Bitcoin Forum

58236.37353502 FindCoins sent and confirmed in block 226766

Transaction ID 0a50f8c9e5a4154e0f24ea45316cb3dbfe3e7504293c8f6c13ad0ad87ca70d45

2 different block explorers agree that the transaction is confirmed:

http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?blockexplorer=FIND&block=226766
http://findcoin.dcredits.com/explorer.php?226774




But 2 different block explorers also agree that the receiving address is empty and has never seen any transactions:


http://findcoin.dcredits.com/search.php?id=FXKLahV8uhruHY6zPsE1cYVGj67aTXVots
http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?address=FXKLahV8uhruHY6zPsE1cYVGj67aTXVots&blockexplorer=FIND




The reason this transaction was noticed is because it was apparently sent to an exchange for a coin-swap:


http://barr.me/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/btcpoolFind1.png






Does that mean that the sender fooled the exchange into accepting a deposit that never arrived?
The exchange has confirmed that the receiving address is one of their deposit addresses.


Because they're running their own block explorer during the coin swap, someone has suggested that they could be masking their own staking activity on their explorer.
But this transaction is on both explorers, so that doesn't apply here.



The only theory so far is that maybe because the transaction ID starts with a 0, it is accepted as valid within the block, but when it scans a different way for wallet balance the 0 gets automatically dropped and isn't a valid transaction ID?  It looks like there are some other transactions on the blockchain that begin with a 0, but this particular transaction was easily spotted as missing because the address "has never been seen".  No other transactions have been noticed as missing.



Raw block:

The raw transaction is too long to post, here's a link (click "show raw transaction" at the bottom of the page)



http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?blockexplorer=FIND&txid=0a50f8c9e5a4154e0f24ea45316cb3dbfe3e7504293c8f6c13ad0ad87ca70d45

This is the address that sent the missing transaction, and it apparently still has the funds:

http://findcoin.dcredits.com/search.php?id=FVhHfaR1U7KVkPanD9K8mC5SaJnuSLZbcX


So it's not a typical double-spend, because the coins haven't been spent again yet.  Unless you count staking.

And a double-spend would usually mean that the block containing one of the transactions would be orphaned, but the block and the transaction are still on the blockchain.

Does that mean it has to be an error in the code which allows a transaction to be confirmed in a block but it doesn't show up when it scans for that address?

If this was an intentional exploit used to deposit coins at BTCPoolExchange without actually sending the coins, then the YoBit exchange might have an even larger discrepancy between the amount of FindCoins they're selling and the amount they're actually holding.

New theory:

The coins are double-spent as Proof-of-Stake transactions, with one transaction going to an outside address and another transaction sending the same coins back to the sending address.

This could be done intentionally, or it could be an unintended result of modifications to the staking wallet.  Maybe someone changed the code to give themselves more stake rewards, and it accidentally caused these double-spends.



Does anyone know what this transaction does?  The type of transaction is "stake modifier", it has no inputs or outputs, and it seems to be included in the blocks with the disappearing transactions:








Stake modifiers are supposed to help prevent double-spending, but I've seen a new attack described in March 2015 which some coins solved with checkpointing, and FindCoin hasn't been updated since before then.

Isn't this explorer hosted at your own website?

http://findcoin.dcredits.com/



Your explorer says the coins are still in your address.


This topic is addressed to blockchain experts, not people who don't know how to rescan their own wallet.  Or people who think 100,000 coins overloads the blockchain.

You deposited 58236.37353502 FindCoins at BTCPoolExchange, and you exchanged them for your own premined DGCS coins, and you still have the FindCoins in your wallet.

Those coins were supposed to be sent to a burn address, but the burn address is only holding 100 coins.

These are proven facts that everyone can see on the blockchain, so your screencaps mean nothing.

Besides, your screencap shows 162 confirmations, and the block explorer now has 577 confirmations for that block.  Did you have some reason to take that screencap before this topic was started?  Because you just said there's no double spending going on.

Update on the mystery transactions:

Apparently the network forked, and now everyone is back on the same chain.

But the block explorer is still showing confirmed transactions to addresses that are still empty.

