>>- First ICO day bonus. Users who buy WAVES tokens on April,12 receive a bonus of 20%
Is this coming from the pool of 1m set aside for early supporters or from the 85m itself?
bump Still nobody want to answer this. Whats the catch?  Its probably from the 85m. Makes at least sence... but I also don't know for sure |
|
|
|
Validate your ICO Passphrase!
Important! Every ICO participant should do it! Guys I don't understand it. Why should I risk security issues again. I saved the file. Is there really the possibility that its wrong? Kidding me? With bitcoin you try to make paperwallets offline to be sure, that there is no hacking possibility and I should repeatedly risk it here? The fact that you are complaining about having to check your passphrase to make sure it's valid is funny as shit.  a really? and if I put it on a safe usb somewhere locked? whats the point? |
|
|
|
Validate your ICO Passphrase!
Important! Every ICO participant should do it! Guys I don't understand it. Why should I risk security issues again. I saved the file. Is there really the possibility that its wrong? Kidding me? With bitcoin you try to make paperwallets offline to be sure, that there is no hacking possibility and I should repeatedly risk it here? just follow rules like ma dringt koa hells ausm weisbiaglasl... crypto rules say, that you don't send unnecessarily security tokens around... so again the question. Is there ANY case, that a passphrase can be wrong in the generated file? |
|
|
|
Validate your ICO Passphrase!
Important! Every ICO participant should do it! Guys I don't understand it. Why should I risk security issues again. I saved the file. Is there really the possibility that its wrong? Kidding me? With bitcoin you try to make paperwallets offline to be sure, that there is no hacking possibility and I should repeatedly risk it here? |
|
|
|
Also- the never ending ICO is a detriment to the project. what is the point? announce a final month, get done with it and have newly interested people buy in - in the free market.
show me one decent tech startup that declared a date to end of funding  Ethereum, counterparty, NXT, Maidsafe etc etc etc. I would increase the percentage of coins kept for the project (besides for the devs) and AS INTEREST grows in the project, i.e. demand, so will the price increase since the supply will be limited. Right now you basically offer unlimited supply+ some previous buyers sell (many times lower than you) and this holds down a healthy supply and demand curve. Ending the ICO will mean that supply becomes limited and since the project progresses, value should increase as not many previous holders will sell anymore + new comers will create demand that with less supply will translate to better value. since there will only be 10M coins for example after the burn, the value of each will eventually increase and a real market will start including an increased value for the project's funds to be able to finance marketing and maybe more dev's to expedite some issues.
but the project won't necessarily have the luxury of not spending the tokens before they reach the moon. we'll adjust the premine (and maybe other settings) in the future when it becomes more relevant That's why i suggest that you increase the project's share and differentiate between this and your personal coin holdings. for example if the "project" keeps 20% of the final number in an audit-able and transparent fashion it should have sufficient funding for some time and especially if the ETH like scenario plays out-:the ETH foundation now has funding for 5 years. All from the 42 days pre sale. from 14 cents to 11 dollars (no touring complete ofcourse...). If they were continue to sell for 2 years the value would still be 14 cents. wasted energy. I told him many times already... stubborn.. |
|
|
|
Whats with spamming there. You read, how long the campaign is running? 50 Posts in 2 months is really not much. Thats just 7 a week. If you have a little discussion to a topic in a tread, you got very fast 10 posts with sence in a few hours... |
|
|
|
11'355'541.999999999
Thats an huge sum, i think they must be freezed for at least 1 year. is not a good idea to add them to the foundation to soon. If they are freezed is the same thing and if some one is in late ( for family or health problem) can reedem the IOTA. also after the deadline. Please iotatoken think about that In the terms everyone agreed to when participating in the crowdsale they had 90 days to collect. We set this limit because 3 months is more than enough for anyone with a genuine interest in IOTA to claim them. We gave an extension of 1 week for a couple of late claimers. If someone has not shown an iota of interest in IOTA for 3 months straight, they frankly don't deserve it or need it. The iotas are going towards the project, no freeze. Yeap, there were TERMS OF CROWDSALE, it was clearly stated that IOTAs need to be claimed in 90 days, and in fact IOTA team give addition 1 week for latecomers. If people do not want their iotas - someone other do  Hehe you can do that, but be prepared for the troll shitstorm after the people realize it |
|
|
|
|
I thought about it again.
I try to summarize the numbers (please correct me, if something is wrong):
42.0M Tokens
05.0M IPO sold Tokens
09.5M stolen Tokens but curently not sellable
00.5M stolen Tokens dumped at lower price and are eligible for a later dump below IPO price.
So we see that the guy sold about 10% of the IPO tokens. So ohad said he would give 10% more coins to compensate it.
But even if ohad managed to distinuish the coins and gave everyone else 10% more new tokens, it would still look like this:
42.0M Tokens
05.5M IPO sold Tokens
00.5M stolen Tokens sold at lower price and are eligible for a later dump below IPO price.
so the stolen coins selling percentage shrank 1%... there is nearly no difference...
If BITTREX does not manage to rollback the trades. The only reasonable possiblity is to buy the coins somehow back.
|
|
|
|
Bittrex not willing to cooperate and rollback the trades? Don't trade there..
I will second that. And somehow the crap keeps piling up on Bittrex. Made so many bad experiences over there, I am fed up. Bittrex is not responsible for it. If you don't understand that go back to the banking system... |
|
|
|
nothing to do with bittrex. omni dev writing a script for automatic distribution of the new token
how does omni dev know, which of the bittrex coins were sold of the scammer? all the scammer got is known, and he transferred 500K to bittrex yes and they are mixed up with others on bittrex. Only bittrex knows, which coins were the scammers, and which were there already before or did I miss something? But the calculation is somehow wrong. You can't calculate 500K out of 42M but 500k out of the sold coins...
