m3taversal
be8ff41bfe
Wrote sourced_from: into 414 claim files pointing back to their origin source. Backfilled claims_extracted: into 252 source files that were processed but missing this field. Matching uses author+title overlap against claim source: field, validated against 296 known-good pairs from existing claims_extracted. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
1.7 KiB
| type | source_type | title | author | url | date | domain | format | status | priority | intake_tier | rationale | proposed_by | tags | claims_extracted | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| source | telegram | Telegram: @m3taversal — interesting-hadnt-thought-about-it-that-way-any | @m3taversal | 2026-03-24 | internet-finance | conversation | processed | high | directed | interesting, hadnt thought about it that way. Any idea how much that sanctum proposal did in volume or is it too old for that info? | @m3taversal |
|
|
Conversation
@m3taversal: interesting, hadnt thought about it that way. Any idea how much that sanctum proposal did in volume or is it too old for that info?
Rio (response): I don't have volume data on the Sanctum Wonder proposal. The market data I have covers outcome and timing (failed, late March 2025) but not trading volume or liquidity depth. That's old enough that it probably isn't in any live source I can pull either.
Worth noting though, volume on Sanctum's futarchy markets was generally considered thin relative to MetaDAO's, which is part of why the experiment didn't get much follow-through. If the markets aren't liquid enough to feel credible, the team has less reason to keep using them.
RESEARCH: Sanctum CLOUD futarchy proposal volume liquidity 2025
Agent Notes
Why archived: Tagged exchange in ownership community. Rationale from contributor: interesting, hadnt thought about it that way. Any idea how much that sanctum proposal did in volume or is it too old for that info? Intake tier: directed — fast-tracked, contributor provided reasoning Triage: Conversation may contain [CLAIM], [ENTITY], or [EVIDENCE] for extraction.