Yep, saw the whitepaper and even commented here on it.

I can see the jewelry possibly being popular, or more so the silver and gold aspect. Any possibility of silver/gold coins being offered?

And which merchant giftcards do you have lined up? For what retailers? Thanks.

How about a change of pace, and the devs talk about upcoming merchants, new things planned, and updates on other exchanges, rather than childish bickering?

I believe the devs have already stated they would be willing to pay for votes to get on MP and Cryptsy, although it's probably too early in the game to consider that. I'm not even sure if it's on any voting lists yet (expect not). Polo would be the next logical choice... also curious if the devs have been in talk there to get the coin listed. Usually it's best to get the coin on at least Bittrex + Polo, if possible, to start with. It also creates some arbitrage situations from time to time.

I removed most of my crumb btc amounts off the exchange in time, but left a bit over a million freebiecoins there. Guess nothing in life is free...

Shame, as I thought sharex was one of the better 'low end' exchanges. Sort of the least terrible out of the lousy exchanges may not exactly sound like a compliment, but it was at least an exchange I'd bother to use for offbeat new coins.

I do agree that I wish she would use a higher standard for promoting certain coins, but no need to go so overboard about it. And no need to be such a jerk either.

People should use their best judgement and not rely on spammers or those who are super gung ho about any coin. The way I look at it is, try to remove emotion and just assume every single person is potentially lying to you, and  just try to weed out those who seem to be lying the least.

So it's fine for her to do her promo stuff (she does have a blog after all, that's what they are for)... and yeah, ideally she should be a bit pickier about what coins she decides to promote. But I see no need for insults.

I agree as far as a variety of coins go.

I think longterm, something like a bitpay or coinpayments debit card will sort of be the way most merchants will handle accepting crypto. Marketplaces specific to crypto would still have a place, if the vendors agreed to a discount for specifically using crypto as a payment source.

A lot of merchants already offer discounts based on web linking (ebates, fatwallet, etc)... just translate that to a crypto discount instead + crypto gateway for conversions, and that's how I think we get mass acceptance in regard to using cryptos as a currency. Or at least more of an acceptance than currently exists, I should say.

Whitepaper is fine. There are a couple of typos I noticed at quick glance:

Some have argued that this can be commercial transactions are better served by using traditional fiat currencies and that there is no need for these digital currencies to be adopted on a wider scale.

We feel that providing such a marketplace is a win-win situation for all parties involved: the Digital Commerce coin and it's investors benefit...

I do wonder what specifically will drive merchants to use your marketplace over a different coin. I asked this early on, and was told that the dev team had some contacts or 'ins' with specific vendors. Can you name any of them at this time?

Withdrawal worked for me fine the other day, moved half of my coins to my wallet. Maybe it takes a bit more time... forget how long it took for me.

How long will staking take, by the way? Anyone know?

This is a better deal for old investors, but it's actually in their best interest not to share this news. I know it sounds weird, but the more people that invest now, the less coins for current investors, seeing as it will be a proportional split with none destroyed.

My million freebies have been lost at Sharex, apparently.

And unfortunately it doesn't make the coin rare. The coins still exist, just that they are owned by the exchange owner now. He can dump tons at any time, assuming freebies gets listed on another exchange. It could be problematic.

Before being accused of spreading FUD, this is what the dev replied to me here in this thread:


I am not spreading FUD, nor does the dev even view it as so. They made a mistake. I offered a suggestion as to how to maybe fix it. I don't expect everyone, or necessarily anyone, to even agree with it. Don't assume that negative comments about a coin are necessarily FUD, especially when the dev admits that he made a mistake.

Copying open source code isn't plagiarism. Copying an ann thread would be. There is a difference.

I'm not spreading FUD, just stating my opinions. The dev has apologized, so it's a start. I am not sure if it'll repair the damage, but there are limited options for him at this point. I guess a buy wall could be one other option (suggested this to the mil guys too), as it  gives people a way out if they so choose.

Yeah, I think a lot of people are aware of it. I really question Bittrex as to what they were thinking. Not only in regard to the copycat coin, but the fact they plan to hold ipos so close to one another now. In that thread, the dev said that bittrex may hold ipos once weekly... that's crazy to me.

Well, it sort of beats me as to how you can fix things at this point. Sure, you can fix the thread (just rewrite it entirely). But there is no way to easily fix your reputation now. It's like when a journalist gets caught plagiarizing someone else's work. They can apologize multiple times, but they typically have to hide away for a while, if they ever want to come back.

The only thing I can suggest is a restart to the coin, refund investors and re-plan everything for a later date. But I expect you'd be rather hesitant to do this. And honestly I have no idea if that would even help.

You were way too similar in format. It's not just a matter of holding the same info, it was basically a copy/paste 'fill in the blanks' type of copying.

In the real world that is called plagiarism.

Again, you can change it now, but the damage is already done, in my opinion.

And no, it's not just the opinion of a coin nor its goals that make it different. It's the devs behind the coin. We don't really invest in coins here (not just coins, I should say), we invest in the devs behind them. And you were either too lazy to even write up an original announcement, or used such bad judgement that you thought by copying a successful ipo ann, yours too would be successful. I mean, it's barely any better than the Ethereum256 coin ann  (devs figured people would somehow think their coin was associated with the real Ethereum project).

So you can argue that it doesn't matter, but it really does. It shows absolutely horrible judgement on your part.

One a week? Once a month would be plenty. And that even assumes there is one decent coin a month to run as an ipo. If you said every 2 weeks, maybe, if decent coins were available. It usually takes a new ipo coin 2-3 weeks to even find its floor. What may occur is simply propagating the pump and dump mindset even more than it already is, where people will hop from ipo to ipo... until they aren't profitable. And then the entire thing gets run into the ground and crashes, where nobody trusts ipo coins at all.

And yes, the thread is the similarity. That is the problem. If a dev copies another coin's work (I don't mean open source code, but the thread in this case), it does make one question both the integrity of the developer and their judgement. People already are skeptical of all ipos... they see you start a new one, copying the same exact format as a recent popular coin.

What should they think? Hey, this guy is honest and knows what he is doing? Or this guy is doing a quick money grab, doesn't have morals, and just goes around copying the same exact ann format that belongs to another coin?

Have you maybe considered that it may not be in your exchange's best interest to constantly offer ipos so close to one another? Especially ipos that basically copy the ipo you just held?

If ipos occur every couple of days, you'll run them into the ground. Some standards need to be in place. DCM did it right... doesn't mean we now need 20 copies of that same ipo.

That's what would really scare me about this coin. Even if it manages to hold its own pricewise, I'd be afraid of dumps. Even LCL was in the ballpark of ipo prices for a while, until miners really destroyed the coin.

There is of course some logic to this, but when I say a buy wall, it's not like you are supposed to keep it there forever. I forget how long the LCL guy kept it up (not long, as his weird double priced ipo didn't work out so great), but just enough to be a safety net. If things turn really sour, really quickly, at least it's a way out for those who invested. At the same time, if things go well, the buy wall won't even be hit.

It's basically betting on your own coin. If you don't feel confident enough to offer a temporary buy wall, why should people feel confident enough to invest?

Of course not all ipos needs to do the buy wall thing, but to be honest, there are a number of red flags for this ipo. And if an ipo doesn't even sell out, it's not a great sign as far as how the price will go.

He needs to agree to put up a guaranteed by polo buy wall after the ipo is over, if he wants to sell out. It may mean less money for him, but there isn't enough trust otherwise. I won't say people won't make money on this, as who knows....  but to me it's super risky.