Schuppi Delegate Platform

I supported this weeks executive by exploiting the low gas prices we had tonight :wink:

I have been in favour of the three preceding polls as well (this, this and this), so there is really nothing I can add here.

1 Like

Active Polls

Ending 2021-11-17T23:00:00Z

Local Liquidation Limit Adjustments for ETH-A, ETH-B, ETH-C, WBTC-A and WSTETH-A (thread)

voted Yes

Following the suggestions by @Risk-Core-Unit here in order to increase the throughput in liquidations on those ilks. Being able to have smoothly running liquidations is going to be really important on the next market downturn.

Rates Proposal (thread)

votes Yes

Despite appetite for DAI-from-WBTC has cooled down a lot in the last week (but not special compared to other ilks), I still think it is reasonable to increase the rates here. The new rates are matching more to the risks we have added by the increased debt-exposure.

Offboard the AAVE-A Vault Type + Offboard the BAL-A Vault Type + Offboard the COMP-A Vault Type (thread)

voted Yes

It is about time to remove vault-types that haven’t seen a reasonable adoption. This is getting even more important by the time we need to fund the operational costs for oracles (related), but it is also a matter of focus.

I am wondering if Matic adoption will pick up.

Change of Covenants for P1-DROP (Peoples Company Series 1) (thread)

voted Yes

Despite still being in turmoil mode on RWA I don’t think we should use every opportunity to block making progress. The content of this change is harmless, cannot see how this request needs to get turned down.

2 Likes

Active Polls

Ending 2021-11-21T23:00:00Z

Ratification Poll for Modify Core Unit Budget, RWF-001 (MIP40c3-SP39) (thread)

voted Yes

This is just an unmodified renewal of the currently running budget for the RWF Core Unit. The team has delivered in 2021 and I am very much looking forward to 2022.

Ratification Poll for Real-World Finance Core Unit MKR Compensation, RWF-001 (thread)

voted Yes

A vesting plan for one of the oldest Core Units was overdue. The proposal is a reasonable vesting plan, no objections.

Ratification Poll for Modify Core Unit Budget, MKT-001 (MIP40c3-SP33) (thread)

voted Yes

Like almost all Core Units - this team is under budget. It got some headwinds in the last MIP cycle. Let’s move on.

Ratification Poll for Modify Core Unit Budget, COM-001 (MIP40c3-SP40) (thread)

voted Yes

Essentially a renewal of the currently running budget. No surprises.

I think we should get a standardized and mandatory system in place (reference) - this would not only help the teams to focus on their core competencies but also increase visibility for all stakeholders.

Ratification Poll for Supplement to Collateral Onboarding Application (MIP6c3-SP1) (thread)

votes Yes

The collateral onboarding process is not ideal in general, but it is great that we get something new for RWA now. I expect more iterations on it in the future, but this is a good start for sure.

Ratification Poll for Adding Sidestream Auction Services Core Unit, SAS-001 (thread)

voted Yes

This Core Unit has a meaningful mission and a capable team for executing it. The only thing that I do not like is the retroactive vesting - I know this is not the first time and @wouter made some good points why we should do that. There need to be good reasons when this is applied but my subjective assessment is aligned with the procedure here.

Ratification Poll for the Immunefi Security Core Unit (IS-001) (thread)

voted Yes

A great addition to our existing Core Unit stack and I am really happy to have @psychonaut as Deputy Facilitator in here as well.

Ratification Poll for Adding the Deco Fixed Rate Core Unit (DECO-001) (thread)

voted Yes

This Core Unit application has been the cause of some sleepless nights and making a decision on it has been the hardest tasks as a new delegate so far. I have been talking with a lot of people from the community, from existing Core Units and from the Deco team.

The discussions, opinions and assessments on this application are wide-ranging and frankly speaking: If I would be just a casual voter, I would probably just abstain.

