Bitcoin Forum

I do not have experience as user, anyway I do not recommend coin(token) owners to work with service of these team.
Their sites: tokpie.io tokpie.com
after telegram message additional: youengine.io

They convince me, that they list on CoinGecko, CoinMarketCap, etherscan and provide liquidity(trading volume) for a lifetime on their exchange.
For this I've paid (0.343ETH) on that moment is 750$

Non of this things wasn't done. Today I got message, that no even partial 50% refund.

Beware to work with them.

If this topic will be interested, I'll provide screenshots of letters.

Screenshots of letters.
Update: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5376009.msg58669335#msg58669335

This message I recently got in Telegram.

https://i.ibb.co/7rMd6qQ/photo-2021-12-08-22-28-01.jpg

and here is topic https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5376035.new#new

Better not waiting for people's interest before you release the screenshot of letters. If you'd like to propose a possible scam activity by someone, you should as well present all of the evidences you have against them.

On the other side, your username ringed a bell on my mind that I couldn't just place, it was until I looked at the accusation thread against you selling fake tokens (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5376035.0) that I remember we have an unfinished discussion (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5373479.msg58592554#msg58592554) on your ANN thread, about your claim of "clean reputation" and your project's progress for the past three years, which for whatever reason, you didn't reply.

You are going to have to upload screenshots of your chat with TOKPIE plus proof of payment of the 750 USD using a transaction ID otherwise no one will take your scam accusation seriously.

I think you have noticed it by now that people seem less interested in it due to lack of the required details. Follow this scam report format - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=260073.0

Just replied. See you in ANN (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5373479.new#new)


What happened:
Took eth and not complete, what promised, list on CoinGecko, CoinMarketCap, etherscan and provide liquidity(trading volume) for a lifetime on their exchange. Avoid to refund even part.

Scammers Profile Link:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=357369 and https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1887294

Reference Link:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5050817
Amount Scammed: 0.343 ETH
Payment Method: ETH
Proof of Payment:
https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb4108c7205321de724ffe03640dc21152791e8298227c572d901f420d45510ca
PM/Chat Logs:

https://i.ibb.co/xsY9r56/Screenshot-2021-12-09-at-23-29-25-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
https://i.ibb.co/Fxfmd4y/Screenshot-2021-12-10-at-00-39-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
https://i.ibb.co/kx60PsV/Screenshot-2021-12-09-at-23-41-16-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
https://i.ibb.co/grvHZ9y/Screenshot-2021-12-09-at-23-52-06-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png

Update:
https://i.ibb.co/GPyQ3zN/Screenshot-2021-12-10-at-01-16-34-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png

Additional Notes:
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x89bc3de2e4669e68c0eb768e1f911c54ef1e13aee4b62d9394735b18917f15b7
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x1c1a7d2d9ba0cd51b9b79e010d9126404dd5decda8ef8bf69d86694cfa5348b9

Just to be clear, I have seen a couple of Green Token transactions (10,000 and 20,000). In the agreement, I see $750 in ETH and 10,000 Green tokens.
 Did you later on agree to just give them 30,000 Green tokens in total?

Since the accused are not responding to the accusation. I am tagging both accounts so that they come here and respond before I make final Judgement.

10 000 Green Tokens for each pair ETH, BTC, USDT = 30000 Green Tokens in total
20000 was needed for additional (BTC and USDT) pairs setup, because they start from one pair (ETH) and ask only 10000.
Should be clear.

Thank you for pay attention!

Alright, makes sense now

BTCITA187 was online today but didn't bother responding to the scam accusation. In the next few days, I will mark them as scammers if they don't do anything to resolve the scam accusation.

I would also advise you to create type 1 and type 2 flags ob their profiles if they don't work on the issue in the coming days.

Thank you for help!

Don't used before type 1 and type 2 flags. Will mark in few days.

I searched YOUC thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5237861.0) --which also managed by BTCITA187-- and learned that both project had formed a partnership. A cursory glance at the last page gave me an impression that YOUC, however, seems to start abandoning their project.


Although all indication up to this point pointed to the direction that the accused are indeed doing a misconduct, I think we need to be sure we cover every side of the story, this email --I quote below-- is the entire length of the email body? What I wanted to know is whether there is a statement anywhere and at any point during your negotiation with TOKPIE/YOUC that there are certain terms and condition that has to be met for the lifetime volume assistance?

If there is a clear evidence that there were not any information about terms and condition for lifetime support, thus TOKPIE/YOUC is breaching the contract, I'll gladly support the flag.

The deal did not work as they changed their terms and conditions. The next thing they were supposed to do was to pay back what OP sent to them and everyone leaves happy, but they refused

I don't know how legitimate OP's project is, but one thing I now know is that he paid them so ETH for a service they have never provided.

As I previously stated, all indications up to this point are in favor of CryptorClub, that Tokpie/YOUC are doing misconduct by breaching their contract. However, I would really love if we could cover every ground --and every side of the story-- before the flag raised. What concerned me, other than some emails are not shown in full, which leads to a possibility to a biased judgement from the third parties who read this thread, is the date between the emails.

