Arcium
1624 Established
(@arcium OR $ARX) -is:retweet
1211
Neutral
↑ +40 above avg
avg ethos(72 never seen before)
1048
supporters
36.1/day· 54% above avg
92
skeptics
3.2/day· ≈ avg
2513
positive tweets
86.7/day· 54% above avg
163
negative tweets
5.6/day· 28% below avg
7099
tweets scanned
245/day· 63% above avg
2026-05-11 → 2026-06-08
window
29 days
Audience composition vs baseline(avg across 31 projects)
26%with reviews
↑ 12% above avg
68%no reviews
↓ 3% below avg
6%never seen
↓ 9% below avg
Just ₳ Guy ⛏️ · 1.0K followers
- @0xGaius_ @jussy_world @PhoenixTrade @bulktrade @HeliusPrivacy @grass @Arcium @zinc_cash highly underrated & undervalued2026-06-07♥ 1↻ 0sentiment 70%
- @_markstreeter @Arcium im highly skeptical since random big accounts are just suddenly bullish on this. ive looked into the site, its convoluted. like im not saying a complicated system cant work. maybe im missing something but to me, it seemed like barriers to entry were really2026-05-29♥ 2↻ 0sentiment 78%
- And here we go, straight from @Arcium claiming rounds are 30 seconds long when the timer on the website CLEARLY is much longer. I am also wondering how all these huge accounts across X are suddenly bullish on this unproven 'mining'. convoluted extraction.2026-05-29♥ 10↻ 1sentiment 85%
- @Arcium yo why is your protocol blocking people after they ask about round timers? no response back from anyone with any answers, yet all these large accounts are publicly shilling this? everyone is all the sudden bullish on this random 'mining' i call BS2026-05-29♥ 2↻ 0sentiment 82%
- @SolanaSensei @UmbraPrivacy @craftsdev @zinc_cash @Arcium @solana @toly @yrschrade @julian_arcium @mango_ how is that possible? honestly, I question the claim of round timers and they blocked me? please this is such a basic thing and its what the system is supposed to work around2026-05-29♥ 2↻ 0sentiment 85%
Supporters · 1048
ranked by ethos (highest first) · click any face
Recognized · 285
12
2
3
3
2
4
13
4
2
6
14
20
5
2
6
2
3
2
3
3
2
2
6
6
4
4
2
4
6
6
2
2
7
4
2
3
5
4
2
2
2
5
5
7
2
2
36
4
3
6
3
3
14
13
3
12
13
4
3
2
2
3
3
2
6
2
2
4
7
6
2
3
3
15
3
5
2
2
2
2
10
7
3
2
2
4
6
10
5
2
2
7
4
4
3
3
17
4
3
2
2
7
30
3
3
30
5
3
2
2
34
6
10
4
2
6
4
4
3
2
2
2
4
4
6
3
2
10
9
6
2
2
8
3
No Ethos reviews · 702
lower signal
2
3
9
6
2
7
2
3
2
2
2
4
2
9
7
3
16
3
2
18
20
15
8
6
4
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
4
2
2
5
3
2
6
2
2
19
4
3
2
2
5
2
2
4
3
2
2
2
2
25
4
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
29
6
6
5
5
4
4
4
3
2
2
2
2
14
8
7
5
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
3
2
13
10
6
6
5
5
4
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
10
9
8
7
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
20
13
8
8
6
6
6
5
5
5
4
4
4
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
16
9
9
7
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
23
17
11
9
9
8
7
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
2
2
2
2
6
5
4
4
3
3
7
7
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Never seen before · 61
lowest signal
ethos:Untrusted< 800Questionable800–1199Neutral1200–1399Known1400–1599Established1600–1799Reputable1800–1999Exemplary2000–2199Distinguished2200–2399Revered2400–2599Renowned2600+Never seen before