I find it sort of interesting how people react to icos. So many people have been burned, be it from bittrex/polo/regular escrow or on c-cex, I guess they simply want a place to vent their anger. Some folks honestly may be just trying to warn others.

I don't view all icos as scams, but of course many are. I'll also add I have little interest in this coin and simply posted because I found the choice of 'null' as a name so bizarre. Same way as if you saw a headline that read 'Invalid -- Invest in the Future' ... my curiosity led me to read this thread.

As for constructive criticism, see if c-cex will agree to revise their ico rules so the team doesn't get all the funding immediately. Or see if polo will take the coin in conjunction with c-cex, as you can use their icd rules, and they will hold the funding until it is needed. That is the biggest risk of course ... devs get their money, then bail.

There are a number of red flags here, even overlooking the ICO stuff. The choice of the coin's name (you must have realized the meaning of the word Null, right?), the first page states that you won't do pod, then beneath it states you will (maybe update that), the whitepaper isn't out yet, mobile apps aren't available until after you are paid, and honestly, what is so special about the coin or plan? You don't need a whitepaper to outline why your coin is unique in some way, or why people should invest in it at all.

Go with pod + coins source trust rating

Forget c-cex, use poloniex. Their newer ICD rules state that the devs do not get the funds upfront. They only get funds as they need them, for stated coin dev purposes, with a strict ledger. They also require a valid form of ID.

And consider changing the name of the coin.

I suggest going with coinssource verification if you wish to pass on POD. Although I'd suggest both. I think all ICO coins nowadays need at least some form of developer verification, be it through an exchange or one of the above methods.

A somewhat interesting choice of a coin name there. Null means something is invalid, or zero.

Similar line of thinking I have, although I'll probably not be quite as greedy and take profits a bit lower than that, assuming it hits around 5Kish. I tend to try to do the 'sell high, buy back lower' game if it hits a high point, but eventually 20-30% of my coins I'd like to hold longterm. Then they are paid for and I'm already in profit, so it's just gravy. I already did that during this last mini-pump, and bought back most of what I sold, so think they are mostly paid for anyway... I probably should calculate where I stand.

And if it makes you feel any better, I skipped VRC entirely. So you at least made some profits. Those of us who overlook a coin entirely make nothing at all. Better to try and at least get something, than worry about past mistakes. Although that is sometimes easier said than done.

The important thing is to do your own research. Ask this same question in the Vericoin thread, and they'll say Vericoin will skyrocket. Just invest whatever you feel safe with, and are okay with losing. It's not a bad idea to diversify as well.

Assuming the Win wallet won't take forever, I suggest waiting until it is released before even considering Bittrex. The coin is currently sort of a 'sleeper'. I think it'd do better on bittrex after the win wallet comes out. Right now, it's not like extra attention to the coin will help much, as it'll just end up with a million more tech questions about setting up a node in linux ... which probably just confuses new people seeing this thread, thinking the coin has problems.

And although I don't agree with trolls, it may not exactly be a bad idea to release part of the source code, even if just a snippet, or speed up a 3rd party review. Assuming the coin does better/volume picks up on exchanges like bittrex, trolls will come out... inevitable. Best to give them as little fud food as possible.

A bit of an odd and unusually specific request there. Sent you that mighty sum of SRCC.

I have to ask, what do you need 1.747497 SRCC for exactly?

I say leave it. Perhaps he should be reported to a moderator, as there was a blackmail threat against a forum member, which apparently then caused this weird fud storm amongst several coins. But no sane person would take him seriously, so I wouldn't worry about it. He needs to at least research the coin a little bit before spreading fud properly.

I'm actually getting a little disappointed in the quality of fud on a couple of coins recently. They are becoming way too lazy. On another coin I used to follow, a troll got the dev's name wrong, complained he vanished (dev logged in an hour earlier), thought people would lose their expensive 'investments' --  most of the coins were free,  and complained how the dev would vanish with no repercussions (dev posted his photo 2 days earlier). At least do a little research first.

Maxmint held about 35 BTC of the IPO. It was just stated above by GreXX... are you even reading comments in this thread at all?

The majority of the ipo was through bter, with some spare coins going through escrow through max mint. It'd probably improve the quality of your posts if you researched the coin a bit.

And thank you for your concern as to our investments. It is heartwarming to see such people out there, worrying about others. I too worry about some people here, but less so their investments and more so as to their mental health.

Are you talking about Maxmint or Bter? You are aware that the coin was primarily sold through Bter, right? That escrow has been released. The small amount for Maxmint may not have been yet... not sure.

I'm not sure of timelines, but I do recall him saying he wanted to change it, told Poloniex to change it, yet they dawdled and took forever to do so. Again, I have no idea why they waited so long.

To be honest, we are talking about a coin given away for free basically, with little to no volume, and I expect basically nobody even noticed it when it was released. I don't mean this as an excuse, just it's a lot of anger over something that doesn't particularity matter nor I expect many even care about.


If you have any evidence, I'm sure plenty of people would be interested in seeing it. I would be. All I am aware of is the fact he made a coin, which by the looks of it, was primarily for promotion purposes. There was no IPO on the coin itself, so I'm not entirely sure why you keep claiming such.

As for him being a scammer, typically they don't release their photos, real names, phone numbers and so on. I've had differences of opinion on how they managed their trust rating thing there, so don't take this as a blanket statement that I approve fully of how they have done things -- but to me, any trust rating program is better than none at all.

Just remember to make a lot of backups. I probably go overboard, wallet.dats on usb drives, sd cards, external drives... backups for my backups. If my PC explodes into a ball of fire, I still have my coins.

I assume you made a backup of your wallet.dat on a usb drive or something similar?

What drive was your original wallet on?

The only problem is, nobody but whales know what they are doing exactly.

Even if inflated, we don't know if Mr. Whale plans to pump again after a brief lull, or retreat back further. So we don't know if it in fact will go back down a whole lot before going up once more... maybe... maybe not. At some point there will be a big retreat I expect, but we can't say for certain it'll occur now, or later, or after yet another pump.

I didn't buy a ton of coins (.75ish) some at IPO prices, some a bit more. I sold a decent amount during this hike, bought some back after the retreat. I'd actually benefit more from a big retreat right now than another pump, but who knows... everyone has an ulterior motive if they say they definitely know what the price will do.

http://www.coinssource.com/about/

He listed his identity, as well as several co-workers.

The naming issue with the coin you are mentioning was primarily due to poloniex, I believe. They took forever to change it ... no idea why.

The ipo was for coins source, for shares of the site, not the coin. They pretty much have given away most of their coin, for free, via promotions.

Pretty much the same pattern that occurs with every coin nowadays.

Pump, proceeded by fud/negativity, and then hype + pump again... repeat as necessary. The pumpers buy back coins during the price suppression, then pump resumes until they hit whatever magical number they have in their heads.

Only question is what is the new floor and how often they repeat the process.

I never quite understood the type of trolling/fud people tend to take part in here. Even if a person's goal is to suppress a coin's price due to the perceived competition with a coin he is holding (which is a flawed goal to begin with), logically you'd think it'd work better if the person posted in a somewhat sane manner.

Research the coin, post valid concerns, maybe even post them several times. Then either it takes, or doesn't take.

Instead trolls post like they are morons, have no idea half the time what the coin they are fudding is even about, make up wild accusations (hey, these fonts look sorta, kinda similar to some other coin!), and then they go into insult mode. Why would they think that would be  taken seriously by anyone?

I've also seen iffy coins with real valid concerns actually do better due to trolling, just because the accusations were so moronic that people simply overlooked it as noise.

When a person posts repeatedly and goes around calling people 'fucktards', I take it the troll is either 14 years old, or simply a true troll ... meaning they have no intention of suppressing a coin's price, they just like being annoying. Either that, or they simply aren't very bright.

The first two tiers are limited in spots. Once filled up, that's it, unless someone drops out. So at that point, someone in theory could instead go with a bunch of tier 3 spots which will be reasonably equivalent.

There is also an advantage in a way of going with multiple tier 3 vs tier 1/2, as if you need coins to trade/sell, you can just take them from one of your tier 3 accounts.  The remainder would still be in the loyalty program. If a tier 1/2 person does this, they are out of the program entirely.

Was thinking the same exact thing. After cryptorush went down, I wasn't even aware this was on an exchange anymore. And seeing as it had a daily volume of like $142, evidently not many others are aware either... or care either way.

When I was reading the paper, I wanted to make sure you weren't running into a 'Producers' situation -- giving more than 100% away of the company. Due to the 3rd tier being unlimited, in theory you could run into problems unless there was a limit on shares.  Or shares would need to be treated like rewards, changing person to person as someone drops out. But that would be a weird way to go in regard to company shares.

---

And still curious how you plan to stop folks from making multiple accounts after the first two tiers fill up?