Of course we take Blocknet coins! That's why the ITO included them.
We'll use the coins to fund development.
You said at the beginning, that you fund the development with the BTC you earn from the ITO?! No you tell us that this isnt enough and that you want to hold a bunch of BLOCK token?? No. Argh. The commenter referred to altcoins that people used to buy BLOCK as "blocknet coins". We SOLD Blocknet tokens for alts. We're KEEPING the alts and using them for development. |
|
|
|
can some coins be moved around if they aren't all sold? It's unfair how the coingateway ITO was held... there were problems, people weren't sure if they were receiving discounts. I think another 10% of blocknet coins should be moved into the coingateway for users who missed out due to the unfair circumstances.
All discounts will be paid. Check out my post history for details. I gave details on this very recently. |
|
|
|
Then why did you let a third party determine the exchange rate?
Because it's their responsibility to exchange the coins for BLOCK. We'd have a conflict of interest if we determined the price. This is pretty glaringly obvious IMO. How would there be a conflict of interest? Coingateway takes a percentage of the value of the transaction. They could value this transaction in terms of the tokens and have no uncertainty. Then you could set the exchange rate. And if you had done that, you could share the valuation function with us. There'd be a conflict of interest for us because we could set an algorithm that guaranteed we'd rake in the maximum amount of altcoin per BLOCK. |
|
|
|
Update on CoinGateway's pricing algorithm: we looked at volume and set a btc amount
but [the algorithm] is confidential tho i rather not disclose that
let say Bitswift for example
we look at what it takes to buy 0.2 btc worth of bitswift and average the price around that
differnet alt usually have different btc volume equivalent depending on their volume
|
|
|
|
The term "you" here refers to a third party (CoinGateway) with no vested interest in shafting anyone.
In fact, their prime interest is to attract customers, so I very much doubt there'd be any "shafting" going on.
Their algorithm was not disclosed to prevent gaming coins' prices prior to the ITO.
If you're unhappy with the price of SWIFT, please take it up with them. I'm interested to hear their response actually, so by all means post it here.
Are you saying that you let CoinGateway come up with the averaging function for your ITO? That makes very little sense. It would be impossible to game an averaging function significantly if it weighted historical prices more than recent prices. That's not a new concept. I thought you guys were computer scientists and knew about mathy things like that. This. Why on earth would a third party company have any input in to the valuing of the Blocknet tokens? Also I've noticed that people who paid with XC (not sure about other coins) received Blocknet tokens at different rates - I got approx 2.9 BLOCK per XC and cryptico got roughly 2.7. Was the BLOCK price not fixed? Not trying to fud here, just seeking clarity. They're not valuing Blocknet tokens, they valued coins used to buy Blocknet tokens. Of course. We've been very upfront on the fact that all funds will be transparently held and spent. P.S. I made your remark non-abusive. I'd appreciate it if you could edit the original similarly. |
|
|
|
The term "you" here refers to a third party (CoinGateway) with no vested interest in shafting anyone.
In fact, their prime interest is to attract customers, so I very much doubt there'd be any "shafting" going on.
Their algorithm was not disclosed to prevent gaming coins' prices prior to the ITO.
If you're unhappy with the price of SWIFT, please take it up with them. I'm interested to hear their response actually, so by all means post it here.
Are you saying that you let CoinGateway come up with the averaging function for your ITO? That makes very little sense. It would be impossible to game an averaging function significantly if it weighted historical prices more than recent prices. That's not a new concept. I thought you guys were computer scientists and knew about mathy things like that. Yes, it is their responsibility for the pricing of coins, in the same way that it could not be our responsibility to price coins on an exchange where one is listed. Ah. So the blocknet people don't take blocknet coins for the ICO. Hmmm. Where's the faith in the blocknet coins?Your opinions get more weird by the second. Of course we take Blocknet coins! That's why the ITO included them. We'll use the coins to fund development. Then why did you let a third party determine the exchange rate? Because it's their responsibility to exchange the coins for BLOCK. We'd have a conflict of interest if we determined the price. This is pretty glaringly obvious IMO. |
|
|
|
The term "you" here refers to a third party (CoinGateway) with no vested interest in shafting anyone.
In fact, their prime interest is to attract customers, so I very much doubt there'd be any "shafting" going on.
Their algorithm was not disclosed to prevent gaming coins' prices prior to the ITO.
If you're unhappy with the price of SWIFT, please take it up with them. I'm interested to hear their response actually, so by all means post it here.
Are you saying that you let CoinGateway come up with the averaging function for your ITO? That makes very little sense. It would be impossible to game an averaging function significantly if it weighted historical prices more than recent prices. That's not a new concept. I thought you guys were computer scientists and knew about mathy things like that. This. Why on earth would a third party company have any input in to the valuing of the Blocknet tokens? Also I've noticed that people who paid with XC (not sure about other coins) received Blocknet tokens at different rates - I got approx 2.9 BLOCK per XC and cryptico got roughly 2.7. Was the BLOCK price not fixed? Not trying to fud here, just seeking clarity. They're not valuing Blocknet tokens, they valued coins used to buy Blocknet tokens. |
|
|
|
The term "you" here refers to a third party (CoinGateway) with no vested interest in shafting anyone.
In fact, their prime interest is to attract customers, so I very much doubt there'd be any "shafting" going on.
Their algorithm was not disclosed to prevent gaming coins' prices prior to the ITO.
If you're unhappy with the price of SWIFT, please take it up with them. I'm interested to hear their response actually, so by all means post it here.
Are you saying that you let CoinGateway come up with the averaging function for your ITO? That makes very little sense. It would be impossible to game an averaging function significantly if it weighted historical prices more than recent prices. That's not a new concept. I thought you guys were computer scientists and knew about mathy things like that. Yes, it is their responsibility for the pricing of coins, in the same way that it could not be our responsibility to price coins on an exchange where one is listed. Ah. So the blocknet people don't take blocknet coins for the ICO. Hmmm. Where's the faith in the blocknet coins?Your opinions get more weird by the second. Of course we take Blocknet coins! That's why the ITO included them. We'll use the coins to fund development. |
|
|
|
The term "you" here refers to a third party (CoinGateway) with no vested interest in shafting anyone.
In fact, their prime interest is to attract customers, so I very much doubt there'd be any "shafting" going on.
Their algorithm was not disclosed to prevent gaming coins' prices prior to the ITO.
If you're unhappy with the price of SWIFT, please take it up with them. I'm interested to hear their response actually, so by all means post it here.
Are you saying that you let CoinGateway come up with the averaging function for your ITO? That makes very little sense. It would be impossible to game an averaging function significantly if it weighted historical prices more than recent prices. That's not a new concept. I thought you guys were computer scientists and knew about mathy things like that. Yes, it is their responsibility for the pricing of coins, in the same way that it could not be our responsibility to price coins on an exchange where one is listed. that's just wrong. Umm, any reason for that opinion? |
|
|
|
The term "you" here refers to a third party (CoinGateway) with no vested interest in shafting anyone.
In fact, their prime interest is to attract customers, so I very much doubt there'd be any "shafting" going on.
Their algorithm was not disclosed to prevent gaming coins' prices prior to the ITO.
If you're unhappy with the price of SWIFT, please take it up with them. I'm interested to hear their response actually, so by all means post it here.
Are you saying that you let CoinGateway come up with the averaging function for your ITO? That makes very little sense. It would be impossible to game an averaging function significantly if it weighted historical prices more than recent prices. That's not a new concept. I thought you guys were computer scientists and knew about mathy things like that. Yes, it is their responsibility for the pricing of coins, in the same way that it could not be our responsibility to price coins on an exchange where one is listed. |
|
|
|
Yah why didn't you take the past 2 month average for the ITO? GOD WHY?
