Bitcoin Forum

If you have a cryptocurrency, but you cannot sell it, because this cryptocurrency blocked deposits on all listed exchanges ( detail the withdrawals are enabled )

the reason for the deposit block is a request from the cryptocurrency project team itself, for "investor safety" reasons. but the blockchain has not been stopped and the transfer from wallet to wallet is normally working!

this is cause for suspicion of the right project?
I'm here asking, because I don't want to see meaningless answers from the project team, they don't know how to answer that question.




if anyone here is curious to know what project it is, it is NRG

The reason that has already created by the developer is too vague. that means the developer itself asked the exchange sites to block all of the traders. This looks very suspicious and have you checked about the event that is still running that made the project asked the exchange sites to block all of the services before?

are you talking about this project below?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4912743.0

and upon reading the thread, seems that it is really the project that you are talking about here as you have posts also on their thread. and based on my experience, a project will only block the deposit if they will be running their sale without the interruption of other holders other than them. and usually, the team will inform such situation if they are honest about it, but seems that they don't want to divulge their "obvious" reason. I have encountered several of this with my tokens but the team informed that they will be doing their token sale first in the exchange before they will open the deposit to others. but this one, seems secretive. be careful with this project. If I may suggest, once they open the deposit and trading to others, I guess sell it as fast as you can as the chance of abandoning this project is somewhat high.

Yes!  This project!

I have no idea why NRG would block all deposits in exchanges platform, and are you sure you found out why!?
NrG was a rewarding airdrops for participants and jt wasn't locked when airdrops were paid.

I implore you to chat up the exchange platforms and nrg too, find out if its maintenence or outright lock

Update : just as i assumed, there's wallet maintenence for nrg

https://i.postimg.cc/yd74rxp2/Screenshot-20200429-110240.jpg (https://postimg.cc/sBHNMjrJ)

It's possible, one thing came my mind and that's upgrade, many the project want to upgrade their Network or switch from one blockchain to another, of its NRG then contact the team on their telegram group, I'm sure they have a good reason for this

yes, but what I can’t understand is that they can’t give technical explanations about it, if it’s a network update, why only blocked deposits? as I said, withdrawal works normally, transfer between wallets too.

Maybe their wallet is having problems at the exchange. I have seen several similar cases before, but it was quickly fixed by the project and the exchanges. If they take too long to maintain, you need to go to the telegram of the projects and make things clear.

If the team itself can't give you an answer so there's no way for us to answer it.
How long they have blocked the deposits?

Around 1,5 month

That's already a long time if they've done that. It's a mystery that neither you and me can't answer if the devs themselves have no clarity why they've done that.
I hope that it will be up soon and devs will come up to answer you.

they have no clarity in explaining the case, they keep a ready message which is your answer when you ask the question about, that's the problem

Here are few things that can cause this type of problem in a coins life
1. Ongoing maintenance
2. Upcoming Separate blockchain
3. Normal system upgrade
4. Change of Algorithm

No cause for alarm here at all, I suggest you should have patience, things will be back to normal later

I will sell it and will not hold it for a long time, such a reason does not make sense I mean if it's true that you bought the token you should be able to control it.
or you should at least read the agreement first.

Agreed. I have Energi $NRG too on my wallet. As long as there is enough liquidity in the market and the devs are consistently developing the project then there's nothing to worry about.

@OP just relax and don't be nervous. By the way do you already talk to the team about maintenance? I didn't join on discord since I don't like that app. I'm just subscribed to their telegram channel don't have any announcements regarding maintenance.

To the best of my knowledge, a team can tell an exchange to block all deposits maybe they are working on something, or could be they are improving their network, it can be for a whole lot of reasons. But however, if the deposit suspension is taking too long, then the team are in the best place to answer and clear the community on why the deposit on exchanges is suspended for long. Lastly, if they aren't giving any good answer then something suspicious is wrong.

If it is a shit exchange then they may support shit coin developers but exchange with huge trading volumes may not accept their request, they may delist the projet if something shady activities happening around.But you can't do anything when exchange blocked deposits so you just have to hope it will get enabled someday.

There can be two scenarios about this development one positive and one negative.
The positive scenario may be that team found some security, privacy or code breach and trying to make sure that there are no stolen tokens that are sold on exchanges that is why they have halted the trading and will reactivate as soon as they think that threat is over and everything is clear.
The negative scenario may be that after raising good funds this project team has become greedy and its intentions have changed now and with hige money in hand now they do not want to continue the project rather just exit after making excuses and fake stories so that they can enjoy the money for rest of their lives.
I hope the positive scenario will come out to be true and investors will be safe.

i really hope for the positive scenario

from.my understanding, I think the scenario usually plays out when the project has been hacked. In such cases, the team asks partner engages to halt withdrawal and deposits to enable them stop a Hackettstown dumping on exchanges or sometimes to perform a technical adjustments like a swap or network upgrade

I do not think there is no one among the admin on their telegram group that will not be able to give you the right answer.
You could have chatted them instead of assuming that they do not know. NRG right from time has not ben locked. Well, that is my own opinion. Also, try to check across all exchanges if that is the case with all. If one exchnage does not allow despite, due to some technical problems, another should allow.

I also have a similar experience with other projects in 2018. The token is locked, the goal is that the dev team can build the market first. As long as the dev team gives a clear announcement I don't think that is a problem. Just ask when the freeze will end. However, don't expect too much, especially if the dev team isn't open and unresponsive.

Most of the times, deposit block on a particular project means a platform upgrade is going on or there is security challenges and If I understand clearly I think the team have every right to direct the exchange on what to do and on what they want since it is for the project's good. I don't know much about this project, but if you have seen recent developments then it could mean an upgrade is going on or better still construct your questions and ask the team, I believe they will answer.

I've seen it happen, usually after some update, but not for long...
if the team continues its development and you can see daily in all aspects of the project
is still no reason to worry. :)

The termed probably known as locked or special case where developers choose to restrict movement of tokens or coins. Usually it is done by investors who purchased on early bird cases anf has provisions to let their buyers agree on the terms of vesting period.

Also there are times that they have giveaway through airdrop and bounty and decides to locked the tokens for a certain period. Purpose is not to dump of course. On the other case, since its not an erc20 token maybe exchange have some trouble with their blockchain? I know NRG, maybe there is some error just ask the devs about it.

This is very similar to Bizpaye Token, Developers have blocked the withdrawal in a certain exchange and Blocked the deposit in other exchange which make it suspecious. Their reason for doing is for bounty hunter make the price dump that might be the same case with the token you are token about, or maybe the developers are cooking something up to get all the tokens listed in all exchanges they listed it in then run away and scam.

observing the situation more deeply, even on the very topic of NRG announcement, probably NRG investors are in trouble.
Suspicions for a scam exit is great.

My friend also experienced something similar when joining CINDX. The development team reasoned that it was to make it easier for the team to control prices in order to provide benefits to investors. Sometime after the tokens were distributed, there were indeed those who sold them on the fork delta, at very cheap prices. While the development of the project is still ongoing. So the decision was taken by the dev team, I don't know, is it really the right reason or just an excuse to escape, because until now there has been no further development of information.

I have seen a similar case in the MiracleTele project, this token is freely traded on a decentralized exchange but not on the main exchange because it prohibits deposits, scammer projects have easily increased rates because actually none of them can trade on the main exchange.

They also explained the closing of deposits. Their network is not yet stable enough and there are breaks in the chain. But they are working hard on it.

Regarding deposits, here is one potential issue that could occur due to a chain split. Say you sent some NRG to the exchange and you were both off chain. The exchange accepts the deposit and you trade for a different coin/token then withdraw. After that, you both realize that your transaction wasn’t valid. Since you have already withdrawn the new coin/token, the exchange cannot undo this and because the original transaction was off chain, they don’t get the NRG you sent (you may be good about it and resend but not everyone would). Now the exchange is out those funds with no way to recover them. Multiply this by however many people do their deposits at this time and it could be a massive problem. Setting an arbitrary time for confirmations is not really a solution to this because how do you determine how long it will take for the exchange to realize they are off chain?
With withdrawing, everything is in the exchanges system so if you are both off chain, the exchange still has this information saved and can process the transaction again once they are back on chain.

Yes, and there are also many who benefit through the Miracle Tele project when the project is being carried out and after the bounty period is over, it's just that those who hold tokens are victims of scam from the Miracle Tele project, it is very unfortunate.

In such cases you halt trading.

Not close deposits for retail and keep them open for the team.

+ Tommy has an EBI key that controls any wallet he wants. That's probably why Exchanges won't open deposits, they could have their coins frozen by Tommy at any time and don't want to risk that.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

You are contradicting yourself. You say that exchanges do not want to open deposits, because they are afraid that Tommy can freeze their wallets. And at the same time, you claim that they accept deposits from the ENERGI team, which can freeze their wallets.

