What makes you think that something that is worth a hell of a lot would even be sold. All I´m saying is that the anticipated value of that paycoin brand name is part of the price discovery of this coin. Notice the part
part. Now, whether what people anticipate in investments turns out to be right or wrong later is another matter. The future will tell.
If you are unfamiliar with this price discovery thing look it up.
LOL, sure, 'price discovery'! I do not think that terms means what you think it means. Let's see, XPY is a decentralised digital currency, the value of which is determined by speculative investors looking to buy and sell to each other at various times and at various prices predicated on, well, speculation on there being some sort of future massive interest in the digital coin for some reason or other. XPY does not own anything. The Paycoin 'brand' and the paycoin.com domain name are not owned by the XPY network of nodes. If anyone were to ever, and this is a big fucking if, want to purchase the Paycoin 'brand' and domain name for their own project, it would not be for the benefit of the XPY network of nodes. |
|
|
|
If and when crypto becomes all the craze in commerce a paycoin brand is going to be worth a hell of a lot, I don´t see any way around that. If and when the, supposedly registered, Paycoin 'brand' and the paycoin.com domain were ever to be worth 'a hell of a lot', where would the money from their sale go? A brand and a domain are not decentralised, they are owned by specific legal entities, persons or corporations. What I'm saying is, what on earth makes you think this fantasy 'hell of a lot' value would end up benefiting XPY bagholders? |
|
|
|
Well, I very seriously doubt that you can buy that website for $19,715
It´s just a nominal value. Who´s the appraiser anyway?
those website appraisals are bullshit. a domain is worth as much as you can find an offer for it. Exactly and no serious investor is going to want to buy in to a domain associated with this clusterfuck. Google is going to haunt that name for many years to come. |
|
|
|
Not sure why to you "maybe nominally a million dollars" means "to arbitrarily declare a value of a domain name"
maybe
adverb
perhaps; possibly.
"maybe I won't go back"
synonyms: perhaps, possibly, conceivably, it could be (that), it is possible (that), for all one knows;
Because it is wildly speculative as a figure and serves to support Vlad's absurd hype-based 'reasoning'. This is more likely to be the truth of the matter:  Although, saying that, how about this?  See, I've just done two appraisals and they are both nearer each other than anywhere near your million-dollar fantasy. |
|
|
|
paycoin.com has as such to have some value as a brand name maybe nominally a million dollars.
+1 This guy gets it. Get's what, how to arbitrarily declare a value of a domain name? Vlad, seriously, are you going to make me have to post more examples of your blatant hype/shilling practices? You *do* know you have a rich posting history to mine, right? I know how you repeatedly mention that you possess no technical skills but surely you're capable of remembering that this forum allows users to easily see the sort of calibre of shill/hype monster they are dealing with? |
|
|
|
Like I said, if I'm a liar and a scammer then dump - sell when I say buy and you'll get rich. Otherwise just shut it.
Ah, yes, the ol' "If you don't believe me then don't buy and, more importantly, STFU because you are ruining my attempt to hype this bag of XPY I'm holding" routine. Seriously, Vlad, have you read your post history? It doesn't do you any favours. At all. Maybe back in 2014 you might have made a healthy living doing all this hyping but, come on, put a little more creative effort into it will you? Repeating *exactly* the same method from a few months back is just unimaginative and tedious. |
|
|
|
I was buing blue at 150 sat [as was Brock Pierce] Brock Pierce hanging out in a Skype chatroom with you, Vorhees and Co looking to spend a few bitcoin on buying up a coin with no developer? Not only that but, according to you, asking you to 'accumulate' Bluecoin on his behalf? Sure, sounds legit. my track record is impeccable
How do you figure that when your post history proves otherwise, frequently? |
|
|
|
Secondly, I know quite a few connected people in crypto and word is that someone is working on launching a PayCoin Casino.
This would explain the mass accumulation and price manipulation which I have noticed for a few months now.
I have no proof of this and it could be bad info or misinformation but I thought I'd throw it out there.
