How AFN actually works.

Three things. First, the scoring rubric is published — if a founder submits a PR that earns 25 points but a contributor's equivalent PR gets fewer, that discrepancy is visible to the whole team. Second, the Gnosis Safe multi-sig requires multiple signers to approve each sprint allocation — a founder can't unilaterally push through a self-serving allocation. Third, all minting transactions are publicly visible on Polygonscan. Any irregular allocation pattern would be immediately apparent to any contributor who checks the chain. The honest answer is: we're early stage and trust is still partly social. The on-chain infrastructure makes cheating much harder and much more visible than in any traditional equity arrangement.

The SDM token contract is currently in final audit and testnet validation on Polygon Mumbai. Mainnet deployment is targeted for the close of the founding sprint cycle. The contract address will be published here and on our GitHub the moment it's deployed. We will not ask contributors to interact with any contract before that announcement — be wary of any unofficial claims of an early SDM contract address. The only source of truth is this site and the official AFN GitHub repository.

Points already converted to SDM tokens at sprint close remain yours — they're in your wallet and governed by the vesting schedule, but they can't be taken back. If you stop contributing mid-sprint, work completed and verified before the sprint close still earns that sprint's allocation. Work in progress that isn't verified at sprint close doesn't score. Unvested tokens follow the vesting schedule regardless — stopping contribution doesn't accelerate vesting, but it also doesn't forfeit already-earned tokens. There is one exception: if a Core Contributor is removed for cause (defined in the governance charter), the Safe multi-sig can vote to pause future vesting. Already-vested tokens are never clawed back.

Engineering contributions have clear verification signals (merged PRs, deployed code, closed issues). For design and operations, verification is peer-based: a deliverable is considered verified when a second contributor — not the one who produced it — marks it complete in Taiga, attaches the output artifact (design file, doc, deployment log), and a sprint lead confirms it meets the sprint definition of done. This isn't perfect — peer review for non-code work has subjectivity. We document edge cases in the SBRA scoring guide and evolve the rubric each quarter based on team feedback. The scoring guide is public on GitHub. If you disagree with a point value, that's a governance proposal.

Vested SDM tokens are standard ERC-20 tokens on Polygon — technically, nothing stops peer-to-peer transfers once vested. However, there is no liquidity pool and no official DEX listing until platform launch milestones are met. Trading in that environment means finding a willing counterparty yourself, with no price discovery mechanism and high information asymmetry. We recommend against it. The token's value proposition is tied to AFN platform utility and governance rights. Pre-launch trading undermines that by creating a speculative dynamic that doesn't reflect the platform's actual progress. The plan is to establish a QuickSwap or Uniswap v3 pool on Polygon at a defined platform milestone, with treasury funds seeding initial liquidity.

For Future Contributors, there's no minimum — you can contribute as much or as little as you have capacity for, and earn proportionally. That said, very low contribution levels (under ~20 SBRA points per sprint) produce negligible token allocations and are difficult to verify consistently. Realistically, a part-time contributor putting in 5–8 hours per week can generate meaningful SBRA scores. For Core Contributor consideration, the expectation is sustained, substantial contribution across at least two sprint cycles — enough to establish a verifiable track record before the expanded allocation and governance rights are extended.