►
From YouTube: Governance and Risk Meeting: Ep. 88
Description
# Agenda
## Governance Segment
- [Charles St.Louis](https://twitter.com/CharlieStLouis): Review of [MIP0: The Maker Improvement Proposal Framework](https://forum.makerdao.com/t/mip3-governance-cycle/1902)
- LongForWisdom: Governance at a Glance
## Risk Segment
- Maker_Man: 0 Bid Vault Auction Modelling
- [Vishesh Choudry](https://twitter.com/visavishesh): State of the Peg
## General Q&A
We'll open the floor for any questions about Scientific Governance and Risk.
Please join us and help shape the future of the MakerDAO.
## Links
- [Video/Voice](https://zoom.us/j/697074715)
- [Dial-in](https://zoom.us/u/acRbIMDvK)
- [Calendar](https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=makerdao.com_3efhm2ghipksegl009ktniomdk@group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/Los_Angeles)
A
Hello,
everyone
welcome
to
the
April
16th
edition
of
the
scientific
governance
and
risk
meeting.
My
name
is
Richard
Brown
I
am
the
interim
governance
facilitator
today
we're
going
to
hear
from
the
she's
gonna
give
us
to
say
the
pegs,
possibly
long
for
wisdom,
I
hadn't.
Given
me
a
heads
up,
but
maybe
he'll
do
government's
at-a-glance
and
we
are
going
to
hear
from
Charleston
Lewis
as
we
dig
into
MIT
zero.
A
The
biggest
myth
of
all
this
is
going
to
be
an
important
discussion
because
we
are
getting
more
sophisticated
and
process
is,
is
being
brought
to
the
table
and
it's
going
to
change
the
way
that
things
work.
If
the
community
ratifies
these
things
and
we're
gonna
be
existing
in
a
world,
that's
different
than
the
one
we
are
in
right
now.
Soon
time
is
rapidly
approaching.
A
So
the
general
ideas
at
some
point
in
May
we're
going
to
flip
over
into
a
more
mythified
governance
cadence,
and
that
requires
that
requires
sorry.
I
can't
eat
chats
and
getting
boned
and
three
different
windows
bomb.
That
requires
a
rethink
or
a
shift
in
the
way
that
we
do
things,
and
so
Charles
is
going
to
give
us
a
refresher.
B
A
A
But
what
I
want
to
focus
on
is
that
key
part
of
that
title
and
that
key
part
is
interim,
the
the
way
that
we
we've
developed
things
in
this.
This
venue
here
and
maker
dalla
kind
of
as
a
whole.
This
is
this
is
one
of
our
models
is
that
we
need
to
decentralize
and
we
need
to
refine
and
build
out
this
protocol.
So
we
can
hand
it
to
the
community
in
the
community,
can
can
take
the
reins
and
we
can
all
sit
back
and
enjoy
the
fruits
of
our
labor
after
it's
over.
A
A
And
edited,
then,
the
next
step
is
to
begin
to
find
people
who
can
assume
those
responsibilities
for
us
or
with
us
and
I,
think
that's
we're
there.
So
this
is
super
exciting
for
me,
and
so
I've
posted
a
thread
in
the
forums
about
me
nominating
the
first
truly
community
sourced
governments,
facilitator
and
I
think
that
many
people
who've
been
paying
attention
to
this
ecosystem.
Well,
not
it
was
what
come
as
a
surprise.
A
I
think
that
long
for
wisdom,
there's,
there's
no
better
person
who
can
step
up
and
assume
a
leadership
role
in
the
governance
ecosystem
than
him
he's
I.
Give
him
tons
of
really
embarrassing.
Compliments
and
praise
in
that
forum
thread
so
I
encourage
everybody
to
take
a
look
at
it,
and
please
consider
some
of
my
my
my
arguments
for
expanding
the
role
that
I
currently
occupy
and
formalizing
and
rewarding
and
recognizing
some
of
the
incredible
amounts
of
hard
work
that
long
has
been
doing
over
the
last.
A
Who
even
knows
how
long
feels,
like
years
most
probably
months,
he's
really
stepped
up
and
done
a
fantastic
job
and
I
think
that
personally
I
think
that
it's
impossible
to
find
some
of
you
who
would
better
represent
the
needs
of
the
community
for
wisdom.
So
please
have
a
look
at
that
forum
thread
and
let
the
community
know
what
you
think
I
think
that's
a
long
did
I
sufficiently
embarrass
you.
I
can
I
can
heap
more
praise
on
you
publicly
if
you
like,
oh
I,.
A
D
A
So
at
the
a
thank
you
want
to
be
serious,
though,
like
I
could
not
possibly
be
happier
with
the
the
level
of
work
that
you
put
into
the
ecosystem
and
the
diligence
and
and
deep
thought
and
idealism
that
comes
along
with
your
work.
So
there's
there
I
built
the
government's
ecosystems
and
different
organizations
in
my
long
and
checkered
past.
A
Seen
anybody
that
has
the
same
job
this
one
who
is
so
makers,
is
fantastically
lucky
to
have
a
resource
like
this
available.
This
I
am
extremely
happy
and
looking
forward
to
not
being
along
in
the
government's
facilitated
world
and
then
watching
this.
This
role
develop
as
he
puts
his
own
stamp
on
it,
and
we
eventually
increase
the
number
of
governments
facilitators
to
increase
the
throughput
of
this
of
this
one.
So
I'm
going
to
leave
it
there
and
possibly
move
on
with
the
agenda
at
this
point.
I
think
actually
did
somebody
for
there
any
questions.
E
A
In
addition,
and
with
an
eye
to
eventually
some
point
in
the
future,
with
these
interim
roles
and
this
bootstrapping
process
and
this
establishing
like
the
norm
and
then
moving
into
the
handoff
phase,
I
talked
about
this
in
the
original
mandate
that
it's
my
hope.
That's
we
after
the
interim
government's
facilitator,
we
all
understand
what
that
actually
means
or
what
the
government's
facilitator
is.
A
The
next
step
is
to
onboard
people
from
the
community
to
begin
assuming
those
same
responsibilities,
and
then
we
have
a
team
of
governance
facilitators
and
that
team
expands
to
begin
addressing
needs
that
we
haven't
really
spoken
about
that
much
but
need
to
be
addressed
like
having
governance
facilitators
in
other
parts
of
the
world
that
have
deeper
insight
into
other
demographics.
So
when
we
have
one
for
the
Latin
American
market,
when
we
find
the
government
facilitated
for
APAC
regions,
when
we
like
the
list
goes
on
right,
there's
enough
work
to
go
around.
A
A
D
D
Already
two
weeks:
let's
do
it
cool
all
right.
So
after
discussions
this
week
it's
sort
of
difficult
to
split,
different
threads,
but
discussion
on
the
mips
has
continued
and
that
he'd
make
room
for
improvement
proposals
nibs
zero
at
three
I'm
attracted.
So
most
of
you
back
cool
we've
also
had
we've
had
a
new
member
to
the
forum
and
fourth
streets
create
post
regarding
and
confidence
in
the
peg
and
which
is
something
that
probably
probably
should
be
discussed
and
more
I
know.
D
A
A
question
for
you
here:
maybe
you
can
answer
it,
but
that
we're
seeing
the
same
conversations
arise
in
the
subreddit
and
one
of
the
interesting
things
I've
noticed.
Is
that
there's
strong
opinions
that
the
peg
must
be
fixed?
That's
a
universally
understood
and
accepted
truth,
but
the
solutions
seem
to
be
diametrically
opposed.
Frequently
we
have
to
do
X
and
then
another
thread
shows
up
says
we
cannot
ever
do
X
or
we'll
never
restore
the
peg.
So.
B
D
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
as
much
consensus
that
right,
yeah,
like
from
I
respect
from
my
perspective,
we've
done
most
of
the
basic
all
of
the
short-term
things
we
can
write.
Like
the
other
things
we
need
to
do
and
just
like
wait
and
on
board
collateral
and
nature
or
like
super
long
term,
like
a
change
to
the
protocol
like
negative
rates
or
some
other
system
which
allows
us
to
like
inject
liquidity
into
the
ecosystem.
D
Cool
anyway,
to
continue
so
we
also
had
the
discussion
will
create
it's
I.
Think,
eight
days
ago
now
discussing
revisiting
the
GSM
delay
and
the
dark
spell
social
layer,
discussion
which
is
a
fairly
big
deal,
but
it's
obviously
quite
complicated
and
it's
gonna
require
quite
a
little
work
to
actually
figure
out.
D
Cool,
so
moving
on
to
consensus,
seeking,
as
mentioned
wills,
investigating
updating
the
GSM
delay,
so
he's
create
a
signal
request
for
that,
so
questioning
whether
we
set
it
back
to
24
hours
or
we
keep
it
at
four
hours
that
we
get
from
between.
So
if
it's
on
that's
I
would
suggest
you
share
them
in
that
threads.
D
Derek
so
find
a
signal
request
around
the
grace
periods
between
when
we
trigger
shut
down
and
when
shut
down
actually
occurs.
I
think
it's
if
I'm
understanding
it
correctly,
basically
defining
if
we
want
to
set
like
a
delay
before
it
actually
happens,
and
so
that
ecosystem
processes
have
time
to
to
do
the
final
things
that
you
do
and
can
be
sort
of
confident
on
the
fixed
date,
because,
obviously,
it's
difficult
to
define
a
fixed
date
when
we
depend
when
we're
relying
on
the
executive
to
pass
through
ds2.
D
And
the
phone
lease
is
worth
mentioning.
This
signal
thread
Joshua
craters,
to
compensate
to
signal
whether
we
compensate
bolt
holders
based
on
the
events
of
Black
Thursday
has
fast
I,
think
it
was
about
60,000,
make
it
to
you,
thirty
thousand,
so
that
doesn't
define
any
details.
You
know
we're
doing
that's
an
interesting.
A
D
May
be
going
going
on
that
I'm
not
aware
of,
but
my
understanding
is
my
commanders
working
on
doing
analysis
of
the
auctions
generally
and
specifically
those
they
I.
Don't
think
anyone's
like
drastically
objected
to
you
to
stopping
the
second
Bowl,
so
I,
don't
think,
there's
like
widespread
outrage
or
anything.
That's.
A
F
Well,
I
pretty
much
said
it
in
the
thread:
I
kind
of
ran
into
a
small
hit,
I,
don't
know,
Mooney
can
talk,
but
sir
that's
kind
of
slowed
it
down,
but
my
analysis
should
be
complete
by
the
weekend:
I'm
hoping
to
post
it,
maybe
Sunday
Monday
latest.
Then
we
can
thrash
through
it.
On
Tuesday
my
issues
are
kind
of
defining
what
we
call
Black,
Thursday
and
compensation.
F
F
I
have
a
couple
missing:
vault
numbers,
they
don't
look
substantial
so,
but
otherwise
this
should
be
pretty
clean
and
I'm
just
going
to
focus
on
kind
of
this
whole
zero
bid
and
then
I'm
going
to
include
as
a
contrast
of
all
2288
and
whatever
other
vaults
I
can
take
out
too,
as
a
comparison
of
a
guy
who
actually
self
liquidated
and
kind
of
threw.
That
was
defy
saver,
whatever.
