A launch with no investors, no private sales and on-chain-enforced team vesting. Also the clearest evidence that a project must host its own supply data: aggregators still reported a maximum supply the DAO had voted to reduce years earlier.

docs/token/research/JUP.md

A retrospective airdrop with a closed claim window and a permissionless sweep back to the DAO. Also the source of the hard-coded-governance-threshold mistake CGW explicitly avoids.

docs/token/research/JTO.md

The closest structural analogue: paying contributors for accurate real-world data. A named contributor allocation and coverage-weighted rewards are both directly transferable. The staking-and-slashing mechanism is not.

docs/token/research/PYTH.md

Burn-and-mint equilibrium: how a service keeps a predictable price while the token used to reach it does not. Studied for the Garden Credits question.

docs/token/research/RENDER.md

Data Credits, and six years of hard-won evidence on rewarding verifiable real-world contribution — including a second token that was introduced and then reversed, and a coverage mechanism ultimately retired.

docs/token/research/HNT.md

Studied as a contrast case. Distribution breadth produced real ecosystem integration; the absence of a utility-first design is what CGW must not imitate.

docs/token/research/BONK.md

Pyth expands reward capacity for feeds few publishers cover. Applied to CoinGarden, the thousandth photo of a common houseplant is worth far less than the first record of a regional cultivar — and the emission model should say so.

Pyth’s accountability comes from requiring capital and confiscating it for bad data. Applied to a gardener who misidentified a plant, that is both absurd and fatal to the requirement that the app stay useful without crypto. CGW uses reputation weighting and reward ineligibility instead — never confiscation.

After roughly fifteen governance proposals, Helium’s conclusion was to stop paying for the assertion and pay only for the validated result. CGW rewards accepted, deduplicated contributions that survive review — never the act of submitting one.

docs/token/research/COMPARATIVE_ANALYSIS.md

docs/token/research/CGW_RECOMMENDATIONS.md

docs/token/CGW_MICA_REQUIREMENTS.md

docs/token/GARDEN_CREDITS_RESEARCH.md