---
type: decision
entity_type: decision_market
name: "Sanctum: Should Sanctum offer investors early unlocks of their CLOUD?"
domain: internet-finance
status: failed
parent_entity: "[[sanctum]]"
platform: "futardio"
proposer: "proPaC9tVZEsmgDtNhx15e7nSpoojtPD3H9h4GqSqB2"
proposal_url: "https://v1.metadao.fi/sanctum/trade/C61vTUyxTq5SWwbrTFEyYeXpGQLKhRRvRrGsu6YUa6CX"
proposal_account: "C61vTUyxTq5SWwbrTFEyYeXpGQLKhRRvRrGsu6YUa6CX"
proposal_date: 2025-08-20
resolution_date: 2025-08-23
category: "treasury"
summary: "Proposal to allow investors immediate unlock of vested CLOUD by forfeiting 35% to Team Reserve"
tracked_by: rio
created: 2026-03-11
source_archive: "inbox/archive/2025-08-20-futardio-proposal-should-sanctum-offer-investors-early-unlocks-of-their-cloud.md"
related:
- "Sanctum: Should Sanctum change its logo on its website and socials?"
- "Sanctum: Should Sanctum implement CLOUD staking and active staking rewards?"
- "Sanctum: Should Sanctum use up to 2.5M CLOUD to incentivise INF-SOL liquidity via Kamino Vaults?"
reweave_edges:
- "Sanctum: Should Sanctum change its logo on its website and socials?|related|2026-04-19"
- "Sanctum: Should Sanctum implement CLOUD staking and active staking rewards?|related|2026-04-19"
- "Sanctum: Should Sanctum use up to 2.5M CLOUD to incentivise INF-SOL liquidity via Kamino Vaults?|related|2026-04-19"
---

# Sanctum: Should Sanctum offer investors early unlocks of their CLOUD?

## Summary
This proposal would have empowered the Sanctum Team to offer investors immediate unlocks of their vesting CLOUD tokens in exchange for forfeiting 35% of their holdings to the Team Reserve. With 9% of token supply unlocking monthly over 24 months from investors, the mechanism could have increased the Team Reserve by up to 27 million CLOUD while reducing token overhang. The team committed not to redistribute forfeited tokens for at least 24 months.

## Market Data
- **Outcome:** Failed
- **Proposer:** proPaC9tVZEsmgDtNhx15e7nSpoojtPD3H9h4GqSqB2
- **Platform:** Futardio (MetaDAO Autocrat v0.3)
- **DAO Account:** GVmi7ngRAVsUHh8REhKDsB2yNftJTNRt5qMLHDDCizov
- **Completed:** 2025-08-23

## Significance
This proposal represents an alternative approach to the token vesting hedgeability problem: rather than allowing investors to maintain nominal lockups while hedging exposure through derivatives, it forces an explicit forfeit-for-liquidity trade-off. The 35% forfeit rate creates a real cost for early liquidity, making the alignment mechanism meaningful rather than cosmetic. The proposal's failure despite potential treasury benefits suggests futarchy markets face adoption friction even for economically rational proposals when they require sophisticated financial reasoning from participants.

## Relationship to KB
- [[sanctum]] - parent entity governance decision
- [[time-based token vesting is hedgeable making standard lockups meaningless as alignment mechanisms because investors can short-sell to neutralize lockup exposure while appearing locked]] - alternative mechanism to hedging
- [[futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements]] - demonstrates complexity friction
- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]] - low volume uncontested decision pattern

## Full Proposal Text

*Source: futard.io, tabled 2025-08-20*

9% of token supply from investors is currently unlocking monthly for next 24 months.

This proposal would empower the Sanctum Team to offer investors immediate unlocks of their vesting CLOUD, forfeiting 35% of their CLOUD to the Team Reserve (which the team undertakes not to redistribute for at least the next 24 months).

The net result would be an increase of up to 27 million additional CLOUD to the Team Reserve & a decreased token overhang.

Read the full proposal here https://research.sanctum.so/t/cloud-005-should-sanctum-offer-investors-early-unlocks-of-their-cloud-under-deliberation/1793