Update:

The Digital Credits dev is still holding FindCoins in his own address after those coins were double-spent and sold at BTCPoolExchange:

http://findcoin.dcredits.com/search.php?id=FVhHfaR1U7KVkPanD9K8mC5SaJnuSLZbcX

(that's his own block explorer hosted at his own website, here's another:)

http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?blockexplorer=FIND&address=FVhHfaR1U7KVkPanD9K8mC5SaJnuSLZbcX


And he's still claiming they burned FindCoins that are not actually in the burn address (and are still in their own addresses):

http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?blockexplorer=FIND&address=FVCryptoLifeDotNetBurnAddrXXcBdXmn



And he doesn't like me talking about it, so he started trying to dox me in C-Cex chat by posting people's facebook links, names, phone numbers, and street addresses that he thinks are mine.  And then for good measure he said I'm a "racest biggit" and that he's going to sue me for "salnder" and get half my paychecks for the next 20 years. 

...but he still didn't send the coins.

Simple. Your coin forked and explorers are on opposite prongs

Both explorers agree, so the senders who double-spent coins can spend their coins again on the main chain

Hi,


I'm resposible for the blockexplorers on the digital credits website. Intrisitin hires me to do some work for him from time to time.. I have nothing to do with dgcs besides some freelance jobs.. But we've talked about that before  :)

This chain is really screwed.. I did a complete resync with the coin daemon, and a complete re-index of the explorer today.. Somehow intristins address has a negativ balance now.. really strange.. the burn address also has more coins in it then before..

I don't know much about whats going on between you and intristin.. But from the way I've got to know him over the last few months I doubt he is pulling tricks here.. This is purely source related crap..

If you want, I will do another explorer, with the iquidus open source code on my own server, or yours whatever you want.. Multifaucet must do a resync and reindex also imo.. If you don't trust or believe me and my explorers, I am willing to teach you how to setup the iquidus explorer yourself to see the facts.. If you dont know how to make one that is..


I really hope you and him can work this out..


Cheers,
Banzai

There was definitely something unusually broken about it, but it looks like you've fixed it enough so that the transactions are showing in the proper addresses.

Of course the burn address still only shows 324789.4, as I predicted, and not the 449,479 that intristin says were exchanged for premined DGCS and burned.


See here for a detailed analysis of the numbers:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=905226.msg13746789#msg13746789


The dev has deleted most of his own comments, and he says he's suing me for pointing out the discrepancies in his numbers.

He also tried to dox me in C-Cex chat, posting phone numbers and addresses that were supposed to be mine, and he encouraged people to visit my house in a threatening way. 

But the burn address still doesn't have 449,479 FIND.








You knew about it 3 months ago, did you forget?

Maybe you can check your personal sent messages and refresh your memory:






Or if you'd like to review my original comments about DGCS and your responses, you can read here:


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1219460.msg13004301#msg13004301

Look, The blockchain of FIND coin was attacked and forked. You, BARR_Official, aka runpaint, aka Adam Hornbuckle have been trying to imply that Digital Credits and BTCPOOL have been running some kind of scam in an effort to steal a tiny amount of some worthless dead altcoin.

We have provided evidence that the blockchain was attacked and split. You want people to think we are behind all of it, yet you have no proof. Because of the forked blockchain we can provide no further proof of anything.

To everyone else reading this thread you have two choices. Trust that we are telling the truth or trust that BARR_Official, aka runpaint, aka Adam Hornbuckle is. If you trust him and his multiple identities, don't buy our coin, It really is as simple as that. Otherwise, invest in our coin and profit like so many others have.

How do you know it was attacked instead of accidentally forked?  Are you making things up again? 

Or do you know for a fact that it was attacked? 



 


No phone number and address this time?  You sick pathetic stalker. 






No, I just posted facts.  You deposited FindCoins at BTCPool exchange and sold them for DGCS, but BTCPool Exchange didn't actually receive the FindCoins.   So you got the DGCS for free.  How does that imply that BTCPool was scamming?

I never said the double-spending was intentional on your part. 

You're the only one who says it was an intentional attack, so you're the only one implying that you are a thief who did it on purpose.

Are you going to sue yourself?







No you haven't.  I'm the one who provided evidence that there was a problem, and you're the one who denied it and tried to intimidate me into keeping the truth hidden.

It's like the bank telling you that they never received your check, and you screaming and crying that they're slandering you, but your only proof is "Look, I wrote it down in my checkbook!" 






Actually the transactions have gone through now, only because of my efforts, so what are you talking about? 

The only remaining question is where you got your figures for how many FindCoins you burned (although I pretty much answered that question for you with basic deduction). 






Why should they trust your word when they can see proof on the blockchain?  I'm not asking anyone to trust me or take my word for anything. 

IMO, only a fool or a scammer would come here and ask thousands of complete strangers around the world to "trust" you.

So I guess you have two choices.







lol? 






Oh yeah, the people who bought in November at 10 times the current price are really making out.

intristin, aka screenname DigitalCredits, aka Tristin something, aka whatever other different names you use online, here, C-Cex chat, YoBit chat, etc.

What is your point?






That is not true.






Then why are you here?






You're projecting.  Just because you do things dishonestly doesn't mean everyone else does.

I started this account for official BARR purposes, and other people can use it to answer messages, update the ANN, and swap people's coins.  runpaint is my personal account, it's not a secret, and I've openly explained this before on bitcointalk for anyone who cares or is in love with me and wants my personal details.

You, on the other hand, created your own fake forum with your own fake users to take your own fake votes about sending millions of premined coins that you had publicly promised you would never send.  And then after you had the "vote" consisting of 2 "new users" with 0 activity, neither you nor anyone else made any posts on your "forum" for the next 3 weeks.  And then you deleted the entire forum along with all posts and records.






Your statement is untrue, as usual.





Thanks!

Where did the 449,479 FindCoins come from, and where is the proof that they were burned?

The block explorer doesn't show that many, and even BTCPoolExchange doesn't claim to have sent that many.

lol, I haven't said if that's me or not.  And I won't.  Keep saving pictures of dudes and obsessing over them.

But even if that guy is me, and even if he's stupid, what does that have to do with anything?

Why can't you show transactions for 449,479 Findcoins? 

wait arent you the digitalcredits dev?
the immaturity you are showing here is literally blowing my mind .
and to think i found this thread cause i was gonna invest in your coin
people tell me , dont invest in the coin, invest in the dev
well this is the dev of dgcs people, this is who you trust your money to?
well not me haha, screw it ill buy cube, even spots shady ass aint as bad as this dev omg lol

According to you, BTCPoolExchange burns the coins.

Here is what BTCPoolExchange says they sent:







That's a total of 324,689.4

The block explorer that you own, hosted at the website you own, says the address has 324,789.4

http://findcoin.dcredits.com/search.php

But you counted one transaction twice.

324,689.4 is the actual amount, but you added the 124,689.8 again.  And that equals 449,379.2.  And then you added the 100 coins you sent from your own address, so you're claiming the burn address has received 449,479.

Because 3 transactions was too many for you to add without getting confused.


(and the block explorer that you don't own says the burn address has only received a total of 124,789.8 )
http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?blockexplorer=FIND&address=FVCryptoLifeDotNetBurnAddrXXcBdXmn








That's obviously not true.

But even if it was an honest mistake on your part, how did you end up releasing 112,369 DGCS?  
449,479 X .25 = 112,369, and that's the exchange rate you were using.

But 449,479 is an error, right?  Just because you counted a transaction twice while attempting simple arithmetic, that doesn't make BTCPoolExchange put DGCS into someone's account.  Or does it?

Well I didn't think it was just my imagination.  He seems unstable, I feel sorry for him.  But I'm sure every dishonest dev has an excuse. 

And now he's saying you're me, and that he can see your IP address when you post on bitcointalk.  Are you scared yet?

this guy is an idiot. i wont be following this thread, i have gotten the info i need to not touch that coin haha.
ty barr, let him hate but all he can do is sling garbage to avoid your questions it seems ;)

for all you newcomers   tl;dr       
burns didnt happen, atleast he refuses to prove it
claiming if you invest in his coin you make money, just look at novembers investors.

o and i aint close to scared the fact that he tried saying that IP shit just shows he's so full of shit his eyes are brown to me haha
because 1;   he dosent have the power to even tell that  , (just lying as usual thinkin people are dumb)
and 2; because im not barr lmao, were actually 3000 miles apart looking at his post history (dutch i think?)
so anyways, pce guys, take care barr, lifes too short to waste on these penny scammers

Are you still claiming that you burned 449,479 Findcoins?

Cool story.  If it's childish to point out discrepancies in numbers, then I guess I'm childish.

But then if I hadn't, they wouldn't have re-synced their block explorer.  So I must be doing something right.

I'm not holding any Clams, I sold at a good profit.

I would think the person posting incoherent nonsense would be the one that might need more help

lol
such time spent on trolling a shit coin.

results seem to be

a) a fork results in transactions not showing up on a different fork.
ie two explorers can show different results.

good job on that one. we salute runpaint for his hard work in exposing this fact.

b) barr_official is obsessed with his enemy DGCS, and is not afraid of making shit up and attacking the honesty of others.

also good job. your troll level is mighty and you will be revered for generations by all shit coin swap devotees. not only did you manage to attack the integrity of intrinsin but also many others running the explorer and exchange.

c) there does seem to be a discrepancy between amount claimed and amount shown on explorer
"449,479 FIND coins have been burned"
vs
324789.4 shown at http://findcoin.dcredits.com/search.php?id=FVCryptoLifeDotNetBurnAddrXXcBdXmn
see below for more conclusions

and a further good job. it's just  a shame that you had to spend so much time and make up so much obvious falsities to get to one final seemingly legitimate point. (edit however the implications seem much milder than you continue to troll, i blame the fact that no-one seems to have spelt out the answer IN SIMPLE ENOUGH LANGUAGE (see below)).
although if you had done a simpler and clearer job you would have lost the troll level awarded in b),
but you might have actually received an answer. i guess it's up to you whether you'd prefer getting an answer, or prefer attacking peoples integrity mercilessly with little regard to facts.

lol A+ on everything. except for presentation, total #fail on presentation.


personally, if i was intrinsin i would totally ignore (or troll) barr_official, who has shown himself/herself to be a right annoying twat.
anyone who is unsure of Barr_official's personality, then please read his mounting hysteria and general rudeness/personal attacks on the find thread
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=905226.msg13720149#msg13720149

this awesome behaviour seems to have been going on since DGCS was released? and that post above is far from the beginning.
from my perspective it seems to stem from the fact that BARR is the best thing ever to hit the shitcoin market, and that DGCS is an impostor and must die.

disclosure : barr_official also seems to despise me (and is quite happy to make stuff up attacking my integrity) for suggesting that we use remaining distribution Bumba as a shitcoin swap for Barr. and i am quite happy to troll him as he has shown himself to be quite rude :D
i also suggested he disclose all his private dealings with Barr as he is using undisclosed personal funds which results in an opaque distribution of Barr to himself. it seems possible he owns the vast majority of distributed Barr but that is an unknown reality.



edit :
and bonus points for getting them to re-sync the explorer, another game changing moment. well done


edit edit :
in regards to c)
later consideration and conclusions ----
it seems that any figures as reported to the swap were from the exchange, as the Digital Credits dev doesnt handle the swap coins at all.

it should be obvious to anyone, that Intrinsin is only responsible for not updating his figures after the dust cleared from the blockchain chaos.
it's obvious then that the burn figures for Find are as reported on the blockchain.
 ie 324789.4 as to the distribution figures for DGCS, either they are the same as previously reported or different :D

the exchange is responsible for the swap funds, so it seems quite reasonable that the figure quoted is real, with the problems relating to FIND and the blockchain issues.
also it seems that no funds can be missing unless the exchange itself has done something, which seems quite unlikely :)

lol, intristin deleted his posts here at the same time that a sockpuppet deleted his posts too?

