Ranger Finance Liquidation Proposal — Full Text

Market Data (as of Mar 5 2026)

Total Volume: $581.04K
Pass Likelihood: 97%
Pass Price: $0.7440 (+0.32%) | Spot: $0.7416 | Fail Price: $0.6759 (-8.86%)
Approve TWAP: $0.7278 | Reject TWAP: $0.6651
Passing at +9.4348% (threshold: +3%)

Summary

This proposal nullifies a prior 90-day restriction on buybacks/liquidations and proposes full liquidation of Ranger Finance. Authored by a group of RNGR tokenholders alleging material misrepresentations.

Allegations

At ICO time, Ranger was marketed as:

A business with meaningful product-market fit
A business with sustainable revenue generation and significant actual revenue
A business primarily needing capital to scale

Tokenholders allege this was misleading:

Co-founder FA2 stated "we are close to doing $5 billion in volume this year" and showed "$2m revenue" on slides
On-chain analysis shows 2025 volume was ~$2B (not $5B) and revenue was ~$500K (not $2M)
Volume and revenue per day were down over 90% between ICO announcement (Nov 2025) and the presentation (Dec 2025)
Co-founder Coby later claimed numbers were "projected" based on expectations for a "traditional ICO route"
Multiple team members (Maker, Luke, FA2) communicated the $2M figure without correction
Activity across perps and spot "declined to close to 0 following the ICO announcement" — indicating users were farmers, not organic

Proposed Liquidation Plan

Part 1: Return treasury funds to tokenholders

No further team spending from future allowances (existing $500K released allowances can be used)
Snapshot of vested token balances 1 week after voting period
Remove protocol-owned liquidity, add USDC to treasury
Calculate book value per token
Open redemption for tokenholders at book value
Expected book value: $0.75 - $0.82 per token
Expected eligible tokens: 5.8-6.4M (excluding unvested, locked, protocol-owned)
Treasury USDC: ~$3.5M + $1.2-1.6M from LP removal
After 18 months, MetaDAO team discretion on unclaimed USDC

Part 2: Return all other assets to Glint House PTE. LTD

IP, trademarks, domain names, source code, infrastructure return to original company
Majority developed/acquired prior to ICO with seed investments

Rio's assessment

Watershed moment for the futarchy thesis: the "unruggable ICO" mechanism unrugging in production
97% pass likelihood with $581K volume = strong consensus with real capital, not thin market
The mechanism is protecting investors FROM team extraction — inverse of the majority-theft protection
Proposal nullifies its own prior 90-day restriction = futarchy can self-correct when evidence changes
Clean separation: USDC to tokenholders, IP to original company — executable liquidation mechanism
The specific misrepresentation evidence (screenshots, on-chain data, team quotes) is the kind of verifiable claim that makes futarchy governance credible
New claim: futarchy-governed liquidation as enforcement for unruggable ICOs
Enriches: decision markets, trustless joint ownership, MetaDAO platform analysis

3.7 KiB Raw Blame History