Sabitlenmiş Tweet
votesa ■
3.2K posts
votesa ■
@votesa
Web3 addicted, degen, shitposter, professional roundtripper.
Katılım Mayıs 2021
1.2K Takip Edilen2.3K Takipçiler
wtf is $sato
how the curve works and what happens when 99% of supply gets minted
sato keeps minting new tokens until ~2300 ETH gets paid into the contract in total (currently ~1060). when minted supply hits 20.79M (99% of the 21M cap), the `selfDeprecated` flag flips on-chain and minting locks forever
by the curve's math, price at 99% lands around ~$5.5 per sato at current eth, mcap ~$116M (now $9.89M). that's roughly 12x from here by pure formula. could be way higher in practice from fomo overshoot on secondary
what happens after the flip:
→ no new sato will ever exist again. supply can only shrink from there: every sell burns tokens, no buy mints them back
→ the bonding curve still buys back from sellers. the contract holds every wei of eth ever paid in (minus what early sellers already pulled). that becomes a permanent floor under the price until reserves drain
→ price discovery moves from formula to market. uniswap pools, otc, whatever gets built. the curve stays as a guaranteed floor you can always sell back to
→ race to exit. the earlier you sell through the curve after the flip, the more eth you get, because reserves drain with every sell. late sellers get crumbs. every early holder knows this, and in the first hours after 99% there will be a run for the exit. a bank run by design
at current inflow (~1000 eth/24h) we're a couple days away from 99%
if 99% actually gets filled, this will be one of the cleanest experiments with an immutable bonding curve in eth history. let's see what happens
English
"Reserve Backed Token" reality check, 48h in
they branded this as "the only megaeth token with real backing instead of gambling USDm away". the chart says otherwise
→ market price $5.64, backing $5.50, premium gone
→ BAM (the price floor mechanism) "not guaranteed to be live at launch" per their docs. so there's no defense if it breaks below NAV
→ per ToS: RBT holders have no redemption right against reserves. backing numbers are "informational only"
→ ToS caps team liability at $100 USD total. you lose 50K, you get $100
genuinely shocked this passed @megamafia review. how do you launch a protocol asking users to deposit real money with docs this contradictory.
aged like wine.
votesa ■@votesa
Blackhaven on @megaeth literally encoded a soft rug into their bond contract every @blackhaven bond auto-routes 10% of your USDm to a wallet the team spends "at their sole discretion" not my words. their docs. the actual mechanic: → you bond USDm, get RBT vested over a fixed term → 90% flows to backing reserves (the part that secures RBT) → 10% flows to a separate "protocol reserves" fee address → from there, quote, "core contributors will transfer out the fees... based on operational needs at their sole discretion" translation for normal humans: a multisig the team treats as an expense account. no DAO. no vote. no vest. no cap. no public ledger of what gets pulled or when. every 10M of TVL = 1M straight to the team. zero accountability. pure greed. i had to re-read this three times. ten percent. of the body of the deposit. not of yield, not of fees, not of profits. of the principal. who signs off on this?? and the whole thing is wrapped in MegaETH points fomo. "bond your stables, farm ecosystem points, get the airdrop bro." the points are the cheese. the 10% skim is the price you pay for sniffing them. cherry on top: their main price defense (BAM, the arb module that buys back RBT below NAV) is "not guaranteed to be live at launch." direct quote. so the team is already collecting their cut while the actual stability mechanic doesn't even exist yet. for context: even OlympusDAO, the OG bonding protocol that everyone called a ponzi, never took a 10% cut of principal to a discretionary team wallet. their fees ran through DAO governance. and the part that genuinely stings: this is the protocol getting positioned as MegaETH's "reserve layer." this is what the chain wants to be known for? NGMI for MegaETH.
English
Been watching @internbehavior for a few days now.
Internbehavior isn't the project.
Internbehavior is the showroom.
The project is what @igoryuzo is quietly stacking underneath and once you see it, you can't unsee it:
what is building:
— Bankr — AI agent for crypto operations;
— uniswapV4-hooks-skill — teaching AI to build secure V4 hooks;
— @internbehavior — public AI trading agent with its own signals:
/signals → SKILL.md for other agents;
copy trade prompts → API for agents;
EDGE/WETH hook → built using the V4-hooks-skill;
treasury.
@bankrbot gives agents a way to act in crypto.
The V4 hooks skill gives those agents a way to build secure liquidity primitives — not just use them, build them.