Because then it wouldn't work in their favor. Show us the calculations that were used to determine the average prices for the alt exchanges.Ask CoinGateway. You'd be mistaken to think that anyone at the Blocknet is in possession of their algorithm. I'll ask them too, and report back if I get an answer. |
|
|
|
Yah why didn't you take the past 2 month average for the ITO? GOD WHY?
I suggested that to them actually, but it would be unethical of me to have had any further sway on their decision. |
|
|
|
I want an answer to this.Why don't you get someone from Coingateway on here to give a real statement about the 10% we're ALL missing?
Things sound VERY uncertain right now and I'd hate for this to cast a negative shadow over BLOCK.
And I also want to know why the SWIFT -> BLOCK exchange rate was NOWHERE near an average price. +1,000,000 Why was it valued on the dump? Why not the recent average? Some people were stocking up well in advance of the ITO. They got the shaft, especially when they were holding through the dumps based on claims that an average would be used. The value of an "average price" depends entirely on one's algorithm for determining the average. So "nowhere near an average price" is strictly incorrect. You can reverse engineer the averaging function from the time at trade and the trade rate. Your average was for a 45 minute window at best. Either that or you took the lower of two ratios, one being a long term average and the other being a short term average. You shafted SWIFT people here because it dumped the hardest. Other coins like SSD were stable throughout and those people got the fairest deal. The term "you" here refers to a third party (CoinGateway) with no vested interest in shafting anyone. In fact, their prime interest is to attract customers, so I very much doubt there'd be any "shafting" going on. Their algorithm was not disclosed to prevent gaming coins' prices prior to the ITO. If you're unhappy with the price of SWIFT, please take it up with them. I'm interested to hear their response actually, so by all means post it here. |
|
|
|
An update from CoinGateway:
Coingateway has about 40 tickets in-process for payments.
Once those are done, they will do the 10% payouts.
This is likely (but not certain) to happen at around 21:00GMT (5pm EST).
So they'll automatically issue the payouts for those who purchased with the participating altcoins or will there be a kind of claims process? Submit a ticket, on a principle of best practice. It'll ensure that there's zero chance your purchase will end up falling through the cracks. |
|
|
|
|
Now now tx42, be civil.
No abusively worded comments please.
Let's also respond to uncivil comments with civility.
|
|
|
|
I want an answer to this.Why don't you get someone from Coingateway on here to give a real statement about the 10% we're ALL missing?
Things sound VERY uncertain right now and I'd hate for this to cast a negative shadow over BLOCK.
And I also want to know why the SWIFT -> BLOCK exchange rate was NOWHERE near an average price. +1,000,000 Why was it valued on the dump? Why not the recent average? Some people were stocking up well in advance of the ITO. They got the shaft, especially when they were holding through the dumps based on claims that an average would be used. The value of an "average price" depends entirely on one's algorithm for determining the average. So "nowhere near an average price" is strictly incorrect. |
|
|
|
This is a retarded term:
* The ITO must raise 850 BTC total across all exchanges to be considered a success.
WTF is this? Bittrex, get serious will you?
That is the minimum amount (that we determined ourselves) in order for the project to go ahead. |
|
|
|
is stealth still part of blocknet?
Why wouldn't they be? |
|
|
|
Any idea when are we going to be able to withdraw blocknet from bittrex?
Well you first need a wallet to withdraw the coins or tokens or whatever they call it. There is no wallet yet. Well, getting 2500 BTC in the name of the claim that they will start developing the blocknet once they get the funds. I see blocknet it's not selling like hot cakes, as the ones behind it expected, because people are starting to wake up to these scams. It was about time ! Jimmy Zed Huh? There is a wallet. Look at the OP, or the website. And the Blocknet is selling fast. 700 BTC in the first 7 hours. The ITO lasts 7 days and we're selling a maximum of 2500 BTC worth of BLOCK. All's pretty healthy here. |
|
|
|
|
An update from CoinGateway:
Coingateway has about 40 tickets in-process for payments.
Once those are done, they will do the 10% payouts.
This is likely (but not certain) to happen at around 21:00GMT (5pm EST).
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
