Funding Flow
Economic Infrastructure for Networked Coordination
A memorandum for Mission-Aligned Funders and Founders alike
Version 1.0 New Moon, Lunation '73, November 2024
Abstract
Holonic Funding is a federated smart-contract infrastructure that enables autonomous resource coordination across decentralized networks. By making relationships economically meaningful and tracking multi-resource contributions transparently, the system allows communities to coordinate value flows without centralized control or monetary abstraction.
This whitepaper presents the vision, technical architecture, tokenomics, market opportunity, and implementation strategy for building the financial operating system for regenerative, networked economies.
Core Innovation: Where traditional systems abstract complexity through money, Holonic Funding reveals resource flows—enabling fair coordination while maintaining the autonomy of participating nodes (Holons).
Table of Contents
The Problem: Coordination Failure in Networked Systems
The Solution: Holonic Resource Orchestration
Technical Architecture
Tokenomics & Value Representation
Real-World Validation
Market Opportunity
Business Model
Implementation Roadmap
Risks & Mitigation
Team & Governance
Investment Opportunity
Conclusion
1. The Problem: Coordination Failure in Networked Systems
1.1 The Fundamental Mismatch
Communities working on regeneration, commons-based projects, and decentralized coordination face a critical infrastructure gap:
Value creation happens across relationships, not hierarchies.
Yet every existing financial system assumes hierarchical control and monetary abstraction. The result is systematic coordination failure:
Rigid funding structures that require centralized decision-making
Administrative overhead consuming resources meant for mission work
Centralized bottlenecks slowing resource allocation to weeks or months
Lack of trust infrastructure requiring repeated verification across organizational boundaries
Inability to share resources fluidly (space, tools, expertise, time)
No mechanism to track contribution and impact in distributed networks
Fragmentation between groups that should be collaborating
1.2 Why Current Alternatives Fail
Traditional Finance
Enforces hierarchies and centralization
Hides resource flows behind monetary abstraction
Optimizes for extraction, not coordination
Requires legal entities and compliance overhead
DAOs & Web3
Attempted governance through endless voting → fatigue and plutocracy
Introduced tokens for speculation rather than coordination
No mechanism for multi-resource tracking (only tokens)
Cannot represent relationships or commitments economically
Platform Cooperatives
Excellent values, inadequate infrastructure
Forced to use traditional finance tools
Cannot coordinate across organizational boundaries
No federated resource sharing
1.3 The Money Trap
A deeper problem underlies all of these: money has become the universal measure of value, making all other resources economically invisible.
This creates vicious cycles:
Empty rooms sit unused because owners need "market rate" cash, even when community members could use the space
Skilled contributors can't participate because they need immediate liquidity, even when the community has abundant non-monetary resources
Communities with space, food, land, and expertise can't coordinate effectively because the financial system forces monetization of everything
The system optimizes for monetary extraction rather than actual value creation
Example: A regenerative village has empty rooms and can provide housing, food, and community. A developer can build valuable coordination infrastructure. But the developer says "I need $3000/month to survive" and the village says "I need $3000/month in cash to cover operations." Both have what the other needs, but the monetary system makes exchange impossible.
This is precisely the problem Holonic Funding solves.
2. The Solution: Holonic Resource Orchestration
2.1 Core Concept
Holonic Funding is a composable, federated smart-contract infrastructure that enables any group—small or large—to define how resources move through their ecosystem.
Each Holon (individual, team, project, or asset) can:
Receive and distribute resources automatically through configurable primitives
Form federations (networks of trust) with other Holons
Create shared pools for mutual aid, projects, or ecosystem needs
Build trust through commitments and reputation
Coordinate multiple resource types, not just money
Where Web3 created tokens, Holonic Funding creates flows.
Where DAOs attempted governance, Holonic Funding enables resource orchestration.
Where traditional finance enforces centralization, Holonic Funding unlocks peer-to-peer coordination at scale.
2.2 Key Capabilities
Autonomous Resource Distribution
Each Holon receives and distributes resources through modular smart-contract primitives:
Flow Splitters
Configurable routing: "70% to direct contributors, 30% to ecosystem pool"
Adjustable dial between internal rewards and external collaboration
Based on value equations defined by each Holon
Threshold Buckets
Resources accumulate until threshold met
Overflow automatically redistributes to federated Holons
Ensures needs are met before excess is shared
Revenue-Share Modules
Proportional distribution based on contribution tracking
Works with hours, outcomes, appreciations, relationship-building
Each Holon defines its own value equation
Relational Zones
Bilateral economic relationships between Holons
"I'll share my space if you share your expertise"
Makes relationships economically meaningful
Multi-Sig Pools
Collective treasury management
Federated decision-making
Transparent fund allocation
Access and Liability Propagation
Trust-based resource sharing through delegation chains
Borrow assets through network trust
Liability automatically traced to delegator
Resources aren't just money. The system coordinates tools, spaces, services, tokens, land, time, and commitments—each tracked, valued, and governed according to community-defined rules.
Federation (Networks of Trust)
Holons form federations to access shared resource pools under predefined, value-aligned conditions:
Mutual aid treasuries for member support
Project collaboration funds for shared initiatives
Regenerative commons pools for ecosystem health
Risk-sharing instruments for collective resilience
Shared infrastructure budgets for network needs
Federation creates trust graphs where:
Access propagates through relationships
Liability traces through delegation
Reputation builds through delivery
Resources flow to where they're valued
Commitment-Based Trust Building
Holons publish commitments (future obligations) which:
Strengthen trust within networks
Make resource attraction predictable
Create foundation for value-based credit
Enable collaborative investment
Build visible track records of delivery
Example: A developer commits to building a feature in 2 weeks. The network allocates resources (space, food, tools) based on this commitment. Upon delivery, reputation increases and future resource access improves.
2.3 What Makes This Unique
Minimal Governance, Maximum Flow
Instead of endless voting on every decision, Holons autonomously configure their own resource logic. Collective coordination emerges through economic interdependence, not bureaucracy.
Governance happens at the constitutional layer (rules about rules) not the operational layer (deciding every transaction).
Composable Financial Machines
A modular library of smart-contract primitives allows ecosystems to build tailored funding architectures—from simple revenue-sharing to complex multi-stakeholder regenerative funds.
Like LEGO blocks, primitives combine in infinite ways to match community needs.
Relational Economics
Relationships become economically meaningful through relational zones and bilateral signaling—infrastructure no existing blockchain system provides.
"I value your storytelling" becomes "I direct 10% of my resource flow to support your work."