@internbehavior is what happens when you point that toolkit at yourself: a live AI trader that uses Bankr-style execution, holds liquidity in a pool built via the hooks skill, ships its own indices as SKILL.md files for other agents to consume, and posts copy-prompts as a public API surface.
The EDGE/WETH "Dynamic" hook? Almost certainly built using his own V4-hooks-skill. The flywheel is recursive — the toolkit shipped a real product, the product validates the toolkit, the token captures the value of both.
And now polymarket appears in the treasury, so the surface area expands again — from perps to event markets, from one agent to potentially many.
This is what AI-native infra actually looks like, not a whitepaper, not a roadmap deck.
A guy quietly shipping every layer of the stack and using one of them as the public-facing demo.
Intern is the showroom.
The stack is the product.
github.com/igoryuzo/unisw…
English
appreciate the reply, this is the first one with actual acknowledgement that the docs are incomplete. respect for that.
but it's strange that a protocol already taking real user deposits doesn't have full, deployed documentation from day one.
you just said the fees go into the treasury wallet, while the docs say "designated fee address."
you also said 4 week bootstrap, while the docs say "no defined trigger or timeline." these aren't small inconsistencies, this is the difference between what users see and what's actually happening.
and confirming current backing metrics are wrong is honestly worse than the original post. people are bonding right now based on bad numbers.
ok, waiting for the fixes on monday.
English
I know this whole thread is just you farming engagement because that’s all you new crypto accounts care about.
The docs need some work. The fees aren’t going into a separate wallet, they’re still going into the treasury wallet, but a 10% fee is calculated on every deposit for operations.
This fee is only for the bootstrap period, which runs 4 weeks to grow treasury and operations. We seeded the initial backing and LP with our own runway and fair launched without doing a raise.
The backing question is important. We could have easily done the excess mint and paid ourselves the way OG OHM bonds did, but we didn’t want to go that route.
We’re the only project on @megaeth with a token people can actually trade and that has a backing, instead of just gambling their USDm away.
The current backing on our metrics needs to be updated because it doesn’t account for the USDm in LP and doesn’t subtract rewards from circ supply. We’ll have a fix on Monday.
votesa ■@votesa
appreciate you confirming the post in the first line. "everything mentioned is in our public docs" → yes, 10% of every deposit goes straight to your pocket via a sole-discretion wallet. that was the whole point. the rest is misdirection. backing math wasn't the question.
English
English
Blackhaven on @megaeth literally encoded a soft rug into their bond contract
every @blackhaven bond auto-routes 10% of your USDm to a wallet the team spends "at their sole discretion"
not my words. their docs.
the actual mechanic:
→ you bond USDm, get RBT vested over a fixed term
→ 90% flows to backing reserves (the part that secures RBT)
→ 10% flows to a separate "protocol reserves" fee address
→ from there, quote, "core contributors will transfer out the fees... based on operational needs at their sole discretion"
translation for normal humans: a multisig the team treats as an expense account. no DAO. no vote. no vest. no cap. no public ledger of what gets pulled or when.
every 10M of TVL = 1M straight to the team. zero accountability. pure greed.
i had to re-read this three times. ten percent. of the body of the deposit. not of yield, not of fees, not of profits. of the principal. who signs off on this??
and the whole thing is wrapped in MegaETH points fomo. "bond your stables, farm ecosystem points, get the airdrop bro." the points are the cheese. the 10% skim is the price you pay for sniffing them.
cherry on top: their main price defense (BAM, the arb module that buys back RBT below NAV) is "not guaranteed to be live at launch." direct quote.
so the team is already collecting their cut while the actual stability mechanic doesn't even exist yet.
for context: even OlympusDAO, the OG bonding protocol that everyone called a ponzi, never took a 10% cut of principal to a discretionary team wallet. their fees ran through DAO governance.
and the part that genuinely stings: this is the protocol getting positioned as MegaETH's "reserve layer." this is what the chain wants to be known for?
NGMI for MegaETH.
English
the easiest long was longing $MON right after it dipped 15% after account suspension.
my tg got the alpha
higher
gmoanad
English
@CCheeseSandwich 10% off principal is straight up greedy. do the math:
100M TVL → 10M to the team wallet
500M TVL → 50M
etc
if that looks normal to you, congrats, you're exactly who they built this for.
English
@votesa How does 10% fee for operational needs in any way make it a soft rug? Your logic makes no sense.
English
appreciate you confirming the post in the first line.
