Done.  Thanks for the help.

I considered that, but I don't want to be responsible for someone getting their wallets drained due to a scam wallet or link ... I have my doubts about many of these projects, let alone 3rd party wallets or exchanges that claim to support them ... I decided to just create an "unsanitized" list and link to their main webpage, but after that, everything is "do your own research and use at your own risk".  

That is some really impressive work.  I really like the idea and I can see it catching on to some extent.  I can definitely see some mineable ERC20 tokens being launched.  

But the catch is, ICOs are being used to raise money to launch projects.  They have become the kickstarter of the crypto world, so it unlikely that developers would leave that money on the table when they have a larger project they are trying to build.

Updated 2/4/2018 to include MoneroV and updated the launch dates of latest Bitcoin Forks.

https://monero-gold.org

Have you seen what they did their website?  Makes you wonder if this was some terrorist funding B.S.

Bittrex is delisting FUN ... that might have something to do with it.  You should be able to withdraw it, though. 

This is why I got out of EOS.  I'll come back when they have a mainnet and you can buy the coin straight away. 

I'm sure the EOS people are smart and trustworthy and know what they are doing, but too much can go wrong when you are exposing private keys.

They posted on telegram today the ICO distribution will happen with 24 hours:

Spectiv:
Token distribution will be occurring over the next 24 hours
Dylan

Cool.  We will get a look at how it prices on the open market soon, then, I assume. 

To answer the OP's question, if Tether is not backed dollar for dollar, then it is worth less than a dollar.  That's the whole idea of Tether.  And it is found they are not backed, then I think that is the end of Tether.  They would have proven that they can not be trusted ... IMO, they are already past that point, anyway.  Given the "trust" involved in that project, they should be open and transparent about their reserves ... the fact that it may take a court order to get a glimpse inside their accounts is troubling, regardless of the results.

Great post, and great explaination of how I suspected it worked all along.  I would send you some Merit but I already spent all mine.  

After being in a campaign that ‘surprise’ KYC’ed their members after the campaign was completed, I have to say, the KYC was worth it.

People do have a valid complaint about the 'surprise' KYC only being mentioned after the work was done, but from the looks of it, the manager has ID’ed hundreds of “spam syndicates”, duplicate accounts, people registering under other people’s BCT user name, etc …  and at least half of the members didn’t bother to KYC.  It means a lot more for the rest of us.

And I can tell you first hand, from what I’ve witness, the bounty manager is taking this very serious, doing his best to eliminate cheaters and give the people who actually cared about the project a larger share.
Now, I get the complaints, especially when the KYC isn’t mentioned in the announcement, but it worked like it was supposed to.  So far, the most common objections to KYC itself I’ve seen are:

Crypto is supposed to be private:  Yes, it could be, but every other investment I’ve been involved in has required much more info than what the KYC asked for…. Social Security numbers and the names of my heirs, for example.   KYC asked for my name, address, phone number, and a picture ID.  Really, not much more than you can find on a government website about me, or my business Facebook.

I can’t trust an ICO with my personal data:  Really?  You are promoting the ICO and asking people to invest their hard earned money in it, but you can’t trust them with your name and address?   This is only a valid concern if you are a professional bounty hunter retweeting every campaign out there without regard for quality.  If you engage in one bounty at a time, you have the luxury of researching the crap out of it before you get involved.

I hope in the future that more bounties include whether or not they KYC in their announcement.   I know the merit system was just introduced, but I think KYC for signature campaigns will cut down the spamming and duplicate accounts much more.  It will discourage the “spam syndicates” from getting involved right from the start, and probably make the campaign manager’s job easier.

I would absolutely get involved in another project that KYC’s if they check out, so I hope they will start making that part of their announcement.   In fact, if I were a campaign manager, I would put “we reserve the right to KYC our members” in every announcement, just to discourage the multi-account spammers.

This is a good post. I did some checking and for it to reach $21 Trillion, it would be in the ball park of the US stock market ($30T), bond market ($40T), and real estate market ($25T) ...

Crypto is a new and hot asset class, for sure, but I can't see it being on par with those behemoths for a long while.  

I was just thinking the same thing.  Looking at my portfolio chart on Block folio, it's been pretty much flat since mid Dec.  There was one large pump since then, that was erased by the "crash" ... but for the most part, very flat.  Makes we wonder if it's recoiling for another pump soon.

No matter how this ends, it will be a good thing for Cryptos.  Either they will prove Tether is legit, or it will end this scheme before it grows more.

FWIW, the Tether market doesn't look too worried ... holding at 99 cents.

Deep Onion has one of the LEAST spammy signature campaign requirements of any campaign I've seen.  They require ONE post a week on bitcointalk.  The one I am in now requires 15/week.  I think people are just excited about it, because they are getting rich.  There are some "airdrop millionaires" out there now.

I was in their campaign for a while and thought about getting back in.

On Telegram, it is pretty clear they are working on the project.  But you have to know that their plan, more or less, is to wait for EOS mainnet to launch, fork it, improve it ...  then I guess there will be some kind of token swap for these ERC20 tokens they airdropping to their own "mainnet".  The idea behind this project to start with the tech of EOS, and combine that with the most widely distributed coin on the planet.  But, we will have to wait until EOS launches (mid summer???) before we see any real action.

Those "collectibles" are not really safe for trade, anyway, are they?  

I mean, even if the seller can show the physical coin's address has a balance, if they are engraved with a private key, then the seller could sweep the wallet after the sale, right?  Not to mention the creator may have kept records of the private keys engraved and waiting for a balance to sweep, as well.

What am I missing?

This really sucks.  I think Tether is a great idea, if executed properly, but they are doing nothing to put to bed the rumors that they are cooking the books.  This will only give the rumors strength.  

There is an opportunity here for someone else to fill this gap with a transparent Tether competitor, which people will flock to if they are openly audited and prove their backing funds (a) exist and are (b) properly sequestered.

They just reportedly stole 50,000 bitcoins from their "investors" ... now they are going open a new exchange where you can deposit all your various coins.  What could go wrong?

Activity over at telegram is picking up.  Up to 550 users now.  This is link I use to get there from a browser (instead of a cell phone).  I don't know if it works for everyone.

https://web.telegram.org/#/im?p=@xenon_network