Hey, now that you look at it, whether the project team is actually doing serious work— you really can’t just judge by those “milestone” breaking news they post on their Twitter. To put it bluntly, once many teams think about issuing tokens, they start piling up all kinds of seemingly impressive “milestones,” like “mainnet launch,” “ecosystem partnerships,” and so on. But if you scan on-chain activity, most of the treasury spending ends up as market-maker gas fees or some inexplicable large transfers. Tell me, is that money really being spent well?

Actually, from an engineering perspective, the most solid metric is whether they are truly “writing code”—not those hype-driven roadmaps, but whether nonces on Ethereum or other chains are growing normally, and whether the proportion of failed transactions is going down. If a team keeps shouting about “fair ordering,” yet their own on-chain transactions still have to rely on MEV, then you have to put a question mark over that “seriousness.” In any case, my approach is: ignore whatever they’re claiming, and go directly scan the contract addresses—check whether the code has been updated, and whether gas consumption is decreasing. If they can’t even be bothered to look at that, then honestly it’s better to research how miners split their revenue.