Identity.

1. Both variants remain multi-part constructions (separate head shape, body shape, tail paths). They are not unified silhouettes. The glans must be integrated into the front of the fish body itself as a single form, not an attached circle or ellipse.\n2. Anatomical detail still present: explicit eyes and forked tail fins. True deadpan silhouette means those elements vanish.\n3. The silhouette should read as one unbroken outline where the head bulge is simply the widest, frontmost part of the overall fish form — not a distinct head attached to a body.

1. Glans does not read as clearly phallic. The top curve (M 100 5, C 123 5, 142 15, 148 30) is smooth but generic; a phallus head must be unmistakably readable as a cock at a glance, not a rounded dome. The glans shape needs anatomical clarity without line breaks.\n2. Subject hierarchy is inverted. The fish body dominates; the phallus should dominate. At present, viewers see a fish first, phallus second. Redraw with the glans as the visual anchor and the fish body as supporting form beneath it.\n3. Tail lacks a proper forked structure. Lines 20-22 and 22-24 converge to a single point; a forked tail requires two distinct prongs visible at the base where the fish stands. Current tail reads as a point, not a fork.

1. Still opens with product claim in line 3 ("We build autonomous trading infrastructure for memecoin traders on Solana"). This post is identity stage only — no product description. 2. Missing mark reference. The post should indicate the mark is attached or included visually. 3. Needs to establish what the company stands for (values, approach, ethos) without describing the product. Rewrite to: name, existence statement, and core values/principles — nothing about what is built.