Just tried it out now. Splash screen is a bit weirdly sized on my device... sort of squashed at loadup. Calculations seem correct, although it crashed after shutting down and trying to restart it. I'm not sure what that little arrow thingy on the right is supposed to do (assume refresh prices)? It should state it's doing something. And not sure if the tap to go to website button works correctly, unless you meant for it to go direct to the play store. 136e9jxyh1tjUiW3dPbbnxM58S96PfP8Sx Thanks.  |
|
|
|
For those keeping score at home, Payu did have approval from the Lakota tribe to peruse crypto which I still can't understand why people can't wrap their head around that. They didn't adopt it as their only currency but is it the official currency of the Lakota as he does have the signed endorsement to peruse it and see what it can bring to them.
Official != Only
By stating it was the 1st official sovereign currency, it did seem to imply more than a signed endorsement to further investigate the coin. At best, we can call it somewhat creative marketing. But in my opinion that was the first major mistake by the creators of the coin. Rather than go for the 1st national crypto thing on the website, if they simply stated that the coin was being considered as an official currency via the signed endorsement, I think things would have went better. |
|
|
|
Amazing how no now sees the obvious scam here lol it really amazes me…IPO?! lol what a scam shit coin, the other quebeccoin is actually from people who are quebecers. JPGagnon prob started numerous other coins and is just laughing at the following he has making him money then disappearing. lol
Im def going with the quebecers, it does look like they rushed a bit but thats prob cause they saw this scam and wanted to inform ppl before they mine the wrong coin. I heard of these guys a month ago, and i met the dev at the bit coin conference in NewYork last weekend and they are legit. Good guys too. Thats why i have their back. I got you QCC !
IPO though….ahahahahha…sigh…
enjoy
An IPO in itself does not make a coin a scam. Plenty of people have also made money from coin IPOs. I agree in that it is not ideal, which is why I suggested the dev drop it originally ... yet at the same time, it has generated more income than I expected. The end result should be that the dev can work on the coin, at least for the summer months, full time if he so chooses. Any legit coin will not need to attack other coins, make up troll-like responses, nor respond in a juvenile manner. There have been numerous people here sort of testing if this dev was in fact from Quebec, including someone testing him with local slang ... and he passed easily. If you feel that the other coin is legit, good for you. It is clearly the inferior coin as specs go. And as much as people like to think they invest in coins here, in reality they aren't ... they are investing in the devs behind the coins. I have absolutely no confidence in the devs of that other quebec coin -- worse specs, juvenile behavior, and the fact that they released the coin as a copy-cat, speaks volumes. If it was legit, all they had to do was call it a Montreal Coin, a Canada Coin, or some variation thereof. |
|
|
|
|
Ugh, just now saw there is that other quebec coin now. I don't quite get it, to be honest.
You'd think that if anyone wanted to make a copy, they'd make a montreal coin... or pick something else about Quebec to celebrate. Or simply make it a canada coin or choose a different province. At least then their coin would have a chance to succeed. It's like they made their coin purposely just to try to ruin this one.
And after seeing how the brains of some people work in this forum, I wouldn't put it past them if that was simply their goal.
Anyway, it's really weird to me. And it would have been better if this was a moderated thread, even though under normal circumstances moderation isn't quite as fair. In this forum, it's the opposite.
|
|
|
|
I've followed that coin a little bit and asked some questions to the dev. I haven't taken part in the IPO, nor am really keen on the nation coin stuff, but I believe the dev is on the level. The coin shows no signs of being a shitcoin ... good features, rational planning, and the dev is going to use at least one forum member + probably bank deposit box/vault to hold the premine. Of course I can't say it's not all some elaborate scam, but if you want to go after a nation coin, this one doesn't appear to be anywhere near the top of the scam list to me. Ya and not all Nazi's gassed Jews.. some of them you just wanna give a big hug to lol seriously your posting hey as far as scams go this scam is not as scammy as the other scams (which it is obviously) hahahha Huh? What does nazis gassing jews have to do with understanding if a cryptocurrency may be legitimate or not? Just because a person says a coin appears to be on the level, it doesn't mean that person is okay with committing atrocities. Weird thought process you have there. Anyway, read the Quebecoin thread. I wasn't fond of their IPO, but the dev does seem active, has a plan, and is actually from Quebec. Just because a coin is an IPO, it doesn't mean of course it's a scam. It could be... but saying it is beforehand based on a guess is just an opinion. And my comment that this one doesn't appear to be as bad as others was more related to me questioning whatever thought process, if any, is behind some of the choices for this list. MarineCoin, MandarinCoin, AustraliaCoin... not on shit list. Shitcoins the OP made ... not on shit list. Coins nobody have heard of before, coins that will die off on their own... or coins with active devs... get put on the list. Logically it doesn't even make any sense. |
|
|
|
Most likely. In the stock brokerage trade, complaints like that are called "sour grapes." You see that kind of hurt all the time in the penny-stock forums.
But...as the behavioural-finance experts have shown, buying low and selling high is profoundly "inhuman" and hard to pick up unless you're practically raised from childhood to do it. The people who master the skill (to the extent which anyone can) tend to become really cynical as a result.
That's life in the salt mines. So it's not all that hard to see where a complainer is coming from: buy low and sell high is much harder than it looks.
The best thing to do is to get into a coin with a long-term future, hope for the best, and pitch in if you can. There were Bitcoin "bagholders" riding a 90% loss in the tail end of 2011...when Bitcoin was selling at $2. A rising tide bails out people who bought at the top of an interim bubble and have the faith to hold on.
The funny thing about Bitcoin is that some "Bitcoin millionaires" picked up their BTC on a lark in '09 and '10 and then forgot about Bitcoin completely. Strangely, forgetting about it means there's no temptation to sell early on in the bull wave to snap up a nice profit. If there's a journalist around here, the story of the "accidental millionaires" would make a great human-interest-type man-bites-dog item.
That would certainly explain the overuse of the word scam in this forum. I'm not saying there aren't a ton of real scams, but I see it being used to describe pretty regular coins way too often. I guess it is easier to say a coin is a scam, than a person simply made a bad investment. I did read about one fellow who was one of those bitcoin millionaires in some article ... I think he paid $25 for btc while he was researching cryptocurrency for a paper. Then forgot about it, and years later found out it was worth like a million or so. It was mentioned a lot, so I expect many here saw it too. If I had invested in btc, I think the only way I would be a millionaire now if I was one of those people... bought some really cheap and forgot about it. It's so tempting to sell off once a decent profit is made. Instead I vaguely heard about btc around 2010-11ish (I think), didn't know much about it, except for the fact my PC at the time was insanely underpowered, so I had no chance to mine any. Then I forgot about it. I guess the lesson learned for me is, you can't win the lottery if you don't even enter it. |
|
|
|
I've followed that coin a little bit and asked some questions to the dev. I haven't taken part in the IPO, nor am really keen on the nation coin stuff, but I believe the dev is on the level. The coin shows no signs of being a shitcoin ... good features, rational planning, and the dev is going to use at least one forum member + probably bank deposit box/vault to hold the premine. Of course I can't say it's not all some elaborate scam, but if you want to go after a nation coin, this one doesn't appear to be anywhere near the top of the scam list to me. |
|
|
|
The name of the site does sound like you do the opposite though.  The post is signed: ~BCX~ 2014 I would not be surprised at all if it is the opposite... |
|
|
|
Well lets see:
1 BTC - buying QRK, pretty much worthless now
1 BTC - buying NXT, not worth as much as before
1 BTC - buying EAC, pretty much worthless now
1 BTC - buying WDC, pretty much worthless now
1 BTC - buying MZC, pretty much worthless now Calling losses like that a scam is something I've wondered about, as many here use the term rather loosely. Why do people tend to call unwise coin purchases a 'scam'? Is it looking for someone to blame? Or do you feel that a fault with the coin that lowers its value somehow denotes it as a scam? |
|
|
|
|
Your team looks intriguing. I'm sure Smiley Suzy, Crazy Chris and Silly Sally are topnotch.
|
|
|
|
|
Coinex has kept some of my Doge in withdrawal limbo, but otherwise no real loss to scams for me. It wasn't much Doge, but still... annoys me they have it (or lost it).
I am curious what types of scams people have lost money on. Although people seem to complain a ton about shitcoins as 'scams' here, most of the real loss would logically be from bad IPOs, bad exchanges and flat out thieves.
|
|
|
|
|
Could be interesting. The shop is a good idea.
|
|
|
|
I noticed that the dev updated the wallet and fixed that recent bug going around today. Would that even be possible if it's coingen?