You have no proof in any way that what you are saying is true but you thought you'd just, "throw it out there"? Bit like this when you tried to hype Bluecoin? Here are 2 PM's from Vlad2Vlad back in February when I was having it out with him. . . .
If you're being serious about your education then I will invite you to the blue room on Skype, if you're interested.
Charlie Shrem, Voorhees, Brock Pierce, Chad Russo, and other huge industry giants are currently Bluecoin buyers and regularly post in that room.
The room is by invite only but one guy I invited made me look bad so I promised Brian I wouldn't invite anymore people.
If you think I'm a pumper you can just sit quietly in that room and see these industry heavyweights discuss the future of BlueCoin.
It could be one of the best and biggest winners of 2015. Right now I'm trying to find a good coder to help with this app we have to deliver. But I need a coder who knows about telecom software code.
If you're a coder you would be a huge welcome there even if you just give advice and nothing more.
Either way, I always share my investment ideas with people and I always make it clear what the potential and what the risks are.
I'm sure you've heard if a popular guy on this forum that goes by Spoetnik, he hates scammers and is more outspoken than even you, and he was once my worst enemy, he hated me more than you. lol We are now very good friends if you can believe it cause he finally got to know me. lol
At any rate, I personally helped hunt lots of blue for Brock (it would take months to find that much blue on the open market as it's all being hoarded, just like NAUT, XPY, MAX, etc) which he bought for nearly 100 sat. So Brock is very much interested in blue but like I said, if we can't get that app done on time then BLU may not go anywhere but if we do get it done then it would be a huge winner, 40+ fold increase in the next 3 months.
Best of luck!
Seriously, Vlad, do you think you have any credibility? One might consider that your repeated attempts to talk up a big game about how 'players' are going to manipulate a market and now is the time to buy in, you know, not with more than you can afford to lose, of course, is an intentional scam. Can you defend your behaviour given that there's no good reason for it outside of your own personal gain at the price of other people's loss? |
|
|
|
It's down 97% from the peak. Volume is dying (last 24 hours, not even $20k total). Are you sure you're looking at the right chart?
The past week there has been so much unbelievable bad news that I'm still stunned. The price crashed originally but then rebounded quickly right back to .0032, on massive buys. With 14 million coins out and huge inflation and so much bad news, this coin should be at 1 penny, $.60+ is way too high if all the bad news is true and insiders have been dumping the premine [the way most here suggest]. I have seen coins with way lower floats and zero inflation, and with zero to tiny relative premines, crash so fast on way less bad news. And I do not believe traders have been buying it all up. Not with so much bad news in just a single week. So I feel there is something else going on and that's why I have been buying. We will soon find out if there is a big plan or not. Cheers! I've been trading a Long time and speculators don't put in hard floors like this. This is real money at work.
As for me, I've bought all I can afford to lose so I'm gonna wait and watch and then decide on my next move. The good news is that if I'm right - it should happen soon; one, maybe two weeks by the looks of the latest moves.
Anyone remember this? It's deja-vu all over again! |
|
|
|
I mean, has there been any strange behavior with the price - any massive accumulation I don't know, why don't we ask you seeing as this is exactly what you want people to think, which is exactly what you were claiming months ago was going to happen then, too. One this is for sure - I've studied the price of XPY and to me it looks like mass manipulation and accumulation.
Trying to get rid of your old bag or a new one? |
|
|
|
PSA: Scrypt.cc is guilty of Fraudulent Misrepresentation, a crime in every financial jurisdiction in the world. Anyone who has lost money buying or selling their fictitious 'KHS'/'MHS' token is legally entitled to recover their funds back in full.https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fraudulent_misrepresentationFraudulent Misreprentation
Under contract law, a plaintiff can recover against a defendant on the grounds of fraudulent misrepresentation if (1) a representation was made; (2) that was false; (3) that when made, the representation was known to be false or made recklessly without knowledge of its truth; (4) that it was made with the intention that the plaintiff rely on it; (5) that the plaintiff did rely on it; and (6) that the plaintiff suffered damages as a result.
