I dont think it matters. If the facts check out - it's ARCH and BTCArchitect that are being questioned, not the whistleblower.

BTCArchitect has deleted an admission that the OP is in fact, onto something: (now archived) https://web.archive.org/web/20141007010353/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=754055.1520 (scan down and look for the post by BTCArchitect).

There is also this interesting discussion which appears to show something is clearly wrong with BTCArchitect's attitude. On Twitter Twitter and https://web.archive.org/web/20141007075443/https://twitter.com/trumpandpump/status/519346076932132864]archived version[/url].

Please note sometimes you have to F5 a few times for archive.org to show pages

He has been deleting posts which is quite telling...

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.

hehe, well copy paste typos, but look at the block timestamps with the provided link - I updated the spreadsheet accordingly.

Should be more clear now.

So clearly you have no idea how the blockchain technology works. 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. 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.

The IPO terms are very very clear, you just do not understand how bitcoin technology works.

An unconfirmed tx is exactly that, just an unconfirmed tx. IPO talks about confirmed in the blockchain.

No, it confirms that ~37BTC entered the blockchain after the IPO and we not refunded but instead counted towards the IPO. The terms stated otherwise.

Have you read it? There is blockchain evidence. Something stinks. If you dont read it how can you tell what is FUD and what is actually informative...

edit: more information came to light about Edgar Soares in this post

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 the IPO was between "September 09, 2014 at 21:00 UTC and end on September 30, 2014 at 21:00 UTC"



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.



screenshot

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 because block 323253 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