The team are in the best position to answer the question and that is it. But normally, the only reason why a project's deposit will be blocked, suspended or under maintenance on an exchange is when the team gives an order for it to be so, at the same time, the team can't order for block or suspension of deposit if they are not carrying out a major upgrade and/or development. But I think if the situation lingers, then it looks wrong and makes the team wanting, we can't rule out that fact because most team are trickish and won't hesitate to fill their pockets at any given opportunity.

Usually stop withdrawing, depositing and trading activities when experiencing problems with the project, but this case is not clear why. Are all those who hold their tokens or coins not investors? or maybe they have just distributed a very large number of airdrop campaigns and don't want a dump

if like that continue to complain until your funds can immediately be withdrawn and do not use the platform provided by the project again.
it is better to look for a safer one, even though the project promises a large monthly dividend, it should be avoided if you cannot directly access your balance.

They were depositing under the pretex of market making as they fix the chain issue. (proof was posted by their ex lead dev  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4912743.msg54244182#msg54244182_

Now that exchanges realize that the chain in centralized in the hand of one person they are never going to probably open deposits. This just a logical observation.

Tommy froze the ex dev's funds BTW using that key. And some other address aswell

Personally i will take this behavior from the team as suspicious as i have previously seen some projects that have taken strange steps like these and later on they have declared themselves bankrupt or exit scammed.

the problem is the OP is not buying coins or maybe getting them from the Bounty campaign or maybe from the airdrops campaign. in this case I will not say much, maybe for more detail about the aims and objectives of the project they can be interrogated directly with the project team itself.

From my point of view the team does not want investor to feel like it's dumping project which might have adverse effect on the price which they will inturn gain nothing. So they heard to play their card very well for the betterment or success of the projects.
Though only the manager and the team can have accurate answer. Every other will be assumption

Just my two cents from the person who started raising the concerns.

Re network stability:

1. Every team member knows that I have written a farewell on Mar 19 and it was there for half a day until it got removed when "someone" woke up. Tech teams knows that I announced the decision on Mar 05, the week before Gen 3 migration.
2. In the farewell, I've told that I step down, but would be available for an advise if needed. Energi Core were consulting to me until my article on Apr 13/14.
3. The exchanges were expected to have wallets closed for 1 week only.
4. Exchanges got order to close deposits on Mar 06. Right before that, large amounts from Treasury got deposited to exchanges as shown before. Overall exchange wallets got bloated dramatically.
5. Migration happened on Mar 10, the majority of coins migrated until Mar 15 iirc, possible scammers like Bashful were stopped, exchanges where expected to open deposits on Mar 17 latest (it can be seen in announcements).
6. Then, exchanges were ordered to only open withdrawals, but keep deposits closed. I could not get explanations for that.
7. When I was leaving, the network was stable - fact, the deposits where overdue to open for 4 days compared to withdrawals.
8. If there would be even a slight known uncontrolled technical issue, I would know about that at that moment and would not leave that early.
9. The CoinFabric must be able to confirm that we started negotiations on audit in Aug 2019 (!), but Energi leadership overtook that and assured me that the audit was handled. Therefore, I can assume that "someone" could know about possible security issues in advance to use that for an excuse.


Re security issues:

1. No one from Energi has told me anything about possible security problems except the "nothing at stake" problem, but I have found a few of them later and even reported to Energi immediately.
2. The "nothing at stake" problem was mitigated in Gen 2 as part of DoS protection. The same protection was introduced into Gen 3 with some tweaks and improvements. So, it was a poor excuse to have deposits closed.
3. They disabled DoS protection in v3.0.4/v3.0.5 even with my immediate protests. After 18 days, they restored everything in v3.0.6 and called that an accomplishment.
4. I admit, that I have recently found a bug I introduced in very early proof-of-concept code, before even talking to CoinFabric, but that does not give an opportunity of account draining and affects only coins at migration (not a problem for users now). That also has an elegant quick and non-hardfork solution to mitigate.
5. I have found possible large staker "run-away" problem in connection with target of Difficulty 1 and a number of other minor issues, all reported and available as code: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4912743.msg54285537#msg54285537 . PoS difficulty+time model may need some revision though.
6. The "run-away" problem does not apply to exchanges, unless they do staking, but a solution to bail out miner has been provided already.
7. There was a partial consensus smart contract call reversion done from about Apr 07 when Energi Core forcibly rebuilt a chain overriding 500+ blocks from a valid main chain. It was caused by an infinite loop which would not get triggered on a live chain. It affected only Masternode payouts, not critical for deposits.
8. I've also found a possible narrow place where "address().send()" and "address().transfer()" are used what can be used as a sort of DoS vector: potentially, gas can be recovered in target contracts through freeing of storage memory what can be used to bump EVM memory usage and/or stack depth to cause reversion inside the consensus contract. That does not allow to steal funds though and could be easily and quickly mitigated, e.g. forbid targets with non-empty code.
9. There is also a theoretical way to do stake mining after a block gap of 1h to build a stronger total work chain, but it's not exploitable on a live chain. There is old fork DoS protection well described in the SRS, the one Energi Core disabled in v3.0.4.
10. The network staking entropy was heavily affected by 1k MN collateral and auto-collateralization feature. That was affecting the pace of block generation. Partially, it seems that the originally chosen difficulty change algorithm has too large coefficients and I would tune that. However, the ballast staking was compensating the problem pretty well.
11. There is a known tricky bug with Merkle/Patricia tree state due to non-determinism of some operations which get triggered under some conditions on some old forks, but that prevents some large reorgs while the main chain continues to work.
12. The large "reorg" problem is not a problem itself (Proof-of-Stake needs to know state in previous blocks to verify headers), stalled forks and dynamic checkpoints are assumed to stop weak chains and force fallback to chain downloader instead of individual block retrieval. "PoS state error" message is not an error in that case at all, it was left just to visualize such cases.
13. Can there be other problems? Of course, it is a complex software, it must have bugs. Why the chain was rebuilt on Apr 06/07? From what I have heard until Apr 13, I understand that it was a terrible mistake of choosing a badly side-chained Treasury staking node as reference for dynamic checkpoint creation instead of the proper main chain. I have not heard anything about security breaches because Energi Core was still consulting to me almost until the time I wrote my article about Crypto Gen 3. Nodes left on the proper chain were staking with no problems AFAIK. If there would be a demo of a security issue then why it was not done in the testnet instead? If a real attack then what would be the point as the last exchange closed its deposits on Apr 03?
14. The main security issue is that Tommy and Ryan can drain ANY account they want and excuse that with "Masternode owner voting", and they can override blockchain causing double spend attacks, and they can change the dynamic consensus at any time with no voting. Their excuse is the same as if local gang in town would decide who's next property to take by a 20% of quorum. There are reasons why absolute monarchies passed away, and why we have separation of concerns in state governance. There is a reason why it is a crime to take functions of any authority.

Re project itself:

Everyone long enough in the business understands quite well that it is a modified Ponzi scheme, but only people blind with hope of future income shutdown their minds. Masternodes stopped attracting "investors" (or "victims" correctly) due to the price barrier and general economical situation. So, MN collateral got decreased to 1k with phony voting done afterwards, but even that is not enough. That's why a derivative bubble exchange is going to be built. I won't even start about the phony charity - it would be offtopic noise. After the first Earndrop in 2018, the coins where bought out and later sold during artificial crazy market prices of 2019 - I know that for sure from the main actor ;). Possibly quite the same happens with the last Earndrop dump of Q4'19/Q1'20 at price of a little above 1$ and now re-sold at 3+$, but they are a bit more smart the second time - they possibly left less traces in blockchain and kept funds obfuscated in exchanges. Before the Earndrop dumps, the price was apparently decreased with Treasury & personal coin dumps in Q4'19.

The total emission of NRG is about 28,500,000, and they state that a dump of the recovered 200,000 NRG, less than 1%, would seriously hurt other coin owners... As in any other pyramid. The real value of Energi is 0$, but it is common for most cryptos though. Obviously, it is one of the reasons they have blocked additional 93+k of coins which I could control - they were scary of me dumping those. I contacted only a single exchange with request for delisting based on its own rules to get a material evidence to connect trolls to Energi Core, and only after Energi Core had shown self being dangerous to any coin owner. Energi Core lies even in that.

Energi head-hunted me back in 2018, and I literally told them: "I do not believe in crypto, neither I believe in fiat". When I started to contribute into Energi Cryptocurrency (no contracts, except of verbal agreements, "Energi Core Ltd" not even existing), I was too focused on technical aspects until I learned what was Earndrop last Summer when I had to deal with its technical issues and not reported GDPR data breaches. Earndrop shows very well the totalitarian social media marketing sect with a hyper-narcissistic leader associating self with the King, Cyrus the Great. I was ready to leave Energi immediately and only my professional interest to complete the started project (Energi Gen 3) and an opportunity of building another team from scratch was stopping me. Energi has moved release date 3 times (Q3'19, Q4'19, Feb'20) in the Roadmap without even preparing Marketing or Support resources for each deadline. They just put those by pointing a finger into the sky - apparently, they knew they will move the release after the last Earndrop dump settles to re-sell coins at higher prices during closed deposits. Software readiness has never interested them. It seems, they have not even done external audit, but claimed to have that handler. I remind that Beta testing started in Aug 2019.

At the same time, you can see how Energi trolls talk to themselves with an obvious impersonation of me in the main Energi thread. This alone, is enough to understand the moral and methods of Energi leaders. So, the "deposit scam" aligns to that with no doubt.


P.S. In post-Soviet countries, we've seen enough of pyramids in 90's. No pyramid can last forever, it either collapses or transforms through a process when the majority of "investors" loses everything. Then everything starts again. This smaller scale pyramid can destroy the future of many families who make self victims by "investing" into the scheme. Unlike other coins, they constantly lie and shill with sarcastic mocking "love to the World". I've uncovered the true maniacal face of their leader during the last call with him, he literally told me: "Yes, I am a maniac" when he was threatening me, and the blocked coins prove that pretty well ;).

Hello everyone,

Regarding the post above, you can find the actual legal response from Energi Core (EnergiCrypto here) posted here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4912743.msg54292046#msg54292046 - but I will quote it as well.


Immediately after his post on the Energi Bitcoin Talk thread, brand new accounts were created show "support" for him and attack Energi. 2 of these accounts are the original creator of this thread (Hastaguy) and Selicio, both of which are assumed to be either Andrey and/or Bashful/Ziggy. The thread here was created originally to look for support from other users. When the users here did not support this fake account in trying to push Energi as a scam, he turned to the andvgal account to post looking for the same effect. This is why I have come here to post this. He hasn't gotten the support for his false claims in our thread so has moved to other threads to try again.

I will also add that when it comes to the reduction in masternode collateral that was voted on and passed, Andrey was fully aware of the intention for this (he had it already changed during the Gen 3 public testing phase) and he is also aware that the reason for the reduction is to open the masternodes up to more people. Currently a 10k NRG masternode would be approximately $32 000 USD. The new 1k masternodes would be $3 200 USD. This increases decentralization and allows more people to participate in the voting process.

Regarding the 200 000 NRG recovered, Andrey likes to point out about the total emissions but also fails to mention that over half of the emissions are in masternodes. Additionally, there is large mounts in staking as well. None of this is locked in but the majority will likely stay in those two places (masternode collateral totals have been increasing since Gen 3 launch). For simple math, 28 500 000 - 15 000 000 (masternode collateral) = 13 500 000. So we are down to 13.5 million NRG before we even consider staking, wallets that have been lost and coins currently on Cryptopia as well as other third party services not upgraded to Gen 3. He does like to make the point that 200 000 NRG vs 28.5 million is a small portion but this is not accurate. If all 28.5 million NRG was on exchanges this would be but, as usual, he is using a part truth along with a blatant lie to try to get support.

His entire intent is to attack Energi. The proof is quite visible in the fact that all of these allegations that he is making now, if legitimate, should have been made after he was no longer with the company (or sooner since he was the lead tech who helped code some of these features in). He decided to wait until Energi's 2nd "Birthday", during our celebrations with our community on Discord, to start his attack (using yet another fake account to try and push his false information filled Medium post). This was over a month after the Gen 3 launch so why the delay with all of these allegations since they are obviously very severe and he had advanced notice of the majority of them? Pure negligence or timing an attack?

One last thing before I go. His last sentence claims Tommy is a maniac and his frozen coins prove this. How exactly does one equal the other? Just another allegation made that really makes no sense. His "proof" has no connection to his allegation. How does locking the coins of an ex-employee who has already violated signed contracts (and is likely to continue to break the law this way, Just FYI, Energi team member's agree to hold coins for 18 months from the time they are received), mean that someone is a maniac?

Well, every assumption can and should be made that the team and managers only have the company interests in mind, in which case maximum profit at expense of everyone else.

Bear in mind most managers are very dictatorial. "Team members" rarely know what it's all about.

The dev team must have proof to support their claim 'investor safety' when decide to close down trading on the exchange. If there is a hack, vulnerable or maybe just exchange have a problem on their end and deposit and withdraw must closed, I think it's totally understandable. If not, users, traders of that coin should apply pressure toward exchange to make sure everything is transparent. In the end, there must be trust between both parties to moving forward, defuse the problem.