I don’t want to go too much into details, but highlight just two points that bring me to the conclusion to support this:

  • We are onboarding a really skilled team with a unique background - this is a great opportunity for us to evolve. It is not only about the skills they have but also about the nice side effect of unlocking the Project Sandbox (will link to the summary of @SES-Core-Unit once it is live)
  • Yes, there are uncertainties about the legal and regulatory implications - but again: we are not modifying the protocol here - we just onboard a great team that will take care of dealing with this as well. This is a unique opportunity - you might think of a high-risk high-reward situation - and we should not miss it.
8 Likes

I supported today’s executive - increasing the Stability Fee for WBTC-A and onboarding WBTC-B according to the parameters suggested by @Risk-Core-Unit and MOMC, adjusting the Liquidation Limits for ETH-A, ETH-B, ETH-C, WBTC-A, WSTETH-A, offboarding a couple of unused ilks - nothing controversial here.

Let`s get this executed ASAP. The changes on WBTC-A will increase our revenue by >18 MM/y.

3 Likes

Active Polls

Ending 2021-11-24T23:00:00Z

Add a GUSD Peg Stability Module (thread)

voted Yes

I think it is good to have a third PSM in the mix. tin and tout are currently set to zero, so this is not about income. But like the D3M, this is not about revenue, this is about making a strong message to the userbase. A GUSD-PSM will support this.

Add WBTC-C as a new Vault Type (thread)

voted Yes

ETH-C has been a nice addition to our portfolio, I expect the same to happen with WBTC-C as well. I believe the trade-off of having fewer income by a lower Stability Fee is getting to get offset by having a lower risk on our side in case of a large market downturn and we are potentially also attracting different and more users to this product.

Increase the Aave D3M Maximum Debt Ceiling (thread)

voted Yes

I would like to see the D3M in a position to enforce a maximum variable borrow rate as soon as possible. For that, we will need a lot higher DC than suggested with this poll. However I am fully trusting @Derek and his team to go with the appropriate speed.

Increase the System Surplus Buffer (thread)

voted

  • Option 3: Increase the System Surplus Buffer from 60 million DAI to 90 million DAI, with a gradual increase of 1 million DAI per week.
  • Option 4: Increase the System Surplus Buffer from 60 million DAI to 130 million DAI, with a gradual increase of 1 million DAI per week.
  • Option 1: Increase the System Surplus Buffer from 60 million DAI to 90 million DAI, with a gradual increase of 0.67 million DAI per week.
  • Option 2: Increase the System Surplus Buffer from 60 million DAI to 130 million DAI, with a gradual increase of 0.67 million DAI per week.

My primary goal here is to get the SB increased as quick as possible. Going with the 1 MM/week option leaves more than 60% of the profit for MKR burning. Having a higher SB will not only protect us better in case of a crash, but will also allow us to do more experiments (e.g. with RWAs and higher DCs on them).

You may find it strange that I favour the 90 MM option over the 130 MM options - I simply think that we will need to revisit our strategy around increasing the Surplus Buffer short term anyway, so i would rather make a commitment on a shorter timespan.

There were some concerns about the flap-Keeper ecosystem not being in a good shape, but haven’t seen a single auction since we restarted burning that was not running good. It does not take much to keep it alive, we can be safer by just continously burning a bit - but even some months of not burning has not hurt the ecosystem much.

Ending 2021-11-28T23:00:00Z

Community Greenlight Poll - SB-frOGI (SolidBlock Red Frog Digital Coin) (thread)

voted Abstain

I honestly have no opinion here, and I am looking forward to have a better greenlight procedure for RWA in the future as outlined in here.

Community Greenlight Poll - MONETALIS (Monetalis Wholesale SME Green Growth Lending) (thread)

voted Yes

Looks like a nice opportunity to get more DAI from RWA and also fits nicely to the Green Money idea.

2 Likes

Supported new executive. New teams, new vault types, more headroom for D3M - perfect next step for MakerDao. Let’s move!

