m3taversal
fdebd95137
New decision records with full proposal text for projects that previously had zero governance documentation in the KB. Omnipair (4): OMFG-001 through OMFG-004 Ranger (3): ICO launch + $2M buyback + contested liquidation Solomon (3): ICO launch ($102.9M committed) + DP-00001 + DP-00002 Loyal (3): ICO launch ($75.9M committed) + buyback + liquidity adjustment ZKLSOL (4): ICO launch + team burn + buyback + restructuring Umbra (3): ICO launch + security audits + mainnet expansion Futardio cult (3): ICO launch + omnibus (90% token burn) + liquidity pool Kyros (1): Burn 4.42M unclaimed airdrop Jito DAO (1): JTO Vault / TipRouter NCN (JIP-10) Marinade (1): SAM Bid Routing to MNDE Stakers (MIP.5) Pentagon-Agent: Rio <5551F5AF-0C5C-429F-8915-1FE74A00E019>
61 lines
4.5 KiB
Markdown
61 lines
4.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
type: decision
|
|
entity_type: decision_market
|
|
name: "Ranger: Liquidate Ranger Finance"
|
|
domain: internet-finance
|
|
status: passed
|
|
parent_entity: "[[ranger-finance]]"
|
|
platform: "futardio"
|
|
proposer: "Group of RNGR tokenholders"
|
|
proposal_url: "https://www.metadao.fi/projects/ranger/proposal/DPATwR2HLcGZCBZCTffzagV4r7dp5FF2C9aJmiuCDUpS"
|
|
proposal_date: 2026-03-02
|
|
resolution_date: 2026-03-05
|
|
category: "liquidation"
|
|
summary: "Tokenholders voted to liquidate Ranger Finance citing material misrepresentations about revenue and product-market fit — treasury USDC returned to holders, IP returned to team"
|
|
tracked_by: rio
|
|
created: 2026-03-24
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Ranger: Liquidate Ranger Finance
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
Group of RNGR tokenholders proposed full liquidation of Ranger Finance, alleging the team made material misrepresentations about business metrics to entice investment. Key allegations: co-founder stated "$5B volume → $2M revenue" for 2025, but on-chain analysis showed ~$2B volume and ~$500K revenue, with volume and revenue down 90%+ between ICO announcement (Nov 2025) and the presentation (Dec 2025). Activity dropped to near-zero post-ICO announcement, indicating users were points farmers not organic users. The proposal nullified the prior 90-day buyback cooldown.
|
|
|
|
## Market Data
|
|
- **Outcome:** Passed
|
|
- **Proposal Account:** DPATwR2HLcGZCBZCTffzagV4r7dp5FF2C9aJmiuCDUpS
|
|
- **Duration:** 2026-03-02 to ~2026-03-05
|
|
- **Treasury USDC:** ~$3.5M
|
|
- **Expected book value:** $0.75-$0.82 per RNGR
|
|
- **Eligible tokens:** ~5.8-6.4M RNGR (excludes locked team, out-of-range LP, buyback tokens)
|
|
|
|
## Liquidation Structure
|
|
1. Remove all RNGR/USDC liquidity from futarchyAMM
|
|
2. Snapshot vested token balances 1 week after voting ends
|
|
3. Calculate book value per token from treasury USDC + LP USDC
|
|
4. Open redemption for tokenholders at book value
|
|
5. Return all IP, trademarks, source code to Glint House PTE. LTD
|
|
6. Unclaimed USDC after 18 months at MetaDAO team's discretion
|
|
|
|
## Significance
|
|
Third futarchy-governed liquidation on MetaDAO (after mtnCapital and Hurupay), but the first contested liquidation where tokenholders allege material misrepresentation. This is the strongest test of futarchy-governed investor protection: the market mechanism allowed investors to force full treasury return when they believed the team broke trust. The proposal explicitly overrode the 90-day cooldown from the previous buyback proposal, demonstrating that futarchy can override its own prior decisions when new evidence emerges.
|
|
|
|
The detailed on-chain evidence (Dune queries, Discord screenshots, timeline analysis) presented in the proposal shows the level of due diligence possible when governance is transparent and data is on-chain.
|
|
|
|
## Relationship to KB
|
|
- [[ranger-finance]] — parent entity, liquidation event
|
|
- [[futarchy-governed liquidation is the enforcement mechanism that makes unruggable ICOs credible because investors can force full treasury return when teams materially misrepresent]] — strongest evidence
|
|
- [[futarchy can override its own prior decisions when new evidence emerges because conditional markets re-evaluate proposals against current information not historical commitments]] — overrode 90-day cooldown
|
|
- [[ownership coins primary value proposition is investor protection not governance quality because anti-rug enforcement through market-governed liquidation creates credible exit guarantees that no amount of decision optimization can match]] — liquidation as investor protection
|
|
|
|
## Full Proposal Text
|
|
|
|
*Source: metadao.fi, tabled 2026-03-02. Authors: Group of RNGR tokenholders.*
|
|
|
|
Since the ICO concluded, it's become clear that: (1) the Ranger team made material misrepresentations about their business, and (2) the business was predicated on points farming, not organic activity.
|
|
|
|
Key evidence: In a presentation, Ranger co-founder FA2 stated "Current stats: we are close to doing $5 billion in volume this year and next year we are targeting to do $100 billion in volume" with a slide showing "2025: $5b volume → $2m revenue". On-chain analysis shows volume was ~$2B and revenue ~$500K, with volume/revenue down 90%+ between ICO announcement and presentation. Multiple team members repeated the $2M revenue figure without correction.
|
|
|
|
Activity across perps and spot declined to near-zero following the ICO announcement, indicating "users" were points farmers not organic users.
|
|
|
|
Proposed plan: remove LP, snapshot vested balances, calculate book value, open redemption. Treasury USDC: ~$3.5M. Expected book value: $0.75-$0.82. Return all IP to Glint House PTE. LTD.
|