This briefing is intended for David Ellam and collaborators working on OASIS as a standards-driven approach to interoperability, fee transparency, and accountable infrastructure. We are building an Intergalactic Timebank as part of a broader civic and citizen science stack that includes Open Footprint, Hitchhiker-style governance, and a non-market mutual credit economy. Our primary requirement is the ability to operate the Timebank with zero or near-zero gas costs for everyday use. The Intergalactic Timebank is explicitly not a financial trading system. Voz is a mutual credit unit used for learning, creative contribution, and community service. Most activity is off-chain and local-first: signed Voz transaction receipts are published as static, append-only logs. These are periodically cleared into batches by governance, and only batch commitments and policy decisions are anchored on-chain. The chain is treated as a notary, not as a transaction processor. We are particularly interested in OASIS because of its insistence on making infrastructure costs legible rather than hiding them behind “gasless” claims. Our concern is not whether costs exist, but whether they can be pooled, governed, and made invisible to ordinary participants without creating hidden power asymmetries. We want Hitchhikers to participate in the Timebank without holding a gas token or being exposed to fee volatility. We would like to ask OASIS to analyse how well this architecture fits within its framework, and to compare OASIS explicitly with alternative interchain approaches discussed in our internal analysis. These alternatives include Cosmos-style sovereign chains, Polkadot-style cross-consensus messaging, Ethereum Layer-2 sponsorship models, and DAG-based or ledgerless ordering systems. The specific lens we care about is zero or minimal gas cost for Timebank operation, not DeFi throughput or liquidity. In particular, we would value OASIS input on the following questions. Can OASIS support a chain-as-notary model where thousands of off-chain signed receipts are finalised via a single anchored Merkle root. Can governance threshold signatures and policy versions be verified on-chain without per-user costs. Can sponsored or pooled anchoring be made stable over long time horizons without creating gatekeepers. How does OASIS compare to the alternatives above in terms of exit rights, fork safety, and resistance to fee creep. We are not seeking tokenomics, yield, or liquidity design. We are seeking a durable civic substrate for mutual credit, participatory governance, and long-lived citizen science infrastructure. If OASIS can help us reason clearly about where costs truly lie, and how they can be governed rather than externalised, we would welcome a deeper technical conversation and a small pilot exploration. Our next step would be to share a concise technical note describing the Static Ledger Clearing pattern and a minimal Timebank pilot. We would then welcome OASIS’s critical comparison of this approach against the interchain alternatives, with a clear assessment of feasibility for sustained zero-gas or near-zero-gas operation.