Personally I'd be happy with trade media coverage and it should have been done even before the protocol went live. Hell, they should have had a trade journal informed about this as it was happening.

They spent too much time with shonky websites that got pulled apart by techies who know how to drill through the web, when they should have shown all participants in the trade agreement were willing to put their industry rep on the line to a trade journal instead.

Ok, now that's looking a little more substantial.

How about something related to the shipment they say they are doing for Rivaa? Even a manifest would do.

See, that's when you make any rational argument you might have completely worthless, son.


You are screaming abuse at me over your failure to understand how commodities trading works? How's that again? You can't wrap your head around a new perspective yet I'm the stupid one?

I'm interested in facts, not FUD, critical thinking, not ad hominem name-calling.


As a concept, this project might, MIGHT, be one of the most daring and ingenious start-ups in crypto. But I have a lot of valid concerns about how badly it is being presented. This doesn't mean the concept is wrong, just the people and structures behind it might be.

Guys, really?

I'm not FUDing in this thread, I ask questions and seek answers, I do not seek to spread more crap on top of other crap.

Seriously, if you think the concept of what was proposed doesn't make sense, it's because you don't understand it.

Honestly.



I'm still very much doubting that this project is genuinely what it claims to be, but that doesn't mean the concept isn't startlingly ingenious.

Commodity, not currency. Learn the different chaps.

I doubt there were that many and Mintpal said that if anyone could show they had lost out then they'd compensate them.

Erm, that's just making you look ill-educated about commodities trading Mike. The concept is great, the question is whether this particular project is kosher.

Let's not go off-topic here. I don't necessarily think that past business internet footprints are representative of anything much today.

We should be looking solely at the facts we have today, with regards to The URO Foundation and, most importantly, GES claiming to be supplying to Rivaa, with Rivaa paying GES in URO.

That is all that matter in terms of the birth of a crypto commodity.

My concerns is the lack of documentation to support GES being able to actually supply Rivaa with the UREA for the first deal. That's all we need to establish, why would it be such a big deal to show that GES has the UREA on its way to Rivaa?

The concept is great, crypto as commodity, but if this project is genuine, its been a mess of an implementation.

Nilesh and Bohan are part of GES, but GES is getting pissed at Bohan for working so much on URO? I just can't understand why when GES claims to be the 'Global NIER' in the URO Foundation agreement.

It doesn't make sense why the major partner in the whole NIER situation would criticise Bohan for working so much on the one project that he's supposedly responsible for that's meant to revolutionise their business.

Apparently its just a failsafe response Polo have for if there's a glitch.

Mod says it'll be back up shortly.

Dude, will you please stop making these posts, you're just coming across as being desperate now.

Nobody is questioning Rivaa's situation. They are doing their FIAT-based UREA deals with Indian Potash as normal, that doesn't affect the URO situation one bit. It is about trying to get confirmation that GES has actually supplied or is supplying Rivaa with UREA for URO in payment.

That Rivaa has said they will pay for UREA with URO doesn't mean much either, who'd turn down the chance to say yes to buying a commodity at a fraction of the price?

It's all about whether ANY of the Uro Foundation NIERs has or can show that they will be delivering UREA to a customer who has paid in URO.



It also doesn't help when the URO Foundation facebook page does dumb things like referencing a Science20.com article that cites GES, when the truth is that they only mentions GES because they cut and paste a stock picture from the GES website. The article was nothing to do with GES.

That is why there needs to be independent references being made other than GES, because both GES and URO Foundation have far too many questionable aspects to them.

So I raise concerns about how there has been no mention of URO outside of GES and you link me to a GES web announcement which, let's be honest, only actually shows a document relating to a contract in January between IPL and Rivaa which, while it might confirm Rivaa's, FIAT, role in a trade with IPL, doesn't serve to prove anything more than that.

Again, where is there a mention of URO outside of GES, other than crypto news? UREA trade journals would be all over this.

You see, your posts are starting to really unsettle me, you appear to have simply moved into the "just buy coins now before it's too late", mode of response without actually being willing to have a discussion related to some pretty important facets of what was asserted clashing with what is now being asserted.

Nobody other than GES has released information about URO. There have not been any other mentions of it in trade journals or news outside of the crypto world.

So all the reports we are getting that are claiming to be confirmation are, in fact, simply GES web-based announcements.

Indian Potash did a deal with Rivaa for FIAT and, while Rivaa have apparently been willing to send an email to say that they will do a trade in URO, this would actually be them buying UREA with URO, meaning they get to agree to receive tons of UREA at a fraction of the equivalent FIAT price at this time, so there's little reason to question why they'd agree to it.

Either way, there would be an immense amount of interest at trade-level for what is happening, yet there are not independent mentions of it anywhere.

Don't talk to me like I am an idiot, I'm being more than reasonable with you.

But seeing as you want to play that card, sure, this is what Bohan actually said about the Hong Kong company

All I am wanting to establish is why Bohan criticised those who questioned the legitimacy of the Australian office by telling them they should have been checking Hong Kong when, three days ago he writes that the HK office is nothing to do with it either.

I gotta say, that's a pretty meaningless response to my valid concerns. This isn't about faith, it is about objective proof of what is actually taking place.

I'm willing to be open-minded about this project but there are aspects to it that run contrary to the claims being made. It is unreasonable for you to just demand that people simply 'believe'.

Green Earth Systems are directly part of this coin's launch yet Bohan says he is leaving them because they are pissed at him for spending too much time on this project? Surely they should be applauding him for the work being put in considering the amount of money at stake here?

It doesn't make sense, also, that he first said that GES Australia were not the office to be examining as the critics should be looking at the Hong Kong office, yet the pastebin IRC chat I have has him saying that GES Hong Kong is nothing to do with it either.

Except is hasn't been confirmed by anyone other than GES and the contract documents so far relate to Rivaa's FIAT deal with IPL.


Not outside the crypto industry, which is surprising, I would have thought this would be reported by now in the associated industry journals.

Erm, I'm not sure if I should post the link here. I'm genuinely torn over whether a bit of sloppy work with paste-bin being used to save a private conversation should result in complete public exposure.

Suffice to say that, at this point, I know that Bohan is stepping down from GES because he says the accounts department, apparently, are pissed at him for not doing any other work for GES while he's been working on URO. You can ask him if you like, he'd be a fool to deny it because he'd have to know that I have come across the paste-bin IRC transcript.

But that seems kinda weird for GES 'accounts department' (where are they located BTW?) to be complaining to him about a project that, if it became successful, would net the company a fortune from being primary adopters.

No, the information I came across has him intending to leave Green Earth Systems.

As they are part and parcel of the roll-out of this project, it could look to some like he's getting ready to bail.

Well that's not really true, though, is it? Evidence of coins being put into batches is not evidence of legitimacy and not having dumped at .05 isn't either. I don't think the .05 market price would have been able to provide much of a cash-out as the time period was so small for the initial spike.

What is needed is independent clarification from boots-on-the-ground (journalist) in India who can confirm these things.

By the way, if Bohan is the man behind this project, why would he be stepping down, that doesn't make sense to me, especially at such a critical time.

Let me clarify, I mean him leaving GES.

Then, by that measure, 'everyone' is a misinformed idiot. The Bitcoin blockchain has been rolled back in its early history, too, but people didn't start screaming about teh injustice of it all and that it couldn't be trusted and, as has been pointed out numerous times, VRC is still a decentralised currency, if the majority of wallet holders didn't agree to the rollback then Pat and Mintpal would have found themselves sitting alone on their own little fork.

How does this issue relate to a PoS weakness?

BTW, VRC has value-added services which, at this time, are centralised, it doesn't mean to say that people don't value them or find them extremely useful. This rabid hysteria against VeriBit or VeriSend is absurd considering the naysayers are more than happy to use centralised point-of-sale webs services for transactions involving bitcoin.

Right well I'm going to reserve judgement either way at this point. I don't think that evidence of crappy websites and business changes is evidence of scam, but there is not quite enough proof of the big UREA trades actually occurring through URO payments either.

The URO foundation might be on to something staggeringly innovative, but most people here have been burnt plenty of times by outlandish business propositions, so while I am more open to the idea that things are done differently for Indian UREA trades, it'll probably take some sort of confirmation from an independent industry source outside of GES.

I'm sure they could get an Indian journalist or industry association rep from the region to verify with the companies who are actually moving the physical goods around whether it is legit or not.

Still, if it turns out to be a poorly executed, but genuine trade concept, I think there is plenty more room for others to consider attempting same but with a better approach that could establish market confidence a lot earlier.