What if a Protocol Could Bet on its Own “Purpose”?

It’s a potential solution to the most contentious problem in decentralized governance: “What are we actually trying to optimize?”

The War of the KPIs

Today, the consensus on what to measure is wildly polarizing.

“TVL should be the KPI!” one side shouts. “TVL doesn’t matter; never has, never will. Daily Active Users is where the money’s at!” yells the other.

This isn’t a simple disagreement. It’s a fundamental conflict about the protocol’s “purpose.” Today, this is “solved” with a slow, political, and ultimately human-biased governance vote. The winner (e.g., “TVL”) is then hard-coded into the protocol’s DNA, becoming its fixed, static purpose.

But the “right” purpose is regime-dependent. A bull market might demand optimizing for User Growth. A bear market demands optimizing for Protocol Revenue. A protocol locked into a “growth” mindset during a crash is a protocol destined to die.

The Purpose Market

What if, instead of this political battle, we let both sides bet?

This is the “Purpose Market,” a new layer of meta-governance. It’s a futarchy market that sits on top of the main protocol. In this market, proposals aren’t actions (“add this asset”). They are KPIs (“change our purpose”).

• Proposal A: “For the next 90 days, our purpose is to maximize TVL.”
• Proposal B: “For the next 90 days, our purpose is to maximize Daily Active Users.”

The “Operations Market” below would then be bound by the winner. If Proposal B wins, all day-to-day actions (like allocating rewards or funding features) would be judged only on whether they maximize Daily Active Users.

So, how does this “Purpose Market” decide a winner?

The “God” in the Machine

This is the central paradox. The goal is to determine the metric, so how can we use a metric to do it?

This system doesn’t magically find its purpose. It displaces it. It forces a protocol’s founders and community to have one, single, foundational debate: What is our “meta-metric”?

What is our one, unchangeable, long-term “god”?

This is the only political decision the DAO should ever have to make. Once that “meta-metric” is locked in, the ‘Purpose Market’ takes over. All the other political fights (TVL vs. Fees vs. Growth this quarter) are forever automated and handed over to the cold, rational calculus of the market.

The “Purpose Market” is just a high-speed engine for executing the will of its chosen “god.”

An Amoral Engine

That “god” doesn’t have to be “survival.” That is a human bias.

The “Purpose Market” is an amoral engine. It doesn’t care about “good.” It will relentlessly execute whatever existential purpose: Be it survival, martyrdom, or pure profit, that its creators dared to give it.

• What if the meta-metric was to be a “Martyr”? to ‘Burn the most ETH in one year’ and then die, having fulfilled its purpose? The Purpose Market would be a ruthless engine for that one-time goal.
• What if the meta-metric was to be a “Hedonist”? to ‘Maximize immediate dividend payouts’, ruthlessly sacrificing its own future for the present pleasure of its holders?
• What if the meta-metric was “Survival” (e.g., ‘Maximize 10-year token price’)? The market would then price short-term KPIs based on their contribution to that long-term goal.

This system replaces an endless series of human political arguments with a single, foundational philosophical choice.

This isn’t “code is law.” This is “market-executed will is law.”

We set out to build a “guinea pig” to find its purpose. What we would be building instead is a “golem”. An autonomous entity in a constant state of fulfilling its one, locked-in command, using market forces as its eyes and hands.