3 Likes

Active Polls

Ending 2021-12-01T23:00:00Z

Increase the Dust Parameter for Most Vault Types (thread) and Increase the Dust Parameter for ETH-B Vault Type (thread)

voted Yes

Few remember the times we had a dust of 20 DAI. I am really sad we need to make these adjustments, but they are necessary given the current gas-prices. We need to be prepared for liquidating vaults, it is just not avoidable to make these changes.

I hope we can be more open once we allow minting on L2s.

Use the MakerDAO Treasury to Fund MKR Expenses (thread)

voted Yes

As long as we have MKR in our treasury it just does not make sense to mint some for MKR vesting. Even if we cannot agree on burning some of it or putting it to work, we have this option to use it.

Add GUNIV3DAIUSDC2-A as a new Vault Type (thread)

voted Yes

The proposed stability fees are unlikely going to attract users of this vault-type, but we can adjust them later. The first version of integrating the GUNI-product into our stack was already a huge success though not in terms of revenue. I hope we can tweak the parameters, as this is a nice way helping to keep the peg.

One Time Payment to the GovComms CU to Deal with Budget Issues (thread)

voted Yes

Another good example why we would be better off with an accounting CU keeping track of those things. But You can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs - let’s move on.

Parameter Changes Proposal - MakerDAO Open Market Committee (thead)

voted Yes

The proposed changes by MOMC are reasonable - both in terms of balancing growth and profit, but also in terms of trying to break even vault-types with their oracle costs.

I would like to see a lower bar and higher debt-ceiling for D3M mid-term so we can grow the footprint of DAI in DeFi and also making some profit out of it.

Add CurveLP-stETH-ETH as a new Vault Type (thread)

voted Yes

I am really happy to see another staked ETH product appear in our portfolio. Let’s hope it gets enough traction for covering the oracle costs, but you have to spend money to make money.

3 Likes

Active Polls

Ending 2021-12-08T23:00:00Z

Adjust wstETH-A System Parameters (thread)

voted Yes

Just 4 weeks ago we increased the DC to 50 MM and it is really nice to see

If all new vault-types would work this way we wouldn’t need to talk about offboarding that often :wink:

I have been supporting the last increase and of course also support this increase of the Debt Ceiling.

Adjust MATIC-A System Parameters (thread)

voted Yes

Really happy to see that MATIC-A finally gets some traction. I guess we will no longer need to talk about offboarding this vault-types if the proposed line will be utilized. Thanks @Risk-Core-Unit for taking the initiative. Lowering the gap also fits to the proposal by MOMC (ratified onchain here).

Ending 2021-12-19T23:00:00Z

Community Greenlight Poll - G-UNIv3-DAIUSDP (Gelato UniswapV3 DAI-USDP LP Token) (thread)

voted Yes

This is a similar application to GUNIV3DAIUSDC1 but based on USDP (PAX). The situation is almost the same - we also have a PSM for it which is already heavily used. I have some doubts that this will really get used as both 0.01% and 0.05% have insignificant volume right now - but in the end this is just a green light poll and the smart people from our Core Units will have some deeper look at it before this eventually goes into the protocol.

If this gets a positive attestation by our Core Units I think it does make sense to have it as it is a valuable addition the PSM diversifying our risk. My main concern right now is about oracle costs and projected utilization.

2 Likes

I supported the current executive containing some parameter changes, dust adjustments and delegate compensations - very grateful to be part of this list but also sad @MakerMan suffered from the cut-off. Note that there is currently a Signal Request running on this topic - I hope we can retroactively fix this glitch.

2 Likes

I supported the current executive containing some of the changes of the last two weeks:

4 Likes

x-posting for visibility: I will start doing weekly Office Hours and am thinking about sharing more stuff with the community. Please chime in!

