As a person with a decent background with online marketing(SEO, etc), honestly my mind is blown due to the data you've given.
1. 24 million backlinks. The online marketer's dream.
2. A sort of random topic post that barely has any replies to it has the highest keyword volume here on bitcointalk. Like what the hell. I was expecting something along the lines of "bitcoin wallet safety" or "What is an airdrop" or something like that but instead the highest is "SuperChillin." 83,000 in volume too! Compared to "bitcointalk" only at 15,000. That's definitely a significant difference. Baffling, for sure.
Exactly, I haven't even heard much of this SuperChillin' thread before, didn't knew it existed. I checked out the website traffic in other site called, similarweb, and I don't find the word superchillin' anywhere. Here's the data I found: https://www.similarweb.com/website/bitcointalk.org#overview     The top 5 keywords include claymore and bitcointalk. I am really surprised it doesn't include "satoshi" or "bounty", or "airdrop". |
|
|
|
And who is "Blazed pot"?
Its not "who". Its(What) this: Blazed == marijuana.
This thread is pointless as no scams have been committed. This is merely you wanting me removed due to people I have added into my trust list that you disagree with. The escrow has had funds sitting for 1.5 years and only 2 weeks back there was talk of a refund. Why all the rush when the vote is still several days from being done?
That thread is a mess, you could actually make some things clear, at least to defend your(team's) reputation. There's a few a lot of misunderstandings, and allegations. |
|
|
|
I received a PM today with a typical excuse:
<...>
I hear the explanation of what I bolded above a lot. Transaction fees are pretty damn low, so there's really no reason why funds should be pooled--and given that blockchain transactions are the only good way to prove accounts are connected, people shouldn't be doing this.
I'm hardly swayed by this picture, either. It shows a bunch of shitposters sitting around a shitposting table in a shitposting farm. They deserve negative trust just for that. Give me a fucking break. Guaranteed the women here don't care about bitcoin in the least. They got recruited to spam like suicide bombers get recruited by ISIS.
Oh come on, there are threads for worse things, but not a thread for this gold mine? Its off-topic here anyway, might as well create a thread.  The excuse is BS, but the "team" is more or less, true. They are more likely blood relatives than a team. And most bounties require like 10 posts a week, by the looks of the image, it looks like they are sitting there, chillin' and abusing bounties with hundreds, if not thousands of accounts. TP, just when you thought that things couldn't get any worse.  As long as they call the Bitcointalk.org forum as a place to work and blatanly even send PM showing their group work they deserve to be banned and not only given negative trust.
There are no rules for that, so they can't be banned, unless they are badly spamming, or breaking any of the current rules. This forum is to discuss about bitcoin mainly, there are sections for different persons which maybe good at a thing (like I am in sport betting) to show off their talent but shitposting is a disastrous way to take this forum into a more filthy mess than it already is.
Yeah, we lost that long back. If things go this way pretty soon we won't have a Technical Discussion or Development boards anymore, the spammers will infest that place too.
It won't happen most likely. Those boards are heavily moderated,spam gets immediately thrown out of there.
FYI, eth fees is 0.012$. Great, they are gonna buy bread with that saved money. |
|
|
|
Was a vote ever done to see if the beta wallet and first API Cluster were acceptable?
Are the people who received 60% of the funds also entitled to a share of the refund for tokens they own?
There was no other vote other than the one asking for refund, speaking from the information available here. The people who received 60% of the funds were the team members, and it was all spent, why would they get a refund. They might get a refund if they themselves were a private investor of the project. I disagree. This is only reason why OgNasty should do it. If something is wrong they will have to post proofs, and with so much hate between you two, I believe if OgNasty say everything is OK than everything is OK.
It is simple as that.
OgNasty and Lauda have had their beef for years, even though Og isn't a scammer, there is major trust issues between them. It'd would be better for both parties to hire a 3rd party unbiased professional auditor, or at least to someone who knows basic accounting and is trustworthy. My question is why were these coins moved? And more importantly, why is there a refusal to say the coins are in fact held in this address?
Each of the escrows also provided signed messages saying the bitcoin would be held in a "2-of-3 multisig" address. I am also curious to know if each of the three escrow agents solely controlled each one of the three keys required to unlock the funds, and if this continues to be the case. The wording of the signed messages certainly implies this is the case, however some statements in the ANN thread makes me be not so sure.
From the ANN thread, it was written that Lauda would control the bitcoin payments. I think Nemgun and Yanni also controlled the seeds(?). First of all, information regarding the alts needs to be made immidiately public. We need to know the addresses they were received to, when they were sent to an exchange, what exchange rate they were sold for, and where the bitcoin was withdrawn to after the coins were sold.
I calculate the alts to be worth just over 502 BTC at current depressed prices that are significantly lower than what they were when the ICO sale ended. Plus the additional 104 BTC from the sale of BCH, and the 1590 BTC raised in the ICO, and the total BTC comes to about 2200 BTC. All of these numbers are lower bound amounts.
It is unclear as to how the fact that the issues with converting were due to "investors lack of due diligence" as I have no idea how one could lead to another.
I am not sure why several hundred BTC was moved to exchanges. Something appears to be out of order here.
For the safety of the parties involved, the escrow , the investors, and the NVO team, it would be better for the exchange info to be private. The investors lack of due diligence caused problems because of the escrow: The Investors will have to provide a personal Bitcoin address they control in order
to receive the NVO Tokens. This is very important as NVO Token will be a counter party
asset, the investors have to provide a PERSONAL bitcoin address, not a pool or.............
exchange address because they would be stuck into these addresses...............................
Only Lauda would be able to explain why some bitcoins were sent to bittrex. |
|
|
|
How did >3,094 BTC turn into 1169 BTC without this being a scam?
This: ~60% of the funds have been disbursed to the team according to milestones and the remaining ~40% (probably more due to forks) are likely to be refunded pending a vote, which is in progress: https://nvo.party/Some folks here seem to use a definition of a scam as "anything less than 100%" but the initial 30% distribution was set in stone basically (end if ICO / start of development) and the other 30% seems to be quite straightforward too (availability of beta wallet software IIRC) so there isn't much room for a scam unless the escrow actually runs at takes some or all of the 40% with them.
Where did the 10-78 missing BTC from the BCH sale go? Is there something quoted above that is not true?
Only a proper professional audit would help answer that question. |
|
|
|
Has anybody offered to do an audit?
Presumably, signed messages, txid's and addresses can be provided so anyone can look at the information themselves... Signed messages can't be provided : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1576803.0And txid's and addresses are already public. I haven't gotten too deep in it to check between the exact amounts, as I don't have the exchange rates, and the necessary data. I think this info should be private than public, unless there's more to this accusation, which is highly unlikely.
Actually this is not the case. Up to 60% of the total is (well, was) the amount that the team was allowed to withdraw according to the milestones, but it was never fully taken. Based on my math, if you include forks in the calculations there is about 50% extra left than the minimum defined by the milestones (thus, not 40% left but ~60%).
Since you said, forked coins were sent to nemgun , how does the total end up to 60%? |
|
|
|
Says someone who jumped in on page 6 You gotta do what you gotta do.  But yeah considering that a one-post newbie started the thread and vanished without following up with proof, this is starting to look like a nothingburger.
Honestly speaking, the way things were said and the claims and allegations OP had bought in, and with those links and what not, made it seem really bad, and when the amount was that big, it seemed too sketchy, thankfully, the real truth was out, before things got worse, and this accusation will just remain at that, and nothing beyond that. Edit: Nice that you got some answers. I saw a publicly stated escrow address that was empty. Users complaining to me of a scam. Lauda refusing to say where the funds were, refusing to give exchange rate data, refusing to let someone audit the situation, and ignoring questions. I still don't understand why a simple timeline of events can't be provided. You would think it would be fun to provide all this data.
The funds were moved from that address to another address, which is also one of the multi-sig address, it wasn't disclosed but is definitely viewable on blockchain. This is the address: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/36Uh2ine6UzWGPTDYdENqS6pj6Rzx4Q67RThe timeline is pretty simple: -> NVO escrow terms were agreed before the BCH existed, and were different than the original CET terms. -> The ICO raised around 3000 BTC, the alts weren't converted immediately. Some were, some still are/were recently converted. -> There were issues while converting, due to investors lack of due diligence(quoting Lauda's exact words). -> Fast forward to June(?), some shit happened(didn't read or get enough or any info on that) and it resulted in a vote, whether or not the investors should be refunded or not. -> Vote is still going on, and if it results in a refund, they will be taken care of by Lauda and team. I believe it is safe to say the escrow was at the very least mishandled and funds should have never moved from the escrow address (I still have no idea why they did or where they went. I read to an exchange managed by a single person?) without a transparent transfer to another address and updated signatures. The blockchain was created exactly so situations like this don't happen. It is disappointing to see this level of transparency.
From what I can tell, only the alts were moved to an exchange, and most of the bitcoin stayed there only. Some bitcoins were sent to bittrex, and I don't know what happened to that. There's still more than 1000 btc in the escrow address ,plus forks. |
|
|
|
I think the post is not qualified for a merit since it's just only a question about the project right? Maybe he have valid reasons/opinions why he/she give it to that, who knows?
sMerits quantity on his/her rank is very low so it should be spend wisely and give it to those worthy ones.
In most people's eyes, it may not qualify. But some people just have poor choices and I don't even think he knows that merit is supposed to be for good/high quality posts. For all I know, he didn't even read the Merit & new rank requirements thread. OP is a shill dude, I wouldn't be surprised if he's paid for it.  |
|
|
|
^ So if the vote results in a refund, you'll provide the forks back. Also, if I am getting this right, the investors might get more , because the exchange rates of converting were screwed up earlier, so the additonal forks would only benefit the investors. The investors would get ~60% of what they had invested(instead of 40%), plus an airdrop of his(by the new CEO) token to the NVST holders for his project. I am starting to wonder how quickly people jump to illogical conclusions here and why,never mind scratch that, I know why. It wasn't that hard to get proper answers, was it?  |
|
|
|
Has anybody offered to do an audit? I would recommend ibminer, he's known to be an unbiased judge of circumstances.
From what I can tell, based on what I have read : The NVO escrow terms and CET terms are different. So the BCH/other forks scam doesn't really apply here. Yanni and Nemgun are telling different stories. You can't really sign messages of a multi-sig, even if you can, it may compromise the all 3 seeds along with the money it. Blazed, minerjones and Coinpayments haven't replied here, so Lauda is taking a lot of blame and accusations/allegations. The 1000 btc isn't really missing, its that, the alts were converted into BTC at a specific rate(?) I am confused on this one, Lauda, you said, this was the exchange rate, and how did they suddenly reduce? I am sorry, this thread is a mess, has more of irrelevant info than the relevant and useful one, cite a link, if you have replied to this before. Were the alts exchanged recently? So the funds are in multi-sig at the moment and not in an exchange, right? Anything else am I missing? |
|
|
|
Not many people would use it, a lot info maybe invisible in that mode. I think pictures can't be viewed in that mode. But doesn't hurt to use it, when required. There's another mode called wap. That's much better, it has no colors: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178608.0;wap |
|
|
|
You think he was lying about how many accounts I have? Is this baseless speculation? Or is there some evidence to support this? Do you have other examples of him lying about anything?
There is not anything wrong with having multiple accounts and trying to stomp out all alt accounts will only give people a false sense of security.
Its good to know that people can twist my own words. But no, I didn't say nor think that BadBear lied. He never said that he knows how many accounts you have, but it was implied that you have a lot of accounts. Like I said, there's nothing wrong in having multiple accounts, except only, when you random people use multiple accounts to spread lies/whatever shilling is to be done. And I don't know if BadBear lied elsewhere, even if he did, I don't care to even bother about it. Should we be worried? Yes and no. I prefer to read a post from him than a post from a shit poster. To agree with him or not is something else. But I prefer to disagree with someone and to like to read than reading someone with a crap post even if I agree with him
Agreed. QS has a lot of knowledge, and is useful sometimes, if only he uses his knowledge for rightful purposes. |
|
|
|
What? No. If any user breaks the forum rules and if they reported, they are handled accordingly. And if someone plagiarizes, report them and cite the original source. They WILL be banned.
IIRC, autobans=permabans,it might include temp bans too, but they aren't shown in modlog. Manual bans aren't shown in modlog(as per badbear's comments). |
|
|
|
As such, I am not quite sure how you are coming to the conclusion that BadBear thinks I have a lot of accounts....
BadBear knows you have alot of alt accounts(an unfair estimate would be 10), he was just doing his job as an admin and protecting you(your alts) from being exposed or whatever. But there's nothing wrong with having alt accounts, unless you use for you know....
And aren't we all playing the accusation game here? <sarcasm> aTriz was part of ALU, and I participated in his campaigns ,and we all know he only accepted his own alts, and aTriz is a known alt of Lauda,so I am an alt of Lauda and Lauda was part of chipmixer once, and hence DarkStar_ accepted me, and thus making me another alt of DarkStar_'s shady campaign alts. DarkStar_ accepted actmyname soon after I joined and I added all alts in the Overview of campaign managers list, thus making me an alt of everybody over there. Irfan_pak10 rented my avatar/personal space and the ad space in that thread, so he bribed me and became my alt. Vod has given me at least 21 merits, so I am his alt. The Pharmacist and I have the same habit of posting(I am nowhere close) , so I am his alt. In conclusion, I extort people, I am a pedophile, I am a deranged kid, and a naive person who makes unwise decisions, amongst other things. Oh, QS and I have the same avatar, so he is my alt too. </sarcasm> |
|
|
|
A few things: Not all boards under the altcoin section are infected with spam. From what I have heard, the Altcoin Mining section has less spam than the other altcoin boards, and a lot of good discussions occur there. And there aren't any guidelines or anything to the topics to be created there. Any topic that has the words like "bounty", "airdrop", and any altcoin gets to be there, and the spam starts to take its course. 1/2(welsh moderates only half the boards there) mods aren't enough for the biggest board in bitcointalk. I don't really care for the reasons behind people reporting. As long as they aren't making alternate accounts, and reporting posts purposely to pad their report count. If they are genuinely reporting posts made by other people, then I don't really care for their motives as it still results in a cleaner forum.
Since you have seen the dark side, how badly does that section require additional moderators? And are there any guidelines on what type of posts belong there? The altcoin marketplace has a lot of off-topic threads and they always stay there only,unless reported, which is quite rare(I'd assume). |
|
|
|
Everyone who posts in reputation is an alt of Lauda & co or is an alt of QS & his shenanigans . Don't know if I am Lauda's alt or QS's alt. But I am DarkStar_'s alt for sure.
To be fair, for all those who accused to be QS's alt, they got to do out out of habit, for QS has been known to have a lot of accounts, said by BadBear himself.
Its been a while since we had Timelord2067's accusations. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
