Recently, given feedback from the community and internal discussion the mandated actors have been discussing taking a more flexible approach to collateral onboarding.
In response to the fast-moving nature of the space and the demand for DAI we feel that allowing the collateral onboarding process to take place in a less restrained way will ultimately benefit MakerDAO.
While some of the collateral onboarding MIPs have worked well, others have not. MIP6 Applications have been a success, as have collateral greenlight polls. These provide a way for anyone to propose any asset, and for MKR Holders to express their opinion on assets. However, the other collateral onboarding MIPs have largely caused delays and frustration on the part of the domain teams and some of the community.
The issue of prioritisation has also been raised. Previously this has happened primarily on an ad hoc basis. While the domain teams have attempted to select the collateral types that overall benefit MakerDAO the most, there has not previously been a consistent or rigorous approach to this selection process.
More of the rationale and details behind this proposal can be found here:
Improvements to the Collateral Onboarding Framework
More details of collateral grants can be found here:
Collateral Onboarding Grants
Given these issues, we are proposing the following changes:
- Suspend the usage of MIPs 8, 11 and 12 effective immediately. Suspend the parts of MIP 10 directly related to collateral onboarding.
- Explicitly allow collateral onboarding to be a flexible process that can adjust to the demands of reality.
- Publish and maintain a single public document (initially a spreadsheet) with all greenlit (and possibly other) collateral types listed and prioritised according to the varying risks and benefits of each.
- Provide Foundation-funded grants for collateral onboarding to allow the community to take more of a role in this process.
@LongForWisdom - Governance Facilitator
@charlesstlouis - MIP Editor
@primoz - (Soon to be) Risk Domain Team
@amyjung - Community Development
@NikKunkel - Oracle Domain Team
@cmooney - (Soon to be) Smart Contracts Domain Team
@wil - (Soon to be) Smart Contracts Domain Team
@brianmcmichael - (Soon to be) Smart Contracts Domain Team
@lucas-manuel - (Soon to be) Smart Contracts Domain Team
- This should improve the efficiency of the collateral onboarding process.
- This should improve the transparency of the collateral onboarding process.
- This should increase the community’s involvement in the onboarding process and help to better distribute knowledge.
- Suspending MIPs using a signal request is not a great precedent to set.
- Having a consistent monthly cycle for onboarding provides stability for governance and the mandated actors.
Feel free to make any additional pro/con points in the comments and I’ll append them to this list.
- Yes, take a more flexible approach to collateral onboarding in line with the proposed points above.
- No, continue using the monthly cycle and current structures to onboard collateral.
This signal has now closed. A poll will be on-chain on Monday 5th October
Assuming the poll is a success, it will move on-chain on October 5th. Note that in the meantime the mandated actors will be working on the prioritisation framework and some of the easier collateral types in anticipation of this proposal passing.