NOTR

Analysts

Who is worth listening to

Analysts are people who review new projects in public, with sources. Their record is built from facts that can be checked later, not from followers or diplomas.

First round

Anyone can become an analyst by showing their work

No diploma, no fund, no followers needed. You review a project that has just launched or is about to, you argue for or against with sources, and you say what would prove you wrong. NOTR records what actually happens, and the result stays on your profile, good or bad. We start with a handful of people and the team enters every review by hand.

0

Analysts

0

Reviews published

0

Claims waiting for a date

0

Claims resolved

  1. 1

    You review a project

    A verdict (Ready, Not yet, Not ready) and an argument for each of the three questions: is it safe, are the price and structure fair, does it keep its word.

  2. 2

    Every argument has a source

    A claim, a link and a date. Where something cannot be checked yet, you say so. Charts are welcome as evidence.

  3. 3

    You name what would prove you wrong

    One or more facts that can be checked by a date: a promise kept, an unlock on schedule, an audit published.

  4. 4

    The facts decide

    When the date passes, NOTR records whether the claim held or broke, with a source. A hit rate appears after 10 resolved claims, because fewer say nothing about skill.

What to argue with

The three questions are the same for every project. What you can use as evidence depends on whether the token trades yet.

Before launch

No market yet, so plans and documents. Much cannot be checked, and an honest review says so.

  • The team: public names and what they built before.
  • The tokenomics: who gets what, at what price, when it unlocks, how much trades on day one, the opening valuation against the last round.
  • The contracts and audit, if they exist: can supply be minted, can the contract be changed.
  • The sale terms: where the money goes, refunds, the platform.
  • Dated promises, turned into claims you can check later.

Already trading

Real behaviour you can see. Price is only context, never an argument for or against.

  • Everything on the left, and now what you can see.
  • On the chain: does supply match the stated cap, who holds the tokens, did team or insider wallets move.
  • Unlocks: did they happen as promised.
  • Liquidity: locked or not, how deep.
  • Promises and questions: which were kept by their date, which went unanswered.

One rule for both: an argument is a claim, a source and a date. Each question gets Met, Partly, Not met or Can't check yet. For the thresholds we use and how they were tested, see warning signs on the problem page.

Rules

  • A public identity. A nickname is fine, but you link an X or Telegram account you already use, so people can see who is speaking.
  • Say what you hold. If you own the token, say so. If a project pays you or is your employer, you do not review it.
  • No price targets. NOTR does not publish price forecasts or buy and sell calls. A review that is only about price is rejected.
  • Every review counts. We publish each review you send, and you cannot withdraw it later. A changed view is added as a dated update.
  • No more than 3 open reviews at a time in the first round, so every one gets proper reasoning.
  • No promises and no accusations. No guaranteed returns, no referral links. Claims about named people or projects need a public source. We may reject a review that breaks this, and we explain why.
  • Opinions are yours. A review is the personal opinion of the named person, not NOTR's and not investment advice. NOTR keeps your email only to answer you.

Join the first round

Write to us on Telegram or by email and say you want to try. We send you the form and answer your questions. You can see what it asks below.

Telegram: t.me/notrscoreEmail: notrscore@gmail.com

What the form asks
Nickname:
Link to your X or Telegram (the account you already use):
About you, 2 to 3 lines:
Do you hold, or get paid by, any project you will review? (yes/no, which):

First review
Project and ticker:
Stage (before launch / already trading):
Verdict (Ready / Not yet / Not ready):
Summary, 2 to 3 lines:

1. Is it safe? (Met / Partly / Not met / Can't check yet)
Argument and source link:

2. Are the price and structure fair? (Met / Partly / Not met / Can't check yet)
Argument and source link:

3. Does it keep its word? (Met / Partly / Not met / Can't check yet)
Argument and source link:

I am wrong if (a fact that can be checked, and a date):
Charts (attach as images, optional):

The record

The first round has just opened. Nobody has published a review yet. Every review will appear here with its sources and date, and the results will be shown when the dates pass, wrong ones included.

Where this goes next

Verified people, ratings and levels

Once the first round shows that the format works, analysts will vote on verdicts with a rating that grows with every right call. This part is a concept, shown with invented people and numbers.

Illustrative data. These are fictional example projects for demonstration purposes only — not a real assessment of any actual project.

Not investment advice. NOTR publishes public data, analysis, and risk signals — never a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold.

  1. 1

    Verify once, vote under a nickname

    A passport check by an outside provider makes sure each person has one account. Only the nickname is public.

  2. 2

    Write a reason, stake rating

    No reason, no vote. The stake is part of the person's own rating, at most half of it.

  3. 3

    Right: rating grows. Wrong: stake is lost

    A right call adds 60% of the stake to the rating. A wrong call removes all of it, and the lost rating is paid to no one.

  4. 4

    Higher rating, higher level

    Everyone starts at 100 as a Newcomer. Rating moves people up to Member, Analyst and Expert, and a heavier vote.

