I don’t think the data on clanker vs pdf is right

from my understanding it’s comparing all clanker volume, to just pdf bonding curve volume

clanker has been a resounding success but that metric feels misleading

unless I’m just totally wrong? which would be ideal

founder /openventures | /proxyswap | tokenbot @clanker

I've been pretty open about this issue, the difficult of comparing launchpads with a bonding curve to one that launches directly onto markets 

clanker has no "secondary" its all just clanker volume 

pump, wow, ape store all define their volume as happening on bonding curve

goal is certainly not to be misleading about to scale of clanker volume, just to benchmark our growth against competitors

yes def not suggesting you are intentionally trying to mislead, aware the models are pretty different making it hard to compare

I think part of this is that I'm approaching it in relation to revenue & fees, as we've been deep in that data 

clanker did 60m of volume, thats the number that matters for our revenue & for our users fee share

pump did 405m of volume on the bonding curve (where they earn revenue, charge fees)

we're biased towards more data, so we'll continue to refine & improve these metrics, I also think its relevant - particularly with base competitors 

whats the total vol of all graduated coins from wow, ape, etc

@tian7.eth useful feedback here