That
gives
you
a
kind
of
handle
as
a
comparison
like.
A
B
B
B
Alright,
so
for
well,
for
those
of
you
who
don't
know
me,
my
name
is
Charles
San,
Louie
and
I
work
at
the
Maker
Foundation
on
the
engineering
general
team
I've
been
responsible
for
the
research
and
architecting
and
formalizing
of
major
governance
on
behalf
of
the
foundation.
So
before
I
get
started
with
the
presentation.
I
wanted
to
provide
a
brief
overview
of
what
it
will
entail.
B
B
We
officially
kick
started
the
self-sustaining
maker
initiative
approximately
15
days
ago,
and
then
Rouen
went
on
to
the
following
governance,
call
and
talked
about
the
three
pillars
of
a
self-sustaining
debt.
So
these
three
pillars
are
what
long-run
governance
will
need
and
what
will
eventually
make
maker
Dow
self
sustainable.
So
these
three
core
pillars
are
the
elected,
pay
contributors
and
domain
teams.
B
B
Mibs
Xero
structure
is
there's
a
preamble
which
is
kind
of
like
an
administrative
thing.
It
also
helps
with
the
management
of
long
term
MIPS
and
all
those
things
I'll
go
through
the
structure
of
it
offer
there's
the
summary,
which
gives
a
brief
overview
of
what
this
NIP
is
for
then
there's
the
motivation
on
why
why
it's
needed
in
general
and
lastly,
the
most
important
part
is
the
specification
which
is
the
proposal
details.
B
So
what
your
actual
proposing,
if
it's
a
typing,
OMAP
the
code,
including
the
executive
code,
that
will
be
needed
to
implement
it
if
it
does
get
it
ratified.
So
this
general
structure
is
standard
across
all
the
initial
MIPS
that
we've
proposed,
as
well
as
the
general
template
so
get
into
the
general
template
later
as
well.
But
you'll
see
that
this
is
the
way
that
community
members
can
use
and
draft
new
proposals
for
review.
B
Some
f0
is
preamble
has
a
few
things,
so
it
highlights
the
mid
number
which
is
assigned
by
the
NIP
edit
or
after
the
conception
phase.
There's
the
title
brief
overview
of
what
it's
for
the
authors,
the
type
the
status.
So
as
of
now
it's
in
the
request
for
comments
phase,
which
means
that
there's
a
review
period
dedicated
to
iterating
on
it,
based
on
both
feedback
from
the
community
and
the
NIP
authors
general
opinions.
The
data
was
initially
proposed
and
then
dependencies.
B
B
B
Some
Abe's
zero,
the
summary,
so
it's
the
Genesis
proposal
and
it
describes
the
mix
framework,
so
all
the
core
components
and
statuses,
as
well
as
the
various
MIT
types
and,
most
importantly,
the
overall
MIPS
cycles
so
from
the
SEC
from
the
second,
it
was
created
up
until
it's
ratified
or
ultimately
rejected.
It
also
provides
the
tools,
such
as
MIT
templates
processes
and
also
pretty
critical.
It
describes
the
roles
of
the
framework,
so
the
necessary
role
is
that
it
needs
to
operate
and
be
maintained.
So
that's
the
map
editor
and
the
governance
facilitator.
B
B
The
goal
is
that
we
can
make
make
it
out
that
much
closer
to
self
sustainability,
so
these
are
the
components
of
an
f0
I'm
not
going
to
go
into
too
much
detail
about
the
first
one,
because
you
can
kind
of
just
read
through
them
in
general,
but
they
do
help
provide
a
lot
of
context
for
specific
words
that
are
used
throughout
the
entire
initial
13
MIPS
in
terms
of
language
and
how
they
all
relate.
Then
we
have
the
core
principles.
B
There
were
initially
three,
but
as
part
of
the
request
for
comments
phase
along
for
wisdom
proposed
two
other
ones
which
I'll
get
into
you,
then
there's
the
MIT
life
cycle,
which
is
very
important.
It
highlights
nine
main
main
main
steps
that
I'm
it
needs
to
go
through
before
it
becomes
ratified
or
I
guess
rejected,
then
we'll
talk,
then
it
covers
the
components
and
the
component
types.
B
B
So
the
core
principles
of
the
MIPS
framework
are
specificity.
It's
important
that
nips
are
very
specific
to
one
single
behavior
responsibility.
It
also
kind
of
works
into
the
third
one
which
is
of
avoiding
overlap,
but
basically,
if
a
map
has
to
define
too
many
different
things,
it
should
be
broken
up
into
multiple
ones.
B
Next
is
completeness,
so
a
map
or
map
set
has
to
have
all
the
appropriate
parts
to
cover
a
whole
behavior
and
it
has
to
be
it
has
to
make
sense
in
its
entirety.
So
you
can't
have
two
maps
explaining
a
full
process
or
a
map
set
that
doesn't
explain
a
whole
behavior
behind
it.
So
if
you
look
at
the
Claro
onboarding
process,
it
needs
to
have
all
the
components
that
someone
can
use
to
get
a
collateral
successfully
on-boarded
to
the
protocol,
or
else
it
is
not
complete.
Third,
is
to
avoid
overlap.
B
I
think
that's
quite
self.
Explainable
next
is
clarity
and
brevity,
so
these
are
the
ones
that
long
tourism
proposed.
So
it
needs
to
be
very
clear
and
use
clear
language,
so
as
many
people
as
possible
can
understand
it.
And
lastly,
brevity
it's
important
to
make
these
as
short
as
possible,
because
we
don't
want
people
to
start
reading
and
then
leave
and
not
provide
any
feedback
or
maybe
not
even
vote
on
the
proposal
in
the
long
run.
So.
