0200project
Genesis token

Retiring the Genesis token

Published 2026-09-02, before any transaction.

This page is not linked from anywhere on our site. It exists to be found by someone looking up this contract — not to introduce anyone to it.

We deployed a token called 0200 on Base on 2026-09-01. A third-party classifier flagged it as a scam. We investigated why, published what we found, and are now retiring it. This page is published before any transaction, so what follows can be compared against it.

What will happen, in order

  1. The entire liquidity pool is withdrawn. It holds $25.00 and 250,000 tokens. We hold effectively all of the LP tokens.
  2. The full balance — 1,000,000,000 tokens — is sent to the token’s own contract address, 0xC626A027A0Fa57A9424Df1173b51d80d26B44FA6. That contract has no owner, no rescue function, no withdraw function and no proxy. There is no code path by which those tokens move again.
  3. Both transaction hashes are published here.

The state that led to this, all of it checkable

  • One wallet holds 999,750,000 of 1,000,000,000 tokens: 0x3129b6525dbe86a0c61d3c8ad162a333a5ef1783. It is a normal wallet — not a vesting contract, not a timelock. Nothing on-chain restricts it.
  • There are two holders: that wallet and the pool.
  • Liquidity is $25.00 and the LP is not locked.

The arithmetic that follows: a buyer who spends $100 receives about 200,000 tokens. If the majority holder then sells 1,000,000 tokens — 0.1% of their position — that buyer can recover $0.95. That $0.95 is what the concentration costs a buyer: in the same pool with no majority holder able to sell into it, the round trip returns about $99.40, the difference being pool fees. After the steps above there is no pool at all, and no way to buy this token.

Those are reproducible from chain state. Anyone can check them.

What this does not change

The contract is immutable and will exist permanently. totalSupply will continue to read 1,000,000,000, because this contract has no burn function. The pool contract also survives: UniswapV2 permanently locks a small amount of liquidity when a pair is created, so about 0.0000001 tokens remain in it and cannot be withdrawn by anyone. The contract is permissionless. Anyone can create a new pool for it using their own tokens.

Current holders: two — our wallet, and the pool. No external address holds this token.

The Genesis token is retired

Executed 2026-09-02. Both transactions confirmed on Base mainnet.

The liquidity pool was withdrawn and the entire supply sent to the token’s own contract address, where it cannot be moved by anyone, including us.

  • Liquidity withdrawal — block 50803021
    0xb365ca46b440c415cf3ec36d9a83eea4b89c6e1ccd2f58c6f1577f0ff8f1b887
  • Transfer of full supply to the contract — block 50803098
    0x742db31dd0dca7b00686354662cc0f7334fa65584b819c6f43511292cc494cb6

How to verify this yourself, in two reads

Every token that exists is now in one of two places, and they add up exactly:

balanceOf(token, token)  +  balanceOf(token, pair)  ==  totalSupply()

  999,999,999.9999999  +  0.0000001  =  1,000,000,000.0000000

Where token is 0xC626A027A0Fa57A9424Df1173b51d80d26B44FA6 and pair is 0x98d0bE8540a898eE5d946325D9535a12814a8978. The deployer’s wallet now holds zero.

Note what this is and is not: the tokens were transferred, not burned. This contract has no burn function, so totalSupply() still reads 1,000,000,000 and always will. Nothing was destroyed and no supply was reduced — the entire supply is simply at addresses that cannot release it. Any market capitalisation computed from that number is meaningless.

Why those addresses cannot release them. The contract has no owner, no rescue function, no withdrawal function and no proxy; the source is verified and public and the absence of those functions is checkable. The 0.0000001 in the pair is the minimum liquidity UniswapV2 permanently locks when a pair is created, and it cannot be withdrawn by anyone.

The pool is drained, not deleted. The pair contract still exists and holds that dust. The contract is permissionless: anyone can create a new pool for it using their own tokens. Any such pool would not be ours and we would have no involvement in it.

The withdrawal returned 24.999999 USDC. That is our own capital returning to us. It is recorded as a change in where an asset sits, not as revenue. No tokens were sold, at any point, to anyone.

Amendments to this page

2026-09-03. The retained USDC has been spent. The section above states that the withdrawal returned 24.999999 USDC and that it is our own capital returning to us, recorded as a change in where an asset sits. That was accurate when published and it is no longer the whole picture: that USDC has since been spent on domain registrations for 0200project.

Both movements are asset-location changes and neither is revenue. The withdrawal returned our own capital from a pool we owned; the spend converted that capital into an expense. No token was sold, at any point, to anyone — that statement is unchanged and remains true. The original text is left above rather than rewritten, because it described the state accurately at the time and a page that asks readers to check its claims against what happens should show what it claimed before.

2026-09-02, after execution. The verification check published above was corrected. It originally read balanceOf(token, token) == totalSupply(). That equality is false and always will be: 0.0000001 tokens are permanently stranded in the pair, so the contract holds 999,999,999.9999999 against a total supply of 1,000,000,000. A reader running the original check would have seen a mismatch, which this page told them to read as “something is wrong” — a failure that did not happen. The corrected check accounts for every token in two named places and holds exactly.

2026-09-02, shortly after publication. One sentence was corrected. It originally read:

“After the supply is sent to an address it cannot leave, the same buyer recovers approximately $99.40, the difference being pool fees.”

The arithmetic was correct and the framing was not: it described a buyer making a round trip after retirement, and after the steps above there is no pool, so no such buyer can exist. The corrected sentence uses the same figures to say what the $0.95 measures — the cost of the concentration — and states the true end state. The original is left here rather than removed, because a page whose claims are meant to be checked against what happens should also show what it previously claimed.