The first set of questions concerns fee mechanics. Ask how transactions are priced and who ultimately pays. If there are no gas fees, what replaces them: staking, validator subsidies, inflation, or institutional sponsorship? Can governance transactions and batch anchors be sponsored or pooled so that individual users never face per-action costs? The second set concerns anchoring and batching. Ask whether the framework supports committing Merkle roots or batch hashes cheaply and infrequently. Can one on-chain transaction attest to thousands of off-chain signed Voz receipts? Can this be done with threshold signatures rather than individual submissions? These features are essential for scaling a mutual credit system. The third set concerns identity and signatures. Ask whether the system natively supports external identities such as DIDs and whether signatures created off-chain can be verified on-chain without re-signing or wrapping assets. The towel identity must remain consistent across static ledgers, clearing batches, and anchored governance decisions. The fourth set concerns governance and exit. Ask how validators are selected, replaced, or challenged. Can a community fork its own clearing rules and still interoperate? What happens if fees or policies change in the future? A gas-free system that cannot be exited safely is more dangerous than a modestly priced one. The fifth set concerns non-market guarantees. Ask whether tokens or certificates can be cryptographically restricted from transfer or exchange. Ask whether bridges to external markets can be blocked by design or constitutionally forbidden. The system must support accounting without liquidity.
# See - Non-Market Token Design - Towel Identity - Pledge Bank