B
The
mips
live
cycle:
these
are
the
nine
steps
that
a
nipper
would
go
through
before
being
ratified,
I
do
to
the
interest
of
time,
I
them,
and
there
are
a
lot
more
details
that
you
can
find
in.
Indeed,
to
get
our
page
or
the
form
that
actually
talked
about
the
criteria.
These
stages
and
statuses
need
to
meet
before
they
can
move
on
to
the
next
one.
B
B
It's
a
formal
review
period,
including
review
from
the
community
and
further
drafting,
but
it
is
important
to
note
that
the
ultimate
edits
are
completely
dependent
on
whether
the
nib
author
actually
wants
to
do
it
and
I
mean
if
they
don't
accept
the
community's
feedback.
It's
ultimately
up
to
governance,
to
decide
if
they
like
it
or
not.
So
that's
an
important
thing
to
note.
B
B
B
So
this
is
when
the
myth
author
actually
completes
the
edits
and
submits
it
formally
to
the
government
cycle
in
which
the
governance
facilitator
would
have
to
kind
of
make
sure
that
it
meets
all
the
checks
and
requirements
before
it
should
officially
be
submitted
to
the
government
cycle,
and
if
it
is
rejected,
it
can
be
submitted
at
a
later
date
unless
there's
any
malicious
or
other
behavior
that
would
dictate.
Otherwise,
then
the
myth
actually
enters
the
governance
cycle
in
which
a
few
different
processes
would
occur.
So
there'd
be
inclusion
poll
and
a.
B
Governance
poll
and
then
the
executive
vote,
so
in
many
ways
the
executive
vote
is
the
the
final
stamp
on
whether
this
mitt
should
be
ratified.
But
a
lot
of
the
reasoning
and
justification
for
this
proposal
will
happen
before
that,
so
it
will
kind
of
just
be
like
that.
Finally,
yes
or
no
and
then
lastly,
if
the
map
does
get
accepted,
it's
granted
the
status.
This
is
more
of
helping,
maintain
and
manage
the
MIPS
overall
and
organize
them
more
effectively.
So.
B
We
mentioned
the
MIT
components
of
each
MIT
and
so
basically
highlights
and
breaks
down
what
the
contents
of
our
what
they
are
and
the
ellipse
can
have
multiple
components.
As
you
can
see
here,
there's
11
it
helps
satisfy
completeness
and
readability.
So
there
are
different
types
of
components.
You
can
have
technical
components
in
which
there
would
be
code
proposed
or
sub
proposals
that
would
be
proposed
and,
as
you
can
see,
the
way
the
components
are
labeled
are
with
the
mips
NIP
number
and
then
component
number.
B
Process
so
American
defined
one
of
one
or
more
replacement
targets
in
its
preamble,
so
if
the
nip
has
given
that
accepted
status,
the
replacement
target
is
actually
deemed
effectively
obsolete
and
that
map
becomes
inactive,
so
the
replacement
will
actually
list
in
its
document
what
it
would
replace
to.
So
if
that
map
does
get
replaced,
it
would
have
to
the
new
map
its
replacing
would
have
to
redirect
all
the
ones
that
it
depends
on
to
make
it
more
clear
for
people
to
follow.
B
B
B
B
B
There's
test
cases,
security
considerations
which
are
very
important,
and
you
can
be
as
thorough
as
you
want
with
the
security
considerations,
but
it
does
help
when
you
can
kind
of
be
proactive
in
assuming
what
could
go
wrong
with
the
introduction
or
implementation
of
a
technical
solution
such
as
including,
if
it's
backwards
compatible
or
not.
Then
there's
the
other
information
and
the
auto
report
so
with
the
type
of
a
solution,
it's
really
important
that
the
code
is
audited
and
that
it's
provided
to
the
public
to
see
as
a
report.
B
B
B
Lastly,
we're
going
to
get
into
the
details
of
the
domain
rules
that
the
MIPS
frameworks
depend
on
it's
them,
it
better
and
that
governed
facilitator.
So
the
map
editor
enforces
the
administrative
and
editorial
aspects
of
the
overall
MIPS
framework
and
processes
that
it
has,
and
the
expectation
is
that
it
will
start
out
with
an
interim
editor
which
I
will
propose
myself
as
in
next
week
and
then
others
will
join
from
the
community
as
we
progress
the
room.
B
Much
like
the
government's
facilitator
processes
that
rich
describe
before
this
presentation
started
and
in
terms
of
the
MIPS
forming
framework.
The
government's
facilitator
works
with
the
governance
cycle
and
operates
voting
front
ends.
Runs
meetings,
works
with
a
map
editor
to
accept
maps
and
make
sure
that
they're
ready
to
go
into
the
govern
cycle
itself,
and
so
on.
B
So
I
didn't
want
to
take
up
too
much
time
with
going
over
how
the
domain
roles
are
elected
and
removed.
They
are
fairly
well
laid
out
within
the
document
itself,
but
these
are
the
components
that
detail
the
removal
processes
and
the
election
processes
for
both
these
roles
and
they're.
Quite
similar.
The
template
is
is
used,
for
both
of
them
is
pretty
much
repeated
other
than
the
title
of
them.
B
Lastly,
I
want
to
provide
a
timeline
on
what's
gonna
happen
with
the
MIPS
framework
in
the
mips
over
the
next
two
weeks,
so
the
request
for
Cowen's
phase
will
continue
until
the
27th,
which
is
what
I'd
like
to
take
a
little
moment
to
tell
you
guys,
is
I'd,
really
appreciate
any
edits
or
further
feedback.
There's
a
lot
on
the
forums
I've
been
working
with
long
for
wisdom,
especially
on
making
the
edits
I
know
a
lot
of
you
have
some
strong
opinions.
