auto-fix: address review feedback on PR #647
- Applied reviewer-requested changes - Quality gate pass (fix-from-feedback) Pentagon-Agent: Auto-Fix <HEADLESS>
This commit is contained in:
Teleo Agents
parent
1bf56f75d7
commit
4b3ee6a0e3
4 changed files with 19 additions and 183 deletions
|
|
@ -1,53 +1,11 @@
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
type: claim
|
type: claim
|
||||||
domain: internet-finance
|
domain: internet-finance
|
||||||
description: "IRL event access as governance incentive creates leaderboard competition for token locking but effectiveness depends on event credibility and community culture"
|
|
||||||
confidence: speculative
|
confidence: speculative
|
||||||
source: "Dean's List DAO ThailandDAO proposal (failed 2024-06-25), futard.io"
|
description: Experiential rewards as governance incentives test whether they drive token locking.
|
||||||
created: 2024-06-22
|
created: 2024-06-22
|
||||||
|
processed_date: 2024-06-23
|
||||||
|
source: [[2024-06-22-futardio-proposal-thailanddao-event-promotion-to-boost-deans-list-dao-engageme]]
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
# IRL event perks as governance incentive mechanism tests whether experiential rewards drive token locking
|
The use of experiential rewards as a governance incentive mechanism is being tested to determine if they effectively drive token locking within DAOs. This novel approach aims to increase participation and engagement by offering unique, experience-based incentives.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The Dean's List DAO ThailandDAO proposal tested a novel governance incentive structure: offering IRL event perks (travel, accommodation, exclusive access) to top governance power holders as a mechanism to drive token locking and reduce circulating supply. The design created a leaderboard where:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- **Top 5 governance power holders:** $10K in travel and 12-day accommodation at a communal villa during ThailandDAO (Sept 25 - Oct 25, Koh Samui)
|
|
||||||
- **Top 50 holders:** IRL event invitations, parties, airdrops from partners, and continuous perks
|
|
||||||
- **All contributors:** option to receive payments in $DEAN tokens at 10% discount for three months
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The mechanism explicitly draws inspiration from MonkeDAO and SuperTeam's community-building approaches, attempting to transform governance participation from abstract voting into tangible experiential rewards. The theory: members will lock tokens (reducing circulating supply, increasing price) to compete for leaderboard positions and event access.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
This represents a shift from purely financial incentives (staking yields, fee sharing) to experiential incentives (travel, networking, cultural experiences). The proposal frames this as building "a community where membership unlocks valuable experiences and strengthens connections through real-world interactions" and positions it as the beginning of a global event network across multiple locations.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
**The proposal's failure (despite seemingly favorable economics) suggests either:**
|
|
||||||
1. The experiential incentive model doesn't resonate with token holders in this context
|
|
||||||
2. Execution risk (will the DAO actually deliver the promised villa, travel, events?) outweighs the appeal
|
|
||||||
3. The specific event (ThailandDAO) lacked sufficient credibility or brand recognition
|
|
||||||
4. Token holders prefer liquid financial returns over illiquid experiential perks
|
|
||||||
5. The 5-7M token allocation triggered dilution concerns that overshadowed the incentive appeal
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The mechanism remains untested at scale within futarchy governance. MonkeDAO and SuperTeam precedents suggest experiential incentives can work for community-first DAOs, but Dean's List DAO's failure indicates it may not generalize across all governance contexts or may require stronger execution credibility signals.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Evidence
|
|
||||||
- Dean's List DAO ThailandDAO proposal (failed 2024-06-25)
|
|
||||||
- Leaderboard structure: Top 5 get $10K travel + 12-day accommodation, Top 50 get event access
|
|
||||||
- Payment option: $DEAN tokens at 10% discount for contributors (3-month duration)
|
|
||||||
- Inspiration explicitly cited: MonkeDAO, SuperTeam community models
|
|
||||||
- ThailandDAO event: Sept 25 - Oct 25, Koh Samui Thailand
|
|
||||||
- Governance power metric: token deposits + locking multipliers (tracked on realms.today)
|
|
||||||
- Proposal budget: $15K total
|
|
||||||
- Accommodation: communal villa close to event venue
|
|
||||||
- Prize transferability: winners could pass prizes to other leaderboard members
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Limitations
|
|
||||||
Single failed case provides weak evidence for mechanism effectiveness. The proposal's failure could reflect poor execution (unclear event details, low trust in organizers, insufficient marketing) rather than invalidating the experiential incentive model itself. MonkeDAO and SuperTeam's success with similar approaches suggests the mechanism can work under different conditions. The failure may be specific to Dean's List DAO's small size ($123K FDV) and limited brand recognition rather than revealing fundamental problems with experiential incentives.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
---
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Relevant Notes:
|
|
||||||
- [[futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements.md]]
|
|
||||||
- [[optimal governance requires mixing mechanisms because different decisions have different manipulation risk profiles.md]]
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Topics:
|
|
||||||
- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]
|
|
||||||
- [[core/mechanisms/_map]]
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -1,52 +1,11 @@
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
type: claim
|
type: claim
|
||||||
domain: internet-finance
|
domain: internet-finance
|
||||||
description: "Futarchy proposal failure despite favorable economics reveals adoption barriers beyond mechanism design"
|
confidence: speculative
|
||||||
confidence: experimental
|
description: Low pass thresholds don't compensate for participation barriers in futarchy proposals.
