Thanos snapped his fingers at the BTC  |
|
|
|
I stand by what I said 100%. As I am an international customer and used a reshipper I incurred extra costs which would have made it easier just to have a new piece sent out. Your solution of "slap a USPS label on it ezpz" just doesn't work, but you weren't concerned about that. If you had ended up repaying me for the customs/duty/reshipper fees then you'd end up losing money which is why I suggested you just send me another piece, I pay my reshipper and customs/duty fees again for something that ISN'T the exact same thing I had already paid for. I was going for a suggestion of "ease" which there shouldn't have been any problem about. You printing a new design on a piece of metal and sending it to me should cost the same amount as you printing the EXACT same picture I had already had on the EXACT same size sheet of metal, there would have been zero difference and it would have led to me having more Lynx Art Collection pieces on my wall which people would see and go "hey where can I get one those those are pretty neat". This is what leads me to believe you never did sell out of these. You have one sitting around and it would have been easier to sign it with my number and send it to me (no extra printing cost because it's sitting in your office, but on the website its "sold out"). Purely speculation but it just seems real off that you wouldn't want more of your art seen on a customer's wall. Refer to my now Negative Trust rating left for you, sharing private communications between customer/business is a nono. I am so thankful I used a reshipper as I wouldn't put it past you and your company to dox someone or keep addresses if this is how you are acting sharing private communications. |
|
|
|
No problem now. Sheet aluminum can be sensitive to temperature changes and the slight warping might be due to my chosen mounting location. I get many compliments on the piece from friends and it is not going anywhere but I do appreciate your standing behind your products 100%. I look forward to doing business with you in the future.
Thank you.  Happy to hear you get lots of compliments on it IMO I am probably not the only customer who may experience panel warping. With respect: consider instead of just using four mounting blocks glue half inch thick hardwood mounting strips routing the top one for mounting. Suggested design drawn in red. The mounting strips should not add much weight at all and would completely stiffen the panel, should prevent anyone else experiencing the warping I had. Just a thought. https://i.imgur.com/PTgKk0d.pngHave you addressed/fixed the problem here frankbitcoin? Nowhere on your website do I see a disclaimer that this may happen to these high quality metal sheets. ($899) https://i.imgur.com/0pGH8E6h.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/zF7r2boh.jpgAt least now people don't look at the offcenter image on mine, they just see the ends curling up and the crease forming in the middle of the bottom. Edit: Oh retalitory feedback aswell.. including quotes from private messages. Interesting. That was not retalitory feedback. It was feedback because you left me neutral feedback after I clearly said I would replace your panel. For free. You then said you wanted a different design for free and that you'd "just keep the one you had." Sorry, but returns do not work that way. You then called me a prick and told me to f off.... after I offered to remedy your issue ... at no charge... A bit odd, no? And honestly I'd almost venture to say that you bent yours intentionally to make this post. I have 20 of these panels hanging in our office and have absolutely no issues. Quoted so you can't ninja delete this. |
|
|
|
No problem now. Sheet aluminum can be sensitive to temperature changes and the slight warping might be due to my chosen mounting location. I get many compliments on the piece from friends and it is not going anywhere but I do appreciate your standing behind your products 100%. I look forward to doing business with you in the future.
Thank you. Happy to hear you get lots of compliments on it IMO I am probably not the only customer who may experience panel warping. With respect: consider instead of just using four mounting blocks glue half inch thick hardwood mounting strips routing the top one for mounting. Suggested design drawn in red. The mounting strips should not add much weight at all and would completely stiffen the panel, should prevent anyone else experiencing the warping I had. Just a thought.  Have you addressed/fixed the problem here frankbitcoin? Nowhere on your website do I see a disclaimer that this may happen to these high quality metal sheets. ($899)   At least now people don't look at the offcenter image on mine, they just see the ends curling up and the crease forming in the middle of the bottom. Edit: Oh retalitory feedback aswell.. including quotes from private messages. Interesting. |
|
|
|
thats the same imagery used when you print bitaddress.org paper wallets. some very slight differences but wonder which came first. |
|
|
|
|
eodguy coins never disappoint. lookin good.
|
|
|
|
Remember that time you came to the forum and I showed you how to make your art worth something to us? Then you basically just ripped my photoshop masterpiece piece for piece.  Yeah. The idea was given publicly. Obviously. You actually ripped MY design. The moon art you just showed is mine. And then you put the word Bitcoin on the flag.  Remember that time when I tried to offer you a free replacement for your panel that you said you had a small issue with, and you said no, you'd keep the panel, and that we could mail you an entirely different design for free? And then when I said I could only issue you a replacement for the exact item in question, you told me to "go f myself" and called me a "prick?" Remember that time? By the way, your last public comment to me was "I'm done with you", so uhh... you're still here. You really want to take this route and continue to harrass me on a public forum, be my guest; I'll exposure your disgusting, pitiful behavior. Go find something to do; you seem to need some hobbies. I was just establishing some backstory for this piece... jesus christ frank.. drama sells. When you're competing with BTCC in the quality control market and you find yourself tied.. you're gonna need a boost. Also you're 100% right I like me some free shit. |
|
|
|
Remember that time you came to the forum and I showed you how to make your art worth something to us? Then you basically just ripped my photoshop masterpiece piece for piece. |
|
|
|
Got my "free shipping" coupon in email this morning.... Thanks Cassie @ BTCC  Isn't it only redeemable for the next 6 months or so? Unless BTCC Mint comes out with something new in that time then they just want you to buy more of this junk 2018 Titanium run. Hi teeGUMES, The term of validity is one year, until Sept 4, 2019 as mentioned in the email sent to each customer. Free feel to contact us by emailing to mint-support@btcc.com if you have any other confusion, thanks. Regards, BTCC_Official My bad, the picture I had seen does show that, I read dates in different orders. |
|
|
|
Got my "free shipping" coupon in email this morning.... Thanks Cassie @ BTCC Isn't it only redeemable for the next 6 months or so? Unless BTCC Mint comes out with something new in that time then they just want you to buy more of this junk 2018 Titanium run. |
|
|
|
I don't see where it doesn't say that all funds go directly to me in case of dispute either. You play on a lot of slides too when you were young suchmoon?
Why would it go to you? In case of a dispute the escrow decides if the product has been delivered and the funds go to the seller, or not and the funds go to the buyer (the latter is what happened here). Is that another one of those Merriam-Webster things that you don't want to accept? I can do ad hominems with the best of them so perhaps let's take it easy with the playground insults. What funds? The amount that some anonymous 'aliased' escrow promises you is the number? "Just trust me guys". I'm done here anyways. With your voice actually meaning something here I figured you'd act a little different. Transparency is one of the biggest things in order to establish trust.. especially with the ol "not your keys not your bitcoin". In this case the investors don't even get to see the public key side which is what bitcoin and public decentralized ledgers are used for. My questions raised have never been whether or not I believe there is theft or fraud happening here, it's been solely about transparency and answers for the less fortunate. The few that have this power have remained silent or continue to talk circles. If this does not raise red flags for you then I'm sorry and I hope the best for you in life. |
|
|
|
This is fair to say as I have been using the wrong words to express what I meant. I believe most people can understand what I am trying to get at when saying one side has failed to provide their product and this leads to the investor side recouping what is left.
I'm not here to discuss Merriam-Webster's definition of escrow with you suchmoon. What I do believe is that the founders (the problems) hold more information than the investors(the wronged) who deserve better.
Even in a conflict the escrow is not supposed to favor one party over the other. The only terms that I can find are these: The funds will be released using milestones defined as follow:
- 30% release at the end of the crowdsale.
- 30% at the delivery of the beta wallet and first API Cluster
- 30% At the delivery of the Beta Validator
- 10% At the delivery of the plugin system
The funds won't be released until the escrows
agree that a milestone has been reached.
I don't see where it defines exchange rates or transparency levels or any of these things that are being discussed here. I don't see where it doesn't say that all funds go directly to me in case of dispute either. You play on a lot of slides too when you were young suchmoon? |
|
|
|
Seems rather stupid to say your last couple sentences. An escrow should have btc/altcoin amounts in something like an excel spreadsheet with proper accounting / tracking. Very easy to press Ctrl C and Ctrl V on their keyboards and post it here. This isn't just about how the ICO is being run, it falls back on the CET ( Crypto Escrow Team ) and how they conduct their business with no transparency. This will effect further business for them.
If I wanted to do business with an escrow I would negotiate terms before the deal. It doesn't seem that the NVO team or the bagholders (the parties to the transaction) had the requirements that you're alluding to at the time when the ICO was conducted. If they did then they should bring it up. How is that stupid? Tell me who the escrow team works for now? The NVO team or the bagholders? Is it possible to contact every single one of the investors? If so why hasn't this been done. If they replied back and said " NO I DONT WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY DID OR DIDNT GO TO THE TEAM THAT FUCKED OVER MY INVESTMENT " then yea I can see where you're coming from. The escrow is an independent third party. It doesn't work work for the team or the bagholders. That would be a major conflict of interest. If there is a grievance of some sort it's not unreasonable to expect the aggrieved party to come forward with a complaint. As you just illustrated it would be ridiculously difficult to prove a negative (absence of grievances), particularly given the anonymous nature of crypto transactions. This is fair to say as I have been using the wrong words to express what I meant. I believe most people can understand what I am trying to get at when saying one side has failed to provide their product and this leads to the investor side recouping what is left. I'm not here to discuss Merriam-Webster's definition of escrow with you suchmoon. What I do believe is that the founders (the problems) hold more information than the investors(the wronged) who deserve better. |
|
|
|
Why did they choose you as spokesperson? Horrible choice.
I'm nobody spokesperson, unless stated otherwise. This has been made public, others want to know that aren't even involed, they want to know if they use you guys in the future if this is how you're going to act and show transparency.
Whatever you request and gets agreed upon beforehand is what we deliver. If they did then they should bring it up.
They did not. As said: ...even though it was just an attempt to cause issues and delay the refund (which has ultimately failed despite their best efforts).
It's the accusation "Lauda is doing pills" all over again; the difference being that this one (surprisingly) isn't from a Quickseller & co. account. As I wrote before. i gave up. I dont have any hope to get the answer I would like to have.
And now I hope that people will realise that this is not the best way to handle stuff like this. And that other escrows will provide the information and that these escrows will be chosen.
This is Lauda's m.o. .. slide the thread with useless drivel until people get so frustrated and confused that they no longer wish to participate because it is a one sided conversation. Whatever you request and gets agreed upon beforehand is what we deliver.
Who agreed upon these rules? Escrow and NVO team correct? Did each and every investor enter into conversation with you agreeing to what would be delivered? Or did they trust the NVO team to deliver as expected and feel safer doing it because an escrow team was in place? Like I said before, your terms were discussed with the NVO management, not with each and every investor which is now who YOU work for. This makes your agreements null and void with the founders. Let's see what the results of "what you request and gets agreed upon beforehand is what we deliver" actually are. Should be fairly easy to copy and paste the original agreement here. And then lets see which of the founders (whom caused this whole problem) agreed to this and whether it becomes null and void due to their inability to fulfill their duty to the investors. |
|
|
|
Seems rather stupid to say your last couple sentences. An escrow should have btc/altcoin amounts in something like an excel spreadsheet with proper accounting / tracking. Very easy to press Ctrl C and Ctrl V on their keyboards and post it here. This isn't just about how the ICO is being run, it falls back on the CET ( Crypto Escrow Team ) and how they conduct their business with no transparency. This will effect further business for them.
If I wanted to do business with an escrow I would negotiate terms before the deal. It doesn't seem that the NVO team or the bagholders (the parties to the transaction) had the requirements that you're alluding to at the time when the ICO was conducted. If they did then they should bring it up. How is that stupid? Tell me who the escrow team works for now? The NVO team or the bagholders? Is it possible to contact every single one of the investors? If so why hasn't this been done. If they replied back and said " NO I DONT WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY DID OR DIDNT GO TO THE TEAM THAT FUCKED OVER MY INVESTMENT " then yea I can see where you're coming from. Right now we are acting on the presumption that this whole ICO went smooth and everything were delivered that was asked. Reality check.. it didnt. |
|
|
|
Which is likely why some of the investors only have bitcointalk.org left to find their answers.
They received their answers. This thread was started by no "normal investor". It was very soon after I left the discord channel (which is now apparently used for their *upcoming projects*?). Now you have outsiders that commonly use escrow and members involved in this that are watching this from afar wondering WTF is this the kind of transparency I'm going to get in a dispute?
There is absolutely no dispute about funds; the dispute is entirely related to something else and the details of it are almost non existent over here. Let's not forget either that no answers were ever given here and Lauda flipped off most people asking questions until suchmoon entered the fray. This trust system is shit but I can only guess that suchmoon is some sort of default trust and thats what caused Lauda to start answering minor questions. Shows character when a person shows zero respect to everyone until someone with a bit of power steps in.
I've replied about 3 hours after this nonsense was posted, even though it was just an attempt to cause issues and delay the refund (which has ultimately failed despite the best efforts); clear bias. And that other escrows will provide the information and that these escrows will be chosen.
Again, you need to look up how ICO escrows are done. If full (public) transparency isn't initially agreed upon, then you shall not receive it. Case point, most large(er) ICOs *known* escrows. edit to add: This is the absolute worst case scenario for any escrow to have to deal with. I honestly do wish this never did happen in the real world and this part of the job would not have to come up and even present itself.
Thanks for acknowledging that. It is indeed one of the worst outcomes, especially when some terms are somewhat ambiguous or non-existent. Despite the beauty of simplicity, it did me no favors this time around. We call this a slide. Zero useful information. You are dragging other people's name through the mud ( your escrow team ). Why did they choose you as spokesperson? Horrible choice. Again, you need to look up how ICO escrows are done. If full (public) transparency isn't initially agreed upon, then you shall not receive it. Case point, most large(er) ICOs *known* escrows.
Guess what. You don't work for the ICO anymore. You work for the people. They want to know. This has been made public, others want to know that aren't even involed, they want to know if they use you guys in the future if this is how you're going to act and show transparency. |
|
|
|
I thought that even the 3,000 BTC amount was speculation. I'm clearly not helping solve anything and very likely missing vital chunks of information. I also thought the alts were forked and exchanged when the value was much more insignificant and that 60% was to be spent on development. I may have read through the entire thread, but my reading comprehension must be beyond salvageable.
I'll just bow this one out.
3000+ was the valuation at the time of ICO, which the token distribution was based on. Actual exchange value was likely lower - perhaps in the 2700 BTC range but I can't say that I know the exact number. 30% was to be distributed to the development team immediately after the ICO (first milestone) and another 30% after the release of beta wallet (2nd milestone), leaving 40% in escrow. 1400 / 3100 is 45% and 1400 / 2700 is 52%, i.e. it passes a basic smell test: the refund covered more than the escrow was supposed to hold. The extra funds have been presumably gained from forks and the 2nd milestone not being completely distributed due to some internal disputes. At this point it would seem that whoever wants to accuse Lauda et al of wrongdoing should come up with evidence, not the other way round. Otherwise this could go on for years with random people claiming that the refund should have been 10 BTC or 100 BTC or 1000 BTC higher. Seems rather stupid to say your last couple sentences. An escrow should have btc/altcoin amounts in something like an excel spreadsheet with proper accounting / tracking. Very easy to press Ctrl C and Ctrl V on their keyboards and post it here. This isn't just about how the ICO is being run, it falls back on the CET ( Crypto Escrow Team ) and how they conduct their business with no transparency. This will effect further business for them. Your basic smell test just had a 400 bitcoin discrepancy. Nice one. (Guess what? with proper transparency you wouldn't need to be sniffing around, we'd have the exact numbers to talk about and help with this situation.) It sounds like the "proper" communication channels so far have heavy bias and if you question the wrong founder/other founder/escrow then you are removed from said telegram/slack/other mode of communication. Which is likely why some of the investors only have bitcointalk.org left to find their answers. Aswell the official website has been claimed to have the ability to act nefarious in this situation so that is also not a proper means of communication for most. If any single investor has no other way to find information about this project and what is happening besides bitcointalk then it is owed to them to be able to find what they need here. The ICO took place here, the Crypto Escrow Team has their roots set in here and was probably chosen based on what the ICO team had seen here. Now you have outsiders that commonly use escrow and members involved in this that are watching this from afar wondering WTF is this the kind of transparency I'm going to get in a dispute? I sure as hell bet the founders of this failed project have all the information, but guess what.. they're the ones that had an internal problem and failed the people that funded their project. Therefore these escrows now work for the investors. Guess who gets snipped on an lipped off by the escrow when they ask for transparency? The investors. Let's not forget either that no answers were ever given here and Lauda flipped off most people asking questions until suchmoon entered the fray. This trust system is shit but I can only guess that suchmoon is some sort of default trust and thats what caused Lauda to start answering minor questions. Shows character when a person shows zero respect to everyone until someone with a bit of power steps in. disclaimer: i am in no way involved in this failed ICO, just a reader and occasional user of escrow. edit to add: This is the absolute worst case scenario for any escrow to have to deal with. I honestly do wish this never did happen in the real world and this part of the job would not have to come up and even present itself. It is very unfortunate but it is why the fee charged should be substantial enough to put up with this kind of headache. I fully believe the escrows need to be paid just as well during the good times as the bad times. Think of it like car insurance. |
|
|
|
Every customer is unhappy with this series and what does BTCC ? -> A solution ? No
 I am truly sorry to hear that you're very disappointed about the metallic qualities of the 2018 Titanium coins. Your best solution is to reach out to BTCC Mint customer support to ask for a full refund or replacement.
<---- click https://mint.btcc.com/contact <---- click it really is just a mess all around. its so very hard to give the benefit of the doubt here. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
