Near
1595 Known
(@nearprotocol OR $NEAR) -is:retweet
1165
Questionable
≈ avg
avg ethos(553 never seen before)
2872
supporters
82.1/day· 3.6× avg
567
skeptics
16.2/day· 4.7× avg
7211
positive tweets
206/day· 3.8× avg
1158
negative tweets
33.1/day· 4.3× avg
15041
tweets scanned
430/day· 2.9× avg
2026-05-01 → 2026-06-04
window
35 days
Audience composition vs baseline(avg across 29 projects)
9%with reviews
↓ 5% below avg
75%no reviews
↑ 5% above avg
16%never seen
≈ avg
Jacob.Turbo · 188 followers
- Great job @JesusMartinez did you sell with Hays? You shilled $Near and $Tao at the top. You deserve 0 followers. You hear me Jesus? Zero https://t.co/3hy8eiECHw2026-06-04♥ 2↻ 1sentiment 80%
- @dragonisnear @jp_dawg Yeah you will learn when solana:rndrizKT3MK1iimdxRdWabcF7Zg7AR5T4nud4EkHBof out performs $near2026-06-03♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 72%
- It’s going to take a lot for $Near to make a 7.26 billion market cap. It’s not worth the risk for a 2X.2026-06-03♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 75%
- So $Near needs almost the same market cap as $Ada Cardano to even 2X. Ask your self is $Near bigger than $Ada ? In my opinion it’s not at least not right now. @JesusMartinez was just shilling $Tao and look what happened. Be careful listening to @JesusMartinez his opinions are bad2026-06-03♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 80%
- For anyone confused on why @JesusMartinez moved on from $Tao to $Near read my opinion below. $Tao is in the dumps so he just shills the next token that is up. When $Render makes 200% gains I’m sure he will cover $Render next. After we make our money.2026-06-03♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 82%
- So $Render hitting 10billion is a 10X while $Near needs a 30Billon market cap for a 10X. $Render will 10X first then go to 50billion. $Render is a clean 50X from here that is actually realistic.2026-06-03♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 85%
- Both $Near and $Tao are L1’s that will be obsolete in a few years. Both have know real world use case with longevity.2026-06-03♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 80%
- @jp_dawg Both are L1’s and will be obsolete in a few years. I understand you are clearly biased towards $Near but it will have its time and do a 2X and be long gone.2026-06-03♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 85%
- There isn’t any point in using $Near. It’s a pure speculative play which will die just like $Tao did2026-06-03♥ 6↻ 1sentiment 90%
- You can’t have both. $Near and $Tao are competing and one will win. But in the long term both will be obsolete. $Render will always be needed and will scale to fix all AI problems and fulfill important needs.2026-06-03♥ 7↻ 1sentiment 75%
- @dragonisnear There is nothing proprietary about $Near its all a scam. Everything will be easily converted one day. You’re just mad cause I keep it real. $Near will NEVER 10X ever.2026-06-03♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 95%
- So $Near won’t be a winner. It’s totally useless. $Render is probably the most useful AI crypto in the market and the future will only prove this statement. Nobody will use the $Near L1 and its features could easily be copied by $Eth or $Sol.2026-06-03♥ 12↻ 1sentiment 88%
- The $Tao community are going to zero while @JesusMartinez jeeted and bought $Near 🤣🤣🤣2026-06-03♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 72%
- hhahahahahah dude makes videos of $Near after it moved…….. when @JesusMartinez made $Tao videos he should have been making $Near videos to actually help his viewers make money..2026-05-26♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 72%
- I agree. As soon as @JesusMartinez started making videos on $Tao the price started dumping. He only makes videos after the prices move for max engagement. He did the same thing. He tweeted $ICP out after it moved 50%. Now he’s doing $Near after its 74% move.2026-05-26♥ 1↻ 1sentiment 75%
Supporters · 2872
ranked by ethos (highest first) · click any face
Recognized · 260
No Ethos reviews · 2131
lower signal
3
10
2
2
4
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
12
7
2
5
3
2
2
4
2
2
13
6
4
3
9
5
3
2
2
3
5
11
6
10
8
2
2
2
2
9
2
5
4
4
2
2
7
3
2
2
2
12
6
16
13
10
7
6
6
6
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
3
3
2
11
10
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
6
5
2
2
2
19
5
4
4
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
23
10
7
5
4
4
2
2
2
29
12
5
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
15
5
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
6
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
6
6
6
5
5
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
26
16
12
11
9
9
7
7
7
6
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
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
3
7
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
10
4
2
2
2
2
14
4
4
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
101
27
9
8
7
6
5
5
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
92
41
36
30
30
27
25
25
22
20
18
17
15
14
14
14
13
13
12
11
11
11
11
10
10
10
10
8
8
7
7
7
7
6
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
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
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
2
2
2
2
84
51
48
33
27
25
24
23
23
23
22
22
21
21
21
20
20
19
19
19
19
19
18
18
18
18
18
18
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
16
16
16
16
15
15
15
15
15
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
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
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
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
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
26
2
11
3
6
4
3
3
3
63
24
24
19
18
14
14
11
7
7
7
7
6
6
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
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
17
9
7
7
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
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
Never seen before · 481
lowest signal
ethos:Untrusted< 800Questionable800–1199Neutral1200–1399Known1400–1599Established1600–1799Reputable1800–1999Exemplary2000–2199Distinguished2200–2399Revered2400–2599Renowned2600+Never seen before