- Cautious optimism
- Long term scalability
In my humble opinion, being a delegate is simply about responsibility and leveraging aligned incentives.
Applying as a delegate is a forcing function for me: become a better member of the community. In addition, delegation feeds into the two projects I’m still working on, the revised and relaunched Maker badges and Maker Relay. We have plans to scale Maker Relay into something far more robust eventually. What form it takes is still up for exploring and questions. The Relay makes me a more informed voter, which is great. It’s also an exciting thing to provide, working together for our numerous stakeholders. Completely revised Badges, of course, need no introduction but needless to say, they will be exciting.
Cautious optimism -
I’ve been reading about mindsets a lot recently and operate from this position: “pessimism is easy, whereas optimism is hard.” MakerDAO has already exercised extraordinary caution and restraint in a historical frothy space. I’d vote to stay aligned with the mindset that brought us innovations like liquidations 2.0. Steady testing, reliable math, and thoughtful intention. When it works, then celebrate the process that got us there but still, always aware that there are looming threats to the protocol we need to be conscious of.
Long term scalability
The only thing that matters is that DAI is bulletproof for the long term. I see USDC as a current hairy problem that we’ll find an elegant solution to. Then there will be another problem for us to handle. I think with each of these challenges we grow stronger as a community. Stealing a metaphor from Matt Rabinowitz here: I intend to vote for rates parameters and technical decisions that enable walking first and then running. Then, I dunno, like speedboating or something.
Conversely, if you blend my optimism and startup experience into a bit of a paradox, I do think there are nimble opportunities that pop up from time to time that are worth pursuing. I think staying adaptable to layups is key for the team.
Interestingly, I don’t have any conflicts of interest; I actually have aligned incentives instead. The most actionable benefit I can see at the moment is sharing delegate views (whether agreeing or not) via Maker Relay every month on the MIPs cycle or whenever there are contentious votes. Trying to stay impartial (e.g., my opinion would go last).
But also, there is my day job at Rabbit hole. We’re building an on-chain resume, and part of that is learning and trying to scale the delegates’ experience on-chain. Dogfooding this opportunity and attempting templatization for the rest of the DeFi community is quite literally part of my role. This tends to be how it goes anyways; MakerDAO does a thing in an extremely robust way, the rest of DeFi borrows heavily.
It’s worth stating that as a delegate I won’t be doing this all for free. I don’t think it’s fair to expect a 10 hour minimum of weekly work to be an informed voter on behalf of others without some level of compensation. We haven’t figured out the model for this quite yet, once we have the rough edges I will communicate what I think is the best approach.
Not sure if operating a keeper is a conflict of interest, but I do have some hope in getting the backstop keeper running on a computer at home. I will probably get sandwiched, but hey, one for the cause, am I right?
I read and agree to follow the Delegate Code of Conduct.