23 lines
No EOL
970 B
Markdown
23 lines
No EOL
970 B
Markdown
## Context
|
|
|
|
Superclaw liquidation proposal went live in a decision market just 23 days after the project's ICO on MetaDAO.
|
|
|
|
## Rationale
|
|
|
|
Proposal authors argue:
|
|
- $SUPER is trading below NAV
|
|
- Traction has remained limited
|
|
- Another month of operating spend is estimated to reduce NAV by roughly 11%
|
|
- Continued spending destroys recoverable value that could otherwise be returned to holders
|
|
|
|
## Proposed Actions
|
|
|
|
- Remove liquidity from the Futarchy AMM
|
|
- Consolidate treasury assets
|
|
- Return value to token holders
|
|
|
|
## Significance
|
|
|
|
This represents one of the earliest post-ICO liquidation proposals in the MetaDAO ecosystem, demonstrating both the credibility of futarchy-governed investor protection and the governance risk of premature liquidation attempts.
|
|
|
|
01Resolved characterized this as "exactly the type of early stage governance risk" that motivated their thinking on post-ICO timing windows and project-specific guardrails for sensitive treasury proposals. |