Leicester Responds To Your Comments On The TITANO Situation

"Reportedly"
"Apparently"
"Assume"

These are important words. It's called context.

We have never bought into TITANO - and likely never will without a contract rewrite, at this point - because we frankly thought their tokenomics weren't that good.

But when they banned the whale and burned his earned tokens, that told us there was something strange and not worth our time.

We shared coverage that came from Certik, one of the most credible orgs in #crypto. They called it a #rugpull, we shared what they said, and we provided a single call-to-action, as a courtesy:

Can you sell? If you can't, you've been #rugpulled.

You therefore should assume the opposite: if you can, you haven't been rugpulled.

Regardless, liquidity WAS drained - as confirmed by TITANO themselves. They appear to have fixed it since. But it still happened. They claim it was the hack of PLAY - but Certik confirmed, with evidence, that the owner wallet was responsible, meaning likely not a hack.

However, we also said that even if nothing was wrong, trust should be eroded because it was allowed to happen.

We also see people not recognizing: Certik said minting happened. A commenter seemed to think that minting was removed. Thus, we assume TITANO told you they removed it. If they told you that, they lied.

SO...at what point do you hold them accountable for lying?

In any event, it doesn't matter if it's us or someone else. You're free to - and are encouraged to - independently verify what you see and hear. Starting with going to Twitter to view the Certik tweet.

That's what you probably should do before you call us a liar and get proven stupid.