auto-fix: strip 7 broken wiki links
Pipeline auto-fixer: removed [[ ]] brackets from links that don't resolve to existing claims in the knowledge base.
This commit is contained in:
parent
b2a8f9be63
commit
dee4bc3662
2 changed files with 7 additions and 7 deletions
|
|
@ -43,19 +43,19 @@ ORE's three-tier boost multiplier system (vanilla stake, critical pairs, extende
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||||
*Source: [[2026-03-05-futardio-launch-blockrock]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
*Source: 2026-03-05-futardio-launch-blockrock | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
BlockRock explicitly argues futarchy works better for liquid asset allocation than illiquid VC: 'Futarchy governance works by letting markets price competing outcomes, but private VC deals are difficult to price with asymmetric information, long timelines, and binary outcomes. Liquid asset allocation for risk-adjusted returns gives futarchy the pricing efficiency it requires.' This identifies information asymmetry and timeline as the boundary conditions where futarchy pricing breaks down.
|
BlockRock explicitly argues futarchy works better for liquid asset allocation than illiquid VC: 'Futarchy governance works by letting markets price competing outcomes, but private VC deals are difficult to price with asymmetric information, long timelines, and binary outcomes. Liquid asset allocation for risk-adjusted returns gives futarchy the pricing efficiency it requires.' This identifies information asymmetry and timeline as the boundary conditions where futarchy pricing breaks down.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||||
*Source: [[2026-03-21-blockworks-ranger-ico-outcome]] | Added: 2026-03-21*
|
*Source: 2026-03-21-blockworks-ranger-ico-outcome | Added: 2026-03-21*
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Ranger Finance case shows futarchy can succeed at ordinal selection (this project vs. others for fundraising) while failing at cardinal prediction (what will the token price be post-TGE given unlock schedules). The market selected Ranger successfully for ICO but didn't price in the 40% seed unlock creating 74-90% drawdown, suggesting the mechanism works for relative comparison but not for absolute outcome forecasting when structural features like vesting schedules matter.
|
Ranger Finance case shows futarchy can succeed at ordinal selection (this project vs. others for fundraising) while failing at cardinal prediction (what will the token price be post-TGE given unlock schedules). The market selected Ranger successfully for ICO but didn't price in the 40% seed unlock creating 74-90% drawdown, suggesting the mechanism works for relative comparison but not for absolute outcome forecasting when structural features like vesting schedules matter.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Additional Evidence (challenge)
|
### Additional Evidence (challenge)
|
||||||
*Source: [[2026-03-21-phemex-hurupay-ico-failure]] | Added: 2026-03-21*
|
*Source: 2026-03-21-phemex-hurupay-ico-failure | Added: 2026-03-21*
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Hurupay had $7.2M/month transaction volume and $500K+ monthly revenue but failed to raise $3M. The market rejection is interpretively ambiguous: either (A) correct valuation assessment (mechanism working) or (B) platform reputation contamination from prior Trove/Ranger failures (mechanism producing noise). Without controls, we cannot distinguish quality signal from sentiment contagion, revealing a fundamental limitation in interpreting futarchy selection outcomes.
|
Hurupay had $7.2M/month transaction volume and $500K+ monthly revenue but failed to raise $3M. The market rejection is interpretively ambiguous: either (A) correct valuation assessment (mechanism working) or (B) platform reputation contamination from prior Trove/Ranger failures (mechanism producing noise). Without controls, we cannot distinguish quality signal from sentiment contagion, revealing a fundamental limitation in interpreting futarchy selection outcomes.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -52,10 +52,10 @@ The "Unruggable ICO" protection mechanism operated as designed for the misrepres
|
||||||
**What I expected but didn't find:** Any detail about the conditional market volume on the Ranger LIQUIDATION proposal itself. The telegram source claims 97% support and $581K traded — if accurate, this would be the most decisive and highest-volume governance decision in MetaDAO history for a single-project matter. Need primary source verification.
|
**What I expected but didn't find:** Any detail about the conditional market volume on the Ranger LIQUIDATION proposal itself. The telegram source claims 97% support and $581K traded — if accurate, this would be the most decisive and highest-volume governance decision in MetaDAO history for a single-project matter. Need primary source verification.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
**KB connections:**
|
**KB connections:**
|
||||||
- [[Futarchy solves trustless joint ownership not just better decision-making]] — direct evidence update. Two liquidations with capital returned is the strongest empirical support to date.
|
- Futarchy solves trustless joint ownership not just better decision-making — direct evidence update. Two liquidations with capital returned is the strongest empirical support to date.
|
||||||
- [[MetaDAO empirical results show smaller participants gaining influence through futarchy]] — minority RNGR holders successfully forced a liquidation against a team with information advantage
|
- MetaDAO empirical results show smaller participants gaining influence through futarchy — minority RNGR holders successfully forced a liquidation against a team with information advantage
|
||||||
- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]] — if $581K traded, this was a contested decision (much higher than $58K average). Contested governance generates more market engagement — important scope qualifier.
|
- [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]] — if $581K traded, this was a contested decision (much higher than $58K average). Contested governance generates more market engagement — important scope qualifier.
|
||||||
- [[Futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for defenders]] — the FairScale implicit put option problem is separable from the liquidation governance question. Liquidation works; early-stage quality filtering doesn't.
|
- Futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for defenders — the FairScale implicit put option problem is separable from the liquidation governance question. Liquidation works; early-stage quality filtering doesn't.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
**Extraction hints:**
|
**Extraction hints:**
|
||||||
- Claim candidate: "MetaDAO's futarchy governance has successfully executed capital return through two separate liquidation decisions, establishing a two-case empirical pattern for the trustless joint ownership mechanism"
|
- Claim candidate: "MetaDAO's futarchy governance has successfully executed capital return through two separate liquidation decisions, establishing a two-case empirical pattern for the trustless joint ownership mechanism"
|
||||||
|
|
@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ The "Unruggable ICO" protection mechanism operated as designed for the misrepres
|
||||||
- Watch: Does the governance market volume spike on contested decisions (vs. $58K average on uncontested)? Ranger liquidation may provide the data point.
|
- Watch: Does the governance market volume spike on contested decisions (vs. $58K average on uncontested)? Ranger liquidation may provide the data point.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Curator Notes
|
## Curator Notes
|
||||||
PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[Futarchy solves trustless joint ownership not just better decision-making]]
|
PRIMARY CONNECTION: Futarchy solves trustless joint ownership not just better decision-making
|
||||||
WHY ARCHIVED: Second successful futarchy-governed capital return — key evidence for Belief #3 upgrade from "early directional" to "likely"
|
WHY ARCHIVED: Second successful futarchy-governed capital return — key evidence for Belief #3 upgrade from "early directional" to "likely"
|
||||||
EXTRACTION HINT: Focus on the two-case pattern and the scope distinction (governance enforcement vs. pre-launch due diligence). The misrepresentation pre-launch and the successful liquidation post-discovery are different mechanism functions.
|
EXTRACTION HINT: Focus on the two-case pattern and the scope distinction (governance enforcement vs. pre-launch due diligence). The misrepresentation pre-launch and the successful liquidation post-discovery are different mechanism functions.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue