
just
repeats
and
active
discussions
on
the
most
popular
ones
in
the
past,
but
the
most
newest
one
is
the
psm
flapper.
J
So
this
is
suggesting
any
improvements
or
changes
to
mip
35,
as
it
is
also
an
rfc,
so
it
can
be
changed
and
we
also
have
the
vaults
with
the
liquidation
ratio
less
than
the
cr,
which
has
been
pretty
active
over
the
past
couple
weeks
and
the
other
recent
one
was
the
collateralization
of
commodities
for
purposes
of
financing,
duties
and
tariffs.
So
that
seems
like
a
very
interesting
one.
J
I
suggest
checking
it
out
and
of
course
we
have
the
constant
discussion
of
the
liquidation
system
redesign
and
the
technical
summary
of
it
paired
with
the
actual
proposal
of
that
mip-45
going
on
in
the
forums
and,
lastly,
there's
the
delegation
of
authority
premier
discussion
as
well
all
right
so
in
terms
of
cloud
onboarding
updates.
Right
now
we
have
two
governance:
clara
onboarding
governance
pulls
live,
that's
for
the
link,
eath
and
uni
eat
uni,
v2
lp
tokens,
and
we
have
two
proposals
waiting.
Oh
wait.
Sorry
ignore
this.
J
They
will
be
up
for
two
weeks
and
we
have
a
total
of
12
proposals.
As
you
can
see,
a
lot
of
them
are
lp
tokens,
but
we
also
have
a
re-vote
for
ray
now,
as
they
have
made
a
couple
updates
to
their
application
and
have
had
conversations
with
the
community.
So
we
felt
that
it
will
be
eligible
for
resubmission
in
a
revote
from
the
mcu
community
and
yeah.
That's
about
it
from
me.
So
I'll
pass
it
off
to
the
next
agenda
item.
A
K
K
This
should
go
into
ancient
port
next
monday,
and
then,
if
confirmed,
we
should
have
all
wall
types
using
this
module
apart
from
unilps,
where
we
also
plan
to
propose
this
parameters
soon
and
for
stablecoins.
We've
already
suggested
that
this
wall
type,
this
module,
wouldn't
be
really
applicable
due
to
the
liquidity
crunch
reasons
and
so
on.
Lately
we're
also
monitoring
the
growth
of
heat
that
exposure,
as
was
mentioned
trades
group,
might
propose
another
rate
increase
on
the
day.
K
The
last
one
wasn't
implemented
yet,
but
should
be
this
friday,
if
confirmed,
and
the
idea
would
be
to
try
to
lower
the
the
pace
of
that
growth
there
simultaneously
we're
running
simulations
on
each
c
wall
type.
So
this
would
be.
This
would
be
the
new
wall
type
with
a
higher
liquidation
ratio,
and
the
idea
would
be
to
try
to
stimulate
world
users
e-tail
world
users
to
migrate
to
safer
world
type,
which
would
be
easy
or
just
try
to
get
new
die
meeting
from
it
to
be
done.
K
On
each
c
on
the
on
the
safer
wall
type,
the
strategy
could
be
a
bit
questionable
because
it
doesn't
seem
that
borrowers
are
very
rate
sensitive
currently,
so
it
remains
unclear
what
kind
of
spread
between
etay
and
ec
would
would
needed
to
be
made
for
users
to
to
really
move
to.
You
know
to
a
world
type:
that's
actually
less
capital
efficient.
K
We
also
made
a
report
on
auctions
this
week
using
this
year's
data.
In
summary,
there
was,
I
think,
150
150
auctions
this
year
maker
collected
more
or
less
all
penalty
fees,
so
about
half
half
a
million
on
all
worlds.
It
also
seems
that
waltz
were
getting
appropriate
amounts
of
collateral
back,
but
there
was
there
seemed
to
be
one
option,
though,
where,
where
maker
didn't
collect
a
full
amount
of
penalty
fee-
and
this
was
one
auction
on
die-
eat
unilp
vault.
