The General’s
field paper.

01 / The project

General Tso combines an imposing military commander with a literal chicken. Its fictional mascot wears ornate armor, commands the Chicken Army, and treats a takeout box with the gravity of a battle plan. The project’s identity draws on food culture, internet humor, and the familiar General Tso name.

The intended purpose of $TSO is participation in a meme-driven community. No product revenue, dividends, ownership rights, redemption rights, yield, or binding governance rights have been specified. Future features must be described and reviewed before they are presented as token benefits.

“War Chest,” “The Kitchen,” “Extra Crispy,” and “Secret Sauce” are project vocabulary. These names do not establish a treasury, DAO, burn mechanism, or liquidity pool.

02 / Token design

XRP Ledger is the selected chain. The token standard and issuance settings remain to be finalized. The final specification must identify the exact network and token identifier, rather than relying on the ticker alone.

Name / intended ticker

General Tso / TSO

Blockchain & token standard

XRP Ledger; token standard to be finalized

Contract or issuer address

Not announced

Total supply & decimals

To be decided

Public sale, team, treasury & liquidity allocations

To be decided; final allocations must total 100%

Vesting & release schedule

To be decided

Mint, freeze, pause, upgrade & fee permissions

To be specified for the chosen token standard

Burn mechanism

Not specified

No numerical tokenomics are proposed in this version. In particular, this draft makes no claim of a fixed supply, zero tax, revoked authority, locked liquidity, or an audit.

03 / The War Chest

Proposed operating principles are to separate project funds from personal funds, identify the parties controlling funds, and publish the relevant treasury addresses and spending policy. These controls have not yet been implemented.

Before a sale, the project should define signing authority, wallet recovery, spending approvals, vesting enforcement, and the treatment of funds if the launch is cancelled. A proposed budget should separately disclose development, operations, legal and accounting work, community activity, and liquidity funding. No allocation percentages have been approved.

MSMG Production is the project operator, as designated by its owner. The owner confirms that the company is incorporated in Hong Kong. Its exact registered name, company details, contact information, and legal role in any token offering remain to be verified and published.

04 / Proposed token sale

An ICO is being considered. Whether it will proceed depends on the issuer, intended buyers, legal analysis, technical readiness, and payment-provider acceptance. Calling a token a meme coin does not by itself determine the legal treatment of an offering.

A final sale document would need to state buyer eligibility, price, accepted assets and networks, minimum and maximum contributions, sale allocation, fundraising limits, start and end conditions, delivery and vesting, fees, cancellation and refund rules, and the use of proceeds. None of those terms is fixed in this draft.

Any required identity verification and sanctions screening must use an appropriate provider and published privacy practices. This site currently collects neither identity documents nor contributions. See the ICO briefing for the current status.

05 / Proposed markets

XRP ↔ TSO and USDT ↔ TSO are candidate markets, not confirmed listings. A functioning market requires compatible assets, an execution venue, actual liquidity, and appropriate operating arrangements. No price, trading volume, liquidity depth, or exchange partnership is claimed.

On the selected XRP Ledger network, its existing decentralized exchange is one route to evaluate. The asset identifier and issuer must be verified. Tether’s supported-protocol list reviewed for this draft does not list XRP Ledger for native USD₮; a similarly named issued asset is not automatically official USDT. A USDT market would therefore need a separately verified compatible network and venue or a reviewed representation of the asset.

The initial approach to evaluate is integration with an existing venue rather than operating a custodial exchange. This is a design proposal, not a regulatory exemption. A platform that holds customer funds or matches customer orders requires a separate legal, custody, security, and operational assessment.

Technical references: XRPL tokens · Tether supported protocols

06 / Proposed development stages

1. Define the project. Brand, public documentation, legal issuer, intended jurisdictions, and token design. XRP Ledger has been selected; branding and this draft website are in progress.
2. Specify and test. Token allocation, permissions, vesting, treasury controls, test-network issuance, and independent technical review. Not started in this website implementation.
3. Decide on a sale. Final terms, eligibility, payment acceptance, reconciliation, token delivery, and refund testing. No sale date is committed.
4. Evaluate markets. Verify assets, venue support, liquidity funding, and trading integration. Neither proposed pair is live through this site.

These stages express a proposed sequence. They are not delivery guarantees or promises of a token launch or listing.

07 / Risks & open decisions

A meme token may have no value or practical utility. If issued, its price could be highly volatile and buyers could lose the full amount paid. A market may never develop, liquidity may disappear, and selling may not be possible.

Additional risks include concentrated ownership, operator permissions, compromised wallets, implementation defects, network outages, stablecoin or bridge failure, payment disputes, and changes in law or provider support. Technical review cannot eliminate these risks.

Hong Kong is under consideration as a project jurisdiction but has not been selected or legally reviewed. The issuer has not been confirmed. Jurisdiction-specific legal and tax advice is needed before proceeding. The U.S. SEC staff’s meme-coin statement is limited to the circumstances it describes and is not a blanket approval of ICOs. The final structure and marketing must be assessed on their own facts.

The Hong Kong SFC explains that an ICO’s treatment depends on its terms and circumstances, including whether its tokens are securities. This draft does not establish eligibility to offer tokens in Hong Kong or elsewhere.

Hong Kong SFC statement on ICOs · SEC staff statement on meme coins

08 / Version history

Draft 0.1 · 18 September 2026. Initial brand, proposed scope, unresolved token design, sale requirements, candidate markets, and risk disclosures. Not a final offering document.