<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Inclusion-Lists on BLAZED.sh Blog</title>
    <link>https://blazed.sh/blog/tags/inclusion-lists/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Inclusion-Lists on BLAZED.sh Blog</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2026 08:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://blazed.sh/blog/tags/inclusion-lists/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>FOCIL and MEV: Inclusion Is Not Transaction Ordering</title>
      <link>https://blazed.sh/blog/posts/focil-inclusion-vs-ordering/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2026 08:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://blazed.sh/blog/posts/focil-inclusion-vs-ordering/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;A transaction can be included in a block and still be useless to your bot. A competing liquidation can execute first. A swap can move the pool price before your arbitrage runs. Your own transaction can appear in the block with a failed receipt and a gas bill.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;That distinction matters when reading about FOCIL, short for fork-choice enforced inclusion lists. &lt;a href=&#34;https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-7805&#34;&gt;EIP-7805&lt;/a&gt; proposes a way for validators to constrain which transactions builders may omit. It does not give a searcher a reservation at the top of a block, and it does not make an included transaction succeed.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
