Chef 🐸

hi my name is manny and I like bobo and memes. The Green Exchange ! @ourbit

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

Let’s break out of the matrix together

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@tedcruz solana:7QAn5wqkBcGuvfLLC16iLvX8fPyqXrzkMqnzHLS9NNna takeover

[Ted Cruz @tedcruz]

Tragically, every word of this is accurate.

It’s a foreign influence op that is ripping our Nation apart 👇👇👇

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

You got Ted Cruz retweeting Nick Fuentes

The solana:7QAn5wqkBcGuvfLLC16iLvX8fPyqXrzkMqnzHLS9NNna movement is just starting

[Ted Cruz @tedcruz]

Tragically, every word of this is accurate.

It’s a foreign influence op that is ripping our Nation apart 👇👇👇

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@LexaproTrader @BoboCapital_LLP Pumpfun robbed an entire contest

https://t.co/Gi5gDIWPFQ

Never forget

[queenalyssa @queenalysoor]

Catastrophic error.

@SECGov, further to our earlier correspondence, I kindly refer you to the following findings.

At precisely 14:00 UTC on 9 November, when https://t.co/69iSw7MUMz’s $2.5M competition closed, BOBO held 1,703.392 SOL in its quote vault, while BearCouncil’s StonkFun GROYPER held 382.739 SOL. At the cutoff price, their estimated total pool values were $294,317 and $66,131 respectively.

Meanwhile, the $1.5M winning squad retained $7,022.65 in credited STOKE profits against 266.623 SOL in its vault, $10,362.87 on INVERSE against 171.904 SOL, $7,043.16 on KIM against 33.538 SOL, and $6,106.72 on CYBRLK against just 6.868 SOL.

@Chefofmemes was correct on the arithmetic, and by a devastating margin. The historical reserve evidence vindicates his central observation with finality. BOBO held 248.006 times CYBRLK’s SOL, a disparity exceeding two orders of magnitude. GROYPER held 55.725 times as much.

Even after adjusting for the reserves the pools actually priced against, those multiples remained 69.660 and 15.651 respectively. There are important chronological distinctions: CYBRLK held more SOL than GROYPER at four of the six winning sales I matched on 3 November.

STOKE presents the cleaner comparison, with $4,755.23 in unrealised profits remaining in the winning score at the exact cutoff, when its effective reserves stood at 242.754 SOL against GROYPER’s 382.702. STOKE nevertheless offered the better modelled exit on a 10 SOL position; at 50 SOL, GROYPER did.

More remarkably so, @pumpfun final highlights still credit BearCouncil with $12,970.72 on BOBO, including $12,641.05 unrealised. Yet the GROYPER mint identified in BearCouncil’s earlier public group snapshot is absent from those final highlights, and Pump has not disclosed the specific trades, positions or amounts excluded.

The known BearCouncil GROYPER holdings were valued at 816.72 SOL using the marginal price, yet a modelled immediate liquidation returned just 255.26 SOL. The winning squad’s STOKE holding, underlying its unrealised credit, was marked at 61.47 SOL and returned 48.32 SOL under the corresponding exit model.

Ah think about the implications. When a competition rewards unrealised P&L, moving the price through a relatively small trade can revalue an entire holding. And when an actual buyer executes at that price, the profits on the tokens sold become realised as well. The distinction between genuine price discovery and artificial price formation becomes fundamental, yes.

This is BASIC trading economics. Illiquidity and manipulation are not interchangeable. How does such an elementary distinction become the basis of a multimillion-dollar competition controversy? A market can be thin without being manipulated, just as a completed, profitable sale can result from artificial price formation.

The irony is the books were almost always significantly deeper on the excluded group. But if https://t.co/69iSw7MUMz’s residual defence is that the excluded profits were manipulated, rather than the now-refuted illiquid tokens argument, the historical liquidity findings on their own rather illiquid tokens make the examination of the winning squad’s own trading unavoidable.

The preliminary wallet findings suggest a sophistication and scale of price-setting activity within the winning book that could make ANY manipulation alleged against BearCouncil look like a teenager standing beside a mafia boss. The wallet analyses are voluminous and will require more time, but the emerging picture is of a far more elaborate trading operation which is a much bigger picture to this story than this distraction and ultimately well-settled liquidity issue.

