Maturity-driven go/no-go: Quantify the threshold, anti-pattern and review rhythm of Phase 1→2, 2→3; benchmark the mainnet stage gating rather than the marketing roadmap.
Updated
12.4 · Switching signals
The calendar is only used to plan the review rhythm; the access control conditions are the only basis for whether to switch stages.
Phase switching should be like an Ethereum upgrade or a mainnet milestone: triggered by preset conditions and observational data, and can be explained to the outside world “why it is now possible to enter the next phase.”
Core answerWhat quantifiable condition triggers a phase switch?
The passage of time does not guarantee that learning occurs. Ethereum uses the research and test network as its gate control; Uniswap uses on-chain verifiable transaction volume as its de facto standard. If WCN only turns pages on a quarterly basis, it will easily fall into "overpromising for the sake of narrative" - a disease shared by a large number of one-off TGE projects.
It is recommended to conduct a roadmap review every quarter: compare the signals in the table below to determine "stay/forward/return to strengthen", and record the root causes of non-compliance (demand, product, compliance, organization).
Phase 1 → Phase 2: switching signal (recommended for access control)
Network and closed loop
At least one core Deal type completes multiple end-to-end closed loops; multiple roles on the node side have continuous participation (not single event registration); and there are baseline data for stage conversion rates and cycles.
Proof and PoB prototype
Proof's minimum field set and audit path run stably; PoB can output a readable staged account book (including version or change record intention); there is an entrance for objections.
Business and Risk Control
At least one revenue line can be reconciled monthly; major compliance/reputation incidents have disposal records and rule patches; there are no unresolved "systemic fraud" accusations.
Anti-Pattern (If you are not satisfied, you are not allowed to enter Phase 2): Proof is missing in large areas but still claims success; Agent is not standardized but has been connected on a large scale; there is no revenue but emphasis on "growth hacking".
Phase 2 → Phase 3: switching signal (recommended for access control)
PoB and standards
PoB schema is versioned; breaking changes have migration strategies; auditing SLA and attribution disputes have trackable downward trends or clear tolerance thresholds.
Agent governance
Permissions, logs, rollback and manual coverage strategies are implemented; accidents can be postmortem; unauthorized access and data events are quantitatively monitored.
Settlement ready
The off-chain ledger or settlement object has been defined at the rule level (who, based on what PoB, dispute path); the identity and permission model can support settlement, not only support display.
Anti-Pattern: Settlement rules are still completely verbal; on-chain contract development is out of sync with PoB quality; forcing the asset layer to cater to financing nodes.
Indicator combination (no single point decision-making)
multidimensional thresholdAlso look at: Deal quantity and quality, Proof completeness rate, revenue structure, PoB/Agent event log, risk events. BANNED Only use DAU or "LOI quantity" to decide.
persistent windowIt is recommended that key signals reach the standard for 2–3 consecutive statistical periods (such as monthly or quarterly) to avoid campaign distortion in a single month - similar protocols are observed in the multi-stage stability of the test network.
ReplicabilityNew verticals or new regions can reach the target under the playbook, proving that non-heroic individuals are accidental - benchmarking the "implementation success rate" of scalable SaaS.
risk toleranceThe system can still operate or can be downgraded in an orderly manner under pressure such as the absence of key personnel, the exit of a single node, external regulatory inquiries, etc.
Comparison with the "one-time launch" path
Dimensions
Stages (WCN)
Full stack at one time
Failure Diagnosis
Attributable to Network/Standards/Automation/Billing
Often Attributable to Blur
Capital efficiency
Each stage can be independently financed or verified through cooperation
Large amounts in the early stage are sunk in the chain and compliance
Trust accumulation
Each stage has random checkable outputs
Depends on narrative and time
Regulatory Dialogue
Progressive Disclosure and Tightening of Boundaries
Easy to cross the line in one go
Risk overview (across stages)
Stage misjudgmentForcibly "announce the next stage" for the financing rhythm. Release: Public access control checklist and scope of compliance evidence (within compliance permission).
Gamification of indicatorsSwipe registration and invalid deal. Release: Quality inspection and random audit samples.
The significance of the switching signal is to prevent self-deception internally and provide a "verifiable rhythm narrative" externally similar to Ethereum-style stage gating and the evolution of the head DeFi protocol version.