Making a coin and making a wallet are 2 different things. A wallet for a coingen coin can be repacked and fixed the recent openSSL bug. Please study a bit more by yourself.  Well, that is why I asked. I'm not overly concerned whether it's a coingen coin or not. So I have no desire to download multiple wallets, test, or put research in. I was just trying to get you to post in a logical manner and ask the dev to demonstrate some feature in his coin that could disprove it's coingen. That makes more sense to me than posting for weeks on end, repeatedly saying the same thing over and over. If it's possible for the dev to prove his coin is not coingen, just ask him for some evidence. |
|
|
|
For a coingen coin, the source code is almost the same as bitcoin. There won't be any super block. Hence, one needs to take time to premine the blocks one by one until the target value has reached. Therefore, for coingen coin, it is almost impossible to premine 50% (too time consuming and costly). 2.5% to 5% premining is a logical and practical move for a coingen coin.
This is also one of reasons that I believe that HKC was made by a coin generator.
Well, then to approach your issues logically -- rather than post a thousand times, or repeatedly claim scam -- maybe see if we you prove or disprove it's a coingen coin? Rather than look at similarities, maybe look at differences where it couldn't be coingen? I believe one person in the ann thread (or maybe even it was here), said two coingen wallets couldn't be open at the same time, or they wouldn't work. Yet this didn't occur with HKC. Does that disprove it's coingen, or is there a way around that? I noticed that the dev updated the wallet and fixed that recent bug going around today. Would that even be possible if it's coingen? I have no idea what traits or features can't be implemented if it's a coingen coin, so not sure if either of the above disproves it or not. But I expect there must be something the dev could do with the coin to show it's not coingen (assuming it's not). And if so, by correlation it does make it much less likely he planned to scam the premine, as otherwise he would have chosen a much larger premine to begin with. |
|
|
|
I have mentioned before. HKC should be considered as a SCAM because there is no auditing on distribution of 2.5% HKC premined to HK people via the problematic faucet. If majority of these premined coins finally are kept and sold by the HKC dev (when HKC succeeds), it can result in good amount of income.
Sorry, I meant the question in regard to HysonCorp's post. By now we all know you think the coin is a scam, for various reasons... some of which may not be so logical, but we have heard them a million times, repeatedly. I still suggest the coin is not necessarily a scam. You could say it potentially could be a scam, although you could say that about 90% of the alt coins out there too. Logically if the dev had plans to scam the premine, he would have chosen a much larger premine to begin with. He'd also have a basis to do so, since other nation coins use 50%+ premines. Yet he didn't... he chose a rather normal-ish 2.5%. So he's either honest, or a really inept scammer? |
|
|
|
|
I am curious about something. When people cry scam all over the place, do you have a different definition of scam than most rational people use?
You can say it's a junk coin, or serves no real purpose right now. That would be a valid opinion.
You can say in your opinion that the dev lied somehow, about something. But unless he profits from it, at the expense of others, it still is not a scam.
If a scam, it implies the dev is making out like a bandit somehow. The coin isn't worth anything. There is no giant premine like other nation coins use. No airdrop. No IPO.
Where is the scam exactly? Is it a scam because you think the dev may walk off with the faucet's premine? Which in its entirety might pay for a bill at a good restaurant?
I'm not going to say it's a good coin, as at this point it certainly isn't. I just find it bizarre how often scam is thrown about, just based on... well, not entirely sure what it is based upon.
|
|
|
|
|
That's actually a decent way to figure out if a dev is from a specific nation for a lot of coins here, now that I think of it. Ask them things that only native people would know.
I know on the Mandarin coin thread that the devs couldn't speak Chinese.
And on the Australian coin thread I think they got the colors for the nation incorrect.
If the dev was only born in HK, but doesn't live there now, I guess he may not know all local terminology. But he should know a decent amount about HK, I'd think. Ask him stuff only HK people would know? Things that he couldn't look up on the web, of course.
For instance, in the Quebecoin thread, a couple of people sort of tested the dev with local slang in French .. and he passed easily.
|
|
|
|
"Thick face skin" is a cantonese term which is very commonly used in Hong Kong.
If you are not brought up in HK, I could understand that you don't understand.
In English, it means "cheeky"
Ah, makes sense then ... thick face skin = cheeky. At first I thought you were trying to say I had thin skin, that is, someone who is over sensitive. Then after thinking about it some more, I was completely lost and had no idea what it meant. |
|
|
|
Interesting idea but bitcoin has wealth concentrated at the top don't you this kind of scheme will only benefit the richest?
Yeah, I was wondering about that too. Wouldn't it just duplicate one of the main faults of bitcoin? That is, a lot of coins owned by a very small percentage of people? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