CryptorClub were exchanging emails with Tokpie team on April, which emails can be summed as that Tokpie promised a promotion, free lifetime volume assistance, and listing on CG, CMC, etc. within 24-72 hours after the payment, which set us roughly around the end of April 2021 at the latest to see all of the deals to be completed. So why do they waited until December, more than 7 months, to report the failed deal? I'm curious if there are other exchanges of emails between April and December.

Further, TOKPIE's reply on this part of email gave an impression to me that CryptorClub missed a step or two, I'd really appreciate if either side can give an information about this

https://i.ibb.co/48Ww2FL/1.png (https://ibb.co/k4KVJGT)

Now, I'm not sure if my hunch is correct, that judging from the post history, LinksMe.ga is CryptorClub's alt, and if I'm correct, whether this should be considered as a ban-evasion, but I'll leave that matters --just like I'm temporarily dropping the discussion in GGREEN's Ann-- in pursue of solving this case. Given CryptorClub is currently temporarily banned from the forum for incentivizing post, I understood that his reply will be delayed for at least until January 2022 and LinksMe.ga is jumping in to fill the position, I'll appreciate if LinksMe.ga can answer and shed some light into the matters I asked.


On the other hand, BTCITA187's silence is rather concerning. If by some reason they're not aware of this thread --which I doubt they didn't-- I am somewhat sure they noticed that bright orange negative trust that sat on their profile. Just in case, I'll wrote on TOKPIE's telegram as well as sending a PM to them. I'll add the screenshot of the invitation via edit. If they remains to be silent after the invitation... well, let's hope not.

Edit: a screenshot of notifying BTCITA187 via PM and a post in YOUC thread --which managed by them.

https://i.ibb.co/CK80FZK/PM.jpg (https://imgbb.com/)
https://i.ibb.co/12XgBsb/Thread.jpg (https://imgbb.com/)

Hello guys, we completely don't agree with the blaming man!
CryptorClub cheated Tokpie and its users in two ways:

1. He got the listing service a long time ago (April 25): https://tokpie.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019702238-The-Green-Token-GREEN-Listed-on-Tokpie
and had not made any blames until now. Why is he blamed now? Because he changed the token network from Ethereum to the Matik that has never been supported by Tokpie.

2. So, he decided to blackmail us by requiring a refund of 100% first. When we refused to satisfy such a ridiculous request, he wrote this post and requested a 50% refund.
This man is a blackmailer!

Regarding listing on trackers, we made everything from our side, but this man simply could not satisfy trackers' requirements in terms of his project quality.

Bottom line.
- Ask yourself why CryptorClub has been silent since April 25?
- Ask yourself why Tokpie has already listed over 120 projects for the last 12 months and only this man is blaming us?
- We kindly ask bitcointalk's admins to close this fake blaming post and red flag CryptorClub user.

Besides, look at many positive feedback about Tokpie listing service:
MYC: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6804871552434360320?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A6804871552434360320%2C6873198370144571392%29
TREKS: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6866725839640375296?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A6866725839640375296%2C6866823186894331904%29
KLTR: https://twitter.com/thedartcoart/status/1457433106173071374
ZITI: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6796937558434676736
SCCN: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/tokpie_discover-the-succession-project-sccn-token-activity-6826862025122168833-sS9U/
PXBSC:  https://www.linkedin.com/posts/tokpie_meet-the-paradox-nft-bsc-pxbsc-token-activity-6834476088618565633-axBa
PEECH: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6797181290329313280
Coinstox's CEO: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6776126388576624640/.
DIRTY:  https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6795703391017426944 (https://t.me/BillyWizz)

Now that both party is here, discussion and investigation should be easier.

BTCITA187, I'd like to give you a mind-blowing information: email screenshot works both ways. Just like how CryptorClub could provide history of email exchanges between them and TOKPIE, you can too.

As you claimed that they have been silent since 25 April, and only now started to complain in order to blackmail a refund, can you provide a screenshot of email history indicating that it is indeed true that your last email with them is as how they provide in the evidence, and there were not any other emails in between April and December, whether from their side complaining about the broken agreement, or from you asking anything --thus, proving and favoring your side that you've delivered the product as promised and there were no issue up to earlier this month.

Second, is there a logical, acceptable, or whatever reason you can provide that explains why you stopped the lifetime volume assistance support? No matter who blackmailed who --I'd like to point out that YOUC, your partner, is also blackmailing CryptorClub, threatening that they'll have a very bad review that'll appear on google's top result-- a deal is a deal, you promised a volume assistance that's free for forever, which should at least trasnlates for as long as the project live. Not only that, as per their claim, you also failed to deliver the promise where they'll be listed on CoinGecko, CMC, etc.

I couldn't care less about what other project said about you in the past. There are a lot of projects that started good and left the stage in the years that follow. Like YOUC, for example, and how their thread is now abandoned. So, what is your version for these two accusation points I state above?

Edit: adding and changing some words to better match the terms raised by TOKPIE on the email and the situation happened.

ok
Sure, kindly check these screenshots proving that the service was provided (+ many trackers passed), max efforts applied, but due to his low project quality (refused to provide team section) he could not pass CG
Screenshot 1: https://ibb.co/X3g9YS8
Screenshot 2: https://ibb.co/d7LS2qP
Screenshot 3: https://ibb.co/QDCYS0v
Screenshot 4: https://ibb.co/sySrtWM


The logic is simple. The Green exchange listed its ERC20 GREEN token on Tokpie (on April 25) and Tokpie made what was offered (screenshots above). Then, Green exchange changed (NOT TELLING to Tokpie) its token to the new one GrandpaGreen (GGREEN) running on Matic network. Proving screenshot: https://ibb.co/ZBhnyk9
Proving link on their telegram: https://t.me/greencoinexchange/417. But, Tokpie had never been supporting the Matic network (and CryptorClub knows that), so vol service and even trading his old GREEN token could NOT be provided technically anymore. CryptorClub decided to use it as an occasion to get money back despite a lot of work made for him. Shame man.
Moreover, the fact that he did not notify us about such a vital network change means that he cheated us.

Agree with you! but our Btt thread is not abandoned and part of the positive feedbacks provided above are fresh

The Matic Network and GrandpaGreen (absolutely different token) is not related at all to this thread!

Lie, that could NOT be provided technically. They provide trading until this topic was created. GREEN token always has erc-20 standard on Ethereum and nothing was changed!
WE NEVER ASK to provide trading volume on Matic network. GREEN is not old - is live token in Ethereum network, that can be deposited/withdrawed from/to Matic Network as any other ERC-20 standard token.
We ask to add Matic contract address on CG, and they say no problem. Letter below
https://i.ibb.co/BV60PCM/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-24-45-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
So Tokpie had never been supporting the Matic network is also lie, because they agree to add it on the stage of negotiation.

means, that from moment of Bitcointalk topic creation? Right? All worked good(for ETH pair) until letters in December? Because was no letters regarding problems with Matic before. By the way, you agree to work with it on stage of negotiations (https://i.ibb.co/BV60PCM/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-24-45-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png).
So if service can't be provided, why still no refund?

Lie.
GREEN Token was never changed. We don't have to inform about any other tokens we launched on other networks and GrandpaGreen (GGREEN - is absolutely other token with other unique name and ticker) and its not related to this topic!

Other thing, that any user with his any ERC-20 token launched on Ethereum can deposit/withdraw it to Matic network, and there it has another contract address. So this is official GREEN token address on Matic 0x8a4001fd666be272605c56bb956d11a46200db81

Lie.
We talk our token can be deposited to Matic from the start.
Here they agree to add Matic address to CoinGecko
https://i.ibb.co/BV60PCM/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-24-45-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
And they personally provide screenshot, where was mentioned Matic.
The both ways emails here
https://i.ibb.co/SfKGw9j/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-00-46-13-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Here is request about exactly this Matic address
https://i.ibb.co/MDPhHM4/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-47-25-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Here is response, that no problem, they can add it
https://i.ibb.co/BV60PCM/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-24-45-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
After that they made post on their blog, mentioning Matic and original contract address on Matic 0x8a4001fd666be272605c56bb956d11a46200db81
https://i.ibb.co/F4XLTjv/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-59-35-Tokpie-Green-Exchange-is-SCAM-and-Grandpa-Green-Token-is-SCAM.png
Link on post: https://tokpie.io/blog/trade-green-exchange-token/

Lie.
About notification response in previous block (At it was not change but possibility of any token). And its not related to this topic.
ERC20 (Green Token) GREEN was launched on ethereum and Its contract address:
0x5e68801a5dda8671051006eb2920ffe9cd553544
Its name and network was never changed
Because its technically impossible nor to change name nor to change network.
This token still alive and can be: Deposited, Withdrawed, Transferred

Anyway Nor GREEN (as token, that has Matic possibility) Nor GrandpaGreen (that is absolutely other token) not related to this topic at all.

Your team NOT make listing of ethereum erc-20 GREEN token with address (0x5e68801a5dda8671051006eb2920ffe9cd553544) on:
CoinGecko
Etherscan
CoinMarketCap
Forever free volume rejected (ETH/WBTC/USDT - Ethereum mainnet)

Please focus on that.

We got listing service on Tokpie (what has no priority) with forever free volume, but not on (CG,CMC, Etherscan - that has priority)
In May (https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png) we first time ask about 50% refund

Lie.
First we ask them twice to get 50% refund to close this question. In May (https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png) and in December (https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2FGPyQ3zN%2FScreenshot-2021-12-10-at-01-16-34-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png&t=632&c=_VfcfskgwGLJrw)
Only then CryptorClub post topic on Bitcointalk.
Then they wrote in Telegram, screenshot in starter post (https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2F7rMd6qQ%2Fphoto-2021-12-08-22-28-01.jpg&t=632&c=tDturzlOxV9Xww), that they delist token from everywhere - and already delist it from Tokpie!
100% refund asked now After they reject 50% refund proposal twice, in May (https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png) and in December (https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2FGPyQ3zN%2FScreenshot-2021-12-10-at-01-16-34-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png&t=632&c=_VfcfskgwGLJrw), when rejected volume assistance and on actual time delisted from Tokpie.
And because spent a lot of time right now including this topic work.

