What if Arbitrum censors withdrawals and forced inclusion breaks?
A censoring sequencer plus broken forced-inclusion traps Arbitrum withdrawals, exposing that 'rollup security' is really sequencer trust — ARB and bridged-in liquidity reprice, with ETH dragged on beta as users flee L2s. Closest analogue is repeated 2023-24 L2 sequencer outages (Arbitrum, Linea, zkSync) that froze chains for hours with modest token hits. Forward angle: forced-inclusion failure is qualitatively worse than downtime because it breaks the escape hatch, so the repricing should hit centralized-sequencer L2 tokens harder than past brief halts.
Every number ships with its receipt — the odds, the range, the precedents, and a public grade at Reality Check. The statistical machinery that produces it is proprietary.
The butterfly cascade
How this trigger trickles across markets, left → right — the root shock, its first‑order moves, then the ripple effects. Drag any node; tap a market for its real price history.
Resolution timeline — how this probability is moving
Our model's odds (electric blue) over time vs the market's (Polymarket, amber), from the past toward the 6–18 months horizon. Each dot is a real macro event that nudged the probability — green pushed it up, red pushed it down. Tap a dot for the source. Loading the probability audit trail…
What it would mean
If this plays out, it is a risk-off shock. Arbitrum's sequencer censors withdrawals while forced inclusion breaks, trapping users and exposing centralized-rollup risk. The trigger decomposes into signed root‑shocks — Crypto confidence ▼ · Risk appetite ▼ — which propagate through our causal graph to the markets below.