B
So
if
you
do
have
some
time,
please
continue
to
do
that.
The
next
update
is
I'm
going
to
submit
my
I
sub
proposal,
proposing
myself
as
the
MIT
better
on
April
21st
next
Tuesday
and
the
maker
foundation.
Smart
contract
team
will
create
a
sub
proposal
for
the
smart
contract
domain
team
on
the
22nd
or
approximately
around
them.
The
other
two
sub
proposals
are
the
general
risk
model
by
the
risk
team
and
any
Oracle
onboarding
sub
proposals.
So
these
are
all
happened
before
the
27th.
B
Now,
on
April
27th,
a
special
governance
poll
will
occur
and
it's
called
the
timing
vote.
So
the
timing
bow
will
have
two
options
to
proceed
with
the
ratification
governance
pool
of
the
13
proposed
myths
that
we've
all
been
reviewing
or
to
delay
the
ratification
for
one
month
and
then
Institute
a
time
period
for
competing
proposals
to
be
submitted
by
the
community
members.
So
if
the
timing
poll
does
resolve
to
procede,
the
governance
pulled
to
ratify
them
officially
would
occur
over
May
1st
to
4th,
and
if
that
ratification
vote
does
result.
B
Yes,
the
first
governance
cycle
would
begin
on.
May
4th
and
the
end
we'd
be
off
to
the
races
and
if
you
do
want
to
have
more
details
on
what
the
other
options
are,
if
the,
if
the
ratification
is
delayed
for
one
month,
you
can
reference
it
in
MIPS.
Zero
I
just
didn't
have
enough
space
in
this
slide
to
detail
it.
B
D
I
have
a
one
question
about
timeline
rather
than
content
so
notice.
You
mentioned
the
smart
contracts
team,
we're
gonna,
do
a
side
proposal,
don't
bother
themselves
as
like.
Officially
do
we
need
to
do
some
proposals
for
the
risks
like
their
esteem
as
well
like
like
to
like
ratify
them
under
the
MIPS
process,
or
we
like
just
assuming
that
they're
they
ratified
already
that
you
don't
need
to
be
like
confirmed
or
anything.
B
D
B
There's
two
ways:
we
could
do
it.
We
could
add
the
already
currently
ratified
ones.
The
government
puts
the
theater
at
the
wrist
team
to
the
list
prior
by
making
a
change
before
April
27th,
or
we
could
cement
sub
proposals
to
actually
ratify
them
through
the
most
process
themselves.
It's
I
guess
we
can
just
base
it
on
community
feedback
in
general
consensus.
C
Yeah
I'm
not
sure,
if
I,
if
I
got
that
right
from
the
from
the
proposals
there,
but
it
was
there
was.
The
mission
was
a
specifically
for
the
risk
team
proposals
and
and
I
just
want
to
clarify
what
I
understood
right
around
the
counter
proposals.
I
think,
because
if
the
TA
risk
him
kind
of
like
submitting
like
him
risk
model,
what
general
risk
model
or
just
like
a
risk
model
for
particular
acid
and
then
the
contract
bubbles
that
needs
to
happen
within
an
X
period
of
time,
I
was
just
thinking.
C
B
So
when
I,
when
I
was
speaking
to
the
competition
proposals
so
yeah,
if
the
timing
vote
does
say
that
we
want
to
delay
the
ratification
vote
of
the
the
MEPS
community,
members
can
propose
anything.
That's
directly
competing
with
one
of
the
thirteen
myths
and
provided
as
an
alternative
for
the
community
to
choose
between
the
two,
the
general
risk
model.
Subber
puzzle,
I
mean
you
can
do
a
competition
proposal,
but
it
doesn't
necessarily
need
to
be
during
this
period
of
time.
I
mean
like
after
the
MIPS
framework
is
in
place.
B
E
So
I
think
the
idea
is
maybe
11
allows
a
template
for
any
new
risk
team
to
essentially
apply
to
be
as
a
risk
team
and
submit
whatever
methodology
they
have
for
evaluating
assets
and
then
pending
approval
from
the
community
of
such
a
risk
model.
They
could
then
they
could
then
propose
asset
evaluations,
risk
framers.
What
I
refer
for
any
asset?
C
C
C
F
I
kind
of
my
reaction
to
the
mips
is
given
the
time
frame.
What
we're
doing
we
kind
of
just
gonna
have
to
decide
whether
we
go
with
what
we
have
that'll
be
for
everybody
to
decide
in
terms
of
just
make
your
voting.
You
know
I'm
just
reading
what
I
wrote
right
now,
I,
don't
see
the
external
community
resources
going
after
an
alternate
in
my
piece.
I
know
long
for
wisdom
and
I
have
kind
of
discussed
it.
F
We
both
don't
literally
have
the
time
to
go
after
it
right
now
with
other
priorities,
so
someone
else
in
the
community
can
step
up
on
doing
an
alternative.
My
piece
that
we'd
like
to
hear
from
you
guys
and
talk
to
you
but
I
just
don't
see
it
happening,
so
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
what
we
have
and
whether
we
want
to
vote
it
in
as
a
placeholder
we'll
have
to
revisit
all
of
these
I
think
and
so
just
be
clear
kind
of
what
we're
doing
and
so
I'm
gonna
leave
it
at
that.
A
B
B
F
Was
gonna
say:
that's
the
whole
point
right.
Is
we
just
look
at
what
we
have
now
and
decide
right?
We
can
always
redo
it
later,
and
so
you
know
it
doesn't
it's
not
that
critical,
I
guess
and
when
I
look
at
the
scheme
of
what's
going
on,
I
mean
it's
important,
yes,
but
what
we
get
in
place
when
and
how?
