As a full-early investor I of course want the access to this coin at launch. However, I hope that most of the early birds have more vision than just wanting to take all the coins.
If this coin is going to have a real chance, the maximum number of people need to feel that they have a shot at this. I now agree wtih Anon that 50% mining is likely the best balance.
I think some kind of proportional system as has been discussed is a nice balance. 2nd round investors know they are buying into a much more secured investment. So that 1.0 ratio early bird, vs .8 or .75 ratio for the second round etc. Makes sense?
1st round didn't really take a risk. Escrow was available. With that said, 2nd round and 3rd round won't take a risk either, so I guess there should be some advantage to taking the jump first, which does in a way help peoples resolve jumping in 2nd or 3rd. Even then, why not just have a longer ipo period instead? Why not give non-escrowed investors more percentage than escrowed instead of all this round-about business? Let them put in a higher cap (2btc?). They are the ones who really took a risk. Otherwise It's all somewhat nonsensical and arbitrary devices being used to justify giving larger slices to some and smaller to others. This is what I'm talking about with distribution not getting nearly the amount of thought pre-ipo as it ought to. So, as the project becomes more "real" with whitepapers/working code, etc, more people will become interested. We can assume more people will invest in each successive investment period so their stake will be smaller. Cutting up the percentages is uneccessary and pointless. IF few invest in the third period, then just drop them into the second period with a slight dilution of those shares. There were better ways to do it, but you didnt think it through. Now the terms are the terms. Don't change anything, except if few invest in 3rd round, drop them into second round, adjust % accordingly and redistribute 3rd round percentage to mining. I understand where you are coming from but I personally think its a lot more complicated. And the escrow service does not level the playing field in anyway. This is why. 1) I consider the escrow a 'safer' bet. But there is still risk always 2) Regardless of if you escrowed or directly sent, you choose to take BTC out of something else. For example, I would have invested in MINT instead with that BTC, MINT is up 2X what it was when I sent to EXO. Of course you could have lost value but that is not the point. The point is vital-funds are currently in stasis and no longer in Play. There is a tremendous cost to this. That IS the risk as I see it. 3) The massive amount of initial funding could entirely enable a much stronger coin to be produced. If I was the dev on a project like this I would consider changing my life immediately and growing the team in the face of such demand. If everyone played it safe and held back and just waited this coin might never come into existence. This is the same for many new coins. 4) Essentially from here out its a different game, the moment a white paper was produced I view the risk as essentially halving. So in this 'new' climate its easy to forgot what it looked like just last night. |
|
|
|
|
Crypto Rewards the Faithful! MOVE LIKE ONE!
|
|
|
|
|
As a full-early investor I of course want the access to this coin at launch. However, I hope that most of the early birds have more vision than just wanting to take all the coins.
If this coin is going to have a real chance, the maximum number of people need to feel that they have a shot at this. I now agree wtih Anon that 50% mining is likely the best balance.
I think some kind of proportional system as has been discussed is a nice balance. 2nd round investors know they are buying into a much more secured investment. So that 1.0 ratio early bird, vs .8 or .75 ratio for the second round etc. Makes sense?
|
|
|
|
The "early bird" is incredibly diluted, eXo needs to combine second and third round at 10%. Early Bird should be at least 25%.
I also agree that as time goes on, and if the coin becomes more feasible everyone will forget the massive amount of early bird-contributions that could have helped push this coin into existence. With the production of this whitepaper the risk-level is dropping rapidly. Giving a much healthier environment to future investments. I think this is great as it will build the popularity of the coin. However if it was not for a massive early-adopter perk/bonus I would absolutely waited to buy coins at market. I'm not sure what is the most 'fair' but I think the massive amount of BTC put up before a whitepaper should be respected. I'm sure its got the dev's attention and I hope that the whole project takes on new life because of it. |
|
|
|
what do you guys think of the whitepaper?
Its 20 pages, I've read good portions and skimmed the rest. I'd say its a solid proposal for a interesting coin. But I'm easy to please because I'm not a coin developer so I don't know how feasible this all us. Though they claim to have working software already. |
|
|
|
#edit: whitepaper: linksorry guys, as mentioned I am out for today. Have fun reading and keep in mind that it is the first, initial version. Much will be changed with your help and ongoing development. your eXocoin team (ok a bit too early but that does not hurt, right?  ) start of 2nd stage will be announced. As for now, no investments are possible! Reading now, I am happy to have this PDF FILE! |
|
|
|
4th quarter of 2014? Is this a joke or scam? This isn't our firs rodeo is it? I'm giving them a 90% chance of being a scam, or at best vaporware. You don't post a couple pictures of the back of a stupid gigabyte Mini-itx case and ask for $12,000 PRE ORDER. |
|
|
|
sent you some btc-with the public labeled address
How canyou mine?? solo or pool?? any one has a pool??can you tell me ? InsanityCoin has no mining reward. There is no block reward and the transaction fee of 10% is destroyed, not given to miners. The current methods of obtaining the coin are via InsanityDev, or on https://poloniex.com/exchange/btc_wolfIf you still wish to mine to secure the network, I believe solo is your only option. So here is the part I don't understand, I bought some on Poloniex, and the QTY I bought remained the same, So does this mean that the WOLF has stayed stationary inside Poloniex, however ownership has shifted in some table on a database, and that when I withdraw the coins they will be subjected to the 10% reduction? |
|
|
|
|
19sats, can we break 20? can I get sleep tonight? Its Anyones Guess!
|
|
|
|
|
Wish I could buy more at 4 sats!
|
|
|
|
I hope the whitepaper is better than the homepage.
Hahaha, Can we say Frontpage 98!  Really though, I don't care what the pages look like so long as things are solid, If this coin even begins to lift-off the ground I'm sure it will get 3 make-overs in the next few months! |
|
|
|
Can 50% mining stage dumping initial price of coin through IPO? 30% mining would be better for price.
I agree here, 50% mining with 100M coins could cause intense dumping on exchanges. Completely eroding the perception of 'value' earned by the IPO |
|
|
|
|
The amount of Buy-in is too disproportionate to what I think was expected for the "Early-Bird"
Early-Bird IPO buyers are taking insane risk here, Its entirely possible that the 2nd and 3rd buy-ins could contribute less coins in a much lower risk environment and take more EXO if it does not gain in popularity and exposure.
I know this has been addressed, but this is a major confidence issue. I suggest removing the 3rd buy-in and and digging into the mining block to even out the risk for the first two block buyers. Or doing something to mitigate these fears.
|
|
|
|
Yousee, your flawed thinking is that they will dump it only on cryptsy. There are other exchanges mate.
Of course, but the supply of dumping coins would still destroy the market entirely long before any huge amount of coins could be sold. I've been on this coin since day one. I've read every post in this thread at least once. I think the devs are doing a poor job keeping us happy. But I don't think they've spent the premine. They have actually been very consistent since day one, The issue is that people don't like to hear what is being said. There is the catch 22, If people don't like hearing it, Its hard to get behind it and support it! I think incryptex is going to come out at some point. The devs will still have 150M+ EAC in storage. Incryptex will use EAC as the baseline currency. NOT BTC like all other exchanges do. Then boom EAC is now valuable over night. Now that 150M+ is worth enough to retire, Not 30K usd split 3 ways. This coin was never positioned to be a pump and dump, I think the devs are after a major pay off. They fought to keep the coin off cryptsy but couldn't control it. Its easy to look at a small snapshot of time and draw conclusions. Also never sell at a loss! I've had to keep buying as the price drops to lower my position. |
|
|
|
I think to a point it doesn't matter, I view crypto currencies as the next/new stores of value for the digital age. Sure we will still have NYSE, Nike and Komatsu however. For the younger generations I suspect a digital asset of mathematical rarity will make as much sense as a company that makes shoes fairly well. Or more specifically I don't think a coin has to be widely traded to be of use. I think MINT could be a purely speculative investment that might really pay off regardless of if it finds much Utility.
The world seems hungry for Crypto, who knows what is going to happen next.
I think utility might not be entirely pertinent at least as a means for speculative adjustment. A few of the major coins with utility will start to become indispensable. Although admittedly with the wrong adjustment we can still see hyper inflation (regardless of being a capped coin supply or not) in the same way we have external risk factors influence financial crisis. It seems to me that the younger generation is clutching onto things like crypto as many struggle to make serious financial gains through traditional means. I wouldn't explicitly refer to any crypto in the same way as I'd see public companies because production and service value are major factors in their market valuation. They're not entirely speculative, it's not a chicken and egg scenario. Their production value signals market adjustment. Rather than arbitrary 'out of thin air' adjustment. Crypto like Mint is more in line with gold/silver/art/diamond/ruby holdings, where crypto like BTC/Doge are seemingly set to be more in line with USD/Euro/etc currencies that are dependent on their utility. ie the amount of produced goods or services that their 'money' (crypto) can buy. In a lot of ways Mint is a little more sincere than a lot of commodities where we have a difference between 'perceived' and 'actual' supply that is itself manipulated a great deal. But it's also a little naive to think that because we're here right now we will benefit most from the next financial instrument. What's to stop the next kid deciding they didn't get their fair share, so they want a large chunk of the crypto market by creating their own coin? Not a lot at the moment. The barriers to entry are tiny. As a matter of fact, it's exceedingly easy to start a new coin. There needs to be differentiation, and something involving more than a nice green tinge that determines value. I'm interested to see what happens to the entry requirements of crypto over the long term, and the adoption of new crypto. If you consider we currently have less than 100 cryptos that make any sort of long term sense, will we see another 100 over the next year? Or will we see more like 2,000 additions over the next year? The reason real world (natural) commodities serve as a valid indicator for 'wealth' is that there aren't any new ones to be found. Other artificial commodities like art are entirely speculative, new artificial (and limited) commodities come up on a regular basis, but it takes skill/talent (and a lot of luck) to become the next Picasso. I think this is the best ending phrase anyone has ever responded to me with! ha! I basically totally agree with you. I may differ a bit in how much 'value' I think the new kids really place on what the old guard considered work. I am even guilty of this. For example, I am buying a new laptop. I am buying it refurbished, for a amazing price. I bought a SSD drive and and more ram for it too so, it will be quite the sweet machine for little more than a third of what it should cost. Now I am entirely aware that it probably cost 2 billion dollars to build that chip-fabrication facility. And even more amazingly that the technology in every bit of my soon to be delivered laptop is built upon 20+ years of insanely aggressive innovation layer after layer. That being said, I hardly give it a second thought! Access to these types of goods and services has been completely stable since I was young and my dad bought a 8086 PC home. I would never consider investing in Samsung, or DELL stock. I've traded before and managed my own retirement funds but its still a bit of a pain in the ass to do it. And even though I am cynical about everything and not one of these younger guys I am a hundred times more excited about MINT coin than I am any traditional investment methods. I don't even like fiat. I can't seem to take a little profit out of crypto even when I need it. Instead I find MINT, or something else. I sense a strong possibility that the next generation that is just at the cusp of this world may just skip the whole fiat-phase altogether. Getting cash to them will be this annoying process like getting a money order is to me. They won't have a clue nor care that some huge factory is pumping out ipad10's and can be publically traded. Even your point about them maybe starting to flock to crypto because they are having difficulties with traditional means. That is basically exactly it. 'This' is starting to make more sense than 'That'. Crazy I know. |
|
|
|
The best thing that could happen now is the devs come clean and explain exactly where the premine went, 50mil to Wes, 200mil to norb to develop his http://www.incryptex.com etc. and whatever is left (hopefully ZERO) and to prove it. That way people will be more likely to invest and a real community effort could be made to rebuild this coin from scratch. What we really need is someone skilled at blockchain investigations to go thru the blockchain to figure out exactly whats gone where and how much is left. I know some guy did a really good blockchain investigation on Quarks and when the Sheep Market Place got stolen, that one guy was epic at tracking that shit. We need him lol. +1 The thing that gets me the most about the premine accusations is that its not really magically 'free' money. This coin has to go somewhere to create a payoff for the dev's. Even IF it was pump/dump coin at these prices and even much better prices there is no real value here. Sure at 100satoshis, they could start dumping and maybe pull out 10 BTC before the price crashed the floor. Look what just happened, I estimate someone just sold what, 2-3 million coins at 'market' and it crashed the price to 50 satoshis. In order for the premine to be worth anything the coin has to go places, I wish the dev's posted more, I wish the would be more transparent, I would prefer many things. However my intuition is that while the devs would obviously hope the community would be building the best it could. They know that they are busy working on some large projects which have several ways that they could greatly improve EAC so they just simply are not concerned with trying to keep all of us happy. They are possibly content with the progress they make behind closed doors for now. You are exactly what is wrong with this coin. Do you know how much 270 million EAC is worth? That is approximately 200k USD. What goddamn projects are the devs working on? Is it until it reaches 1 satoshi that you will say "oh had I known"? This is the same nonsense that was said when we were at 180 satoshi, at 130 satoshi at 100 satoshi and now at 60 satoshi with still no updates from the devs except for WESCUNT coming in to talk about the oh so secret projects in the works. Either way believe what you want. Glad I dumped at 130 satoshi after losing half my portfolio. Tell yourself a lie long enough, you just might believe it. Assuming there was infinite demand they could sell it for 150K USD, but go look at cryptsy. There is less than 10 BTC worth of "buy" orders. The devs are trapped just as much as we are. I can't even sell the EAC that I have because I would exhaust all the current buy offers and the price would hit zero. Literally zero and stay there until enough new buys showed up to exhaust my supply. I learned this the hard way after having a big break on a small coin, and I was left holding the bag and unable to sell more than a sliver without totally crashing the market. I think there is a lot less premine left, I bet its under 170M, maybe even 150M. And if that is the case it can't be sold regardless. So the dev's had better be in the kitchen cooking up some utility. Because they aren't getting paid until it happens. |
|
|
|
The best thing that could happen now is the devs come clean and explain exactly where the premine went, 50mil to Wes, 200mil to norb to develop his http://www.incryptex.com etc. and whatever is left (hopefully ZERO) and to prove it. That way people will be more likely to invest and a real community effort could be made to rebuild this coin from scratch. What we really need is someone skilled at blockchain investigations to go thru the blockchain to figure out exactly whats gone where and how much is left. I know some guy did a really good blockchain investigation on Quarks and when the Sheep Market Place got stolen, that one guy was epic at tracking that shit. We need him lol. +1 The thing that gets me the most about the premine accusations is that its not really magically 'free' money. This coin has to go somewhere to create a payoff for the dev's. Even IF it was pump/dump coin at these prices and even much better prices there is no real value here. Sure at 100satoshis, they could start dumping and maybe pull out 10 BTC before the price crashed the floor. Look what just happened, I estimate someone just sold what, 2-3 million coins at 'market' and it crashed the price to 50 satoshis. In order for the premine to be worth anything the coin has to go places, I wish the dev's posted more, I wish the would be more transparent, I would prefer many things. However my intuition is that while the devs would obviously hope the community would be building the best it could. They know that they are busy working on some large projects which have several ways that they could greatly improve EAC so they just simply are not concerned with trying to keep all of us happy. They are possibly content with the progress they make behind closed doors for now. |
|
|
|
50 satoshi per eac, lovely.
8 btc to 95.
Damn, Even I didn't see that coming. |
|
|
|
That isn't a technical calculation. And I think your answers to a), b), and c) are all extremely ambiguous.
Where is the incentive for people to use their MintCoin for trade? It looks like anyone who sells MintCoin will be forgoing a 20% annual interest rate in the first year on that money??
Is it some sort of obligation to assume someone who asks valid questions not here to see crypto like this succeed? I'm trying to understand how others see it working in commerce, that's what's important for the adoption of a particular coin. I have three degrees. Two are masters in international business, and applied finance. I would like to encourage people who can discuss this at the appropriate level to add their views. I'm in for 12M MintCoin currently, I'm not swayed by short term gains I have no need for additional liquidity.
Why does it seem all the kids here are threatened by intellectual discourse?
I think to a point it doesn't matter, I view crypto currencies as the next/new stores of value for the digital age. Sure we will still have NYSE, Nike and Komatsu however. For the younger generations I suspect a digital asset of mathematical rarity will make as much sense as a company that makes shoes fairly well. Or more specifically I don't think a coin has to be widely traded to be of use. I think MINT could be a purely speculative investment that might really pay off regardless of if it finds much Utility. The world seems hungry for Crypto, who knows what is going to happen next. |
|
|
|
This coin really has potential, been mining some and bought at different levels.
My only concern, is the premine. Is the dev going to be transparent about what they are doing with it? 700MM is a LOT of coins. As a community we should hold them accountable.
Look what happened to EAC, 270MM premined, everyone said no big deal, same script you hear with all premined coins. premine for bounties, giveaways, development, support and maintenance, new feature developments etc.
What bounties have been paid already?
What bounties are still outstanding?
How much has been given away already?
How much are allocated for future giveaways?
What new features/developments do you plan to implement?
I think a good percent of those coins should go into establishing a MintCoin Foundation.
Really let outsiders know this is a serious coin looking long-term.
thoughts?
I'm pretty sure the EAC premine has not really been touched, You can go back a couple hundred pages and find the address where it is stored. It is a concern though I agree, the community needs to know the coins will be spent well. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
