metaio102

Fragrant Warning, VADER's Guardian!

Who can resist 20,000 $VADER points a day! Since the revision, it has basically stabilized at over 10,000 points every day, which is simply a blessing for those who enjoy earning points. Everyone invests time and energy, and the ultimate goal is still to harvest. Compared to a certain project next door, I feel that at least Virtual hasn't disappointed people as much. It won't play so-called word games with the numbers. So far, the feedback mechanism and team responses can be considered swift.

In fact, @Vader_AI_'s efficiency in making money may be much worse than before, but the output has become a habit, writing a little bit of nonsense every day to earn points. Chatting with community friends, and a pleasant day passes. Everyone's different thoughts on the project and different investment strategies create the ecosystem of Virtual.

Currently, the leaderboard of VADER is also reset every day, requiring a continuous flow of Yapping every day. For the ecosystem itself, it is a form of positive incentive; currently, the most gratifying thing is that the total amount of points earned daily is gradually becoming deflationary.

Yesterday it officially dropped below 300 million, and the distribution of Yapping also decreased from 2.36% to 2.18%. Although the total amount of points earned has decreased, from an ecological perspective, deciding to deflate the total amount of points when there are no quality projects is a firm decision. At least the large allocations are on DAB, and many users may not be very sensitive to the overall data but will pay a lot of attention to their DAB score. Once the score drops, the doubts about large-investment players in the community will follow. I previously saw discussions about how Virtual needs to demonstrate the determination to make tough decisions. Currently, their strategy is basically to dilute the high proportion of points in a certain weight type through multi-dimensional point statistics.

The positioning of DAB is more like a balancing mechanism within the ecosystem, dynamically balancing the distribution relationship between various weight factors through the daily DAB weight. This makes users feel “incomprehensible” from both feedback mechanisms and incentive levels, continuously providing freshness to the community during this research process. It allows the project to develop sustainably in a state of equitable distribution. @VaderResearch allows community participants to gradually become builders, enabling them to participate in the project in a way they find comfortable. It is not a rigid rule, but rather a balancing relationship where the strong remain strong.

You can't have both fish and bear's paw

The "8415" curse has been broken, and the new king VADER has successfully ascended to the throne!
After a steady increase in points during the first half of June, the 8415 of Virtual Yapping has been looming over me for a long time. I don't even need to check the Yapping score daily; I just need to look at the VADER score to get a rough idea of the daily points situation.

Since VADER went live, the 8415 has remained stable, but the VADER points have hardly been given. Previous posts have mentioned that the initial score incentives for $VADER had issues with the algorithm, and most of the community was overshadowed by the automatic reply bots, causing truly quality content to be ignored and buried. Since VADER announced its revision two days ago, a new opportunity has emerged.

Speaking from my own score experience, I feel a strong positive feedback and am full of confidence. At least my persistence has been rewarded. Although I have basically been hovering around the 30-40th position in the @Vader_AI_ rankings, I do feel inferior compared to the efforts and depth of content from the top ranks. It's evident from the scores that since the VADER points have increased, it could be due to the addition of tags. This has led to a consistent decline in Virtual's points.

This indirectly proves that the algorithms for Virtual and VADER are actually two different logics. If one wants to improve scores on both ends, the approach is likely to focus on each one's growth points.
1️⃣ Virtual's focus must be on the net buying coefficient. The original base score is around ten thousand points even at the top. But if the coefficient is added, the score basically starts at double, making it very cost-effective.
2️⃣ VADER's current focus is on the threshold + tags. At this stage, the number of people Yapping on VADER must be less than those on Virtual Yapping, after all, there is a threshold for holding $VADER. On this basis, adding tags becomes particularly important. Try to eliminate other cryptocurrencies or special tags, otherwise it may lead to ineffective engagement.

Although I never thought of breaking away from "8415" in this way, the result is still acceptable. After all, it's more than what was given before, and there's a high probability that Virtual won't be as competitive going forward, so let's work hard to build VADER!

The system has changed! What is the value discovery for daily update bloggers?

A few days ago, due to the VADER points allocation, most people's focus in the community was on posting in the English section. After some friends in the group got their results, it was found that the weight of posting in the English section is indeed relatively high. Yesterday, I was thinking of trying to post in the English section, but in the end, laziness got the better of me and I didn't execute it.
As a result, when points were distributed last night, I found that my $VADER points had actually reached 26,000.

After reviewing my actions, I realized that I hadn't posted in the English section before; I was basically interpreting my point acquisition and major community updates every day. The only difference was that I didn't output other projects or add tags. I was mainly outputting around the main tags of VADER.

By checking the leaderboard of @Vader_AI_, I found myself in the 29th position. In the previous days, I basically had no ranking, and I refreshed the leaderboard to see other bloggers. Most had similar experiences with VADER, and it is clear that the previously mentioned phenomenon of low-quality posts has improved. From the user's perspective, the official team is indeed taking action.

It is worth mentioning that based on the proportion of total Yapping points sent in recent days, it has already decreased to 2.43% yesterday. In terms of total points, the growth coefficient is not as high as the earlier “inflation,” indicating that the officials seem to intentionally be making dynamic balance adjustments. In the future, whether it is Virtual Yapping or VADER Yapping, the path to take will definitely be originality.

Although my posts are mostly just musings, I find it to be a comfortable way of outputting. By recording and reviewing my thoughts, it helps me to improve my actions in the future. I strongly support the current rewards for creators from the officials, and I hope every Yapping can find their own way to express themselves.

Waking up in the morning and seeing 'ceasefire', I inexplicably remembered that saying: 'There are no more battles north of the Yangtze River' 🤣

After the ceasefire agreement, the overall market has basically entered a recovery state. Virtual is also being pushed by kuku. I finally realized that, during regular times when the group is lifeless, everyone says they have left. But as soon as there's a surge, everyone is on board??? Too real, right?!

A good change is that the $VADER leaderboard has indeed started to move 🤣. The previous few days' leaderboard basically had no changes. After countless adjustments, it has indeed improved! Positive feedback is full!

