Compare commits
2 commits
65733011bc
...
08fb75eb04
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
08fb75eb04 | ||
|
|
1de55f27dc |
5 changed files with 31 additions and 1 deletions
|
|
@ -27,6 +27,12 @@ From the MetaDAO proposal:
|
|||
|
||||
This claim extends futarchy-governed-permissionless-launches-require-brand-separation-to-manage-reputational-liability-because-failed-projects-on-a-curated-platform-damage-the-platforms-credibility by showing the reputational concern operates at the mechanism level, not just the platform level. The market's rejection of Futardio suggests futarchy stakeholders prioritize mechanism credibility over short-term adoption metrics.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
|
||||
*Source: [[2024-08-28-futardio-proposal-test-proposal-based-on-metadao-content]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
Proposal lists 'Makes futarchy look less serious' and 'May make it harder to sell DeFi DAOs / non-crypto organizations' as explicit potential pitfalls, showing MetaDAO leadership recognized the reputational risk before launching futardio.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -34,6 +34,12 @@ This claim complements [[coin price is the fairest objective function for asset
|
|||
|
||||
MetaDAO's Futardio proposal explicitly states: 'One of the ideal use-cases for futarchy is memecoin governance. This is because memecoin holders only want the price of the token to increase. There's no question of "maybe the market knows what's the best short-term action, but not the best long-term action."' This provides direct confirmation from MetaDAO itself that memecoins eliminate the temporal tradeoff problem that complicates futarchy in other contexts.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
|
||||
*Source: [[2024-08-28-futardio-proposal-test-proposal-based-on-metadao-content]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
MetaDAO proposal explicitly states 'memecoin holders only want the price of the token to increase. There's no question of "maybe the market knows what's the best short-term action, but not the best long-term action."' This confirms the theoretical argument with direct practitioner reasoning.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -52,6 +52,8 @@ MetaDAO's token launch platform. Implements "unruggable ICOs" — permissionless
|
|||
- **2024-08-28** — MetaDAO proposal to develop futardio as memecoin launchpad with futarchy governance failed. Proposal would have allocated $100k grant over 6 months to development team. Key features: percentage of each new token supply allocated to futarchy DAO, points-to-token conversion within 180 days, revenue distribution to $FUTA holders, immutable deployment on IPFS/Arweave. Proposal rejected by market, suggesting reputational risks outweighed adoption benefits.
|
||||
- **2025-11-14** — Solomon launch: $8M raised (12.9x oversubscribed, $102.9M committed) for composable yield-bearing stablecoin
|
||||
- **2026-02-03** — Hurupay fundraise launched targeting $3M, closed Feb 7 at $2M (67% of target) in refunding status
|
||||
- **2024-08-28** — MetaDAO futardio proposal created, proposing memecoin launchpad with futarchy governance for each token, points-to-token bootstrapping mechanism, and $100k development grant
|
||||
- **2024-09-01** — Proposal failed, MetaDAO decided not to develop futardio platform
|
||||
## Competitive Position
|
||||
- **Unique mechanism**: Only launch platform with futarchy-governed accountability and treasury return guarantees
|
||||
- **vs pump.fun**: pump.fun is memecoin launch (zero accountability, pure speculation). Futardio is ownership coin launch (futarchy governance, treasury enforcement). Different categories despite both being "launch platforms."
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ The futarchy governance protocol on Solana. Implements decision markets through
|
|||
- **2024-01-24** — Proposed AMM program to replace CLOB markets, addressing liquidity fragmentation and state rent costs (Proposal CF9QUBS251FnNGZHLJ4WbB2CVRi5BtqJbCqMi47NX1PG)
|
||||
- **2024-01-29** — AMM proposal passed with 400 META on approval and 800 META on completion budget
|
||||
- **2024-08-31** — Passed proposal to enter services agreement with Organization Technology LLC, creating US entity vehicle for paying contributors with $1.378M annualized burn rate. Entity owns no IP (all owned by MetaDAO LLC) and cannot encumber MetaDAO LLC. Agreement cancellable with 30-day notice or immediately for material breach.
|
||||
- **2024-05-30** — Drift protocol used MetaDAO activity data (5+ interactions over 30+ days) to identify 32 qualified participants for retroactive DRIFT token rewards, demonstrating cross-protocol futarchy adoption
|
||||
## Key Decisions
|
||||
| Date | Proposal | Proposer | Category | Outcome |
|
||||
|------|----------|----------|----------|---------|
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -6,9 +6,13 @@ url: "https://www.futard.io/proposal/EmPUGgv2Utzuu2vgSu6GcTRAtJMox5vJeZKi95cBgfJ
|
|||
date: 2024-08-28
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
format: data
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
status: enrichment
|
||||
tags: [futardio, metadao, futarchy, solana, governance]
|
||||
event_type: proposal
|
||||
processed_by: rio
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["memecoin-governance-is-ideal-futarchy-use-case-because-single-objective-function-eliminates-long-term-tradeoff-ambiguity.md", "futarchy-governed-memecoin-launchpads-face-reputational-risk-tradeoff-between-adoption-and-credibility.md"]
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Proposal Details
|
||||
|
|
@ -352,3 +356,14 @@ This would all be left to the discretion of the team building it, but they would
|
|||
- Autocrat version: 0.3
|
||||
- Completed: 2024-09-01
|
||||
- Ended: 2024-09-01
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- futardio proposal created 2024-08-28, failed 2024-09-01
|
||||
- Proposed $100k grant paid over 6 months to development team
|
||||
- Target launch window was Q3 2024
|
||||
- Points-to-token conversion period capped at 180 days
|
||||
- Revenue distribution model: all platform revenue to vault claimable by FUTA holders
|
||||
- Token distribution: solely to points owners and MetaDAO
|
||||
- Planned immutable deployment on IPFS or Arweave
|
||||
- Nallok and Proph3t proposed as supporters/funders, not core team
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue