An interesting summary read. Do your documents have further details on strategy, e.g. such as the token buy/burn rate plans? etc.
1 Like
80 % of stock IPOs fail 5 years after launch. 100% of TGC ICOs fail after 1 Year in Solana DeFi. We need more incentives and long-term commitment. It´s just dust in the wind. Huma needs to be priced and we need a discount price to LFG. Not 1:1.
I propose 0.5:1
2 Likes
XRP who?!
timeline for vote/details looking like it will be on track for Sunday?
Hi all — I’m reposting here because my previous comment was removed from this thread, and I honestly don’t understand why.
The comment was a detailed critique — it asked 20+ questions about the proposal, token utility, DAO alignment, and treasury strategy. It was written in good faith to contribute to the discussion and, judging by reactions and comments, it seemed to resonate with many community members. Yet, it was flagged and taken down without any specific explanation.
I’ve read through the Jupiter Research Guidelines, and I genuinely don’t see how my post violated any of them. It was:
- Relevant to the topic
- Non-promotional
- Focused on the proposal’s content and implications
- Written in a structured, respectful tone
So, if someone from the admin or moderation team could please let me know what specific part of my post didn’t meet the guidelines, I’d really appreciate it. I’m happy to remove or rephrase any parts that crossed a line — but I also believe that a critical voice is part of healthy governance.
Until then, it’s hard to understand how critical feedback like mine fits into the research forum if it’s being removed without explanation.
Thanks in advance.
7 Likes
I am speechless!! How could this get removed? It was very respectful post showing a concern from a loyal $JUP holder and the questions where questions in the mind of so many loyal community members.
Do you have the missing reply saved anywhere?
3 Likes
This sounds all pretty good, however, I also think that the swap 1:1 is questionable. The value of the new token is unknown and there is a good chance that it will be worth less then 1 JUP. What is that ratio based on, e.g. what are the underlying assumptions?
1 Like
Hi everyone,
A few days ago, I posted a critical comment under the HUMA proposal that was unexpectedly removed. The removal was later clarified by a team member as a misunderstanding — it was flagged as spam by a community user and approved by a moderator without full context. I appreciate the transparency and quick response from the team, especially Julz, for taking the time to investigate.
That said, I’ve carefully reviewed the original post, reflected on the tone, and also read through the full discussion from the community. I want to repost a refined version that keeps the core questions and concerns — but with a tone that encourages thoughtful discussion rather than confrontation.
My intention remains the same: to protect the long-term interests of the JUP community and spark serious dialogue about how our treasury is used, how value flows (or doesn’t) to the JUP token, and whether this proposal represents true alignment or simply exposure to more risk.
Strategic Direction & Community Trust
- Why is the DAO being asked to swap JUP for a pre-market token with no on-chain liquidity or track record, instead of investing in deeper utility for JUP itself?
- Why hasn’t JUP token received the kind of structured utility — staking rewards, buybacks, governance influence, fee distribution — that HUMA promises to deliver on Day 1?
- Why not explore investing in internal projects (such as yield vaults, lending markets, or JUP-based reward loops) that could bring tangible value to our native token and holders?
- Is this truly a strategic partnership or more of a fundraising event for an external team?
- What metrics will define the success or failure of this partnership 6–12 months from now?
- Has the DAO conducted an open review of the proposal in a public AMA or deep-dive session? If not, is there a plan to do so?
- Why not model this deal on LFG v1? While it had its flaws, at least JUP stakers were rewarded with tokens. Here, we’re asked to pay into a presale without guaranteed upside.
Token Utility, Value Capture, and Risk
- What mechanisms exist to ensure that value generated by HUMA’s products flows back to its token — and not just to the protocol or its partners?
- If staking rewards, buybacks, and protocol access are the backbone of HUMA token value, will these be live at launch? If not, when?
- How will HUMA’s APY-generating infrastructure create sustainable returns without relying on temporary incentives or liquidity mining?
- How does the DAO protect itself if HUMA fails to maintain growth or token value post-TGE? Is there an exit strategy, insurance, or fallback plan? Maybe we could do a back swap if, let’s say in 11 months the value of the tokens held by the DAO is $100K and the JUP tokens in HUMA’s treasury are worth $400K — would a 1:1 swap-back be on the table?
- Would it not be safer to convert that $250K of JUP into a more stable, non-correlated asset like BTC or USDC, especially given the speculative nature of early token launches?
Governance Process, Expectations & Tone
- I recognize that my previous post may have come across as overly sharp. That was not my intent. I care deeply about this community and believe tough questions are necessary — but tone matters too.
- I’m grateful that many in the community, including those who disagreed with my views, engaged respectfully. I’ve taken that to heart and revised the framing accordingly.
- My hope is that the DAO continues to welcome dissenting voices and critical inquiry — not just cheerleading. That’s how trust is earned and maintained.
9 Likes
OMG. TLDR ihateoranges dude … Jupiter is building jupnet, the ultimate omninet of everything. A close partnership with Jupiter and Huma make strategic sense. Look at Solmate as a recent example. It all beautifully knits together, monies, revenues, and services for both institutions and retail investors. And…we are getting to dip our toes in at a nice discount.
2 Likes
I want to acknowledge the team’s effort — it’s clear a lot of work is going into pushing new ideas and trying to bring value to the DAO. But with proposals like this one, I still keep coming back to a core question: why is it so hard to build real utility around our own token, JUP?
Many of us didn’t buy in just for a short-term play. We believed JUP would be more than a governance token — that it would represent shared ownership in something bigger. Some people have managed to average down, but I think many holders are still waiting for the value they believed they were helping to build.
The community isn’t asking for a pump — we’re asking for purpose. For a token that does something. And when people ask those questions, I don’t think they should be dismissed as complainers.
If there’s a plan for real JUP utility, it would mean a lot to see it clearly. Because right now, it feels like we’re funding other ecosystems while our own token continues to wait for its moment.
9 Likes
I’m not against partnerships or big-picture plays — and I do think Jupiter is aiming to build something ambitious with Jupnet and beyond.
But here’s where I’m stuck: how does this specific swap actually benefit Jupiter, the DAO treasury, our community, or JUP stakers in a concrete way? HUMA gets funding, credibility, and exposure — we get speculative tokens locked for a year and no added utility for JUP.
It’s being framed as strategic, but if JUP doesn’t capture any value from it, then what exactly are we getting in return? Just wondering if “strategic” here means anything more than lending out our name and funds.
So I’ll ask again — what’s in it for JUP holders, really?
5 Likes
Have a read of this (takes 60 seconds) Solmate and what could happen with JupSol (if future votes similar to SIMD-228 get passed). Now think on how these revenues cross-fertilize both Huma and Jupiter…and nicely, they both have tokens in each other’s treasury! It is also (as Erbil said in his paper) about the community vibe and support of one another. Think on, e.g. joint Working Groups in the future? ~The possibilities! Here’s the 60 second read Splyce & Huma Unveil SOLMATE to Keep Solana Yield Sustainable Amid SIMD-228 Staking Shifts
Hi
It says we’re giving them a dollar value of 250k ie 500k jup tokens for 250k worth of their token.
They should be the ones complaining as we’re buying their token for peanuts
Hey everyone, here’s an extended summary of the X Spaces with Huma Finance.
Proposal Background & Intent
Erbil’s Summary:
- The idea for the partnership originated at Catstanbul, where Huma founders connected with Jupiter community members and the core team.
- Huma is a PayFi protocol originally built on the EVM. With Huma 2.0, they relaunched exclusively on Solana, citing technical fit and shared values with the Jupiter ecosystem.
- Jupiter was a key partner in launching Huma 2.0, helping bootstrap traction for their LP tokens and ecosystem integration.
Core Belief: Huma isn’t just launching a token—they’re building long-term infrastructure and want to align with like-minded communities.
