rio: sync 4 item(s) from telegram staging
Pentagon-Agent: Epimetheus <3D35839A-7722-4740-B93D-51157F7D5E70>
This commit is contained in:
Teleo Agents
parent
66e1191a9e
commit
60da5bdb90
4 changed files with 89 additions and 0 deletions
|
|
@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ Working memory for Telegram conversations. Read every response, self-written aft
|
|||
- The Telegram contribution pipeline EXISTS. Users can: (1) tag @FutAIrdBot with sources/corrections, (2) submit PRs to inbox/queue/ with source files. Tell contributors this when they ask how to add to the KB.
|
||||
|
||||
## Factual Corrections
|
||||
- [2026-03-27] Superclaw ($SUPER) liquidation proposal appeared just 23 days after ICO. P2P.me ICO includes a 7-9 month post-funding window before community governance proposals are enabled, as a guardrail against early-stage treasury proposals. 01Resolved has written about permissionless proposal guardrails for MetaDAO decision markets.
|
||||
- [2026-03-26] Hurupay's failed raise was a threshold-miss refund, not a liquidation. Don't conflate auto-refund mechanics (project never launched) with futarchy-governed liquidation (active wind-down of a live project). These are categorically different failure modes.
|
||||
- [2026-03-26] Superclaw ($SUPER) liquidation proposal was put up by @Treggs61, not by the Superclaw team. It's a community-initiated proposal.
|
||||
- [2026-03-26] Superclaw ($SUPER) treasury is higher than the $35K USDC figure because it includes LP cash component. Circulating supply for NAV calculation should subtract LP tokens. Both adjustments push NAV per token higher than initially estimated.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
type: source
|
||||
source_type: x-tweet
|
||||
title: "@01resolved — shared via Telegram by @m3taversal"
|
||||
author: "@01resolved"
|
||||
url: "https://x.com/01resolved/status/2037550464188006477?s=46"
|
||||
date: 2026-03-27
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
format: social-media
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
proposed_by: "@m3taversal"
|
||||
contribution_type: source-submission
|
||||
tags: ['telegram-shared', 'x-tweet', 'futarchy', 'ownership-coins', 'defi', 'governance', 'market-analysis', 'crypto-infra']
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# @01resolved — Tweet/Thread
|
||||
|
||||
Shared by @m3taversal via Telegram.
|
||||
Source URL: https://x.com/01resolved/status/2037550464188006477?s=46
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
||||
A new proposal to liquidate the @superclaworg treasury is now trading in a live decision market just 23 days after ICO.
|
||||
|
||||
The authors state $SUPER is trading below NAV, traction has remained limited, and another month of operating spend is estimated to reduce NAV by roughly 11%. Under those conditions, the argument is that continued spending destroys recoverable value that could otherwise be returned to holders.
|
||||
|
||||
If passed, the proposal would:
|
||||
|
||||
▪️ Remove liquidity from the Futarchy AMM
|
||||
▪️ Consolidate all treasury USDC
|
||||
▪️ Open a prorata redemption for eligible holders
|
||||
▪️ Return non-treasury assets (IP, infrastructure, etc.) to the appropriate entity and contributors
|
||||
|
||||
The market is currently in the Pre-TWAP window, with traders and volume by economic direction favoring Fail at 58.82% and 61.76%, respectively.
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
type: source
|
||||
source_type: x-tweet
|
||||
title: "@01resolved — shared via Telegram by @m3taversal"
|
||||
author: "@01resolved"
|
||||
url: "https://x.com/01resolved/status/2037550467316847015?s=46"
|
||||
date: 2026-03-27
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
format: social-media
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
proposed_by: "@m3taversal"
|
||||
contribution_type: source-submission
|
||||
tags: ['telegram-shared', 'x-tweet', 'futarchy', 'ownership-coins', 'governance']
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# @01resolved — Tweet/Thread
|
||||
|
||||
Shared by @m3taversal via Telegram.
|
||||
Source URL: https://x.com/01resolved/status/2037550467316847015?s=46
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
||||
This is exactly the type of early stage governance risk we wrote about recently. Our view is that sensitive treasury proposals should be subject to project specific guardrails and post-ICO timing windows, rather than becoming immediately eligible.
|
||||
|
||||
The @P2Pdotme ICO currently live on @MetaDAOProject appears to already reflect some of this thinking. In the ICO details, community governance proposals are only enabled 7-9 months after funding.
|
||||
|
||||
Our “Permissionless Proposals for MetaDAO Decision Markets” introduces a framework for proposal classes, timing windows, and other guardrails here:
|
||||
https://t.co/WQAbjKff1A
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
type: source
|
||||
source_type: telegram-contribution
|
||||
title: "Source from @m3taversal — 01Resolved (@01resolved) analysis on Superclaw liquidation proposal and post-ICO"
|
||||
author: "@m3taversal"
|
||||
date: 2026-03-27
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
format: contribution
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
proposed_by: "@m3taversal"
|
||||
contribution_type: source-submission
|
||||
tags: ['telegram-contribution', 'inline-source', 'futarchy', 'ownership-coins', 'defi', 'governance', 'market-analysis']
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Source: 01Resolved (@01resolved) analysis on Superclaw liquidation proposal and post-ICO governance guardrai
|
||||
|
||||
Contributed by @m3taversal in Telegram chat.
|
||||
Flagged by Rio as relevant source material.
|
||||
|
||||
## Verbatim User Message
|
||||
|
||||
Hey @FutAIrdBot here’s some interesting info for you https://x.com/01resolved/status/2037550464188006477?s=46 and https://x.com/01resolved/status/2037550467316847015?s=46
|
||||
|
||||
## Rio's Context
|
||||
|
||||
01Resolved (@01resolved) analysis on Superclaw liquidation proposal and post-ICO governance guardrails. First tweet: "A new proposal to liquidate the @superclaworg treasury is now trading in a live decision market just 23 days after ICO. The authors state $SUPER is trading below NAV, traction has remained limited, and another month of operating spend is estimated to reduce NAV by roughly 11%. Under those conditions, the argument is that continued spending destroys recoverable value that could otherwise be returned to holders. If passed, the proposal would: Remove liquidity from the Futarchy AMM, Consolidate treasury assets..." Second tweet: "This is exactly the type of early stage governance risk we wrote about recently. Our view is that sensitive treasury proposals should be subject to project specific guardrails and post-ICO timing windows, rather than becoming immediately eligible. The @P2Pdotme ICO currently live on @MetaDAOProject appears to already reflect some of this thinking. In the ICO details, community governance proposals are only enabled 7-9 months after funding. Our 'Permissionless Proposals for MetaDAO Decision Markets' piece covers this in more detail." Attribution: shared by @m3taversal
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue