These are your own words bud, so if you are arguing against them you are arguing against yourself: "the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies"


I don't think I am smart, those are your own words- you're the smart one!
Unless you are arguing against yourself, in which case that isn't very smart...

I'm just ecstatic that you finally agree that the burden of proof is on qtum who has declared they raised over 15 milion USD but provided absolutely zero proof to support that. And that the burden does not lie on me since I am simply denying that claim. This means you are going to help me pressure them for this proof, right? Really looking forward to you asking qtum to provide the proof now that you admit it is their responsibility! Glad you are on our side for once!

Or do you want to admit you are a lying hypocrite? Which will it be?

You can't weasel your way out this time, those are your own goddamn words.

Going up on nothing, just wait til there is something!

Fair enough, I'll remove that part of my post but can you respond to the rest of its content- ya know my actual points?

And I hope you can at least understand the suspicion though when tons of newbie accounts are near simultaneously registered with the sole purpose of defending a singular project. Sockpuppets/shills are very much so a real thing and quite prevalent on this forum.

This is true, and we already see dividend paying tokens such as TIME on bittrex. I think the team purposely doesn't want the shares traded on bittrex or poloniex although it's not yet 100% clear to me why I do have my suspicions.

I saw that, doesn't change the fact they haven't revealed the ICO funds and that, now, based on stackoverflow's own logic they should do so. That is all I am asking for at this point. Can you think of one good reason they would hide the funds aside from needing to hide something about them? Every other legit project has revealed this info on their own accord immediately following the conclusion of their ICO.

And to be an advisor does not mean much by itself, Peter Todd was an advisor to the scam coin Viacoin. They paid him and that was enough to convince him it was legit and to work for them and as a result his name was unknowingly used to pump up and legitimize a scam. We already knew there are big names (Roger Ver, etc) "associated" with qtum, but I'm not so foolish to let that alone satisfy my suspicions because in the past big names have been associated with scams, often unknowingly. And we know for fact that Dai scammed a previous coin (BitBay) under the nose/behind the back of the rest of the unknowing team and its associates. So in otherwords, there very much so is precedent for my suspicions here.

Honestly, if they could just prove they raised the money they claim they did I would admit I was wrong about that and give the project the benefit of the doubt until the release. But appearently they are unwilling or incapable of that simple task which says one thing to me.

Lol ok you are an obvious troll or a simple idiot if you think kraken is a "scam exchange". They are more legitimate than any other altcoin exchange right now in terms of compliance with the law. And they have multiple options for secondary security you can select from, you can use 2FAs and/or secondary passwords when logging in, when making trades, and when depositing or withdrawing. True, email verification is not an option but don't try to act like that is the only way to provide secondary security. If you use both a secondary password and 2FA to enable withdraws that is just as secure as email verification.

I love when your own words/posts work against you. Makes it almost too easy.

"All people here stand on one of two sides" tell me stackoverflow, aside from you and maybe 2-3 other people (not counting the obvious sockpuppet accounts that were made days ago) how many users here stand on the side of qtum? Go ahead and list them and then when I get a chance I will list all the users who stand against it (will take me considerably longer to assemble that list).

But this is my favorite, so freaking perfect and I almost can't believe you were foolish enough to say this given everything: "the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies"

So, that means without a doubt that you agree that the burden of proof is on qtum who has declared they raised over 15 milion USD but provided absolutely zero proof to support that (when all they have to do is share the addresses)   we are simply denying that claim, so the burden does not lie on us. Thank you! This is exactly right and what I've been saying all along! So can we get that proof now? You are with us in asking for the proof now clearly, right?

Your own words are now a direct contradiction to a stance you so adamently cling to here (that qtum doesn't need to provide proof), you have just admitted yourself that the burden of proof lies with them in regards to those funds. Thank you for finally agreeing!

Looking forward to seeing how you try to weasel out of your own words.

Actually we appear to have succeeded brilliantly, seeing as how they didn't raise any money at all! No addresses with funds in them whatsoever   feelsgoodman!

Meanwhile everybody on this forum knows you're nothing other than qtums loyal dog, as evidenced by your post history especially your failed attempt to discredit Gleb by fraudulently manipulating an image. I can't thank you enough for doing that, as it proves beyond a doubt you are full of shit to everybody.

And btw we can do whatever we want so no, I won't go away. I love how that's all you can do now to defend this shit, just beg and plead with everybody to pull a veil over their eyes and walk away.

Here's a good place to start: https://medium.com/@icocountdown/due-diligence-pack-for-qtum-7369ef48917b#.a6bqulp3k

And here's a link to the previous project Dai scammed: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=890531.msg17942817#msg17942817

And this is Gleb: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=349097
You can find additional dirt on this project not contained in the medium.com post by looking at his past posts in this thread (and other threads, for example you can see the thread he started to get help from the mods to prove that stackoverflow manipulated an image to try to make it look like Gleb was extorting him for money- a good example of why you should not believe a thing stackoverflow says: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1813991.msg18070334#msg18070334 and you can also find all the previous scams he was successful in spotting prior to this one)

Oh boy you're going to love their (lack of) communication with global investors here... They won't even provide the ICO fund addresses so that investors can verify the funds exist and watch what is being done with them. It's been a while now since the ICO has ended, and still no proof of funds. They won't even respond to requests for proof with any explanation or excuse, not that there can possibly be a good one. There is only one logical reason not to provide the proof, and that is to hide something.

It's simple. He is either a paid shill or a member of the team. Don't believe me? Just look through his post history and decide for yourself.

Dash and Eth are both a part of ICNx. And Eth is one of the currencies they hold from the ICO for ICNp investing, so in that way it is a part of ICNp too.

They have said they plan to greatly increase the number of projects they invest in for ICNp in the near future. Last I checked they still have around 19 million USD worth of funds for ICNp investing in the form of BTC, ETH, and LSK that was collected during the ICO (they were smart and decided to use their fiat first allowing all those cryptos to appreciate in value since the ICO hence how they have significantly more money now in terms of USD than they did at the conclusion of the ICO).

I imagine their top prioirty right now is finishing up and releasing the platform. Give them some time before labeling them too conservative, they have barely gotten started yet. IMHO everything so far indicates the team knows what they are doing, perhaps even better than they may lead one to believe.

Freaking idiots... you would have said the same about Ethereum before it broke out. This isn't a pump and dump coin, go run along and play with your little toys elsewhere and leave the real projects to the adults.

Still patiently waiting for addresses for the ICO funds, something that should have been provided ASAP after the ICO conclusion.

Jesus dude you don't have to repost every single article in full, you aren't even linking to the article you are literally including them in entirety in your posts.

No not really it's an ideological question, they need to show support for one or the other (or both) to help decide which one performs better and which one will be adopted just like every other BTC service provider. And BU is a blatant attack on bitcoin to weaken it so if they show support for BU I am probably going to bail.

Besides, isn't it true that the way BUtcoin is designed once it forks off if Bitcoin core ever gets back the majority of hash rate the BUtcoin chain is reorganized (deleted)? If so, there is no way in hell BUtcoin is a safe thing for them to hold as part of ICNx. Could literally have the assets disappear overnight.

People should be reporting this to wikipedia, they have provided no proof of it when it is simple to do and all those other projects it is listed with have done so.

I mean support as in which will they include in ICNx, and which they will allow to be used on the platform. I guess they could just do both for these things too like you said but I don't think it would be wise to keep BUtcoin in ICNx and by doing that or allowing use of BUtcoin on the platform they would be showing support for it and strengthening and legitimizing it as well.

Exactly, BU is a shady ass attack at bitcoin to weaken confidence in it (most likely originating from bank and government entities that see it as a growing threat to fiat currencies and the old economy) and it is being led in part by Roger Ver. Would be so fucking awesome if the satoshi addresses did dump BTU when it splits haha that would be the most amazing thing possible especially considering Roger Ver keeps on trying to pitch emotional appeals to authority to satoshi as a reason why BU should be implemented.

But perhaps you should ask your qtum superiors whether they will support BU or SegWit, because so far Ver has been pretty adamant about pushing any project he is involved or invested in towards supporting BU.

I wonder which bitcoin Iconomi will support, bitcoin core (segwit) or BUtcoin? Better be core or I lose all hope.