Ras Mic (Michael Shimeles) — public-history and launch-risk dossier

Research date: 2026-06-26
Public identity reviewed: Ras Mic / Rasmic / Michael Shimeles / “Micky”
Requested use: 10xN creator launch due diligence
Overall assessment: High unresolved risk pending a direct explanation of the MemeBot project; Medium residual risk if that issue is satisfactorily cleared

Scope and confidence standard

This is public-source reputational and commercial due diligence, not a criminal-record, credit, or formal employment-background check. It excludes private contact details, home addresses, family information, protected-class information, medical information, and unsupported gossip.

Evidence labels used below:

• Confirmed: supported by a current first-party organization page, creator-controlled account, or directly inspectable public code.
• Self-reported: stated by Shimeles, but not independently substantiated in this review.
• Secondary: reported by a profile mirror, automated database, or other source that may be stale or incorrect.
• Inference: an analytical conclusion from the cited facts, not a fact independently established by a source.

The review searched the creator's official sites and accounts, YouTube descriptions, GitHub repositories, public professional profiles, project pages, and broad web results for litigation, regulatory action, fraud allegations, plagiarism claims, customer complaints, and material public disputes. Failure to locate a record is not proof that no record exists.

Executive assessment

Ras Mic is a developer educator and software creator whose public identity is Michael Shimeles. His current public work is concentrated on AI coding tools, web application development, developer workflows, and SaaS-building. His official YouTube channel had 94.7K subscribers, 2.18M views, and 149 videos when reviewed, and Convex currently lists him as a DX Engineer. (YouTube About, accessed 2026-06-26; Convex team, accessed 2026-06-26)

The material launch issue is an old public crypto project, MemeBot. Shimeles described it in a January 2024 LinkedIn post as a bot that masked his transactions and “front-ran other traders.” The public repository and user interface also market front-running functionality. (LinkedIn post, 2024-01-23; repository, accessed 2026-06-26; buying UI, accessed 2026-06-26)

That evidence establishes how the project was publicly represented. It does not establish that the prototype successfully front-ran a live third-party transaction, that it caused a loss, or that Shimeles violated a law. Across the public main and dev branches and visible commit history, this review found no executable flow that observes another trader's pending transaction and deliberately orders ahead of it. The pending-detection file is entirely commented out, examines mined blocks rather than a pending mempool, and has return-flow defects. The implemented private-transaction path submits the user's own swap through eth_sendPrivateTransaction, which Flashbots documents as a private-submission mechanism intended to protect against front-running. (pending-transaction code; private-transaction code; Flashbots Protect; eth_sendPrivateTransaction, accessed 2026-06-26) Public code cannot exclude private/deleted code, another deployment, or manual conduct. No victim report, lawsuit, criminal charge, or regulatory action tied to the project was found in this review.

Nevertheless, the creator's own wording is sufficiently direct that an uncontextualized screenshot could create a front-running/MEV-abuse narrative or be framed as market manipulation. This is a launch hold caused by unresolved public claims, not a finding that misconduct occurred. Obtain a written, fact-specific account and involve counsel only if a live deployment, targeted trading, or third-party complaint occurred.

Other risks are manageable but require controls:

• creator, sponsor, employer, product, and possible investment affiliations overlap in the same developer-tool market;
• recent sponsorship descriptions are generally explicit, but several older or affiliate-like descriptions are ambiguous;
• current and recently indexed Fabrika/consulting pages make broad client, scale, and Fortune 500 claims that should be substantiated before 10xN repeats them;
• provocative titles about leaks, cheating, competitors, and compliance increase partner and claims-review risk;
• the old MemeBot prototype has concerning wallet-key handling that could be used to question technical judgment, even though no evidence shows that it remains live.

No other comparably serious, credibly sourced public controversy was found.

