What should $LODGE decide first?

$LODGE is the governance layer. It is a scarce membership stake in Steam Collective - the right to shape research priorities, approve $BUILD proposals, set protocol standards, and allocate treasury capital outside purpose-bound builds.

$BUILD asks what capital should fund. $LODGE asks who decides, and under what rules. Those are different questions. Confusing them is how communities end up with capital and no legitimacy, or votes and no capacity to execute.

The first $LODGE decisions matter more than later ones. They set the precedent for who holds power, how hard it is to capture, and what kinds of proposals the community treats as real.

Three directions are on the table.

Distribution. Who receives initial $LODGE, what total supply makes sense, whether founders vest, and how new contributors earn governance stake without turning membership into noise.

Vote mechanics. Quorum, lock-ups before voting eligibility, and anti-capture rules. A governance token without friction becomes a spectacle. Too much friction and nothing ships.

First agenda. Before the architecture is fully settled, what should holders prioritise first: a research funding vote, a $BUILD proposal standard, or a shared protocol metadata rule that every node must log?

None of these replace each other. But the first move signals what Steam Collective thinks governance is for. What should $LODGE decide first, and what would make that decision legitimate?