"everything mentioned is in our public docs" → yes, 10% of every deposit goes straight to your pocket via a sole-discretion wallet. that was the whole point.
the rest is misdirection. backing math wasn't the question.
Blackhaven@blackhaven
Everything mentioned is in our public docs. On the Olympus comparison, OHM bonds didn't fee the principal, but an equivalent amount of OHM was minted to the treasury alongside every bond. Olympus: 1,000 DAI in, 100 OHM to the bonder, another 100 OHM minted to treasury. Backing added per OHM = ~$5. Blackhaven: 1,000 USDM in, 900 flows to reserves backing RBT, 100 RBT to the bonder, no extra RBT minted. Backing added per RBT = ~$9. Even with the 10% fee, RBT bonds receive a higher per-token backing than your OHM comparison.
English
sat down to study the ecosystem, planned a full breakdown. dropped it once i realized most terminal apps are casinos, gambling packs, binary options, and ponzis like blackhaven. the whole campaign is just extracting money from ICO/presale buyers and fleecing newcomers. but lol what was i even expecting. tech? lol
English
@votesa @megaeth @blackhaven Everything about this chain unfortunately has turned out to be a scam. The apps they put on a pedestal have 0 unique mechanics just reskinned existing things. black haven is an ohm fork (in 2026 lmao)
English
this OG schooled the "new folks" then deleted the tweet. don't worry grandpa @joakimhi, screenshot's right here.
bro that "OG knowledge" is sitting in the Legacy section of olympus docs. deprecated by olympus themselves.
you're quoting a museum exhibit and calling it a gotcha.
i compared blackhaven to current olympus, not the 2021 version. you skipped to 2021 on purpose. convenient.
and "olympus was greedier 5 years ago" doesn't justify blackhaven taking 10% of every deposit straight to a sole-discretion wallet in 2026. that's not a defense. that's a confession.
votesa ■@votesa
Blackhaven on @megaeth literally encoded a soft rug into their bond contract every @blackhaven bond auto-routes 10% of your USDm to a wallet the team spends "at their sole discretion" not my words. their docs. the actual mechanic: → you bond USDm, get RBT vested over a fixed term → 90% flows to backing reserves (the part that secures RBT) → 10% flows to a separate "protocol reserves" fee address → from there, quote, "core contributors will transfer out the fees... based on operational needs at their sole discretion" translation for normal humans: a multisig the team treats as an expense account. no DAO. no vote. no vest. no cap. no public ledger of what gets pulled or when. every 10M of TVL = 1M straight to the team. zero accountability. pure greed. i had to re-read this three times. ten percent. of the body of the deposit. not of yield, not of fees, not of profits. of the principal. who signs off on this?? and the whole thing is wrapped in MegaETH points fomo. "bond your stables, farm ecosystem points, get the airdrop bro." the points are the cheese. the 10% skim is the price you pay for sniffing them. cherry on top: their main price defense (BAM, the arb module that buys back RBT below NAV) is "not guaranteed to be live at launch." direct quote. so the team is already collecting their cut while the actual stability mechanic doesn't even exist yet. for context: even OlympusDAO, the OG bonding protocol that everyone called a ponzi, never took a 10% cut of principal to a discretionary team wallet. their fees ran through DAO governance. and the part that genuinely stings: this is the protocol getting positioned as MegaETH's "reserve layer." this is what the chain wants to be known for? NGMI for MegaETH.
English
Everything mentioned is in our public docs.
On the Olympus comparison, OHM bonds didn't fee the principal, but an equivalent amount of OHM was minted to the treasury alongside every bond.
Olympus: 1,000 DAI in, 100 OHM to the bonder, another 100 OHM minted to treasury. Backing added per OHM = ~$5.
Blackhaven: 1,000 USDM in, 900 flows to reserves backing RBT, 100 RBT to the bonder, no extra RBT minted. Backing added per RBT = ~$9.
Even with the 10% fee, RBT bonds receive a higher per-token backing than your OHM comparison.
English
English
@Smoltingfan @megaeth @blackhaven wait. they're actually in megamafia?? no way. tell me you're joking.
English
@Robsvr @megaeth @blackhaven it's real. quote is in the OP screenshot, page is docs.blackhaven.xyz/products/fixed…. read it yourself.
English
English
@archtuxfan @megaeth @blackhaven exactly. they kept the mechanic and dropped the ethos. just the extractive parts, none of the accountability.
English
English
English
