m3taversal
c3dfbf12a3
- What: Rewrote 10 existing decision records with full verbatim proposal text, Summary & Connections sections, correct v1.metadao.fi URLs, and on-chain metadata - Records rewritten: 1. Ben Hawkins $50K OTC (Proposal 6, failed) — canonical manipulation resistance evidence 2. Pantera Capital $50K OTC (Proposal 7, failed) — first institutional rejection 3. Colosseum $250K OTC (Proposal 13, passed) — first successful OTC, hackathon pipeline 4. Theia $500K OTC (Proposal 10, passed) — 14% premium, active governance commitment 5. Proph3t/Nallok Compensation (Proposal 2, passed) — convex payout with utility theory 6. Burn 99.3% META (Proposal 11, passed) — radical treasury restructuring, FDV fix 7. Develop AMM (Proposal 4, passed) — origin of Futarchy AMM core infrastructure 8. Develop FaaS (Proposal, passed) — platform expansion to multi-DAO, $96K budget 9. Benevolent Dictators (Proposal 14, passed) — emergency executive authority via futarchy 10. Fundraise #2 (Proposal 3, passed) — $1.5M raise, no discount, no lockup - Pattern: Full OTC sequence shows market rejects discount deals, accepts premium deals — consistent mechanism for distinguishing extractive vs aligned capital Pentagon-Agent: Rio <5551F5AF-0C5C-429F-8915-1FE74A00E019>
146 lines
8.1 KiB
Markdown
146 lines
8.1 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
type: decision
|
|
entity_type: decision_market
|
|
name: "MetaDAO: Develop Futarchy as a Service (FaaS)"
|
|
domain: internet-finance
|
|
status: passed
|
|
parent_entity: "[[metadao]]"
|
|
platform: metadao
|
|
proposer: "0xNallok"
|
|
proposal_url: "https://v1.metadao.fi/metadao/trade/9uihGagn7bqj1BCBM1GaDbm2DsCwQcWJRc7a7xT1urqj"
|
|
proposal_date: 2024-03-13
|
|
resolution_date: 2024-03-18
|
|
category: strategy
|
|
summary: "Develop Realms-like UI for multi-DAO futarchy. $96K budget (smart contract + audit + UI/UX + data + PM). Goal: onboard 5-100 DAOs. Revenue model: taker fees (5-25bps) + monthly licensing ($50-$1K) + consulting. Vertical integration — own the whole stack."
|
|
key_metrics:
|
|
proposal_number: null
|
|
proposal_account: "9uihGagn7bqj1BCBM1GaDbm2DsCwQcWJRc7a7xT1urqj"
|
|
autocrat_version: "0.1"
|
|
budget: "$96,000 ($40K USDC + 342 META)"
|
|
tags: [metadao, faas, multi-dao, futarchy, platform, passed]
|
|
tracked_by: rio
|
|
created: 2026-03-11
|
|
last_updated: 2026-03-24
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# MetaDAO: Develop Futarchy as a Service (FaaS)
|
|
|
|
## Summary & Connections
|
|
|
|
**Develop a Realms-like UI for multi-DAO futarchy governance.** $96K budget across 5 roles (smart contract, auditor, 2 UI/UX, data/services, PM). Goal: onboard 5-100 DAOs. Revenue model: taker fees (5-25bps), monthly licensing ($50-$1K), consulting services. "The goal is not to build this product as a primitive — it's to own the whole stack."
|
|
|
|
**Outcome:** Passed. FaaS launched in May 2024 with Drift, Dean's List, and FutureDAO as first users.
|
|
|
|
**Connections:**
|
|
- This is the proposal that turned MetaDAO from a single-DAO experiment into a platform — the pivot from "MetaDAO governs MetaDAO" to "MetaDAO provides futarchy governance to any DAO"
|
|
- "Most people in crypto agree that the state of governance is abysmal" — 0xNallok's framing of the problem that FaaS solves. Direct evidence for [[token voting DAOs offer no minority protection beyond majority goodwill]]
|
|
- The vertical integration philosophy ("own the whole stack") is a strategic bet that became MetaDAO's competitive moat — no other platform offers the full governance stack
|
|
- Financial projections based on Curve/Aura/Votium comparisons ($50-$500 per proposal in taker fees, 1-2 proposals/month per DAO) — shows mechanism design thinking applied to business model
|
|
- FaaS → Drift, Sanctum, Jito adoption → the project-specific governance proposals that came after this
|
|
- The $96K budget with explicit role-level breakdown and maximum cost commitment is the template for subsequent MetaDAO project proposals
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Full Proposal Text
|
|
|
|
Type: Business project
|
|
|
|
Entrepreneur(s): 0xNallok
|
|
|
|
*A note from 0xNallok: Special thanks are owed to the many parties who've supported the project thus far, to those who've taken massive risk on utilizing the systems and believing in a better crypto. It has been one of the most exciting things, not in attention, but seeing the "aha!" moments and expanding the understanding of what is possible with crypto.*
|
|
|
|
See also: A Vision for Futarchy as a Service
|
|
|
|
### Overview
|
|
|
|
The appetite for market-driven governance is palpable. We have a tremendous opportunity to take this labor of love and shape it into a prime-time product. Such a product would be a great boon to the Solana ecosystem and to the MetaDAO's bottom line.