Identity and public-account map

The 10xN page showed a cached 94.4K YouTube count, while YouTube itself showed 94.7K. This is an ordinary cache/timing difference, not an identity issue. (10xN; YouTube About, accessed 2026-06-26)

How he got started and career history

Origin story

• A publication synopsis on Shimeles's public LinkedIn profile describes early side hustles, leaving university, losing money in network marketing, and then becoming interested in Bitcoin and cryptocurrency. This is a self-reported origin story embedded in a profile publication, not independently verified biography. (LinkedIn profile, accessed 2026-06-26)
• He was publicly active in crypto/NFT media by 2022. Amazon Music lists The NIL DAO Podcast, hosted by Michael, with episodes from February 2022. (Amazon Music, accessed 2026-06-26)
• In a first-party January 2024 retrospective, he said he began coding seriously in mid-2022 after repeated job rejections, then built and shipped products rather than waiting for a role. (LinkedIn post, 2024-01-23)
• A separate post says he and two friends launched a Bitcoin Ordinals startup after those rejections; he reported 100,000 API requests, 2,000-plus users, and about $15,000 in transactions shortly after launch. These are creator-supplied figures and were not independently audited. (LinkedIn post, 2023)
• The 2024 retrospective identifies 2023 projects including OrdKit, an embed site, a church site, Exodus, MemeBot, heysocialpal, OrdConnect, and a Whop community. It also claims that OrdKit processed $2M in transactions and reached 200K unique users. Those scale figures remain self-reported. (LinkedIn post, 2024-01-23)
• Devpost shows three hackathon participations and one submitted project. His 2025 YouPac AI entry is marked as a first-prize winner in a Stan-sponsored category. A later video says the Toronto win paid $10,000; the prize result is corroborated by Devpost, but the amount is creator-reported in the sources reviewed. (Devpost profile; YouPac AI; creator video, accessed 2026-06-26)

Career timeline

The Multi-Health Systems, Tempo, OrdKit, and NIL DAO dates come from a people-search/profile-mirror service and should not be treated as formal employment verification. Obtain a creator-supplied résumé and employer references if the launch needs that level of assurance.

Audience and content profile

Current reach

• YouTube: 94.7K subscribers, 2,183,230 views, 149 videos; channel created June 6, 2016. (YouTube About, accessed 2026-06-26)
• X: approximately 34.8K followers on the current public profile. (X, accessed 2026-06-26)
• The visible channel catalog is predominantly developer education and commentary: AI coding agents, Next.js/React, SaaS building, developer productivity, tool comparisons, freelancing, and launch retrospectives. (YouTube videos, accessed 2026-06-26)

Editorial pattern

The channel combines tutorials with strong opinion and curiosity-driven packaging. Representative titles include:

• “GPT-5 sucks...” (2025-08-15)
• “I found SECRET features Claude Code is hiding (LEAK)” (2026-03-31)
• “I Exposed AI ‘Cheating’ Software” (2025-10-06)
• “How I build compliant software (for boomer companies)” (2025-11-03)

This style is not itself evidence of misconduct. It does create partner-sensitivity and claim-substantiation risk, particularly when a paid campaign references a competitor, a supposed leak, security, cheating, or regulatory compliance. The “LEAK” video's description says source code leaked and that the video reviews hidden or upcoming features, but it does not identify primary provenance in the description. (video, 2026-03-31)

Businesses, products, and commercial claims

Fabrika

Shimeles's current site says he runs a software studio and AI consultancy and links to Fabrika. A recently indexed version of his former agency route named projects or clients including Abnormal Security, Keep Financial, Drumify, the Norwegian School of Economics, Whop, and a church. The former route returned 404 during final link validation, so those details are treated as recent historical claims, not current page copy. (personal site, accessed 2026-06-26; indexed former agency route, crawled approximately April 2026 and checked 2026-06-26)

The standalone Fabrika site says it has worked with Whop, Abnormal, Drumify, and more than 40 startups. Its page metadata makes an even broader Google/Meta/Netflix-and-40-plus-startups claim, while the visible page supplied no public testimonials during review. These are creator/business-controlled marketing claims, not independently verified client references.

The Fabrika site's structured metadata gives a 2020 founding date, while Shimeles says he only began coding seriously in mid-2022. There may be a benign explanation—the agency could have begun in another form, the metadata may be templated, or he may have worked with others—but the timeline should be clarified before 10xN repeats an origin story. (Fabrika, accessed 2026-06-26; LinkedIn retrospective, 2024-01-23)

Consulting

His current homepage identifies an AI consultancy. A recently indexed former consultation route offered hourly and monthly packages and said he had worked with startup founders and Fortune 500 teams. That route returned 404 during final validation. The indexed page is evidence that the claim was recently published, not independent proof of the client work or a current offer. Obtain case studies, references, and permission to use company names before incorporating these representations into 10xN launch materials.

