auto-fix: strip 48 broken wiki links
Pipeline auto-fixer: removed [[ ]] brackets from links that don't resolve to existing claims in the knowledge base.
This commit is contained in:
Teleo Agents
parent
6bd01285a6
commit
1c46452fdd
11 changed files with 47 additions and 47 deletions
|
|
@ -66,8 +66,8 @@ Relevant Notes:
|
|||
- [[futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for defenders]] -- why TWAP settlement makes manipulation expensive
|
||||
- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]] -- the participation challenge in consensus scenarios
|
||||
- [[agents create dozens of proposals but only those attracting minimum stake become live futarchic decisions creating a permissionless attention market for capital formation]] -- the proposal filtering this mechanism enables
|
||||
- [[STAMP replaces SAFE plus token warrant by adding futarchy-governed treasury spending allowances that prevent the extraction problem that killed legacy ICOs]] -- the investment instrument that integrates with this governance mechanism
|
||||
- [[MetaDAOs Cayman SPC houses all launched projects as ring-fenced SegCos under a single entity with MetaDAO LLC as sole Director]] -- the legal entity governed by this mechanism
|
||||
- STAMP replaces SAFE plus token warrant by adding futarchy-governed treasury spending allowances that prevent the extraction problem that killed legacy ICOs -- the investment instrument that integrates with this governance mechanism
|
||||
- MetaDAOs Cayman SPC houses all launched projects as ring-fenced SegCos under a single entity with MetaDAO LLC as sole Director -- the legal entity governed by this mechanism
|
||||
|
||||
Topics:
|
||||
- [[internet finance and decision markets]]
|
||||
|
|
@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ This evidence has direct implications for governance design. It suggests that [[
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (challenge)
|
||||
*Source: [[2025-06-12-optimism-futarchy-v1-preliminary-findings]] | Added: 2026-03-11 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
|
||||
*Source: 2025-06-12-optimism-futarchy-v1-preliminary-findings | Added: 2026-03-11 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
|
||||
|
||||
Optimism's futarchy experiment achieved 5,898 total trades from 430 active forecasters (average 13.6 transactions per person) over 21 days, with 88.6% being first-time Optimism governance participants. This suggests futarchy CAN attract substantial engagement when implemented at scale with proper incentives, contradicting the limited-volume pattern observed in MetaDAO. Key differences: Optimism used play money (lower barrier to entry), had institutional backing (Uniswap Foundation co-sponsor), and involved grant selection (clearer stakes) rather than protocol governance decisions. The participation breadth (10 countries, 4 continents, 36 new users/day) suggests the limited-volume finding may be specific to MetaDAO's implementation or use case rather than a structural futarchy limitation.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -31,10 +31,10 @@ Rated experimental because this is a proposed design not yet deployed. The liqui
|
|||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions.md]]
|
||||
- [[futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements.md]]
|
||||
- [[MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale.md]]
|
||||
- MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions.md
|
||||
- futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements.md
|
||||
- MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale.md
|
||||
|
||||
Topics:
|
||||
- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]
|
||||
- [[core/mechanisms/_map]]
|
||||
- domains/internet-finance/_map
|
||||
- core/mechanisms/_map
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -18,9 +18,9 @@ The 94-99% cost reduction (from 135-225 SOL to near-zero) makes futarchy economi
|
|||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
- [[MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window.md]]
|
||||
- [[MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale.md]]
|
||||
- MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window.md
|
||||
- MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale.md
|
||||
|
||||
Topics:
|
||||
- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]
|
||||
- [[core/mechanisms/_map]]
|
||||
- domains/internet-finance/_map
|
||||
- core/mechanisms/_map
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ Futarchy faces three concrete adoption barriers that compound to limit participa
|
|||
|
||||
Token price psychology creates unexpected barriers to participation. META at $750 with 20K supply is designed for governance but psychologically repels the traders and arbitrageurs that futarchy depends on for price discovery. In an industry built on speculation and momentum, where participants want to buy millions of tokens and watch numbers rise, high per-token prices create psychological barriers to entry. This matters because futarchy's value proposition depends on traders turning information into accurate price signals. When the participants most sensitive to liquidity and slippage can't build meaningful positions or exit efficiently, governance gets weaker signals, conditional markets become less efficient, and price discovery breaks down.
