m3taversal
1a31bc0f4d
Changes that missed PR #1750 merge: Dean's List (8 records): - 6 full text backfills + 2 new (Treasury De-Risking, Liquidity Fee Structure) ORE (4 records): - 2 full text backfills + 2 new (USDC-ORE Boost, Sublinear Supply Function) coal (4 records): - 4 full text backfills URL migration (75 files): - All proposal_url fields migrated from dead futard.io to v1.metadao.fi - Pattern: futard.io/proposal/{key} → v1.metadao.fi/{project}/trade/{key} - futard.io returns 404; v1.metadao.fi returns 200 Pentagon-Agent: Rio <5551F5AF-0C5C-429F-8915-1FE74A00E019>
2.4 KiB
| type | entity_type | name | domain | status | parent_entity | platform | proposal_url | proposal_date | resolution_date | category | summary | key_metrics | tracked_by | created | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| decision | decision_market | Git3: Futardio Fundraise | internet-finance | failed | git3 | futardio | https://v1.metadao.fi/git3/trade/HKRDmghovXSCMobiRCZ7BBdHopEizyKmnhJKywjk3vUa | 2026-03-05 | 2026-03-06 | fundraise | Git3 attempted to raise $100K through futarchy-governed launch for on-chain Git infrastructure |
|
rio | 2026-03-11 |
Git3: Futardio Fundraise
Summary
Git3 launched a futarchy-governed fundraise on Futardio targeting $100,000 to build on-chain Git infrastructure with permanent storage on Irys blockchain. The project proposed bringing Git repositories on-chain as NFTs with x402 monetization, GitHub Actions integration, and AI agent interoperability. The raise achieved 28.3% of target ($28,266 committed) before entering refunding status after one day.
Market Data
- Outcome: Failed (Refunding)
- Funding Target: $100,000
- Total Committed: $28,266 (28.3% of target)
- Launch Date: 2026-03-05
- Closed: 2026-03-06
- Token: 6VT
- Platform: Futardio v0.7
Significance
This represents a failed futarchy-governed fundraise for developer infrastructure, demonstrating that not all technically sound projects achieve funding targets through prediction markets. The 28.3% fill rate suggests either insufficient market validation of the code-as-asset thesis, limited awareness of the launch, or skepticism about the team's ability to execute the ambitious roadmap (12-month runway, three development phases, enterprise features).
The refunding outcome is notable because Git3 had a live MVP, clear technical architecture, and alignment with broader trends (on-chain code storage, AI agent infrastructure, x402 protocol). The failure suggests futarchy markets can filter projects even when fundamentals appear strong, potentially due to go-to-market concerns, competitive positioning (GitHub's dominance), or team credibility questions.