1 Like

Active Polls

Ending 2021-12-15T23:00:00Z

DAI Direct Deposit Module (D3M) Debt Ceiling Targeting and DAI Direct Deposit Module (D3M) Net Rates Spread (thread)

Voted

  • yes on the Net Rates Spread poll
  • DC-target poll:
    • first option: 30% of Real DAI Supply on Aave
    • second option: 25% of Real DAI Supply on Aave

I summarized my opinion here - personally I would love to see an even lower spread to make the variable borrowing rate on Aave more appealing for end-users. With a bar of 3.75% we are most probably not coming anywhere near the DC-target. Nevertheless, I want us to be prepared for sudden spikes in DAI borrowing at Aave so we can provide help on stable variable borrowing rates. That’s why I prefer the highest option on the DC-target.

Recognised Delegate Compensation Trial Performance Modifier (thread)

votes Yes

Unlike the previous polls related to delegate compensation I do not Abstain but instead support this. The current implementation is a bit too harsh on the cut-off, which led to undesirable effects for @MakerMan in the last months. This is a step in the right direction.

Ending 2021-12-19T23:00:00Z

Community Greenlight Poll - aUST (Anchor TerraUSD) (thread)

voted No

@ElProgreso did some research on this token, and also @monet-supply from the Risk team made a comment on it. I am agreeing to both assessments and therefor do not support moving forward with this application.

2 Likes

Active Polls

Ending 2022-01-12T23:00:00Z

Prioritize Onboarding a Compound DAI Direct Deposit Module (D3M) (thread)

voted Yes

We have barely seen a fully exhausted AAVE-D3M yet, but I am a huge supporter of this tool to provide low and stable borrowing rates on DAI to secondary markets and by that increasing the DAI footprint. Extending this tool to Compound is a logical next step.

Raise the Emergency Shutdown Module (ESM) Threshold (thread)

voted Yes

Most of the MKR is not locked in our voting contract and the current ESM Threshold is just barely above the liquidity in Aave, Sushi, UniV2 combined. It should be a lot more difficult for a bad actor to shut down the protocol. Raising the threshold to 100k is a step in the right direction.

Prioritize DAI Direct Deposit Module (D3M) for Maple Finance (thread)

voted Yes

Depending on further investigations and details provided by @Growth-Core-Unit and @Real-World-Finance this could evolve in a great way of providing DAI to the markets. Note we are not voting here on any parameters yet, this is just to test the water if the community is supporting this initiative.

Increase the Dust Parameter for Select LP Token Vaults (thread)

voted Yes

Increasing the dust is always a sad move at it excludes even more users from the protocol. But given the current gas-prices, it is also not economically sound for participants to join the game without being able to provide the necessary amount of collateral anyway. Still hoping for L2 :wink:

Proposal - Recover DAI Locked in Optimism Escrow (thread)

voted Abstain

I don’t like us to perform a special treatment just because the victim is well connected and the amount of DAI is especially huge. We need to set up a process for those cases, also taking the costs for recovery into account. This should really not be handled on individual cases. Some kind of seed-funding of a MIP taking care of those situations would be a nice compensation in this case.

On the other hand: it would not be reasonable to ask the victim to wait some months until a MIP is done and ratified, and this is about 10 MM DAI not usable on Optimism.

1 Like

Active Polls

Ending 2022-01-23T23:00:00Z

Community Greenlight Poll - OGN (Origin Protocol) (thread)

voted Abstain

I have doubts this collateral will allow Maker to run a profitable vault-type on this, but since this is a greenlight poll I will just abstain so it get can get evaluated later on.

Community Greenlight Poll - OUSD (Origin Dollar) (thread)

voted No

Being tied to USDT is a big red flag for me. But even ignoring this, I don’t think onboarding this asset will bring enough benefit to justify the risk.

Community Greenlight Poll - USDap (BondAppetit) (thread)

voted Abstain

I have doubts this collateral will make sense for us, but after all this is a greenlight poll just to put a priority to it.

Community Greenlight Poll - RBLD (Robinland Holdings) (thread)

voted Abstain

I have doubts this collateral will make sense for us, but after all this is a greenlight poll just to put a priority to it.