Proposal Details
The proposal includes two key components:
- Presale for JUP Stakers
- 1% of total supply (10 billion tokens) available exclusively to JUP stakers
- $75 million valuation (FDV) - over 50% discount to Series A valuation
- 3-month lock-up period
- DAO-to-DAO Treasury Swap
- $250,000 worth of tokens at same presale valuation
- Intended as a long-term partnership commitment
Token Utility
The token will feature:
- Staking rewards
- Buyback burn mechanisms
- Governance
- Private access to protocol features
Tokenomics Overview
- Total Supply: 10 billion HUMA tokens
- Utilities: Staking rewards, governance, buybacks, access to protocol features
- Governance Utility: VE model
- Initial Circulating Supply: 18%
- Initial Airdrop: 5%
- Ecosystem Allocation: 38% for airdrops, LPs, content creators, etc.
- Team & Investor Lockups: 1-year cliff + 3-year vesting
Important Disclosures
Key points of transparency:
- This is not financial advice - participation in presale is optional
- Meow and Siong have invested in Huma Finance’s previous round at >2x this valuation
- Regular investors receive 1-year lockup + 3-year vesting
- Community terms are more favorable than both team and previous investors
Partnership Vision
The collaboration aims to achieve:
- Alignment of community interests
- Focus on permissionless systems
- Promotion of global inclusion
- Development of real-world utility
Community Q&A Session on Huma Finance Proposal
Question 1: Staking Rewards During Lock-up Period
Dementes asked about staking rewards during the 3-month lock-up period. The response clarified that participants won’t miss out on incentives since the staking reward systems haven’t been published yet. Once tokens unlock after three months, participants can join the staking program when it launches. This was noted as a point to add to the FAQ section of the proposal.
Question 2: Minimum Staking Requirements
Jamie asked about minimum requirements. The team confirmed there is no minimum threshold - allocation will be proportional to staked amount, with no floor or cutoff. The 1% total supply will be distributed based on relative stake sizes.
Question 3: Allocation Mathematics
The exact allocation will depend on total participation. For example:
- If only 10 million JUP worth of stake participates, individual allocations will be larger
- If 100 million JUP worth of stake participates, individual allocations will be smaller
- Your allocation is proportional to your stake amount
Question 4: Feathers Program Relationship
Clarification was provided that this presale opportunity is completely separate from the Feathers program. Participants will receive benefits in two ways:
- As JUP stakers through this presale
- Through previously earned Feathers rewards
Question 5: Snapshot and Participation
Maria asked about future staker participation and snapshot dates
- Snapshot will be taken at the end of the vote period
- Anyone who stakes and votes during the voting period can participate
- Pre-sale vault will open soon after vote conclusion (probably within days)
- TGE Timeline: Expected within next 1-2 weeks after vote
Question 6: Participation Requirements
Question raised about minimum staking requirements for 700,000+ JUP stakers
- CWG confirmed no minimum threshold or cutoff
- Decision made against implementing cutoffs due to practicality concerns
- All stakers can participate regardless of stake size
Question 7: DAO-to-DAO Treasury Swap Details
iSAK asked about the 250k token swap between Jupiter and Huma
- Intended as long-term alignment between communities
- Huma confirmed they will hold their Jupiter tokens
- Allows both DAOs to have governance participation in each other’s protocols
Important Disclosures:
Erbil disclosed being a significant Jupiter user and staker
- Will not participate in voting or LFG to maintain fairness
- Emphasized focus on community benefit
Question 8: Content Creation Incentives
A community member asked about Part C of the proposal (Jupiter Community Activation) regarding the Jupiter community helping with Huma’s launch through memes, threads, and spaces. Specifically, they inquired whether Jupiter DAO would use the 250k worth of HUMA tokens to incentivize community content creation.
