I was just pointing out that they were telling their promoters to stop promoting it and getting legal advice after the cease and desists before they shut down the lending, as I didn't know before. So possibly they decided they had to shut the lending down. Obviously, it wasn't anything to do with the health of the lending system itself as everyone was happy with it, not least bitconnect with the profits they were making from it. Some people thought the interest was too low as they were used to the newer ones paying more than 2% per day at the beginning such as DavorCoin.
The fact they decided to comply with and stop lending in those states (they were going to refund the loans) doesn't mean it had any merit. Everyone seems to misunderstand bitconnect, that's for sure.
They didn't just "stop lending in those states". They shut it down for everyone. Why not just for Texas residents? Assuming you are in USA, are you going to stop purchasing in ICOs if it's classed a security? Even Gleb had an ICO. TokenPay was a recent ICO that started with good legal advice and accepted US residents and in the middle of it decided it had to refund all US participants and exclude them from the ICO. It seems that Americans can't purchase in many ICOs and that is nothing to do with fraud.
Some states probably got a lot of people complaining to them about bitconnect but obviously not anyone actually invested in it and making lots of money. So I don't see how you don't think it's your fault for shutting them down.
Huh? It's my fault now? Let's see, if I say that Netflix is a shitty investment - will they fold tomorrow? And no, I'm not purchasing ICOs and that has nothing to do with what the government has to say about them. OMG my Netflix just stopped working, please please take back what you said, I'm only half way through Orange is the New Black. |
|
|
|
You are wrong that they didn't dump https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bcc/#!overview go look through the days of the crash to see Millions of BCC hitting the exchange. Those green candles you saw are them selling, and can be achieved by breaking all walls down to less than 10% of the price and then placing new, bigger sell walls for people to buy into. Seeing a number on the screen means nothing, people thought that Zenpool was mining but it turned out to just be a script. But there is no BCCX Block explorer, and there is no escrow so you don't know anything anyways. Most likely scenario is that they just keep all the BTC and sell all the BCC that comes in for the ICO for more BTC once walls increase because it seems like a good deal to be able to buy BCC for $17 so that later on you can sell it for $150  Another nutty one. I already showed you the volume from coinmarketcap (which includes EVERY exchange combined). There was barely a few million $ in volume (meaning less than a million BCC was sold). They were all just panic sellers thinking the price would go to nothing. There was no volume before it to suggest any insider trading either. Remember also that their internal exchange opened a couple of days later at the normal $200+ price. Many people who were waiting for it to open again sold for $200 instead of $30 at other exchanges. The BitConnectX ICO is clearly selling out within seconds every day. The fact they were raking in $13million before on each round (selling 260k BCCX at $50 each) then the BCC offer (of $150 per BCC) means that on current prices they are losing well over $10 million each day if buyers are using BCC instead now (which shows how stupid your argument is that they were the ones dumping for a measly few million dollars and it's not as if they could do it secretly on the blockchain either).On the day Bitconnect closed the lending they still were only offering to exchange BCC at $22 or whatever the market price was for the BitConnectX ICO but the next day they upped it to $150. So if they hadn't offered that price, they would be making over $10million more each day in the ICO (assuming most people don't use BTC any more for the ICO - as it would be pretty stupid to). They must know the BCC will go up to previous levels again. Don't you see how your argument doesn't make sense (I know I haven't explained it very well but it seems obvious they haven't cheated anyone - they can't control users dumping the coins after releasing them all) ======================== That is true if they are really selling BCCX coin with $150 BCC. I am not convinced they are selling any. Has anyone truly bought any BCCX coins with BCC coins from Jan 20 onwards? It is possible that they are prioritizing BCCX sales to other currencies like LTC and BTC. I had LTC and I was able to buy BCCX coins very easily but not any using BCC coins for payment. The time outs without confirmation do not make sense as when I made purchases using full BCC value of $290 before 17 Jan using BCC before the nose dive one time I missed the purchase on reset time but I never got a timeout, it came back and said try again tomorrow all sales made for the day. I doubt they are losing any money due to BCC sales at $150, they are not happening. Where did you show me the volume of Coinmarketcap? I'm looking at it right now and it shows that selling occurred all the way from the 26th to the 17th. I understand that you are trying to defend this, but you are really proving my point. There isn't enough volume to be able to sell ALL the millions of BCC. The offer means that they can just keep the BTC (or LTC, whatever), and can sell more coins now because people *think* that it's a good to use BTC, to buy their BCC they are selling on the exchange by providing buy walls to sell into. There is no escrow to handle the ICO, no BCCX blockexplorer (as far as I can tell) and all statistics are on their site which is literally just text on the screen. What guarantee is there that people aren't just rebuying the same BCC over and over? |
|
|
|
Forgot to tell you that i don't trust a negative, red shiny trust score. Aren't you tired shilling this dead scam?
Did you see who put that there the other day? Someone who goes around calling things a ponzi and giving negative trust to people for the same reasons (also runs a dice site which I'm sure may be illegal in some States - even UK are iffy about BTC gambling sites). I only just looked into his feedback and found he does a dice site. Why is he calling bitconnect a ponzi when he runs a site that has a proven house edge? Don't bitconnect users have to take risks too and only spend what they can afford to lose (I'm sure his site is more dangerous to the average user than bitconnect was - especially the 10% who are always addicted to something)? The BCC token will go back up going by bitconnect's track record. By the way spotted this feedback about him which seems strange: He's offering to take your funds, gamble them on dice games, and return a guaranteed profit. This is impossible, of course. There is a positive house edge, meaning everyone loses in the long term.
"The return varies from 115% to 170% per investment"
I would have made this comment on his thread, but he claims he will delete any criticism from his self-moderated thread, so I wrote it here instead where everyone can see it.
Instead he leaves just the positive comments from the lucky ones. "I deposited, you won, you're great". For every winner there will be at least one loser, whose comment will be deleted.
Obvious scams like this should be removed from the forum. Dooglus is one of the most respected people on this forum and has outed hundreds, if not thousands of scams. He knows FAR more about the Blockchain than you or I do, I have never seen him wrong. JustDice has been around for about 4 years, all funds backing it can be verified on the Blockchain. You've earned your shiny red trust score. |
|
|
|
Bitconnect was not an investment. It was a scam, it collapsed, the last ones to hold the bag got stuck with near-worthless tokens. That's how these scams work. There is no feasible way for "everyone" to make 30% per month. Such investments don't exist. It's not "bad press" that made people lose their money. It's the scammers. With some help from shills like you.
What I don't like, is idiots saying the scam 'collapsed' when they never collapsed. They always paid less BCC in interest than was lent to them in the lending system. It would have carried on fine without all these people saying it was a Ponzi etc. It is obvious to any sane person who isn't traumatised enough to have to believe these Ponzi stories to psychologically survive. Also, as I explained before, to send just 6BTC from my wallet at a normal fee range (few hundreds satoshis per byte) I had to pay hundreds of dollars. My wallet wouldn't have charged me more than I needed to pay but obviously most wallets like electrum generate lots of inputs etc so the more you send the more the fee would be. Oh I seem to deleted what I wrote before but basically those were normal charges for sending that amount of BTC from my wallet, in the last few days I gave examples to before. Instead of just typing it I will copy and paste the images from electrum below from a couple of transactions in the last two days:  You're an utter idiot. I'm sorry, but there is no other way to put it. So what part don't you agree with?? Bitconnect always profited in BCC from the lending system and didn't need to take BCC from new lenders to pay old ones. So it wasn't a ponzi. When someone lent 1BCC for example, by the end of the term the capital release would only cost bitconnect say 0.1BCC if the coin had gone up 10 times in that 8 months or whatever (in practice it only took a few months to go 10X) and the interest paid was also far lower than the gain in the coin price. They could have easily paid 50% higher interest rates (I'm guessing but a lot higher than 1%) and still been in profit!!! They didn't have a guaranteed percentage for reinvests or lower amounts so could have easily carried on without even changing the terms of the loans! Regarding the fees, my wallet lets me choose and I didn't choose the fastest, but low/medium. I set it also to dynamic fees so it can tell how much is needed for certain speeds. I would have paid even more if I wanted it to be faster but any slower wasn't much cheaper so I set it to medium speed. EDIT: Just did the calculation and at 1.5% per day that is about 56% per month and 200X in a year. The coin was initially valued at sub-$1 in the ICO and I think fell to 16cents early on but went up to near $500 all in a year so the 1% wasn't excessive at all. 1% daily is only 35X in a year!!! So what's your goal here? I don't understand why you insist on trying to argue with people who know far more about Crypto than you do, all you are doing is accruing more negative trust. This thing is dead in the water, it's over jim, sell your coins (if you have any left) and learn from your mistakes. Here, I'll even link a couple news articles for you. https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitconnect-ponzi-scheme-no-sympathy-from-crypto-communityhttps://www.coindesk.com/bitconnect-investors-left-lurch-tokens-price-drops-90/https://news.bitcoin.com/not-content-with-scamming-1-5-billion-bitconnect-wants-another-500-million-for-its-ico/There is a very good chance that current exchanges will delist BCC in order to avoid legal trouble and all remaining Coins will be worth $0 Are you serious? I already pointed out the factually incorrect statements from some of those stories (about them running off with bitcoins etc). All they had left when they closed the lending were the same BCC tokens some people are saying are now worthless - the same ones they left all the investors with as that was the only currency the lending platform used (although they were paid in relation to the USD value of the coins when they were lent or when they are withdrawn from the lending wallet). Why would they want their millions of BCC to be worthless (which they stake hundreds of thousands of each month)? I also showed they didn't dump them either (they were more than likely buying them cheap the other day). Actually if I look on the rich list, there has basically been no recent activity on many addresses and I don't think they stake from those largest wallets either. There are hundreds of these coins and BCC is nowhere near as bad as most of the coins on exchanges. A lot of them are pure scams that get dumped on by the devs and you say you know a lot about crypto? There are no laws about these coins in most countries and bitconnect lending wasn't operating as a ponzi when they stopped it. I am not posting for any particular reason other than to try to correct people's prejudices (which seldom works anyway due to the little understood 'backfire effect'). I just tend to go on a bit sometimes  <as they pealed rubber upon exiting the building, leaving the lights on for Investards so to think somebody's home>[/center] I just addressed the Texan thing in the above post but are you now doing your own lending platform (your signature): "The cryptoverse is now populated with neophyte enthusiasts, many who were first introduced to crypto via stumbling upon the likes of BitConnect with their jury's-still-out lending programs, regarded by some as being unsustainable over the long haul. Regardless if the sentiment is accurate or not, the truth of the matter is that there are now countless folks acclimated with the lending platform model as a means to [hopefully] enrich themselves in the crypto space.
After the quasi-success of BitConnect, myriad clones of the model sprung up, many of which immediately vanished at their ICOs' end, leaving some participates spooked while others sought out, then enrolled into yet another pseudo-promising lending platform clone, both groups possessing lighter pocketbooks after participating in rogue entities.
What makes this LendFunding endeavor sound is that the person behind it is well-known in the space, i.e. not hiding his vitals, and the entity of which initial funding is sought - YuTü.Co.in - has a solid foundation business model, primed for long-term growth in tokenizing YouTuber channels of opted-in YouTubers."I thought you were from USA too and didn't you scare another lending platform off and made them close down with everyone's money (Elektra)? If you hadn't exposed them they would have probably made many people lots of money unless it was their intention all along to disappear. I am in the US. Thanks for quoting my content, bud. Notice the lack of grammatical errors?  If by chance you were alluding to my lending program as some sort of Ponzi scheme, sadly you're mistaken, for in spite of its name - LendFunding - the lending program was limited in nature to garner initial funding and as a means to reward early adopters. That was all. Quoting a snippet from your other post ... Also, you must see that the ICO limit on bitconnectx gets sold every day?? Over a quarter of a million BitconnectX. Question: Do you have the link to the blockchain depicting even one BCCX transaction, albeit seeing a quarter of a million BCCX transferred would be nice? You are wrong that they didn't dump https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bcc/#!overview go look through the days of the crash to see Millions of BCC hitting the exchange. Those green candles you saw are them selling, and can be achieved by breaking all walls down to less than 10% of the price and then placing new, bigger sell walls for people to buy into. Seeing a number on the screen means nothing, people thought that Zenpool was mining but it turned out to just be a script. But there is no BCCX Block explorer, and there is no escrow so you don't know anything anyways. Most likely scenario is that they just keep all the BTC and sell all the BCC that comes in for the ICO for more BTC once walls increase because it seems like a good deal to be able to buy BCC for $17 so that later on you can sell it for $150 |
|
|
|
Bitconnect was not an investment. It was a scam, it collapsed, the last ones to hold the bag got stuck with near-worthless tokens. That's how these scams work. There is no feasible way for "everyone" to make 30% per month. Such investments don't exist. It's not "bad press" that made people lose their money. It's the scammers. With some help from shills like you.
What I don't like, is idiots saying the scam 'collapsed' when they never collapsed. They always paid less BCC in interest than was lent to them in the lending system. It would have carried on fine without all these people saying it was a Ponzi etc. It is obvious to any sane person who isn't traumatised enough to have to believe these Ponzi stories to psychologically survive. Also, as I explained before, to send just 6BTC from my wallet at a normal fee range (few hundreds satoshis per byte) I had to pay hundreds of dollars. My wallet wouldn't have charged me more than I needed to pay but obviously most wallets like electrum generate lots of inputs etc so the more you send the more the fee would be. Oh I seem to deleted what I wrote before but basically those were normal charges for sending that amount of BTC from my wallet, in the last few days I gave examples to before. Instead of just typing it I will copy and paste the images from electrum below from a couple of transactions in the last two days: You're an utter idiot. I'm sorry, but there is no other way to put it. So what part don't you agree with?? Bitconnect always profited in BCC from the lending system and didn't need to take BCC from new lenders to pay old ones. So it wasn't a ponzi. When someone lent 1BCC for example, by the end of the term the capital release would only cost bitconnect say 0.1BCC if the coin had gone up 10 times in that 8 months or whatever (in practice it only took a few months to go 10X) and the interest paid was also far lower than the gain in the coin price. They could have easily paid 50% higher interest rates (I'm guessing but a lot higher than 1%) and still been in profit!!! They didn't have a guaranteed percentage for reinvests or lower amounts so could have easily carried on without even changing the terms of the loans! Regarding the fees, my wallet lets me choose and I didn't choose the fastest, but low/medium. I set it also to dynamic fees so it can tell how much is needed for certain speeds. I would have paid even more if I wanted it to be faster but any slower wasn't much cheaper so I set it to medium speed. EDIT: Just did the calculation and at 1.5% per day that is about 56% per month and 200X in a year. The coin was initially valued at sub-$1 in the ICO and I think fell to 16cents early on but went up to near $500 all in a year so the 1% wasn't excessive at all. 1% daily is only 35X in a year!!! So what's your goal here? I don't understand why you insist on trying to argue with people who know far more about Crypto than you do, all you are doing is accruing more negative trust. This thing is dead in the water, it's over jim, sell your coins (if you have any left) and learn from your mistakes. Here, I'll even link a couple news articles for you. https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitconnect-ponzi-scheme-no-sympathy-from-crypto-communityhttps://www.coindesk.com/bitconnect-investors-left-lurch-tokens-price-drops-90/https://news.bitcoin.com/not-content-with-scamming-1-5-billion-bitconnect-wants-another-500-million-for-its-ico/There is a very good chance that current exchanges will delist BCC in order to avoid legal trouble and all remaining Coins will be worth $0 |
|
|
|
Honestly, a coin istelf claiming this x100 benefit in the near future looks like a big reason to not to invest into, 100% red flag and I would not recommend anyone to invest in this project, there are other "shitcoins" with an actual project and a low market cap that can boom to x100, although this is usually very difficult to achieve, you can try and invest in some of them and wait for them to grow.
I regard your statement as Libel Fluidledger does not claim to be a 100x investment! Do not underestimate anything in life! Tread carefully! LOL @ Libel I would suggest people take a moment to read through Tilbrooks post history and leave a little feedback  |
|
|
|
Why do people care about a coin that does not affect them. If they are not invested in it then it doesn't affect them, they should take care of their own business. However, unless they are scared of it for some reason, then it makes sense. The competition is always scared of something that is/was more successful than them.
What part of illegal ponzi scam are you not getting? Of course it wasn't illegal or they wouldn't be operating. The UK financial conduct authority (FCA) do not care about these cryptos and have told me they have no control and do not even seem concerned. These people supporting these scams are no better than the operator himself, do you guys realise that you are helping perpetrate fraud? I really wish I could say these are all puppet accounts but something tells me they aren't and it makes me sad to see such a level of ignorance. I was thinking the exact same thing. Why are people still have the fog pulled over their eyes to be so blinded? Do they just have a glimmer of hope that their bcc stash of coins will be worth what they were at before this ponzi/pyramid scheme was outed and deceased by the governments to stop it or they will sue them all? A mixture of greed, ignorance and sock puppet accounts. Ponzi's attract a very special breed of people who will fight tooth and nail against all reason, faces change but the cycle remains the same. I only came across this yesterday because I read a news article about it. I believe it was within the first couple pages that it was outed when it was claiming to host an ICO on Bittrex even after Rich (owner) had said "no, this is a scam, not being listed" I have 0 sympathy for people took part in this, ALL are either marks or scammers. |
|
|
|
Why do people care about a coin that does not affect them. If they are not invested in it then it doesn't affect them, they should take care of their own business. However, unless they are scared of it for some reason, then it makes sense. The competition is always scared of something that is/was more successful than them.
What part of illegal ponzi scam are you not getting? Of course it wasn't illegal or they wouldn't be operating. The UK financial conduct authority (FCA) do not care about these cryptos and have told me they have no control and do not even seem concerned. A thief steals your money but it's not illegal because he hasn't been caught. These people supporting these scams are no better than the operator himself, do you guys realise that you are helping perpetrate fraud? I really wish I could say these are all puppet accounts but something tells me they aren't and it makes me sad to see such a level of ignorance. |
|
|
|
I wonder if bitconnect is that script.cc guy?  Seems like the exact same MO, just with a blockchain to back it. |
|
|
|
|
I was out of Crypto for the last year and a half and missed the last train.
Btc dropped from 20k to 10k and thought it was as good of a time as any to get back in, problem was that it took ages because people selling and most the the atms out of coins and sitting on huge amounts of cash trying to get in.
I don't really see cryptocurrency going away any time soon, up about 25% so far.
|
|
|
|
I think I've fallen and can't get up.  I'm creating an Alt-coin and mostly done with all the initial changes and daemon compiled (gui still needs to work through a couple small errors), time for the genesis block! Except that I'm stuck with how to create the genesis hash? This is the repo https://github.com/Crestington/motaI will pay $200 to the first person that can explain to me how I can create the genesis block using motad in linux. Happy hunting! |
|
|
|
|
Newbie accounts talking to each other about fictional prices like it's 2014.
I think my ptsd is flaring up.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Josh how've you been?
I'm looking for a bit of coding help on a project.
Would you be interested? We can pay you.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there, I am looking for a little help on a Coin I am working on.
We have most of the changes done but we need advice on generation of the genesis, and mining in Linux so that we can tweak and change the parameters as we need to before moving onto wallet aesthetics.
What would you charge for this?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there, I am looking for a little help on a Coin I am working on.
We have most of the changes done but we need advice on generation of the genesis, and mining in Linux so that we can tweak and change the parameters as we need to before moving onto wallet aesthetics.
What would you charge for this? Your prices seem quite high
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there, I am looking for a little help on a Coin I am working on.
We have most of the changes done but we need advice on generation of the genesis, and mining in Linux so that we can tweak and change the parameters as we need to before moving onto wallet aesthetics.
What would you charge for this?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there, I am looking for a little help on a Coin I am working on.
We have most of the changes done but we need advice on generation of the genesis, and mining in Linux so that we can tweak and change the parameters as we need to before moving onto wallet aesthetics.
What would you charge for this?
|
|
|
|
WELCOME BACK! Garbanzo goes to prison this year~! I still have the whole collection of PAYCON stakers muggling away!     Good he should go to prison. That was such a cool event, Candlesticks and fed coins back into the system as fees to be claimed through staking using bash scripts and then FireRabbit made us a video for a giveaway where we gave away about 15-20% of all CON to people who lost big in PayCoin. One real takeaway was that it helped this guy with cancer make back his nestegg he was going to give to his family after he passed away. Pretty fucked up. |
|
|
|
|
So a couple old friends from the forums asked me to help them create a Coin but it's been a really long time since I've been on the forums or coding and I'm a little rusty. We have some code prepared but need some help getting a test project going and was wondering if anyone could direct us to a service or individual that can help?
|
|
|
|
i wonder if the idiot thats stakemining is that dude with the chickens firehosing paycoins with his prime controller thingy
HAH! You mean this? The Garza-Flux Paycoin Optimus Prime Cap-ict-or! Yo, @Crestington Lol I remember that, that was a lot of fun. I think it's been a little over a year and a half since I was last on these forums, glad to see someone remembers me. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