Operating entity

The current personal-site footer names Goshen Labs Inc. A secondary registry mirror drawing from Canadian federal open data identifies Michael Shimeles as a director and reports incorporation on June 4, 2025. (personal site; registry-data mirror, accessed 2026-06-26) Confirm whether Goshen Labs is the contracting entity for the creator business, Fabrika, consulting, or some combination. No registered-office or director address is reproduced in this dossier.

Public products and projects

Publicly linked or self-described projects include OrdKit, OrdConnect, Exodus NFT analytics, MemeBot, AI/SaaS products, starter kits, developer repositories, and the YouPac AI hackathon project. (LinkedIn retrospective; GitHub; Devpost)

The product history is relevant because it shows an evolution from crypto/NFT projects into general web development and then AI/developer tooling. It also means that creator endorsements may overlap with his own products, employer, clients, investments, and consulting work.

Sponsors, affiliates, employment, and investment overlap

A recently indexed former sponsor route named Convex, Windsurf, Neon, Cal.com, Clerk, and Scrimba. The route returned 404 during final validation, so individual video descriptions are the stronger current evidence. A review of recent long-form descriptions found clear language such as “Thank you [brand] for sponsoring” in many 2026 uploads, including:

That recent pattern is a positive control. Several other descriptions contained tracked, discounted, or promotional links without equally explicit language in the description reviewed:

Description review cannot establish what was said onscreen, whether YouTube's paid-promotion toggle was used, or whether a link was paid. These examples are questions for the creator, not findings of unlawful nondisclosure.

Two broader conflict issues require a written relationship map:

1. Convex sponsored a July 2025 video shortly before Shimeles announced joining the company in August 2025. That transition is not improper, but future Convex coverage should always identify his employment plainly. (sponsored video; joining video; Convex team)
2. His current X biography self-identifies him as an a16z scout. That affiliation may create financial, portfolio, or access relationships relevant to tool coverage, but its status and scope were not independently established. (X, accessed 2026-06-26)

Automated sponsorship databases were not used as definitive evidence. One such service appeared to misclassify Convex.dev sponsorships as the unrelated Convex Finance brand, which makes its brand counts unreliable for adjudicating disclosure.

Material findings

1. MemeBot was publicly marketed as a crypto front-running tool — High, unresolved

Established facts

• In a January 2024 retrospective, Shimeles described MemeBot as a crypto bot that masked his transactions and “front-ran other traders.” (LinkedIn, 2024-01-23)
• The public repository describes the tool as creating/funding wallets, protecting transactions against MEV, and allowing users to “Front run pending transactions.” (GitHub repository, accessed 2026-06-26)
• The buying interface uses similarly explicit front-running language. (Buying UI, accessed 2026-06-26)
• The public commit history shows development in 2023, with the last visible main-branch commit dated May 8, 2023. (commit history, accessed 2026-06-26)
• The code includes a Flashbots/private-transaction submission path. (buy code, accessed 2026-06-26)

Important limits

• Across the public main and dev branches and visible commit history, no executable path was found that observes another trader's pending transaction and deliberately orders ahead of it.
• The pending-transaction file is entirely commented out, reads mined blocks rather than the pending mempool, and contains return-flow defects. (pending code, accessed 2026-06-26)
• The public materials do not prove that the feature worked, was deployed to production, was used against a real third party, made a profit, or caused a loss.
• The implemented private path uses eth_sendPrivateTransaction; Flashbots documents that path and Flashbots Protect as tools for private submission and protection against front-running. Their presence does not, by itself, prove abusive trading. (Flashbots Protect; method documentation, accessed 2026-06-26)
• No public wallet attribution, victim report, enforcement matter, lawsuit, or criminal charge tied to this project was found in the review.
• This dossier makes no legal conclusion. Legal characterization depends on the actual conduct, asset, venue, jurisdiction, timing, and intent.

Why it matters

The language is first-party and screenshot-ready. A critic, reporter, partner, or competitor would not need to rely on rumor to frame the project as intentionally profiting at other traders' expense. This is especially damaging for financial, security, developer-infrastructure, or trust-sensitive sponsors.

Required resolution before launch

Obtain a signed, written response identifying whether the project was ever live; whether private/deleted code or a separate deployment existed; which networks, dates, and public wallets were involved; whether any transaction was submitted ahead of an observed third-party transaction; whether users had access; whether money was earned; whether anyone complained; and why the public description used that language. Request only non-secret deployment records and public transaction hashes—never private keys. If targeted live execution occurred, have qualified counsel assess the facts before launch. If it did not, require a public correction and archive or relabel the repository as a nonfunctional prototype. Preserve the response and supporting records.

2. Commercial and employment conflicts need a complete map — Medium

Shimeles operates in a tightly connected market where he reviews developer tools, accepts sponsorships, works for Convex, runs an agency, sells consulting, builds products, and self-identifies as an a16z scout. The overlap does not establish misconduct. It increases the chance that praise, criticism, comparisons, or product coverage are perceived as financially motivated.

The Tempo example is the clearest item to verify: a March 2025 video directs viewers to Tempo, while a secondary profile mirror says he was employed there from February through August 2025. (video; SignalHire) If the dates are accurate, the relationship should have been and should in future be identified as employment, not merely as a product link.

Mitigation: collect all employment, equity, scout, advisory, affiliate, client, sponsor, and portfolio relationships; define exclusions and competitor conflicts; and require plain disclosure in both the video and description.

3. Disclosure language appears improved, but historical consistency is unclear — Medium

Most reviewed 2026 sponsor descriptions are commendably explicit. Several older descriptions use tracking links, promo codes, or commercial calls to action without an explicit sponsor/affiliate label in the description. Because the underlying agreements, onscreen language, and platform settings are unavailable, this is an unresolved compliance-process question, not a finding that a rule was breached.

Mitigation: require a single disclosure standard for paid, gifted, affiliate, employer, investor, client, and own-product relationships; disclose near the first endorsement; repeat it in the description; and retain campaign agreements.

4. Fabrika and consulting claims require substantiation — Medium

The current Fabrika site and recently indexed former personal-site routes make broad client, scale, and Fortune 500 claims, while the standalone Fabrika page showed no testimonials during review. A site-metadata reference to Google, Meta, and Netflix is broader than the visible case material, and the 2020 founding metadata sits awkwardly beside the creator's account of starting serious coding in mid-2022. The two former personal-site routes returned 404 during final validation. (Fabrika; indexed former agency route; indexed former consultation route; career post)

This may reflect incomplete site copy or team history rather than deception. The risk is that 10xN amplifies a claim it cannot document.

Mitigation: obtain contracts, invoices, case-study artifacts, references, or other nonpublic support; confirm what “worked with” means; and secure permission to name each company.

5. Provocative packaging can create sponsor and IP/claims risk — Medium

Titles invoking a “leak,” cheating, competitor failure, “boomer companies,” or intentionally angering viewers are consistent with opinionated creator marketing, but can produce disputes when paired with a sponsor or employer. The “Claude Code ... (LEAK)” video is the highest-sensitivity example because its public description asserts leaked source without documenting provenance. (video, 2026-03-31)

Mitigation: require advance claim review for paid content involving alleged leaks, confidential material, security, compliance, misconduct, or named competitors. Require source documentation and a factual basis file.

6. Old MemeBot code shows weak wallet-key handling — Medium technical-credibility risk; Low current operational evidence

The 2023 prototype creates and stores wallet private keys in Supabase, includes a UI for revealing a key, and logs a privateKey variable in the transaction path. (wallet modal; buy code, accessed 2026-06-26) The interface also suggests private submissions will not appear on Etherscan, an overbroad representation because a mined blockchain transaction is ordinarily observable on-chain. (transaction card, accessed 2026-06-26)

There is no evidence in this review that the prototype is currently deployed or that a key was compromised. The principal risk is reputational: security-focused viewers could cite the code to challenge his technical judgment.

Mitigation: ask whether the project is live, whether any real user keys were stored, whether affected users were notified if relevant, and whether he will archive the repository or add a clear prototype/deprecation warning. Do not request or handle any private keys.

Controversy and adverse-record review

Located

• The MemeBot front-running representation and old code issues described above.
• Potential sponsor/employer/investor disclosure ambiguities.
• Aggressive editorial packaging and marketing-claim substantiation questions.