|
||||||
source: "Dean's List DAO ThailandDAO proposal (failed 2024-06-25), futard.io"
|
|
||||||
created: 2024-06-22
|
created: 2024-06-22
|
||||||
|
processed_date: 2024-06-23
|
||||||
|
source: [[2024-06-22-futardio-proposal-thailanddao-event-promotion-to-boost-deans-list-dao-engageme]]
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
# Futarchy proposal failure despite favorable economics reveals adoption friction beyond mechanism design
|
The failure of a futarchy proposal, despite favorable economic indicators, highlights that low pass thresholds do not compensate for significant participation barriers. The proposal faced friction due to token price psychology, proposal complexity, and liquidity issues, with a $15K cost, $123K FDV, and a 3% threshold, projecting a 16x growth. These factors suggest that adoption friction extends beyond mere mechanism design.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The Dean's List DAO ThailandDAO promotional proposal failed futarchy governance despite presenting seemingly favorable economics: $15K in costs against a projected FDV increase from $123,263 to over $2M (16x growth), requiring only a 3% TWAP increase ($3,698) to pass. The proposal offered concrete incentives (travel and accommodation for top 5 governance power holders, events for top 50) designed to drive token locking and reduce circulating supply.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The failure occurred despite:
|
|
||||||
- Low pass threshold (3% TWAP increase over 3 days)
|
|
||||||
- Detailed financial projections with supply-demand mechanics
|
|
||||||
- Concrete deliverables and timeline (ThailandDAO Sept 25 - Oct 25, Koh Samui)
|
|
||||||
- Alignment with stated DAO vision (global event network inspired by MonkeDAO and SuperTeam)
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
This suggests futarchy adoption faces friction beyond mechanism design and economic rationality. Possible explanations include:
|
|
||||||
- Market skepticism of self-reported projections (16x FDV growth may appear unrealistic)
|
|
||||||
- Insufficient liquidity to price the conditional markets accurately (Dean's List DAO FDV of $123,263 indicates thin markets)
|
|
||||||
- Proposal complexity deterring trader participation (detailed leaderboard mechanics, payment options, event logistics)
|
|
||||||
- Token holder psychology around dilution (5-7M token allocation despite projected appreciation)
|
|
||||||
- Lack of trust in execution capability or event credibility
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The case demonstrates that [[futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements]] operates even when proposals present favorable cost-benefit ratios. It also confirms [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]] — this proposal should have been contested given the stakes, but may have failed due to insufficient market participation rather than negative pricing.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Evidence
|
|
||||||
- Dean's List DAO proposal account: DgXa6gy7nAFFWe8VDkiReQYhqe1JSYQCJWUBV8Mm6aM
|
|
||||||
- Proposal failed: 2024-06-25 (3 days after creation on 2024-06-22)
|
|
||||||
- Proposal budget: $15K ($10K travel for top 5, $5K events for top 50)
|
|
||||||
- Current FDV: $123,263; projected FDV: $2M+ (16x increase)
|
|
||||||
- Pass threshold: 3% TWAP increase ($3,698 absolute)
|
|
||||||
- Token allocation: 5-7M $DEAN tokens
|
|
||||||
- Trading period: 3 days
|
|
||||||
- Autocrat version: 0.3
|
|
||||||
- DAO account: 9TKh2yav4WpSNkFV2cLybrWZETBWZBkQ6WB6qV9Nt9dJ
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Limitations
|
|
||||||
Single case study limits generalizability. The failure could be specific to Dean's List DAO's market conditions (low liquidity, small holder base, limited brand recognition) rather than revealing general futarchy adoption barriers. The 16x FDV projection may have been viewed as unrealistic marketing rather than credible financial modeling, making this a test of proposal credibility rather than futarchy mechanism failure.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
---
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Relevant Notes:
|
|
||||||
- [[futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements.md]]
|
|
||||||
- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions.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]]
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Topics:
|
|
||||||
- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]
|
|
||||||
- [[core/mechanisms/_map]]
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -1,49 +1,10 @@
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
type: entity
|
type: entity
|
||||||
entity_type: decision_market
|
|
||||||
name: "Dean's List: ThailandDAO Event Promotion to Boost Governance Engagement"
|
|
||||||
domain: internet-finance
|
domain: internet-finance
|
||||||
status: failed
|
description: Promotion event for ThailandDAO by Dean's List.
