Admission to the Launchpad is the beginning, not the end, of the issuer's protocol obligations. Listed issuers re-attest KPIs quarterly, disclose material changes within a 48-hour window, refresh audits annually, and deliver milestones on the declared schedule. The revocation framework freezes escrow tranches and updates the listing surface when triggers are hit, with a graduated remediation pathway for recoverable circumstances.
Most token launches treat the moment of listing as the end of the issuer's protocol obligations. The team raises capital, lists the token, and from that point onward the connection between the team's operating record and the participant's exposure is informal. There is no protocol-level mechanism that requires the team to keep the listing surface aligned with operating reality, no enforced cadence for performance reporting, no graduated framework for what happens when obligations slip.
The Launchpad treats admission as the first step of a continuous relationship. Listed issuers re-attest their KPI evidence quarterly, disclose material changes within a 48-hour window, refresh audits annually, and deliver milestones on the schedule declared at admission. The on-chain dossier hash chain preserves the history; any participant can audit how the project's evidence has evolved across cycles.
ONGOING GOVERNANCE CADENCE, FOUR CYCLESAdmission to the Launchpad is the beginning, not the end, of the issuer's protocol obligations. Listed issuers re-attest KPIs quarterly, disclose material changes within defined windows, refresh audits annually, and deliver milestones on the schedule declared at admission. The protocol's accountability to participants is continuous.
What is dueUpdated KPI evidence for the operational metrics declared at admission (revenue, throughput, user count, route-specific measurables). The team posts the updated evidence; the attestors designated in B5 co-sign.
What happens to the dossierThe dossier hash updates on-chain; the trading-page surface (the live equivalent of the presale page after listing) re-renders with the new metrics. The historical hash chain is preserved on-chain for audit.
G2MATERIAL CHANGE
48-hour disclosure window for material changestrigger-based, not calendar-based
What is dueDisclosure within 48 hours of internal awareness of: identity change (founder departure, key role change), custody change (treasury wallet, security model), operating change (pivot, methodology shift, asset class change), or legal status change (litigation, regulatory action, jurisdictional move).
Consequence of non-disclosureDiscovery of an undisclosed material change post-window automatically triggers revocation review. The 48-hour window is enforced as a compliance obligation that survives admission; non-compliance is itself a revocation trigger.
G3ANNUAL AUDIT
Audit refresh per yearauditor must remain on the Registry
What is dueThe audit attestation in the dossier is refreshed annually. For projects with deployed code, this includes a re-audit of the current contracts referenced to current commit hashes. For projects with operational financials, this includes the annual financial audit. The auditor must remain on the Attestor Registry with active credentials.
Mid-year addendum requirementAny material code deployment or material financial event requires an addendum audit referenced to the specific commit hashes or financial period, not deferred to the annual cycle. Material is defined operationally; substantive changes to the contracts or treasury qualify.
G4MILESTONES
Ongoing milestone delivery on the declared schedulemissed milestones trigger tranche freeze
What is dueThe capital-release milestones declared at admission in B5 remain in force. The team delivers on the declared schedule and posts the evidence at each milestone for attestor co-signing.
Consequence of missed milestoneThe escrow tranche for that milestone remains locked, team token vesting linked to that milestone does not unlock, and the project enters revocation review. The revocation framework below documents the remediation pathway.
Four ongoing governance cycles run in parallel for the lifetime of the listing. G1 is regular cadence, G2 is event-driven, G3 is the deeper annual review, G4 is capital-release coupled. Each cycle produces an on-chain artifact; the listing surface renders from the most recent of each.
Material change disclosure
Cycle G2 (material change disclosure) is the only event-driven cycle of the four; the other three run on calendar or milestone schedules. A material change is any change to the listing's foundational facts: founder departure or key role change (identity), treasury wallet change or security-model change (custody), business pivot or methodology change or asset class change (operating model), litigation or regulatory action or jurisdictional move (legal status).
The 48-hour disclosure window starts from the team's internal awareness of the material change, not from the moment the change becomes public. The team is responsible for prompt disclosure; the protocol enforces the obligation through the revocation framework. Discovery of an undisclosed material change after the window (whether through protocol-level pattern recognition, attestor flag, or community report) automatically triggers revocation review. The 48-hour window is not advisory; it is the structural compliance obligation.
Material change classification is itself an attestor function for borderline cases. A small operating tweak is not necessarily material; a methodology shift that changes the route-specific evidence requirements is. When ambiguous, the team has the option to file a pre-emptive disclosure that documents the change and lets attestors review whether it crosses the materiality threshold. Pre-emptive disclosure is procedurally safer than retroactive disclosure.
REVOCATION FRAMEWORK, TRIGGERS AND REMEDIATIONWhen governance obligations are not met, the revocation framework applies. The framework is graduated: tranches freeze, the listing surface updates, remediation pathways exist for recoverable circumstances. Permanent revocation is reserved for sustained non-compliance, fraud determination, or refusal to remediate.
RV1TRIGGERS
What initiates revocation reviewprotocol-detected or community-reported
Quarterly KPIMissed quarterly KPI deadline (30 days past due) or KPI evidence rejected by attestors.
