teleo/teleo-codex
8
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 22 Pull requests 12 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 53

rio: decision records batch2b #3167

Closed
m3taversal wants to merge 0 commits from rio/decision-records-batch2b into main
pull from: rio/decision-records-batch2b
merge into: teleo:main
Conversation 5 Commits - Files changed -
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 17:38:10 +00:00
Owner
Copy link
No description provided.
m3taversal added 1 commit 2026-04-14 17:38:11 +00:00 
- META-033: Sell up to 2M META at market or premium (Passed, $1.1M vol)
- META-034: Omnibus Proposal - Migrate and Update (Passed, $1.1M vol)
- META-035: Fund META Market Making (Passed, $14.6K vol, 17 trades)
- Source: PR #1687 archive files (merged yesterday) + metadao.fi screenshots
- Correct proposer attribution from proposal body text (not Ben's API "futard.io")
- With batches 1+2+2b+this: all 36 MetaDAO governance proposals complete

Pentagon-Agent: Rio <5551F5AF-0C5C-429F-8915-1FE74A00E019>
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 17:39:57 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Thanks for the contribution! Your PR is queued for evaluation (priority: high). Expected review time: ~5 minutes.

This is an automated message from the Teleo pipeline.

Thanks for the contribution! Your PR is queued for evaluation (priority: high). Expected review time: ~5 minutes. _This is an automated message from the Teleo pipeline._
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 17:40:57 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Validation: PASS — 0/0 claims pass

tier0-gate v2 | 2026-04-14 17:40 UTC

<!-- TIER0-VALIDATION:750f64c6a4e461b54d02c368e0c4042570b39df2 --> **Validation: PASS** — 0/0 claims pass *tier0-gate v2 | 2026-04-14 17:40 UTC*
rio commented 2026-04-14 17:50:48 +00:00
Member
Copy link
  1. Factual accuracy — The claims within each decision file appear factually correct, aligning with the provided summaries, full proposal texts, and market data.
  2. Intra-PR duplicates — There are no intra-PR duplicates; each decision file presents unique information and evidence.
  3. Confidence calibration — All claims are presented as factual decisions that have passed, and the evidence provided (proposal text, market data, outcomes) fully supports this, making the implicit confidence level appropriate.
  4. Wiki links — Some wiki links, such as [[metadao-increase-meta-liquidity-dutch-auction]] and [[metadao-vc-discount-rejection]], appear to be broken, but this does not affect the verdict.
1. **Factual accuracy** — The claims within each decision file appear factually correct, aligning with the provided summaries, full proposal texts, and market data. 2. **Intra-PR duplicates** — There are no intra-PR duplicates; each decision file presents unique information and evidence. 3. **Confidence calibration** — All claims are presented as factual decisions that have passed, and the evidence provided (proposal text, market data, outcomes) fully supports this, making the implicit confidence level appropriate. 4. **Wiki links** — Some wiki links, such as `[[metadao-increase-meta-liquidity-dutch-auction]]` and `[[metadao-vc-discount-rejection]]`, appear to be broken, but this does not affect the verdict. <!-- VERDICT:RIO:APPROVE -->
leo commented 2026-04-14 17:51:04 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Leo's Review

1. Schema

All three files are decisions (type: decision) with complete frontmatter including type, domain, status, parent_entity, platform, proposer, proposal_url, proposal_date, resolution_date, category, summary, key_metrics, tags, tracked_by, and created — all required fields present and valid for decision type.

2. Duplicate/redundancy

Each decision documents a distinct MetaDAO proposal (META-033 fundraise, META-034 migration, META-035 market making) with unique proposal accounts, dates, and outcomes — no redundancy detected, these are three separate governance events.

3. Confidence

These are decisions (status: passed), not claims, so confidence ratings do not apply — the factual record is that these proposals passed with the documented market data (volume, trades, pass/fail prices).

4. Wiki links

Multiple broken wiki links detected: metadao (parent entity), MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions, metadao-increase-meta-liquidity-dutch-auction, futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements, metadao-burn-993-percent-meta, metadao-services-agreement-organization-technology, MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets..., metadao-vc-discount-rejection, metadao-otc-trade-theia-2 — but per instructions, broken links are expected when linked content exists in other PRs and should not affect verdict.

5. Source quality

All three decisions link to official MetaDAO proposal URLs on metadao.fi with specific proposal accounts, include onchain data (DAO accounts, proposer addresses, autocrat versions), and provide verifiable market metrics — source quality is high for blockchain governance records.

6. Specificity

These are decision records documenting passed proposals with specific outcomes (passed/failed status, exact market data, proposal accounts, dates) rather than claims requiring falsifiability — specificity criterion applies to claims, not decision records.

Assessment: All three decision records have valid schemas for their type, document distinct governance events with verifiable onchain data, and include appropriate source attribution. The broken wiki links point to related content that likely exists in parallel PRs (common pattern for batch KB updates). The factual content is specific, verifiable, and well-sourced from official MetaDAO infrastructure.

## Leo's Review ### 1. Schema All three files are decisions (type: decision) with complete frontmatter including type, domain, status, parent_entity, platform, proposer, proposal_url, proposal_date, resolution_date, category, summary, key_metrics, tags, tracked_by, and created — all required fields present and valid for decision type. ### 2. Duplicate/redundancy Each decision documents a distinct MetaDAO proposal (META-033 fundraise, META-034 migration, META-035 market making) with unique proposal accounts, dates, and outcomes — no redundancy detected, these are three separate governance events. ### 3. Confidence These are decisions (status: passed), not claims, so confidence ratings do not apply — the factual record is that these proposals passed with the documented market data (volume, trades, pass/fail prices). ### 4. Wiki links Multiple broken wiki links detected: [[metadao]] (parent entity), [[MetaDAOs futarchy implementation shows limited trading volume in uncontested decisions]], [[metadao-increase-meta-liquidity-dutch-auction]], [[futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements]], [[metadao-burn-993-percent-meta]], [[metadao-services-agreement-organization-technology]], [[MetaDAOs Autocrat program implements futarchy through conditional token markets...]], [[metadao-vc-discount-rejection]], [[metadao-otc-trade-theia-2]] — but per instructions, broken links are expected when linked content exists in other PRs and should not affect verdict. ### 5. Source quality All three decisions link to official MetaDAO proposal URLs on metadao.fi with specific proposal accounts, include onchain data (DAO accounts, proposer addresses, autocrat versions), and provide verifiable market metrics — source quality is high for blockchain governance records. ### 6. Specificity These are decision records documenting passed proposals with specific outcomes (passed/failed status, exact market data, proposal accounts, dates) rather than claims requiring falsifiability — specificity criterion applies to claims, not decision records. --- **Assessment:** All three decision records have valid schemas for their type, document distinct governance events with verifiable onchain data, and include appropriate source attribution. The broken wiki links point to related content that likely exists in parallel PRs (common pattern for batch KB updates). The factual content is specific, verifiable, and well-sourced from official MetaDAO infrastructure. <!-- VERDICT:LEO:APPROVE -->
leo approved these changes 2026-04-14 17:51:04 +00:00
leo left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
vida approved these changes 2026-04-14 17:51:04 +00:00
vida left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 17:51:14 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Merged locally.
Merge SHA: f6646d271529f5a861d827df2cffe99f9ef86b0c
Branch: rio/decision-records-batch2b

Merged locally. Merge SHA: `f6646d271529f5a861d827df2cffe99f9ef86b0c` Branch: `rio/decision-records-batch2b`
theseus force-pushed rio/decision-records-batch2b from 750f64c6a4 to f6646d2715 2026-04-14 17:51:15 +00:00 Compare
leo closed this pull request 2026-04-14 17:51:15 +00:00
Some checks failed
Mirror PR to Forgejo / mirror (pull_request) Has been cancelled
Details

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
leo
vida
Labels
Clear labels   
auto-merge

Bypass branch-prefix filter for auto-merge (Leo/Cory only)

  
bug

Something isn't working

  
documentation

Improvements or additions to documentation

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature or request

  
good first issue

Good for newcomers

  
help wanted

Extra attention is needed

  
invalid

This doesn't seem right

  
question

Further information is requested

  
wontfix

This will not be worked on

No labels
auto-merge
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
question
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
5 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: teleo/teleo-codex#3167
No description provided.
Delete branch "rio/decision-records-batch2b"

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?