Lie.
We also already asked about 50% refund first time in May.
https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Also was letters in July and Aug with volume problems. Late Aug letter you ignored.
The first reason, why we wait, that this volume assistance can be positive in long term for possibility to be listed on CoinGecko.
The second reason - is trial to trust to Tokpie

About team publishing they not ask on the start and took money to list in 72 Hours.
Also they propose to publish fake team and brilliantly edit their email screenshot.
Original one:
https://i.ibb.co/2Pq1hKY/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-42-54-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Their fake/edited screenshot


There was letters between these gap, with such topics (not so important for our opinion):
50% refund in May
They tried to boost volume, and convinced that fail with CG would be compensating with free volume, to have more chance to be listed in future
https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Than we not control process and find in July, that stopped volume assistance.
They renew it after request, on that moment on three pairs
In early Aug was few letters about BNB pair possibility
They request with additional payments for this
In late Aug we ask about check their volume trading assistance, wasn't stable
They ignored it
Than we not control the volume assistance
and checkup it in Dec - two pairs from three was not active
and Coingecko isn't possible during their last emails at all they changed/add new rules and ask about new money depositing for volume boosting seems ask about new 950$ for CG form update.
Here is the full letter, because on previous screenshot only part visible
https://i.ibb.co/p4dJ2TC/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-04-44-18-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
You may see, that additional services payments for updates needed (you may see its not purple, added specially) CMC(950$) + CG(950$)
and only after at least CG(950$) they will update etherscan.

And after all of this, they delisted GREEN from Tokpie and post, that they something technically can't here on Bitcointalk.

Shame on me

The first reason, why we wait, that this volume assistance can be positive in long term for possibility to be listed on CoinGecko. Shame on me
The second reason - is tried to trust to Tokpie, that with volume, that can do something. Shame on me

Green Exchange (GrandpaGreen) Lie:
It does relate to the issue. You stopped to support Green token ERC20 (0x5e68801a5dda8671051006eb2920ffe9cd553544). No mention of it on your web (screenshots below): https://greencoin.online/ So how do you think we can support a token if the project itself DOESN't SUPPORT it, and you DON’t RELATE TO it anymore.
Screenshot 1: https://ibb.co/WtPJnXW
Screenshot 2: https://ibb.co/R4VRyyy
Screenshot 3: https://ibb.co/JxgrD7d
Screenshot 4: https://ibb.co/XY8HnXV
Screenshot 5: https://ibb.co/WsJspqw
Screenshot 6: https://ibb.co/whnBJzZ



Perfect! You confirm that your official token is a Matic token (absolutely different from the one that you listed on Tokpie). So, once again how can we continue to list your old (not supported) token? Moreover, how dare you ask a REFUND for the services that were provided for your ERC20 token and infiltrate us now with that thread.

Lie.
We talk our token can be deposited to Matic from the start.
Here they agree to add Matic address to CoinGecko
https://i.ibb.co/BV60PCM/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-24-45-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
And they personally provide screenshot, where was mentioned Matic.
[/quote]

 Look at the screenshot again: https://i.ibb.co/BV60PCM/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-24-45-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png we show you how Matic address can be added on CG. It doesn’t mean that we can list Matic token!


The both ways emails here
https://i.ibb.co/SfKGw9j/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-00-46-13-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Here is request about exactly this Matic address
https://i.ibb.co/MDPhHM4/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-47-25-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Here is response, that no problem, they can add it
https://i.ibb.co/BV60PCM/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-24-45-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
After that they made post on their blog, mentioning Matic and original contract address on Matic 0x8a4001fd666be272605c56bb956d11a46200db81
https://i.ibb.co/F4XLTjv/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-59-35-Tokpie-Green-Exchange-is-SCAM-and-Grandpa-Green-Token-is-SCAM.png
Link on post: https://tokpie.io/blog/trade-green-exchange-token/
[/quote]



Mentioning your Matic token in decryption is NOT the same as listing it! We never said to you that we can list MATIC token!


Lie.
About notification response in previous block (At it was not change but possibility of any token). And its not related to this topic.
ERC20 (Green Token) GREEN was launched on ethereum and Its contract address:
0x5e68801a5dda8671051006eb2920ffe9cd553544
Its name and network was never changed
Because its technically impossible nor to change name nor to change network.
This token still alive and can be: Deposited, Withdrawed, Transferred

Anyway Nor GREEN (as token, that has Matic possibility) Nor GrandpaGreen (that is absolutely other token) not related to this topic at all.

Your team NOT make listing of ethereum erc-20 GREEN token with address (0x5e68801a5dda8671051006eb2920ffe9cd553544) on:
CoinGecko
Etherscan
CoinMarketCap
Forever free volume rejected (ETH/WBTC/USDT - Ethereum mainnet)

Please focus on that.


Look at this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5376009.msg58705196#msg58705196 We made all steps to provide your ERC20 token with all promised services. But because of your inability to improve your web, some trackers refused to accept you. Who Compensate us all these efforts? You can migrate to any token that you want or even close your fake project, but it does not mean that we must pay you any refund.


We got listing service on Tokpie (what has no priority) with forever free volume, but not on (CG,CMC, Etherscan - that has priority)
In May (https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png) we first time ask about 50% refund

Lie.
First we ask them twice to get 50% refund to close this question. In May (https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png) and in December (https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2FGPyQ3zN%2FScreenshot-2021-12-10-at-01-16-34-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png&t=632&c=_VfcfskgwGLJrw)
Only then CryptorClub post topic on Bitcointalk.
Then they wrote in Telegram, screenshot in starter post (https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2F7rMd6qQ%2Fphoto-2021-12-08-22-28-01.jpg&t=632&c=tDturzlOxV9Xww), that they delist token from everywhere - and already delist it from Tokpie!
100% refund asked now After they reject 50% refund proposal twice, in May (https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png) and in December (https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ibb.co%2FGPyQ3zN%2FScreenshot-2021-12-10-at-01-16-34-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png&t=632&c=_VfcfskgwGLJrw), when rejected volume assistance and on actual time delisted from Tokpie.
And because spent a lot of time right now including this topic work.


Of course, we delist your token because you stopped mentioning your ERC20 token on your web.
No mention: https://ibb.co/WtPJnXW
No mention: https://ibb.co/R4VRyyy
No mention: https://ibb.co/JxgrD7d
No mention: https://ibb.co/XY8HnXV
No mention: https://ibb.co/WsJspqw
No mention: https://ibb.co/whnBJzZ



Lie.
We also already asked about 50% refund first time in May.
https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Also was letters in July and Aug with volume problems. Late Aug letter you ignored.
The first reason, why we wait, that this volume assistance can be positive in long term for possibility to be listed on CoinGecko.
The second reason - is trial to trust to Tokpie

About team publishing they not ask on the start and took money to list in 72 Hours.
Also they propose to publish fake team and brilliantly edit their email screenshot.
Original one:
https://i.ibb.co/2Pq1hKY/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-42-54-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Their fake/edited screenshot


What's are you talking about. Nothing edited! Look again https://i.ibb.co/2Pq1hKY/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-42-54-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png to see that all ways were offered to you to solve the problem.



There was letters between these gap, with such topics (not so important for our opinion):
50% refund in May
They tried to boost volume, and convinced that fail with CG would be compensating with free volume, to have more chance to be listed in future
https://i.ibb.co/LgrTwQh/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-22-35-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Than we not control process and find in July, that stopped volume assistance.
They renew it after request, on that moment on three pairs
In early Aug was few letters about BNB pair possibility
They request with additional payments for this
In late Aug we ask about check their volume trading assistance, wasn't stable
They ignored it
Than we not control the volume assistance
and checkup it in Dec - two pairs from three was not active
and Coingecko isn't possible during their last emails at all they changed/add new rules and ask about new money depositing for volume boosting seems ask about new 950$ for CG form update.
Here is the full letter, because on previous screenshot only part visible
https://i.ibb.co/p4dJ2TC/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-04-44-18-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
You may see, that additional services payments for updates needed (you may see its not purple, added specially) CMC(950$) + CG(950$)
and only after at least CG(950$) they will update etherscan.

And after all of this, they delisted GREEN from Tokpie and post, that they something technically can't here on Bitcointalk.

Shame on me



So, you confirm that service was ok. But then, you decided that is better to blackmail money from us and abandon your ERC20 token.

Lie.
You are not provided service! And know about Matic (and its absolutely different address) from the start, and mentioned on your blog - is not an argument.
Fact - you not provided CG, CMC, Etherscan.

You delist token from Tokpie - True - Please make refund

Lie.
Its token ALIVE, man, and you can find places, where it mentioned.
No mention: https://ibb.co/WtPJnXW - On the first screenshot, you provided you may see huge green button that follows to page, that entire related to token.
The reason why its not traded on eth, because of crazy commissions for gas in Ethereum. You trying abandon any ERC-20 token on Ethereum.
Its tradable and alive! And its not old!
You have captured different part of site, where token not mentioned, its not an argument to stop service.
You complete delist token - refund, please!

Lie.
I provide both screenshots to see your deleted lines.

Lie.
It's not ok! It's you abandon our token.
Sir, sorry that I'm again trying to focus you on whole post. There is absolutely no arguments on each lie that we post and again generated new lie.

Here is request about exactly this Matic address
https://i.ibb.co/MDPhHM4/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-47-25-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
Response
https://i.ibb.co/BV60PCM/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-05-24-45-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png
After that on your blog, mentioning Matic and original contract address on Matic 0x8a4001fd666be272605c56bb956d11a46200db81
https://i.ibb.co/F4XLTjv/Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-59-35-Tokpie-Green-Exchange-is-SCAM-and-Grandpa-Green-Token-is-SCAM.png
Link on post: https://tokpie.io/blog/trade-green-exchange-token/


https://greencoin.online/token_status/
you may see that address there.

Its our official token address on ethereum mainnet! Mainpage edited

Don't try to use name "blackmail" and "fake accusation" of our ask to make 50% refund of your fail with:
CoinGecko, CoinMarketCap, Etherscan
reject trading volume
and delisting token after that

if we are already talking about blackmail, do you understand that this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5376009.msg58659962#msg58659962 is the most obvious form of blackmail and coming on your part?
is that really the way you run your business?

About accusations against Tokpie here, you ^{BTCITA187 or whoever it represents here} need to give some simple answers
Did you promise them all of this stuff like listing on CMC, CG etc... and you take money for that?
Do you have any refund policy, what if you do not meet all of these requirements?
Are you delisted their token much before the end of the contract date? If yes, it is quite legitimate to ask for part of the money back, because you did not deliver the complete service.

After your web started to refer to the ERC20 token (that was agreed to list), the trade was restored.
Check the links:
https://tokpie.com/view_exchange/GREEN-ETH/
https://tokpie.com/view_exchange/GREEN-WBTC/
https://tokpie.com/view_exchange/GREEN-USDT/
That's not our fault that your project doesn't meet the tracker's requirements in full. From our side, everything was done to help you appear there. So we stop calling you blackmailer when you stop blaming us for all your troubles.

---

Tons of hours were spent to provide them with agreed services. Everything was done from our side (trading, vol assistance, promotion, and guidance on what to do to pass trackers). Might be you think we should re-develop their web, find team members for them and do all other development staff. Appearing on trackers is mutual co-working. We did our part, they did not. So, what refund they are asking for now!

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

I have to praise the reaction to restore their trading pairs. it is much better than blackmailing and responding negatively


you still haven't given me clear answers. If you promise them listing on CMC, CoinGecko and whatever, have you done that part of the deal?


no, you don't need to fix their infrastructure, but you should pay attention when accepting similar projects. acceptance of everything only degrades the quality of your service, I guess now you understand why some projects will never come to a bigger exchange, even if they want to pay.

1. Please look at the offer: https://ibb.co/LzkZMPd. It's clearly said "Listing on CMC after traction turning on." CMC has not yet enabled the traction. That's why we said it in the offer.
2. To pass Coingecko we provided them with trading, vol assistance, promotion, Coinpaprika, blog post, and guidance on what to do to pass Coingecko. But Coingecko doesn't accept them because of their low web/project quality.
3. Also, we instructed them how to get Etherscan update: https://ibb.co/JyKT5ZJ. Only token owners can submit such requests on Etherscan.

 

That doesn't matter as long as he is right about the accusation. Is it true that you couldn't provide coingecko, cmc listing? If that's true, you have broken a contract and deserve a big red flag. Please share the information exactly here. Otherwise, you are not going to help yourself.

The offer also said you will ensure coingecko listing after 24 hours your exchange list them? Where's coingecko? Why didn't you list them on coingecko?

To pass Coingecko we provided them with trading, vol assistance, promotion, Coinpaprika, blog post, and guidance on what to do to pass Coingecko. But Coingecko doesn't accept them because of their low web/project quality.

Thanks for your reply. It makes sense. Maybe you are right but if we look at your offer, it was not like OP has to do things. You were responsible to do everything according to your offer. All the details you are talking about regarding listing on coingecko are available on the internet. So, basically, you sold all of them? Or what was the deal? If you just directed how to do which is available on coingecko itself even, what was your part with coingecko in the deal?

We are not interested on pairs from the start. The main reason why we start work is Coingecko listing, what wasn't done nor in 24 hours nor in 72 hours.
Now you say all work done, CoinGecko is our troubles, that it still not listed.
No, its not.

We are not order trading volume assistance, not order promotion and also not order guidance on what to do to pass Coingecko...
The quality of project you have seen on the start when write proposal (24 hours listing to coingecko), and do not tell that needed team section or other modification.
Than took money.
Than we wait more than 24(and 72) hours. Coingecko not passed (with it not passed Etherscan and CoinMarketCap)
After that you propose to post fake team - we not do that.
Games with volume assistance - not effective to pass Coingecko
after you rejected volume.
We ask about 50% refund twice - you reject it.
Now you tell, that is "our troubles"

Now I'm ask about 100% refund. Business with you not interested after all.

Behaviour
a lot of lie
fail Coingecko
fail Etherscan
fail CoinMarketCap
games with volume until rejection
spended time on whole discussion and this topic

What you propose now? What should we post for completition?
I will close this proceedings, if two from this three things will be met (Coingecko, Etherscan, CoinMarketCap) in next ten days.

In other case - 100% refund in ETH.

You posted the wrong imgbb link, the one with referenced email is this one: https://ibb.co/sySrtWM. You might want to change the link on that post via edit to avoid confusion from future readers.

---

Sweety, I am sure you completely understand what they talked about and which email they're referencing to, it took almost zero brain power to understand what he talked about, really. But in case you failed to understand it due to the wrong link --I mentioned above-- here, I'll post them side by side for a better understanding for everyone.

The original email, according to GREEN
https://i.ibb.co/7K4P5b1/23-50-58-Screenshot-2021-12-13-at-22-42-54-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Tradin.png (https://ibb.co/dDgFq75)

The email version of TOKPIE
https://i.ibb.co/DWpC01M/23-51-02-44.png (https://ibb.co/8sc51mx)

Please explain this matter.

---

I have to say I am very disturbed when I reached this part of --crazy and chaotic-- quote-pyramid that my jaw is literally dropped followed by an involuntary whistle of amazement.

One of the main purpose of this board on bitcointalk is to fight against scammers with their fake team etc. and here TOKPIE casually suggest a project to add fake team to be accepted by CoinGecko. Only Satan knows how many projects were suggested by them to do this to pass a crypto platform, it brings a big perspective to the legitimacy of projects supported and marketed by TOKPIE.

