Lancelot

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

ETH Tbilisi 2.3 - May 31 - 6pm (GMT+4) The Renaissance of the DeFi Lego | DeFi Builders Roundtable very cycle someone declares DeFi dead. Then the Lego clicks back together. So what's actually going on? 👇 1/3

@binji_x I'm in!

making a groupchat for people who like ethereum lmk

@lordjorx @Flowslikeosmo Morpho token = Morpho equity, that's the value, there is no value accrual mechanism for now

@Flowslikeosmo How Morpho token accrues value?

The best part about $MORPHO's YTD performance is that it proves just how important alignment is. - There's no DAO drama. - TVL is growing nicely. - Unity across stakeholders (Community, team, etc.). The market is simply pricing in an eventual redirect of value back to token holders.

@betmoardotfun @WSJ @aosipovich nice

Betmoar provided @WSJ with data for their recent piece by @aosipovich ! Check the article out below 👇

When a @Polymarket result is disputed, it goes to a decentralized panel of judges. But the system is rife with conflicts: ~60% of judges were linked to Polymarket accounts, and in nearly 20% of disputes we found judges tied to bets on the very markets they were deciding. w/ @aosipovich wsj.com/finance/polyma…

@LaLiLuLeL0x source: ethcc.io/archives/is-et…

Great article! Though you forgot to mention the most interesting part. The staking yield will not just be reduced but actually turn negative beyond a point. You will lose money when staking ETH, which is great because it will incentivise people to just hold ETH instead of holding derivatives like stETH. This is exactly the kind of incentive we need for the long-term security of Ethereum. 🙌

UMA.rocks founder here, great clickbait post, lots of suppositions, most of them are wrong. I'm not trading at all on PM, Scout wasn't excluded because he rigged markets while at UMA.rocks but because it was brought to our attention that he tried to rig markets BEFORE he joined UMA.rocks (huge difference)

Hopefully Polymarket is on precipice of replacing UMA, because the "oracle" that underpins the site is now a disinformation engine that has been taken over by rogue traders. (If you find the below post confusing, byzantine, stupid, or anything else, first of all that's probably partly my fault, and secondly that's also exactly what I am trying to convey: the resolution of markets is now a dizzying, corrupt mess.) -- The largest and most influential voter in the "oracle" that governs Polymarket's prediction market is no longer anyone with Risk Labs (UMA was created by a legit crypto company, but they've stopped updating UMA and largely abandoned it). It is now UMA Rocks, a collection of Polymarket traders. UMA Rocks decisions are made by various unqualified bozos, who have real-money positions in the markets they're voting to resolve, and thus have a strong incentives in resolving markets to something that personally benefits them. -- Which brings us to the market in question: corny loser Clavicular claimed/joked that he got a girl pregnant, as he has done in the past. He said she was pregnant within 10 days of meeting him. He offered no proof, and talks about it very vaguely, sometimes implying that it is true, sometimes implying that it is a joke. Polymarket has a relationship with Clavicular, and had a market up on a pregnancy announcement (we'll set aside whether Clavicular himself traded on this, I have no idea. He was aware of the market). Obviously a streamer is not inherently credible when his brand is making silly viral clips, and that is doubly true when the streamer is making vague comments. The rules correctly require a credible claim. It shouldn't expire yes until we get something...anything...that is credible. Common sense. Scrolling through the arguments, pretty much every single long-time user of Polymarket thinks it shouldn't count (even ironically including some yes holders). And as anyone who has tried to get pregnant with a partner will realize, his joke doesn't even make sense: it is next-to-impossible to go from sex to a positive pregnancy test within 10 days. But it IS going to expire to yes in a few hours for one reason: UMA Rocks has hijacked the voting process. A user named Scout (who was, at the time, one of the biggest yes holder and also a key UMA Rocks member) posted that it should be Yes because Clavicular is unimpeachable as a source on himself. Note here that Scout is already banned from Polymarket's discord server (very hard to do lol) for engaging in borderline criminal activity, before any of these events happened. Scout then propelled UMA Rocks to officially side with Yes. The second largest voter, a Risk Labs employee, then switched his vote after UMA Rocks voted (this was done out of self preservation, because if you vote on the losing side in UMA, you lose money). The vote was somewhat close in the first round, with "Yes" edging out "Too Early to Expire" in raw token votes (the vast majority of tokenholders voted "Too Early", but UMA Rocks led the small number of whales who actually decide the outcomes to voting "Yes"). Because of the way that UMA works -- it incentivizes the most popular answer rather than the truthful answer -- anything that is leading in a previous round is extremely likely to win. And so now the vote is overwhelmingly projected to go Yes. Clav's "announcement" was a few days ago, and we now know it is very unlikely that anyone is pregnant/girl was already kicked out of his house allegedly, and that it was extremely likely a viral joke from a streamer in need of positive PR...but the wheels are in motion and nobody is trying to stop it. -- Post-script: (1) Scout was kicked out of UMA Rocks a few hours ago for this scheme. (2) UMA Rocks has attempted to wield its influence in various markets since it became the largest holder of UMA a few weeks ago, often posting to flip the odds. But it also often ultimately fails, because Polymarket intercedes and clarifies against them. (3) Polymarket has strangely not clarified or commented on this one, despite it receiving a lot of attention. Which brings me to my final point. It's now been a year since the minerals market heist, where users lost millions of dollars to a fraudulent UMA scheme that took place over a weekend. We were assured that things would change. Unfortunately nothing has changed, and it has gotten far, far, far worse. UMA is far more vulnerable than it was a year ago, and the inmates are starting to take the asylum.

Today, we're launching ZCAM, an iPhone camera app to Prove What’s Real. ZCAM cryptographically signs photos and videos at the moment of capture. Anyone can independently verify the content came from a real device and hasn't been altered or AI-generated.

they are regulating emojis and you think every ounce of freedom is not going to be taken from you? fight back

say it with me now. experts are fake, smart generalists rule the world, everything is designed by people no smarter than you, and courage is in shorter supply than genius

@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