It's probably a coincidence.

bumbacoin, you forgot to mention that you're banned from the BARR ANN.  But I'm sure your comments are unbiased.

haha just like you're banned from the DGCS thread.
good job.

Actually it's not just like that. 

intristin banned everyone, including himself, from the DGCS thread. 
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1231951.0

And the next DGCS thread,
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1234046.0

And the next DGCS thread,
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1234336

And the next DGCS thread,
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1247145

And the next DGCS thread,
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1249946




He didn't want people talking about Proof of Burn, so he closed his topics to solve the problem and stop discussion.
I do want to talk about Proof of Burn, and I solved the problem by banning only you and continuing the discussion. 

So you're wrong again, as you were wrong on the BARR ANN, the BowsCoin ANN, the FindCoin ANN, and the thread you started about me.
 
See the difference?  I talk about burning altcoins, and you just go around talking about me.

simple. you're banned from DGCS thread for the same thing you accuse me of.
the others are closed.


seeing as how you love talking about Proof of Burn,
maybe you can comment on how it seems you quite obviously own at least ~61% of distributed BARR through three different accounts,
how most of the list of coins burnt seem to correlate with websites you made/registered prior to the BARR ann?
how the voting address only shows votes from you, no-one else has voted for a coin.

.

If I own 61% of BARR, it's because I either paid other people for it, or I bought 61% of all the altcoins we burned (and paid people for those altcoins).

You have said that you don't spend your own money on your own coin, but you try to get other people to spend their money.

Who else should spend the most money on a coin, other than the coin's dev?

That shows that I believe in what I'm doing, while you don't believe that your own coin is worth buying.









BARR is just like any community coin swap, except we work with multiple communities.
Anyone who has read the BARR ANN and the ANNs for those other coins already knows all about it, we've never worked in secret.

I was already involved in 5 altcoin communities before we had the idea to swap them all for BARR.
I have burned all of my altcoins for BARR.
You can dig all you want, there's nothing for you to find. 






That's because I'm the only one who has spent BARR, that cost me real money, to participate in our public voting process which is open to everyone.





What does any of this have to do with how many FindCoins have been burned?

lol. seeing as how you can't quite seem to see the problems raised here.
here's some questions.

1. which NXT accounts holding Barr/Offs do you or other team members own?

2. given you seem to own 61%, what do you consider as the real value of Barr?

3. do you have a plan to create a more economically palatable model of distribution? the current distribution does not inspire confidence in the real value of Barr.

4. what other coins on your proposed swap list do you or other team members baghold? if you're doing this for truly altruistic motives, your behaviour so far seems self centered.

5. what is your purpose in pumping the alts prior to swap? it seems that artificially pumping the market value of alts that you personally hold, does a lot to improve your personal future Barr holdings by improving the swap ratio.

6. do you still see that being the dev of Barr, choosing the coin swaps gives you no advantage? choosing all the coins, defining the swap protocols.

7. how do you measure your swap process and come to this conclusion of no profit? you seem to enjoy the fact that you're making shitcoins and Barr stronger through these swaps.

8. is Barr_official used by a different person? it seems confusing going through the history of postings and does not do much to add clarity to your threads/discussions.



i'm mirroring these questions here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1352963.msg13809116#msg13809116

Update!






When you show up to someone's ANN and say they shouldn't be doing certain things,
be ready for them to point out that you're doing the exact same things.

You're the one who accused yourself.






Why did you burn CLOT when it had an active dev?






Why are you asking us to burn a coin with an active dev?





Why are you burning a coin with active devs?





Your coin is an X11 clone.





Nothing you have done has made your coin a success either.





But you are selling things in a marketplace for Bumba, so why did you bring it up since you say it's no different from what you're doing yourself?

https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/MarketPlace?categoryId=0&currencyId=211&locationId=0&sortBy=Title&searchTerm=&type=All%20Items





We're using a better system than you're using:



You could dump any amount of Bumba you wanted at any time, while our decentralized trustlessly transparent accountability deters us from doing that.






Your website has a link to your thread, and you haven't posted anything to it in over 2 months:

https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/Forum/Thread/338?page=2






That was your criticism when I asked for transparency from Digital Credits.
You say I'm trolling a shitcoin.




