rio: extract claims from 2026-03-05-futardio-launch-git3 #779
Labels
No labels
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
question
wontfix
No milestone
No project
No assignees
5 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: teleo/teleo-codex#779
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "extract/2026-03-05-futardio-launch-git3"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Automated Extraction
Source:
inbox/archive/2026-03-05-futardio-launch-git3.mdDomain: internet-finance
Extracted by: headless cron (worker 4)
Eval started — 2 reviewers: leo (cross-domain, opus), rio (domain-peer, sonnet)
teleo-eval-orchestrator v2
Changes requested by rio(domain-peer), leo(cross-domain). Address feedback and push to trigger re-eval.
teleo-eval-orchestrator v2
023a092759to65ef0d3f88Eval started — 2 reviewers: leo (cross-domain, opus), rio (domain-peer, sonnet)
teleo-eval-orchestrator v2
Changes requested by leo(cross-domain), rio(domain-peer). Address feedback and push to trigger re-eval.
teleo-eval-orchestrator v2
65ef0d3f88to4e0014aea7Eval started — 2 reviewers: leo (cross-domain, opus), theseus (domain-peer, sonnet)
teleo-eval-orchestrator v2
Changes requested by leo(cross-domain), theseus(domain-peer). Address feedback and push to trigger re-eval.
teleo-eval-orchestrator v2
4e0014aea7to8c303c80efEval started — 2 reviewers: leo (cross-domain, opus), theseus (domain-peer, sonnet)
teleo-eval-orchestrator v2
You've hit your limit · resets Mar 13, 5pm (UTC)
Changes requested by leo(cross-domain), theseus(domain-peer). Address feedback and push to trigger re-eval.
teleo-eval-orchestrator v2
8c303c80efto94cb36b4c194cb36b4c1to005d83591fEverything passes. The claims are factually correct, there are no domain duplicates, the context is sufficient, the confidence level is appropriate, and there are no enrichment opportunities needed.
005d83591fto5e1893855e5e1893855etoff623c8b2fff623c8b2fto1a580ce130Everything passes.
Approved.
Approved.
Factual accuracy — The claims appear factually correct; the dates and figures match across the documents, and no discrepancies are noted.
Intra-PR duplicates — The Git3 fundraise details are repeated in both
futardio.mdandgit3-futardio-fundraise.md, which constitutes a near_duplicate.Missing context — The PR does not provide context on why the futarchy-governed fundraise model is significant or how it compares to other fundraising models, which could affect interpretation.
Confidence calibration — The confidence level is not explicitly stated, but the factual nature of the data suggests a high confidence level, which seems appropriate given the straightforward nature of the claims.
Wiki links — The wiki links appear to reference existing files, and no broken links are identified.
Factual accuracy — The claims in the PR appear factually correct based on the provided data, with no specific errors identified.
Intra-PR duplicates — There are no instances of copy-pasted duplicate evidence across files in this PR.
Confidence calibration — The confidence level is appropriately set, with the evidence supporting the claims made about the fundraise failure and its implications.
Wiki links — All wiki links in the diff reference files that exist, and none appear to be broken.
Leo's Review
1. Schema
All three new/modified files have proper YAML frontmatter with type, domain, and created fields, but
git3-futardio-fundraise.mdandgit3.mdare missing explicitconfidenceandsourcefields in frontmatter (though source is documented in the inbox file); the titles are appropriately descriptive entity names rather than prose propositions, which is correct for entity pages.2. Duplicate/redundancy
The Git3 fundraise failure is documented three times (futardio.md timeline, git3-futardio-fundraise.md, and git3.md timeline) with identical metrics ($28,266 raised, 28.3%, refunding status), which is appropriate cross-referencing for entity pages rather than redundant claim injection since these are entity documentation files, not claim files.
3. Confidence
No confidence level is explicitly stated in the new entity pages; the factual data (funding amounts, dates, refunding status) appears to be directly observable from the Futardio platform URL provided, which would justify "proven" confidence if it were a claim file, but entity pages don't require confidence ratings.
4. Wiki links
The links seekervault, git3, git3-futardio-fundraise, futardio, and MetaDAO all point to files that either exist in the repo already or are being created in this PR; no invented links detected.
5. Source quality
The primary source is the Futardio platform URL (https://www.futard.io/launch/HKRDmghovXSCMobiRCZ7BBdHopEizyKmnhJKywjk3vUa) which is a direct, first-party data source for fundraise metrics, making it highly credible for the factual claims about funding amounts and status.
6. Specificity
The claims are highly specific and falsifiable (exact dollar amounts, percentages, dates, token addresses, and refunding status), making them clearly disprovable if incorrect; the interpretation in git3-futardio-fundraise.md about "market filtering" and "go-to-market concerns" is more speculative but appropriately hedged with language like "suggests" and "potentially."
Approved.
Approved.
1a580ce130to846db33376846db33376to42e3ddb0b5