Multi-Resource Coordination
Money is just one resource type. Holons coordinate:
Physical assets (tools, spaces, land)
Services (expertise, labor, facilitation)
Time and attention
Commitments and obligations
Access rights
Tokens (both fungible and non-fungible)
Each resource type tracked, valued, and governed appropriately.
Federated Access with Accountability
Trust graphs enable resource propagation (borrowing through chains of trust) with liability automatically traced back through delegation paths.
"I trust Alice, Alice trusts Bob, therefore Bob can use my workshop" → if Bob damages equipment, liability traces back to Alice, preserving trust.
Purpose-Driven Resource Permissioning
Every resource carries clearly encoded conditions:
"Use my land for workshops, not parties"
"This tool available to aligned networks only"
"Space accessible during these hours"
"Expertise available for regenerative projects"
Smart contracts enforce conditions automatically.
Voluntary Ecosystem Contribution
Holons can dedicate a portion of inflows to shared pools—but choose where contributions flow, creating long-term ecosystem alignment without coercion.
Unlike taxation (mandatory, opaque), this is voluntary, transparent, and directed by contributors.
Configurable Value Equations
Each Holon defines its own "value equation" for internal distribution:
Simple: 1 hour worked = 1 point = proportional share
Complex: Hours + appreciations + outcomes + relationship-building
Domain-Specific:
Code commits + documentation + community support (tech teams)
Facilitation quality + space holding + conflict resolution (communities)
Story amplification + partnership development + fundraising (ambassadors)
This flexibility is critical: Different communities value different contributions. Artist collectives weight creative output differently than tech teams. Holonic Funding doesn't impose values—it provides infrastructure for communities to encode their own.
Role Composability
Contributors can wear multiple hats (developer + ambassador + strategist) with contributions tracked across roles. The system handles complexity transparently rather than forcing artificial simplification.
A person isn't just "a developer" or "an ambassador"—they're a multi-faceted contributor whose varied work is visible and valued.
3. Technical Architecture
3.1 System Components
Core Smart Contracts
Holon Contract
Identity and reputation registry
Resource balance tracking (multi-asset)
Inflow/outflow configuration
Federation membership
Commitment registry
Splitter Contract
Configurable distribution logic
Dual-mechanism routing (internal + external)
Adjustable allocation dial (0-100%)
Overflow handling
Threshold Flow Contract
Minimum and maximum thresholds
Accumulation and overflow logic
Multi-round distribution
Convergence optimization
Value Equation Module
Contribution type weighting
Point calculation logic
Time-decay functions (optional)
Outcome validation hooks
Federation Contract
Multi-Holon coordination
Shared pool management
Trust graph representation
Access propagation rules
Commitment Registry
Promise publication
Validation workflows
Reputation updates
Outcome linking
3.2 Distribution Mechanisms
Mechanism A: Internal Flows (Direct Contribution Rewards)
Purpose: Reward direct value creation within a Holon
Process:
Contributors log activities (hours, outcomes, appreciations)
Value equation calculates contribution points
Resources allocated proportionally at epoch end
Example Value Equation:
Configurability: Each Holon sets its own weights based on what it values.
Mechanism B: External Flows (Collaborative Network Rewards)
Purpose: Reward relationship-building and ecosystem participation
Process:
Holons declare relational priorities (which partners they value)
Incoming resources weighted by relational signals
Resources distributed to ecosystem partners
Strengthens network bonds
Relational Zones:
Bilateral relationships between Holons
"I value X's storytelling → direct 10% of flow to X"
Reciprocal value recognition builds trust
Network Effects:
More connected Holons attract more resources
Relationship-building becomes economically rewarded
Network density increases over time
Splitter Configuration
The Dial: 0-100% determines split between Mechanism A and B
0% → All resources to internal contributors (siloed)
50% → Balanced internal/external flows
100% → All resources to ecosystem (pure collaboration)
Communities adjust based on their stage:
Early stage: High internal (build capacity)
Growth stage: Balanced (build + connect)
Mature stage: High external (ecosystem investment)
3.3 Simulation Results
Threshold-based flow funding has been modeled showing:
95% minimum needs coverage even with only 60% of required capital
Network convergence in 3-5 rounds of distribution
Superior equality (lower Gini coefficient) compared to simple allocation models
Scalability to 1000+ node networks without performance degradation
Key Finding: Smart redistribution through overflow logic enables networks to sustain members even during resource scarcity.
3.4 Integration Points
Blockchain Layer
EVM-compatible chains (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, Base)
Integration with Inverter Protocol for workflow orchestration
Cross-chain compatibility through bridge protocols
Identity Layer
Ad4m DID integration for decentralized identity
Sybil resistance through proof of personhood (optional)
Reputation tracking across contexts
Frontend Interfaces
Web application for Holon management
Mobile app for contribution tracking
API for third-party integrations
Data Layer
IPFS for decentralized storage
The Graph for event indexing
Local-first with p2p sync (Perspectives)
4. Tokenomics & Value Representation
4.1 The Resource Visibility Challenge
Traditional financial systems abstract complexity through money—"this costs $40, that costs $50"—hiding whether something was produced locally by 3D printer or shipped globally using exploited labor.
Holonic Funding deliberately goes "one step below" monetary abstraction to make resource flows visible.
This creates tension: the power of money comes from its simplification, but that simplification creates the problems we're solving. We must make complexity navigable without overwhelming users.
4.2 Token Model: Fixed Allocation with Contribution-Based Distribution
Monthly Token Allocation:
Fixed pool released per epoch (e.g., 10,000 tokens/month)
Algorithmic adjustment based on network activity
Distribution governed by contribution ratios within each Holon
How It Works:
Network Release: 10,000 tokens issued to federated Holons
Inter-Holon Allocation: Governance allocates between Holons
Example: 50% to Development, 20% to Community, 20% to Partnerships, 10% to Operations
Based on value created and network needs
Intra-Holon Distribution: Within each Holon, tokens distributed based on contribution tracking
Multi-Purpose Tokens: Same tokens work for monetary resources, physical resources, access rights, discounts
Why Fixed Allocation:
Avoids security token classification (not issuing equity)
Enables value capture during periods of zero monetary inflow
Creates scarcity and incentives for value creation
Allows market to discover token value
Simpler governance (adjust rate, not individual issuances)
4.3 Commitment-Outcome Architecture
Alternative to pure "hours worked" tracking:
Structure:
Commitments → Specific outcomes promised to the network
Execution → Work performed toward outcomes
Validation → Community verifies completion
Minting → Tokens issued upon successful validation
Advantages:
Ties compensation to results, not just effort
Creates visible "trees of executed tasks" for external evaluation
Natural bounty system emerges
Clearer for partnership and funding evaluation
Builds reputation based on delivery
Validation Methods:
Peer review (community validates)
Objective criteria (code merged, document published)
Oracle data (third-party verification)
Time-based (commitment + time threshold = auto-validate)
4.4 The Stability Requirement
User Need: "If I do this work, I need to know I'll receive THIS value."
Challenge: Protocol tokens fluctuate with markets, creating unpredictability.
Dual-Token Approach:
Compensation Layer (Stable)
Stablecoins (USDC, DAI) for predictable value
Resource guarantees (housing, food, tools)
Immediate value realization
Coordination Layer (Protocol Tokens)
Governance rights
Access to network resources
Relationship representation
Reputation tracking
Speculation Layer (Optional)
Market-traded protocol tokens
For those who want upside exposure
Separated from compensation needs
This separation enables:
Contributors get predictable value for work
Network coordination through protocol tokens
Market discovery of protocol value
Risk separation (stable income vs. venture upside)
4.5 Revenue Share vs. Profit Share
Traditional Approach: Profit Share
Revenue minus costs = distributable profit
Simple to calculate
Hides resource flows
Forces monetary accounting
Problem: Two shoes cost $40 vs $50—no visibility into whether one was produced locally by 3D printer or shipped globally using exploited labor. Economic choice based only on price.
Holonic Approach: Revenue Share with Resource Visibility
Track actual inputs (time, space, materials, capital, relationships)
Communities define what counts as contribution vs. cost
Resource pooling shifts ratios naturally (land + time + money → shared outcome)
More complex but more fair and transparent
Example:
Liminal Village contributes space ($20K/year value)
Developer contributes 1,000 hours ($100K/year value)
Funder contributes $30K capital
Network Total: $150K value pooled
Revenue share: 13% to space, 67% to developer, 20% to capital
Profit share would hide these contributions behind "costs"
Why This Matters:
Makes non-monetary contributions economically visible
Enables resource pooling (not just monetary investment)
Creates fair distribution across contribution types
Reveals true cost of value creation (environmental, social)
4.6 Addressing the Bootstrap Period
Reality: Early phase has work happening but minimal monetary inflow.
Token Solution:
Tokens issued based on contributions (work, resources, outcomes)
Value uncertain but tracked transparently
Acts as "sweat equity" with cryptographic verification
Multiple realization points:
Internal network: Exchange for resources (space, tools, services)
External markets: If tokens trade on exchanges
Fiat conversion: When monetary resources flow in
Resource access: Direct redemption within federation
Risk Disclosure:
Early contributors are taking venture risk. This must be made explicit:
Tokens may have zero value if project fails
Recommend hybrid compensation (some stable resources + token upside)
Clear scenarios: best case, worst case, expected case
Regular evaluation cycles (monthly/quarterly) with exit options
Transparent modeling of potential outcomes
Why Honesty Matters:
Building trust requires acknowledging reality. Early contributors aren't "employees getting paid"—they're co-creators taking entrepreneurial risk. Making this explicit:
Attracts the right people (aligned with vision, comfortable with uncertainty)
Prevents resentment (everyone knew the terms)
Creates realistic expectations (not promises of guaranteed returns)
Builds community solidarity (we're in this together)
4.7 Governance Minimization
Distribution requires some governance, but we minimize it:
Protocol-Level Decisions (Algorithmic):
Token release rate
Contribution validation methods
Overflow and threshold logic
Access propagation rules
Community-Level Decisions (Quarterly Review):
Inter-Holon allocation ratios
Value equation parameters
Partnership priorities
Network membership
Individual-Level Decisions (Autonomous):
Intra-Holon distribution
Splitter dial position
Relational priority signaling
Commitment publication
Goal: Embed rules in protocol, not in recurring meetings. Governance as constitutional layer (rules about rules), not operational layer (deciding every transaction).
Why This Works:
Reduces coordination overhead
Enables autonomous operation
Maintains flexibility where needed
Prevents governance capture
4.8 Implementation Pragmatism
The Complexity Trade-off:
We're making visible what current systems hide. This is both our strength (fairness, transparency) and our challenge (cognitive load).
Phased Simplicity:
Phase 1: Simple Profit Share (Months 1-6)
Get communities coordinating financially at all
Basic contribution tracking (hours, appreciations)
Monthly distribution based on simple ratios
Single token type
Builds trust and proves concept
Goal: Demonstrate immediate value without overwhelming complexity.
Phase 2: Resource Visibility (Months 6-12)
Add non-monetary resource tracking
Enable resource pooling (space + time + capital)
Revenue share with visible contributions
Federation begins (2-3 Holons connecting)
Goal: Show how multi-resource coordination creates new possibilities.
Phase 3: Full Holonic Coordination (Year 2+)
Commitment-outcome trees
Complex value equations
Multi-token systems
Cross-network propagation
Algorithmic governance
Goal: Deliver the full vision for sophisticated networks.
Critical Principle: Each phase must provide standalone value. Don't promise Phase 3 capabilities while delivering Phase 1. Build trust incrementally.
Templates Over Configuration:
Rather than exposing all complexity, provide:
Co-op Template
Equal shares, simple profit split
Democratic governance
Member-owned resources
Project Template
Outcome-based bounties
Milestone payments
Contributor reputation
Community Template
Resource pooling
Needs-based distribution
Mutual aid focus
DAO Template
Token-weighted governance
Treasury management
Proposal workflows
Users start with templates, customize as they understand the system.
5. Real-World Validation
5.1 Liminal Village: Living Laboratory
The core principles have been tested at Liminal Village, a regenerative community in Portugal, where:
Multi-resource coordination practiced (housing, food, expertise, time)
Tensions between monetary and non-monetary value directly experienced
Contribution tracking needs validated through actual community operation
Limitations of existing tools (Notion, spreadsheets, verbal agreements) painfully clear
Key Learnings:
1. The Ambassador Role Validation
Communities need people building relationships and telling their story to attract resources—but traditional employment can't fund this until success is proven (catch-22).
Example: Developer working on Holonic Funding needs to build partnerships, tell the story, attract funders. This work creates immense value but generates no immediate revenue. Traditional employment would require revenue first.
Holonic Solution: Sweat equity tracking enables this critical role. Contributions recorded, value recognized within network, reputation built. When resources flow, early relationship-building is rewarded.
2. Resource Mismatch in Practice
Village has abundant space and resources but needs small amounts of cash for specific needs (utilities, supplies). Contributors need stability but the village can't pay traditional salaries.
The Impasse: "I need $3000/month" meets "I have space worth $1000/month but only $500 cash."
Traditional Finance Response: "Sorry, doesn't work."
Holonic Response: "You receive $500 + space + food + community ($1500 equivalent) + sweat equity tokens for future upside. Total package: $2000 current + future upside."
Not perfect, but enables coordination where traditional finance creates deadlock.
3. Trust Before Scale
Small networks (5-20 people) need working internal coordination before they'll invest in larger network participation.
Implication: Must prove value locally before promising federation benefits. Single-Holon utility must be compelling standalone. Network effects are progressive enhancement, not requirement.
4. Sweat Equity Without Infrastructure Breeds Resentment
Contributors working on "sweat equity" basis without actual tracking system experience:
Uncertainty about whether/when contributions will be valued
Feeling exploited when approaching personal financial limits
Tension between believing in vision and needing to survive
Lack of clarity about what success looks like
Critical Insight: Contribution tracking can't be a "future feature"—it must be Day 1 infrastructure. Even simple system (spreadsheet + smart contract) beats having nothing. Trust requires proof.
5. Role Complexity Is Real
Modern work is multi-faceted (ambassador + developer + strategist + storyteller + relationship-builder) but payment systems want single-role simplicity.
Example: Same person builds code, facilitates partnerships, tells the story, designs architecture. Which role are they? All of them. System must handle this without bureaucratic overhead.
Solution: Multi-role contribution tracking with clear value equations. System handles complexity transparently rather than forcing artificial simplification.
5.2 Technical Development Status
Theoretical Framework
"The Holonic Experience" articulates four interconnected layers: collective intelligence, storytelling, decision making, action
Biological analogies validate approach (cellular networks, immune systems)
Philosophical foundation connects to holarchies and systems thinking
Smart Contract Architecture
Dual-mechanism splitter contracts (internal + external flows)
Configurable value equations for contribution tracking
Threshold-based flow distribution logic
Integration design with Inverter Protocol
Simulation Validation
Threshold-based flow funding modeled extensively
95% minimum needs coverage with 60% capital
3-5 round convergence
Scalability to 1000+ nodes demonstrated
5.3 Current Phase: Pre-Deployment
Status: Core smart contract modules in development. Integration architecture defined. Pilot partners identified.
What's Ready:
Conceptual framework validated through lived experience
Smart contract architecture designed
Simulation results validate viability
Partnership discussions underway
Team experiencing the coordination challenges we're solving (unique validation)
What's Needed:
Complete smart contract development and security auditing
User interface for Holon management
Pilot deployments with 3-5 design partners
Documentation and onboarding materials
Legal structure and compliance framework
5.4 Traction Indicators
Holonic coordination principles tested in federated community networks
Interest expressed by multiple bioregional hubs and regenerative villages
Technical framework documented and peer-reviewed within Web3 coordination circles
Strong demand signal for non-speculative community coordination mechanisms
First-mover advantage: no comparable system provides relational funding logic with modular flow control
Critical Validation: The team is experiencing the exact problems we're solving. If we can't coordinate our own resources fairly, the system isn't ready. Our internal struggle validates both the problem's reality and our unique qualification to solve it.
6. Market Opportunity
6.1 Target Markets
Holonic Funding addresses needs at the intersection of multiple emerging sectors:
Primary Markets
Regenerative Villages & Bioregional Networks
1,000+ intentional communities globally
Growing rapidly post-COVID
Need coordination infrastructure
Values-aligned with our approach
Mission-Driven DAOs and Web3 Collectives
10,000+ DAOs active
~$20B in treasuries
Seeking alternatives to token-weighted governance
Need contributor coordination tools
Platform Cooperatives
500+ platform co-ops globally
$3T+ cooperative sector
Need federated resource sharing
Forced to use traditional finance tools
Nonprofits with Multi-Stakeholder Structures
1.5M+ nonprofits in US alone
Increasingly collaborative models
Grant funding requires partnership coordination
Need transparency and impact tracking
Community Land Trusts & Shared Resource Networks
Growing movement for commons-based property
Complex multi-stakeholder governance needs
Resource sharing across properties
Need trust infrastructure
Adjacent Markets
Alternative governance / DAO tooling ($300M+ annually)
Digital commons infrastructure
Regenerative finance (ReFi) ecosystem
Impact networks & bioregional coordination
Local exchange and mutual credit systems
Open-source funding mechanisms
6.2 Market Sizing
Total Addressable Market (TAM):
Global cooperative sector: $3+ trillion in assets
DAO treasuries under management: ~$20 billion
Impact investing market: $1+ trillion
Community foundations and mutual aid: $50+ billion annually
Platform cooperative economy: Growing 20%+ annually
Serviceable Addressable Market (SAM):
Organizations actively seeking alternative coordination tools
Communities practicing regenerative economics
Networks requiring federated resource sharing
Estimated $50-100B in resources needing coordination infrastructure
Serviceable Obtainable Market (SOM):
Year 1: 50-100 early adopter communities (10,000-20,000 users)
Year 3: 500-1,000 organizations (100,000-200,000 users)
Year 5: 5,000+ organizations (1M+ users)
6.3 Market Dynamics
Tailwinds:
DAO governance fatigue creating demand for autonomy-preserving coordination
Climate action requiring bioregional resource coordination at scale
Web3 maturation moving beyond speculation toward real coordination infrastructure
Deglobalization increasing importance of local and regional economic networks
Commons movement needing technical infrastructure for shared resource management
Growing awareness that hierarchical organizations can't solve networked problems
Why Now:
Web3 infrastructure mature enough to support complex coordination
Communities experienced enough with DAOs to know what doesn't work
COVID accelerated remote coordination needs and distributed work models
Climate crisis creating urgency for regenerative coordination
Sufficient examples of coordination failure to validate the problem
6.4 Competitive Landscape
No direct competitors provide relational funding logic with modular flow control.
