Signal Request / Poll: Adjust DAI Debt Ceiling

Options based on various amounts suggested on /r, chat and forum.

Is there a model that was used to determine the prior 50mm and current 100mm ceilings?

  • $110mm
  • $120mm
  • $150mm
  • $200mm

0 voters


For the sake of completeness, can we have ‘No Increase’ added as a signalling option? There should be room for governance to signal disagreement if they want to.

I don’t really expect it to be used, but it’s more the principle of the thing.


Agree, tried to add a no change option earlier but discovered poll options can only be changed within 5 minutes of creation.

Maybe an admin can add that option. @rich.brown

Hah, I hadn’t realised that. That’s annoying, it would have been good to be able to add them on the fly, especially in the case of more controversial/complex subjects. Ideally I’d like for governance to be able to suggest new options during discussion and then be able to add those new options to the poll.

I suppose as a work-around we could delete and re-add polls with new options. That would remove everyone’s signals though, so hardly a good solution…

It wont let me do it either. Probably so people can’t add malicious options afterwards. I.e. ‘Everyone who doesn’t vote for this option is a commie’. It also dilutes the signal from people who vote prior to the addition.

What do people think about having this polls be private? I’m worried that Maker employee avatars could skew the results.

I think it should probably be public. Some people may “delegate” their vote to people they respect in the community. I’m not sure that is a bad thing.

I lean towards public too, but only after your vote has been cast. I believe there is an option for this. This is the best option in my mind because:

  • It allows participants to invest in their own decision before seeing the majority opinion.
  • It prevents participants from voting with Foundation employees until after they have made their own decision.
  • It allows participants to delegate if they want to, but it prevents delegation from becoming a default.
  • It allows us to see who is voting against consensus and ask them to explain their point of view. This is essential to scientific governance and consensus seeking. If you are signalling for a thing, you should be able to explain your reasons for signalling for that thing and either convince others, or be convinced yourself.

This debate probably belongs in the Meta thread on signalling, I’ll copy this there.

We are still seeing increased supply, despite the recent SF increase. Are we planning to spend a week polling for this on-chain instead of the stability fee poll? Or is the hope that we get a better dashboard and multiple votes before this becomes a problem? Can/should we skip to an executive if there is enough forum-consensus?

Is there any estimate on availability of multiple polling dashboard?

1 Like

Is there any estimate on availability of multiple polling dashboard?

Targeting beginning of July/August :slight_smile:

1 Like

I would prefer voting on debt ceiling raise next week.
People can vote on executive to raise to 18.5 if they want. They can also tactically vote for 18.5 or 19.5 fee on current polling (depending on executive vote).

1 Like
  • Have an on-chain poll to raise the debt ceiling next week in place of the SF poll.
  • Have an on-chain poll to raise the debt ceiling when we get to 95mil Dai Supply (in place of the SF poll if the new dashboard is not completed)
  • Wait for the new voting dashboard to be completed before raising the debt ceiling.

0 voters

I actually don’t think the debt ceiling is as imminent of an issue as it might seem. The peg is consistently under par and the bulls FOMO is just beginning, suggesting to me that DAI supply is just starting to get a bit too far ahead due to longs.

Not that I’m against a vote…I just assume it will pass relatively easily from when we put it up, and I’m not sure that we have to rush to be able to expand supply so soon.

I’ve got an impression that consensus is slowly moving from 120m to 150m. Maybe it’s just a short term noise due to eth price rise + someone drawing larger amount, but maybe new poll option of suggested debt ceiling, for example 135m, would make sense?

the main issue here is really not the debt ceiling per se… it is that we have a large area to cover to prep for Multi Collateral Dai… and the debt ceiling is a distraction that we keep being concerned about instead of what is right in front of us that is really important…

that makes sense, and I guess my point is that i agree with you that debt ceiling is not as important as other things, and my point about waiting is that we can probably afford the extra time to be reactionary to a surge in supply, rather than just preemptively pushing up super high.

I also believe that, as a voting group, we are probably not going to vote to lower the ceiling unless something drastic happens, so why not be conservative and raise it to $120 (still a significant expansion of 20%). We can always have another vote to raise when we need the $135-150 limits. The only potential negative I can see to this strategy is that it does take extra cycles for everyone to vote, so consolidating all these steps into a single signal may be prudent.

Either way, I also don’t strongly believe anything bad will happen with a larger ceiling in the short term, just that I think going slower ultimately doesn’t have to prevent us from ending up at the same place, while potentially lowering some risk along the way.

1 Like

When the SF goes up the Dai supply should come down. This will buy us some time till the new dashboard is built. If for whatever reason someone wants to borrow a large amount of Dai they can do so from Compound or dYdX. I think priority #1 is the peg and unless the debt ceiling begins to effect the peg in a big way.

it “should”… however in a bull market… all bets are off… we need the window of time to sort through all of the governance items… if the new dashboard really is ~3wks away, we have time. Point being, we should be heads-down on the critical path. If there is a week where things look “stable-ish”, then we should use that window to skip a poll on the SF and replace it with a poll on the debt ceiling.

Moving my signal to only do this after we reach 95mil.

I think that the recent weakness of the dai peg requires that we continue with weekly polls for the time being. A rising stability fee also has the effect of reducing the risk of us hitting the ceiling, so I hopeful if the fee rises, we will have time to on-chain poll between 95mil and 100mil dai supply.

  1. i don’t trust estimates of software engineers, so i will presume new dashboard will be ready at end of august. Without knowing/understanding what tasks are needed for dashboard to be finished, you can’t really judge how close to release are we atm
  2. i think stability fee hikes will start to affect dai supply or at least significantly slow down the growth, but nevertheless, i don’t think you can really predict any lulls in ether volatility (and consequently dai peg/price).
  3. i think mkr voters probably overshoot with the latest hike, but i also think overall ether sentiment is still bullish. I also think mkr whales showed determination to aggressively modify stability fee and they will continue to do so - i don’t believe they will suddenly change their behavior. They will counter any sudden market events with their polling/executive voting.

I am also changing my signaling vote - to 95 mil threshold. I think debt ceiling limit hit likelihood is significantly diminished and priority should be allowing mkr voters to fine tune recent hikes. I expect them to lower the fee pretty quickly.

1 Like