Not From This World

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@xDisarmYoux @codeusultra @XRPGLOBALRESET @xDisarmYoux is right: Johnson spoke at an SEC roundtable, and Texture is FINRA-registered. But the SEC says invitations aren't endorsements. Dragging Madoff into it proves nothing about Johnson. Stop confusing credentials or insinuations with evidence. Where's a working SoloTex?

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@Merzlikin727 @BRW_Solo He doesn't need to be on the team's payroll to have financial incentives. BRW Capital ranks #2 among TX validators and takes a 5% commission on delegated staking rewards. That's publicly visible. But claiming he's secretly paid for charts needs actual evidence.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Charley57560508 Fair enough, BRW.
I appreciate that you're willing to reassess if October disappoints.
But a 'major announcement shortly after' isn't the same as a product launch.
Let's judge TX by a live, usable USTX and measurable progress—not another promise.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @schwifftynhere @Mk67556 Trust the process? TX Labs announced a marketplace launch on March 6.
Yet TX's own marketplace page still says 'Coming soon'.
What exactly went live, what can users access today, and what's still pending?
Trust is earned with verifiable progress, not slogans.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@schwifftynhere @BRW_Solo @Mk67556 'New to crypto' isn't an argument. You admit PSE dilutes holders, then claim 'most' break even at 2.3 cents. Where are their entry prices and reward histories? Only 40% of PSE goes to stakers. Lowering a per-token cost basis doesn't mean investors are whole. Show the math.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@schwifftynhere @BRW_Solo @Mk67556 Since December?
Then you should have a source by now.
SEC staff said in Sept 2026 that describing current crypto utility generally doesn't, by itself, create an investment contract.
So what specific rule prevents a factual SoloTex update?

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Mk67556 @schwifftynhere BRW, 'trust stealth mode' isn't a legal argument. SEC staff said in Sept 2026 that describing current crypto utility generally doesn't, by itself, promise profit-driving managerial efforts. A factual SoloTex update wouldn't automatically make TX a security. Cite the rule.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Dejan_Stnvrc "Stealth mode" isn't evidence of a DTCC blocker or an explanation for missed expectations. It's two words that answer none of my questions. If you have no official source, just say it's your theory. OG holders deserve facts, not endless speculation.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Dejan_Stnvrc 'Stealth mode' according to whom? TX Labs publicly announced its marketplace launch in March. If the plan changed, where did the team say so? I'm not asking for secrets or guaranteed dates. Just what's live, what's blocked and what's next. Two words aren't transparency.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Mk67556 @schwifftynhere Emissions were scheduled; future demand wasn't. You based your supply argument on expected launches, BRW. That's speculation. TX Labs announced a marketplace launch on March 6. If key functions didn't materialize, management owes holders a clear explanation.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Dejan_Stnvrc BRW, 'likely' and 'imho' are theories, not evidence. TX's SEC submission says Texture handles regulated brokerage activities while TX provides the technology. It doesn't say the SEC controls the company or forbids updates. What rule stops a factual progress report?

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Dejan_Stnvrc You've confirmed there's no official statement tying SoloTex's delay to DTCC's new service. That's the problem. I'm not asking for a guaranteed launch date, just clarity: what's approved, what's actually blocking launch, and what's next? Why can't TX and Texture say so?

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Mk67556 @schwifftynhere You said supply wasn't the issue, yet now cite PSE emissions during a bear market. You also list missing launches and no marketplace. Those raise tokenomics and execution questions, not just regulatory ones. Low demand describes the outcome, not who is accountable for it.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Dejan_Stnvrc You call it strong evidence, but what exactly? Texture mentions DTCC custody, not dependence on its new tokenization service. Management expected SoloTex to launch in 2025; DTCC's rollout was scheduled for Oct 2026. What changed, and where did the team explain it?

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Dejan_Stnvrc Agreed: July wasn't DTCC's full launch. But SoloTex's planned DTCC custody doesn't prove it depends on DTCC's new tokenization service. TX told the SEC secondary trading remained restricted. You admit other blockers may exist. What's the official source for this dependency?

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Mk67556 @schwifftynhere Volume is not proof of causation. You warned of PSE 'price dilution' yourself, and TX's ASCEND proposes pausing emissions so demand can grow without added supply. Regulatory limits are real, but they don't prove what caused TX's price collapse. Show evidence.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Dejan_Stnvrc You're right that July wasn't DTCC's full launch. But DTCC confirms real, limited production trades. Texture still calls SoloTex 'under development'. What official source ties the delay to DTCC composability, and when will the team give holders a clear timeline?

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Dejan_Stnvrc DTCC calls July's transactions "real production trades," not just tests. TX told the SEC SoloTex lacked secondary trading. Texture says features await approval. Can you show an official source for this exact DTCC blocker and a clear timeline? OG holders deserve answers.

[Not From This World @NotOfThisWorldO]

@BRW_Solo @Mk67556 @schwifftynhere Supply and demand BOTH matter. If "plumbing" restricts demand, tokenomics matter more. The team introduced 100B PSE tokens for gradual release, not regulators. Prove plumbing alone caused this collapse. OG holders deserve answers.