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>
2.5 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: