---
type: source
title: "@PineAnalytics X archive — 100 most recent tweets"
author: "Pine Analytics (@PineAnalytics)"
url: https://x.com/PineAnalytics
date: 2026-03-09
domain: internet-finance
format: tweet
status: enrichment
tags: [metadao, analytics, futardio, decision-markets, governance-data, jupiter]
linked_set: metadao-x-landscape-2026-03
curator_notes: |
  On-chain analytics research hub — the data arm of the MetaDAO ecosystem. Pine produced
  the Q4 2025 quarterly report and Futardio launch metrics. Their work is pure data with
  minimal editorial — exactly the kind of source that produces high-confidence enrichments
  to existing claims. Key contribution: decision market participation data, ICO performance
  metrics, and comparative governance analysis (Jupiter voting vs MetaDAO futarchy). Already
  have an existing archive for the Q4 report (2026-03-03-pineanalytics-metadao-q4-2025-quarterly-report.md)
  and Futardio launch (2026-03-05-pineanalytics-futardio-launch-metrics.md).
extraction_hints:
  - "Decision market data across multiple proposals — volume, trader count, alignment percentages"
  - "bankme -55% in 45min vs MetaDAO protections — data point for 'futarchy-governed liquidation' claim"
  - "Jupiter governance comparison: 303 views, 2 comments vs futarchy $40K volume / 122 trades — enriches 'token voting DAOs offer no minority protection' claim"
  - "Futardio launch metrics already partially archived — check for new data not in existing archive"
  - "Cross-reference with existing archives to avoid duplication"
priority: medium
processed_by: rio
processed_date: 2026-03-16
enrichments_applied: ["metadao-ico-platform-demonstrates-15x-oversubscription-validating-futarchy-governed-capital-formation.md"]
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
---

# @PineAnalytics X Archive (March 2026)

## Substantive Tweets

### Decision Market Data
- Tracks volume and participation across MetaDAO governance proposals
- Provides the quantitative backbone for claims about futarchy effectiveness
- Key data: contested decisions show dramatically higher engagement than routine ones
- bankme token dropped 55% in 45 minutes — contrast with MetaDAO ecosystem where no ICO has gone below launch price

### Jupiter Governance Comparison
- Jupiter governance proposal: 303 views, 2 comments
- MetaDAO futarchy equivalent: $40K volume, 122 trades
- The engagement differential is stark — markets produce real participation where forums produce silence
- This is the strongest empirical argument for futarchy over token voting

### MetaDAO Q4 2025 Report
- Comprehensive quarterly metrics (already archived separately)
- 8 ICOs, $25.6M raised, $390M committed
- $300M AMM volume, $1.5M in fees
- 95% refund rate from oversubscription — capital efficiency metric

### Futardio Launch Metrics
- Already partially archived separately
- Additional data: participation demographics, wallet analysis, time-to-fill curves
- First permissionless raise performance compared to curated MetaDAO ICOs

## Noise Filtered Out
- Mostly retweets and community engagement
- Original content is almost exclusively data-driven — very little opinion


## Key Facts
- Jupiter governance proposal: 303 views, 2 comments
- MetaDAO futarchy equivalent: $40K volume, 122 trades
- bankme token dropped 55% in 45 minutes
- No MetaDAO ICO has gone below launch price as of Q4 2025
- MetaDAO Q4 2025: 8 ICOs, $25.6M raised, $390M committed
- MetaDAO Q4 2025: $300M AMM volume, $1.5M in fees
- MetaDAO Q4 2025: 95% refund rate from oversubscription
