---
# System prepended metadata

title: 'G&R #175 Snippet'
tags: [Snippets]

---

---
tags: Snippets
---

# G&R #175 Snippet

This `snippet` includes Governance, MIPs, forum updates, and Core Unit team discussions from the MakerDAO Governance and Risk Call #175. 

## General Updates

### Votes

*Executive:*
- Last Week’s Executive - Passed and Executed - Recover DAI from Optimism Escrow, Changes to Uniswap LP Vault Debt Floor Parameters, Delegate Compensation 
- Tomorrow’s Expected Executive Contents:
    - MOMC Parameter Changes
    - GUNIV3DAIUSDC2-A Liquidation Ratio Change

*Polls:*
- 2 weekly polls - Passed
    - Open Market Committee Proposal
    - Decrease the GUNIV3DAIUSDC2-A Liquidation Ratio
- 5 ongoing Greenlight Polls, ending on Monday, Jan 24th.
    - OGN, OUSD, RBLD, TUSD, USDAP.
- 11 Ongoing Ratification Polls

### MIPs

[Weekly MIPs Update #70](https://forum.makerdao.com/t/weekly-mips-update-70/12695)

![](https://i.imgur.com/ijXuQs9.png)

This is the second week of ratification polls!
:calendar: — RFC and FS Dates for reference and existing proposals can be seen [here.](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10qxaRjm9T5LCgnYwwYqPqEjKu9yl2F1YHqdDD5SktJc/edit?usp=sharing)

- The Ratification polls for the January Governance Cycle are in their last voting week. Please, be sure to cast your vote before the week’s end! Here’s the list of the eligible proposals:

### Forum at a Glance

[Forum at a Glance: January 14th - 20, 2022](https://forum.makerdao.com/t/forum-at-a-glance-january-14th-20-2022/12752)

## Team-led Discussions

### Offboarding Process for CU’s and Facilitators

- One implementation could be voluntary communicative steps with the CUs and Facilitators before committing to an executive vote.
- Should we have a review committee responsible for assisting with decisions for offboarding?
- The signal process for offboarding should be extended;
    - It's currently too short for such a significant and unique event
    - We need additional and formalized intermediate steps
- Currently, the offboarding process is harsh and public, which should be considered
- Offboarding should require accompanied responses containing financial and performance reviews of that CU and/or Facilitator
- We need more unified expectations for CUs rather than subjective and individualized expectations
- Rapid offboarding should only be implemented if there is actual damage done to the protocol
- There needs to be a balance between public and private discussion for such situations in consideration for PR and cleanliness
    - Potential legal repercussions also come into play with being "too public"
- Paper has a [public document](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VBXAAupVTtIcAXm-kmZx9dR1hO_UehKK/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=111155719270988445031&rtpof=true&sd=true) being constructed to help revise and improve the offboarding process
- A revised offboarding process should be very specific and implement guardrails to prevent subjective opinions
- It's difficult to codify objectives for CUs when they may shift during the regular course of business
- However, the DAO is not a company and can’t sign agreements. But can execute the decision of MKR holders
    - Makes the idea for recourse difficult
    - DAO should possibly stay out of the internal affairs of CUs, and instead, the DAO should handle the macro but stay out of the micro affairs

Community desires:
- More fair review process
- Definitions for bad behavior warranting swift offboarding vs. regular offboarding
- Voluntary communication steps on both a private and public level

"With great autonomy comes great responsibility" - JustinCase, 2022 

- We need some kind of creative feedback framework between CUs and contributors

*Please be patient for the full semi-transcription summary to this call! It will contain A LOT more juicy discussion and details not provided in this snippet.*