K
Additionally,
we'll
we'll
also
try
to
get
a
bit
more
to
do
a
bit
more
pr
about
this
potential
change
around
d5,
because
yeah
this.
This
would
hopefully
attract
more
keepers
on
board
to
to
beat
on
this
this
type
of
auctions,
and
that's
that's
pretty
much
it
going
forward.
We're
mostly
focused
now
on
liquidations,
2.0
and
just
doing
our
other
regular
risk
related
work.
So
that's
that's.
A
A
A
L
L
One
thing
that
is
important
is
that
we
are
working
on
is
the
on-boarding
process
for
asset
originators,
because,
obviously,
most
of
the
time
asset
acetogenators
are
from
the
traditional
finance
and
they
don't
understand
all
the
meep
six
meep
30
and
all
the
mips
stuff
and
the
defy
stuff
in
general.
So
we
have
now
a
nice
sheet
to
explain
also
the
process
to
them.
L
That's
also
something
that
was
put
on
the
forum
with
fydi
and
what
are
the
application,
because,
obviously,
if
you
make
a
promise
to
land
for
a
long
period
of
time
at
a
fixed
rate,
if
the
dice
supply
decreases,
that
might
be
an
issue
what
we
call
a
liquid
tissue.
So
some
research
should
be
done
in
this
direction
to
see
if
it's
possible
at
all,
if
it's
a
big
risk
and
if
there
is
a
risk,
what
is
the
limit
of
the
risks
that
we
can
take
and
that's
about
it?
A
M
A
M
We
just
started
put
we're
gonna
start
posting,
our
updates
on
the
forum,
so
you
can
see
them
in
the
thread
and
go
to
all
the
links
and
I'll
just
give
you
the
highlights
for,
for
the
know,
your
mip,
we
did
do
the
keg
last
friday
and
then
the
long-term
lending
module
from
alan
from
yield,
portico
and
lev,
who
kind
of
co-wrote
that
both
highly
recommended
to
check
it
out.
The
recordings
are
there
and
then
with
collateral.
M
Onboarding
that's
happening
next
wednesday
is
fortuna
fi,
which
is
the
yield
and
lending
protocol
for
tokenized,
real
real
world
clash,
flow
cash
flowing
assets
and
then
a
huge
chunk
of
ours.
We've
been
working
mostly
on
core
unit
stuff,
so
starting
with
the
community
call
that
was
frank
and
juan
and
imeo
and
pros
actually
also
another
recording
where
they
kind
of
broke
down
the
the
unit
and
answered
some
questions.
M
The
second
one,
a
second
section
is
there
are,
as
you
see
a
few
mips
and
sub
proposals,
so
the
framework
itself,
the
core
unit
framework
itself,
risk
governance,
real
world
finance,
suggests
kind
of
leaving
comments
and
reading
through
it.
One
final
time
before
it
goes
into
a
frozen
period.
I
believe
the
end
of
next
week's
correct
me
from
wrong
so
kind
of
try
to
get
to
that
before
it
goes
through
and
leave
comments
and
stuff.
M
We
did
have
two
new
drafts
posted
in
the
two
new
core
unit
drafts
court:
the
growth
core
unit
by
nadia
and
then
marketing
core
unit
by
seth
also
recommends
checking
those
two
out,
and
then
we
do
have
a
few
that
are
still
in
draft
that
was
just
posted
earlier,
and
so
we
have
the
smart
contracts.
We
have
a
front
end
both
by
written
by
derek
and
then
strategic
communications,
pr
and
marketing.
By
kathleen.
M
M
The
I
I
always
encourage
kind
of
people
to
do
the
go
back
to
imeo's
core
units.
I
wish
I
wish
existed
stuff
like
talking
about
l2.
This
is
kind
of
where
all
the
brainstorming
comes
together
and
you
yourself
can
just
say
like
this
man.
I
wish
something
like
this
existed,
but
actually
I
encourage
you
to
reach
out
to
your
network.
