Confetti primary sources — 2026-05-10

Classification takeaway

Confetti is most usefully classified as onchain contest infrastructure with a vote-and-earn price-curve market built into the decision process. Its main mechanism is not simple polling; it is a marketized coordination primitive where attention, rewards, reputation, and later execution can all be routed through contest outcomes.

Primary sources reviewed

1. Confetti monorepo README — https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jk-labs-inc/confetti/main/README.md

   • Used to confirm the current product brand, live site, audit note, and the existence of versioned smart-contract and frontend infrastructure.
   • Useful as provenance that the project is maintained as a real multi-package codebase rather than only a hosted app.

2. Docs landing page — https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jk-labs-inc/jokerace-docs/main/docs/pages/index.mdx

   • Used to confirm the official docs structure, the current Confetti branding in the docs, and the existence of technical how-to material rather than only user-marketing copy.

3. FAQ — https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jk-labs-inc/jokerace-docs/main/docs/pages/faq.mdx

   • Used to verify the core contest mechanism: voters buy votes, 90% of spend goes to a rewards pool, winning voters claim proportional rewards, price curves raise vote costs over time, and creators retain certain manual powers around ties and pre-vote reward withdrawal.
   • Also used to capture the “fields” mechanism and the project’s own framing of contests as monetization, attention, reputation, insight, and execution infrastructure.

4. Building an Extension — https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jk-labs-inc/jokerace-docs/main/docs/pages/technical-how-tos/building-an-extension.mdx

   • Used to confirm that Confetti explicitly wants third parties to build permissionless extensions and that the protocol treats the chain itself as its API.
   • Especially important for understanding Confetti as a control plane for downstream analytics, role assignment, funding, and execution tools.

5. Confetti Onchain Data — https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jk-labs-inc/jokerace-docs/main/docs/pages/technical-how-tos/confetti-onchain-data.mdx

   • Used to confirm contract versioning across chains and the existence of reusable query templates and data access patterns.
   • Helpful for classifying the protocol as extension-friendly infrastructure rather than a closed contest product.

6. Case Study — https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jk-labs-inc/jokerace-docs/main/docs/pages/case-study.mdx

   • Used as evidence that the team frames contests as a mechanism for ecosystem attention routing and community competition, not only for lightweight voting.
   • Helpful for seeing the intended flywheel: contestants market the contest, early voters seed rewards, and the contest becomes both coordination surface and growth engine.

Why it stays in the active corpus

• It adds a distinct contest-market mechanism that is not well captured by generic grants, polling, or governance entries.
• It creates a useful comparison class for Prop House, grants rounds, hackathon judging, reputation systems, and AI-agent or multisig execution flows that could be triggered by a contest outcome.
• The durable insight is that once contest outcomes are onchain and richly structured, the real control surfaces move into vote-pricing, payout splits, tie resolution, allowlists, submission schemas, and extension-layer interpretation.