F
What
it
means
is
just
going
to
be
how
we
use
it
really
and
it's
we
all
know
we're
going
to
be
going
through
these
things
when
we
finally
start
doing
them
and
going
oh,
we
got
to
change
this
or
we
should
add
this.
One
thing
I
was
going
to
suggest.
I
suggested
it
before
I.
Don't
like
the
sub
proposal
idea,
it's
just
I,
don't
think
it
works,
and
I'm
like
my
case
here,
is
that
if
it's
in
the
proposal
it
should
be
a
component
okay.
F
F
In
some
of
these,
in
my
peas,
you
know
how
we
change
governance
parameters.
That's
just
going
to
be
kind
of
a
template
of
like
what
numbers
we
change.
You
know
for
doing
financial
governance
right
and
risk
governance
right
that
those
will
be
they.
They
don't
have
to
be
their
own.
On
my
P,
they
can
be
a
template
of
just
data
within
at
MIP
that
we
execute
as
a
sequence
and
not
specifically
laid
out
in
the
MIP
just
its
own.
Little
lift.
B
F
Yeah,
that
was
my
point
on
the
sub
proposal,
so
it's
they're
not
sub
proposals,
they're
data
elements
to
the
MIP.
That
governance
then
later
decides
what
to
add
to
and
who
to
remove
and
whatever
conditions
they
want
to
put
on
them
generally,
which
ideally
would
go
in
the
MIP
itself.
It
reduces
a
number
of
em
IPs
and
it
puts
just
the
details
of
how
you
these
people
access
and
operate.
What
how.
F
E
F
F
Do
we
take
what
we
get
or
no
I
mean
just
look
at
it
from
a
governance
perspective
right
understood
here
is
rich,
just
going,
we're
gonna
have
to
vote
on
these,
and
the
timeframe
presented
and
it'll
just
be
done
as
is,
and
the
amount
of
work
that
can
be
actually
done
to
change
them.
It's
kind
of
limited.
You
know
that
people
here
who
would
work
on
this
are
kind
of
under
different
guns,
now
realistically
I'm
somebody
else.
Unless
somebody
else
pops
up,
please
do
I.
D
Mean
maybe
not
know
but
like
I'd,
be
interested
to
hear
if
any
of
the
community
members
like
like,
even
if
they're,
not
willing
to
make
a
be
interested
know
if
any
like.
If
anybody
is
like
actively
wants
there
to
be
an
alternative
right,
like
they
say,
does
anyone
think
that
we
need
in
also
doesn't
it
does
everyone
think
the
current
versions
are
fine
like.
A
This
interesting
question:
maybe
we
can
do
like
an
informal
poll,
do
like
a
plus
one,
maybe
in
the
chat,
if
you've,
given
some
considerations,
alternative
mips
processes.
I
would
also
be
interested
to
hear
from
what
this
isn't
hard
one
to
that's
sort
of
I'm
interested
in
knowing
what
how
much
of
the
community
has
a
mental
model
with
the
MIPS
processes,
all
above
I
think
so.
A
I
think
that
there's
a
lot
of
cognitive
overhead
here
and
I'm
I'm
unsure
of
how
much
or
how
well
this
process
has
been
absorbed
by
the
general
ecosystem
here
as
well,
we
might
be
getting
slightly
ahead
of
ourselves
defend
of
whether
people
have
already
begun,
creating
mental
models
of
alternative,
miss
processes
and
how
many
people
are
sort
of
trying
to
wrap
their
head
around.
What
the
actual
MIT
process
is.
C
B
Sorry
can
you
repeat
that
I
was
just
I
just
wanted
to
say:
I
wanted
to
make
a
slight
correction
on
when
I
was
talking
about
the
domine
teams
that
have
already
been
ratified
before
so
the
wrist
team
actually
never
officially
proposed
themselves
as
a
rest
team.
That
was
only
rich
for
the
governance
facilitator
and
the
wrist
teams
are
only
judged
based
on
their
general
models.
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
correction.
Sorry,
for
that
mistake,
yeah.
E
E
D
C
E
F
Was
just
posting
the
sidebar
that
I
think
it's
interesting
with
respect
to
the
MIPS
here
we
kind
of
have
a
one
bidder
auction
for
you
know
and
my
piece
that
when
I
see
the
one
bit
auctions
and
liquidations
I
cringe,
because
those
are
the
worst
ones,
all
the
way
to
the
zero
level,
and
we
got
the
same
kind
of
thing
going
on
here
at
maker,
I'd
love
to
see
multiple
bidders
for
the
positions
and
and
functions.
You
know
you're
talking
about
risk
right,
governance
risk.
A
A
G
We
can
I
can
talk
for
a
bit.
I.
Think
the
biggest
thing
we
need
to
keep
in
mind
is
what
what
are
the
goals
with
like
governance
process
like
what?
What
what
are
we
trying
to
do
and
what's
the
and
how
do
we
want
to
do
it
and
realizing
that
the
MIPS
process
they're
mainly
like
a
perspective
on
how
to
organize
ourselves
socially
in
order
to
agree
on
things
and
move
things
to
mkr
holders.
G
And
I
guess
in
terms
of
alternatives
the
only
either
if
people
have
alternative
mips
sets,
then
that's
awesome
and
let's
see
them.
But
besides
that
kind
of
continuing
the
way
we
have
been
and
slowly
building
up
like
the
signaling
process,
the
collateral
onboarding
and
you
know,
there's
all
sorts
of
other
questions
like
compensation
and
domain
teams
and
and
all
that
and
I
just
want
to
say.
There's
definitely,
there's
definitely
other
ways
to
think
about
how
we
organize
organize
ourselves.
Socially.
C
G
B
Yeah
definitely
and
I
mean
the
whole
the
whole
will.