Adjacent tools address fragments:
Treasury Management
Gnosis Safe, Parcel, Multis
What they do: Multi-sig wallets for collective fund management
What they lack: Autonomous flow logic, contribution tracking, multi-resource coordination
Contribution Tracking
Coordinape, SourceCred, Praise
What they do: Track contributions, calculate rewards
What they lack: Automatic distribution, federation, resource sharing beyond tokens
Workflow Orchestration
Inverter, Allo Protocol
What they do: Fund distribution workflows, milestone-based payments
What they lack: Holonic federation, relational economics, multi-resource tracking
Community Platforms
Hylo, Loomio, Discord/Telegram
What they do: Communication and governance discussion
What they lack: Economic coordination, resource tracking, automatic distribution
Traditional Platforms
Slack, Notion, Asana + Stripe/PayPal
What they do: Work coordination + payment processing
What they lack: Contribution tracking, federated coordination, non-monetary resources
6.5 Our Competitive Advantage
Holonic Funding is the only system integrating:
Autonomous resource distribution
Federated trust networks
Multi-resource coordination (beyond tokens)
Relational economics
Configurable value equations
Commitment-based reputation
Composable primitives
Into a single, interoperable infrastructure layer.
Additionally:
First-mover advantage in relational funding
Validated by lived experience (not just theory)
Solving coordination problems we directly face
Strong technical foundation (simulations prove viability)
Values-aligned with target markets
Network effects create defensibility
Barrier to Entry:
Complexity of building trust infrastructure
Need for deep coordination expertise
Requires lived experience with the problems
Technical sophistication (smart contracts + UX)
Community building (can't just build and ship)
7. Business Model
7.1 Revenue Streams
Primary: SaaS Subscription + Protocol Fees
Tiered subscription model with optional protocol fee participation:
Basic Tier (Free for Small Groups)
Single Holon coordination (up to 10 members)
Simple contribution tracking
Template-based setup
Community support
Revenue: $0 (freemium entry point)
Professional Tier ($50-200/month)
Multi-Holon federation (up to 100 members)
Custom value equations
Advanced primitives
Priority support
Analytics dashboard
Revenue: Average $100/month per org
Enterprise Tier ($500-2,000/month)
Large network coordination (unlimited members)
Dedicated integration support
Custom module development
SLA guarantees
White-label options
Revenue: Average $1,000/month per network
Protocol Fee Option (0.5-1%)
Optional fee on monetary flows through the system
Shared back with protocol token holders (regenerative model)
Only applicable to fiat/crypto transactions, not resource exchanges
Users opt-in by holding protocol tokens
Revenue: Variable based on network transaction volume
Secondary: Premium Modules & Services
Premium Modules ($50-500/month each)
Advanced analytics and forecasting
Specialized primitives (industry-specific)
Integration packages (existing tools)
Custom reporting
Professional Services ($150-300/hour)
Onboarding and training
Custom architecture design
Partnership structuring
Technical consulting
Future: Module Marketplace
User-created coordination primitives
Revenue share: 70% creator, 30% platform
Curation and quality assurance
Open-source encouraged but monetization enabled
Revenue: Percentage of third-party sales
7.2 Revenue Projections
Conservative Scenario (5 Years)
1
50
2,500
$5K
$2K
$84K
2
200
10,000
$25K
$15K
$480K
3
1,000
50,000
$125K
$75K
$2.4M
4
3,000
150,000
$400K
$250K
$7.8M
5
10,000
500,000
$1.2M
$800K
$24M
Assumptions:
Average $120/month per organization
Protocol fees average 0.5% on $500K/month network volume by Year 5
Conservative adoption rate (20% annual churn)
Premium services and modules not included
Optimistic Scenario: 2-3x these numbers if network effects accelerate adoption.
7.3 Why This Model Works
Immediate Revenue
SaaS subscriptions from day one
Not dependent on token speculation
Predictable, recurring revenue
Aligned Incentives
Protocol fees only matter when users succeed (move real resources)
Higher tier subscriptions reflect higher value received
Premium modules address specific needs (not forced upgrades)
Network Effects
More Holons = more value to each Holon = higher tier subscriptions
More users = more module demand = marketplace growth
More coordination = more protocol fees = more token value
Not Token-Dependent
Business viable even if protocol tokens don't achieve high market value
Revenue from actual value delivery, not speculation
Sustainable even in crypto bear markets
Regenerative Model
Protocol fees shared with token holders
Success feeds back to community
Early contributors benefit from long-term value creation
7.4 Unit Economics
Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC): $500-1,000
Content marketing
Community building
Pilot programs
Word of mouth (later)
Lifetime Value (LTV): $3,000-10,000
Average 2-5 year retention
Upsells to higher tiers
Premium modules
Protocol fees accumulation
LTV:CAC Ratio: 3:1 to 10:1 (strong economics)
Payback Period: 6-12 months
7.5 Go-to-Market Strategy
Phase 1: Anchor Deployments (Months 1-12)
Strategy: Deploy with 3-5 regenerative communities as design partners
Activities:
Deep engagement, co-creation approach
Document learnings publicly
Build case studies and testimonials
Iterate rapidly on feedback
Free or heavily discounted during pilot
Goal: Prove product-market fit, gather detailed feedback, create reference customers
Phase 2: Ecosystem Expansion (Year 2)
Strategy: Target Web3 communities, platform co-ops, progressive foundations
Activities:
Content marketing (blog, podcasts, workshops)
Conference presence (ReFi, DAO, cooperative summits)
Partnership with adjacent platforms (Coordinape, Inverter)
Community-led growth (champions program)
Goal: Reach 200 organizations, establish category presence
Phase 3: Sector Penetration (Year 3+)
Strategy: Scale to nonprofits, impact networks, civic infrastructure
Activities:
Sales team for enterprise customers
Integration marketplace launch
Certification program for consultants
Regional ambassadors for localization
Goal: Establish as standard coordination layer, path to profitability
8. Implementation Roadmap
8.1 Phase 1: Foundation (Months 1-6) - $500K Funding
Technical Development
✅ Complete core smart contracts
Holon registry and identity
Splitter contracts (dual-mechanism)
Threshold flow logic
Value equation modules
✅ Security audit (Trail of Bits or similar)
✅ Testnet deployment (Polygon Mumbai or similar)
✅ Basic web interface for Holon management
Pilot Programs
✅ 3 design partner communities identified
✅ Weekly co-creation sessions
✅ Iteration cycles every 2 weeks
✅ Document learnings publicly
Team
✅ Hire: Lead smart contract developer
✅ Hire: Frontend developer
✅ Hire: Community coordinator
✅ Establish: Legal entity and compliance framework
Milestones:
Smart contracts audited and deployed on testnet
3 pilot communities using the system
$10K+ in resources coordinated through platform
Validated product-market fit with qualitative evidence
8.2 Phase 2: Growth (Months 6-18) - $750K Additional Funding
Technical Development
✅ Mainnet deployment
✅ Mobile app for contribution tracking
✅ Integration with Inverter Protocol
✅ Template library (co-op, project, community, DAO)
✅ Analytics dashboard
✅ Federation features (cross-Holon coordination)
Market Expansion
✅ 50 organizations onboarded
✅ 10,000 users coordinating resources
✅ $500K+ in resources flowing through system
✅ Case studies and documentation published
Team Growth
✅ Hire: Backend engineer
✅ Hire: UX/UI designer
✅ Hire: Content marketer
✅ Hire: Customer success lead
✅ Engage: Legal/compliance counsel
Revenue
✅ First paying customers (Professional tier)
✅ $5K+ MRR by Month 18
✅ Clear path to profitability defined
Milestones:
50 organizations actively using platform
$500K+ coordinated resources
$5K MRR from subscriptions
Strong qualitative validation (testimonials, case studies)
8.3 Phase 3: Scale (Months 18-36) - $1.5M Additional Funding
Technical Development
✅ Commitment-outcome system fully deployed
✅ Advanced analytics and forecasting
✅ Module marketplace launch
✅ API for third-party integrations
✅ Multi-chain support
Market Penetration
✅ 500 organizations
✅ 100,000 users
✅ $10M+ coordinated resources
✅ Geographic expansion (Europe, Asia, Latin America)
Team Scaling
✅ 15-20 person team
✅ Regional community managers
✅ Sales team for enterprise
✅ Developer relations
Revenue
✅ $125K+ MRR
✅ $1.5M+ ARR
✅ Path to profitability clear
✅ Series A positioning established
Milestones:
Category leadership established
Strong network effects visible
Path to $10M ARR clear
International presence
8.4 Phase 4: Leadership (Year 3-5)
Vision:
10,000+ organizations
500,000+ users
$1B+ coordinated resources annually
Standard coordination layer for regenerative economies
Self-sustaining ecosystem of module creators
Profitable, sustainable business
9. Risks & Mitigation
9.1 Adoption Challenge (Chicken-Egg Problem)
Risk: Networks need critical mass to provide value, but reaching critical mass requires initial adopters.
Severity: High
Mitigation:
Anchor deployments with existing communities (regenerative villages, established co-ops) that have critical mass internally
Design for immediate value even at small scale—single-Holon utility must be compelling standalone
Federation benefits kick in gradually as networks grow, not as requirement for initial value
Free tier reduces barrier to experimentation
Templates provide quick-start value without configuration burden
Status: Pilot partners identified, freemium model designed
9.2 The Bootstrapping Paradox
Risk: Building coordination infrastructure requires sustained effort, but contributors need resources to survive during development.
Severity: High (existential for team)
Reality: This is the exact problem Holonic Funding solves—but we face it ourselves in building the solution. The team experiences firsthand the tension between "we need money to live" and "we're building a system that transcends money dependency."
Mitigation:
Hybrid approach: Use traditional funding (grants, investment) to bootstrap, while practicing Holonic principles internally
Sweat equity tracking from day one: Even without full system deployment, track all contributions to honor early builders when resources flow
Transparent agreements: Clear terms about how early contributors benefit as the system succeeds
Staged value capture: Design multiple inflection points where contributors can realize value (not just waiting for "exit")
Community investment: Engage regenerative finance community members who understand long-term systemic value
This risk is also validation: If we can't solve our own coordination challenges, the system isn't ready for others. The struggle makes us better builders.
Status: Internal contribution tracking implemented, clear agreements with team members
9.3 Paradigm Resistance
Risk: The system requires users to think differently about value—not everyone will make this shift easily.
Severity: Medium
The Challenge: Most people are trained to think: "I have an empty room → I need cash → I must charge market rate." Holonic Funding asks them to think: "I have an empty room → This person creates value for the network → Network membership has value → Resource exchange makes sense."
Mitigation:
Start with values-aligned communities (regenerative villages, co-ops) already questioning current systems
Demonstrate immediate tangible benefits (resource access, reduced overhead, better coordination)
Make monetary benefits clear when they exist (reduce costs, increase coordination efficiency, attract funding)
Progressive onboarding: Start simple (Phase 1), add complexity as understanding deepens (Phases 2-3)
Champion/ambassador program to model the shift for others
Success stories showing concrete results, not just theory
Key Insight: This isn't a bug, it's a feature. The paradigm shift is precisely what enables systemic change—but it means early adoption will be among those already questioning current systems.
Status: Marketing focused on early adopter communities, pilot partners values-aligned
9.4 Technical Complexity
Risk: System may be too abstract or complex for average users to configure effectively.
Severity: Medium
Mitigation:
Pre-built templates for common use cases (co-op, village, DAO, project)
Guided setup workflows with smart defaults
Professional services for complex implementations
Progressive disclosure of advanced features (simple first, complexity optional)
Community-created modules means specialists can build for specific needs
Documentation and training materials for different user types
Status: Template library designed, UX principles established, professional services model planned
9.5 Regulatory Uncertainty
Risk: Resource coordination and flow automation may face regulatory scrutiny depending on jurisdiction and resource types.
Severity: Medium to High (varies by jurisdiction)
Mitigation:
Conservative legal structure establishment from day one
Engage regulatory advisors early (crypto, securities, money transmission)
Design for compliance (KYC/AML where required, reporting capabilities)
Geographic phasing based on regulatory clarity (start in favorable jurisdictions)
Resource separation (different rules for money vs physical resources)
Clear disclosures about legal status and limitations
Specific Concerns:
Security token classification: Fixed allocation model avoids this, but need legal opinion
Money transmission: May need licenses in some jurisdictions for monetary flows
Tax implications: Resource exchange may have tax consequences users need to understand
Status: Legal entity formation in progress, regulatory counsel engaged, compliance framework being designed
9.6 Web3 Skepticism
Risk: Association with Web3/crypto may deter mainstream community adoption.
Severity: Low to Medium
Mitigation:
Emphasize real coordination benefits over blockchain features in marketing
Abstract technical complexity from user experience (they don't need to know it's blockchain)
Target communities already aligned with decentralization values
Demonstrate tangible outcomes through pilot programs (show, don't tell)
Avoid crypto jargon in user-facing materials
Focus on impact: "coordinate resources fairly" not "decentralized autonomous organizations"
Status: Messaging strategy focused on outcomes, not technology
9.7 Network Effects Timing
Risk: Value increases with network size, but building network takes time—users may leave before network effects materialize.
Severity: Medium
Mitigation:
Immediate single-Holon value (doesn't require network to be useful)
Quick wins in first 30 days of use
Regular value delivery (monthly distributions, visible contributions, etc.)
Community building around shared values (retention through culture, not just features)
Freemium model reduces cost of waiting for network effects
Status: Product designed for immediate value, community strategy in development
9.8 Smart Contract Risk
Risk: Bugs or vulnerabilities in smart contracts could result in loss of funds or system failure.
Severity: High (catastrophic if realized)
Mitigation:
Professional security audit by reputable firm (Trail of Bits, OpenZeppelin, etc.)
Formal verification of critical contract logic
Bug bounty program for community security researchers
Gradual rollout starting with small amounts at risk
Insurance for smart contract coverage (Nexus Mutual, Unslashed, etc.)
Upgradeability through proxy patterns (balanced with decentralization)
Emergency pause functionality for critical situations
Status: Security audit budgeted and planned, best practices research completed
10. Team & Governance
10.1 Current Team
Roberto Valenti - Founder & System Architect
Developer of Holons System and Liminal Village founder
10+ years experience in systems thinking and coordination technology
Deep expertise in holonic principles and distributed systems
Living the problems we're solving (validation through experience)
Simon Q - Ambassador & Partnerships
Building relationships with regenerative communities and funders
Storytelling and strategic communication
Partnership development and network weaving
Experienced coordinator in regenerative spaces
[Additional team members to be added based on your actual team]
10.2 Roles to Fill (Seed Funding)
Lead Smart Contract Developer
Complete core contracts and primitives
Security best practices
Gas optimization
Solidity expert
Frontend Developer
Web application for Holon management
React/Next.js experience
Web3 integration (wagmi, viem)
UX sensibility
Backend Engineer
API development
Database design
Integration management
Scalability focus
Community Coordinator
Pilot program management
User onboarding and support
Feedback synthesis
Documentation
UX/UI Designer
Make complexity navigable
Template design
User flows
Visual identity
10.3 Advisory Board (To Be Established)
Technical Advisors
Smart contract security expert
Distributed systems architect
Tokenomics specialist
Domain Advisors
Regenerative economics practitioner
Platform cooperative leader
DAO governance expert
Impact measurement specialist
Business Advisors
Web3 go-to-market strategist
SaaS business model expert
Legal/compliance counsel
10.4 Governance Structure
Current Stage: Founders Lead
Clear decision-making for speed
Transparent communication of decisions
Open feedback loops with community
Benevolent dictatorship while building
Post-Launch: Progressive Decentralization
Protocol governance through token holders
Operational autonomy for team
Community input on strategic decisions
Clear separation: protocol layer (decentralized) vs. business layer (centralized)
Long-term Vision: Protocol Commons
Core protocol governed by token holders
Business operates as protocol participant
Multiple organizations building on protocol
Commons-based governance for shared infrastructure
11. Investment Opportunity
11.1 Current Funding Need: $750K - $1.5M Seed Round
Use of Funds:
Technical Development (45% - $340K-675K)
Smart contract development and optimization
Security audits (2 firms for critical components)
Frontend and backend development
Integration with existing protocols
Mobile app development
Pilot Deployments (20% - $150K-300K)
3-5 design partner engagements
Integration assistance and customization
Weekly co-creation sessions
Iteration resources
Success measurement and documentation
Team (25% - $190K-375K)
3-5 core team members (developers, designer, community coordinator)
Competitive salaries for crypto/Web3 talent
Benefits and contractor support
Advisor compensation
Operations & Legal (10% - $75K-150K)
Entity formation and legal structure
Regulatory compliance (securities, money transmission)
Accounting and financial systems
Insurance (liability, smart contract)
General operations
11.2 Milestones This Funding Enables (12-18 Months)
Technical:
✅ Audited smart contract suite deployed on mainnet
✅ Production-ready web application
✅ Mobile app for contribution tracking
✅ Integration with key protocols (Inverter, etc.)
✅ Template library for common use cases
Traction:
✅ 50-100 active organizations using the platform
✅ 5,000-10,000 users coordinating resources
✅ $500K-1M in resources coordinated through system
✅ Clear product-market fit validation
Business:
✅ First paying customers (Professional tier)
✅ $5K-10K MRR from subscriptions
✅ Validated pricing and business model
✅ Clear path to profitability established
✅ Series A positioning (metrics, narrative, investors engaged)
Community:
✅ Case studies and testimonials published
✅ Active community of practitioners
✅ Developer ecosystem emerging
✅ Thought leadership established in space
11.3 Path to Profitability
Revenue Trajectory:
Month 6: First paying customers ($1K MRR)
Month 12: Early traction ($5K MRR)
Month 18: Growth validation ($10K MRR)
Month 24: Scale beginning ($25K MRR)
Month 36: Profitability threshold ($100K MRR)
Unit Economics:
Customer acquisition improving as word-of-mouth grows
Lifetime value increasing as federation network effects kick in
Margins improving as platform scales
Protocol fees becoming meaningful at scale
Profitability Timeline: 36-48 months with this funding level
11.4 Series A Positioning (18-24 Months)
Metrics for Series A:
500-1,000 organizations
50,000-100,000 users
$50K-100K MRR
Strong retention (>90% annual)
Clear network effects (federation growth)
Category leadership established
Series A Use:
Scale go-to-market (sales team, marketing)
International expansion
Advanced features (commitment-outcome, analytics)
Module marketplace launch
Team scale to 15-20 people
Series A Size: $3M-5M
11.5 Investor Value Proposition
For Impact Investors:
Systemic leverage: Infrastructure enables regenerative coordination at scale
Theory of change: Make commons-based resource coordination practical
Measurable impact: Resources coordinated, communities empowered, carbon reduced
Aligned values: Not extractive, regenerative by design
For Web3 Investors:
First-mover advantage: No comparable relational funding infrastructure
Network effects: Value compounds as more Holons join
Platform economics: SaaS + protocol fees + marketplace = multiple revenue streams
Defensibility: Deep coordination expertise + community + technical complexity
Market timing: DAO fatigue creates opening for better coordination tools
For Strategic Investors:
Platform leverage: Build on our infrastructure (Inverter, Gnosis, etc.)