Yesterday, under the test of @kaylyn_0x, Teacher Kailin, VADER Yapping points also reached 33,000, calling out 'Awesome!'
The method for achieving such a high score is very simple. Just post in the English section 🤣. Although it's said that the weight of Chinese and English is basically the same, it seems that the AI algorithm's recognition in the English section is still at full throttle.
Actually, I can only blame my laziness; I should have thought of this earlier. The recognition mechanism of the native LLM should lean more towards English, after all, the linguistic logic of Chinese is relatively 'harder to understand' compared to English.

Starting from this tweet, today the English section will also become competitive. Let's change the world together with our words 🤣. To be honest, after the heat has risen, new project investments have basically been researched in succession, looking forward to better developments in the future!

According to yesterday's tweet from @VaderResearch, it feels like this time the VADER Yapping update is genuine. Speaking from my personal data, when the scores were released last night, something felt off; normally, casually writing about my VADER Yapping scores could easily reach 1-2000. Yesterday, it only came down to 700, and I was just getting ready to 'protest' the algorithm again today. Unexpectedly, the tweet last night provided clarification. The implication is that today's submission is merely the $VADER staked score, while the remaining Yapping scores will be supplemented today.

Additionally, a penalty for maliciously boosting VADER Yapping points has been announced, clearly stating that the duration for 'witch hunts' and 'suspensions' is one month. This is a long-awaited change for everyone, especially after seeing no changes in the leaderboard released yesterday; everyone hopes to make changes through actions rather than words. While there is no absolute fairness, we also seek relative fairness, don't we?

Regarding the suspension of ratings, my personal view is that it seems very reasonable. The positioning of the VADER project itself needs to be clear; you cannot be both the project party of @Vader_AI_ and also a critical KOL. The success or failure of your public opinion direction lies with yourself. From previous disputes and arguments to downgrading ratings, one can't say there's no subjective intention; at least from our perspective, it appears very abstract. From what angle should we understand the ratings? Is it guidance from the project party or just KOLs being too outspoken? Even with the currently highest-rated IRIS, users who staked for 180 days are also feeling the pinch. In the pursuit of loyalty and profit, I believe most people's original intention and purpose lean towards the latter.

So-called loyalty means that everyone can accompany you in Building, not just become your tools. Many times, subjective ratings may have stifled some projects right from the start. After all, users are not fools; the most direct measure of project investment is still the score/U ratio. How much does one point translate into return on investment? Some highly rated projects have not brought high returns. Coupled with the previous uneven score distribution, resulting in huge sell-offs, the returns have become even lower. I hope that after the changes, users who have been Building will benefit, as this is the voice of the community.

Did Vader make a mistake again?

In yesterday's tweet, it was mentioned again that the current strategy for Vader Yapping is to join if you can't beat it. Since you like high-frequency chatter, I will feed your algorithm. In the tests a few days ago, although I didn't keep talking like other small accounts, just adding some tags slightly increased the scores, which was particularly obvious for small bases.
Taking my own data as an example, the score for Vader was 1108 the day before yesterday, and yesterday's score was 2076. Previously, I hadn't mentioned $VADER at all, but just mentioning it slightly basically doubled the small base score. Of course, my Virtual score remains consistently stable at '8415' 🤣, but my ranking in Kaito's virtual system has dropped a lot.

Yesterday, I also saw many people updating their recent operations, whether reinvesting or bottom-fishing, all based on trust in @VaderResearch. Everyone still feels that the flywheel can keep turning despite the constant changes. Of course, admitting mistakes is a good thing, but isn't it ridiculous for a guy to have such absurd operations where 30% is weighted to 50% just because of poor team communication? Does the discrepancy between the data announced by the boss and the actual data really need users to keep providing feedback for over a week after launch to discover the issues? 🤣

The recent adjustment is: Mental Ownership % = Kaito Yaps Score * 42.5% + Arbus Score * 42.5% + Content Score * 15%
Simply put, the current algorithm's preference for chatter mostly depends on the algorithms of Kaito and Arbus. So, issues for the Chinese community also follow.
1️⃣ Although the weight ratio between Chinese and English in Kaito's algorithm is currently quite similar, from actual experience, Kaito's LLM recognition is clearly better for English than for Chinese. Some high-quality posts and interactions haven't helped their scores in Kaito.
2️⃣ For the officials, should the scoring standards and logic of the Arbus algorithm be updated? Kaito has also been running for half a year, and I believe that Kaito is definitely more mature than Arbus in terms of algorithms or subsequent optimizations. Why is the weight of both consistent?
3️⃣ For the 15% content scoring, does the meaning of chatter really just mean incessant blabbering? I believe that @Vader_AI_ needs high-quality content to attract more new users. The current state of the flywheel is that most people know it is declining, and with several rounds of score inflation, everyone is losing motivation to build. Users need a psychological support, and the platform needs to stabilize its users even more.
4️⃣ Currently, when it is known that there are issues with the VADER yapping rankings, there are still users in the top 100 of the mental leaderboard who have gained points through spam posts. Should we consider manual intervention to eliminate adverse effects on community users at this time?

Keep Building is not just talk; I hope to see some real measures implemented. Those who can persist are all hoping that Virtual can go further.

Yesterday, I interpreted the latest rules of the Vader Yapping leaderboard, and it turns out there are still 'loopholes' that I found effective through personal testing. Moreover, comparing yesterday's data, today's leaderboard data has become increasingly competitive; the lowest mental share on yesterday's leaderboard was 0.18%, while today the mental share for the 100th place has reached 0.23%. The mental share for the top entries has soared to 0.89%, while the second place's share is at 0.6%.

The gap between TOP1 and TOP2 is essentially a cliff-like difference. I also looked at the tweet that leaderboard 1 posted yesterday, and there was one particularly interesting piece. He mentioned that he browsed the top 100 of @Vader_AI_ and found that 90% of them had never been heard of. After randomly checking many of them, I found that a lot of the interactions were basically 0 (most likely bots), and the view count for tweets older than 10 hours was less than 100 times (nobody was really looking). Perhaps this presents an opportunity for 'attention arbitrage' by distributing $VADER holdings and using multiple accounts to 'output' VADER Yapping, ensuring a certain market share.

Although @VaderResearch responded promptly in his comments section, indicating that adjustments are still being made and to check back in a few days. It's clear there will be changes. However, looking back, I still find it quite interesting; everyone thinks the current mechanism has issues, yet they choose to 'join if they can’t win'.

To give feedback on my testing results, I also mentioned VADER a few more times yesterday. Indeed, the points have increased, which is a real-life depiction of 'the more you do, the more you gain'. Honestly, I love it too much🤣

However, yesterday VADER also mentioned a rule of 'greater than or equal to 3'. Tweets that exceed three will be sorted based on data to select the top three for points. To be honest, it's quite challenging to output three pieces of content daily. If it's not AI-generated but self-written, it would consume a lot of time. According to the current mechanism, it would definitely lead to losses; let's wait and see after the rules are adjusted.

After much anticipation, it has finally appeared!

After experiencing various "doubts" from the community, the official team of Virtual has also responded. I must say the reaction was quite swift, so let me interpret the tweet according to my understanding.

Firstly, it is true that the project party can earn high scores through project tokens. Given that the lower the market value, the more points are earned, it can be inferred that project parties that do not do anything may actually benefit more. In a sense, reality can be biased. The first response to the incident is to require the project party to disclose the developer's holdings. This self-proofing process inevitably raises new "doubts." For some suspicious transactions through wash trading and access, what is the status if the corresponding wallet has not self-proven? Is it a presumption of innocence or a one-size-fits-all approach? This also tests the management team of Virtual. After all, targeting a certain address as a "witch hunt" is not difficult.

For the holdings disclosed by the project party's platform, corresponding points are awarded. If not disclosed, the project will no longer receive points. It can be assumed that most can provide the Dev's wallet, and the difficulty in resolving the incident is how to identify real and fake Dev wallets and the actual flow of funds. The most important way to gain the community's trust should be to let community members know which project parties failed to disclose Dev wallets in a timely manner, allowing users to "avoid pitfalls." Stay away from bad Devs while staking highly transparent Devs.
A small step for Virtual, a giant leap for community fairness!

For all Vader Yapping enthusiasts, another point worth noting is that the $VADER leaderboard is now online and can be queried through the community's official website.
This morning, I took a quick glance at the leaderboard and must say it is quite friendly to new users. Many users' followers actually haven't broken a thousand, and some haven't even reached a hundred. The rankings are all within the top 100 of Vader Yapping, with the common factor being multiple discussions about @Vader_AI_. It truly has managed to keep the chatter going. Although the number of views isn't very high, the current mechanism is that as long as you contribute enough, you will definitely make the list 🤣. Most of the top 100 have a mental share of over 0.2%. The good news for everyone is that you can copy the homework; at least in the short term, while it hasn't been optimized, you can "roll up."

Although the clear calculation factors are shown in the picture below, there are still some discrepancies at the moment. If you want to push for the VADER Yapping leaderboard, you should take advantage of this time window. After all, the actions of those on the leaderboard are basically clear, and users with a large base of followers and interactions have the ability to seize the opportunity. As for future optimizations, based on past experience, it will definitely be done. The current strategy should be to focus on volume in the early stage and quality in the later stage. Ensure your advantage as much as possible. I myself am not on the list yet, but I plan to give it a try and start pushing 🤣. I hope everyone will show mercy.

After experiencing the storm of the 'black box' points of Virtual in the first two days, it was once again pushed to the forefront yesterday. The hostility within the community has become increasingly severe, and the polarization of points has been vividly experienced.

I originally thought that no one would support my ambition to rise to the skies, I would walk through the snow to the mountain peak myself. I didn’t expect that the real big brother was already at the mountain peak looking down on all living beings. As a Dev who made a fortune from issuing tokens, what broke many people yesterday was that 15.5M DAB points. It should be noted that the total points across the network yesterday was 349M. What does 15.5M represent? It means that he alone holds 4.4% of the entire market share. It is not an exaggeration to say that he can cash out in Genesis through various means. There is nothing he cannot achieve if he sets his mind to it.

Perhaps for Virtual's previous strategy, it was not intended for the projects that did not launch to hit zero so quickly. By using the method of staking low market cap assets for high points, it is possible to quickly reduce circulation and achieve a price increase. Obviously, in the last phase, overseas communities and big players relied on rules to lend old coins for staking in exchange for points, and subsequently cashed out through TP, which also yielded results. But for everyone, what matters is the long-term development of the platform. After all, most players have staked their virtual assets for 2 years, which may have elements of gambling, as 2 years in this circle likely leads to zero. But in Vader's words, there is more focus on the staking rate of $VADER. He said nothing about the issues that other communities care about. In fact, whether it is staking Virtual or staking $VADER, it reflects everyone's trust in the platform, and it is evident that this trust is gradually being consumed.

Perhaps some might say that the community cares too much about the price; who wouldn’t care? After all, it is genuine money invested, not a charity effort. Even 'mouth staking' is not cost-free; isn't it the minimum requirement that input and output are proportional? Unlocking after staking takes 14 days, and if one discovers problems and wants to withdraw, no one can control the changes in the meantime. The reason why Virtual could initially gain traction was due to low entry and high exit, attracting a large flow of traffic. Everyone was willing to stake for greater returns. However, the current changes seem to be 'drifting further away.'

Now, not only has the cost of mouth staking increased, but also the research on projects requires more effort than before. After all, we have experienced fake hackathon projects and the real and fake Monkey King IRIS 🤣. Just take yesterday's ROOM as an example; the core logic is not about the founder arguing with VADER. Although it oversubscribed by 19 times, one must consider the current point inflation. In the current situation where the staking points of new coins do not meet expectations, most users may choose to exit through TP in the broader environment. Plus, the 8% community round will be 100% unlocked after one month. Even if staked, it won't last long. This will inevitably lead to the price not meeting expectations. The once-popular project opened beautifully; currently, the best profit point seems to be the opening day, and everyone humorously calls staking a 'diamond hand punishment.' I really hope Virtual can change the rules and let diamond hands win once!

