Credibility
Credibility is the Nun Report's read on the people behind a token: the deployer and the founders. Code can be audited perfectly and still be run by known scammers, so this is a separate, essential axis.
Where you see it
Credibility appears as a grade badge (in the dossier's Provenance & Team block, next to the deployer) and it also feeds the Stalker Score and can raise a Negative reputation red flag.
The grade
| Grade | Meaning |
|---|---|
| A / B (green) | Good track record: a known, established operator. |
| C (orange) | Mixed or thin signals. |
| D / F (red) | Poor history: past failures or fraud associated with the team. |
| UNKNOWN (grey) | Not enough information to judge. Common for brand-new, anonymous teams. |
Below the grade, a short list of signals explains it in words (for example, a recognisable founder, a verified project presence, or the opposite).
Negative reputation
When the team's public accounts carry a genuinely poor track record, repeated failed or abandoned projects, or worse, the Nun Report raises a Negative reputation red flag on the dossier. This is one of the strongest single warnings, because it's about a demonstrated pattern of behaviour, not a guess about code.
How to use Credibility
- UNKNOWN is not automatically bad; most fresh micro-cap launches are anonymous. It just means this axis can't help you, so lean harder on the contract and holder analysis.
- D / F or Negative reputation is a strong stop. A bad human track record tends to repeat regardless of how clean this particular contract looks.
- A / B is reassuring but not a green light. A credible team can still ship a token that fails. Combine it with the market and holder checks.
Ask yourself: "Would I trust these specific people with my money?" Credibility turns that question into a grade, but the evidence (the signals, the deployer history) is right there for you to judge yourself.