Voting Intention Polls September 13, 2021
Intention is to vote yes to offboard KNC as a collateral type . KNC has 138M MC with barely any vault use.
Intention is to vote yes to onboard Gelato USDC-DAI as a collateral type.
Intention is to vote yes to Adopt the Debt Ceiling Instant Access Module (DC-IAM) for PSM-PAX-A. I want to make a single statement about the PSMs in general. The PSM was only intended to be a short term approach to dealing with DAI PEG and provide DAI liquidity. My understanding also is that during an ES these will no longer function, oracles on prices are permanently set to 1 (basically disabled). A solid PEG might be good for developing business but when I examine the price fluctuations of all other stablecoins - not one has a PEG as tight as DAI. This is a very strong constraint and in conjunction with my post on the Maker Trilemma - ala Impossible Trinity means Maker must follow market rates or face a carry trade driving capital into or out of the PSMs should Maker rates diverge from Market. Limitations on collateral in the future could have significant implications for the PEG generally (both up and down). This also has strong implications regarding any and all fixed rate proposals and Institutional Vaults
Intention is to vote yes to Ratification Poll for GovAlpha Core Unit Budget Q4 2021 to Q1 2022 (MIP40c3-SP29).
Intention is to vote yes to Ratification Poll for Risk Core Unit MKR Compensation (MIP40c3-SP25). I am decidedly against including retroactive rewards on a CU by CU basis as these should be pooled together so everyone can be treated fairly. I also believe MKR rewards should be bonuses related to system performance-profit to be sustainable.
Intention is to vote yes to Ratification Poll for Collateral Engineering Services Core Unit, CES-001. Given that Maker intentions for growth are RWA and Institutional Vaults I have some concerns of overlap between CUs but I am convinced duplication of effort is a potential quality assurance. I have stated in the past to get both competition and quality in a decentralized business will cost 2-3x more than in a centralized business. There are key issues with having a single CU or group of individuals solely responsible for carrying on DAO functions. Single sourcing in any business for services is generally bad and leads to higher costs and greater inefficiencies. The best model is to actually offer up tasks for bid and to seek ways to develop a healthy market for sources for business services. There are many reasons a decentralized entity should be looking to create such a model. Here we can do it by having additional CUs with overlapping functions.
I intend to abstain from Ratification Poll for StarkNet Engineering Core Unit, SNE-001. I don’t have any real informational background on why this CU is necessary, nor whether anyone else can carry on its services should this unit go dark or offline.
I intend to vote yes to Ratification Poll for Development & UX Core Unit, DUX-001. So far work of this unit looks good. I would like to see some development of a broader market for services as stated above.
I intend to vote yes to Ratification Poll for Strategic Happiness Core Unit, SH-001. I like the idea of generating both PR and someone keeping an eye on general status of the DAO from a satisfaction standpoint. I think the return for the cost likely will be higher than expected but intend to monitor approach. It would be interesting for this unit to develop polls, and/or measurement metrics to monitor status using a scientific data driven approach.
I intend to abstain Ratification Poll for RWA Foundations (MIP58) . My concern here is that while this appears reasonable, it also appears to duplicate a number of efforts of our RWA’s. There is no real analysis presented as to how this MIP potentially could conflict with not just other MIPs as @PaperImperium suggests, nor a co-ordinated statement from our currently onboarded RWAs as to whether this structure negatively or positively impinges on their own already created structures. In short I don’t have a good handle on why this is necessary, or whether it affects current RWAs or is just looking to provide a framework for future RWAs.
With gas costs pretty low submitted a tx to vote as above.