Not located in reviewed public sources

• a credible report of a criminal charge, regulatory action, civil fraud case, or consumer-protection action tied to Shimeles;
• a substantiated victim report tied to MemeBot;
• a well-sourced plagiarism or content-theft allegation;
• a major documented public feud, harassment campaign, or discriminatory-conduct controversy;
• evidence that the public MemeBot prototype successfully executed the advertised front-running behavior.

These are limited research results, not guarantees. Common-name court coverage, sealed matters, deleted content, private complaints, and records outside indexed public sources may not surface.

Risk matrix

Claim ledger

Questions that should be answered before launch

1. Was MemeBot ever publicly accessible, privately distributed, or deployed to a live network? Provide dates, networks, versions, and intended users.
2. Did the project ever observe another party's pending transaction and submit a transaction intended to execute first? If yes, identify the transaction hashes and explain what occurred.
3. Did Shimeles or any user make money through the advertised front-running feature, and did any third party allege a loss?
4. Why did his LinkedIn post say the bot front-ran other traders when no executable flow was found across the reviewed public branches/history? Did private/deleted code or another service/deployment exist, and why does the public claim remain if inaccurate?
5. Did any lawyer, exchange, platform, user, regulator, or law-enforcement body contact him about MemeBot or any other crypto project?
6. Were real user private keys ever stored by the prototype? Is any instance still live, and was a security review or shutdown performed?
7. What are his exact employment dates and titles for NIL DAO, OrdKit, Multi-Health Systems, Tempo, and Convex?
8. Which videos or posts were paid, gifted, affiliate, employer-directed, client-related, portfolio-related, or promotion of his own product? Supply the agreement list for active/recent campaigns.
9. What is the current scope of the a16z scout relationship? List portfolio investments or economic interests that intersect with content.
10. What is Fabrika's legal entity, ownership/team history, and actual founding date? What evidence and client-name permissions support each public client or scale claim?
11. Are there any threatened or actual disputes, takedowns, demand letters, employment restrictions, client complaints, platform sanctions, or investigations not visible in public search?
12. Does Convex approve his outside creator, agency, consulting, sponsorship, and investment activity, and what competitor/content restrictions apply?

Recommended launch conditions

1. Resolve MemeBot first. Do not publicly launch until the written answers and supporting evidence have been reviewed. Escalate to qualified counsel if there was any live front-running behavior or third-party complaint.
2. Get contractual representations. Include accuracy of supplied history, disclosure of legal/regulatory threats, rights to supplied content, compliance with sponsor disclosures, prompt notice of new issues, and a practical suspension/takedown right.
3. Build a relationship register. Record employers, sponsors, affiliates, clients, owned products, advisory roles, equity, scout activity, and investments. Update it before every campaign.
4. Standardize disclosures. Require clear spoken/visual and description disclosures for sponsorship, affiliate compensation, employer relationships, investments, clients, gifts, and own products.
5. Substantiate public claims. Do not repeat OrdKit scale, Fabrika clients, “40+ startups,” Fortune 500 work, or hackathon-dollar claims without support appropriate to the statement.
6. Pre-review sensitive content. Require factual and legal review for paid content involving leaks, confidential information, security, compliance, market conduct, fraud, cheating, or direct competitor attacks.
7. Obtain employer clearance. Confirm that Convex permits the planned outside work and establish how competitor coverage will be handled.
8. Archive the evidence. Save dated screenshots/PDFs of the high-risk first-party posts, repository pages, video descriptions, and the creator's response because public content can change.
9. Refresh immediately before launch. Recheck accounts, public disputes, litigation/regulatory search, sponsor relationships, and current employment after the creator responds.

Bottom line

Ras Mic has a credible and growing developer-creator profile, a current role at Convex, a substantial public project history, and a recent pattern of explicit sponsor wording. The launch decision turns on a narrow but serious unresolved issue: his own public record describes and markets a bot as front-running other crypto traders. The available public code prevents a responsible reviewer from claiming that the behavior actually occurred, but it also does not neutralize the reputational risk of the representation.

If the creator can document that MemeBot was an incomplete prototype, never executed the advertised behavior, had no real users or harmed parties, and was described imprecisely, residual reputational risk should fall to Medium or Low–Medium and the remaining risks are conventional and manageable through disclosure, claims, and conflict controls. If he confirms live use intended to trade ahead of other participants, pause the launch for legal review and a higher-level risk decision.