|
|
|
|
If passed, this proposal would fund two workstreams:
|
|
|
|
- **Minimum viable product**: I would coordinate the creation of a minimum viable product: a Realms-like UI that allows people to create and participate in futarchic DAOs. This requires some modifications to the smart contract and UI to allow for more than one DAO.
|
|
- **UI improvements**: I've already been working with engineers to add helpful functionality to the UI. This proposal would fund these features, including: historical charts, improving UX around surfacing information (e.g., showing how much money you have deposited in each proposal), showing historical trades, showing market volume.
|
|
|
|
The goal would be to onboard some early adopter DAOs to test alongside MetaDAO. A few teams have already expressed interest.
|
|
|
|
### Problem
|
|
|
|
Most people in crypto agree that the state of governance is abysmal. Teams can loot the treasury without repercussions. Decentralization theatre abounds. Even some projects that build DAO tooling don't feel comfortable keeping their money in a DAO.
|
|
|
|
The root cause of this issue is token-voting. One-token-one-vote systems have clear incentive traps that lead to uninformed and unengaged voters. Delegated voting systems ('liquid democracy') don't fare much better: most holders don't even do enough research to delegate.
|
|
|
|
### Design
|
|
|
|
A possible solution that MetaDAO has been testing out is futarchy. In a futarchy, it's markets that make the decisions. Given that markets are empirically better than experts at predicting things, we expect futarchies to perform better than traditional DAOs.
|
|
|
|
Our objective is to build a product that allows DAOs in the Solana ecosystem to harness the power of the market for their decision-making. This product would look and feel like Realms, only with futarchy instead of voting.
|
|
|
|
Short-term goal — minimum viable product supporting:
|
|
- I, as a DAO creator, can come to a website and create a futarchic DAO
|
|
- I, as a futarchic trader, can trade in multiple DAOs proposals' futarchic markets
|
|
|
|
### Objectives and Key Results
|
|
|
|
**Release a minimum viable product by May 21st, 2024**
|
|
- Extend the smart contract to support multiple DAOs
|
|
- Generalize the UI to support multiple DAOs
|
|
- Create docs for interacting with the product
|
|
- Partner with 3 DAOs to have them use the product at launch-time
|
|
|
|
**Improve the overall UI/UX**
|
|
- Create an indexer and APIs for order and trade history
|
|
- Improve the user experience for creating proposals
|
|
- Improve the user experience for trading proposals
|
|
|
|
### Timeline
|
|
|
|
Phase 1: Initial discussions, UI design, React development, program development, data services/APIs
|
|
Phase 2: Program deployed on devnet, data services linked, UI deployed on dev branch
|
|
Phase 3: Audit and revisions, testing UI with limited beta testers
|
|
Phase 4: Proposal for migration, UI live on mainnet, documentation and videos
|
|
Final: Migrate program
|
|
|
|
### Budget
|
|
|
|
Expected deliverables within 30 days, full deployment within two months. Estimated MAXIMUM costs:
|
|
|
|
- 1 smart contract engineer ($15,000 / 160 hours)
|
|
- 1 auditor ($10,000 / 40 hours)
|
|
- 2 UI/UX ($32,000 / 400 hours)
|
|
- 1 data/services developer ($13,000 / 140 hours)
|
|
- 1 project manager/research/outreach ($26,000 / 320 hours)
|
|
|
|
Total: $96,000. If costs exceed estimate, cost borne by the Entrepreneur.
|
|
|
|
Funded through: $40,000 USDC from multi-sig treasury + 342 META (5x overcollateralization for price fluctuation). Weekly payments. FaaS Multi-sig (2/3): 0xNallok, Proph3t, Nico.
|
|
|
|
### Business
|
|
|
|
Ultimately, the goal of the MetaDAO is to make money. Monetization options:
|
|
- **Taker fees on markets**: 5-25 basis points via taker fee
|
|
- **Monthly licensing fees**: BSL code → charge monthly fee for code and site
|
|
- **Support and services**: consultation around futarchic governance, Gauntlet model
|
|
|
|
**Vertical integration:** "The goal is not to build this product as a primitive and then allow anyone to build front-ends for it: it's to own the whole stack."
|
|
|
|
### Financial Projections
|
|
|
|
293 DAOs use Realms today (free platform, many inactive). Estimated 5-100 paying customers.
|
|
|
|
Volume per proposal based on MetaDAO data (proposals 6-8): ~$50-$500 per proposal. At 1-2 proposals/month per DAO: $100-$1,000 in taker fee ARPU.
|
|
|
|
Monthly licensing comparable to Squads ($99-$399/month). Governance premium: $50-$1,000/month.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Raw Data
|
|
|
|
- Proposal account: `9uihGagn7bqj1BCBM1GaDbm2DsCwQcWJRc7a7xT1urqj`
|
|
- DAO account: `7J5yieabpMoiN3LrdfJnRjQiXHgi7f47UuMnyMyR78yy`
|
|
- Proposer: (0xNallok)
|
|
- Autocrat version: 0.1
|
|
- FaaS Multi-sig: `AHwsoL97vXFdvckVZdXw9rrvnUDcPANCLVQzJan9srWy`
|
|
|
|
## Relationship to KB
|
|
- [[metadao]] — parent entity, platform expansion
|
|
- [[token voting DAOs offer no minority protection beyond majority goodwill]] — the problem FaaS addresses
|
|
- [[MetaDAO is the futarchy launchpad on Solana where projects raise capital through unruggable ICOs governed by conditional markets creating the first platform for ownership coins at scale]] — FaaS was the precursor to the launchpad
|