|
Мы сообщим как только подключим EGGS в личных кабинетах
|
|
|
|
Isn't 30,000 btc (22 million $) what you guys are asking as final goal to develop the technology a little excessive? I know that you guys don't work for free but don't expect to reach the final goal i doubt It'll even reach the first goal. Also, BTC probably will go to above 1000$ so you guys will end up having much more $ than thought.
I invested in this so don't get me wrong i just want to make sure i did the right thing, I just heard that with what you guys already raised is enough to start this thing going, you guys also probably will have some part of the total amount of generated tokens, but you guys also will have the money raised from the ICO to "develop" the technology? So you'll have all the money of the ICO and if the tokens price skyrocket in the future you'll have even more and even more if btc price goes to above 1000$ in the near future. This looks really suspicious from my point of view.
The whitepaper is hard to me to understand, so sorry for my ignorance.
No worries, but not at all. There are just things like cross-blockchain support (very very hard to do), private DAOs (also very hard to do), hackathons (not cheap), partnerships with incubators (also not cheap), high-level branding firm (that alone costs $40k+/month), futarchy based DAOs that just simply will not occur, or would have to occur through some other means. I've seen clients spend $10+ million to upgrade a reverse auction system for tires (and other parts)... 15 years ago, so no $22 million is not excessive not for a technology that changes how organizations get funded and make decisions that is a major shift from how humans have been making decisions over the last few thousand year. If you think you can pull together a team to do all that for cheaper, do it well and have them stick around for a few years because it will take 5-10 years for this to get traction like any new technology, please by all means help humanity out and do it! In any case, we can get the basic system out, and want to present the community with the option of funding the extras which many of the potential DAOs we speak to would like to have. If not then perhaps other projects will seize on the opportunities we highlight here:  And as far as btc going over $1000 or other future predictions. There's an old saying: a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Some analysts say that this current price range of BTC is the top end of the value of being stuck at 3 TPS. There is no solution in plain site, and therefore it is just as likely that in February BTC is worth $400 as people start looking for more flexible, scalable solutions; hence why we also took ETH, ETC, LTC and XRP to hedge against budget constraints should BTC continue to see challenges. |
|
|
|
Hello Team,
I sent XRP donations from POLO. Is there an issue/problem sending donations from an exchange. Must we send donations from a wallet. Are my donations OK.
Great project!
Thank you very much
if you don't see the transaction come through send an email to support@wings.ai and one of the team members that is familiar with XRP will help you. |
|
|
|
If the ICO money is just for developing the technology then how DAO members will fund projects/proposals?
+1 You all should read the white paper.  https://wings.ai WINGS is a platform for proposing, valuing and forecasting on the success of a project, providing the smart contracts for taking in funds as well as project governance (decision making). As well as other add-on Dapps like chatbots to make interactions with a DAO easier and accessible via mobile; or the WINGS bounty application to allow projects to engage, develope and reward their community for various tasks necessary to the realization of the project. Just like kickstarter and indiegogo (or other crowdfunding platforms for that matter) do not keep stacks of money waiting for projects to come along, neither does WINGS. WINGS provides the platform and the community to suss out which projects are good, value them, put forecasts on if they will achieve their milestones, and a project governance layer so that project funders: a) can get a curated list of projects that are judged by the WINGS DAO community to not be scams b) get a valuation of the project from the community, so that they can get an idea of how much the project should raise or is valued at c) get forecasts on the ability of the project team to execute and deliver on milestones d) get control over project governance and make decisions as a DAO in case something goes wrong and if the project team needs the DAO to make certain decisions (i.e., how big should transaction blocks be, or how should fees operate, or should we approve some new code upgrade). This (a) lowers risk for people, and (b) puts power back into the hands of people who fund a project. |
|
|
|
wings.ai can you tell me what is going to happen if the first goal is not reached? What will happen to the less than 5000 btc raised?
Also i still don't understand what will happen to all the money raised (please don't tell me to see roadmap) I don't understand the roadmap, to me is just a bunch of letters that doesn't tell me anything, the last DAO of slock.it that failed, at least all the 100 million dollar there raised was strictly to fund projects of proposals posted by the own DAO members. With your Roadmap is just telling me, first 5000 raised will be for enabling chatbot v1, who cares about chatbot? I don't know why i have the impression that you guys are charging for the technology? Like with 5000 BTC we'll enabling you THIS, Instead of with 5000 BTC the DAO members will have 5000 BTC to decide which proposal(s) they want to fund.
Please enlighten me.
Chatbots are helpful many times. You don't have to visit website to perform some functions. You can instruct chatbots to perform some functions. They would be using the money raised for developing the technology. No, they are not using ico money for funding the proposals. Wings does not fund any proposal. It would be users of wings who would invest in them after Wings Platform is launched. This is indeed correct. WINGS is not a "fund". Regarding chatbots, this has been part of the WINGS story since Day 0 and we believe necessary to mainstream people to interact easily with DAO smart contracts. |
|
|
|
We all know the reasons all these guys are running to Switzerland to register the company (called now foundation), they are only going there to protect themselves not the investors. In my country most of if not all corrupt officials have been accused to have Swiss bank accounts because the country allows for some kind of protection for these people. I will appreciate it, if you guys will stop running to Switzerland to register your company. You are just talking novice investors for granted.
Donor: a person who gives money or goods to an organization
You should really check the updated Swiss laws, after all the scandals you have mentioned Swiss got so much pressure, that it basically did a 180 flip and now one of the most transparent countries in the world. For example: http://www.taxavoidancestrategy.com/why-former-tax-havens-like-switzerland-and-luxembourg-are-no-longer-tax-havens/As per the donor definition you brought, the full definition also means that you don't get anything back, while with Wings (and any other crypto projects) you get a trade-able token which may appreciate in value due to the demand created by the platform adoption and the network effect. |
|
|
|
I was shock to see the terms DONATION on their website, I'm 100% certain that most people did not read the terms and conditions and decided to invest blindly, I don't think the so called donors see themselves as donors but investors. I think something needs to be done to protect investors. Can wings team tell me they will go for funding from VCs and will tell them they are not investors but donors.
Being a non-profit foundation, Wings will not (and can not) apply to VC capital. We will remain solely community funded. As stated several times before, we have exactly the same structure (and even the same auditor) as the Ethereum Foundation. In fact, you are welcome to compare the Swiss registrar entries: This means we are obliged not just to the campaign participants but actually to the Swiss government as well, which expects us to deliver a working product and audits how the collected funds are used. This makes "running" with the money completely impossible. Regarding the foundation tokens, as it was previous mentioned (and emphasized in Wings Terms of Campaign), they will be locked in a vesting mechanism and be released to foundation members gradually over the time. |
|
|
|
Perhaps people see glaring red flags and are avoiding it like the plague The biggest red flag of them all is as many people here have correctly voiced concern about- The team's incessant use of "donation" plastered in all of their marketing and on their site that is making people uneasy about "donating" lol. Let's put our rationale caps on, would you go in and buy a car or a TV or invest in a stock, where the salesperson tells you that the funds you are paying the company are "donations" to them?? Speaking of Golem for example, there are also no investor relations with the participants whatsoever, you are welcome to comb through their agreement, and see they giving tokens in exchange for the transactions - exactly as we are doing: https://golem.network/doc/GNTterms.pdfHowever as Wings can be used to launch any kind of projects (possibly nefarious as well), we had to go extra step in order to make sure everyone participating in the project will be completely protected, and designate all activity as a non-profit foundation, sponsored by the community donations. Additionally, they also flat out admitted that have been bribing people to create twitter hype. Contrary to them claiming this is the norm, this is actually not true. Let's take a look at ICONOMI. This is straight from their site: ICONOMI provides an opportunity for investors looking for high profits, not possible in the old economy. With newly developed financial instruments, ICONOMI will drive new investors and fresh capital into decentralised economy.
Giving incentive (either in form of bounty in crypto area, bonus points in mainstream, etc...) is a common practice to boost project awareness. ICONOMI did exactly the same as well. Regarding them designating their campaign as investment, we preferred to follow our experienced legal partner advise, especially with the SEC rumored to take interest in ICO's lately. I implore people to put 2 and 2 together and see this for the scam it is. The other coin to make a big use of "donation" is Synerio AMPs and the donators lost 70% off the bat after the insiders dumped immediately after the ICO was over.
If you read the Wings Terms of Campaign, you will see that foundation tokens are locked in a vesting-like contract, and will be gradually released over the time, making impossible for any foundation member to sell a large portion of them immediately. |
|
|
|
This guys is full of shit. If you don't see how much of a scam this whole campaign is, then you deserve to lose all your money.
It appears that you have something personal against our project or / and team, otherwise I find it hard to explain how you mixed so much negativity into a single post. Still, you took the time to raise your concerns in public, and we feel obliged to answer on them. There are no legal and regulatory laws preventing any company from having legitimate investors. If they really are confident in their product, then they shouldn't have any issue with calling investors what they are (or are they too scared to have REAL obligations to deliver). Investors clearly understand the risks of investing, but calling them "donators" is just pretty much robbing you in broad daylight. Which company out there calls people "donators"?? You buy a stock of a company, you are an investor and shareholder flat out. When Facebook, Twitter and Google conducted their IPOs, did they ask for "donations".
You really should look into SEC regulations including Howey test for unregistered securities, and how SEC can pursue any company worldwide that has even a single US based investor, before posting such statements. Rather than rushing into ICO (which we could do as early as June), we spent 5 months deeply studying the subject, including working with one of the leading legal companies, in order to set up the best available structure that will protect us, our users and the companies that will be using Wings. Designating any transaction as a donation is a part of the structure, and it has nothing to do with any of the other reasons that you have mentioned. For the matter of fact, one of the most successful altcoin projects Ethereum, was also set up as a non-profit foundation (and actually done by the same legal team), would you accuse them as a scam because of that? This scheme brings into mind Synerio AMPs where Dor Konforty ran with the same "donation" scam and fucked over all his "donators" when they lost more than 70% of what they put in before they even got their coins. Guys, please wake up. You have a snake oil salesman who is pretty much selling you snake oil and not even hiding the fact that its snake oil. Do not "donate" to this fucker who will steal your money. These guys (and I believe many are ex crypti) are all part of the same developer cartels that copy, develop, pump and dump the coins that you won't hear about in a years time. Just look at what happened with Lisk, the DAO, and Synerio AMPs.
We don't have any relation whatsoever to Synereo, which also to my best knowledge is a US LLC company, rather than a Swiss non-profit foundation. Same with the DAO, and the only relation to Lisk, is that we shared same team with its founders (Max and Olivier), taking no part in Lisk campaign (beyond supporting Crypti until the transition to Lisk was completed). I'm sorry if you lost any money on these projects, however you really should address these concerns with these project leaders, rather than projecting this experience on us. It worth emphasizing that one of the main reasons that Wings was established in the first place, was to bring more accountability to the crowd-funded projects, and returning control back to the project backers via DAO mechanics. We hope that once people see the benefit in such control over projects, they will demand from the project creators using Wings or / and similar platforms, in order to make sure the creator sticks to the original commitments, including how many project tokens the creator has access to. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