Community Greenlight Poll - TUSD-PSM (TrueUSD) (thread)

voted No

We still have a good amount of TUSD sitting in the TUSD-A and a PSM would be a nice thing to offload the remains so it would be easily accessible for people who want to swap their DAI to TUSD - but not the other way round.

The Debt Ceiling for TUSD-A has been set to 0 more than a year ago (reasons: here, here) and setting up a PSM with a Debt Ceiling > 0 is not something appropriate in the current situation.

Ratification Poll for Modify Core Unit Budget, ORA-001 (Oracle Gas Costs) (MIP40c3-SP45) (thread)

voted Yes

While I agree with some of the comments that this proposal should be split in two seperate ones I don’t think it will change a lot - MakerDAO will cover both parts and it is correct to do so. There is bigger fish to fry on the oracles side. It was clear that with the carve out of the oracles team the operational gas-costs would still be covered by the foundation and that this will transition later - now it is happening.

Ratification Poll for Onboarding Tech-Ops Core Unit (TECH-001) (thread)

voted Yes

This is a well established team with a track record transitioning over to the DAO. No doubts on my side and good luck and best wished for @simonkp and @dumitru and the team for this next phase.

Ratification Poll for the Strategic Finance Core Unit (SF-001) (thread)

voted Yes

@Aes has been working in the DAO for quite some time and the mission of his coreunit is needed. I am confident the team will deliver great results and help us grow. Let’s go!

Ratification Poll for Collateral Offboarding Process (MIP62) (thread)

voted Yes

Great to see we are finally formalizing this procedure, thanks a lot @PaperImperium for driving this initiative.

Ratification Poll for Core Unit Budget, SNE-001 (MIP40c3-SP47) (thread)

voted Yes

The Starknet Engineering CU has delivered from the start and I am happy to support the next steps. L2 support for Maker is desperately needed.

Ratification Poll for Bug Bounty Program for MakerDAO Critical Infrastructure (MIP64) (thread)

voted Yes

Nice to see the newly founded Immunefi CU is starting to get some traction. Let’s hope we will not see the 10 MM reward anytime soon :wink:

Ratification Poll for Maker Keeper Network (MIP63) (thread)

voted Yes

This is a step into the right direction. We need the keeper ecosystem to grow and this will help to make it happen.

Ratification Poll for Offboarding Content Production Core Unit (MKT-001) (thread)

voted No

I do agree that there are issues w.r.t. cost VS output and the lack of transparency and OKRs - but the latter is not something unique to this Coreunit.

I think it is premature to cut ties, we aren’t there yet.

Ratification Poll for Facilitator Onboarding for RWF-001 (MIP41c4-SP27) (thread)

voted Yes

I am hoping the RWF-turmoil is now finally settled, best wished for @williamr taking over and a big Thank you to @SebVentures - really happy you found a next place within the DAO to keep contributing!

Ratification Poll for Development & UX Core Unit Budget - DUX-001 (MIP40c3-SP52) (thread)

voted Yes

This is just continuing the current budget. Keep up the good work!

Ratification Poll for Modify Core Unit Budget - Sustainable Ecosystem Scaling (SES-001) (MIP40c3-SP55) (thread)

voted Yes

This is just continuing the current budget. Keep up the good work!

6 Likes

Thanks so much for the feedback!

I’m Scarlet Chen, CEO of Robinland. As you mentioned, we’re in the process of the community greenlight poll about our MIP6 proposal here. We saw that you have some questions/concerns so would like to reach out proactively to see if there’s anything we might be able to answer.

Robinland channels liquidity from Defi lenders like Maker to fund real estate development projects for a better physical world. Our team consists of real estate industry veteran, crypto native coder, and lawyer familiar with the legal process underneath a security token offering (STO, only process the SEC approves of to issue on-chain crypto tokens that represents real world asset). We tokenize real estate debt projects via security token issuance, and pledge the tokens with Maker to access financing. The projects are all first lien projects w/ full recourse rights, from developers w/ A ratings in NYC.