I think, if TOKPIE can't provide a very reasonable and acceptable reason behind this corrupted suggestion --which, I have to say, from where we stood right now I don't think there will be any acceptable reason--, even if this scam accusation is resolved, there is still this issue that worth a whole different flag and red trust.

Holy crap! This guy is suggesting creating a fake team. What the hell is going here? How come a service asks to do such an unethical job? If I understood perfectly, I guess both of the guys are unethical & both deserve a negative tag for practicing such unethical activities. Both parties are dishonest which I would more comfortable with to say scammer as indirectly it's the same as a scam.

What do you mean both parties? We never post fake team and don't agreed to do that.
Or I understand something wrong? Do you read whole thread?

again you have the wrong approach. Can you be more unprofessional?
Do you have in your TOS somewhere that it is clearly indicated "if some unsatisfied customers publicly complain to your work, his token will be delisted immediately"?
Also, I find on your blog where you just dragged the sentence "this exchange is a scam, blah, blah..." a couple of times (source (https://tokpie.io/blog/trade-green-exchange-token/))

you need to present clear evidence that it is a scam because otherwise, it will probably turn against you.

You measure your work with hours. We not order hours - we order result. Result should be after 24 hours.
Our part with work was not required on their proposal.
You ask to post fake team.
We reject it and ask refund.
Your fairy tail about 24 hours equals tons also not true.

The work not done. Result not met. About improving web quality by our part with our team or fake team members was not in your starter proposal.
This is your decision - last post or no.
Our communication with you and loss of 0.343ETH and this topic now part of Bitcointalk community, after rejection of 50% refund twice and 100% after all.

Now I may conclude for myself:
Tokpie = Lie
Tokpie = Scam

Beware to work with Tokpie.
-1 Rep added only now.

I think examplens question is sufficient, if answered, to put some weight into the scale, which is why I didn't comments further, to wait for your response regarding it. However, since you keep ignoring their questions, I could only assume that the answers are not favoring you, that if you answered, you'll only show people that you did a misconduct and breaching contract.

You keep insisting that you've done your part, where one of it were listing om coingecko, and that they refuse to list GREEN because of insufficient points from GREEN's side, namely a poor website design and no team details. Thus, it is not your fault.

However, have you been aware of these lack of requirements when you offered GREEN your service and promised them the listing? If your answer is yes, then why do you still promising them the listing although you are fully aware that the chance is very slim? If your answer is no, don't you study a project prior to offering them your service? At least studying the basics like if their project is "doable".

And please at least tell us that you've warned GREEN prior to the agreement that there will be some difficulties in listing due to the lack of certain requirements. Because if you didn't, you're rather misleading them by giving an impression that all GREEN need is to pay and everything will goes smoothly.


This sounds awfully like an evasion, like you know you're the wrong side and you can't prove otherwise, hence you want to leave before making much more damage --like the shocking revelation how you encourage your client to fake team members. I think it is quite fair to say that, up to this point, people here are giving you benefits of doubt by refraining from tagging with negative trust until there is enough evidence to conclude who is at fault here. If you decided to walk away --disregarding what't the real motive behind it-- how should we know what's your defense will be against them?

Last, no response regarding advise of fake team? I think we can safely put a decision regarding this.

I didn’t say you used a fake team but both of your behaviors, characters are kinda unethical. You have planned tokpie exchange to get volume? Don't you think it's unethical? That's why I have said both of you are unethical, shady.

I don't know before purchase what exactly they planned to do.
Volume was not our order.
Our order was listing to CG, CMC and etherscan.
"Volume Assistance" they provide for free, and I don't know what exactly it is before purchase.
In same way we understand what is liqudity and its normal practice as in CEX as in DEX. Trading bots is also normal practice.
Fake volume not ethical, if its not covered by, at least, bots. No?
So if bots trading between each other is also not ethical?

Anyway I don't think before about "Volume Assistance" definition, so can't recognize my behavior as unethical. Especially, if I don't order it.

This might be a misunderstanding between the two parties. I explored some of the ones you both present.

About the Green token main chain. If we refer to token trackers, what we can see together is that the ERC-20 network runs first than the polygon network which means the ERC-20 network is first the GREEN main chain.

ERC20 network (https://etherscan.io/token/0x5e68801a5dda8671051006eb2920ffe9cd553544) - 1st transfer is 11 may 2018
Polygon network (https://polygonscan.com/token/0x8a4001fd666be272605c56bb956d11a46200db81) - 1st transfer is April 14, 2021

Tokpie's claim in this case makes more sense to me. Based on one of the screenshots of the conversation in this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5376009.msg58669335#msg58669335), a deal was struck on April 6th to be listed on Tokpie and other services before the polygon chain GREEN was created. And the GREEN Team also can't insist that Tokpie has to support polygon networks, although technically your reason is justified but you don't list your token to support 2 different networks in Tokpie.

---

About being listed on Coingecko (CG), I don't know how experienced Tokpie is with this. I think you are too confident to give listed offers only 24 hours. Even more so if you only make your exchange only as data preference. The Green team should also realize this is too easy to be true for (sorry to say) a low quality project and you should ask for a money back guarantee on the initial agreement if it doesn't work out in time.