M
We
do
have
a
call
coming
up
with
opolis
in
two
weeks.
It
will
be
the
tuesday
community
call
that
david
leads
details
will
be
coming
soon,
but
that
will
also
they
are
another
kind
of
employment
service
provider.
I
like
to
think
of
it
from
the
perspective
of
an
employee
versus
kind
of
the
accountable
that
was
by
dennis
is
more
like
from
an
employer,
I
kind
of
see
it
as
two
pieces,
and
then
we
had
some
few
interesting
conversations
on
some
of
these
core
units
and
topics.
So
first
one
is
facilitator
responsibilities.
M
In
some
of
the
questions
that
we
saw.
I
noticed
one
of
it
was
just
like
what
are
the
expected
facilitator
responsibilities
as
a
high
level.
It
is
written
out
in
the
core
unit
frameworks,
but
really
like
the
two
main
things
to
know
is
that
you
you'd
be
responsible
for
the
budget.
Even
if
you
have
someone
who's
gonna
do
the
accounting
for
your
company
or
whatever.
If
something
like,
half
a
million
goes
missing.
M
That
being
said,
depending
on
how
you
structure
your
team
and
how
it's
organized,
you
can
be,
for
example,
a
pm
and
also
be
a
facilitator.
So
you
might
be
a
pm
of
your
team,
but
you
are
the
facilitator,
so
you're,
essentially
just
like
the
person
responsible
keeping
in
mind
that
there
are
responsibilities
of
a
facilitator
right.
So
if
you
have
a
super
busy
role,
you
might
not
always
be
able
to
cover
both.
So
you
might
have
a
facilitator
who's,
just
kind
of
responsible
for
communication
or
things
like
that.
M
They
don't
necessarily
have
to
be
two
separate
roles
if
you're
kind
of
torn
between
two.
But
if
you
feel
like
it,
it
all
folds
in
and
you
can
do
both
you
can
you
can
be
both
right.
I
I
would
say
it
doesn't
maybe
make
sense
to
have
two
separate
budget
line
items
like
a
facilitator
budget,
and
then
you
know
a
pm
budget
that
you
would
fill
in,
because
you
would
essentially
be
playing
both
roles,
any
comments
or
questions
on
that.
Actually,
if
people
had.
M
And
a
good
example
of
that
is,
seven
ventures
posted
his
monthly
report,
so
he
gave
a
january
monthly
report
of
what
that
team
has
been
doing
and
maybe
in
your
own
core
unit,
you
decide.
That's
also
what
you
want
to
be
responsible
for.
So
some
of
the
things
that
operational
support,
for
example,
we
talked
about,
was
being
able
to
give
a
quarterly
report
of
all
the
core
units.
What
all
the
kind
of
total
of
all
the
core
units
have
been
up
to,
but
yeah.
M
The
second
interesting
conversation
that's
been
brought
up
is
facilitator
salaries,
and
this
was
kicked
off
by
long
for
wisdom
and
his
kind
of
governance
budget.
You
should
also
check
out
that
thread.
There's
an
interesting
poll
in
there,
for
example,
and
generally
there's
been
conversation
around
kind
of
the
expected
transparency
and
like
what
kind
of
expectations
a
core
unit
that
you
propose
or
salary
that
may
be,
that
you
decide
to
be
public
and
set,
might
set
expectations
for
other
future
core
units
or
future
facilitators
that
go
into
it,
and
it's
also
okay.
M
I
should
add
that
some
teams
would
rather
have
that
more
kind
of
loose,
so
they
might
just
say
this
is
just
the
general
amount
that
we're
gonna
spend
on
people
and
that's
also,
okay,
we're
seeing
just
different
structures
that
we're
that
people
intend
to
do,
and
so
I
would
also
open
the
floor
up
now.
If
people
wanted
to
kind
of
bring
up
any
questions
or
thoughts
that
they
had
about
facilitator
salaries
or
if
long,
you
want
to
expand
on
the
governance.
