When a tool becomes the master…

In one of his sweeping MIPs, Rune Christensen redefined the role of AVCs.

AVCs would be required to participate in the reworking of the Maker Atlas, and specifically, in the work to make it fit for the upcoming Governance AI Tools (GAIT).

AVC members could also only work on these tasks and still be eligible for compensation.

Quote:

New participants can register as unaffiliated AVC member, and if their Atlas contributions are high quality, they are eligible to earn AVC Participation Rewards immediately in Q1, w/o needing to fulfill eligibility requirements for 1 whole quarter prior to Q1. If there are more eligible AVC Members than there are reward slots, new AVC Members in this group will only earn rewards if they are among the top 8 in terms of total MKR held. (Currently, there are a total of 8 AVC reward slots.)

AVC Members contributing work of exceptional quality throughout the Quarter will earn Participation Rewards without consideration of their total MKR held.

This is in line with GOV12 of the Atlas where the Bootstrapping process requires full support from all Alignment Conservers.

How can AVC members approach this task?

In our view, as opensky, we had read the intention of AVCs to be the spokespeople for the intent of MKR holders. Bound by the Atlas and the spirit of universal alignment AVCs should, in our view, be responsible for making sure the Scopes evolve towards a glorious future and the ultimate benefit of MKR holders and the protocol.

Re-writing the Atlas so it is better understandable by a potential future AI is - at best - tangential to this purpose. But it can also be a vehicle for expressing these intentions.

After further clarification by VoteWizard and LeBateleur it now seems like AVCs will be there to review the submissions of ADs mostly. This is very much in line with how we saw AVCs work with ADs in the previous paradigm. ADs where there to do the heavy lifting, while AVCs select the most appropriate contributions and offer guidance as to what MKR holders want.

The same can apply to the current work. In our view AVCs should behave as follows:

• Formulate strong and clear intentions about how the protocol should evolve, within the bounds of the Atlas.

• Review the output from the Atlas rework under the light of this intention.

• Comment meticulously, reiterating the intention

• Reject output that does not conform with the AVCs intention and offer guidance there.

In some ways this allows an unprecedented amount of control to AVCs. In other ways it requires a lot more work than before. Given the current compensation, the ask is certainly more than reasonable.

A proposal we read in a chat suggested that it would be an interesting experiment to radically rethink AVC compensation, and pay much less, to many more entities. Or pay for work done, not for a seat at the table. All in all this suggestion seemed very aligned and we would wholeheartedly support it.

We highly recommend these forum posts for the Maker governance enthusiasts.

One of the most prominent Aligned Delegates 0xDefensor has been derecognized. Sad to see a valuable contributor leave. The discussion is nevertheless a showcase in how careful Maker Governance is about how it operates and a testament to the high level of all participants.

The latest Clydesdale and Andromeda Dashboard by Steakhouse are a must-see for anyone who wants to know if they can sleep well holding DAI.

What exactly does alignment to the Atlas mean? Or what is misalignment. Spun out from another thread, this discussion could help our fundamental understanding of the ethics of MakerDAO.

In other news, Spark has already maxxed out the WBTC supply caps and is likely to ask for another extension. WBTC is certainly far from an ideal product. Rumors about the real or not-so-real backing of this token have swirled crypto twitter since it’s inception. So far, it has proven the doubters wrong every time.

Should Spark get more exposure than the 5,000 BTC it currently has?

Given the $3.6 billion currently supplied, another 200M worth of WBTC seem to be reasonably low risk.

DAI supply update

DAI supply has reduced by 400 million (!) since our last newsletter. We believe it is time to attack this number in earnest. The DAI supply is directly related to the amount that Maker can invest in yield bearing RWA and such directly related to profit.

We believe the recent increase in Stability Fees, together with the low L2 and dApp coverage of DAI, when compared to USDC and USDT mean that the coin is not participating in the overall ecosystem growth as much as it could.

DAI on Tron to the rescue? We’re only half (or maybe a quarter) joking.

Voting update

We want to point out this poll, as it has a wide-ranging impact on many aspects.

Other than that, there are a couple of Auction and SparkLend parameter updates for you to vote on.

Ad section

If you have MKR and want to influence governance, join KISS AVC. A simple, effective AVC with one meeting a week.

If you want to delegate, please consider delegating to a KISS AVC affiliated delegate, such as Bonapublica, vigilant, BLUE or PenguinSolider.