|
|
|
|
PSA: Scrypt.cc is guilty of Fraudulent Misrepresentation, a crime in every financial jurisdiction in the world. Anyone who has lost money buying or selling their fictitious 'KHS'/'MHS' token is legally entitled to recover their funds back in full.https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fraudulent_misrepresentationFraudulent Misreprentation
Under contract law, a plaintiff can recover against a defendant on the grounds of fraudulent misrepresentation if (1) a representation was made; (2) that was false; (3) that when made, the representation was known to be false or made recklessly without knowledge of its truth; (4) that it was made with the intention that the plaintiff rely on it; (5) that the plaintiff did rely on it; and (6) that the plaintiff suffered damages as a result.
|
|
|
|
They are so extreme that no one is allowed to express anything outside of their narrow viewpoints. It doesn't even matter if you view what is going on as a scam, in their minds if you don't march lock step with them, without thinking or caring you are the enemy. They have only have simple goals, to scream about a scam and to never allow for any redemption from what they are currently attacking. Waaaaaa! Waaaa! Waaaa! <snip>
I do love seeing how you repeatedly resort to tone complaint instead of actually considering and, if disagreeing, rebutting, the facts being presented. It basically means you have nothing in your locker other than to whine about how mean we are being to you when the truth is, now listen real fucking carefully now, your 'fractional mining' whining is utterly and totally irrelevant to the fraudulent misrepresentation issue. A major fraud involving millions of dollars has taken place and all you want to do is ponder, "Well you can't prove they don't have *some* mining going on . . ." as though that lends anything of any fucking value to this thread. Oh, yeah, look at me and my potty mouth, still doesn't change the fact that everything I am saying is true and supported by objective reasoning and valid evidence, unlike your endless fucking tone complaints. Seriously, what is with you? A quick scan through your post history shows you consistently and rabidly calling anyone who raised concerns about anything you were invested in a, 'fudder' and using your fallacious reasoning to talk a big game about how wrong they are, only for you to frequently wind up on the ass-end of a number of scams, begrudgingly admitting that, yeah, maybe the, 'fudders' were right after all. Are you incapable of learning from your many, many, mistakes? |
|
|
|
Here, dyask, let me make this *real* fucking simple for you: PSA: Scrypt.cc is guilty of Fraudulent Misrepresentation, a crime in every financial jurisdiction in the world. Anyone who has lost money buying or selling their fictitious 'KHS'/'MHS' token is legally entitled to recover their funds back in full.https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fraudulent_misrepresentationFraudulent Misreprentation
Under contract law, a plaintiff can recover against a defendant on the grounds of fraudulent misrepresentation if (1) a representation was made; (2) that was false; (3) that when made, the representation was known to be false or made recklessly without knowledge of its truth; (4) that it was made with the intention that the plaintiff rely on it; (5) that the plaintiff did rely on it; and (6) that the plaintiff suffered damages as a result. |
|
|
|
EVERY SINGLE USER WHO HAS LOST MONEY TO SCRYPT.CC IS ENTITLED TO A FULL REFUND
Really? I don't think so! What about "every single user" who earned money in scrypt.cc? There are always winners and loosers in ponzis. And stop call scrypt a "criminal operation". It's just a ponzi site like many thousands others. No one in the world believed this was a real mining company. You're an idiot. That some users may have made money does not change the fact that every person who lost is entitled to a full recovery of their funds. The site promoted itself as a cloud mining operation, it matters not whether you think that people should have known it was a ponzi. It is a criminal operation which took money under false pretences, irrespective of whichever mechanism they ran the financials with in the back office. No jurisdiction permits that. I find these extremist viewpoints