I made
https://t.co/iCJOxOqFj8
to interact directly with legacy dex routers on Avalanche. Useful for reflection/fee tokens if a dex's site won't route through the appropriate function call
ggs, not sure why anyone would ever use polymarket again. I feel awful for the people that purchased at much larger prices before the clarification, this is highway robbery
Bitcoin at $126k:
Man, I wish I had one more chance to buy at $66k.
Bitcoin at $66k:
It’s a Ponzi.
It’s going to zero.
I’m waiting for lower.
Conviction is why a few get rich.
I now have a $1m position in $BMNR
@BitMNR is heavily undervalued at the moment amidst crypto pressure and DAT collapse across the board.
Likely a good entry point here.
@jdotarnold Yeah they are hiding behind us precedent even tho they have don'le the opposite. Then they add clarification after May 31st that shows up on the UMA voters so the UMA vote was decided by polymarket prior to a vote
Until recently, I believed @Polymarket was a project that could deliver a game-changing airdrop in the style of $HYPE, bring hope back to airdrop farmers and breathe new life into the trenches.
I didn’t even really see my $1,200 in negative PnL as a loss, because I believed it was more than worth it for farming such a promising project.
But after what they’ve done over the past three days, I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if they followed the @pump playbook instead - launched an IPO/ICO at a $20B valuation and never airdropped anything at all.
This market should resolve YES under the original wording.
⚠️⚠️⚠️
The question was not “Will MicroStrategy announce or confirm a Bitcoin sale by May 31?” The question was whether MicroStrategy sells any Bitcoin by May 31.
Strategy’s own filing confirms that 32 BTC were sold during the period May 26 to May 31. That means the event occurred inside the market timeframe.
⚠️⚠️⚠️
@Polymarket later clarification changed the standard from “did the sale happen?” to “was the sale confirmed before the deadline?” That is a material change, not a clarification.
If confirmation before the deadline was required, it needed to be in the original rules. It was not. The original rule said “sells,” not “announces,” “discloses,” or “is confirmed.”
Polymarket’s own documentation says clarifications cannot change the fundamental intent of the question. This clarification did exactly that.
⚠️⚠️
UMA may end up voting NO because it is being told to follow the updated context, but that only proves the problem: UMA is not independently resolving the original market. It is being asked to ratify Polymarket’s retroactive change.
The fair result is YES. The likely mechanical result may be NO. Those are not the same thing.
You give up gains over 11.5% for a more "guaranteed" gain of 11.5%. If Bitcoin down a particular year you still get 11.5%, obviously still some risks and no guarantees STRC remains @ $100
MSTR holders capture any gain from BTC purchased from STRC proceeds past 11.5% a year (variable rate could change tho)
@StrategyMaxi@Strive@apyx_fi Sir Saylor has explicitly said he want to strip down STRC volatility, and strive doing same with SATA, that's my only claim
Reminder that nothing has actually happened to Bitcoin or MSTR
The prices of both assets has just gone down (which doesn’t matter)
They are exactly the same as when they were at all time highs
Well - MSTR is actually much, much better now than when it was at all time highs
Lots of people are exposing themselves today.
They do not understand that Strategy has a balance sheet built for war.
The previous times $STRC closed below $95:
Aug 19, 2025 = $93.60
Nov 20, 2025 = $92.79
Feb 5, 2026 = $93.67
This is hardly anything new. Every single time it went back to par and it will do so again.
Once Bitcoin stabilises, the move to bi-monthly dividends is complete and the yield is raised, the path back to par is obvious.
Remember the names of the people lying to you for attention when it inevitably trades back to par.