Here is a copy-paste of my thoughts regarding this issue from the discord, feel free to pass this part if you follow it:
- The current debt ceiling likely did not account for the delay of the audit.
- The app is in a very early stage and it is important for us to keep the momentum of growth by letting newcomers use the app as intended.
- Since contract interactions are rather limited in V1, increasing the debt ceiling does not necessarily bring much risk.
- The introduction of ETH/alETH to the app will likely bring even more attention and capital to the app within the DeFi space, therefore a relatively larger increase is justified.
To conclude, I believe we don't have much to lose by increasing the globally mintable alUSD amount. Conversely, we have a lot to lose by missing out on users who can not reliably use the app.
My current inclination after reading the discussion here so far:
Protecting the alUSD-DAI peg is probably as important as not turning away new people is. However, there are existing security mechanisms with that already provide protection for the peg. One of these is the transmuter, another is the slippage/bonus mechanism inside the alUSD-3CRV-f pool. Additionally, perhaps other ways can be devised to incentivize people to be beneficial to the system, such as increasing the rewards in the alUSD-3CRV-f pool.
I would support a relatively small increase like scoopy suggested, only if care is taken to act quickly, in order not to have another debt ceiling in a week (i.e. increasing it in small increments again if need be). Similarly, action must be taken to remove the alUSD pool as soon as possible; because our userbase is only going to grow further, presumably even at an exponential rate. Thus, the risk of another debt ceiling is higher with passing time.