LGTM Code gets the coin
...Review fund ...In queue

Rules

The whole mechanic in plain words

Before the bench

What the filter checks

  • yesThe repository is public, alive and not archived.
  • yesIt was created more than 30 days ago.
  • yesIt has 20 commits or more.
  • yesIts history spans at least 30 days, so a single dump of somebody else's code does not pass.
  • yesA fork has to be 20 commits ahead of the repository it came from.
  • yesNo single day holds more than 40 percent of its stars, sampled across the star history.
  • yesIt carries a license.
  • yesOne submission per repository per 7 days.

The checks run against GitHub when you paste the link, and again when the submission is taken, because the browser's answer proves nothing.

Who gets the 60 percent

The receiver

If the repository belongs to a person, that person is the receiver. If it belongs to an organisation, the receiver is the human who committed most to it in the last 12 months, bots excluded.

The share goes to a pump.fun social fee PDA keyed to that GitHub account id. Only pump.fun can pay it out, and only to whoever signs in there with that same GitHub account. We never hold it, we cannot move it, and we cannot redirect it.

An organisation id cannot own one of those accounts, which is why an organisation's coin pays its top committer instead.

The receiver is shown before anything is submitted. Authors who want nothing to do with it can say so and the repository stops being accepted.

The review

What the two readers do

Both reviewers get the same material: the README, the file tree, the main files picked by size, imports and how often they change, the commit history, the tests and CI, and the issues. They read separately and never see each other's notes.

Every comment points at a real line and links to it on the exact commit. Comments are tagged the way a human reviewer tags them: nit, blocking, praise.

Each reviewer scores five things from 0 to 10: does it work, code quality, is the idea its own, is the project alive, documentation.

The verdict

Three ways it can end

LGTM
Both averages are 7.0 or more and no comment is tagged blocking. The pad launches the coin.
Changes
Anything else. No coin. The repository can come back in 7 days and the second review reads only what changed.
Reject
Spam, bought stars, or a repository written to farm a coin. It does not come back.

The verdict and a hash of the whole review are written on chain in a memo, so the text behind a coin cannot be edited afterwards.

60 percent

The author

Their own pump.fun social fee PDA, locked in the launch transaction and never editable afterwards.

25 percent

The review fund

The models and the first buy on the next coins. An empty fund means approved repos wait instead of launching.

15 percent

Buy back and burn

The keeper spends it on $LGTM and burns what it buys. Every burn has a signature.

The stake

0.1 / 0.25 / 0.5

The first buy, by score: 0.1 SOL at an average of 7, 0.25 at 8, 0.5 at 9 or more. It is never sold by us.

The stake and its deadlines

What happens to the first buy

The tokens the pad buys at launch sit on the launcher wallet. There is no code anywhere here that sells them.

Once the coin leaves the bonding curve, the author signs in with GitHub, gives a Solana address and the keeper sends the tokens to it.

If the coin never leaves the curve within 14 days, or the author does not take the stake within 90 days of it bonding, the tokens are burned.

What we do not promise

The honest part

An author may want nothing to do with a coin made from their work. The share is still theirs and still sits at pump.fun. A coin's page says plainly that the author did not ask for it unless they have said otherwise, and a repository whose author asks us to stop is not accepted again.

Pump.fun does not forward what nobody collects. If an author never signs in there, their share stays in their PDA and nobody else can take it, including us.

A reviewer can be wrong. That is why there are two of them, from two different labs, why every comment is tied to a line you can open, and why the whole review stays on the coin's page.

We never write to anybody on GitHub: no issues, no pull requests, no mail. The only place this pad speaks is here and on X.

The review fund can run dry. When it does, the queue holds and the site says so instead of launching coins it cannot pay for.

Nothing here is financial advice. A coin from a good repository can still go to zero, and you can lose everything you put in.