Sorry, I think I am lost on this part. If we could take one step backward, were you here as an early investor who previouslt planted their money and now returned to do the same once more, or as a developer team?

On a different note, I'm agree that it's very important to do in depth research and ask questions o every project we put our interest on.

What difference do your service offer from the old methods where projects lock their own token, in their own selected address, with their own smart contract locking?

Don't take me wrongly, I believe all of us here know the reason why I questioned your post. And in case someone --or anyone-- didn't, I raised this issue because nowadays there are a lot of projects who tried to fake interests and hyping up their project by asking someone --and paid them-- or one of their members to fake some questions and feign interests. Beyond's case is rather unique, because the project were merited by a trusted member, yet it had its own member asking about the project they're in, so I would really love to clear this to avoid further doubt from anyone, and me myself, in the future.

If I may ask further for the sake of clarification, does it mean the project take a drastic turn and changes since you leave them? Given you had to ask about ethical and technical issue they may raise

Ok, so let's lend you some benefit of the doubt and we proceed to discussing the project, how exactly does Locker Finance work? Do you pose as an escrow where you held other parties' fund? Do you have access to it, and what security measures set to.prevent the funds from being hacked?

So in short, the answer is, "yes Mila52 is part of our team, but they asked that question because they hadn't re-joined us, so they didn't familiar with the nature of our project"?

I can't help but notice that the interesting question came from an user with your project's signature. Given you have no bounty, and no such signature lying around freely for anyone to use, and given their personal message is set as "official street team member", with street team seems to be --the way I get it, due to the lack of info and mentions, other than two times being said in TG-- your previous project, or ar least you habe a tie in history with it, I would assume Mila52 is part of your team, hence the signature and personal message. If I am correct, then why'd they have to ask such question and thinking here while they can actually discuss it internally off screen, suppose they didn't know the answer already, given its the ethics within your projects field?

They've been taking advantage od BSC's DeFi since they're reemerged earlier this year. And I think, with how they jumped projects, goes off-communication often, and come back with another offering, it'll be hard to build reputation and gain people's trust. May I remind every body here that this account moves hand between the devs due to it being donated, and that at one point, one of this so-called dev used this account for personal use

So, after going out of radar, again, for about one and a half month, you came with another different project? Would you be so kind and enlighten us on its relation to 0x1's main project?

Those team were online and active several days ago, but they prefer to take care of the bounty thread and their stakes instead of answering serious question here. Which, for me, is rather worrysome and questionable since they've hired a top BM so they should be more focused on their ann and leave the bounty thread to their BM

#PROOF OF REGISTRATION
Forum Username: Holydarkness
Forum Profile Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=754818
Telegram Username: @Holy_Darkness
Participated Campaigns: Signature
Smart Chain (BSC) Wallet Address: 0x280E7EB232A480D142262Dc526618BaFBbdB4619

It is so unfortunate that you mentioned about grammar, because usually educated people and professionals acknowledge that English is not the first language of many people, and grammar errors are very common --this is why I didn't bring your messy English into attention. Attacking people's grammar shows (1) how low that one's intellect and wisdom is, (2) they don't have a valid point, so they have to reserve to grammar to looks good and fierce, (3) in my personal point of view, shows how little you interact and had experiences with people internationally in business manner.  Bravo. Although it is quite ironic, because I believe your grammar "intellect" is the one that puts you in this situation on the first place. I asked you, "which part of school" not "which school". I've even explained this further on the sentence that followed the question on that post. I asked you which division of education institutions you tried to penetrate, like the cafeteria where students can pay their lunch with token, or in tuition system that's paid in your token, or in the education system itself where introduction to crypto is delivered to the students in classes by your team.

Second, allow me to quote this proof where you admit chinyere popoola, who wrote a stellar review of your project, is related to you.


I lied?

Oh, a small addition, just FYI, edited --or changed, if we borrow your term-- posts are marked by this forum, and there is a system to archive every post made in this forum, you are free to track which post I edit or delete, although I didn't see the purpose behind this.

In regards to your 1st and 2nd page of lightpaper (or was it onepager-divided-into-six? It's very short and not detailed), I'd like to point out that the barrier to entry of token early sale were not just the high minimum contribution or the composition of holders-and-short-term-traders. If any ICO projects from the past 4 years ever taught anyone, there is a huge risk of rugpull and scam projects, which lead to to an opinion that a project that's already --borrowing your words-- "months after an exchange listing" is safer, because reputable exchanges filter outs low quality projects, which usually has tendency to exit-scam. With this said, I didn's see any point covering this on the proposal of your project. I assume your project didn't propose any feature to fight this known issue? If so, then what's so different between you and other existing crowdfunding platforms?

Two things to address the entire of two of your posts combined:

1. Show me which part of my post spread lies. I challenge you.
2. With all of those rant you made, you managed to spectacularly failed to answer the question. Was it deliberate? Allow me to repeat the question, in case my 70 IQ managed to mix the questions with other things so it confuses you: which part of school that you tried to reach and what's the critical thinking behind this?

Oh, come on! I was ready to drop the mother-son review --one that has a high tendency to be biased and sided-- as a poor and unprofessional judgment s well as a trick to bait people. But now you're going to reach schools? To which part of school is this? Where atudents can buy lunches with your token? Or is it to pay tuition? May I know the critical thinking behind this?

They have long abandoned the account since it is marked, so I am very doubtful that they'll  notice the protest, or even visit this thread from time to time anymore, as they'll most likely tried to go as far away as possible from this --hey, it stripped their lies. Now they do their ann and promotion on this thread with what I strongly assume as one of their alt account. To be honest, I almost joined that thread to give another protest and raise awareness for other people on said thread when they did another... "change of plan" where their so-called DeFi release delayed --Ohoo, look at that, another change of plan-- for two months.

Sorry, I was away for a while because I need to take care of some things.

Catching up from where we left it, please answer me this simple question before we proceed to question your business ethic: Do you see it fair and acceptable for a relative that is heavily tied to you --family, as you state-- gives a review which has a huge tendency to be biased and sided?

But why? If you wanted to really reward your holders, can't it be done through YPRO itself and not through developing another token? And will this YPF and YPRO swap-able to either of them? With ratio 1:1?

Here I go,

First thing I still don't understand is how you state you have 97% satisfactory, not only from how you collected the data itself, but also on the validity of the data. Simply speaking, if those 97% are satisfied, then shouldn't this new token situation not necessary? they're satisfied, afterall. While we're at it, please explain how you get this number too, did you contacted each of your buyers? How? Aren't they just an address without any name and contact details? If you can reach them to ask about feedback just from their participation on your ICO, wouldn't it be worrysome because their privacy and anonymity breached?

Second, you are completely aware that if the real issue here is ETH high fee and your community demanded you to switch chain, you can simply switch without having to another token sale, right? Plenty of tokens are switching from ERC to BSC, and all they need were swapping the token or doing a gateway, I never see a project that take another token sale just because they need to switch. Care to explain the reason behind this?

Third, your self-acclaimed achievement of good reviews, I can't help but wonder if these reviews are valid or are they made by relatives, friends, and/or paid service, a bounty you had, perhaps? Given how shallow and generic their reviews are, it seems like those people had not even tried your platform. One thing that is interesting to mention is how one from the seven of those reviewers --of we talk statistic, that's about 15%-- shared the same surname as yours. Does Chinyere Popoola related to you?

So, hopefully, one last thing I'd like to clear out before I questions about you in details, you do aware that you created a new token with whole new sale, which basically a whole new project, this is according to the majority of your members' demand?

Yet you added another token sale stage that's ultimately delayed the product launch, although you claimed that your utmost priority is product launch. And about this sale itself, as per your own post above this, it confuses me in the difference between $YPRO and the YPF, why do you need two tokens?