28 lines
1.2 KiB
Markdown
28 lines
1.2 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
type: source
|
|
source_type: x-tweet
|
|
title: "@01resolved — shared via Telegram by @m3taversal"
|
|
author: "@01resolved"
|
|
url: "https://x.com/01resolved/status/2037550467316847015?s=46"
|
|
date: 2026-03-27
|
|
domain: internet-finance
|
|
format: social-media
|
|
status: unprocessed
|
|
proposed_by: "@m3taversal"
|
|
contribution_type: source-submission
|
|
tags: ['telegram-shared', 'x-tweet', 'futarchy', 'ownership-coins', 'governance']
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# @01resolved — Tweet/Thread
|
|
|
|
Shared by @m3taversal via Telegram.
|
|
Source URL: https://x.com/01resolved/status/2037550467316847015?s=46
|
|
|
|
## Content
|
|
|
|
This is exactly the type of early stage governance risk we wrote about recently. Our view is that sensitive treasury proposals should be subject to project specific guardrails and post-ICO timing windows, rather than becoming immediately eligible.
|
|
|
|
The @P2Pdotme ICO currently live on @MetaDAOProject appears to already reflect some of this thinking. In the ICO details, community governance proposals are only enabled 7-9 months after funding.
|
|
|
|
Our “Permissionless Proposals for MetaDAO Decision Markets” introduces a framework for proposal classes, timing windows, and other guardrails here:
|
|
https://t.co/WQAbjKff1A
|