being expressed very troubling. That fact that someone can't express a point of view without being attacked for it is alarming. Extremist? HAH! Here's the thing, he wasn't expressing a viewpoint, he was claiming something which is utterly incorrect. You are entitled to your own opinion, you are NOT entitled to your own facts. Correcting someone's false assertions is not 'extremist', although your attempt to again employ 'tone complaint' smacks of more distraction from the fact you can't rebut my assertions because they are true. None of us knows the true scope of what has happened here and there is room for all of us to be incorrect. Scrypt.cc sold millions of dollars of mining power they have mathematically been proven not to own, this is criminal fraud. There is no fucking 'room' in that fact for any, "Ah, yes, but . . ." it is a fact supported by evidence. Let's assume investors are entitled to have their losses returned. While it is probably simple enough to take the sum of deposits minus withdraws to come with how much someone lost or gained, it doesn't mean people will receive back those losses. For a point of reference one can look at the Madoff investment scheme . . . blah blah rambling <snip>
*sigh* Seriously? Are you a child? Are you autistic or are you part of the scam and desperately trying to bail you and your buddy ThorSWO out of the deep shit the perpetrators of this criminal fraud are in? It matters not whether the funds can be recovered in full, every single fucking investor who made a net loss on an 'investment' which turned out to be fraudulent is legally entitled to a full recovery of their funds. Whether they get it is another matter entirely, but they remain fully entitled to it because they invested into a scheme which promoted itself as something it was not, which is fraud in EVERY financial jurisdiction. |
|
|
|
EVERY SINGLE USER WHO HAS LOST MONEY TO SCRYPT.CC IS ENTITLED TO A FULL REFUND
Really? I don't think so! What about "every single user" who earned money in scrypt.cc? There are always winners and loosers in ponzis. And stop call scrypt a "criminal operation". It's just a ponzi site like many thousands others. No one in the world believed this was a real mining company. You're an idiot. That some users may have made money does not change the fact that every person who lost is entitled to a full recovery of their funds. The site promoted itself as a cloud mining operation, it matters not whether you think that people should have known it was a ponzi. It is a criminal operation which took money under false pretences, irrespective of whichever mechanism they ran the financials with in the back office. No jurisdiction permits that. |
|
|
|
|
Dyask,
You are the one who keeps insisting on citing 'Fractional Mining' as some sort of 'best case' scenario, when it absolutely is not a positive thing in any way whatsoever.
You are the one who keeps insisting that scrypt.cc is 'only' a matter of a couple of hundred bitcoin, when they have stolen thousands and thousands of coins, making them a multi-million-dollar criminal enterprise.
You are the one who appears to actually want to downplay and minimise the very serious nature of this criminal operation.
EVERY SINGLE USER WHO HAS LOST MONEY TO SCRYPT.CC IS ENTITLED TO A FULL REFUND
THIS INCLUDES ANYONE WHO BOUGHT 'KHS'/'MHS' AND SOLD AT A NET LOSS.
Now, consider the thousands of bitcoin in 'profit' scrypt.cc have stolen, each and every coin belongs to their 'investors'. Millions of dollars of bitcoin which is owed back to their 'investors'. Once their 'investors' realise they are legally entitled to get their money back, even if they traded 'badly' on the 'KHS'/'MHS' 'market' because the whole thing was a criminal scam, they may mobilise to do so.
So, dyask, do you want to keep derailing the conversation and insist that there is some way you can call their 'Fractional Mining' a 'best case', even though it is utterly meaningless to the conversation as the entire operation is an illegal fraud, or can we get back to the business of informing people sufficiently about the actual and useful facts so that the community of people who have lost a significant sum of money might find a way to track these fuckers down and see them brought to justice, possibly recovering their stolen 'investment' along the way?