Compared to other proposals (some already approved) on the forum, our advantage is: (1) there is no retail investor involved in any stage, which mitigates compliance risk for Maker (2) there is no utility token or NFT involved in our process, only security tokens, which ensures 100% compliance w/ current SEC rules about securitization (3) we have in-house lawyers familiar w/ the STO process, and our COO has structured Reg D and Reg A fund in her previous career, which are the same underlying process of how we onboard a debt project at Robinland.

As for track record: (1) our COO has been in the real estate industry for 7 years and (2) our lawyer has been in practice for 10 years on the same legal process (3) our real estate projects are supplied by Crowdfunz, a real estate PE w/ 5 years track record, 0 default rate, and 10-20 projects financed every year. This is all reflected in the proposal we put together - We talked to one of the senior members of the governance community, and he said ‘this is far more superior than anything I’ve seen on the forum; lots of concerns have been addressed ex ante, like providing Maker w/ a put option’.

We’ve spent a long time & lots of thoughts putting together the proposal, read most of the proposals on our forum of similar nature, talked to 5+ lawyers about our structure, and also one of the major members of the Maker governance to get feedback. We truly believe that we’re bringing a better alternative to both parties (supply of projects and supply of liquidity) in this ecosystem!

We noticed that a large fraction of the community has voted ‘abstain’, and one delegate voted ‘no’, which is why we’re proactively reaching out. We’re happy to respond to any feedback/criticism the community and/or you might have, as we believe we have the capacity to change our proposal in a way that accommodates Maker’s needs.

My apologies for the intrusion if any! And we’re here to answer any question you might have. Many thanks for your time and we really appreciate it!

I supported last weeks executive containing

1 Like

Active Polls

Ending 2022-01-19T23:00:00Z

PPG - Open Market Committee Proposal (thread)

voted Yes

While the proposed changes will most probably decrease the revenue of Maker I think it is a proper response to the overall lower borrow-demand. Especially lowering ETH-A WSTETH-A Stability Fees and increasing our share on AAVE-DAI through the D3M is something I support.

There has been some discussion on the high Debt Ceiling for GUNIV3DAIUSDC2-A (data can be found here, discussion on the chat), but I don’t think we should have an artificially low Debt Ceiling on those GUNI-based-vaults. The market will find an equilibrium on its own.

Decrease the GUNIV3DAIUSDC2-A Liquidation Ratio (thread)

voted Yes

This brings GUNIV3DAIUSDC2-A to the same level as GUNIV3DAIUSDC1-A - cannot see a reason why we shouldn’t do this.

Ending 2022-01-23T23:00:00Z

Community Greenlight Poll - RBLD (Robinland Holdings) (thread)

changed vote to Yes (Greenlight)

After a call with @Scarlet_Chen and reading the post of @LongForWisdom about the intention of MIP6-Greenlight-Polls I changed my vote to support this application. I think this asset is totally worth exploring and there is no reason to stop it right here.

4 Likes

Thanks so much @ultraschuppi ! Will keep working w/ the Maker community & iterate on our application based on the new guidelines just put forth by the RWF core unit here. We really appreciate being given the chance to further engage with Maker and will work towards common interest!

1 Like

Supported the most recent executive containing

On a sidenote: excited how well the recent liquidations went! Let’s keep on burning!

2 Likes

I just supported (within one minute after it hit the voting portal) the newest exec which will

  • deactivate the lerp on the Surplus Buffer
  • set the Surplus Buffer to 250 MM directly.

This is an out-of-schedule exec that has been set up after some discussions on discord and this urgent signal request

As long as we do not have a good mechanism of burning MKR we should just stop doing it. Happy this topic now gets some attention and I am excited that @hexonaut already has a short-term solution to this problem of inefficient MKR-auctions

4 Likes