grenadeandClaude Opus 5
f81ebd4746
The premise was that pools are the best surface for observing wormhole transfers, because payouts must leave a pattern in the batches. The pattern is there. Most of it is not payouts. Two things break the obvious reading. Batch *size* is aggregation: the pallet documents a public batch as one segment per inner private batch and a segment as one client, so a 120-output batch is an aggregator bundling unrelated people. And the most recurrent recipient is the aggregator itself — one address is credited in 91.5% of every public batch anyone submitted and in none of the private ones, which is the rebate minted to the proof's `aggregator_address`. QUANPOOL's mining address appears in 501 batches for 7.54 QTC total, 0.015 each: the fee share paid to whoever included the batch. Classified, three addresses take 76% of everything the exits pay. A cohort table that did not say so would be describing aggregator plumbing and calling it an economy, so the share is the section's eyebrow and its first sentence. What survives the subtraction is the finding worth shipping: among genuine recipients, 35 addresses paid twenty or more times take two thirds of the remaining value at twice everyone else's average credit. That is a recurring-payment shape and the page says it is no more than that — the chain records no sender, so a regular payee is as plausibly an exchange deposit or one person on a schedule as a pool meeting its obligations. Batch size is not rendered anywhere, on purpose. Closes #20 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>