I am against this proposal. MPH is a very new project and in my opinion has an elevated level of risk. Recently, there was a bug found in the smart contract that would have resulting in loss of user funds, Sam did identify and remediate it. But it makes me wary as there may be other issues.
Also, I suggest you make the proposal more detailed, informative, and persuasive for other community members, including a poll. As it is written now, it is not a very compelling proposal.
88MPH would be a great candidate for partnership. Strength in collaboration. Finding bugs and fixing them is a natural process of progression in defi. Yearn should activley collaborate with great dev teams in the space. I support this.
If you’d like to resubmit a proposal, please make sure to take the time to lay out clearly what exactly your proposal will accomplish. “Add this asset” is not useful advice for a vault, especially if you can’t code. “Add this asset, lend it here, create yield on it this way, here are some estimates and models” is much more likely to get you taken seriously and potentially a developer will team up with you to codify the strat.
Furthermore, please take care to format your proposal properly. This includes clearly delineated sections with proper headers. A poorly-formatted, and poorly-explained proposal gives forum users no reason to engage. If you can’t take the time to explain your idea and present it in an easily digestible way, then why should they take the time to read it and offer feedback?