It will be a CG confusion, when the main network is changed to polygon, on the other hand the Tokpie team might just add market list of GREEN with their own exchange which doesn't support polygon network. That's why GREEN is hard to be listed there.

---

As a suggestion to solve the problem for both of you, then consider these things:

Firstly, @Tokkie however you have failed to list this coin on CG, even after 24 since the April 6 email was sent. You should return the money immediately consciously at that time if you are a professional.

Second, @GREEN you can't actually claim a refund because there's no agreement about it, instead you're asking for more than the original agreement.

Although this attempt at listing was not successful, there is a process that must be rewarded with money even if it will be lower than what was originally agreed. I don't agree if the return has to be 100% and I don't agree if there is no return at all. At least a few percent, depending on how far the process was.

Regarding refund. I propose about 50% refund twice. Twice got note: no refund.
I understand your position: no agreement - no refund. In same way agreement was to list 24 hours to CoinGecko and 72 hours to Etherscan, not telling about CoinMarketCap. No of this wasn't done. We ask about 50% refund twice to close questions from us.
100% refund we asking only now (its not more, than we sent). Because their work completely ineffective and after two 50% refund rejects we spend time on this topic.

Regarding main chain of Green Token. When we tell in our Telegram Group about Polygon is main chain we meant, that there most exchanges count at that moment and even now. In same time Ethereum network ERC-20 token never stops working. Main reason, why it has no activity, that is 100$ fee for simple transfer or exchange is a little bit insane for any user, that use token of not so huge project as ours.
To Polygon any user can at any time deposit their ERC-20 tokens (Trade there with ~$0.01 fee) and withdraw back to Ethereum and trade on it also.
Hope its clear

By the way we never ask about supporting Polygon network on Tokpie, the ask was only add contract address of GREEN to Coingecko, while list, what was accessible from the beginning and its not confusion for Coincgecko (as a lot of tokens support both chains and Coingecko track it). Anyway even Ethereums contract was not added to CG. Polygon should be second step.

I found this topic because I received an offer from TOKPIE about listing and adding my token (SONE) (https://etherscan.io/token/0xc55891e8b246417ac0ff87c292a8f34819b2e29b) to CG, CMC, Etherscan.
And I have some doubts about whether it meets the requirements of CG. And will I be able to get the services TOKPIE specified in the offer, or after payment it turns out that my project does not meet the requirements of CG and I can not fix it in any way.
How can I be sure that my token is suitable for CG?

they ^Tokpie just want to take your money. it was discussed in the topic https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5377380
I certainly didn't trust them or enter into a deal with them.

Have you tried to communicate with Coingecko about the necessary conditions for signing up for their service? As I know, listing on their service (CMC also) is free.

Yes, they are free, like examplens said. The hard part that made such... fishy platform like... tokpie were preferred to help new coins to get listed is because of the conditions that has to be met to be listed, these requirements will not be disclosed to you prior to listing, but several of them are: the daily trading volume, trading spreads, and team details... which, tokpie surprisingly --in a bad way-- is more than happy to help you tailor them. You can see them yourself on the point number one of this remnant of evidence from previous expose of their shady business

https://i.ibb.co/p4dJ2TC/Screenshot-2021-12-14-at-04-44-18-GREEN-price-market-cap-on-Etherscan-CMC-Coin-Gecko-Trading-View-an.png

Thanks, I'll try to fill out the on CG form myself. But I do not understand, if my token is not traded on some CEX and it has no volumes on DEX (but it listed there), it will not be able to get to CG? Nevertheless, there are a lot of scam-projects on CG. It turns out that scammers (like Tokpie) are deceiving other scammers (who use Tokpie) with the help of scammers (in CG)? :)

it seems like you started from the wrong side. You want to be listed on CG first, and only then do you look for the possibility of an exchange. it seems to me that the reverse is necessary.
creating a token is the easiest thing today, everything that comes later requires much more specific work. listing on the exchange for all new tokens is a big problem and that's what exchanges like Tokpie and similar use. after all, you still need to achieve a constant daily trading volume which is very difficult to achieve (Tokpie offers artificial trading volume).

Do I understand you correctly that the right way for a new token that is not scam and does not want to seem so is to listing it on DEX, achieve any minimum daily trading volumes, and only then add it to CEX (not like TOKPIE), CG, CMC and others?

I am not sure how correct my following statement is, as I'm not really well versed on this topic, but IMO, the short answer for your question is yes. Adding token to DEX is relatively easy, you only need to provide LP and convince your holders to do organic trading to fulfill the daily trading volume. Once these requirements --listed above on the screenshot-- met, you can apply for CG and co., and once listed on CG, I think it'll be easier to apply for a CEX. Not the big player CEX, small ones first, but that's a start.

Alternatively, if you still really aim for CEX --I'm not sure if they still do this-- you can try to enter those event of community vote free listing. I recall several big exchanges held these events years back.

Nonetheless, our discussion has walked to the zone of OOT. So if you want to know further, I'd suggest you to... have your own thread. Not sure which board for this kind of topic, though.

I just thought that false volumes could as well be created on the DEX in order to get on CG, but this is no longer a problem of TOKPIE or this topic, you are right. We are just talking about a hypothetical crypto projects that could be honest for their users.