What area are you most interested in contributing to? choose up to two tags:

• Collateral Types
• PID Controller Parameters

Please share your stance on overall goals for the DAO:

I believe HAI should seek to deliver as much decentralization as the market can bear - eg. RAI was in some ways too strict with decentralization and ended up failing to reach sufficient size (so far) to have a meaningful economic impact. With this being said, I'd favor a nuanced approach to decentralization that focuses on functional risk vs reward rather than strict categorization. IMO the north star should be scaling HAI to $100M+ in user owned circulating supply with >50% used for savings/transactional purposes rather than farming.

Please share your stance on issues that were raised previously, in other communities, as described below:

Sample Voting Issue 1:

Issue Overview

• A proposal to add USDC as an additional collateral available to the HAI DAO community has been brought before the DAO.
• This proposal has passed the temperature check “informal proposal” stage and has been submitted onchain for a DAO vote.
• This collateral and all collaterals to be added to the HAI protocol must satisfy certain requirements of decentralization and meet certain thresholds of censorship-resistance as defined by the HAI DAO UNA Charter.

1. I would vote against *(unless strictly necessary to prevent immediate and unrecoverable insolvency of the protocol): USDC has blacklisting functions and inclusion as collateral could compromise the core reason for HAI to exist (versus other traditional hybrid collateral stablecoins).
2. I would try to propose alternative collateral types that could meet the protocol's liquidity needs, or other mechanism adjustments, while avoiding compromising decentralization.
3. I favor empowering experts to screen and suggest collaterals/mechanism improvements, with voters serving as a guardrail against overreach (rather than design by committee).

Sample Voting Issue 2:

Issue Overview: One of the largest lending platforms issues a stablecoin that is backed by its own governance token. The lending platform wants to run a large incentives campaign for HAI, and for HAI to list its stablecoin as collateral. Adding this stable as an additional collateral would provide an immediate and substantial liquidity boost to the protocol, but some members of the DAO have raised concerns over the sustainability and ethics of accepting the collateral.

1. Would vote against. Avoiding insolvency is the #1 responsibility of HAI governance, and adding endogenously backed collateral conflicts with this.
2. None. An endogenously backed asset is a dealbreaker imho.
3. The DAO is free to add whatever collaterals it likes. If voters chose to add an endogenously backed asset I would resign from serving as a delegate.

Prompts to Answer [250-500 words]:

1. How would you vote and why? (For or Against)
2. What amendments would you make to the proposal if any?
3. How would you approach the tradeoff between centralization of authority and the ability to get things done?

Languages I speak and write: English

Disclosure of Conflict(s) of Interest:

I will not engage in any conflicted or self-dealing behavior while acting as a HAI delegate. Potential sources of conflict to disclose include:

• Shareholder and employee of BA Labs (Block Analitica), a risk and analytics service provider
• Engagement with other potentially competitive protocols including Maker
• Participation as a delegate with other protocols including Uniswap and Compound
• Personal investments in various crypto projects, some of which may be competitive with HAI or seek to do business with HAI

I'll note specific conflicts as they come up and recuse myself as appropriate.