Built on one
settlement asset.
Three surfaces, one token underneath. Each stands on its own; together they compound.
Pay for gas anywhere,
holding one asset.
Existing answers are partial. Bridges move assets but still need gas on both sides. Exchanges work only for people who already have an account. Gas sponsorship works but ties the user to one application, one chain, and one sponsor's balance sheet.
The user signs an intent
They hold STTR and nothing else. No native token on the destination chain, no prior bridging.
A paymaster fronts the gas
It pays the network in the native asset and is compensated in STTR. The chain sees an ordinary paid transaction.
STTR moves natively between chains
ERC-7802 burn-and-mint rather than wrapped representations, so there is one STTR, not a family of bridged copies.
Why the token has no transfer fee
A fee-on-transfer token cannot do this job. Paymasters, bridges and concentrated-liquidity pools all require that a transfer of n delivers exactly n. A 1% fee does not make the token 1% worse at this — it makes it unusable. That is why there is no fee mechanism in the contract at all.
Money that moves
between people.
The consumer surface for the same rail. Balances, payments and settlement between people, denominated in STTR — so the asset someone holds to use the network is the asset they already use to pay each other.
One balance, no chain to pick
Sending money should not require choosing a network. The app settles underneath; the user sees an amount and a recipient.
Gas is already handled
Because gas abstraction sits underneath, a first-time user with only STTR can transact immediately.
Unit of account
Balances, transfers and in-app settlement are denominated in STTR rather than converted at each step.
One token, one vote —
and the vote has to be real.
Naive one-token-one-vote is trivially defeated: borrow a large balance in a flash loan, vote, repay, all in one transaction. Governance decided by whoever can borrow most for twelve seconds is not governance.
Checkpointed voting power
ERC-5805 records voting power at each point in time. A Governor reads it at a timepoint before the proposal existed, so a balance acquired afterwards carries no weight. The test suite runs this exact attack and asserts the borrowed balance votes zero.
Delegation is opt-in
Tokens do not vote until delegated, including to yourself. Unclaimed and idle supply cannot be counted as consent for something nobody chose.
Locked tokens do not vote
The vesting contract never delegates, so unvested team and investor supply carries no governance weight while it is still locked.
Timestamps, not block numbers
The token's clock runs in mode=timestamp, so proposal windows mean the same thing across chains with different block times.
The Governor and Timelock contracts are not yet written. The token is ready for them; the governance layer is on the roadmap, not shipped.