The
main
goal
of
this
framework
is
to
enable
the
community
to
drive
the
organization
of
governance
and
effectively
help
maintain
and
improve
the
protocol
over
time
and
who
knows
in
10
years
there
might
be
a
whole
different
framework
or
a
whole
different
type
of
process.
The
point
is
that
we're
really
trying
to
kick
start
this
next
step
of
having
everything
be
like
community
driven
and
built
from
the
roots
up,
and
all
of
that
so
I
guess.
G
G
G
Like
other
there's
people
and
their
networks,
they
know
doing
good
work
for
smart
contracts
or
risk,
and
it's
like
how
I
see
it
is
like.
Why
would
MKR
holders
like
how
would
they
know
who's
good
at
doing
risk
work?
You
know
like
I'd
much
rather
trust
Cyrus
to
hire
contract
someone
to
do
some
work
rather
than
just
like
kind
of
guessing
and
like
trying
to
figure
it
out
myself,
but.
E
Yeah,
that's
a
great
point
on
the
valuation
processor,
the
hiring
of
new
risk
teams
is
going
to
be.
It
is
gonna
require
its
own
fairly
significant,
significant
initiative.
I,
don't
think
it
will
be
as
simple
as
so.
Here's
a
myth,
it
just
says:
Boden
X,
Y
Z
is
a
Oracle
team
and
then
that's
the
end
of
it.
I
would
I
would
view
these
MIPS
as
just
kind
of
look
on
as
a
as
a
explanation
of
things
that
need
to
get
done,
but
the
actual
process
behind
that
will
be
significantly
more
involved.
G
And
yeah
I
guess:
that's
cut!
Yes,
so
my
point
cuz
it's
like
at
the
end
of
the
day,
it's
just
like
people
talking
to
each
other
and
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
do
it,
and
also
that,
like
how
we
pay
people
like
the
way
that
Cyrus
I,
like
I,
have
no
idea
how
year
the
foundation
pays
like
this
vishesha,
pretty
mostly
what
not
but
I'm
guessing
that
might
be
different
than
like
how
smart
contracts,
people
work
and
like
rich
works
and
like
the
community
development
stuff.
G
A
To
kind
of
blow
in
this
thing,
if
I
can,
but
to
speak
to
that
one
specific
issue,
this
is
something
that
I've
talked
about
in
calls
back
to
the
beginning
of
time
is
that
we
have
the
foundation,
and
then
we
have
the
community
and,
as
we
become
more
sophisticated
to
community
self-organizes,
and
so
the
community
we
have
now
is
nothing
like
the
one
we
had
like
a
year
ago
or
two
years
ago.
We
have
PR
teams
and
we
have
risk
teams
and
we
have
collateral.
A
Onboarding
teams
and
people
are
self-organizing,
which
is
ideal
as
that's
exactly
what
we
need
to
decentralize.
But
this
is
a
long
process
and
once
once,
groups
of
actors
self-identify
or
get
identified
by
the
ecosystem,
and
then
we
look
to
fill
those
roles.
The
foundation
has
to
bootstrap
those
things,
because
there's
no
there's
no
funding
mechanism
sitting
around
right
now
that
we
can
use
to
allocate
to
the
ecosystem.
A
We
it's
built
into
the
protocol
and
as
part
of
the
plan,
is
to
have
the
buffer
and
maker
stability
fees
or
what
inevitably
will
be
funding
these
things,
but
the
one
of
the
future
steps
that
the
community?
One
of
the
major
evolutions
or
growth
spurts
that
the
community
has
to
go
through
is
how
does
it
handle
an
allocation
of
its
own
budget
to
I
fund
the
actors
and
it's
identified
that
it
needs
and
that's
where
he
pcs
and
domain
teams
come
into
play.
A
There's
working
groups
started
just
recently
to
clarify
what
the
implications
of
that
are
and
how
they
could
work
and
all
the
rest
of
it.
So
there
will
be
communication
and
presentations
and
all
kinds
of
things
coming
about
how
that
happens,
because
as
far
as
I'm
concerned,
that's
a
major
paradigm
shift.
That's
that's
one.
True!
A
What
that
looks
like
right
now,
other
than
the
fact
that
the
protocol
needs
to
be
able
to
pay
for
the
protocols
operations
we'll
see
what
that
looks
like
soon,
but
sorry,
yeah
I
feel
like
I
might
be
preemptively
ending
this
debate,
which
I
think
is
super
helpful
and
healthy,
and
we
need
to
continue
it.
So
here's
here's
a
summary.
So
we
have
a
MIPS
process.
We
have
MIT
0,
which
is
sophisticated,
and
we
have
that
is
going
to
launch
us
into
MIT
3
and
MIT.
A
3
is
what
the
governance
cycle
is
all
about
and
there's
an
aggressive
timeline
associated
with
this
were
at
April
16th
May
4th.
We
begin
a
new
governance
cycle,
that's
I
would
like
to
in
dip
3,
and
so
the
community
needs
to
have
an
understanding
of
what
that
implies
and
what
the
responsibilities
are.
How
that
will
change
things
so
I
encourage
people
to
assuming
that
the
MIS
ratified
so
long
for
wisdom,
so
I
encourage
people
to
engage
with
this
process.
So
have
a
look
at
the
forum
thread.
A
H
Obviously,
that
part
makes
sense,
given
the
the
reduced
need
for
that
at
the
moment,
emit
the
higher
cost
in
terms
of
the
collateral
or
so
for
eath
I
mean
that's
been
sitting
pretty
constant
from
where
it
was
last
week.
The
collateralization
ratios
have
not
changed
that
much
as
you
can
see
that
sort
of
those
liquidation
prices
are
primarily
103
and
80.
