This is a good question to raise, but I feel like it’s raised at the wrong part of the process. This proposal responds to a goal we put forth this season, and one week was given to voice any disagreement with the goals and start an appeal proposal if necessary. Given that no such disagreement was raised, I think we should judge proposals by their ability to address the given goal rather than the goal itself.
To address your point though (but again also emphasizing that it’s raised at the wrong part of the process), I disagree that the membership is for creating sales and exit liquidity. People want to support the mission of longevity, and they could have bought tokens, but instead they opted for the membership (which is also converted to tokens). These people are probably not too familiar with web3. We want to understand who they are, why they are supporting us, and how we can incentivize more support, so we can further get more people to help fund longevity research.