How much are sold actually? Lets say 10M, then we are already at 5%...
see my demo proposal again, i edited it a minute later ah ok sorry. So coins are 10% cheaper then. You could decrease the selling price by 10% as well for now. But not necessarily from my side |
|
|
|
|
But the calculation is somehow wrong. You can't calculate 500K out of 42M but 500k out of the sold coins...
How much are sold actually? Lets say 10M, then we are already at 5%...
|
|
|
|
nothing to do with bittrex. omni dev writing a script for automatic distribution of the new token
how does omni dev know, which of the bittrex coins were sold of the scammer? |
|
|
|
We have still all the same percentage, because the scammer will also get more. In your offer stands, that at the beginning the leftover coins will be destroyed. So its equal to say: "I will only sell 41.5M" now.
This implies, that you want to sell all tokens in any way. Whats with the not sold coins being destroyed then?
of course i speak about the scammer not getting more (but about the new tokens), and the 500K holders also won't get that addition. so it fits even with coin destruction, which is still planned as usual. Lets see, if you can let bittrex manage that. Probably not that easy, but maybe possible. But the calculation is wrong. You can't calculate 500K out of 42M but 500k out of the sold coins... |
|
|
|
500K out of 42M is roughly 1.2%.
if the 500K would be destroyed, then this will increase the worth of all holders in 1.2%.
we can simply give all current holders 1.2% more than they have now, without destroying the 500K.
this proposal doesn't answer all concerns raised but only to demonstrate another direction of thought.
We have still all the same percentage, because the scammer will also get more. In your offer stands, that at the beginning the leftover coins will be destroyed. So its equal to say: "I will only sell 41.5M" now. This implies, that you want to sell all tokens in any way. Whats with the not sold coins being destroyed then? |
|
|
|
How much is this prank gonna cost us?
500000*17cent = 85000$ multiplied by the percentage of shares you own. |
|
|
|
Again, if the trade has been done on illegitimate terms and has been done so. The trade becomes null.
IF the trade is reversible, buyers must be refunded 1:1. Nothing less, nothing more.
IF the trade is not reversible then ... But let's see.
Sorry I don't understand it. Everyone here is screaming for decentralization but not even we here are able to handle it. There has to be a insurance for those things, that will buy the tokens back. That is the only legitimate way. If I steal something from your house the insurance will pay as well, if you have one. Of course the police will try to find it. But in a completely decentralized system there is no tracking possible. It is simply gone. So you have to pay more attention or have an insurance. If not, you are fucked! It is simply luck, that you could hold back the selling of all. BTW: in this case its really ridiculous. Just picture a scenario, where the "scammer" dumped all. Who is fucked more? We or ohad? Repeatedly: This presale is taking way too long and it should have ended already. |
|
|
|
Can anyone please tell me what was the price of IOTA after the ICO ended? With all the collected BTC's, what is the price right now before launch ?
0.0000025 right ?
My price (one of the middle bonus's) was 0.0000011 btc per iota. So people are trying to sell at 3500 ? So that's about 30 times the initial investment, a bit greedy if you ask me .... I could live with x10 profit for the early birds, but 30+ is a bit too much  OK thank you for the information, will be waiting for the exchanges to hit. Or if anyone is willing to sell at 1500 sat. msg me P.S. That is my personal opinion, if some one does not like it, just dont answer Personally at 30x the sale price with no idea when it will launch I am out . I mean to get 3500 sat will not be easy. I hope all the people who paid the recent premium will get their money back but for me the risk is really not worth it. Good luck with the project buying pre-release after ICO doesn't make sence anyway. Buy if it hits the exchange. then you can at least stop it from dropping because of some dumpers :-) |
|
|
|
Just wondering if there is a way to fix the signature logo for Hero/Legendary members? The logo and waves is very pixelated... Thanks for your consideration.
Don't know what you want. This looks cool... One can even think, that is is supposed to be pixelated. |
|
|
|
So we will have clients in both C++ and Scala. Why is that?
The more clients, the better!  I can understand if its for different OS. It just adds the overhead of keeping all the clients in sync when we add more functionalities. Wouldn't having more programming languages making it much harder to maintain and update the code? What's the advantage of this solution? Clients are only so-called "reference implementations". The "coin" itself is only the protocol. Everyone thinks bitcoin is the programm, and nxt is the program and lisk will be the program and wave as well. But thats wrong. Everyone can write similar implementation in another language (at least backend code) that fits the protocol (in the same blockchain). For a successful coin there should be different solutions. That shows, that it has a good adaption. And if one of the implementations has a security bug, people can go to the other already availbable solutions, if they exist. If there is only one implementation everyone has to use the client with the bug in the time it is not fixed.... It's somehow sad, that everyone here wants to make a new coin and a new coin and a new coin instead of making the current ones bigger. Ok, if the coins protocol is improving, that is fine (like waves probably). But often its the other way around. They don't even write new code and copy the whole thing instead. And if the client has a security problem, 10 of those clones have a problem ;-) |
|
|
|
Bter holds almost 50% of the coin and the price rocketing on the exchange....thats so surprising...
^this don't think so. polo volume is 10 times of it... the supply is only 20% now and everyone expecting raise because of lisk... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