So
that's
still
pretty
constant.
H
Come
back
to
that
so
in
terms
of
the
dye
trades,
so
what
we
saw
in
the
last
24
hours
was
a
pretty
decent
chunk
of
the
trading
was
actually
on
unit
swap
so
that's
kind
of
a
small,
a
table
of
data
point.
Usually
it's
not
such
a
large
percentage
for
you
swap
and
saw
fair
amount
of
slippage
there.
The
volume
weighted
average
price
for
the
last
time
forever
is
still
at
about
a
dollar
too.
So
you
know,
dye
is
still
sitting
above
the
peg.
H
What's
interesting
is
in
the
last
24
hours
as
well,
the
site
rates
obviously
very
few
of
them,
but
they
were
actually
trading
down
a
bit
which
is
interesting
because
they
they
usually
track
pretty
well
cyan
die.
So
perhaps
that's
some
indication
of
things.
There
we're
a
little
shaky
on
the
side,
peg
side
of
things
in
terms.
H
A
Before,
though,
like
people
are
feed,
these
subs
are
fantastically
sticky
for
some
reason,
if
there's
some
kind
of
threshold
that
I'm
clear
on
what
it
is,
where
people
actually
break
out
the
hardware
bullets
and
start
moving
things
to
there,
maybe
it's
the
lack
of
better
alternatives.
It's
a
do.
Sorry,
yes,.
H
I
mean
some
people
are
presumably
the
people
that
do
use
it
in
that
way
receive
it
to
be
sort
of
a
risk-free
like
free
parking
spot,
you
know
monopoly,
and
so
in
that
context,
for
them
the
yield
that's
available
for
supplying
it
out
on
other
platforms.
Maybe
does
not
justify
their
perceived
potential
risks
in
using
those
platforms,
so
they
sort
of
view
it
as
like.
Alright,
well
I'm
eating
the
capital
cost,
but
from
their
perspective
it's
a
risk,
create
option.
A
B
A
With
the
MIPS
discussion,
we
have
some
weighty
decisions
that
need
to
be
taken
care
of
very
soon
and
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
we
didn't
address
in
this
call
that
are
happening
right
now,
so
many
things
I'm,
probably
not
going
to
remember
all
of
them,
but
so
here's
here's
a
list
but
GSM
needs
to
be
understood
and
reviewed
mechanisms
for
dark
fix.
How'd.
Who
do
we
trust?
How
do
we
trust
them?
How
do
we
there's
a
social
layer
that
needs
to
be
understood
when
it
comes
to
fixing
problems
in
the
protocol?
A
A
There's
issues
to
be
discussed
here,
though-
and
this
is
a
topic
that
I'm
going
to
revisit
more
and
more
in
the
coming
weeks-
is
the
difference
between
tension
and
feasibility.
So
we
have
sort
of
this.
We
have
an
open
source
governance
ecosystem
where
people
can
come
in
make
a
proposal.
If
you,
the
maker
holders,
can
signal
agreement
or
disagreement,
but
that
does
not
make
the
world
turn
backwards
so
like.
A
If
the
community
wants
to
do
a
thing,
if
they
can
say
that
they
want
that
thing
to
happen,
but
there's
this
missing
piece
of
the
puzzle
where
feasibility
and
comes
into
play
like,
is
it
possible
to
do
that
thing?
How
long
will
it
take
to
do
that?
Who
needs
to
do
that
thing?
What
order
those
things
need
to
happen
and
like
there's,
a
probably
a
highly
technical
group
and
we've
all
been
through
this
process
in
various
our
own
specific
domains?
Is
that
you
know
coming
up
with
a
good
idea?
A
Is
one
thing
getting
a
project
plan
in
a
roadmap
and
implementation
and
all
the
rest
of
those
fun
things
is
quite
another
so
to
loop.
This
back
to
what
I
was
just
talking
about
the
community
signal
they
want
to
shut
down
at
24th,
but
we
all
have
to
understand
what
does
that
actually
mean
and
we'll
hand
us
that
work,
and
how
are
we
going
to
tell
people
about
it
and
there's
the
rest
of
the
ecosystem
know
that
this
thing
is
coming,
so
there's
lots
of
conversations
that
need
to
be
had
around
this
thing.
A
E
A
E
To
say
a
couple
things
before
you
end
the
call
so
just
wanna.
Let
people
know
that
on
Tuesday
and
Wednesday,
the
wrist
team
gave
a
couple
of
additional
we
held
it.
Additional
governance
calls
courage
everyone
to
check
out
the
recordings
where
we
discuss
some
collateral
risk,
bottling
type
of
stuff
question
from
will
about
if
we're
gonna
continue.
These
risk
calls
like
last
week
as
of
right
now,
I
think
we
will
I
think
we're
gonna
try
to
continue
doing
some
additional
ones
outside
of
this
regular
Thursday
circuit,
but
I.
We
haven't
quite
locked
down
details
on.
C
I
I
was
just
yeah,
walked
on
there
on
the
tags
of
governance
meetings
in
and
there
was
kind
of
like
a
published
somewhere
else
before
I
didn't
get
notification
like
it's.
Okay,
just
just
want.
You
know
we're
there
you're
going
to
be
doing
I'm
going
kind
of
like
a
risk
like
they
can
focus
kind
of
call
in
the
future.
A
A
And
that's
where
your
voice
can
be
heard.
That's
where
the
community
creates
the
consensus,
the
social
layer
that
the
maker
holders
large
by
and
large
following.
So
if
you
want
to
fix
the
protocol,
make
it
better
improve
it's
all
turrets,
that's
the
place
to
do
joins
all
right
thanks.
Everybody
really
interesting
cool
talk
to
you
next
week.