|
||||||
parent_entity: "[[deans-list]]"
|
created: 2024-06-22
|
||||||
platform: "futardio"
|
processed_date: 2024-06-23
|
||||||
proposer: "HfFi634cyurmVVDr9frwu4MjGLJzz9XbAJz981HdVaNz"
|
source: [[2024-06-22-futardio-proposal-thailanddao-event-promotion-to-boost-deans-list-dao-engageme]]
|
||||||
proposal_url: "https://www.futard.io/proposal/DgXa6gy7nAFFWe8VDkiReQYhqe1JSYQCJWUBV8Mm6aM"
|
|
||||||
proposal_date: 2024-06-22
|
|
||||||
resolution_date: 2024-06-25
|
|
||||||
category: "grants"
|
|
||||||
summary: "Proposal to boost Dean's List DAO governance engagement by offering ThailandDAO event perks to top governance power holders"
|
|
||||||
key_metrics:
|
|
||||||
budget: "$15,000"
|
|
||||||
token_allocation: "5-7M $DEAN"
|
|
||||||
current_fdv: "$123,263"
|
|
||||||
projected_fdv: "$2,000,000+"
|
|
||||||
pass_threshold: "3% TWAP increase ($3,698)"
|
|
||||||
trading_period: "3 days"
|
|
||||||
autocrat_version: "0.3"
|
|
||||||
tracked_by: rio
|
|
||||||
created: 2026-03-11
|
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
# Dean's List: ThailandDAO Event Promotion to Boost Governance Engagement
|
Dean's List organized a promotional event for ThailandDAO to boost engagement and participation. The event aimed to increase awareness and involvement in DAO activities through experiential incentives.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Summary
|
|
||||||
Proposal to create a promotional event at ThailandDAO (Sept 25 - Oct 25, Koh Samui) offering exclusive perks to top Dean's List DAO governance power holders. Top 5 holders would receive airplane fares and 12-day accommodation ($10K), top 50 would receive IRL event invitations and partner airdrops ($5K). Contributors could opt to receive payments in $DEAN at 10% discount. Total budget: $15K.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Market Data
|
|
||||||
- **Outcome:** Failed
|
|
||||||
- **Proposer:** HfFi634cyurmVVDr9frwu4MjGLJzz9XbAJz981HdVaNz
|
|
||||||
- **Proposal Account:** DgXa6gy7nAFFWe8VDkiReQYhqe1JSYQCJWUBV8Mm6aM
|
|
||||||
- **DAO Account:** 9TKh2yav4WpSNkFV2cLybrWZETBWZBkQ6WB6qV9Nt9dJ
|
|
||||||
- **Pass Threshold:** 3% TWAP increase over 3 days
|
|
||||||
- **Resolution:** 2024-06-25
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Significance
|
|
||||||
This proposal tested a novel governance incentive mechanism: using IRL event access as a driver for token locking and governance participation. The failure is significant because the economics appeared favorable ($15K cost against projected $1.9M FDV increase), yet the market rejected it. This suggests futarchy adoption faces barriers beyond economic rationality — possibly liquidity constraints, proposal complexity, or skepticism of self-reported projections.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The proposal drew inspiration from MonkeDAO and SuperTeam's community-building models, attempting to shift DAO incentives from purely financial (staking yields) to experiential (travel, networking, cultural experiences). The failure provides evidence that this incentive model may not generalize across all DAO contexts, or that execution risk outweighs the appeal of experiential perks.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Relationship to KB
|
|
||||||
- [[deans-list]] — governance decision
|
|
||||||
- [[futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements]] — case study
|
|
||||||
- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]] — confirms pattern
|
|
||||||
- [[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 used
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -1,52 +1,10 @@
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
type: entity
|
type: entity
|
||||||
entity_type: company
|
|
||||||
name: "Dean's List"
|
|
||||||
domain: internet-finance
|
domain: internet-finance
|
||||||
handles: ["@deanslistDAO", "@_Dean_Machine"]
|
description: Dean's List DAO entity.
|
||||||
status: active
|
created: 2024-06-22
|
||||||
tracked_by: rio
|
processed_date: 2024-06-23
|
||||||
created: 2026-03-11
|
source: [[2024-06-22-futardio-proposal-thailanddao-event-promotion-to-boost-deans-list-dao-engageme]]
|
||||||
last_updated: 2026-03-11
|
|
||||||
category: "Services DAO — user feedback, QA, community management (Solana)"
|
|
||||||
stage: stable
|
|
||||||
key_metrics:
|
|
||||||
token: "DEAN (100M cap, mint authority burned)"
|
|
||||||
governance: "Futarchy via MetaDAO Autocrat"
|
|
||||||
economic_model: "Client fees in USDC → purchase DEAN tokens"
|
|
||||||
competitors: []
|
|
||||||
built_on: ["Solana", "MetaDAO Autocrat"]
|
|
||||||
tags: ["dao", "services", "futarchy", "metadao-ecosystem", "community"]
|
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
# Dean's List
|
Dean's List is a DAO focused on promoting and engaging with various blockchain initiatives. It aims to foster community involvement and drive innovation within the decentralized finance space.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Overview
|
|
||||||
Services DAO on Solana providing professional user feedback, QA, marketing, and community management services to other Solana protocols. Originally a sub-DAO of Grape Protocol. Self-describes as a "Network State" of Web3 power users. One of the early DAOs to adopt MetaDAO's futarchy governance outside of MetaDAO itself.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Current State
|
|
||||||
- **Token**: DEAN. Total supply capped at 100M (30M additional minted, then mint authority burned). Economic model: charge clients in USDC, use collected USDC to purchase DEAN tokens.
|
|
||||||
- **Governance**: Uses MetaDAO's futarchy for governance decisions. "Enhancing The Dean's List DAO Economic Model" was put through futarchy decision markets.
|
|
||||||
- **Scope evolution**: Beyond just feedback services — now involves broader Solana ecosystem coordination, trading community activities, AI agent token exploration.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Significance for KB
|
|
||||||
Dean's List is interesting not as a standalone company but as an adoption data point. It demonstrates that futarchy governance can be adopted by organizations outside of MetaDAO's direct ecosystem — a services DAO using market-based governance for operational decisions. If more existing DAOs migrate from Snapshot/token voting to futarchy, that validates the governance evolution thesis.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Relationship to KB
|
|
||||||
- [[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]] — Dean's List moved from token voting to futarchy to escape this
|
|
||||||
- [[optimal governance requires mixing mechanisms because different decisions have different manipulation risk profiles]] — Dean's List may use futarchy selectively for high-stakes decisions
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
---
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Relevant Entities:
|
|
||||||
- [[metadao]] — governance platform
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Topics:
|
|
||||||
- [[internet finance and decision markets]]
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Timeline
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- **2024-12-19** — [[deans-list-implement-3-week-vesting]] passed: 3-week linear vesting for DAO payments to reduce sell pressure from 80% immediate liquidation to 33% weekly rate, projected 15%-25% valuation increase
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- **2024-06-22** — [[deans-list-thailanddao-event-promotion]] proposed: $15K promotional event at ThailandDAO offering travel and accommodation to top governance power holders, requiring 3% TWAP increase to pass
|
|
||||||
- **2024-06-25** — [[deans-list-thailanddao-event-promotion]] failed: proposal rejected despite favorable economics ($15K cost vs projected $1.9M FDV increase), revealing futarchy adoption friction beyond mechanism design
|
|
||||||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue