The Smart Contracts team has enough work on our plate to keep us busy for the next year at the very least.
Currently we’ve got Liquidations 2.0 work, MIP21 & MIP22 work, DssGov work, and the keg, the vox, the flash, and the cropjoin have all been approved, plus everything else in the MIP backlog, and we’re going to need to find some time for scaling research as well. In order to pull this off you’d want signoff from smart contracts and we don’t have the bandwidth for this. Weekly spellcrafting and tooling around that process already takes a significant amount of our time, and adding an entirely new system to our monitoring, maintenance, and manipulation workflow means that little else will get done at all.
Governance has had it’s work cut out maintaining demand around the USD peg, these problems will be compounded by adding another base accounting module and collateral risk exposure. Does governance really want to manage a separate system and peg in a climate where it can barely get the votes to pass an executive as-is? And where the gas costs on the network prohibit casual use anyways?
The MCD system is open-source and it’s within the crypto spirit to copy and rename this, but the core team just doesn’t have the bandwith to assist, as such, I’d recommend that MKR holders absolutely not give MKR minting authority to backstop a secondary system at this time.
Ideas are easy and we have plenty of them. Prioritizing the resources we currently have is the problem here. It’s so easy to vote “YES” on a proposal, but that yes vote has consequences as it throws more work on us that we then have to prioritize and implement. Throwing community devs onto projects to skirt the core team’s bandwidth limitations only increases the pressure on us since we’re going to end up reviewing code anyways, the net result being that you’ll end up with fewer resources than you began with. We’d much rather those devs work with us to help process our existing priority queue.
IMO we need to focus on making our core protocol and offerings more robust and secure, and training up a large enough team to safely and securely manage the system. Maker’s value proposition right now is that people feel safe in our smart contracts, and compromising that security by stretching too thin will ultimately erode Maker’s top position.