Bitcoin Forum

edit: more information came to light about Edgar Soares in this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=813877.msg9249623#msg9249623)

It would seem there has been some deception regarding the Archcoin IPO.

I was watching when the IPO ended at about 927 BTC, but the number kept on climbing to 957 (and actually 964 according to the sweep address). I figured these were just payments sent and confirmed too late so would be refunded by BTCArchitect before distribution. However I only saw two small refunds made (and these were in response to people in IRC).

According to the terms (http://crowdsale.archcoin.co/terms.html) the IPO was between "September 09, 2014 at 21:00 UTC and end on September 30, 2014 at 21:00 UTC"

http://s13.postimg.org/e4yh9xm6v/terms0.png

Since there is a difference between when someone "sends" a bitcoin payment and when they are actually first confirmed, the time will be the timestamp recorded in the block itself.

http://s29.postimg.org/8aqgxaryv/terms1.png

screenshot (http://postimg.org/image/ms98uh769)

So I decided to look for myself in at the data in the blockchain and found several payments that should have been rejected and refunded. Including them as part of the IPO is unfair and against his own terms.

Clearly greed got the better of him and he decided 37BTC extra was more important than keeping to his word.

To cut a lot of technical details short, the last acceptable block was 323252 (https://blockchain.info/block/000000000000000003711c06a9169764c802af69ad284a385d46418f23385f97) because block 323253 (https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000001017880b39f8b872f6a03b182bd4d275f94bc712421f34) confirmed at 21:01:31. Anything received in block 323253 or later should have been refunded.

Here is the data I gathered: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qrlpTfF4I6Yzpf51Cg0wwPnPhytBcY3W9sorAmkZ_oI

I really wish people could just be straight up and honest. I spent so much time listening to BTCArchitech tell us how trustworthy he is, I actually believed it. But truth is, the people trumpeting "trust me trust me" are in fact the very people you should be wary of.

The question is now, what else has he lied about?

edit: more information came to light about Edgar Soares in this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=813877.msg9249623#msg9249623)

2 activity now GTFO

Outrageous!!!  :o :o :o


 ;D ;D  ::)

Low activity..self moderated thread..

I don't know enough about the coin, or care enough about the coin to verify the information, but IPOs should be transparent and you shouldn't change the rules mid-way.

Oh jesus, what a deception! A total fail! Arch is dead now :(  This will remain the biggest deception in history! Has anyone contacted the news agencies and updates wikipedia already?



A confirmation on the blockchain can also be explained as when the transaction shows up without actual block confirms, think about it for a second..

I can confirm they were in the blockchain before the end of the IPO.

Thanks, have a nice day

Mh....

IPO rules clearly state transactions have to be CONFIRMED in the blockchain before 21:00 UTC. Transactions in block 323253 were CONFIRMED (which means "included in a block") after 21:00 UTC.

So transactions in block 323252 should have been the last transactions accepted.

If I am not completely mistaken here the OP has a point.

Or more drastically:

Including those transactions in block 323253 or later was either a mistake or wrong on purpose.

For others who might not understand this, here is a more detailed explanation:

When you send a payment, your client signs a message which is they relayed over the network. At that point the tx is in the mempool. It has not been mined and may not be mined (e.g. because the tx doesnt have enough fees and thus gets de-prioritized or no fees and never gets included). Until it has been mined it *is not included in the blockchain or any blocks*.

This is how double spending works, you can relay one tx and quickly relay another competing tx to another set of nodes. Since some miners will hear of TXa first and other TXb first, then it's a lottery for which will be mined.

Imagine you sent a tx with no fees and it confirmed 24 hours later... that's entirely possible. That's why confirmed in block timestamp is important

The IPO terms are very very clear, but it does look like greed got the better of him.

Or in a few words:

Transaction in mempool != Confirmed transaction.

Simple as that.


I won't say it's a scam - but at least a mistake which resulted in everyone investing "in time" getting less ARCH. And the dev getting more BTC.

Betcha wont hit him.

Wonder if those people who paid over 10k sats consider it a success right now haha.

But anyway, thanks for the quick 100%...even if you are a total retard.

OMG, seriously, you actually started a thread for this, GTFO

CryptoBooster is so cute! He is like a little crime stopper!

http://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m14egswOvU1r4gei2o1_400.gif

Really WOOOOOWWW   fucking looser get a life

i'm going to have to sleep on this one and consider the long term ramifications.

wut who cares about a few btc??

ARCH TO DA MOOOOOOON!!

well people are greedy...But he probably should ask community if they want it to be refunded, or they are Ok with it. Would be more confident.

weirdest thread ever

I am sure if the people wanted a refund or wanted no extra investment in the coin they would have asked for it, but no one complained in the thread, so it is probably fine to let it be.

I just caught Coinsource.com red handed changing their reporting. On the 6th they posted information about ARCHcoin deception, and then today they changed it. Fortunately Google Cache caught the deception. maybe BTCArchitect paid them off? Coinsource in any case have just proven themselves to be totally untrustworthy.

BEFORE:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzceO-oIQAMYJi6.png

AFTER:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzceOyKIUAAYy73.png

See for yourself here (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.coinssource.com%2Farchcoin-pioneering-innovation-investing-deception-and-manipulation%2F)

And notice they even put a URL redirect for the old URL

http://s24.postimg.org/3m20lell1/Screenshot_from_2014_10_08_19_34_52_XX.png

Or maybe because of Coinssource.com shitty attempt at journalism and was called out for it?

butthurt much?


http://i61.tinypic.com/33kagm0.jpg

LOLOLOL come on man, that site is Wordpress every fucking post is a redirect. you moron.

You are going to have to do a lot better than that to get cheap coins. Bring it tool

so exposing facts that are visible on the blockchain for everyone to see & prove is a "shitty attempt at journalism"? When I read that article I found it indeed interesting as it CAN be relevant when you want to know what kind of person runs ARCH. Strange move from Coinssource in my opinion, whatever the reason is. Maybe they will make a statement about it.

And if you had any balls you would be posting from your real account.

ICO price here we come. Bagholders, prepare for your losses. This thread turned out to be a whistle-blower. Greedy and cocky devs never a good thing.

R.I.P, Architect close the thread, is silent on twitter and cryptotrust is down, another deception in cryptoland, another scam.

Did you see this thread also? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=813877.0

Congratulations on wasting 957 BTC on something that could be made for 0.5btc.