Lancelot

ETH/BTC ratio all time high is inevitable, it's not a matter of if it will happen, but when

@Dogeplaymid UMA.rocks founder ici, le but de notre comité ce n'est pas de rig le market mais de trouver la truth, c'est justement pour ça qu'on a un comité transparent et pas une seule personne (moi) qui décide

Pourquoi les manipulations sur Polymarket sont elles si courantes et impunies ? Depuis quelques jours, le bet "Iran military action against Oman by March 31 ?" n’est pas encore clos car le consensus n’est pas formel: 57 % de OUI/P2, 33 % de NON/P1 et 10 % de 50/50/P3 Le bet était à 12 votes sur Oui et 7 sur Non dans Experienced (Screen 1). La seule raison pour laquelle il n’était pas déjà résolu, c’est le fait qu’une personne "dontg" a contesté avec 750$ Mais pourquoi a t il dépensé 750 $ pour bloquer le vote Oui ?! Car à la base, "dontgambledontilt" aka "dontg" avait parié sur le Oui, mais le prix a chuté de 49,9 prix moyen d’achat à 16,2 prix moyen de vente, causant une perte de 750 $ (Screen 2) Il a vendu en perte tout en sachant qu’il avait raison sur le bet et s’est dit : pourquoi ne pas manipuler le prix et récupérer mes pertes ? Il a mis 750 $ de garantie pour que le bet ne puisse pas être validé/contesté le consensus: oracle.uma.xyz/?project=Polym… Il a ensuite acheté du Non. Puis « JessicaOnlyChild » a voté Non, suivi de la note « Additional context » qui a annulé les 8 liens en rapport avec le vote OUI postés par @CarOnPolymarket sur Discord: discord.com/channels/71859… Résultat : le bet a pumpé sur le Non à 100 %. Lorsqu’elle a voté Non, 7 autres vérificateurs ont voté Non dans les minutes qui ont suivi (Screen 3) + sur Discord: discord.com/channels/71859… Qui est "JessicaOnlyChild" et pourquoi ses votes ne devraient ils plus compter ? Elle a déjà manipulé à plusieurs reprises des bets, comme il y a moins d’une semaine: x.com/TheGreekTrader… Mais ce n’est pas nouveau : elle manipule les bets avec ses amis: x.com/GenaTheCroco/s… Et il faut savoir que @aenews, membres de vote pour résoudre les Bet, avait parié sur le Oui en sachant qu’il manipulait les bets pour gagner mais il s’est fait virer aujourd’hui car il faisait du pump and dump, comme son ami @frigodor qui en faisait avec Jessica (Screen 4, aenews en vert qui avait acheté et en noir "dontgambledontilt/dontg") qui achète du Non et conteste pour faire chuter le prix, etc.) J’apprécie Polymarket, mais ce n’est pas normal de pouvoir manipuler les bets en toute impunité et que le consensus ne soit pas réellement décentralisé @zachxbt @Dark_Emi_ @Atlantislq @PolymarketHelp @HugoMartingale @mustafap0ly @notyrjo RT et Like pour que le maximum de personnes puisse voir comment Polymarket font du pump and dump via l'UMA Merci DPM

@FastLife At least we are doing things transparently at UMA.rocks, telling everyone of our every move, posting our rationale on Discord, ... Do you prefer this or having BornTooLate and Across DAO controlling half the supply? We are making things better, not worse.

Translate from french with Grok because I'm too lazy to do it myself and I'm working IRL for a more ridiculous salary than Zora's airdrop. But I wanted to share again because it's a super interesting article on Polymarket's manipulation. ⮕ Quick to read. You will understand better why some people have extraordinary PnL's. ----- Why are manipulations on Polymarket so common and go unpunished? For the past few days, the market “Iran military action against Oman by March 31?” has still not been resolved because the consensus isn’t clear: 57% YES/P2, 33% NO/P1, and 10% 50/50/P3. The market stood at 12 votes for Yes and 7 for No in the Experienced group (Screen 1). The only reason it wasn’t already settled is that one user, “dontg,” disputed it with a $750 bond. But why did he spend $750 just to block the Yes outcome?! Because “dontgambledontilt” (aka “dontg”) had originally bet on Yes. The price then crashed from an average entry of 49.9 down to an average exit of 16.2, resulting in a $750 loss (Screen 2). He sold at a loss even though he knew he was right on the market, and basically thought: “Why not manipulate the price and get my money back?” So he posted a $750 bond to prevent the market from being validated/resolved by the UMA oracle (oracle.uma.xyz/?project=Polym…). He then bought No. Shortly after, “JessicaOnlyChild” voted No and added an “Additional context” note that dismissed the 8 Yes-supporting links previously posted by @CarOnPolymarket on Discord (discord.com/channels/71859…). Result: the market pumped to 100% No. The moment she voted No, seven other verifiers also voted No within minutes (Screen 3) — the same thing happened on Discord (discord.com/channels/71859…). Who is “JessicaOnlyChild” and why should her votes no longer count? She has already manipulated multiple markets, including one less than a week ago (x.com/TheGreekTrader…). And this isn’t new — she manipulates markets with her friends (x.com/GenaTheCroco/s…). It’s also worth noting that @aenews, a voting member responsible for resolving markets, had bet on Yes while actively manipulating outcomes to win. He was kicked out today for running pump-and-dump schemes, just like his friend @frigodor, who was doing the same thing with Jessica (Screen 4 shows aenews in green buying Yes, while “dontgambledontilt/dontg” in black is buying No and disputing to tank the price, etc.). I like Polymarket, but it’s not normal that people can manipulate markets with total impunity and that the consensus is not truly decentralized. @zachxbt @Dark_Emi_ @Atlantislq @PolymarketHelp @HugoMartingale @mustafap0ly @notyrjo RT and like so the maximum number of people can see how pump-and-dump schemes are being run on Polymarket via UMA.

@TheGreekTrader @koozy_pm @mustafap0ly Founder of uma.rocks here In what way exactly is POLY the solution apart from its market cap being higher than UMA? The system will likely be similar, buy as much POLY as you can and vote with it, same as currently, no?

@koozy_pm $POLY is the solution and according to senior intern @mustafap0ly it's their highest priority.

Sadly, a few influential Polymarket/UMA voters can basically decide the outcome of markets. Here's what just happened: There's a market on whether Trump talked with President Xi in March. Trump and Karoline Leavitt said they did, but China never confirmed it. And almost always (if not always), these kinds of calls are publicly announced by China, so that created a lot of doubt. That's why the odds dropped to around 17%. But today, literally nothing changed. No new evidence, no confirmation, nothing. The only thing that changed is that an influential UMA voter decided to vote that they talked. And just from that, the odds jumped from 17% to 95%. That's kind of insane. At this point, markets aren't resolving based on clear evidence, but based on what a few people like "JessicaOnlyChild" or "UMA rocks" think. I really hope Polymarket clarifies every market, until the new oracle system is live. It shouldn't be possible for a handful of non-Polymarket people to have that much influence over outcomes.

@BreakingOSInt @TheGreekTrader @zoltar02 This comment is highly underrated

@TheGreekTrader @zoltar02 What makes $POLY any different than UMA? Large whales will accumulate and then have massive sway on outcomes.

@TheGreekTrader Founder of UMA.rocks here, ask me anything

@0xBaseee @Atlantislq Interested to learn how POLY will fix this (i'm the founder of uma.rocks by the way)

@Atlantislq uma is fucked up, polymarket has to launch POLY asap to solve this problem

UMA holders, please take my money I honestly don’t understand how this oracle works

@TheGreekTrader Next time please tag @umadotrocks

@banan_crypto Next time please tag @umadotrocks

UMA Rocks couldn't fool the community. Polymarket works properly Yesterday, on "Who will Trump talk to in March?" market, Xi Jinping YES shares price started to increase Odds on that outcome had pumped from 17% to 95% BUT NOW odds are 2% there What madness was there? :0 Major UMA voters started pushing a YES resolution proposal Their main point was that Trump and his administration said they had talked to China And that's it No any major new public evidence. Or confirmation from China Ofc, for most ppl, that’s not enough And they started posting about it on X. Buying NO Shares. Asking UMA whales about their decision The odds have started to fall because most ppl thought they were too high 95% -> 65% -> 2% (we are here now) And this case shows the effectiveness of @Polymarket at its best However someoe may manipulate markets in the short term, odds in the end come back to a fair lvl

Have you ever wondered what Buddhism and Bitcoin have in common? I'm glad you ask because I've just wrote on article about it. Enjoy the read ⬇️ frigodor.substack.com/p/buddhism-is-…

Ppl have been lulled into thinking that Bitcoins “immutable” protocol makes it a better SoV than ETH. But there are two properties that Ethereum’s roadmap enable which will instantly make ETH an ideal SoV. 1) Native Privacy 2) Forced tx inclusion The first is estimated to go live by 2028 and the second is scheduled for the next hard fork. The combination of these things will make Ethereum truly unique as a credibly neutral platform and will solidify ETH as an ideal SoV.

"Being genuinely the best at one specific job is the best marketing strategy in an AI-first world. The single best strategy here is to go after long-tail niche markets, just so that you reduce the competition and aim at being the best or one of the best among a few."

My information consumption is now 1/4 X, 1/4 podcast interviews of the smartest practitioners, 1/4 talking to the leading AI models, and 1/4 reading old books. The opportunity cost of anything else is far too high, and rising daily.

@CarOnPolymarket so, Polymarket is next?

This is what happens when 99% of your users are airdrop farmers

@0xKolten @unbanksyETH @pear_protocol MORPHO has better than value accrual, it has token = equity, which is better in the long term

Just to clarify some stuff: Apollo didn’t really buy those tokens AFAIK. It said they “may.” Also, V4 is not instantly replacing V3, so there will be a net new revenue source on top of V3. If Aave will win passes, there will also be multiple net new product revenue sources going to the DAO. Meanwhile MORPHO has no value accrual mechanism that benefits holders.

First pair trade: long $MORPHO, short $AAVE using @pear_protocol (great ux btw) Thesis: Apollo buying Morpho tokens signals institutional conviction in the lending primitive (at the cost of AAVE). Meanwhile, AAVE core contributor leaving, and tension btw labs entity flaring up. Labs pushing v4 weakens, not strenghtens AAVE. As Evgeny wrote: "V4 is as unproven as Morpho, and so that differentiator is gone" - x.com/EvgenyGaevoy/s… - altogether bearish AAVE in low time frame. I will close if I feel that Morpho chart is showing weakness, and/or AAVE news fade into irrelevance next few days.

It's possible (and desirable) to take paths 1 & 3 at the same time. Letting TradFi bridge to crypto to make them think that they won, while building the self sovereign stack in the background.

@EvgenyGaevoy It's possible to take both paths 1 & 3 at the same time. Letting TradFi bridge to crypto to make them think that they won, while building the self sovereign stack in the background.

@jacob_jacquet That's cool bro but please fix the sign up on rezi, not working at the moment

Built with Claude Code resumetemplates.ai

so let me get this straight, majority of crypto is in existential crisis while - blackrock partners with uniswap - apollo partners with morpho - openai rolls out evmbench - hyperliquid launches us policy center genuinely some of the best news this space has seen in a very long time the future is bright

"The only race that actually matters is the one where you make enough money to get out of the race. This isn't about greed; it's about liberation. Most people use money to amplify their ego. They buy the Lambo to prove their existence to a hollow society. But the true purpose of money is to enable self-discovery. It is a tool to buy back your time so you can figure out the work that puts you in a state of "thoughtless joy." If your wealth doesn't enable you to connect with your core, those numbers - millions, billions - are useless. You must kill the "thief of comparison" before you can truly be free. Otherwise, you’re just a wealthy rat in a slightly more expensive cage." Well said.