G
No,
I
think
that
each
each
core
unit
should
choose
the
the
level
that
they
want
to
and
you
can
go
for
it
like
super
transparent.
Everything
is
public
and
some
companies
are
doing
it
in
the
open
out
there
and
and
that
that
could
be
fine,
but
the
fact
that
it's
the
blockchain
and
everything
is
transparent
should
not
should
not
trick
you
into
thinking
that
that's
something
that
is
required.
G
I
think
nick
brought
the
brother
the
point
that
sometimes
it's
harder
to
negotiate
with
different
peoples
or
to
attract
talent.
If
everything
is
public,
I
tend
to
agree
more
with
his
point
of
view
than
the
radical
transparency,
but
again
yeah
brian
is
bringing
up.
Another
important
point
word:
privacy.
It's
it's
another
important
thing
right.
If
you're
a
developer,
making
half
a
million-
I
don't
know
that
could
be
a
security
issue.
At
some
point
I
don't
know
your
kids
going
to
school.
D
That
that's
actually
my
recommendation
for
almost
everybody
thinking
about
this
I
mean
I,
I
think
everyone
can
make
their
own
choices,
but
I
would
highly
recommend
that
you
sort
of
scope
the
budget
at
the
domain
team
level
that
this
sort
of
utopia
of
radical
transparency
is
actually
like
a
giant
dangerous
security
trap.
You
do
not
want
people
knowing
how
much
you
make
individually,
especially
because
the
tokens
that
we
get
paid
out
in
the
space
are
bearer
assets,
and
so
you
know,
and
a
lot
of
the
countries
that
you
guys
live
in.
E
E
You
know
whatever
the
status
whatever
it
was,
that
was
done
in
the
course
of
the
previous
month
or
quarter
and
outlining
the
historic
budget
was
x,
and
this
is
the
forecasted
budget,
because
without
that
there's
an
aspect
to
you
know
all
these
units
that
are
being
put
together.
They
sound
great,
but
it
also
sounds
really
expensive.
B
M
M
Just
to
add
to
that
point
what
you
said:
matt,
the
oh,
an
example
is
you
might
for
us
operational
support.
We
want
to
kind
of
add
to
the
conversation
if
something
feels
off
like
it
could
be
in
a
positive
way.
Right
so,
let's
say
there's
this
massive
budget
and
we
say
that
seems
kind
of
low,
but
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
say
how
it
feels
kind
of
low
if
it
wasn't
kind
of
even
vaguely
broken
down.
M
Maybe
it's
the
people
is
too
low,
or
maybe
the
people
is
actually
too
high
and
or
whatever
it
is,
then
we
can
also
provide
that
input.
I
should
bring
up
that
for
kind
of
the
governance
budget
and
why
that
was
also
brought
up.
While
the
discussion
was
started
around
the
individual
like
value
that
someone
an
individual
is
bringing.
M
It
is
an
opportunity
that
I
think
it's
a
positive
thing
where
people
say
hey.
Actually,
I
think
you're
being
undervalued
right,
that
we
actually
need
that
kind
of
commentary
in
the
community
so
that
we
ensure
that
we
do
have
fair
pay.
Otherwise,
if
no
one
says
anything,
people
will
be
undervalued
and
people
who
are
undervalued
from
what
I
see
almost
never
like,
speak
up
or
represent
themselves.
So.
E
E
G
I
I
do
agree
something
else
that
it's
important
to
just
to
maybe
to
close
my
my
point
of
view
here,
but
if,
if
you
are
using
a
episode
on
him
like
long,
it's
maybe
easier
to
to
be
that
transparent,
I
think
we
all
trust
him
and
we
we
definitely
want
to
keep
him
doing.
What
he's
doing
I
mentioned
this
several
times
in
the
in
the
forum,
but
but
yeah
not
being
pseudonymous
out.
