# $PURRS Social Sentiment & Intelligence — 2026-10-01 14:10 UTC

> **Asset:** $PURRS  
> **Momentum Status:** Fading Quickly  
> **Timestamp:** 2026-10-01 14:10 UTC (2026-10-01T14:10:00Z)  
> **Canonical URL:** https://cryptitalk.com/2026-10-01-14-10/crypto/PURRS  
> **Overview Brief:** https://cryptitalk.com/2026-10-01-14-10/crypto.md  

---

## 10-Minute Social Metrics
- **Posts Analyzed:** 1
- **Total Impressions:** 309
- **Likes:** 9
- **Retweets:** 5
- **Comments:** 4

---


## Momentum & Sentiment Analysis
Total Engagement - Comments: 4, Retweets: 5, Likes: 9, Impressions: 309


---

## Cited Community Posts & Evidence


### Post #1 by @reddit
> **Author:** [@reddit](https://x.com/reddit)  
> **Metrics:** 1 likes · 0 retweets · 0 comments · 100 views  


> **Source Link:** [https://x.com/reddit/status/65eef5927d28232c8efaaf6bba28a4e3c6af55c5b936365ee31a0e0a622a8058](https://x.com/reddit/status/65eef5927d28232c8efaaf6bba28a4e3c6af55c5b936365ee31a0e0a622a8058)  


> 
> "For 7 hours and 41 minutes in March 2013 the Bitcoin network was split in two

On 11 March 2013 an upgrade split the network in two. New nodes followed one chain, old nodes could only follow another, and about 60 percent of the mining power was on the side that old nodes rejected. It got fixed that night, in public, in the developers' chat room. We went back through the log and the block data and wrote it up. A few things that surprised us while doing it: The block that caused it wasn't too big. It was 998 kB, under the limit. Old versions had capped their database at 10,000 locks years earlier, nobody thought of that as a rule about blocks, and it turned out to be one. It was even a slightly different rule on each machine."




---


## Contributing Accounts

- `@RHpurrsuader` (https://x.com/RHpurrsuader)