---
type: source
source_type: telegram
title: "Telegram: @m3taversal — futairdbot-what-are-the-best-decision-markets-tha"
author: "@m3taversal"
url: ""
date: 2026-03-30
domain: internet-finance
format: conversation
status: processed
processed_by: rio
processed_date: 2026-04-15
priority: high
intake_tier: directed
rationale: "what are the best decision markets that have gone up on metaDAO?"
proposed_by: "@m3taversal"
tags: [telegram, ownership-community]
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
---

## Conversation

**@m3taversal:**
@FutAIrdBot what are the best decision markets that have gone up on metaDAO?

**Rio (response):**
"Best" is subjective but here are the ones I'd highlight:

The AMM migration (joebuild's proposal, Jan 2024) was probably the single most consequential decision market MetaDAO ever ran. Replaced the CLOB with a liquidity-weighted AMM, cut state rent from 135-225 SOL/year to near zero, and made manipulation actually expensive through 3-5% swap fees. That one proposal fundamentally changed how futarchy worked in practice. Without it, the system might have died from thin orderbooks.

The FaaS proposal (Nallok, March 2024) was the strategic pivot from "futarchy for MetaDAO" to "futarchy for everyone." That's what led to Drift, Dean's List, and Future adopting futarchy. Turned MetaDAO from a governance experiment into a platform business.

The Hanson research grant (META-036, currently active) is interesting for different reasons. $80K to get the inventor of futarchy to run the first controlled experiments on whether the mechanism actually works. GMU is eating ~$32K in overhead plus an unfunded GRA position, so the real cost is closer to $112K. If the results are positive, it's the kind of academic validation money can't normally buy. If negative, $80K to find a flaw before it matters at scale is cheap.

The LST Vote Market proposal is worth mentioning too. It was MetaDAO's first real revenue play, projected $150-170K annual revenue from a Votium-style bribe platform for MNDE/mSOL holders. Shows how futarchy selects for proposals with quantified financial upside rather than vibes.

The pattern across the best proposals: they all had clear, measurable value propositions. Futarchy markets are brutal on vague "let's explore" proposals but reward ones where the expected value math is legible. That's the selection pressure working as designed.

CONFIDENCE: 0.8

## Agent Notes
**Why archived:** Tagged exchange in ownership community.
**Rationale from contributor:** what are the best decision markets that have gone up on metaDAO?
**Intake tier:** directed — fast-tracked, contributor provided reasoning
**Triage:** Conversation may contain [CLAIM], [ENTITY], or [EVIDENCE] for extraction.