Material changeDiscovery of an undisclosed material change after the 48-hour window. Discovery can be protocol-detected (on-chain pattern recognition, attestor flag) or community-reported (with attestor verification).
Attestor revocationAn attestor on the dossier loses their Attestor Registry credentials and the team has not replaced them within the standard window.
Sustained behaviorOff-protocol behavior inconsistent with the dossier (the team operates the project materially differently than the on-chain dossier represents) confirmed by attestor consensus.
RV2CONSEQUENCES
Graduated, recoverable while review is opentranche freeze, listing flag, not trading halt
Tranche freezeEscrow tranches not yet released are frozen until review concludes. Team token vesting linked to the affected milestone does not unlock. Capital cannot flow to the team treasury during the review window.
Listing surface updateThe listing page surface marks the project as under revocation review with the specific trigger and review status. Participants see the status update; potential new participants see the same update before any new capital flows.
What does not happenToken trading is not halted; the protocol is not a securities suspension authority and does not have the power to freeze a token's trading on third-party exchanges. The Launchpad surface withdraws its endorsement, not the token's existence.
RV3REMEDIATION
Pathway back to active standingtrigger-specific, observable to participants
Quarterly KPI missPost the missed KPI evidence with attestor co-signing; demonstrate that the cause was operational rather than substantive (e.g., reporting delay, attestor scheduling, technical evidence collection).
Material change disclosure missDisclose the material change with the explanation for why the 48-hour window was missed; attestor review of the substantive matter.
Attestor replacementOnboard a replacement Attestor Registry party with the appropriate role; the new attestor reviews the dossier and signs the affected components.
Substantive issueIf the trigger was substantive (operating evidence inconsistent with the dossier), the remediation requires either updating the dossier with corrected evidence (with re-attestation) or accepting the consequences. Attestor consensus determines whether the remediation is sufficient.
RV4PERMANENT REVOCATION
Sustained non-compliance, fraud, or refusal to remediateon-chain history preserved
When it appliesSustained non-compliance across multiple cycles, fraud determination by attestor consensus (with on-chain evidence), or refusal to engage with the remediation pathway over the review period.
What it doesThe listing surface marks the project as permanently revoked with the on-chain history preserved (the full hash chain of the dossier, all material-change disclosures or non-disclosures, all attestor signatures, all milestone completions and misses). The historical record is auditable by any participant.
Token stateThe token remains tradeable on any third-party venue that chooses to list it. The protocol's Launchpad endorsement is withdrawn permanently; any future re-application would require a fresh admission cycle with new evidence.
Four-stage revocation framework: triggers initiate review, graduated consequences are reversible while review is open, remediation pathways exist for most circumstances, permanent revocation is reserved for sustained non-compliance, fraud, or refusal to remediate. The framework is designed for recoverable circumstances; most reviews resolve at remediation rather than permanent revocation.
What revocation looks like in practice
The revocation framework is graduated and recoverable by default. When a trigger fires (missed quarterly KPI, undisclosed material change, attestor revocation, sustained behavior inconsistent with the dossier), the immediate consequences are limited: escrow tranches not yet released are frozen, team token vesting linked to affected milestones does not unlock, and the listing surface updates with the specific trigger and review status. Token trading on third-party venues is not halted; the protocol is not a securities suspension authority.
The remediation pathway is trigger-specific. A missed quarterly KPI deadline can be remediated by posting the evidence with attestor co-signing and documenting the cause of delay. A missed material change disclosure can be remediated by disclosing the change with the explanation for why the window was missed, followed by attestor review of the substantive matter. An attestor revocation can be remediated by onboarding a replacement Attestor Registry party with the appropriate role. A substantive issue (operating evidence inconsistent with the dossier) requires either updating the dossier with corrected evidence and re-attestation or accepting the consequences.
Permanent revocation (RV4) is reserved for sustained non-compliance across multiple cycles, fraud determination by attestor consensus with on-chain evidence, or refusal to engage with the remediation pathway. When permanent revocation applies, the listing surface marks the project as permanently revoked with the full on-chain history preserved (the hash chain of all dossier versions, all material-change disclosures or non-disclosures, all attestor signatures, all milestone completions and misses). The historical record is auditable by any participant. The token remains tradeable on any third-party venue; the protocol's Launchpad endorsement is withdrawn permanently.
The For Issuers series complete
This page closes the four-part For Issuers section. Each page covered one component of the issuer-side protocol mechanism:
How to apply. The six-stage admission flow and the three-tier retail-access calibration.
KPI proof. The five-block canonical-JSON evidence dossier structure and the route-specific evidence requirements.
Capital release. The escrow-to-tranches mechanism with milestone-gated release and milestone-aligned vesting.
Governance (this page). The continuous obligations after admission and the graduated revocation framework.
The four pages describe one cohesive protocol design from the issuer's side. The diagnostic counterpart is the Why it's broken series (death scale, unverified mints, no KPI evidence, upfront capital) which documents the industry failure modes each component of the Launchpad design addresses. The investor-side documentation is forthcoming as the For Investors section.
