I was listening to the Yapline earlier and @R2D2zen was talking about how @wallchain leaderboards are being gamed
So i took screenshots of all the leaderboards and ran it through an LLM to find similarities, oddities and see what comes out of it
The results will surprise you

The screenshots for the following seven leaderboards were taken today and processed:
• wallchain
• limitless
• idOS
• genome
• heyelsa
• apecoin r.a.i.d.
• covalent
Focus was limited to looking at Mindshare % across different leaderboards to see if a pattern emerges
Here's what the LLM pulled out:
• @GemsScope appeared on 5 leaderboards
• @ArtvisionNFT, @MookieNFT, @leaf_swan - in 4 each
• @erequendiweb3 - appears 3 times
• @zuri_nft - appears 2 times
All within a 0.7 - 1.3% mindshare band

Different types of projects have different audiences, yet these same accounts repeatedly hold about 1% mindshare, no matter the leaderboard
That is statistically not possible without automation or coordination
The mindshare of these accounts also shows concerted moves. When one rises, the rest follow by ±0.1–0.2% showing possible clusters

Accounts like @beijingdou or @GratefulApe_eth show large variances in their mindshare on different projects, jumping between 1% to 10%
It's variances like these that are indicative of actual mindshare engagement with a real audience

This analysis is only indicative of a potential problem on Wallchain and it's up to @max_bevza and @kyparus to look into this
Obviously, a single-day snapshot of different leaderboards is insufficient to reach a solid conclusion. It's not a top-only issue either
You'll probably find more of the same further down the different leaderboards in varying degrees. And this points to an issue with the Wallchain algorithm and penalties for suspicious patterns displayed

Finally... @ripchillpill recommended to compare the Wallchain leaderboards on Wallchain itself and on Xeet
Interestingly, only three accounts overlapped. Everyone else was unique to a single platform
If this due to a difference in the algorithm or some other factor? I'm not able to make a definitive conclusion for this, but it was an interesting one to look at

8,85 mil
1
El contenido de esta página lo proporcionan terceros. A menos que se indique lo contrario, OKX no es el autor de los artículos citados y no reclama ningún derecho de autor sobre los materiales. El contenido se proporciona únicamente con fines informativos y no representa las opiniones de OKX. No pretende ser un respaldo de ningún tipo y no debe ser considerado como un consejo de inversión o una solicitud para comprar o vender activos digitales. En la medida en que la IA generativa se utiliza para proporcionar resúmenes u otra información, dicho contenido generado por IA puede ser inexacto o incoherente. Lee el artículo vinculado para obtener más detalles e información. OKX no es responsable del contenido alojado en sitios de terceros. El holding de activos digitales, incluyendo stablecoins y NFT, implican un alto grado de riesgo y pueden fluctuar en gran medida. Debes considerar cuidadosamente si el trading o holding de activos digitales es adecuado para ti a la luz de tu situación financiera.