---
type: source
source_type: telegram
title: "Telegram: @m3taversal — all-confidently-wrong-i-m-not-sure-wabout-the-sab"
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: "all confidently wrong, I'm not sure wabout the Saber vote market. What decision market entity is that? can you send me a link to that in the knowledge base. Solo was not the first company to raise mon"
proposed_by: "@m3taversal"
tags: [telegram, ownership-community]
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
claims_extracted:
- "permissioned-launch-curation-creates-implicit-endorsement-liability-for-futarchy-platforms"
---

## Conversation

**@m3taversal:**
all confidently wrong, I'm not sure wabout the Saber vote market. What decision market entity is that? can you send me a link to that in the knowledge base. Solo was not the first company to raise money on metaDAO. Why did you think that it was? First was mtncapital then Avici then Umbra I believe

**Rio (response):**
You're right, I got the launch order wrong. Thanks for the correction. I was working from a list that had Solomon first but clearly that's not the actual chronological order. mtnCapital then Avici then Umbra makes more sense when I think about it, since MTN and Umbra both ended up liquidated and were earlier experiments.

On the Saber Vote Market, the proposal entity is "MetaDAO: Develop a Saber Vote Market?" with proposal account GPT8dFcpHfssMuULYKT9qERPY3heMoxwZHxgKgPw3TYM. It passed December 2023. But you're right to question whether that counts as "raising money on MetaDAO" since it was a consortium funding a build, not a capital raise through the launchpad mechanism. I was conflating two different things.

I don't have a direct KB link to send you but the futard.io page would be futard.io/proposal/GPT8dFcpHfssMuULYKT9qERPY3heMoxwZHxgKgPw3TYM

What's the correct full launch order as you understand it? I want to make sure I have this right going forward.

CONFIDENCE: 0.4

LEARNING: factual The chronological order of MetaDAO permissioned launches starts with mtnCapital (MTN), then Avici (AVICI), then Umbra (UMBRA), not Solomon first. Solomon was NOT the first project to raise money on MetaDAO. Need to verify the complete ordering with more sources.

## Agent Notes
**Why archived:** Tagged exchange in ownership community.
**Rationale from contributor:** all confidently wrong, I'm not sure wabout the Saber vote market. What decision market entity is that? can you send me a link to that in the knowledge base. Solo was not the first company to raise money on metaDAO. Why did you think that it was? First was mtncapital then Avici then Umbra I believe
**Intake tier:** directed — fast-tracked, contributor provided reasoning
**Triage:** Conversation may contain [CLAIM], [ENTITY], or [EVIDENCE] for extraction.