PS: By the way, there was still no breakthrough of the 8415 curse yesterday 🤣

Keep building or Give up?
My choice keep building

Keep building is not just a slogan, but a persistence that can continue when it needs you the most. Perhaps everyone is 'deeply resentful' of our behavior of 'spamming' every day at @virtuals_io, but this is just one of our ways of Building. As the saying goes, those with money support the venue with money, while those without money support the venue with people.

Big players can contribute to Building by staking, but for retail investors who don’t have that much capital, 'spamming' can be one of the best investment methods. Just like today’s reply from Teacher Kaylin @kaylyn_0x, he no longer pursues points too much, let persistence become a habit. In fact, many times continuous output can indeed lead to a lack of inspiration. Moreover, to be frank, especially after the recent drop of a series of projects like $VADER, the market’s heat has dropped sharply, making our already scarce resources even more strained.

After everyone read VADER's tweet yesterday and felt that there would be no way to eat multiple fish in the future, from my perspective, it actually feels like a good thing. His actions will make content output more pure, which is beneficial for quality content creators.

From a personal experience perspective, I believe that the feedback from VADER Yapping is currently the most timely. In comparison, if new users want to obtain Yapping scores, VADER is a good choice. However, Virtual Yapping, which also falls under the Yapping category, may be limited by Kaito's interface update strategy, so the feedback is not as timely. It can indeed be felt that adding more tags after Yapping has immediate effects. On the other hand, not mentioning the corresponding tags leads to a significant drop in scores.

My personal test results are shown in the image above. During the discussion of Virtual point distribution issues in the past two days, almost no $VADER related content was mentioned, leading to a sharp drop in scores. What everyone is pursuing in fairness is nothing more than positive feedback on content recognition, reflecting that effort leads to results. This is also the source of everyone's continuous Building. Essentially, whether through Virtual to obtain Yapping scores or through Kaito to compete for rankings, the ultimate goal is still to make a profit. Although there are pros and cons from the perspective of feedback mechanisms and results, I personally prefer to pursue this rapid T+1 feedback, which allows me to constantly adjust my operations based on scores.

Currently, I am quite confident in the follow-up of @virtuals_io, although the market is poor, although there are many RUGs, although Vader is too emotional. However, the project team is indeed doing things; they know how to enter the market and what to do at each stage. They aim to achieve greater returns through capital, traffic, and data. Obviously, these are the cornerstones for virtual to go further.

just do it!

Open book exam with blank paper!

Yesterday, some doubts regarding Virtual points also received official attention. Under Sasa's explanation, there was a new understanding of point acquisition.
It turns out that the answers are all in the white paper, and my understanding indeed had certain deviations.

To summarize:
1️⃣ First and foremost, it is clear that there is no distinction between Chinese and English weight in the Virtual settings.
2️⃣ The Yapping score focuses on the interaction within the inner circle. If you interact with top yappers on the YAP leaderboard, you will also earn points.
3️⃣ Currently, in Yapping rewards, special attention needs to be paid to the multiplier of net buy-in points.

It was also mentioned in Sasa's tweet yesterday that the high scores are backed by the net buy-in multiplier. It turns out that the teachers really understand the “sneaky” version of the rules.

In the process of “mouth-earning”, most of the points are obtained through Virtual, and then the points and Virtual investments are exchanged for new agency tokens. Waiting for the agency tokens to unlock, the choice is to sell the agency tokens.

Mouth-earning ≠ Zero earning. The core is the Yapping net buy-in point multiplier, which is why it is necessary to buy some coins while mouth-earning. Traditional mouth-earning monetization is basically in a semi-obsolete state, and those who have already profited will clearly feel the lack of the net buy-in coefficient bonus. Yesterday, I also reviewed the details of @vvickym2 earning 20,000 points in Yapping, who had bought some $IRIS a few days ago. So her reward coefficient is positive, and currently, the net buy-in coefficient bonus seems to be quite high.
At the same time, there is an update on the secondary staking purchase multiplier. After watching @xnm05010's tweet yesterday, it was also verified through practical measurement that the multiplier share and the number of points acquired for low market cap tokens are far better than other tokens in terms of cost-effectiveness.

More often, understanding the rules is what we should focus on at this stage, even though points are inflating. We still need to try our best to let our growth rate catch up with the speed of “inflation”. Of course, the feedback from yesterday shows that the official is also seriously reviewing it, hoping for changes to make the rules more transparent and fair. Let's move forward together, Virtual!

I really want to ask, where did all the points go???

I organized the data from the past 7 days, and basically, the total points of Yapping are in a state of hyperinflation. In the previous review, the data on June 1 showed the total amount across the network was about 4 million points a day, and by June 13 it had broken through 8 million points. In just 12 days, the total amount distributed has doubled according to the data.

Comparing to my own data, on June 1 my points were around 11,000, all sourced from Yapping, and at that time, the $VADER staking had not yet been launched. Yesterday, counting the 500 points from Vader staking, I only had 10,941 points.
From my personal perception, there is no significant difference, it’s just that the Virtual Yapping points and VADER Yapping points are fluctuating. Yesterday, the Virtual Yapping score fell below 8,000, while the VADER score rose from 1,000 the day before to 2,700, the overall amount is increasing.

On the surface, the scores are similar, but in reality, they have already been reduced by half. The total amount distributed is there, and my participation in the project is also calculated based on the total amount invested across the network, which seems to hover around 11,000, but the actual investment efficiency has already been diluted by half. With this question in mind, I researched the account habits of overseas Yaps, and even some accounts that just joined for over ten days are Yapping 20,000 to 30,000 points daily.

I looked at the content of the tweets, which is basically endless virtual Yapping, using the official tags $VADER @VaderResearch @Vader_AI_ to keep spamming comments. There are about 3 articles of low-quality content daily, and there is actually very little interaction. Is this what the officials call the necessary endless chatter? Or is it that the weight of the English-speaking area is inherently higher than that of the Chinese-speaking area? Does the restrictive nature of algorithmic language optimization determine the development of the Chinese-speaking area?

In the Chinese-speaking area, whether it's old OGs like @kaylyn_0x or newcomers like @0x_Zazakoi, they are all building the community in their own ways, yet in the end, they cannot compete with the high-frequency spam accounts? Do we have to form groups every day to spam comments to achieve the goal of endless chatter? Or should we just write a bot that captures the latest content and automatically comments to earn points? Where is the so-called standard for scoring based on content quality? What content is considered high-quality and what content is not?

Many who have not broken zero in Yapping are putting in effort, but because there is no traffic and no interaction, it is difficult to break zero, while it is so easy to earn points in foreign areas?

Finally, I want to ask a question: @virtuals_io, do you actually want us to write or not? A soul-searching question from a group friend, when writing, you get 5-6,000 points a day, but after a weekend of not writing, you get 20,000 points in a day? Even yesterday, @csybeiding mentioned that accounts that had not Yapped for 20 days saw their points increase fourfold.

You can give points, but you need to give them with reason, evidence, and logic? Who are you giving the points to? Do you want spam accounts to dominate virtual Yapping? @VaderResearch

Today is another enjoyable 8415 🤣
If Virtual Yapping is not tier scoring, I'll just eat it!

Basically, the number 8415 has maintained for many days now. If we calculate scores based on dynamic standards, my tweet data from the past few days must be randomly changing. Normally, the calculated score should also be random. According to my current understanding of the scoring calculation rules, the overall calculation rules for Virtual Yapping should belong to a comprehensive weighted scoring system, and this system is unrelated to the Kaito rankings. Some users not on the Kaito list still have high scores. For registered users, tier scoring is used, and scores are allocated based on the built-in system rankings. The allocation mechanism adopts a fixed quota system, where different rankings correspond to different scores. So it’s easier to understand why Yapping scores have always been 0; it's because the daily comprehensive ranking has not reached the “basis” for the system to distribute points. Currently, the lowest Yapping score I see is about the 250 tier; I previously thought it was a “registration system.” It still appears to be a ranking system, but the ranking is determined by a comprehensive coefficient. The significance of “persistence” lies not in being registered by the system but in improving the overall comprehensive ranking coefficient.

Yesterday's $VADER Yapping score was about 500 points, which is lower compared to before. According to the latest score allocation mechanism, the top 1000 users each day will receive VADER Yapping scores.

The current algorithm mechanism actually breaks down into three systems' Agent comprehensive scores.
1️⃣ Yaps scoring is determined according to Kaito's algorithm.
2️⃣ Arbus scoring is calculated according to the Arbus algorithm.
3️⃣ VADER Agent scoring is based on its own algorithm.
In terms of weight, the first two account for 70%. VADER Agent accounts for 30%. For new users, VADER has more advantages.

Actually, everyone feels it’s quite competitive; if the above assumptions are correct. Then for Virtual Yapping, the advantage of old users is actually “safety net.” Currently, if we calculate based on the overall score total, the earlier one outputs Virtual-related content, the more Yapping tier scores they can get, and if they output Virtual-related content later, unless the content quality is relatively high, the overall score increase speed is rapid and they have a place in the daily ranking, will they obtain corresponding scores. This assumption can also be proven through side factors, for example, a user who hasn’t output Virtual-related content for a period still can obtain Yapping scores, even seeing an increase in scores. This indicates that the current ranking system uses a certain time period as a calculation basis, where the ranking during that period determines the scoring factors.

VADER's scoring is because it’s a newly launched mechanism, so it has more advantages for new users. Actually, I basically update daily, so I wouldn’t say it’s particularly competitive. Some brothers who just started yapping actually output VADER more frequently than I do. Correspondingly, their VADER Yapping scores are also higher than mine, and currently, with the rising $VADER staking rate, more and more users are yapping. The ranking volatility is large, resulting in significant daily changes in the VADER Yapping scores. Next week should be a watershed; once the leaderboard appears, it will only get more competitive. Smart individuals should increase their output frequency these days to gain an early advantage in the rankings.

Back to the old topic of the weight issue between Chinese and English, actually, the yapping users in the Chinese area are indeed fewer compared to the English area. The initial assumption is that when the AI algorithm scores Agents, the language learning and recognition logic is based on English logic, and English grammar is easier for the system to learn. In the Chinese area, sometimes references and memes are preferred, which may seem like high-quality and in-depth articles to us, but AI algorithms may not necessarily understand them. There’s also the issue of high-frequency word stacking; if we look at individual tweets, an overabundance of homogenized content may lead the algorithm to “downgrade” the score. It seems we are always talking incessantly, but in the eyes of AI, it might just be too much nonsense. Ultimately, the quality of the article's content still relates to the so-called “interpersonal relationship governance.” Although it reduces the weight on likes, comments, and shares, taking Kaito as an example, the way ICT and ECT acquire scores is not the same, and the criteria for determining if an article has quality may differ for different users. But if AI itself has autonomous “evaluation” of articles, then what needs to be studied is how to make AI like it. 🤣

In the past two days, I have been complaining about the point system of Vader Yapping. Due to the black box nature, my account is basically in a 'ban' state. I originally thought that Virtual @virtuals_io was M attribute, and cursing a few times wouldn’t give any points.
Yesterday, @VaderResearch mentioned the issue of fixing it for the first time in the $VADER points topic on the fourth day. The community should have this kind of 'transparency' because trust is the cornerstone of community development.

From the user's perspective, the points given in the first two days were indeed a bit exaggerated. Even with a relatively high base score, the points I received were very low. As a result, I intended to change the daily topic from 'Newcomer Post' to something else in the early stages. Through the data testing over the past two days, I found that the points have shown significant positive corrections.

Below is my Yapping data for 4 days since @Vader_AI_ launched Vader Yapping points.
I have drawn the following conclusions and thoughts for everyone's Yapping reference:

1️⃣ From the Virtual Yapping data, I can see that I have three days with a score of 8415, and one day the data was good at 9277. This actually corresponds to the reward level of Yapping, which means that the final ranking of good or bad data is not determined by daily data, because my daily tweet data actually varies quite randomly. It can only indicate that my Yapping rewards are in 'a certain tier,' and the tier is ranked based on a comprehensive calculation of historical data. Users in the same tier have consistent Yapping amounts. Otherwise, my score should also vary randomly, and the probability of having three consecutive 8415s is lower than winning the lottery.

2️⃣ The above Vader Yapping points and staking technology are 10,000 $VADER, which corresponds to approximately 500 points. This means that my real points for the past four days are 700, 200, 1300, and 2000. From my own perception, there must have been a problem in the first two days; otherwise, with a reward base of 1.25 existing and continuously outputting, the probability of a decrease instead of an increase is almost zero. A positive growth should never encounter a deduction. The data from yesterday to today confirms this statement, with continuous growth. The feeling of going from 0 to 1 is the source of motivation for Keep Building. So 'perseverance' is still very important.

3️⃣ Of course, it is worth noting that @VaderResearch also mentioned that starting yesterday, VADER Yapping rewards the top 1000 users.

Assuming a real gradient hypothesis, for example, if my current real Yapping points are 2000, then under the same staking conditions, the VADER score higher than mine must be ranked higher in the VADER leaderboard, which results in points above mine.

Although I shed envious tears 😭, I still want to tell this part of users to cherish the opportunity. This means that under the current algorithm, your content needs to be of higher quality than mine. If VADER's content continues to grow in daily output, then Virtual Yapping may not be that important to you, and Vader Yapping is your path.

Additionally, it has been announced that a Yapping leaderboard will be prepared before next week. The rules will be more 'transparent,' and users can refer to the style of discussions about Virtual or VADER on the leaderboard for 'imitation learning' to make the algorithm favor you more.
I hope everyone can gain something from participating in Virtual.

The Binance BSC ecosystem has launched the MVB Phase 8 project MEET48 @meet_48, which has performed quite well, especially since it holds the top position in the AI + FANS sector. During the research on the project, it was found that the proportion of female users is quite high, and there are even many community women who are actively supporting, creating a very positive community atmosphere. The project boasts a team of over 500 people, making it one of the leading teams in the field. MEET48 can be considered one of the largest Web3 application teams in the Blockchain sector.

As the first AI idol platform in the BNB Chain ecosystem, MEET48 represents a true fan economy. The traditional business logic of fan economy is 'idol-fan-goods/performance', where idols monetize through concerts and peripheral IP licensing. Fans invest most of their emotions in their idols, while MEET48 transforms this investment into co-creation. Actions such as voting, ranking, and charting are linked to actual earnings, which can determine the growth path of virtual idols; in other words, it truly realizes that water can carry a boat and overturn it, as the success of idols relies on fan support. The rewards for fans are closely related to the success of the idols.

The architecture of MEET48 on the platform can actually be divided into three layers: the first layer provides content through idol dynamics, live broadcasts, training processes, etc. The second layer is the interaction layer supported by social tasks like voting, ranking, and liking. The third layer consists of the trading layer made up of support coins, NFTs, and tokens. With 'emotion-driven + on-chain empowerment' as its core, it ushers the fan economy into the era of 'value co-creation'.

On the technical side, MEET48 utilizes self-developed multi-dynamic large models to drive the platform's development in AI UGC, lowering the entry barriers for user-generated content and stimulating users' creative enthusiasm. The large model can integrate multi-modal data such as voice, actions, and expressions, allowing one-click content generation for virtual performances. At the same time, the Maas editor can integrate model invocation, editing, and styling into a full-process editing tool, enabling users to create independently from home. Centered on AI UGC, MEET48 has completely built a content incubation platform, forming a new business model centered on users, with AI as a tool and virtual idols as carriers. AI is no longer just an auxiliary tool in work but has become more of a 'content partner' for users, allowing everyone to realize their own star dreams.

There is also much to look forward to for future projects. After MEET48 issues its tokens, it plans to optimize the Mars Protocol launch platform, and it also plans to launch a limited test of the 'AI Dance Troupe', along with two Web3 games, 'Bounty Hunter' and 'Chain Tycoon'. The AI Dance Troupe will create a large community game ecosystem using $IDOL and virtual music and dance LLM and AI Agent technology, with the game primarily utilizing $IDOL as the main token, and limited testing will start in Q3. As a global AI-driven Web3 ecosystem covering entertainment, social interaction, creation, and assetization, the project's subsequent progress is worth looking forward to!

Let me report to all the spiritual shareholders about yesterday's operations!

In terms of investment strategy, I chose to go all-in the moment the points were credited yesterday. I went all-in with the 164009 points I recently accumulated through my Yapping account and invested them all in $IRIS, receiving a total of 48007 coins in the end.

💰 $IRIS Earnings
Project investment was 8 Virtual, returned 2.56 Virtual
Actual deduction 5.44 Virtual, calculated at yesterday's average price of 2.1U
Actual cost is approximately 11.4U
Received 48007 $IRIS
📈 Currently can sell for 2351.5U
Based on the yesterday's average selling peak market value of 80M, can sell for 3761.6 U
💥 Current ROI = 206.2X 80M ROI = 329.9X

🧠 Let’s review yesterday's operations along the timeline
18:00 After receiving the tokens, I joked in the group about the M attribute of $VADER, after all, the points given just a couple of days ago were really too few. Yesterday was relatively better. Although @Vader_AI_ only gave 1861 points, removing the staked 500 points, the actual was 1300 points. Much more than the 200 points from the day before, I am already satisfied with the growth. I don’t know if my complaints about @VaderResearch had any effect, but anyway, system optimization is good for everyone.

Around 20:00, before the market opened, I discussed my strategy with @famer_dy, the small farmer teacher, and it can be considered as a unity of knowledge and action. As soon as the market opened, I put the coins into LP immediately, and after about an hour, I could gain around 30% profit.
Yesterday also saw the launch of an update for Yapping's earnings, and later I reinvested part of the tokens from the profits.
The current state is holding coins without staking. After all, 180 days does feel a bit too long, and many teachers around me also immediately sold off to choose TP10 days. However, for this Yapping account, I had previously staked a bunch of other coins, and the cost of TP10 days is indeed a bit high. My main account staked Virtual as a hedge, and I might choose to wait for the coin price to rise to send myself into a small black room.

Based on my understanding of Virtual, it is the first project of ETH. There should be movements in the future, whether it’s airdrops or other rewards. Otherwise, it would directly become a liquidity deadlock. After all, everyone is not foolish and there's no need to be so obsessed with “paper wealth.” To be honest, I really can’t hold on to tokens for half a year, and in the case of no hedging, three months is about my limit. The remaining profit funds are planned to be directly exchanged for Virtual to continue staking. Today the price of Virtual also dropped, and some users chose to take profits and exit. The future strategy should be to reinvest profits into Virtual for short-term staking to earn Vevirtual rewards, and wait for Virtual prices to rise for proportional hedging. Regular Virtual airdrops subsidize my hedging costs.

As for $VADER, I'm still considering whether to add a bit more. Currently, the staking volume is indeed very high, and most of it is for a year. However, I still need to see the future ecological positioning. Let’s encourage each other!

Flammable and Explosive!!!

This is really outrageous. I thought the calculation of $VADER Yapping points based on the official published formula the day before yesterday was already quite absurd, but I didn't expect the points updated last night to be even more abstract.

The @Vader_AI_ Vader points from the day before yesterday were 1207 points, with a stake of 10,000 $VADER yielding about 500 points. The actual points obtained through Yapping were around 700 points. Yesterday's Vader points were 786 points, and if we remove the staked 500 points, the actual Vader Yapping points were just over 200 points.
This is really vastly different from the official description. I still remember the official announcement of a 1.25x coefficient reward for continuous Yapping, but according to actual calculations, it’s clearly not there. To be honest, I really don't know how to reconcile this statement; I would like to call myself the first person to reverse score.

Yesterday, I also asked Teacher Kailin @kaylyn_0x, and his score difference was also significant. From 8000 points on the first day to 1000 points on the second day. I really think it’s too abstract; in theory, the algorithm's initial phase should be a gradual accumulation process, but the Vader Agent's algorithm is quite difficult to understand. How can we break through the algorithm and the black box?
Continuous building leads to this?

In response to this situation, @VaderResearch provided the explanation: Due to us rewarding more viewers today, the Vader Yapping points you received may be less than yesterday.

Isn't it ridiculous? Don’t you check what you say? Going from 9000 points to 8000 points is a bit less than yesterday. Going from 8000 to 1000 is also a bit less? Where is your algorithm? Where is your calculation formula? Where is all the information you publicly announced? Are you really playing that game where the final explanation rights belong to the organizer?

Back to the hottest topic recently, $IRIS, which last night also staged a “True and False Monkey King” trio. Are we small but have big dreams?
To ride the wave of $IRIS, they are really going all out, either the same avatar or a similar name. But after shouting for so long, everyone basically knows that it’s actually on ETH, after all, it’s the first project of Virtual on ETH.
Although many brothers made mistakes, fortunately, the official corrected the errors in a timely manner and returned the corresponding points. In comparison, it can be considered an indirect loss mitigation.

Currently, $IRIS has already over-recruited 18X. My own strategy is to go all in after obtaining the points this afternoon. Although I thought that if calculated by average points return, it might not be as good as tomorrow's hackathon project $BAIBY, but after all, it is the first project on Eth. If Virtual continues to make efforts in the Eth ecosystem in the future, then choosing to participate in $IRIS will definitely not be wrong. After all, there are precedents for quality projects on Base, although the unlocking time is 182 days, there might also be subsequent airdrops and other gameplay. It is suggested to take a look at the secondary market when it opens, considering cost-effectiveness. Some large holders with high points will surely choose to dump TP immediately upon seeing the 182-day lockup period, as the cost-effectiveness is much higher in comparison. If you really want to buy in, either you are a capable scientist who gets in immediately and arbitrages, or you wait for the large holders to dump and then buy in during the dip. This is of course my own idea, and specific operations still depend on the actual situation.

Since Bnalpha has deepened its collaboration with Sonic SVM @SonicSVM, it has recently started paying attention to projects on Sonic. When looking at the infrastructure of an ecosystem, aside from the liquidity of trading Dex, the most important aspect is to examine its own DeFi ecosystem.

Currently, projects that appear to have good quality include @chaos_Fi, after all, it is the champion of the Sonic Mobius hackathon, and Sonic SVM is a project within the Solana ecosystem @Solana_zh. It has become one of the highlights of the LSD protocol within the Sonic ecosystem, driven by StaFi LSaaS technology. Users can stake SONIC to obtain tradable sSONIC, achieving dual benefits of staking and liquidity.

In the ecosystem, it also solves the problem of 'prepayment' in games, in cooperation with FoMoney. By integrating sSonic as a payment currency, users can stake Sonic on the front end to obtain sSonic. This means that while users earn staking rewards from Sonic, they can seamlessly integrate into various GameFi and DeFi applications within the SONIC network. Users ultimately make seamless payments on the front end, with settlements done through Sonic's staking rewards on the back end. The existing GameFi games typically involve depositing coins into an account and interacting directly when needed, and there is always a concern about not being able to withdraw to the chain at times, with funds often being in excess. This effectively locks up funds for the ecosystem without usage, but users lose the staking rewards during that period. With the technological push from Chaos, it is extremely friendly to gamers. However, it remains uncertain whether more people will impulsively spend due to this mechanism.

Currently, the best way to participate in Chaos, I believe, is to earn $CHAOS and IDO allocation through Zealy tasks. The total rewards include airdrops of 10 million Chaos and 20% IDO eligibility.