|
||||
|
||||
Proposal creation compounds this friction through genuine difficulty. Creating futarchic proposals requires hours of documentation, mapping complex implications, anticipating market reactions, and meeting technical requirements without templates to follow. The high effort with uncertain outcomes creates exactly the expected result: good ideas die in drafts, experiments don't happen, and proposals slow to a crawl. This is why [[futarchy proposal frequency must be controlled through auction mechanisms to prevent attention overload|proposal auction mechanisms]] matter -- they can channel the best proposals forward by rewarding sponsors when proposals pass. This connects to how [[knowledge scaling bottlenecks kill revolutionary ideas before they reach critical mass]] - even when the governance mechanism is superior, if using it is too hard, innovation stalls.
|
||||
Proposal creation compounds this friction through genuine difficulty. Creating futarchic proposals requires hours of documentation, mapping complex implications, anticipating market reactions, and meeting technical requirements without templates to follow. The high effort with uncertain outcomes creates exactly the expected result: good ideas die in drafts, experiments don't happen, and proposals slow to a crawl. This is why futarchy proposal frequency must be controlled through auction mechanisms to prevent attention overload|proposal auction mechanisms matter -- they can channel the best proposals forward by rewarding sponsors when proposals pass. This connects to how [[knowledge scaling bottlenecks kill revolutionary ideas before they reach critical mass]] - even when the governance mechanism is superior, if using it is too hard, innovation stalls.
|
||||
|
||||
Liquidity requirements create capital barriers that exclude smaller participants. Each proposal needs sufficient market depth for meaningful trading, which requires capital commitments before knowing if the proposal has merit. This favors well-capitalized players and creates a chicken-and-egg problem where low liquidity deters traders, which reduces price discovery quality, which makes governance less effective.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -24,13 +24,13 @@ Yet [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontest
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||
*Source: [[2026-01-01-futardio-launch-mycorealms]] | Added: 2026-03-11 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
|
||||
*Source: 2026-01-01-futardio-launch-mycorealms | Added: 2026-03-11 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
|
||||
|
||||
MycoRealms implementation reveals operational friction points: monthly $10,000 allowance creates baseline operations budget, but any expenditure beyond this requires futarchy proposal and market approval. First post-raise proposal will be $50,000 CAPEX withdrawal — a large binary decision that may face liquidity challenges in decision markets. Team must balance operational needs (construction timelines, vendor commitments, seasonal agricultural constraints) against market approval uncertainty. This creates tension between real-world operational requirements (fixed deadlines, vendor deposits, material procurement) and futarchy's market-based approval process, suggesting futarchy may face adoption friction in domains with hard operational deadlines.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||
*Source: [[2025-06-12-optimism-futarchy-v1-preliminary-findings]] | Added: 2026-03-11 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
|
||||
*Source: 2025-06-12-optimism-futarchy-v1-preliminary-findings | Added: 2026-03-11 | Extractor: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5*
|
||||
|
||||
Optimism futarchy achieved 430 active forecasters and 88.6% first-time governance participants by using play money, demonstrating that removing capital requirements can dramatically lower participation barriers. However, this came at the cost of prediction accuracy (8x overshoot on magnitude estimates), revealing a new friction: the play-money vs real-money tradeoff. Play money enables permissionless participation but sacrifices calibration; real money provides calibration but creates regulatory and capital barriers. This suggests futarchy adoption faces a structural dilemma between accessibility and accuracy that liquidity requirements alone don't capture. The tradeoff is not merely about quantity of liquidity but the fundamental difference between incentive structures that attract participants vs incentive structures that produce accurate predictions.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -46,8 +46,8 @@ Relevant Notes:
|
|||
- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]] -- evidence of liquidity friction in practice
|
||||
- [[knowledge scaling bottlenecks kill revolutionary ideas before they reach critical mass]] -- similar adoption barrier through complexity
|
