Marketing Language Analysis
Common marketing terms and observable patterns. Compare claims against metrics.
Note: Marketing language often differs from technical implementation. These patterns are generalizations - individual projects vary. Always verify claims using on-chain data on our projects page.
| Marketing term | Observable pattern |
|---|---|
| "Community-driven" | Foundation or core team makes key decisions |
| "Governance token" | Token voting concentrated among large holders |
| "Decentralized network" | Multiple nodes operated by related entities |
| "Trustless" | Trust shifted from one entity to another |
| "Permissionless" | Validator set requires approval or stake threshold |
| "Open source" | Code public, governance private |
| "Progressive decentralization" | Timeline not specified or repeatedly delayed |
| "Fair launch" | Early participants had informational advantage |
| "No premine" | Team had mining advantage at launch |
| "Decentralized governance" | Small number of addresses control majority votes |
| "Battle-tested" | No public exploits to date |
| "Immutable" | Upgradeable via governance or admin keys |
| "Censorship-resistant" | Sequencer or validator set can order transactions |
| "Decentralized stablecoin" | Collateral includes centralized assets |
| "DAO-governed" | Token-weighted voting with concentrated holdings |
| "Non-custodial" | Smart contract upgradeable by admin |
| "Validator network" | Validator set selected or approved by foundation |
| "Layer 2 solution" | Separate chain with bridge to mainnet |
Verification Methods
- 1.Check Nakamoto Coefficient: How many entities could halt the network?
- 2.Token Distribution: Who holds how much? Who had access before launch?
- 3.Upgrade Mechanism: Can someone change the rules? Who?
- 4.Halt Capability: Can the network be stopped? By whom?
- 5.Source Documentation: Compare marketing to technical documentation
Have additional patterns? Submit a Pull Request