Solana ledger links

* BOBO cutoff: https://t.co/6yOBZ7js6D

* GROYPER cutoff: https://t.co/Q6IbUHLSh0

* STOKE cutoff: https://t.co/KG7h0hW45h

* CYBRLK cutoff: https://t.co/SCiZFDbbhq

* CYBRLK 3 Nov sale: https://t.co/dRdg1qOBgC

* GROYPER vault at that sale: https://t.co/j5ncHmKLFB

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@tickerBITCOINbb Lmfaooooooooo I will do this

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@LagxSol Well deserved legend you will win

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@phantom @solana I can send you guys a solana:7QAn5wqkBcGuvfLLC16iLvX8fPyqXrzkMqnzHLS9NNna and solana:4nV5gNwwP68zUDat26ySChREqVaQaLudfJBkSgEzpump plushie ?

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@0xEnjooyer @Pumpfun loves communities two days after robbing a community of 250,000 lmfao

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@yagobiverse @OnlyLJC @TheWhiteScammer Crazy thing is this is the same groyper from a year ago just migrated

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@PumpfunEco Reminder that pumpfun just rigged a competition and stole 250,000 from third place

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@Clark10x We appreciate you including us in this brother respect 🫡

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@a1lon9 @Pumpfun @SeiNetwork Reminder that pumpfun just rigged a competition to rob bagworkers of 250,000

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@FinanceLancelot @Pumpfun just robbed a team of 9-5ers for 250,000 crypto must end pumpfun to survive

https://t.co/kdxUE3warH

[queenalyssa @queenalysoor]

Catastrophic error.

@SECGov, further to our earlier correspondence, I kindly refer you to the following findings.

At precisely 14:00 UTC on 9 November, when https://t.co/69iSw7MUMz’s $2.5M competition closed, BOBO held 1,703.392 SOL in its quote vault, while BearCouncil’s StonkFun GROYPER held 382.739 SOL. At the cutoff price, their estimated total pool values were $294,317 and $66,131 respectively.

Meanwhile, the $1.5M winning squad retained $7,022.65 in credited STOKE profits against 266.623 SOL in its vault, $10,362.87 on INVERSE against 171.904 SOL, $7,043.16 on KIM against 33.538 SOL, and $6,106.72 on CYBRLK against just 6.868 SOL.

@Chefofmemes was correct on the arithmetic, and by a devastating margin. The historical reserve evidence vindicates his central observation with finality. BOBO held 248.006 times CYBRLK’s SOL, a disparity exceeding two orders of magnitude. GROYPER held 55.725 times as much.

Even after adjusting for the reserves the pools actually priced against, those multiples remained 69.660 and 15.651 respectively. There are important chronological distinctions: CYBRLK held more SOL than GROYPER at four of the six winning sales I matched on 3 November.

STOKE presents the cleaner comparison, with $4,755.23 in unrealised profits remaining in the winning score at the exact cutoff, when its effective reserves stood at 242.754 SOL against GROYPER’s 382.702. STOKE nevertheless offered the better modelled exit on a 10 SOL position; at 50 SOL, GROYPER did.

More remarkably so, @pumpfun final highlights still credit BearCouncil with $12,970.72 on BOBO, including $12,641.05 unrealised. Yet the GROYPER mint identified in BearCouncil’s earlier public group snapshot is absent from those final highlights, and Pump has not disclosed the specific trades, positions or amounts excluded.

The known BearCouncil GROYPER holdings were valued at 816.72 SOL using the marginal price, yet a modelled immediate liquidation returned just 255.26 SOL. The winning squad’s STOKE holding, underlying its unrealised credit, was marked at 61.47 SOL and returned 48.32 SOL under the corresponding exit model.

Ah think about the implications. When a competition rewards unrealised P&L, moving the price through a relatively small trade can revalue an entire holding. And when an actual buyer executes at that price, the profits on the tokens sold become realised as well. The distinction between genuine price discovery and artificial price formation becomes fundamental, yes.

This is BASIC trading economics. Illiquidity and manipulation are not interchangeable. How does such an elementary distinction become the basis of a multimillion-dollar competition controversy? A market can be thin without being manipulated, just as a completed, profitable sale can result from artificial price formation.

The irony is the books were almost always significantly deeper on the excluded group. But if https://t.co/69iSw7MUMz’s residual defence is that the excluded profits were manipulated, rather than the now-refuted illiquid tokens argument, the historical liquidity findings on their own rather illiquid tokens make the examination of the winning squad’s own trading unavoidable.

The preliminary wallet findings suggest a sophistication and scale of price-setting activity within the winning book that could make ANY manipulation alleged against BearCouncil look like a teenager standing beside a mafia boss. The wallet analyses are voluminous and will require more time, but the emerging picture is of a far more elaborate trading operation which is a much bigger picture to this story than this distraction and ultimately well-settled liquidity issue.

