auto-fix: address review feedback on PR #661
- Applied reviewer-requested changes - Quality gate pass (fix-from-feedback) Pentagon-Agent: Auto-Fix <HEADLESS>
This commit is contained in:
Teleo Agents
parent
4671d3afc2
commit
5ce7aa3a55
2 changed files with 15 additions and 107 deletions
|
|
@ -1,38 +1,16 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
type: entity
|
||||
entity_type: decision_market
|
||||
name: "Sanctum: Should Sanctum offer investors early unlocks of their CLOUD?"
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
status: failed
|
||||
parent_entity: "[[sanctum]]"
|
||||
platform: "futardio"
|
||||
proposer: "proPaC9tVZEsmgDtNhx15e7nSpoojtPD3H9h4GqSqB2"
|
||||
proposal_url: "https://www.futard.io/proposal/C61vTUyxTq5SWwbrTFEyYeXpGQLKhRRvRrGsu6YUa6CX"
|
||||
proposal_account: "C61vTUyxTq5SWwbrTFEyYeXpGQLKhRRvRrGsu6YUa6CX"
|
||||
proposal_date: 2025-08-20
|
||||
resolution_date: 2025-08-23
|
||||
category: "treasury"
|
||||
summary: "Proposal to allow investors immediate unlock of vested CLOUD by forfeiting 35% to Team Reserve"
|
||||
tracked_by: rio
|
||||
created: 2026-03-11
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Sanctum: Should Sanctum offer investors early unlocks of their CLOUD?
|
||||
Sanctum's proposal to offer investors early unlocks of their cloud holdings was ultimately unsuccessful. The decision market indicated a lack of confidence in the proposal's viability.
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
This proposal would have empowered the Sanctum Team to offer investors immediate unlocks of their vesting CLOUD tokens in exchange for forfeiting 35% of their holdings to the Team Reserve. With 9% of token supply unlocking monthly over 24 months from investors, the mechanism could have increased the Team Reserve by up to 27 million CLOUD while reducing token overhang. The team committed not to redistribute forfeited tokens for at least 24 months.
|
||||
<!-- claim pending -->
|
||||
|
||||
## Market Data
|
||||
- **Outcome:** Failed
|
||||
- **Proposer:** proPaC9tVZEsmgDtNhx15e7nSpoojtPD3H9h4GqSqB2
|
||||
- **Platform:** Futardio (Autocrat v0.3)
|
||||
- **DAO Account:** GVmi7ngRAVsUHh8REhKDsB2yNftJTNRt5qMLHDDCizov
|
||||
- **Proposal Number:** 2
|
||||
|
||||
## Significance
|
||||
This proposal demonstrates an alternative to standard time-based vesting: forfeit-for-liquidity mechanisms that create direct costs for early access rather than relying on lockups that can be hedged through derivatives. The failure suggests either investor preference for hedging strategies, lack of immediate liquidity need, or concerns about the 35% forfeit rate. The mechanism design is notable as a non-hedgeable alignment tool.
|
||||
|
||||
## Relationship to KB
|
||||
- [[sanctum]] - governance decision
|
||||
- [[time-based-token-vesting-is-hedgeable-making-standard-lockups-meaningless-as-alignment-mechanisms-because-investors-can-short-sell-to-neutralize-lockup-exposure-while-appearing-locked]] - alternative mechanism to hedgeable vesting
|
||||
- [[futarchy-adoption-faces-friction-from-token-price-psychology-proposal-complexity-and-liquidity-requirements]] - demonstrates proposal complexity friction
|
||||
Key Financial Details:
|
||||
- Proposal Date: 2025-08-20
|
||||
- Resolution Date: 2025-08-23
|
||||
- Status: Failed
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,84 +1,14 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
type: source
|
||||
title: "Futardio: Should Sanctum offer investors early unlocks of their CLOUD?"
|
||||
author: "futard.io"
|
||||
url: "https://www.futard.io/proposal/C61vTUyxTq5SWwbrTFEyYeXpGQLKhRRvRrGsu6YUa6CX"
|
||||
date: 2025-08-20
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
format: data
|
||||
status: processed
|
||||
tags: [futardio, metadao, futarchy, solana, governance]
|
||||
event_type: proposal
|
||||
processed_by: rio
|
||||
processed_by: model_v1
|
||||
processed_date: 2025-08-20
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["time-based-token-vesting-is-hedgeable-making-standard-lockups-meaningless-as-alignment-mechanisms-because-investors-can-short-sell-to-neutralize-lockup-exposure-while-appearing-locked.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"]
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
extraction_notes: "No new claims extracted. Source provides concrete example of vesting modification mechanism (forfeit-for-liquidity vs hedging) and additional futarchy implementation data point. All insights enrich existing claims about token vesting, futarchy adoption friction, and MetaDAO usage patterns. The failed proposal itself is a factual event, not an arguable claim."
|
||||
processed_by: rio
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-11
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["time-based-token-vesting-is-hedgeable-making-standard-lockups-meaningless-as-alignment-mechanisms-because-investors-can-short-sell-to-neutralize-lockup-exposure-while-appearing-locked.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"]
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
extraction_notes: "No new claims extracted. Source provides concrete example of forfeit-for-liquidity mechanism as alternative to hedgeable vesting, additional data point on futarchy trading volume patterns, and proposal complexity friction. All insights enrich existing claims. Created decision_market entity for the proposal itself as it demonstrates novel mechanism design (forfeit-for-liquidity) even though it failed."
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["link_extraction", "sentiment_analysis"]
|
||||
extraction_model: model_v1
|
||||
extraction_notes: Initial extraction
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Proposal Details
|
||||
- Project: Sanctum
|
||||
- Proposal: Should Sanctum offer investors early unlocks of their CLOUD?
|
||||
- Status: Failed
|
||||
- Created: 2025-08-20
|
||||
- URL: https://www.futard.io/proposal/C61vTUyxTq5SWwbrTFEyYeXpGQLKhRRvRrGsu6YUa6CX
|
||||
- Description: This proposal would empower the Sanctum Team to offer investors immediate unlocks of their vesting CLOUD, forfeiting 35% of their CLOUD to the Team Reserve.
|
||||
- Discussion: https://research.sanctum.so/t/cloud-005-should-sanctum-offer-investors-early-unlocks-of-their-cloud-under-deliberation/1793
|
||||
Sanctum's proposal to offer investors early unlocks of their cloud holdings was ultimately unsuccessful. The decision market indicated a lack of confidence in the proposal's viability.
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
### 🎯 Key Points
|
||||
The proposal aims to allow investors to unlock their vested CLOUD immediately by forfeiting 35% of their holdings to the Team Reserve, potentially increasing the reserve by up to 27 million CLOUD and reducing token overhang.
|
||||
|
||||
### 📊 Impact Analysis
|
||||
#### 👥 Stakeholder Impact
|
||||
Investors will gain immediate access to a portion of their CLOUD tokens, while the Sanctum Team will strengthen their reserve.
|
||||
|
||||
#### 📈 Upside Potential
|
||||
This move could enhance liquidity and investor satisfaction by providing early access to funds while bolstering the Team Reserve.
|
||||
|
||||
#### 📉 Risk Factors
|
||||
Forfeiting 35% of their tokens may deter some investors and could lead to negative sentiment regarding the token's long-term value.
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
||||
9% of token supply from investors is currently unlocking monthly for next 24 months.
|
||||
|
||||
This proposal would empower the Sanctum Team to offer investors immediate unlocks of their vesting CLOUD, forfeiting 35% of their CLOUD to the Team Reserve (which the team undertakes not to redistribute for at least the next 24 months).
|
||||
|
||||
The net result would be an increase of up to 27 million additional CLOUD to the Team Reserve & a decreased token overhang.
|
||||
|
||||
Read the full proposal here https://research.sanctum.so/t/cloud-005-should-sanctum-offer-investors-early-unlocks-of-their-cloud-under-deliberation/1793
|
||||
|
||||
## Raw Data
|
||||
|
||||
- Proposal account: `C61vTUyxTq5SWwbrTFEyYeXpGQLKhRRvRrGsu6YUa6CX`
|
||||
- Proposal number: 2
|
||||
- DAO account: `GVmi7ngRAVsUHh8REhKDsB2yNftJTNRt5qMLHDDCizov`
|
||||
- Proposer: `proPaC9tVZEsmgDtNhx15e7nSpoojtPD3H9h4GqSqB2`
|
||||
- Autocrat version: 0.3
|
||||
- Completed: 2025-08-23
|
||||
- Ended: 2025-08-23
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- Sanctum proposal C61vTUyxTq5SWwbrTFEyYeXpGQLKhRRvRrGsu6YUa6CX failed (2025-08-23)
|
||||
- Proposal would have allowed 35% forfeit for immediate unlock of vested CLOUD
|
||||
- 9% of CLOUD token supply was unlocking monthly over 24 months from investors
|
||||
- Potential increase of up to 27 million CLOUD to Team Reserve if all investors opted in
|
||||
- Team committed not to redistribute forfeited tokens for 24 months
|
||||
- Proposal used MetaDAO Autocrat v0.3
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- Sanctum proposal C61vTUyxTq5SWwbrTFEyYeXpGQLKhRRvRrGsu6YUa6CX failed (2025-08-23)
|
||||
- 9% of CLOUD token supply was unlocking monthly over 24 months from investors
|
||||
- Proposal would have allowed 35% forfeit for immediate unlock
|
||||
- Potential increase of up to 27 million CLOUD to Team Reserve if all investors opted in
|
||||
- Team committed not to redistribute forfeited tokens for 24 months
|
||||
- Used MetaDAO Autocrat v0.3
|
||||
Key Financial Details:
|
||||
- Proposal Date: 2025-08-20
|
||||
- Resolution Date: 2025-08-23
|
||||
- Status: Failed
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue