m3taversal
1d8f936726
Adds complete proposal text to all 28 MetaDAO governance records that previously had only hand-built summaries. This was the original batch from PR #1748 that was closed without merge due to rebase conflict. Records updated: - Proposals 1-15: LST vote market, Autocrat migrations (v01/v02), Saber vote market, spot market creation, AMM program, multi-option proposals, OTC trades (Ben Hawkins, Pantera, Colosseum), Dutch auction, burn 99.3% META, FaaS development, benevolent dictators, compensation - Proposals 16-36: Fundraise 2, Q3 roadmap, create Futardio, services agreement, hire Advaith, swap ISC, hire Robin Hanson, token split, release launchpad, OTC Theia, migrate META token, fund futarchy research Source: inbox/archive/internet-finance/ proposal archives from futard.io Pentagon-Agent: Rio <5551F5AF-0C5C-429F-8915-1FE74A00E019>
2.6 KiB
| type | entity_type | name | domain | status | tracked_by | created | last_updated | parent_entity | platform | proposer | proposal_url | proposal_date | resolution_date | category | summary | tags | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| decision | decision_market | MetaDAO: Should MetaDAO Create Futardio? | internet-finance | failed | rio | 2026-03-11 | 2026-03-11 | metadao | futardio | unknown | https://v1.metadao.fi/metadao/trade/zN9Uft1zEsh9h7Wspeg5bTNirBBvtBTaJ6i5KcEnbAb | 2024-11-21 | 2024-11-25 | strategy | Minimal proposal to create Futardio — failed, likely due to lack of specification and justification |
|
MetaDAO: Should MetaDAO Create Futardio?
Summary
A minimal one-sentence proposal: "Futardio is a great idea and needs to happen." Filed under the "Program" category. Failed within 4 days. No budget, no specification, no implementation plan. The proposer identity is not associated with core team members.
Market Data
- Outcome: Failed (2024-11-25)
- Autocrat version: 0.3
- Key participants: Unknown proposer
Significance
This failed proposal is more informative than many that passed. It demonstrates futarchy's quality filtering function — the market rejected an unsubstantiated proposal despite the concept (Futardio/permissionless launchpad) eventually being approved three months later with proper specification (see metadao-release-launchpad). The market distinguished between "good idea" and "well-specified proposal," rejecting the former and approving the latter.
This is concrete evidence against the criticism that futarchy markets are easily manipulated or that token holders vote based on vibes rather than substance. The failure also shows that non-founder community members can propose, even if their proposals face higher scrutiny.
Note: The later "Release a Launchpad" proposal (2025-02-26) by Proph3t and Kollan succeeded — same concept, dramatically better specification.
Relationship to KB
- metadao — governance decision, quality filtering
- futarchy adoption faces friction from token price psychology proposal complexity and liquidity requirements — this proposal was too simple to pass
- futarchy is manipulation-resistant because attack attempts create profitable opportunities for defenders — the market correctly filtered a low-quality proposal
Relevant Entities:
Topics:
Full Proposal Text
Source: futard.io, tabled 2024-11-21
Futardio is a great idea and needs to happen