I partially disagree with the proposal, as there is insufficient information provided for another market maker agreement.
I raised this concern initially, but unfortunately, neither those in favor of the proposal nor @FTL Labs provided sufficient information. As a result, the proposal was executed, and it has now failed.
From my perspective, given the current market cap and liquidity, we do not need additional market makers. Instead, FTL Labs should focus on incentivizing liquidity provision for GYFI/GYD, while market participants handle liquidity provision themselves.
Adding another market maker without sufficient information—such as the exact terms of the agreement, similar to the Cowswap Agreement—does not help deepen the liquidity of $GYFI. Instead, it is merely a waste of resources and time.
Finally, regarding the failure of the market makers, someone must take responsibility to prevent such actions from happening again.