Solana ledger links

* BOBO cutoff: https://t.co/6yOBZ7js6D

* GROYPER cutoff: https://t.co/Q6IbUHLSh0

* STOKE cutoff: https://t.co/KG7h0hW45h

* CYBRLK cutoff: https://t.co/SCiZFDbbhq

* CYBRLK 3 Nov sale: https://t.co/dRdg1qOBgC

* GROYPER vault at that sale: https://t.co/j5ncHmKLFB

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@Clark10x https://t.co/kdxUE3warH

We will never forget what they did

[queenalyssa @queenalysoor]

Catastrophic error.

@SECGov, further to our earlier correspondence, I kindly refer you to the following findings.

At precisely 14:00 UTC on 9 November, when https://t.co/69iSw7MUMz’s $2.5M competition closed, BOBO held 1,703.392 SOL in its quote vault, while BearCouncil’s StonkFun GROYPER held 382.739 SOL. At the cutoff price, their estimated total pool values were $294,317 and $66,131 respectively.

Meanwhile, the $1.5M winning squad retained $7,022.65 in credited STOKE profits against 266.623 SOL in its vault, $10,362.87 on INVERSE against 171.904 SOL, $7,043.16 on KIM against 33.538 SOL, and $6,106.72 on CYBRLK against just 6.868 SOL.

@Chefofmemes was correct on the arithmetic, and by a devastating margin. The historical reserve evidence vindicates his central observation with finality. BOBO held 248.006 times CYBRLK’s SOL, a disparity exceeding two orders of magnitude. GROYPER held 55.725 times as much.

Even after adjusting for the reserves the pools actually priced against, those multiples remained 69.660 and 15.651 respectively. There are important chronological distinctions: CYBRLK held more SOL than GROYPER at four of the six winning sales I matched on 3 November.

STOKE presents the cleaner comparison, with $4,755.23 in unrealised profits remaining in the winning score at the exact cutoff, when its effective reserves stood at 242.754 SOL against GROYPER’s 382.702. STOKE nevertheless offered the better modelled exit on a 10 SOL position; at 50 SOL, GROYPER did.

More remarkably so, @pumpfun final highlights still credit BearCouncil with $12,970.72 on BOBO, including $12,641.05 unrealised. Yet the GROYPER mint identified in BearCouncil’s earlier public group snapshot is absent from those final highlights, and Pump has not disclosed the specific trades, positions or amounts excluded.

The known BearCouncil GROYPER holdings were valued at 816.72 SOL using the marginal price, yet a modelled immediate liquidation returned just 255.26 SOL. The winning squad’s STOKE holding, underlying its unrealised credit, was marked at 61.47 SOL and returned 48.32 SOL under the corresponding exit model.

Ah think about the implications. When a competition rewards unrealised P&L, moving the price through a relatively small trade can revalue an entire holding. And when an actual buyer executes at that price, the profits on the tokens sold become realised as well. The distinction between genuine price discovery and artificial price formation becomes fundamental, yes.

This is BASIC trading economics. Illiquidity and manipulation are not interchangeable. How does such an elementary distinction become the basis of a multimillion-dollar competition controversy? A market can be thin without being manipulated, just as a completed, profitable sale can result from artificial price formation.

The irony is the books were almost always significantly deeper on the excluded group. But if https://t.co/69iSw7MUMz’s residual defence is that the excluded profits were manipulated, rather than the now-refuted illiquid tokens argument, the historical liquidity findings on their own rather illiquid tokens make the examination of the winning squad’s own trading unavoidable.

The preliminary wallet findings suggest a sophistication and scale of price-setting activity within the winning book that could make ANY manipulation alleged against BearCouncil look like a teenager standing beside a mafia boss. The wallet analyses are voluminous and will require more time, but the emerging picture is of a far more elaborate trading operation which is a much bigger picture to this story than this distraction and ultimately well-settled liquidity issue.

Solana ledger links

* BOBO cutoff: https://t.co/6yOBZ7js6D

* GROYPER cutoff: https://t.co/Q6IbUHLSh0

* STOKE cutoff: https://t.co/KG7h0hW45h

* CYBRLK cutoff: https://t.co/SCiZFDbbhq

* CYBRLK 3 Nov sale: https://t.co/dRdg1qOBgC

* GROYPER vault at that sale: https://t.co/j5ncHmKLFB

[Clark 🆓 @Clark10x]

Let's recap:
-Fomo becomes officially integrated into X Cashtags yesterday
-Today 1.5% of the circulating $PUMP supply unlocks for team/investors
-Float has their next airdrop today
-Elysium had several $5m+ runners in 4 days
-Bear council gets disqualified from 3rd place in the Pump Fun squad competition for reasons unknown

Pump fun: distract them & twap $mihao

At least they picked an organic community for this so MAYBE some people believe this PA is organic, but this is only after their entire payroll got in the coin hours before Ansem made it his entire personality

Also all of this to highlight the fact that at this specific snapshot in time the pf leaderboard has a higher unrealized 24h pnl than fomo

Wow!