So you're trolling a shitcoin?  Except you're following me around to several different threads.

Have you said anything about me that doesn't apply better to yourself?





...so that's a "no"?







And yet all of our undistributed funds are always available for anyone to see on the blockchain, in our easily-found address, while you're holding millions of premined Bumbacoins and you don't even mention the addresses in your ANN.





Kind of like how the top addresses hold 63% of Bumbacoins and you haven't said which addresses you control?

http://blockchain.bumbacoin.com/richlist





But I didn't launch those coins myself, and I wasn't their dev.

You burned a coin that you launched and were in full control of, and you selected everything about the burn process yourself.





That's a great description of your swap of CLOT for BUMBA.





Let's see how a pro answers:



Very informative!





And you set the swap ratio when you burned CLOT for BUMBA.





And there has never been any BARR dumped.  But what did you have to say about that?






And what else?







But now the only excuse for your burn process and leftover coins is "I'm honest!  I've never dumped the Bumbacoin premine! (yet)"

Unlike the Bumbacoin premine, the BARR Burn Fund has never moved a single coin from its single address without an attached message showing txids for burned altcoins.

Why do you have multiple premine addresses and multiple "dev fund" addresses for Bumbacoin?  Why can't you have trustless transparent accountability like BARR does?






Obviously mistaking being trustworthy for a trustless situation.



Just take this as the answer for your next hundred stupid questions:

looks like we have two competing threads with the same posts.. woot
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1352963.msg13833797#msg13833797

here's my reply to the above from the other thread ..



lol. great defense.
he made me do it!! he was on MY thread!!
i'm innocent!!


and there you go again impugning again my good person. shame on you.
my posts were neither troll nor showed evidence that i could not read. such a false dichotomy.






there's a great quote somewhere saying how ACP was trading at 60 sats.
until you pumped it.
then swapped it.








yes, i told you earlier that we were creating artificial demand by doing that.
that is not the problem with what you are doing.








we never claimed to have a trustless system, as you have.


yes, if you dump, people can see where the coins come from.
you do not have a trustless system










top 25 addresses, vs your 3 addresses ??
i have no idea what the rest of your richlists looks like

looks like i own #6 and #8 , about 13% lol bodgey maths/  6.5%
plus i have maybe 5% on exchange <--not sure about that figure.




Let's see how a pro answers:









you don't have trustless accountability.

you have an open ledger, so does bumbacoin, we just don't have arbitrary data.
we never bothered cos we lack any delusions of grandeur,
although it would be nice, but can't honestly see the need.

at the moment we have multiple addresses because thats' how it's happened,
change addresses have been a big reason for it,
the swap happened over a year ago, would be surprising if we'd never moved any coins.

lets put all the coins in address A.
let's send some coins for purpose X.
now the remaining funds, ie the change from this transaction, has gone to address B. etc,

so, let's put all the funds in addresses A B C, then we can leave most of the coins in their declared addresses when we move coins.
yes we could use coin control, but i  use daemons by preference which lack coin control features.
yes, i could craft transactions incoroporating specified change address as origin address, but, i havent. much easier just sending them...

and as you love to point out. all the tx are there on the blockchain for anyone to look at
so, in conclusion, we do have the same level of trustless accountability if anyone wants to dig through the chain. lol

well spotted. fixed now, i hope lol
thanks for that :)

Fixed what?  The fact that you started posting the same things on two threads at the same time, and then pretended that I'm the one who did it?

i made a mistake which was rectified because of your post.

i was under the assumption that was your motivation.
it was very helpful. and as is usual when somebody assists you, i thanked you.

even though you're akin to a terrorist and i cannot let you win, i have no problems with being polite :)

Where have I threatened you?

feel free to go back and read everything and find where i discussed it earlier.
you must have missed it when you were looking for bite size quotes to misrepresent.

In other words, there are no facts to back up what you say.  As usual.

feel free to go back and read everything and find where i discussed it earlier.
you must have missed it when you were looking for bite size quotes to misrepresent and lie about.