  1. 1

    Newcomer

    under 500

    Everyone starts here, at 100. Can vote and stake up to half of their rating. All Newcomers together weigh at most 25%.

  2. 2

    Member

    500–1,499

    Has a record of right calls. Full weight for the stake placed.

  3. 3

    Analyst

    1,500–2,499

    A trusted record. Can be picked for random review panels.

  4. 4

    Expert

    2,500 and up

    The strongest record. Reviews flagged votes and appeals.

Two example analysts

Two people, two ways of reading the same project

Each analyst has a field, a record and a written reason behind every call. Two voices are not a verdict: on a project page the verdict comes from the whole panel, weighted by stake. They are shown here so you can see how different good reasons can be.

Ada Lindgren

Smart-contract security

Example person, invented

A former smart-contract auditor. She reads the audit report before the website and asks one question first: who can move the money, and was that checked by someone outside the team?

Rating

2,140

Analyst
12 months agoNow
Calls right
17 of 20
Accuracy
85%
Staked now
1,460 REP in 10 calls
Max stake per call
1,070 REP
Open calls by answer
Ready 6Not yet 2Not ready 2

How this person reads a project

Reads first

  • The audit report and what it covered
  • Whether every high-severity finding was closed and re-checked
  • Admin keys and upgrade rights in the contract source

Says Not ready when contracts hold user funds and nobody outside the team has audited them.

Short, technical reasons. Stakes more on projects where the evidence is a document she can read.

Calls, with the reason written for each

  • Aurelia Network

    Said: Ready

    Open

    220 REP staked

    Both audits are published and every high finding was re-checked after the fix.

  • Lumen Protocol

    Said: Ready

    Open

    200 REP staked

    Two audits are published, and every high-severity finding was closed and re-checked.

  • Orbital Rollup

    Said: Not yet

    Open

    200 REP staked

    The sequencer audit is still in progress, so its findings are unknown.

  • Pathforge

    Said: Ready

    Open

    160 REP staked

    The oracle audit is published and the findings were fixed in a follow-up.

Kofi Mensah

Tokenomics and unlocks

Example person, invented

Works on token supply and vesting. He reads the unlock calendar before the roadmap and compares what each group paid with where the price is now.

Rating

2,880

Expert
12 months agoNow
Calls right
22 of 27
Accuracy
81%
Staked now
760 REP in 6 calls
Max stake per call
1,440 REP
Open calls by answer
Ready 4Not yet 1Not ready 1

How this person reads a project

Reads first

  • The unlock calendar in dates and amounts
  • How much supply the top wallets hold
  • Whether the team has kept its own schedule so far

Says Not ready when no vesting terms are published, so holders cannot see when supply arrives.

Fewer open calls. Waits for the unlock data before he commits, and puts his largest stake on the project with the longest clean record.

Calls, with the reason written for each

  • Aurelia Network

    Said: Ready

    Open

    260 REP staked

    The unlock schedule is public and has been followed to the day for a full year.

  • Tidewater Swap

    Said: Ready

    Open

    110 REP staked

    Token supply is spread across many holders and the unlock dates are public.

  • Lumen Protocol

    Said: Ready

    Open

    100 REP staked

    The unlock schedule is public and the team has followed it so far.

  • Pathforge

    Said: Not yet

    Open

    100 REP staked

    A large investor unlock is coming and supply is concentrated in few hands.

The same project, two readings

Both of them voted on these projects. Where they differ, the difference is the point: each looks at a different part of the evidence, and the panel verdict is built from many such readings.

  • Orbital RollupThey read it differently

    Ada LindgrenNot yet200 REP staked

    The sequencer audit is still in progress, so its findings are unknown.

    Kofi MensahReady100 REP staked

    Supply and the unlock schedule are clear and published in full.

  • PathforgeThey read it differently

    Ada LindgrenReady160 REP staked

    The oracle audit is published and the findings were fixed in a follow-up.

    Kofi MensahNot yet100 REP staked

    A large investor unlock is coming and supply is concentrated in few hands.

  • Aurelia NetworkSame call

    Ada LindgrenReady220 REP staked

    Both audits are published and every high finding was re-checked after the fix.

    Kofi MensahReady260 REP staked

    The unlock schedule is public and has been followed to the day for a full year.

  • Lumen ProtocolSame call

    Ada LindgrenReady200 REP staked

    Two audits are published, and every high-severity finding was closed and re-checked.

    Kofi MensahReady100 REP staked

    The unlock schedule is public and the team has followed it so far.

  • Tidewater SwapSame call

    Ada LindgrenReady140 REP staked

    The vault contracts were audited twice, by two independent firms.

    Kofi MensahReady110 REP staked

    Token supply is spread across many holders and the unlock dates are public.

  • Blorp CoinSame call

    Ada LindgrenNot ready120 REP staked

    There is no audit of any kind, and the contracts control user funds.

    Kofi MensahNot ready90 REP staked

    No vesting terms are published, so holders cannot see when supply unlocks.

Concept with invented people, ratings and numbers. The exact rating rules, the passport check and the storage of personal data need design and legal review before analyst voting opens.