Response from Jupiter DAO:
- No direct incentives will be provided from Jupiter DAO’s side for Huma-related content
- Support will occur naturally through regular partnership activities
- Focus is on community collaboration rather than team-directed efforts
Response from Huma team:
- Huma will provide incentives for content creators
- Uses Kaito leaderboard to track content performance
- Higher rankings lead to better rewards
Question 9: Tokenomics Overview
Richard provided detailed tokenomics information:
- Total token supply: $10 billion
- Initial airdrop: 5%
- Ecosystem allocation: 38% (distributed over many months)
- Day one floating supply: 18%
- Team and investor tokens: 1-year lock, followed by 3-year vesting
Token utility features:
- VE model implementation
- Governance participation
- Protocol profit sharing
- Priority access to product features
Question 10: PST Liquidity Concerns
Maria raised questions about PST token liquidity on Jupiter. Richard explained:
- Current capital utilization is over 98%
- Pool cap increases are gradual ($10-20M at a time)
- Previous pool caps filled within one day
- Limited supply creates natural price premium
Additional context:
- Protocol aims for organic growth and balanced supply-demand
- Focus on maintaining sustainable double-digit yields
- Market expected to find natural balance point
Question 11: Content Creator Tracking
Sleeky asked about content creation tracking:
- Primary tracking through Kaito leaderboard
- Additional manual tracking for missed quality content
- Focus on consistent, high-quality creators
Question 12: Huma DAO Governance & Rewards
Dinesh asked about Huma’s governance model and rewards structure, particularly regarding benefits from participating in the maxi pool.
Response from Huma team:
- PST (LP Token) Structure:
- 100% dependent on protocol’s internal dynamics
- Generates yields through pay-fi distribution fees
- Expected to maintain stable double-digit yields
- MPST (Maxi Token) Features:
- No USDC yield but higher rewards proportion
- Currently ~70% of positions choose maxi to maximize LP rewards
- Traders can choose between capital preservation (classic PST) or maximizing rewards (MPST)
- Protocol Token Benefits:
- Implementation of VE (vote-escrowed) model
- Staking rewards impact PST holder yields
- Quarterly reward distributions from allocated buckets
- Final value equilibrium pending public token launch
Question 13: Solmate Protocol Integration
A community member inquired about a recently announced protocol integration.
Background on Solmate:
- Emerged from SIM 228 proposal discussions
- Proposal aimed to adjust Solana token staking rewards based on market conditions
- Heavily debated by key community members including Toly and Lily
- Solmate Solution:
- Composite product balancing PST and JupSOL positions
- Addresses potential reduced staking demand
- Leverages Huma’s stable yield structure
- Attracts both institutional and retail demand
Additional Discussion:
- Acknowledgment of Solana validator setup challenges
- Recognition of community involvement in solution development
- Positive outlook on long-term alliance between protocols
10 Likes
This is an incredible well written summary, thank you @AG42 
2 Likes
Thank you, Erbil! TBH it’s mostly Notion Meeting Notes thingy, I just cleaned it up a bit. 
I really enjoyed today’s session with you and Richard. Thanks a lot and I’m really excited about the vote!
1 Like
Something to keep in mind with regards to this vote is that Huma will be launching their token regardless of whether or not this proposal passes the DAO.
So essentially the only things to consider are:
- Do you want JUP DAO members to have access to a pre-sale for Huma tokens at a discounted valuation?
- Do you want the two DAOs to do a $250k treasury swap in tokens?
Those are really the only two items up for consideration.
EDIT: This is NOT an LFG launch
3 Likes
I’d add the 3rd one here:
Is Jupiter DAO willing to officially ally with the upcoming Huma Finance DAO?
I’d consider that more conceptual than tangible since no one really knows what that alliance will look like.
1 Like
This is exactly what the proposal says
So that’s 1:1 ratio right there fam, in terms of token, $75M FDV isn’t a bonus if we don’t know where their token is heading yet, remember launches are not going well lately, this token has a high chance of not moving.
Even the drop will still be locked for months, I honestly don’t see the win here for the DAO
or am I missing some info or misunderstanding the situation? if so please enlighten me
1 Like
Can all JUP stackers participate in this?