Currently, there are only over 3000 users on the Zealy leaderboard, which is not particularly competitive for participation. In terms of task types, after completing the basic tasks, the subsequent ones are mainly simple daily check-ins for points and social tasks on Twitter.
Basic tasks
1️⃣ Join DC
2️⃣ Join TG
3️⃣ Follow Twitter
4️⃣ Submit the wallet for staking sonic
Subsequent tasks can generally only be interacted with after wallet submission.
Tasks include daily check-ins, Sonic checks, liking and retweeting on Twitter, adding symbols to Twitter names, adding '$sSONIC' to X bio, and further Zealy follow tasks from partners and user invitations.
Those interested can participate!

Virtual I have been tortured a thousand times, yet I treat Virtual like my first love

$VADER started the day before yesterday, and the scores came out yesterday 🤣 I can finally understand what @VaderResearch said about the Cookie ranking and the actual ranking of VADER Yapping being vastly different. I was secretly pleased to see Cookie's ranking still in the top spots before the scores came out, but how painful it was afterwards. Now, all I want is for Cookie to take me off the leaderboard 😭

"To make someone perish, one must first make them crazy"

In fact, my Virtual Yapping score has always been relatively high, even after the algorithm changed, I still earn over ten thousand points almost every day. In my “self-smart” attempt to discuss various topics related to $VADER ahead of time, I still thought I was in the top ranks until the scores came out, and I ended up as a “failed art student”.

I got all the questions right and understood all the question meanings. Yet I ended up with a score of 0! Compared to the high scores of other teachers, I am just that $VADER newcomer. Yesterday, after removing the 500 points from $VADER's score, my actual VADER Yapping score is 700 points.

Many teachers were scoring between 7,000 to 8,000 points yesterday, and I even compared with Teacher Kailin @kaylyn_0x. According to the currently published VADER Yapping algorithm, it is very likely that I was black-boxed.

On Kaito's ranking, I am basically similar to Teacher Kailin, both around the fortieth position. If we compare the basic scores of Yaps, I am indeed higher than him. My Arbus score is around 100 points, which should be higher than other users.
These two items' total score accounts for about 70% according to @VaderResearch's statement. The remaining 30% weight comes from the Agent evaluation score, and I believe my content data is still okay, but the score is indeed very low.

In fact, according to the current coefficient of 1.25, the gap will be very large. A low initial score, even with a high coefficient, means that the subsequent score growth is no match for the “top student” on the first day. However, it also serves as a reminder for me to correct my position. Starting today, I will begin to update the growth of my VADER Yapping score, striving to break through the black box through adjustments in my content on @Vader_AI_. Let's see how much I can grow from 700 points. At the same time, I can also build and construct Virtual with more newcomers!

Currently, the track popularity of Depin remains high, and I am also looking for projects that can navigate through bull and bear markets. What is often mentioned by everyone is Building, but what exactly needs to be built in the Depin track? Undoubtedly, it is infrastructure construction, and I have looked at many projects. I am particularly interested in decentralized cloud infrastructure platforms.

As we all know, the core needs for web3 are decentralized computing, storage, and networking. Decloud is the most fundamental infrastructure. Simply put, Decloud is the 'water, electricity, and gas' in the real world. The synchronization of blockchain nodes relies on storage and bandwidth, and the currently popular AI project deployments also require GPU services. The most used dapps also need servers to support them, and all these demands can be met through full-stack decentralized cloud.

The most important aspect of full-stack decentralized cloud is that it can cover all components such as computing, storage, networking, data, identity, and security without relying on centralized cloud vendors. Independent projects exist for each individual need, and I have summarized them for everyone.

The project that can simultaneously accommodate all the above needs and operate independently, at present, seems to be ICN @ICN_Protocol, especially since on May 22, the backer of Xiaomi, NGP Capital, strategically invested in ICN with a valuation of $470 million. Speaking of NGP, one cannot help but mention its historical investment targets; well-known projects like Lime, Helium, Xiaomi, and others all have its presence. The main investment rounds are generally in A-C rounds, mainly covering areas such as cybersecurity, edge cloud, industrial technology, and enterprise software. Professionals do professional work; this principle holds true. Take Helium for instance, a very high-quality and feasible project in the Depin field, with a current market value of $540 million. If Helium is the starting point of NGP's investment in the depin field, then ICN must be its transformative turning point, as they choose to bet on the 'decentralized cloud computing' track this time.

ICN's strength comes not only from powerful investment institutions but also more from its own cash-generating capability. According to publicly disclosed information, by 2024, there will be over 1,000 paying enterprise users, generating annual revenue exceeding $5 million. This achievement could be considered a startup unicorn in web2 and is not the PPT project that everyone has in mind. After all, in the last round, many PPT projects had strong background investments but have yet to materialize. However, infrastructure that supports centralized storage, settlement, and networking is something people can see and verify. The logic of investment is just that; seeing is believing, and hearing is knowing. The most important thing is visibility.

In fact, after careful study, it is not an exaggeration to say that ICN is akin to AWS for web3; currently, ICN is one of the closest projects to a full-stack DeCloud project, with a three-layer structure that is both decentralized and enables efficient collaboration.
1️⃣ Resource Provision Layer Scaler Node can provide physical computing resources (CPU/GPU), storage (NVMe), bandwidth, and other basic services for Web3 applications and AI models, offering a true operating environment.
2️⃣ Protocol Security Layer HyperNode can ensure quality control over the resource provision layer, not providing computing resources itself but can monitor, verify, and penalize independent nodes. This maximally ensures the transparency and stability of resource scheduling during ICN's operation.
3️⃣ Developer Deployment Layer Builder SDK allows quick deployment of decentralized services on ICN, ensuring future ecological diversity and compatibility.

ICN's ability to connect physical resources, network services, and application combinations is the core of building a 'decentralized AWS' for Web3.

Recently, their token $ICNT is also approaching TGE; those who have not participated in the galaxy missions and testnets can take part in the recent 'mouth-holding'. Register on the official website https://t.co/PR0R6bdsC2, select the country, link your old wallet, and then complete Twitter tasks and DC tasks. Follow up by tweeting with the #ICNTWorldDomination tag.
Those interested can follow their official Twitter @ICN_Protocol and Chinese official Twitter @ICN_China.