Ecosystem growth: More coordination tools = more Web3 adoption
Mission alignment: Share vision for regenerative, decentralized economies
Early positioning: Ground floor of new coordination paradigm
For Financial Investors:
Large TAM: $50B+ in resources needing coordination infrastructure
Strong unit economics: 3:1+ LTV:CAC, 6-12 month payback
Clear path to profitability: 36-48 months
Multiple exit paths: Strategic acquisition, public markets (long-term), sustainability as profitable business
Reasonable valuation: Seed stage with clear milestones
11.6 Investment Terms
Structure: SAFE or Priced Round (flexible based on investor preference)
Valuation: $3M-5M pre-money (negotiable based on investor value-add)
Use of Funds: As detailed above (45% tech, 20% pilots, 25% team, 10% ops)
Investor Rights:
Board observer seat (lead investor)
Information rights
Pro-rata rights for future rounds
Standard protective provisions
Token Allocation (if applicable):
Team: 25%
Early contributors: 10%
Investors: 20%
Community/Ecosystem: 30%
Foundation/Treasury: 15%
(Subject to tokenomics design and legal structure)
11.7 What We're Looking For in Partners
Essential:
Mission alignment: Understand and value regenerative, commons-based coordination
Patience: This is infrastructure—network effects take time
Strategic value: Connections to pilot communities, Web3 ecosystem, or regulatory expertise
Long-term thinking: 5-10 year horizon, not 2-year flip
Ideal:
Experience with Web3 infrastructure investments
Connections to regenerative finance community
Understanding of DAO/cooperative governance
Hands-on support (not just capital)
Deal-breakers:
Expectation of quick exit
Push for extractive business model
Misalignment with values (purely financial motivation)
Unrealistic timeline pressure
11.8 Current Status & Momentum
Funding Status:
Seeking lead investor for $750K-1.5M seed round
Interest from [X regenerative funds] and [Y Web3 investors]
In conversation with [Z strategic partners]
Timeline:
Target close: [Q1/Q2 2025]
Start development immediately upon funding
Pilot programs launch: [3-6 months post-funding]
Series A raise: [18-24 months post-funding]
12. Conclusion
12.1 The Opportunity
We stand at a unique moment in history:
Web3 infrastructure is mature enough to support complex coordination
DAO experiments have revealed what doesn't work, creating demand for alternatives
Climate crisis makes regenerative coordination urgent
Deglobalization increases importance of local economic networks
Coordination failure is increasingly recognized as the bottleneck for collective action
Holonic Funding provides the missing infrastructure layer for this transition.
12.2 What We're Building
Not a product. Not a tool. An economic operating system for the next era of coordination.
A system where:
Communities coordinate resources fluidly across organizational boundaries
Value creation is visible and fairly rewarded, even when non-monetary
Trust builds through transparent contribution and delivery
Autonomy is preserved while enabling powerful collective action
Relationships become economically meaningful
Resource flows follow value, not just financial circuits
12.3 Why We Can Win
1. Deep Understanding
We're not theorizing about coordination problems—we're living them. The tension in our own team validates the problem while informing our solution. Our struggle is our competitive advantage.
2. Technical Innovation
No existing system provides relational funding logic with modular flow control. We've designed and simulated the architecture. We know it works.
3. Values Alignment
Our target markets share our vision. We're building for communities we're part of. This creates authentic relationships and natural network growth.
4. First-Mover Advantage
Category is emerging but undefined. We can establish the standard for holonic coordination infrastructure.
5. Network Effects
Each new Holon makes the network more valuable to all participants. Federation creates compounding returns.
6. Practical Path
We're not waiting for utopia. Phase 1 provides immediate value. Phase 2 adds sophistication. Phase 3 delivers the full vision. Each phase stands alone.
12.4 What Success Looks Like
3 Years:
1,000 organizations coordinating resources through Holonic Funding
$10M+ in resources flowing fairly and transparently
Category leadership established
Profitable, sustainable business
Strong community of practitioners
5 Years:
10,000 organizations, 500,000 users
$1B+ coordinated resources annually
Standard infrastructure for regenerative economies
Thriving ecosystem of module creators
Measurable impact on carbon reduction, community resilience, economic equity
10 Years:
Millions of people coordinating across thousands of networks
Regenerative resource flows as default, not exception
Commons-based property and shared resources normalized
Demonstration that systemic alternatives to extractive capitalism work
Foundation for post-capitalist coordination at scale
12.5 The Vision
To enable millions of people and thousands of ecosystems to coordinate resources, commitments, and regenerative projects across the planet—fluidly, transparently, and trustfully—through a federated web of Holons.
This is infrastructure for:
Bioregional regeneration
Global commons coordination
Post-capitalist economies
Cooperative digital infrastructure
Shared risk and shared value networks
This is not incremental improvement. This is systemic transformation.
The world is shifting from centralized organizations and extractive economics toward networks, local ecosystems, and regenerative coordination. This transition needs infrastructure. Holonic Funding is that infrastructure.
12.6 The Ask
We're seeking mission-aligned funders who understand that coordination infrastructure is the leverage point for systemic change.
We need:
$750K-1.5M in seed capital
Strategic partners with network connections
Patient capital for 3-5 year horizon
Active engagement, not just passive investment
We offer:
Ground-floor position in foundational infrastructure
Influence on protocol design and governance
Access to rapidly growing regenerative economy ecosystem
Contribution to systemic transformation
The future isn't predetermined. It's something we create together—when we have the infrastructure to coordinate our intelligence, our stories, our decisions, and our actions at the level complexity demands.
Join us in building that infrastructure.
Contact
For detailed pitch deck, technical specifications, pilot program discussions, or investment conversations:
[Contact Information]
Appendices
Appendix A: Technical Specifications
[Link to detailed smart contract documentation]
Appendix B: Simulation Results
[Link to threshold flow funding analysis]
Appendix C: Pilot Partner Profiles
[Descriptions of design partner communities]
Appendix D: Financial Model
[Link to detailed revenue projections and unit economics]
Appendix E: Competitive Analysis
[Detailed comparison with adjacent tools]
Appendix F: Legal & Compliance Framework
[Regulatory analysis and compliance approach]
Appendix G: Glossary
Holon: An autonomous unit that is simultaneously a whole and a part of larger wholes
Federation: Network of Holons with trust relationships and shared resource pools
Value Equation: Formula defining how contributions translate to resource allocation
Commitment: Published promise of future delivery
Relational Zone: Bilateral economic relationship between two Holons
Threshold: Resource level that triggers overflow or distribution
Epoch: Time period for contribution accounting and distribution
End of Whitepaper
Version 1.0 - November 2024
This whitepaper is a living document. For the latest version and updates, visit: [website]
Last updated
Was this helpful?