1729b0c4b8
- Applied reviewer-requested changes - Quality gate pass (fix-from-feedback) Pentagon-Agent: Auto-Fix <HEADLESS>
38 lines
No EOL
1.9 KiB
Markdown
38 lines
No EOL
1.9 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
type: archive
|
|
archive_id: 2026-03-04-futardio-launch-irich
|
|
title: MetaDAO i.rich Fundraise Proposal and Failure
|
|
date_archived: 2025-03-04
|
|
source_type: metadao-proposal
|
|
source_url: https://metadao.example/proposals/irich
|
|
enrichments:
|
|
- metadao-uses-conditional-tokens-for-fundraising-decisions
|
|
- futarchy-adoption-faces-friction-from-complexity-of-conditional-market-mechanisms
|
|
claims_extracted:
|
|
- irich-fundraise-failed-with-255-dollars-of-100000-dollar-target-committed-before-refunding
|
|
- irich-combines-link-in-bio-with-solana-blinks-and-dex-referrals-to-monetize-social-traffic-through-embedded-transactions
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Source Summary
|
|
|
|
MetaDAO proposal for i.rich platform fundraising through conditional tokens. The proposal sought $100,000 USDC to build a link-in-bio platform integrated with Solana Blinks and DEX referral revenue sharing. The fundraise failed after one day with only $255 committed (0.26% of target), triggering automatic refunds.
|
|
|
|
## Key Facts
|
|
|
|
- **Fundraise Mechanics**: Conditional token mechanism where contributors receive refunds if minimum threshold not met
|
|
- **Target**: $100,000 USDC
|
|
- **Actual Raise**: $255 USDC (0.26%)
|
|
- **Duration**: ~1 day before closure
|
|
- **Product Pitch**: Link-in-bio + Solana Blinks + DEX referral revenue sharing
|
|
- **Outcome**: Failed, automatic refunds processed
|
|
- **DEX Integration**: Mentioned Jupiter / Raydium referral programs
|
|
- **Pricing Model**: Included Richnames NFT username component with character-length-based pricing tiers
|
|
|
|
## Extraction Notes
|
|
|
|
This archive provided:
|
|
1. A concrete data point on futarchy mechanism rejection (enrichment to existing claims)
|
|
2. Observable fundraise failure metrics (new proven claim)
|
|
3. Product architecture claims from pitch deck (new speculative claim)
|
|
|
|
The failed fundraise serves as counter-evidence to the product value proposition claims, appropriately reflected in confidence levels. |