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@wyafam_ @JacalCrypto Bros took us out for being “illiquid” and we were actually the most liquid squad
Don’t expect you to read all this but a like would help to get it out more

https://t.co/kdxUE3vCC9

[queenalyssa @queenalysoor]

Catastrophic error.

@SECGov, further to our earlier correspondence, I kindly refer you to the following findings.

At precisely 14:00 UTC on 9 November, when https://t.co/69iSw7MUMz’s $2.5M competition closed, BOBO held 1,703.392 SOL in its quote vault, while BearCouncil’s StonkFun GROYPER held 382.739 SOL. At the cutoff price, their estimated total pool values were $294,317 and $66,131 respectively.

Meanwhile, the $1.5M winning squad retained $7,022.65 in credited STOKE profits against 266.623 SOL in its vault, $10,362.87 on INVERSE against 171.904 SOL, $7,043.16 on KIM against 33.538 SOL, and $6,106.72 on CYBRLK against just 6.868 SOL.

@Chefofmemes was correct on the arithmetic, and by a devastating margin. The historical reserve evidence vindicates his central observation with finality. BOBO held 248.006 times CYBRLK’s SOL, a disparity exceeding two orders of magnitude. GROYPER held 55.725 times as much.

Even after adjusting for the reserves the pools actually priced against, those multiples remained 69.660 and 15.651 respectively. There are important chronological distinctions: CYBRLK held more SOL than GROYPER at four of the six winning sales I matched on 3 November.

STOKE presents the cleaner comparison, with $4,755.23 in unrealised profits remaining in the winning score at the exact cutoff, when its effective reserves stood at 242.754 SOL against GROYPER’s 382.702. STOKE nevertheless offered the better modelled exit on a 10 SOL position; at 50 SOL, GROYPER did.

More remarkably so, @pumpfun final highlights still credit BearCouncil with $12,970.72 on BOBO, including $12,641.05 unrealised. Yet the GROYPER mint identified in BearCouncil’s earlier public group snapshot is absent from those final highlights, and Pump has not disclosed the specific trades, positions or amounts excluded.

The known BearCouncil GROYPER holdings were valued at 816.72 SOL using the marginal price, yet a modelled immediate liquidation returned just 255.26 SOL. The winning squad’s STOKE holding, underlying its unrealised credit, was marked at 61.47 SOL and returned 48.32 SOL under the corresponding exit model.

Ah think about the implications. When a competition rewards unrealised P&L, moving the price through a relatively small trade can revalue an entire holding. And when an actual buyer executes at that price, the profits on the tokens sold become realised as well. The distinction between genuine price discovery and artificial price formation becomes fundamental, yes.

This is BASIC trading economics. Illiquidity and manipulation are not interchangeable. How does such an elementary distinction become the basis of a multimillion-dollar competition controversy? A market can be thin without being manipulated, just as a completed, profitable sale can result from artificial price formation.

The irony is the books were almost always significantly deeper on the excluded group. But if https://t.co/69iSw7MUMz’s residual defence is that the excluded profits were manipulated, rather than the now-refuted illiquid tokens argument, the historical liquidity findings on their own rather illiquid tokens make the examination of the winning squad’s own trading unavoidable.

The preliminary wallet findings suggest a sophistication and scale of price-setting activity within the winning book that could make ANY manipulation alleged against BearCouncil look like a teenager standing beside a mafia boss. The wallet analyses are voluminous and will require more time, but the emerging picture is of a far more elaborate trading operation which is a much bigger picture to this story than this distraction and ultimately well-settled liquidity issue.

Solana ledger links

* BOBO cutoff: https://t.co/6yOBZ7js6D

* GROYPER cutoff: https://t.co/Q6IbUHLSh0

* STOKE cutoff: https://t.co/KG7h0hW45h

* CYBRLK cutoff: https://t.co/SCiZFDbbhq

* CYBRLK 3 Nov sale: https://t.co/dRdg1qOBgC

* GROYPER vault at that sale: https://t.co/j5ncHmKLFB

[Chef 🐸 @Chefofmemes]

@TheMisterTurtle