|
|
|
|
Best case: Fractional mining ... which is pretty bad. (Only really applies pre-hack) Let me explain something to you, dyask, because you appear to be conflating the notion of 'fractional mining' with 'fractional banking'. 'Fractional Banking' is when the collective total of a Bank's customer deposits exceed the total cash balance the bank possesses. It essentially means that should there be a 'run' on the Bank, a lot of customers would not be able to withdraw all their funds. While this is serious it is nothing like the concept of 'fractional mining' other than the word 'Fractional' because the customers are not 'investing' their funds (generally speaking) if they are simply holding their money at the bank for security/convenience. 'Fractional Mining' is when an organisation has sold more mining hashrate than it actually is in possession of and utilises manipulative and deceptive practices in order to perpetuate the fraud and keep it running so that more people can be persuaded to 'invest', believing it to be an actual investment product, high-risk or otherwise. This does not make it simply, 'pretty bad', it makes it an absolute criminal enterprise and the operators of this enterprise are guilty of fraudulent misrepresentation, meaning that every single satoshi of 'profit' they make, all those thousands of bitcoin they have sent to their own wallets over the months, are effectively stolen funds. Every single 'investor' who bought these fictitious, 'KHS'/'MHS' is entitled to receive their money back in full. That is tens of thousands of bitcoin. So, no, this is not some 'paltry' couple of hundred bitcoin issue, it is a major fraud. |
|
|
|
Wow, dyask, you are really starting to confirm my suspicions that you are either a shill apologist for scrypt.cc or you are autistic. Which part of the following contradiction which was highlighted in bold a number of times do you think is not a contradiction? You claim I contradicting myself but fail to point out what the contradiction is. So much for your logic. I haven't downplayed anything. I simply don't share the same views. I find your use of vulgar language and insults to be also tiresome.
As far as scams go, scrypt.cc is really small compared to LTCgear, GAW or Mt.Gox. Is it that you can't see the contradiction? Is your autism such that you don't recognise how badly you are presenting yourself in this thread? Or are you more involved in this scam than simply being a defrauded 'investor' and this whole schtick you are playing of posting rambling deflection exactly that, deflection? Up until the hack scrypt.cc was questionable and definitely high risk. Since the hack it has turned really ugly. It might come back and people might get out, but right now it is a horrible place to be stuck. I was at scrypt.cc before you even had an account here at bitcointalk. There is a lot of history there.
See, the thing is, even before the 'hack' the same math which I used (see the link in my signature) to prove scrypt.cc was lying about their mining was still applicable evidence proving they were lying about their mining. So there was no 'questionable' about it, they were fraudulently misrepresenting their operation and what they claimed to be selling/trading. That you, persistently, appear to want to keep downplaying the scale of the criminal fraud, while ignoring the facts of the thousands of btc which were fraudulently stolen from 'investors' over the last several months, really is becoming noticeable behind your rambling misuse of logic and reasoning. I stand by my observation, you are either autistic and mentally unable to see how your posts actually read, or you are intentionally behaving in this manner in order to distract from the central issue, namely, that scrypt.cc has stolen millions of dollars worth of bitcoin from people by fraudulent misrepresentation. |
|
|
|
The could be the source of the 6 THs. It simply isn't a valid point to be using.
Then why do you keep bringing it up? I haven't downplayed anything. I simply don't share the same views. I find your use of vulgar language and insults to be also tiresome. As far as scams go, scrypt.cc is really small compared to LTCgear, GAW or Mt.Gox. That doesn't mean that someone wasn't hurt a lot worse at scrypt.cc than others by those scams. However what is going on is the people on the extreme end of the scam scale are unhappy with anyone not as extreme as them. Since the "hack", scrypt.cc has been a complete scam and I haven't said it is legit. Pretty amazing how much I'm attacked just because I don't suck up the scam police.  Hahahaha, this is why I figured if he isn't a shill then he's got to be socially autistic in order to explain how he repeatedly states something and then contradicts it a few sentences later, all the while repeating things that are irrelevant to the discussion and ignoring aspects that are important. BTW, dyask, a 'tone complaint' is just another form of blatantly fallacious argument which is used to distract from the fact that you fail to rebut the points being raised and choose, instead, to complain about how they are said. You're being challenged, not because you don't 'suck up to the scam police' but because your posts are largely nonsensical ramblings containing contradictions and irrelevant statements along with assertions which appear to be an attempt to downplay the size of the scam that is scrypt.cc |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
