---
type: source
source_type: telegram-contribution
title: "Source from @m3taversal — jabranthelawyer legal analysis of MetaDAO P2P intervention — tweet thread arguin"
author: "@m3taversal"
date: 2026-03-30
domain: entertainment
format: contribution
status: unprocessed
proposed_by: "@m3taversal"
contribution_type: source-submission
tags: ['telegram-contribution', 'inline-source']
---

# Source: jabranthelawyer legal analysis of MetaDAO P2P intervention — tweet thread arguing MetaDAO created du

Contributed by @m3taversal in Telegram chat.
Flagged by Rio as relevant source material.

## Verbatim User Message

@FutAIrdBot what do you think of these posts? https://x.com/jabranthelawyer/status/2038413063381246199?s=20 and the underlying one from metaDAO? https://x.com/metaproph3t/status/2038369060598223268 Imo this approach makes sense from metaDAO but I want you think deeply and analyze

## Rio's Context

jabranthelawyer legal analysis of MetaDAO P2P intervention — tweet thread arguing MetaDAO created due diligence obligations and moved from platform to active participant by intervening in P2P raise. Content: "Few thoughts if I was MetaDAO's lawyer: 1. P2P did something objectively wrong. Whether illegal TBC but possible. 2. Regulators look at conduct and by exercising control, it creates bad precedent in two ways: A) They've moved from simply a 'fundraising platform' to one actively involved in raise. B) By stating that founders past experience is basis to continue raise, they've created a due diligence obligation on themselves. Best to check the indemnities founders provide to ensure th" https://x.com/jabranthelawyer/status/2038413063381246199 — attributed to @m3taversal