G
B
Yeah
sure,
just
worth
reiterating
again
that
david
hosted
a
really
informative
call
with
some
community
members
and
there's
a
recording
if
anyone's
interested,
to
learn
more
about
core
units
and
about
the
different
questions
that
are
being
discussed
as
well
as
some
contributors
in
community
development
are
also
writing
core
units
and
sharing
them
in
rocket
chat.
And
so
there
will
be
more
updates
in
the
next
coming
weeks.
A
Thanks,
thank
you
all
right.
So
that
brings
us
to
the
end
of
our
updates.
That's
quarterbacks!
They
are
so
they're
definitely
going
longer,
but
if
anyone
has
any
questions
or
wants
to
continue
any
of
those
discussions
that
we
brought
up
during
this
call
and
now's
the
time
you
can
maybe
spend
like
10
15
minutes
in
general,
qa,
more
discussions.
E
G
Point
so
that's
that's
the
minimum
detail
that
you
need
to
include
in
a
core
unit
right.
So
there's
the
the
budget
implementation,
which
is
the
number
that
the
protocol
will
pay
out.
So
that's
that's
the
the
minimum
that
you
have
to
disclose
and
then
there's
the
the
budget
breakdown
in
which
you
can
go
as
detailed
as
you
want.
But
again,
some
some
aggregation
is
also
fine
like,
for
example,
saying
salaries
or
expected
salaries.
Are
this
but
we're
also
including
growth?
G
E
That
that's,
when
you
submit
it
into
the
forum,
I'm
more
talking
about
on
a
reoccurring
basis,
just
viewing
like
this
call
as
being
a
management
call-
and
you
know
it
fast
forward
the
video
two
years
from
now.
What
would
we
want
as
a
collective
to
see
on
a
reoccurring
basis
that
that's
really
what
I
was
getting
at
each
individual
sure,
but
are
we
going
to
have
at
some
point
like
an
aggregate
slide
that
says
we're
currently
spending?
E
M
G
Things
voucher
also
says
he
would
not
want
to
be
in
a
hiring
interview
for
three
engineers
that
know
the
budget
for
the
three
I'm
assuming
that
it's
a
I
don't
know
a
zero-sum
game,
or
something
so
again
about
you.
You
can
say:
hey
we're
planning
on
growing
10
engineers
and
then
you're
hiring
a
couple
right.
I
guess
that
you
can
start
doing
the
math,
but
potentially
there's
buffers,
there's
different
things
that
you're
considering
and
and
again
you
can
ask
for
more
and
then
use
less.
F
F
F
F
A
F
A
A
A
All
right,
so
there
was
some
discussion
earlier.
I
guess
about
about
altis
and
gas,
and
I
think
someone
brought
up
the
ip1559
in
the
chat,
I'm
kind
of
curious
if
anyone
has
any
strong
feelings
on
that,
I
know
it's
a
little
a
little
out
of
our
perhaps
server
influence,
given
that
it's
ethereum
related
rather
than
maker
related.
But
as
we're
saying
like,
like
the
issues
on
ethereum
are
affecting
maker
in
terms
of
gas
fees.
So
maybe
that's
fair
game.
If
anyone
has
any.
A
E
Think
there's
there's
two
components:
right:
they're
going
to
increase
the
block
size
a
little
bit,
but
then
change
the
way
that
the
fees
are
managed.
So
there
will
be
a
base
fee
that
gets
that's
like
the
minimum
amount
that
you
need
to
to
spend
on
a
transaction
and
then
there's
still
going
to
be
a
fee
market.
A
A
Yes,
so
in
terms
of
the
block
science
thing
where
I
mentioned,
I
think
the
way
that
works
is
that
blocks
will
be
double
size,
but
the
base
fee
will
adjust
to
targets
to
them
that
they
will
be
harmful.
So
it
is
in
the
same
size
as
now,
which
gives
you
kind
of
more
like
burst
capacity,
but
it
should
not,
hopefully
not
result
in
the
state's
loads
and
chain
stuff
growing
any
more
than
it
is
now.