Geez, I guess that did the trick:





Thanks guys.

I've noticed that since quite some time I don't see negative/positive trust ratings. Here's an example:



There are multiple scam accusations against this user and I also gave him a negative rating, but you can see that the numbers are very different. Picture numbered 1 is how I'm "seeing" him, but in picture numbered 2 he looks completely different (the screen is from another post a user made). I'm only seeing negative rating if I was the one who gave it. Same goes for positive ratings. On the picture numbered 3 is how I "see myself". Any idea why's that?

Let me try for the last time to see if you can finally grasp my point. You said:




I replied:




You then said much yada yada. Thread is about:
1. REP hack.
2. If coins were dumped on Poloniex.

I was only trying to imply that your graph is incomplete and it can't be considered as a proof. Do you know what proof means? Not trying to act like a smartass, I only care about the details.

Nothing personal, bud. I'm not attacking anyone here on the forum (as long he's not some scam promoter/shill).

Ah, yes... and about this:


I'm not sure if I know something about charts, and can't say that I'm a pro, but for what is worth: I happen to be a certificate "A" holder for activity as a broker on Sofia Commodity exchange and I have it for almost 15 years now.

Now I'm sure that you are misjudging people and their opinions.

Cheers,
Spartak

No, I don't. Can you please show me that 10k satoshi low? After all, it was your screeshot:

Oh, my...

1. It doesn't really matter, when you took the screenshot. Your candlestick was green and not detailed (and one can argue that it was dumped down to ~7,3k satoshi).
2. I am using 15m simply because its more detailed.
3. How can you argue if REP was dumped on Polo? Of course that most of the movements happened on Polo, like 70-80% of REP's trade volume is happening there. I think it was obvious that I meant the stolen REP.

Anyways, future will tell.

You posted a green candlestick, which shows that buy support is forming. This is the real graph (as you probably took the screenshot while there was a dump):



Currently there is 150 BTC buy support down to 150k satoshi, so I suspect that a lot of buy orders were removed, though I didn't followed the market. But you can't tell that REP was definitely dumped on Polo.

@raphma, not sure if you know what this graph shows...

What's need to be stopped here? People buying this BS are not with their right mind... There you go: https://twitter.com/bulgar1an/status/806523742658539521

Sounds good. Will contact them, but I don't expect much. Anyways, we should follow part of the community's demands so... Thanks for the reply!

Cheers,
Spartak

I heard of them, but not sure if they're legit. You see, my personal goal is to use more reputable exchanges in order to avoid losses (hacks, disappearances of exchange owners etc..). YoBit for example got me angry just recently and I even opened a scam accusation against them, but I was immediately contacted by our Russian team member and he assured me that they're working on delivering better services. Care to share more experience with nova?

It's not something special, really, but I'm working with the guy who owns the service for more than 2.5 years now and I can guarantee that he's honest and people could trust him. The most important thing in a cryptocurrency is usage (therefore - adoption). Some people (speculators, to give an example) could care less if you can pay your hosting (if you use such services) with ARCO, but other people do.

I'm not sure, bud. Haven't spoken with the dev for about 10 days now. Thing is that he's currently working on a lot of stuff such as making the wallet lighter, without changing the algo (some scrypt PoS coins changed their algo to sha, because the wallet use a lot of CPU power). This has been fixed now and I was assured that the wallet should run much smoothly. He also had issues with making the old wallet.dat compatible with the new fork, but that's been fixed as well.

Believe me, I want us to make it asap, but it's out of our (even dev's) hands. If we had the millions of $ in funding like many of the projects out there, then we should have been ready long time ago, but our case is a bit different. That's ok though. What's more important to me personally is that our team is still here and I'm extremely proud with that. We even have some new guys, which will help us to bring FAIL to another level, but these specifics will be announced once our hard fork is completed. We've all agreed that there is no point on working (even small stuff like updating this thread) on something, which is still not ready. This of no use (other to make us falsely look better).

I'll admit that recently (as many people do care about exchanges) I have asked YoBit to list FAIL, but no payment has been made (the want at least 0.1 BTC in order to list a coin), so I'm not sure what will happen.

Cheers,
Spartak

I thought that today's date is December 7...

No, there were supposedly dumped on Shapeshift (https://twitter.com/Poloniex/status/806133021686562816), but there's still no official statement from Poloniex.


LMAO... nice trolling.

I just want to let you know that you'll be soon (ETA December 20) able to pay for web hosting using ARCO. Official announcement will be made once this is official.

Cheers,
Spartak

I think this is a bought account, but it was done probably months ago (if not more). And the reason for the purchase was one and only: scam. I'm not sure if a research on that would help and that is why I haven't bothered myself.

These public long video conversations/conferences are pointless and tiresome. Let's point out one simple (and undeniable) fact:



I'm not 100% sure, but I think AMP was trading at about 500 satoshi (if not lower?) at the beginning of this year, and ~4 months later it peaked at over 43k satoshi. Why am I saying this? To point another fact: AMP creators had the chance to make about $86 profit on every $1 invested. I think 8600% profit in ~4 months sounds good, right? F*ck no! Do you know what I hate so much in this industry? That fiat money are involved! All we hear is "it takes time", "it needs funding", "we must be paid" etc... Wasn't this a crypto-fiat war? Weren't we a crypto enthusiasts? That's why I kinda support premines, because the creators (if they don't have money to invest) of the given currency/token/whatever needs to get paid and deserves to make profit (if the project made a good contribution to the 'crypto-world'). That's perfectly understandable and acceptable (at least in my views). But when it comes to fights over funds, then I call it a failure. Why? Because all of these crypto-related projects needs believers and supporters! Launch the f*cking thing with a tested technology, be friendly with all the people interested in it, list it on exchanges (as many people have such demands), built on top of it (without asking for money from the masses) and move forward. Nothing wrong if you fail to complete your goals (or you get hacked). At least you tried and didn't lied to anybody, right? Maybe on a later time someone else will learn from your mistakes and do it right. I think the situation here is obvious: some people are trying to enrich themselves. That's why I don't follow the progress of many of these projects and I don't care if they invent a spacecraft, which travels with the speed of light. That's why I don't invest in them (though I don't do trades for several months now), no matter if I'm 101% sure that I can make profit. This means to give money (and some support) for something I don't believe and being a hypocrite (i.e., f*ck the average Joe if I can make some extra bucks).

Bottom line: From what I've read in the article, I don't take either of the sides, because they are both wrong. This is not the way.    

EDIT: Ah, almost forgot to point out one other hilarious fact. You're building something decentralized, yet you have CEOs, CTOs etc.? I find it funny...

Looks like credible accusation. Painted him in red + tweeted: https://twitter.com/bulgar1an/status/806203530310721536

^This. See FAILCoin for a reference.