extract: 2024-05-30-futardio-proposal-drift-futarchy-proposal-welcome-the-futarchs
This commit is contained in:
parent
d143625d48
commit
d7a365ed51
3 changed files with 61 additions and 0 deletions
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
type: claim
|
||||||
|
domain: internet-finance
|
||||||
|
description: Human judgment layer resolves ambiguity in automated reward systems while maintaining credible commitment
|
||||||
|
confidence: experimental
|
||||||
|
source: Drift Futarchy proposal execution structure
|
||||||
|
created: 2026-03-15
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
# Futarchy incentive programs use multisig execution groups as discretionary override because pure algorithmic distribution cannot handle edge cases or gaming attempts
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The Drift proposal establishes a 2/3 multisig execution group (metaprophet, Sumatt, Lmvdzande) to distribute the 50,000 DRIFT budget according to the outlined rules. Critically, the proposal grants this group discretion in two areas: (1) determining 'exact criteria' for the activity pool to filter non-organic participation, and (2) deciding which proposals qualify if successful proposals exceed the budget. The group also receives 3,000 DRIFT for their work and has authority to return excess funds to the treasury. This structure acknowledges that pure algorithmic distribution fails when faced with gaming, ambiguous cases, or unforeseen circumstances. The multisig provides a credible commitment mechanism - the proposal passes based on general principles, but execution requires human judgment. The group composition (known futarchy advocates) provides reputational accountability.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Relevant Notes:
|
||||||
|
- futarchy-governed DAOs converge on traditional corporate governance scaffolding for treasury operations because market mechanisms alone cannot provide operational security and legal compliance.md
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Topics:
|
||||||
|
- [[_map]]
|
||||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
type: claim
|
||||||
|
domain: internet-finance
|
||||||
|
description: Three-month clawback period filters for proposals that create lasting value versus short-term manipulation
|
||||||
|
confidence: experimental
|
||||||
|
source: Drift Futarchy proposal structure
|
||||||
|
created: 2026-03-15
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
# Futarchy proposer incentives require delayed vesting to prevent gaming because immediate rewards enable proposal spam for token extraction rather than quality governance
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The Drift proposal structures proposer rewards with a three-month delay between proposal passage and token claim. Passing proposals earn up to 5,000 DRIFT each, but tokens are only claimable after three months. This delay creates a quality filter: proposers must believe their proposals will create sustained value that survives the vesting period. Without this delay, rational actors could spam low-quality proposals to extract rewards, knowing they can exit before negative effects manifest. The proposal also includes an executor group discretion clause - if successful proposals exceed expectations, the group can decide which top N proposals split the allocation. This combines time-based filtering with human judgment to prevent gaming. The 20,000 DRIFT activity pool uses the same three-month delay, with criteria finalized by the execution group to 'filter for non organic activity.'
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Relevant Notes:
|
||||||
|
- futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements.md
|
||||||
|
- performance-unlocked-team-tokens-with-price-multiple-triggers-and-twap-settlement-create-long-term-alignment-without-initial-dilution.md
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Topics:
|
||||||
|
- [[_map]]
|
||||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
type: claim
|
||||||
|
domain: internet-finance
|
||||||
|
description: Token distributions to historical participants leverage behavioral economics to seed active markets
|
||||||
|
confidence: experimental
|
||||||
|
source: Drift Futarchy proposal, endowment effect literature
|
||||||
|
created: 2026-03-15
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
# Futarchy retroactive rewards bootstrap participation through endowment effect by converting past engagement into token holdings that create psychological ownership
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The Drift Futarchy incentive program explicitly uses retroactive token distribution to MetaDAO participants as a mechanism to bootstrap engagement. The proposal cites the endowment effect - the behavioral economics finding that people value things more highly once they own them - as the theoretical basis. By distributing 9,600 DRIFT to 32 MetaDAO participants based on historical activity (5+ interactions over 30+ days), plus 2,400 DRIFT to AMM swappers, the proposal creates a cohort of token holders who have psychological ownership before the futarchy system launches. This differs from standard airdrops by explicitly targeting demonstrated forecasters rather than broad distribution. The tiered structure (100-400 DRIFT based on META holdings) further segments by engagement level. The proposal pairs this with forward incentives (5,000 DRIFT per passing proposal, 20,000 DRIFT activity pool) to convert initial ownership into sustained participation.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Relevant Notes:
|
||||||
|
- 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:
|
||||||
|
- [[_map]]
|
||||||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue