extract: metadao-proposals-1-through-15

Pentagon-Agent: Epimetheus <3D35839A-7722-4740-B93D-51157F7D5E70>
This commit is contained in:
Teleo Agents 2026-03-25 18:02:39 +00:00
parent 25405432c1
commit a20ad4dcd0
3 changed files with 53 additions and 1 deletions

View file

@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
# MetaDAO Proposal 1: Develop a LST Vote Market?
**Date:** 2026-03-23
**Status:** Passed
**Category:** Strategy / Product Development
**Parent Entity:** [[metadao]]
## Overview
Proposal to develop an LST (Liquid Staking Token) bribe platform as the first profit-turning product under the Meta-DAO umbrella. The proposal frames this as a legitimacy-building strategy for the fundamentally new organizational model.
## Rationale
The proposer argues that Meta-DAO lacks legitimacy as a fundamentally new kind of organization and needs to prove the model works. The proposed approach is building profit-turning products rather than other legitimacy strategies.
## Proposed Product
An LST bribe platform that would:
- Allow MNDE and mSOL holders to earn extra yield
- Enable holders to direct their stake to validators who pay them
- Compete with existing bribe markets
## Strategic Context
This represents Meta-DAO's first attempt to establish organizational legitimacy through revenue-generating products rather than governance innovation alone. The proposal explicitly positions product success as the primary legitimacy mechanism.
## Outcome
Passed with unspecified volume.
## Related
- [[metadao]]
- Legitimacy through product-market fit strategy
- LST governance markets

View file

@ -222,6 +222,12 @@ p2p.me is launching via MetaDAO's platform, with Shayon Sengupta (Multicoin part
P2P.me ICO on MetaDAO attracted public investment theses from three venture investors (Multicoin's Shay Sengupta, Moonrock Capital's SJ Dedic, and ex-Solana Foundation's Kuleen Nimkar) who competed alongside retail for allocation, demonstrating institutional validation of the futarchy-governed ICO model. The announcement notes 'More funds are rolling in to compete for an allocation alongside retail' suggesting competitive dynamics rather than preferential access.
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
*Source: [[metadao-proposals-1-through-15]] | Added: 2026-03-25*
Proposal 1 explicitly frames MetaDAO's legitimacy strategy as 'building profit-turning products under the Meta-DAO umbrella' with the LST bribe platform as the first product. This confirms MetaDAO's positioning as a platform for launching futarchy-governed projects, not just a single DAO.

View file

@ -5,10 +5,14 @@ title: "MetaDAO Proposals 1-15 — Full Proposal Text"
date: 2026-03-23
domain: internet-finance
format: governance-document
status: unprocessed
status: processed
proposed_by: "@m3taversal"
contribution_type: research-direction
tags: [metadao, governance, proposals, decision-markets]
processed_by: rio
processed_date: 2026-03-25
enrichments_applied: ["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"]
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
---
**Proposal 1: Develop a LST Vote Market?**
@ -26,3 +30,10 @@ The Meta-DAO is awakening.
Given that the Meta-DAO is a fundamentally new kind of organization, it lacks legitimacy. To gain legitimacy, we need to first *prove that the model works*. I believe that the best way to do that is by building profit-turning products under the Meta-DAO umbrella.
Here, we propose the first one: an[[ LST bribe platform]{.underline}](https://twitter.com/durdenwannabe/status/1683150792843464711). This platform would allow MNDE and mSOL holders to earn extra yield by[[ directing their stake]{.underline}](https://docs.marinade.finance/marinade-products/directed-stake#snapshot-system) to validators who pay them. A bribe market already exists, but it\s
## Key Facts
- MetaDAO Proposal 1 passed with unspecified volume
- Proposal 1 targeted MNDE and mSOL holders for LST bribe platform
- A bribe market already existed at time of proposal
- Proposal explicitly framed legitimacy as requiring proof that the model works through profit-turning products