Yes part of the value of BountyBa.se is that it is funded for the long game.  So like any ICO a pie chart would picture how the funds will be used.  The more transparent the better, as the perps trade on darkness.

For example, for each case, a single wallet address can be published as the official destination of any funds returned voluntarily as a result of negotiations...and for communicating with the perps.  So all coin holders would know when the program is succeeding, and how much will be their next payout.  

A potential buyer of the coin could be perps themselves, incentivising them to give up the entire amount in exchange for a non_prosecution agreement from BountyBa.se, and a relative payout, assuming they come in under the radar of any possible KYC requirement for big buyers.

Similarly, there needs to be incentive for perp teams to betray each other, and for fed agents to get involved as moonlighters, if not as an agency.

Great!   I can provide ideas.  Don't know how involved i can be with a team as i have my own career. 

But i think it would hinge on getting legal rights over the stolen funds, so that the team can negotiate with the thief/thieves, to either return the funds, or be cuffed, probably sooner than later, as a result of the effectiveness of the bounty organization. 

Would want to hear what a lawyer would say about this, but it seems to me things can be done through public notice to become holders in due course of the stolen funds.  This is so that bounty hunters with world wide reach can put cuffs on people wherever they find them. 

People would buy into the coin based on the estimated probabilities of recovery.   

Bounty hunters would likely be the biggest buyers of the coin, based on their inside information...how close they are to busting the perps. 

People who are doing effective doxxing also might be buyers, knowing their information brings the probability of success higher. 

People who have lost may also buy in a small percentage of their initially lost amount, betting on the possibility of some refund, but also wishing to see the arrest and conviction of the perps.  Perhaps they can be given a nominal stake if they can demonstrate just how much they lost, and to what address(es). 

Anyway, given some thought, i'm sure this could work, and would be good for the coin space. 

This type of bounty would be above board legal, not like dark web bounties.  But it would probably increase the effectiveness of all kinds of bounties.

Anybody that would like to vouch for Bruno Kucinskas please come forward. 

Meanwhile, what would you think about helping start a bounty ICO with it's own coin?

I don't want to discuss the details until you apologize for calling me "Dude". 

But it would be very bad news for whoever, or whatever Brock is, if he plans to continue running with a 6 mill bag. 

I'll let the FBI be the judge of whether you are Bruno Kucinskas Jr.  from Las Vegas.  I'm not getting paid for this.  

So i'm going by looks and sounds.  Sounds like Cash-in-ski given your colorful background.

If there is a thread where you think you've adequately defended your reputation, please point to it.  

Meanwhile, we really don't know if the founder of Elektra is the character you think/say you've doxxed.  The character "Brock" might be a stolen ID, in which case you've doxxed nobody.

"Brock" is now gone, feeling compelled to run either A) according to plan, or B) not according to plan.  

Or, Brock is gone because it's very tiring for you to keep up so many sock puppets.  

What we can know is :

a) you have the ability to create a website as sophisticated as was Elektra (not very sophisticated).
b) you approach the thresholds of malice toward "investards" to where you could justify this to yourself.  
c) your background is colorful enough that this could be within your scope of shenanegans.

If "Brock" is a stolen ID, then whoever it is...is pretending to be doxxed as a pretext for pulling all communications before refunding 6 mil in BTC.

If Brock is an actual person, he is going to have a hard life, and will be especially vulnerable when he crosses borders, especially US borders.

That goes for you, if "Brock" is one of your creations, in addition to the Elektra fiasco.  

Just because you think you can provide vitals, does not mean you are not behind this.  

In which case you are a bit overconfident me thinks.

Agreed. There were a couple red flags about the site, generally speaking. 

The attitude you are describing, about the Elektracoin dev, perfectly describes Gleb>Bruno Kachinski.

See my post above.

I didn't have a clue before, but now i've got a clue:

You are behind the Elektracoin ICO...the chief instigator...probably the only instigator.  

That would mean "Brock" is either entirely fictional, or is a stolen ID from a dead man.  

That would mean "Gleb" is a sock puppet, like "Brock", tracing back to a Bruno Kachinski.

That would mean you are Bruno Kachinski, unless that name too was stolen from a dead man.

You have the history, the motive, the means, and the malice to pull this off.

You are spending a lot of effort to turn attention to "Brock"...and away from yourself.

So the only thing left is for complainants to point the feds in your direction, motivated by a wallet with 6 million worth of stolen BTC. 

The irony here is that the MLM type of projects are becoming the only projects USA folks can get involved in! 

So they are being driven to higher risk propositions.

The founders of these high risk projects find ways to remain anonymous, and this mystery is being accepted by investors, who understand that anonymity is a must, in order to avoid long armed crack-downs, in which case the U.S. would steal everybody's money, as it did with BTC-e.   As such, anonymous ponzi authors are trusted more than US alphabet agencies. 

It's been over ten hours since i challenged you to take on a truly difficult target: Hextracoin. 

Are you up to the task?

There are easy targets, and there are epic challenges that only a handful of true doxers can overcome.

Hmmm

Gleb Gamow,

   Even though i have a bit in Hextra, i would ask you to turn your attention there, leaving the Brock alone for a while.  Since Brock used his name in correspondence, this dox could be considered too easy, and doesn't look good for you if you pick on the easy target too much.  Hextra, on the other hand, is guaranteed to be hard.  There, you would be considered the underdog, and not the perceived bully here, with the easy target.  

  Many have been mentioned, but Hextra has got to be the absolute worst.  

    1.) They took BTC without warning it was going to be locked up until some minimum tokens were purchased.
    2.) They made it impossible for the majority of contributors to get into the ICO. They were supposedly selling $300k worth of tokens in less than a minute per day. How? People with high bandwidth and 5 to 25 second responses could not get in.  There is some speculation Hextra was front running the unusual interest in their coin.  
    3.) People complained about the above for three weeks, but Hextra did nothing except reduce the daily buy quota. Meanwhile, the daily sell-out stayed under a minute, excluding people with "bad gateway" errors, every problem you can imagine.  Meanwhile, Hextra watched and did nothing as scalpers with a ton of HXT invaded their Facebook page, offering to sell HXT for high prices to the majority who could not buy.  Many buyers were scammed, and some of the successful, who bought 50 HXT to allow their BTC to be withdrawn, still could not get their BTC withdrawn.
    4.) Once the ICO was over, Hextra continued to lock up the BTC taken in, at first giving overload error messages, and finally putting the withdrawl requests into a "que", never to be released.  
    5.) For the first few hours of their internal exchange opening, no one could buy or sell, yet the price was moving. How?  
    6.) If you put in a limit order and cancelled, it would eat your BTC.
    7.) After less than two days opening for business, they shut down, site inaccessible. https://hextracoin.co/ico
    8.) A day after shutting down, they finally posted something on Facebook saying they were down for maintanance till November 9th, but will probably stay down through the Segwit2x fork (held through BitcoinGold fork already) as they are still arresting a ton of BTC.  
    9.) People are reporting HXT being taken out of their account, and dumped into one address.
    10. People are reporting BTC recently sent to the platform is going through the blockchain, but not being acknowledged by Hextracoin dashboard.
    11.) This whole time they have been aloof, incommunicado, downright arrogant about the pain and insult they are inflicting.  
    12.) At least Brock was communicating.  Hextra is insulated on steroids, perhaps thinking their aloofness will protect them from anyone with doxing skills.  


So please, if you are really doing the Bitcoin community a favor, please turn your attention to the worst of the bad actors: Hextracoin.  They make Brock look like a boyscout, having not actually done wrong yet, while Hextra has added insult to injury so far.  

I have received the following email from GoldRewards:

"All Referral Bonuses accrued in ICO Round 1 have been credited to each account. Please check your goldreward account > Refferals to confirm.
 
ICO Round 2 getting closer.

N.B - Please no funds should be transferred to any address different from the address indicated in the order created. The directions were explicit. Any funds sent to the wrong address will not be credited and we won't delay the process any further trying to sort this clear cut User error. Thank you."

As you can see, GoldRewards is implying that people have sent funds to the wrong address, as the address for each purchase changes each time.  

However, in my case, i have not made any mistakes in regards to these ever changing purchase addresses, and i have all the records to prove it, not only the transaction history above (see my last post) but also snapshots.

I brought this to GoldRewards attention the day after Round 1 ended, and sent another message a few minutes ago.  

I am awaiting communication about my credits more than i am awaiting Round 2.

I have sent the following message to GoldRewards via their contact link on their website. It is the second message i've sent regarding this issue.

GoldRewards,

During ICO Round 1 i performed the following four transactions.

Only transaction #4 was "completed".

Transaction #3 was done with ETH but did not have enough "gas" and was cancelled/returned by the blockchain.

Transactions #1 and #2 have not been acknowledged by GoldRewards, totalling 1200 tokens.  

I have only been credited 300 out of 1500 due for ICO Round 1.

Please advise.




Transaction: #1
Time: 2017-10-28  13:18
BTC: 0.02661379
Amount GRX: 200
TxID: 901c224bd0e40b0c084c12195c958541426c8f6655af02a038d44793b8a0b540
To: 1MqmUiUS2d36kutVKkNL4ezzV2YqUyUkpt   
For: 0x2b7875fC5dd3a0623a5A1cbBd7E9232160236b0c
Status: Not acknowledged by GoldRewards

Transaction: #2
Time: 2017-10-28  20:24
BTC: 0.13274976
Amount GRX: 1000
TxID: c545c273b586b3bedc1338a05482ad1e6eb393c0f768ef012467a72187c1d9d7
To: 1Q9UkvC7jLYtj3tTAQRGN27JgJwQf8vWhS
For: 0x2b7875fC5dd3a0623a5A1cbBd7E9232160236b0c
Status: Not acknowledged by GoldRewards

Transaction: #3
Time: Oct-29-2017 03:43:11 AM +UTC
ETH: 1.29100075
Amount GRX: 500
TxHash: 0x508c1d1a3f85834873984e94a659d14ca226d323aa55cee231eb686bb12160f9
To: 0x3e46ffb558abd461d027fc5afd1a5add72c9886a
For: 0x2b7875fC5dd3a0623a5A1cbBd7E9232160236b0c
Status: Blockchain cancelled "out of gas".

Transaction: #4
Time: 2017-10-28  20:53
BTC: 0.03970386
Amount GRX: 300
TxID: b28e96a1d5461a0927978d1c435d437bb66dd812678a586714da916fcc5bfd5c
To: 1JaY4AeNPx5r59djRaeeqoNKc2rmD5VVfi
For: 0x2b7875fC5dd3a0623a5A1cbBd7E9232160236b0c
Status: "Completed" by GoldRewards

This is excellent.

Everything about it screams rip off of Bitconnect, trying to leverage Bitconnect's relative success and reputation to fuel an ICO frenzy into exchange FOMO for those who are betting on a repeat.  

It's a bet on the possible theft (from Bitconnect) and almost zero originality.  

I doubt RegalCoin believes it owes anything to people who are betting on a theft of ideas and a claim on a bot.

It's a bet on a "bot" that they say they have, even though everything else is cut and paste.  

For those with risk appetite, it could also be a bet on the momentum of this pump, knowing full well there is no substance underneath the company (a bet on the naivete of crypto investors).  

The originators of this coin could be totally unrelated (to Bitconnect) copiers (thieves) of the surface appearance of the offer, without the actual bot to uphold long term growth.

The originators could also be rogue break-away units from Bitconnect, without permissions, with or without the bot (thieves and liars).  

The originators could also be break-away units from Bitconnect with permissions, with the bot (agents).  

It's also possible neither company has a bot, or any bot that performs as well as stated .  

They may also be geniuses who invented their own amazing bot not stolen from Bitconnect.  

These must all be considerations before betting x% of risk capital.

We don't know much.

What we can know is that these kinds of pumps depend on a plausible product that presumably makes money.  For example, BitPetite has a tumbler.   I doubt the tumbler produces enough to support the numbers.  

20x is (was) only available to those who could get in on the ICO and sell at recent highs.  Turns out you could only get in maybe 10 minutes each day, and only if you knew the exact Hong Kong time the daily rationing started.   This kept a lot of people out as this scarcity could easily have been artificially manufactured.  

Based on the probability this was a sophisticated pump that might well result in an opportunity to grab 10x, I was interested in risking x% of my capital, but found the rationing game confusing.  Instead of getting a message, "come back tomorrow at 12 pm Hong Kong" i got an inexplicable inability to make the buy button function.  I had no idea what was wrong with the button and not a lot of people emphasizing the narrow windows of opportunity (probably trying to exploit them themselves).  

Now that it sits at about 17x ICO, the betting proposition is not so attractive.  Based on the probable emptiness of the whole campaign (probably no bot), this is not such a good proposition to bet on as the value of the coin will probably increase not much more than the value of any alt coin. And, like any sophisticated pump, could start losing 50%-80% of it's value when people start realizing just how empty it is.  As a trader, i would not buy anything but dips in the 50% range looking for 25% here and there.

Based on the motives/methods/language used by the YouTubers promoting this coin, i do believe it is totally empty behind the scenes, supported soley by incoming new cash flows pumping the value of the coin.  The large coin holdings of the originators could pay out the claimed 45% per month for quite a while to keep this going.   It's success largely depends, imo, on the coin value going up faster than the 45% they plan to pay out to bot loans each month.  

Yesterday i registered again (seems my first registration is unrecognized) and before anything else, i had to have my account "activated" by a third party UP-LINE.  Yes, an UP-LINE was imposed upon, even though i don't care about upline or downline.  ( I don't recall Bitconnect requiring this kind of activation of me) .  To me, this third party upline activation policy is a red flag as the promotional dependencies are emphasized beyond reason.   They hooked me up with a YouTuber who is promoting the hell out of this using language best used by pure pumpers, predicting price points, ect.  The obvious reason they do this is to get me to pump more x% of my capital than i initially intend (not much), which tells me thats what they are depending on.   If that's what they depend on, then this fits the description of a ponzi.  

As a result, the x% i intend to bet on this has shrunken, along with the price over the last few hours.  

Thanks Burt.  

Very sorry to hear about the terrorism raised against you.  Asset forfeiture is a big issue with me.  The injustice seems so obvious.  The way you explained it makes it perfectly clear what they are up to, and how badly it motivates everything they do.  So i can't understand why the DOJ , especially the current head, isn't aware of the injustice, or care about it enough to not crack down on it, and worse,  to get deeper involved with it, with the help of weed laws.  It's beyond my comprehension.  

Yes, i hope some sellers will come here and explain their prejudice against noobs.  I can't comprehend their position at the moment.  Maybe it started with face to face transactions.   We heard a lot of horror stories about those back in the day.  But online transactions?  How is it possible for a seller to get hurt?  Unbelievable.  

I'm wondering, is there some threshold of sells at which terrorists will label sellers as a "business"?

Is it better to just stick to online transactions if the intent is to reduce chances of terrorist terrorism?

Is getting a money transmitters license in-congruent with the fact that what most sellers are doing is not actually illegal?

Suppose i accept the in-congruency of the extortion scheme, is it difficult to get a money transmitters license? Costly?

Assuming i could even get one, i suppose its just a matter of filing and paying taxes at the usual rates, every year/quarter, yes?  

Do you think it would be worth it to get a license? Or, what kind of volume do you think would warrant a license?  

Sorry to ask such noob questions.  Certainly don't answer any that might provoke more terrorism from terrorists.

[edit] Oh, one last question.  Can you think of a better business model, other than Localbitcoins, for getting things done? Maybe a distributed blockchain solution?

StillCrypto

I have submitted a support ticket to Localbitcoins letting them know that this reputation system is functioning as a de facto blacklist for the untold numbers of sellers who are using it to discriminate against new buyers, like me.  I've actually never bought anything through Localbitcoins yet, due to this system. 

I will report back here what Localbitcoins says about my request to get some sort of list of sellers whose policy it is to refuse new buyers so that we all have our black lists of people to avoid, evening the playing field, so that new buyers are not always wasting their time. 

Will see what they have to say, but i am resigned to the probability that the entire site has been fully compromised by the feds. 

Folks,  

After reading this, it occurs to me that sellers most likely to ignore new buyers could include undercover agents, or people cooperating with the gov for a plea deal.   The reason may be because new buyers are the most difficult to hold charges against.  They may be focused on drag-netting for established buyers against whom it may be easier to cultivate extortive charges.  

Therefore i urge new buyers to come here and report these sellers who, besides wasting our time, qualify to most probably be the agents that we know are lurking and trolling Localbitcoins.  

[see my prior post above]

Today i want to report a big cover-up going on at Localbitcoins, and predict it's demise in favor of smarter competitors.  

Regarding this "reputation system":

As a new buyer i took time off from work and went to town today thinking i could give Localbitcoins a try.

I opened three trades, and was BLOWN OFF by three traders.  

Being new, i didn't know how long i'm supposed to wait for responses, and ended up wasting hours that were taken directly from paid work i could have been doing otherwise.  I did not bother to try and open a fourth trade as the sun was going down and i wanted to try get in a couple hours work so the day was not completely wasted.  

Because the first trader that blew me off, USMC1991, did not bother to respond or state any personal policy that would exclude me, it took me a long time, two more mis-trades, to find out that prejudice against new buyers runs rampant at Localbitcoins.  Not one of these prejudiced traders stated, in their advertising, that they will not do business with new traders.  

While a trade is open, a buyer is restricted from opening other trades, if and when sellers refuse to respond, or respond with "cancel the trade.  I need more reputation".  

If you didn't know what was going on, you could end up wasting valuable time, especially if you are trying to move into bitcoin on a dip.  You have to cancel prior attempts to buy, before you can move on.  

On my second attempt, at least the seller messaged back, soon, "sorry. cancel. need more reputation".  

Since this prejudice was news to me, i began to inquire.  

Turns out the reason he wanted me to cancel is because his BTC was locked in escrow until the trade is resolved somehow either by completion or by cancel on the buyers side.  

I demanded a good reason this seller would not sell, as i was standing with my cash next to a Wells Fargo, ready to deposit to whatever account # he sent. He tries his best to insult me, calling me "son", and telling me he does not need to explain his policy to me.  Finally he admits its his policy he does not sell to new.  Fine. Fair enough. But then i wanted to know why he did not state this policy, up front, in his advertising so that new buyers don't waste their time clicking on prejudiced sellers buttons. I started talking about logging negative feedback, while his text seemed to indicate that he thought his feedback could blow my feedback out of the water.   Then he opened up a "dispute" with Localbitcoins to try to get them to get me to cancel the trade.   So i cancelled it and went immediately to try to register negative feedback.  

When i went to register negative feedback, lo and behold, there were no links available for me to do so.  

So i opened a support ticket with Localbitcoins and found out this, that you can only leave feedback if:

    "- Trade volume between you and your trading partner is more than 0.5 Bitcoin"

This means if sellers ignore you and waste your time, you can't report it.  

This means the feedback on Localbitcoins does not account for any trade closed by a cancel, or anything less than 0.5 BTC.  

This must account for a large part of the volume (or no volume in case sellers are ignoring buyers) at Localbitcoins, hence, the coverup.  

Furthermore, feedback power is reserved for whales who have done more than 50 BTC in volume.  You can leave feedback regardless the trade is cancelled, or the trade is less than 0.5 BTC if:  

   "- The total trade volume of the person who is leaving feedback is more than 50 Bitcoin"

This means the three sellers who blew me off today could leave negative feedback against me (if they are whales), but i can't leave feedback against them.  

This means that if, as someone whose time they have wasted, I protest against this treatment, they could hit me, but i could not hit back.

This leads to something else i discovered, as i was blown off by yet another seller.  

This third seller was trying to filter his buyers by conducting SMS text messaging outside of Localbitcoins, prior to the buyer opening up the trade.   He wanted to know my username. So i gave him my username.  No response.   So once again,  a seller is refusing to do business with a new buyer, and starts to waste my time.  But through text messaging, i found out his motive: he is trying to keep "coin lockers" from locking up his coin in escrow  before he has a chance to reject the new buyers.  

Who are these "coin lockers"?

Given the censoring scenario i have described above, the "coin lockers" are people who are protesting sellers who won't sell to new buyers, ignore new buyers, waste new buyers time...and who are given no feedback outlet to let the public know what is going on here at Localbitcoins.  

So in protest, they open trades, and lock up the BTC of the seller in escrow for the maximum amount of time.  

Personally, i want to know who are all the sellers who won't sell to new buyers.  As a new buyer, i want to boycott them forever, even after i become an established buyer with this elusive "reputation" we hear about.  

I have suggested to Localbitcoins that they create another subcategory market for sellers that only want to sell to buyers with some established reputation.  That way, new buyers don't have to waste their time clicking on their buttons, and can boycott them in the future.  

I have also suggested Localbitcoins require such sellers to state their no-new-buyers policy clearly in their pre-sale stipulations (none of the three stated their policy), so our time is not wasted trying to to business with prejudiced sellers.    

If Localbitcoins does nothing about this culture, then it's clear there is a systemic cover-up going on within their business model.  

Finally, i suggest that people use this forum for new buyers to report any sellers they discover won't do business, either by ignoring new buyers, or blowing them off with insults.  

The three sellers who blew me off yesterday were:

  USMC1991 no response. $950
  alhazim91  refusal.         $300
  (803)699-4674  asked for my username. I gave it. He ignored. $300. Can't remember his username so text# instead.  


  

Currently delivers 28% per year on the cost of the masternode.   You can compare that to other masternode coins.  Imo, once you get into the 100% per year range, the coin is probably doomed to its own inflation.

Masternodes are like lotto tickets.  You hope you can get on board with a coin going the way of DASH.  But that's not going to happen unless the coin's community does what DASH did.  So before you look at the masternode cost or ROI, you need to look at the overall health of the coin.  

Over a year and a half ago, DASH was pumped and dumped, a lot like CHC.   But CHCs future won't have DASH's current success unless it imitates much of it's process.   It's not even near it right now.  

It's possible. Right now, CHC's future is on a knifes edge as it attempts to land on it's feet after this terribly malicious pump.  

Personally, i would not invest in masternodes until they deliver more than just a marginal annual rate of return.   Any of these coins could either die, or lock your capital away for years, costing you lost opportunity in the meantime...unless the masternode comes with a functional voting mechanism that ties the community together in an organized fashion with the financial backing to get things done.  

With the right mechanisms in place, any of these coins could grow 10x in a year.   That's why the fundamentals of these coins is more important than the masternode, unless you treat them like lotto tickets.

Period.  

Anyone who tells you otherwise is a fraud.  

The price goes up AND down every day, so clearly you're analysis is biased to the negative. 

Takes more than one day to implement a high tech voting system. Takes more than one day to implement even a low tech voting system. 

You are conflating this coin with unethical pumpers of prior weeks.

The coin is like any other fork making it's way from Bitcoin three years ago, testing out some new twist in approach. 

It is less abandoned today than it was during several months long stretches in those past three years, as it has incubated and aged. 

There's a very good reason website is not the highest priority at the moment, having more to do with authenticity.

You can read Brakmic's post, or you can READ INTO Brakmic's post. 

I would rather watch CNN talk about Trump. 

Where is you're hatred coming from?

Did the fashionably hatted DruggedOnCoins YouTube personality burn you too?

 

Was a classic pump that went viral when everything on coinmarketcap.com was very very red (BTC was dropping to $1800). It was the timing. This found CHC at the top of coinmarketcap very green. People see this. Bots see this.  People do a youtube search and come up with several pumpers.  Think there is mass community support. Don't have time to do due diligence. The crypto market had been beating people down for weeks. Come join the Armaggedon against the evil whales and market manipulators. Join the righteous HOLDERS. Perfect storm.  

Actually not so classic.  This was an "experiment", to quote the DruggedOnCoins YouTube personality. Translation: this was a new kind of pump, perhaps the first time mass deception was used during the pump, as terms like "community" and "movement" and power-to-the-people type slogans were appropriated and heavily pressed amongst colluding YouTubers, along with a come-join-the-fight mentality, along with a public buy-wall strategy, along with public shaming for retreating from the battlefield.   Using and abusing the term "masternode". At all prices the DruggedOnCoin YouTube personality was like, "Guarantee yourself at least one masternode", "Look at the supply", "there's only 100 masternodes left", "control the  market", "Korean ginseng", ect.   This was a novel way to pump a coin, 1000 units at a time.

All based on zero new development at the time (there was some development three months prior).  So, perhaps the most dishonest pump ever. The dishonesty still persists as the market tests new bottoms, trying to find the truth.  

It was probably the first time a pump team cloaked itself as "the community". Currently, the actual community is turning on the lights. As each light is turned on, you can see the pumping cockroaches scurry for additional cover.