@standard_rsv 14/
So I'm keeping @standard_rsv on my radar.
Not because I think it's guaranteed to work.
Because I want to see whether the mechanism actually works the way the theory says it should.
That's the interesting experiment.
DYOR.
1/
I’ve been reading about @standard_rsv and I think I finally understand what they’re trying to build.
It’s not really “another token.”
The better way to look at it is:
what if you built a central bank where the monetary policy was just code?
🧵
@standard_rsv 13/
But I do know this:
a monetary system built around capital flow → automatic policy → reserves/buybacks is a much more interesting idea than another project promising arbitrary APY.
@standard_rsv 12/
Because that's where the design gets tested.
Anybody can design an expansion mechanism.
The harder question is:
does the system know how to defend itself when the market turns against it?
Standard Reserve is basically attempting to answer that with code.
@standard_rsv 11/
That's actually what I'd be watching.
Not the narrative.
Not the memes.
Not whether CT suddenly starts screaming “STANDARD.”
I want to see what happens when real liquidity enters...
and, more importantly, what happens when real liquidity leaves.
@standard_rsv 10/
Of course, interesting mechanism ≠ guaranteed success.
The project is still extremely early.
The token isn't live.
The NFT isn't live.
Audits are still part of the process.
@standard_rsv 9/
Most crypto monetary systems have humans deciding what happens next.
Here, the goal is basically:
ETH flows in → policy responds.
ETH flows out → policy responds differently.
No committee meeting required.
@standard_rsv 8/
The protocol also intends to permanently seed protocol-owned liquidity.
Then the remaining issuance budget can enter circulation according to the monetary policy.
So supply isn't just “team decides to mint.”
The intended mechanism ties issuance to the system's capital flows.
@standard_rsv 7/
There’s another detail I found interesting:
$STANDARD has a 1B hard cap.
But that doesn't mean 1B tokens just get dumped into circulation at launch.
The design separates the maximum supply from the amount actually circulating.
That distinction matters.
@standard_rsv 6/
Each Charter can have Branches.
And those Branches are what participate in the issuance side of the system.
So instead of simply holding an NFT and hoping someone else values it later, the NFT has an actual role inside the monetary system.
@standard_rsv 5/
And then there’s the part that initially confused me:
the NFTs.
They call them Charters.
But these aren't really meant to be PFPs.
Think of a Charter more like a banking license inside the protocol.
The person holding it becomes a “Banker.”
@standard_rsv 4/
Expansion is deliberately slower.
Contraction is faster.
Basically:
slow to become more generous
fast to become defensive
That makes a lot more sense to me than blindly increasing emissions whenever things are going well.
@standard_rsv 3/
If capital keeps flowing in:
→ issuance can expand gradually
→ fees can help build reserves
→ the system enters an expansion phase
But if capital starts flowing out:
→ issuance gets cut
→ fees are redirected toward $STANDARD buybacks/burns
@standard_rsv 2/
The whole system revolves around one surprisingly simple signal:
net ETH flow.
There’s a Uniswap v4 ETH/$STANDARD pool, and the protocol watches how much ETH is actually flowing in or out.
That flow becomes the monetary signal.
10 x $25,000 Stellar Challenge GIVEAWAY
To Win ⤵️
▫️Follow - @PsychedeliaAcad & @Techriztm
▫️Also follow - @1OnlyAce & @FundedNext
▫️Like & Repost this GIVEAWAY
▫️Post proof of following the above 4 handles & comment done
That’s all💯
Winners after 48hrs
Let’s go📈
Make sure you’re signed up to Fundednext to ensure you win > 🔗 https://t.co/NeoLUezqHu