||||
- [[optimal governance requires mixing mechanisms because different decisions have different manipulation risk profiles]] -- suggests focusing futarchy where benefits exceed costs
|
||||
- [[futarchy proposal frequency must be controlled through auction mechanisms to prevent attention overload]] -- proposal auction mechanisms could reduce the proposal creation barrier by rewarding good proposals
|
||||
- [[futarchy price differences should be evaluated statistically over decision periods not as point estimates]] -- statistical evaluation addresses the thin-market problem that liquidity barriers create
|
||||
- futarchy proposal frequency must be controlled through auction mechanisms to prevent attention overload -- proposal auction mechanisms could reduce the proposal creation barrier by rewarding good proposals
|
||||
- futarchy price differences should be evaluated statistically over decision periods not as point estimates -- statistical evaluation addresses the thin-market problem that liquidity barriers create
|
||||
- [[speculative markets aggregate information through incentive and selection effects not wisdom of crowds]] -- even thin markets can aggregate information if specialist arbitrageurs participate
|
||||
|
||||
Topics:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -27,8 +27,8 @@ Relevant Notes:
|
|||
- [[ownership alignment turns network effects from extractive to generative]] -- futarchy extends ownership alignment from value creation to decision-making
|
||||
- [[the alignment problem dissolves when human values are continuously woven into the system rather than specified in advance]] -- futarchy is a continuous alignment mechanism through market forces
|
||||
- [[collective superintelligence is the alternative to monolithic AI controlled by a few]] -- futarchy is a governance mechanism for the collective architecture
|
||||
- [[mechanism design changes the game itself to produce better equilibria rather than expecting players to find optimal strategies]] -- futarchy is mechanism design applied to governance: the market structure makes honest pricing the dominant strategy and manipulation self-defeating
|
||||
- [[the Vickrey auction makes honesty the dominant strategy by paying winners the second-highest bid rather than their own]] -- futarchy's manipulation resistance parallels the Vickrey auction's strategy-proofness: both restructure payoffs so that truthful behavior dominates without requiring external enforcement
|
||||
- mechanism design changes the game itself to produce better equilibria rather than expecting players to find optimal strategies -- futarchy is mechanism design applied to governance: the market structure makes honest pricing the dominant strategy and manipulation self-defeating
|
||||
- the Vickrey auction makes honesty the dominant strategy by paying winners the second-highest bid rather than their own -- futarchy's manipulation resistance parallels the Vickrey auction's strategy-proofness: both restructure payoffs so that truthful behavior dominates without requiring external enforcement
|
||||
|
||||
Topics:
|
||||
- [[livingip overview]]
|
||||
|
|
@ -23,10 +23,10 @@ This is rated experimental rather than proven because the mechanism has not yet
|
|||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
- [[futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for defenders.md]]
|
||||
- [[MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window.md]]
|
||||
- [[optimal governance requires mixing mechanisms because different decisions have different manipulation risk profiles.md]]
|
||||
- futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for defenders.md
|
||||
- MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window.md
|
||||
- optimal governance requires mixing mechanisms because different decisions have different manipulation risk profiles.md
|
||||
|
||||
Topics:
|
||||
- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]
|
||||
- [[core/mechanisms/_map]]
|
||||
- domains/internet-finance/_map
|
||||
- core/mechanisms/_map
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -18,5 +18,5 @@ Solana developer and MetaDAO contributor who proposed and led the AMM migration
|
|||
- **2024-01-29** — AMM proposal passed; responsible for program changes (400 META upfront, 800 META on completion)
|
||||
|
||||
## Relationship to KB
|
||||
- [[metadao.md]] — core contributor
|
||||
- metadao.md — core contributor
|
||||
- [[MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window]] — technical architect for mechanism evolution
|
||||
|
|
@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ The proposal explicitly prioritizes simplicity and cost reduction over theoretic
|
|||
The liquidity-weighted pricing mechanism is novel in futarchy implementations—it weights price observations by available liquidity rather than using simple time-weighted averages, making manipulation expensive when liquidity is high.
|
||||
|
||||
## Relationship to KB
|
||||
- [[metadao.md]] — core mechanism upgrade
|
||||
- metadao.md — core mechanism upgrade
|
||||
- [[MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window]] — mechanism evolution from TWAP to liquidity-weighted pricing
|
||||
- [[futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements]] — addresses liquidity barrier
|
||||
- [[futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for defenders]] — implements explicit fee-based defender incentives
|
||||
|
|
@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ tracked_by: rio
|
|||
created: 2026-03-11
|
||||
last_updated: 2026-03-11
|
||||
founded: 2023-01-01
|
||||
founders: ["[[proph3t]]"]
|
||||
founders: ["proph3t"]
|
||||
category: "Futarchy governance protocol + ownership coin launchpad (Solana)"
|
||||
stage: growth
|
||||
key_metrics:
|
||||
|
|
@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ key_metrics:
|
|||
ecosystem_launches: "45 (via Futardio)"
|
||||
futarchic_amm_lp_share: "~20% of each project's token supply"
|
||||
proposal_volume: "$3.6M Q4 2025 (up from $205K in Q3)"
|
||||
competitors: ["[[snapshot]]", "[[tally]]"]
|
||||
competitors: ["snapshot", "tally"]
|
||||
built_on: ["Solana"]
|
||||
tags: ["futarchy", "decision-markets", "ownership-coins", "governance", "launchpad"]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
|
@ -53,22 +53,22 @@ The futarchy governance protocol on Solana. Implements decision markets through
|
|||
- **2026-03** — Ranger liquidation proposal; treasury subcommittee formation
|
||||
- **2026-03** — Pine Analytics Q4 2025 quarterly report published
|
||||
|
||||
- **2024-02-18** — [[metadao-otc-trade-pantera-capital]] failed: Pantera Capital's $50,000 OTC purchase proposal rejected by futarchy markets
|
||||
- **2024-02-18** — metadao-otc-trade-pantera-capital failed: Pantera Capital's $50,000 OTC purchase proposal rejected by futarchy markets
|
||||
- **2024-01-24** — [[metadao-develop-amm-program-for-futarchy]] proposed: Replace CLOB markets with AMM implementation to improve liquidity and reduce state rent costs from 135-225 SOL annually to near-zero
|
||||
- **2024-01-29** — [[metadao-develop-amm-program-for-futarchy]] passed: AMM migration approved with 400 META upfront + 800 META on completion, 3-week development timeline
|
||||
## Key Decisions
|
||||
| Date | Proposal | Proposer | Category | Outcome |
|
||||
|------|----------|----------|----------|---------|
|
||||
| 2024-03-03 | [[metadao-burn-993-percent-meta]] | doctor.sol & rar3 | Treasury | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-03-13 | [[metadao-develop-faas]] | 0xNallok | Strategy | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-03-28 | [[metadao-migrate-autocrat-v02]] | HenryE & Proph3t | Mechanism | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-05-27 | [[metadao-compensation-proph3t-nallok]] | Proph3t & Nallok | Hiring | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-06-26 | [[metadao-fundraise-2]] | Proph3t | Fundraise | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-11-21 | [[metadao-create-futardio]] | unknown | Strategy | Failed |
|
||||
| 2025-01-28 | [[metadao-token-split-elastic-supply]] | @aradtski | Mechanism | Failed |
|
||||
| 2025-02-10 | [[metadao-hire-robin-hanson]] | Proph3t | Hiring | Passed |
|
||||
| 2025-02-26 | [[metadao-release-launchpad]] | Proph3t & Kollan | Strategy | Passed |
|
||||
| 2025-08-07 | [[metadao-migrate-meta-token]] | Proph3t & Kollan | Mechanism | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-03-03 | metadao-burn-993-percent-meta | doctor.sol & rar3 | Treasury | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-03-13 | metadao-develop-faas | 0xNallok | Strategy | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-03-28 | metadao-migrate-autocrat-v02 | HenryE & Proph3t | Mechanism | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-05-27 | metadao-compensation-proph3t-nallok | Proph3t & Nallok | Hiring | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-06-26 | metadao-fundraise-2 | Proph3t | Fundraise | Passed |
|
||||
| 2024-11-21 | metadao-create-futardio | unknown | Strategy | Failed |
|
||||
| 2025-01-28 | metadao-token-split-elastic-supply | @aradtski | Mechanism | Failed |
|
||||
| 2025-02-10 | metadao-hire-robin-hanson | Proph3t | Hiring | Passed |
|
||||
| 2025-02-26 | metadao-release-launchpad | Proph3t & Kollan | Strategy | Passed |
|
||||
| 2025-08-07 | metadao-migrate-meta-token | Proph3t & Kollan | Mechanism | Passed |
|
||||
|
||||
## Competitive Position
|
||||
- **First mover** in futarchy-governed organizations at scale
|
||||
|
|
@ -94,15 +94,15 @@ MetaDAO is the platform bet on futarchy as a governance mechanism. If decision m
|
|||
- [[MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets where proposals create parallel pass and fail universes settled by time-weighted average price over a three-day window]] — mechanism description
|
||||
- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]] — known limitation
|
||||
- [[futarchy-governed permissionless launches require brand separation to manage reputational liability because failed projects on a curated platform damage the platforms credibility]] — active design challenge
|
||||
- [[DAO governance degenerates into political capture because proposal processes select for coalition-building skill over operational competence and the resulting bureaucracy creates structural speed disadvantages against focused competitors]] — the problem MetaDAO solves
|
||||
- DAO governance degenerates into political capture because proposal processes select for coalition-building skill over operational competence and the resulting bureaucracy creates structural speed disadvantages against focused competitors — the problem MetaDAO solves
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Entities:
|
||||
- [[omnipair]] — leverage infrastructure for ecosystem
|
||||
- [[proph3t]] — founder
|
||||
- [[solomon]] — ecosystem launch
|
||||
- [[futardio]] — launch platform
|
||||
- omnipair — leverage infrastructure for ecosystem
|
||||
- proph3t — founder
|
||||
- solomon — ecosystem launch
|
||||
- futardio — launch platform
|
||||
|
||||
Topics:
|
||||
- [[internet finance and decision markets]]
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ tracked_by: rio
|
|||
created: 2026-03-11
|
||||
last_updated: 2026-03-11
|
||||
role: "Co-founder & Operator, MetaDAO"
|
||||
organizations: ["[[metadao]]", "[[futardio]]"]
|
||||
organizations: ["[[metadao]]", "futardio"]
|
||||
known_positions:
|
||||
- "Futarchy requires mechanism simplification for production adoption — Robin Hanson's original designs include impractical elements"
|
||||
- "Futarchy as a Service (FaaS) is the scaling path for futarchy governance"
|
||||
|
|
@ -43,8 +43,8 @@ Co-founder and primary operator of MetaDAO. Legal name Kollan House. Serves as t
|
|||
|
||||
Relevant Entities:
|
||||
- [[metadao]] — co-founded
|
||||
- [[futardio]] — operates
|
||||
- [[proph3t]] — co-founder
|
||||
- futardio — operates
|
||||
- proph3t — co-founder
|
||||
|
||||
Topics:
|
||||
- [[internet finance and decision markets]]
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue