I'm generally positive at the moment about Bankera, but there are some red flags. Why is it that a company with 150M or so in raised capital has such a terrible website.  Has anyone looked at the team page.  Its now way down at the bottom of the page. Its a very small team of people and the high profile advisors are no longer listed anywhere that I can see. Also in that team section it says 70+ team members and yet show only 11 within the company, according to the Linkedin company page that Bankers itself links to.  But to make matters worse, those aren't all employees. I happen to know one of those people and asked why his name was there and its because the company page grabs anyone on Linkedin that has mentioned Bankera, so it has pulled in investors as well as staff.  All of the above doesn't mean its a scam, but come on Bankera, with so much funding its time to so a better job on your website.

The thing about people complaining is why?  Did you invest?. If you invested and think its a scam, what new information do you have now that you didn't have before when you invested?  I suspect if the price was way above ICO right now many of these people wouldn't be complaining. So I'm not convinced by anyone saying the coin is a scam today because the price is currently down on their initial investment.

That said, while I haven't seen any new information that would make me conclude this is a scam, I'm also open to that possibility and if such information emerges I'll revise my opinion.  

I say this not to belittle those who are raising issues with the coin, this is one of the few places people can openly raise questions about a project, but rather because I've done such complaining myself previously with other coins.  When I first starting investing, I thought some of my initial investments were scams and I complained just like some of the people here complained.  Then I discovered I was wrong and 6 months later the coin did a 10x. I've since learned to stay emotionless when investing in any coin or project or else I don't invest.

I think this is about right. Bankera appear to be a good team, and they have a track record through Spectrocoin already. My only concern was the number of coins.. which I think will limit how much each token can grow in value. I think all the worry will die down when they start to deliver.  This is a long term HODL. If you have weak hands this was not the right ICO to get involved with. I've seen all of this before in some many other ICO's.  Best thing is don't panic and just forget about this coin for 6-8 months.

 

Great! A positive step!

Way back (check this forum thread)..  metamorphin ,limxdev from bitcore team helped josh with this coin.. you can see it all in here as advertised (go back to the first post and then move forward and you'll see it all) In fact I think Limxdev was listed as the main developer originally. More recently (about 12 months ago or so.. they know better than me) Metamorphin and Limxdev have not been involved although I think limxdev may have made some small tweaks to help out Josh before he got too busy.

As mentioned Metamorphin tried to point out in the discord chat that they were no longer involved in the coin and it was wrong to associate this coin with their work on Bitsend and Bitcore and for that Metamorphin was banned from discord. (That is my understanding anyways)

Yes, I think they meant Limxtec as a company not Limxdev.  In any case it was Metamorphin that was banned. You can check with him directly I'm sure.

I agree with you that an effort is being made by the team to resolve issues with the coin, but having an open and sometimes critical discussion about the coin is absolutely not a sign of weakness.  On the contrary, it is the discord's group think to hear nothing but good things about the coin that is a sign of weakness. No one doubts the risk investing in this coin and many others in crypto but that is a diversion from the point. 

As for your view that those that hold the coin will see the greatest rise ever is misguided. No one can predict the future, but if you really want to see a rise in the value of the coin, you need people like us, keeping this coin and its 'team' honest in order to attract new investors. Whether you like it or not, being open and transparent is the best way to gain new investors and see the price rise.  Right now the team is unknown, has no updated website, no blog, hasn't kept to its roadmap, has lied to its community, has no white paper, bans people for asking honest questions, has no formal registered company, and is not willing to admit its mistakes.   Fix that, and you'll have a coin people *might* invest in.  On the positive side, it does have a large community and as mentioned, people (mainly community investors) are trying to fix past mistakes. 

As for the scamming, go back in here and read the previous posts.  Past behaviour, especially lying of some' team' members to the community and the complicity of others not to speak out, speaks volumes, but to be fair I suspect Josh ( the main dev now and coin creator ), while making mistakes is trying his best. He has unfortunately been surrounded by some bad influencers as of late.

 

This is brand new information. I have never ever heard of 'mini forks' or simply forks and being on the wrong blockchain until after the release of Wallet 3.0.0.0.  The rationale often given for all these wallet upgrades was initially to prepare for the fundamental nodes, and then second related to the #1 wallet. There was never any rationale given that a new wallet was needed to prevent 'mini forks' prior to the release of wallet 3.0.0.0.

So again, has the team mislead us all this time.  However I can confirm that indeed there were all sorts of blockchain issues AFTER these wallet upgrades.  You see all that in the discord chat.

No, you are mixing up events.  Until the introduction of a new wallet that attempted (but failed) to gain consensus for an upgrade to launch the fundamental nodes before block 82k, the blockchain was stable and all exchanges were operating. Of course coin inflation was causing a price decrease over time and had been for weeks, but this was expected and by design. For many who bought in early the price decrease was offset by the massive gains due to the coin interest.

All the blockchain forks began with the introduction of the new wallets often without any notice whatsoever, leaving people running the wrong wallet version, losing coins, and with exchanges going down (still down in some cases).

The original code itself was written well and it was the recent mucking around just before block 80k that started all this mess. Its incredible the team continues to deny their mistakes.  At least a team that admits failure can learn from its mistakes, can be honest with their investors, and can then move forward. That does not seem to be the case here and that does not bode well for the future of this coin.

I would suggest the team get another spokesperson like Kdog to speak here. She at least has integrity.

i wouldn't assume all the 'banned' people are reading your posts here and I doubt they have any idea how to get unbanned or care to, but worse, as another poster said.. its really just making enemies of the coin, instead of letting those people vent or ask their questions. (We know there are lots of reasons to be upset with how the team handled things in the past) 

I agree every question doesn't end in a ban.. but good critical questions more often than not get the 'FUUUUUUUDDDD' / 'BAAAAANNNNN' response.. whether its ends in an actual ban or not..   That's learned behaviour from the team of community curators that have been behaving this way... esp people like Evan.

Lets face it, this forum is the only place where anyone can have an open conversation about this coin.  The discord chat has become group think for investors who want to b3lieve the coin is going to the moon one day. Who knows it might, but for now I'd rather hear all perspectives.. the good, the bad, and the ugly, and I'm mature enough to make up my own mind.

If the roadmap was ever to be changed, that should have been announced well in advance and done properly. What the investors experienced was a sudden and unannounced change in the roadmap.That is simply not acceptable, but worse.. the team lied that they were in negotiations with the #1 wallet... you can't just freeze someones coins no matter how many they have because you created a system that allowed that to happen.  If  someone with a lot of coins agreed to have some of their coins frozen which what was told to us by 'ethical' Jamie Woodruff... that would be okay but we know now from Ergo that Jamie and team had no idea who the #1 wallet was.. they kept changing their mind who that person was, with nothing negotiated.. but they went ahead and froze their coins anyways.. that does amount to stealing.. and it was the conclusion the now 'banned from discord for asking questions' CEO of Cryptopia came to, resulting in the Cryptopia delisting of the coin.

When you are managing millions of dollars you have to act and behave responsibly, this isn't kids play, you can't just change the roadmap.. release new wallets, or freeze peoples coins without informing investors well in advance.

And as for unseen consequences..  unless you had your eyes wide shut in discord.. anyone could see this 10,000% interest was going to create huge coin inflation... it was after all by design.. the same with the #1 wallet.. it was so clear the largest wallet was compounding such that obviously they would eventually have the majority share of the coins.  There was ample time to either announce a roadmap change weeks in advance or simply wait as Greedy John rightly said until the high staking period was over. 

The high staking could have simply continued and the kB3 implemented at block 82k and you would have had a stable coin and none of the drama.
Changing the roadmap... in the end, is what created disastrous previously unforseen consequences..

And so have I addressed the bans.  Read my replies, and you'll see the poster is absolutely correct about the B3 team banning members for asking questions... including the CEO of Cryptopia (fact) and the community presentative Oregongreen (fact), and the people who originally helped to create this coin LimxTec (fact)   Am I wrong..  These were NOT mistakes. They were absolutely deliberate mainly at the leisure of Evan (still part of the team btw) but also other community admins.

Let’s address the point at hand. As I mentioned banning people for spamming or threatening another user is perfectly fine, no one would question that policy. It’s standard in any forum.  But since you bring that up, it’s too bad former team leaders felt it necessary to lie that they had been receiving death threats however, while the rest of the team went along with that lie to get more emotional buyin. (That’s fully documented for all to see... see Evan’s screenshot)

What is unique about the B3 discord (unlike this one) is the banning of people for asking legitimate questions or even making comments. While you try to make it seem as if this is a mistake to ban such people, I can assure you its absolutely the policy of the B3 admins to ban people.

Anyone who ever saw Evan in action knows this for sure..  He even banned Oregongreen, a community leader... really that was a mistake..  no that was deliberate.. He banned left right and center.. often without cause.

The CEO of Cryptopia asked some questions... oh he got caught up in the shuffle..  no he asked hard questions and the community cried FUUUUUDDD BANNNN as they always do when they hear things they don’t like and some admin.. probably Evan again banned him.

I saw personally Limxtec tell the community the project is not in any way associated with bitsend and bitcore... because it isn’t..  Those projects are run by limxtec.  This one is now separate and is run independently. He was upset the admins tried to use this as a selling point for the project... Again the community cried.. lier ... ban him... no time to listen, learn or discuss, and so didn’t they like what they heard and banned him..  As you can see this isn’t an odd mistake.. this is deliberate and it is systemic. Anyone in the forum know this.   If I suggest there isn’t a strong vision for the project.. It needs one beyond a list of features.... immmediately.. I get... FUUUUDDD... BANNNN..   This is how it is in the discord chat.  

Those are the facts, and anyone just has to go there to see for themselves. You can’t have an honest conversation there.  Instead of defending the forum, improve it, make it more open to debate and differing opinions. You as admins set the tone. You might think we are against the coin, no we are actually trying to improve it and the community.

Since the real GreedyJohn helped get this coin going is in this forum.. maybe he can validate that link.. I think its fake (and I saw it too when it first came out).

If the team has the most honest and best intentions for the coin it needs to reflect that kind of honestly in the discord chat by accepting other points of view.  I don't know who exactly set the tone ( Borngreat / Ergo? ) to ban anyone from asking half decent questions about the coin. The result - the CEO of Cryptopia gets banned (pissing him off further for asking simple questions), LimxTex people who actually helped create the b3 coin get banned, Oregongreen (a community leader for crying out loud) gets banned and hundreds of others.

Many people like to say the coin is honest.. but its not if people can't ask critical questions about the coin where the response is always FUUUUUDDD - BANNN.. like herded sheep... the community responds to their masters who trained them to think this way. That kind of behaviour is what has created this delusional community in discord with no critical thinking.

Imagine if people had been able 'check' the behaviour of the team when they said they found the number #1 wallet and froze it.. I did and was pulled aside and told not to ask anymore questions about the #1 wallet, and if anyone asked such a question again.. to say the team was in active negotations with the #1 wallet.. This is actually what I was told to say... when it was finally revealed they had no clue who the #1 wallet was.. the same person told me.. they were disheartened and was contemplating leaving the 'helper' team...  This is what group speak gets you.

Imagine if people could have questioned if that was the right thing to do..  no.. the response has always been, don't ask questions... trust... b3lieve....  and where did all the trust in the team with no critical thinking lead.. disaster.   You want an honest coin.. create an honest and critical thinking community to go along with it that 'checks' and is allowed to question the teams actions..  After all they are making decisions about people's real money.

Until that kind of honesty exists, the coin can never be fully trusted.  At the moment, this is the only place where one can speak freely and openly.

I agree with someone else who said ‘forced’ was the wrong word to use, but I agree that the main dev appears to be trying to make this coin succeed and that certain people with big egos appointed to the ‘team’ (I say team loosely) and now gone likely influenced the main dev into making some decisions that should not have been done or even considered until after the high staking period was over.

That’s a new point about the hardcorded seednodes.. never heard that one before..  I can’t grasp why they would have been shut down.

But you see at the end of it all, as an investor, no one really cares who caused what problem, where..because of whom.. its starts looking like a more systematic problem because there are so many issues to solve..  

Would a well organized team shutdown critical seednodes or allow that to happen?  Would a well organized team allow ‘the community’ to ‘force’ the dev to make such decisions..  Would a well organized team launch their biggest innovation to date (fundamental nodes) without one bit of news about it on their website?  I don’t think so.

Can a team learn and improve, yes.  I reviewed the ‘deadcoins’ site. I concede, B3 is not there yet.. and those deadcoins really do look like terrible coins. By that marker, this project might have a chance.

Btw this forum is much more objective than the discord chat. Better to leave the clear heads here. Those of us asking questions, being frank and open are do a better service for this coin and investors.

Let’s rephrase - here is the latest disaster from discord:

So lets review.  The blockchain isn’t working, no exchanges are working, there is no relevant website, and instead of focusing on those key things there is an announcement about a coin swap that has just been implemented without any advanced notice.

So it seems the team implemented a coin swap before fixing the blockchain or the exchanges, you can be sure the price now stuck at 0.1 sat (because it can’t go lower) has now the opportunity to drop 1000 points further.  A coin swap could be a good idea, but only once all those other issues are sorted and there is at least some positive momentum.  So a coin swap has rolled out without any warning compounding all the other issues and creating more chaos and uncertainty. 

This is not the time to play with new ideas but to fix the basics. The team needs to get its act together.

In a nutshell, it failed because of the egos of certain recently added team members (now gone) who felt it necessary to throw the roadmap out the window, lie to the community, freeze coins, and release untested code, all of which caused complete chaos, a delisting, a massive sell-off, a broken blockchain, people losing coins, not getting rewards, and no exchanges working.  Until about the month ago the coin was doing just fine after more than 18 months.

Efforts are being made to recover from this complete incompetence because of its large 20k discord community, but the damage is done. As with many things, you often only get one chance to prove your worth and this coin has failed that test sadly. Still I wish for the sake of the community that it manages to stabilize next year. One positive note is the community itself. If it does survive it will because of the community.

I think that’s about right. I talked to Cryptokane and he was behind the scenes and said he didn’t like what he saw not one bit.  I talked Evan who said if Jamie every comes after him again.. he’s got a lot more stuff on him (I would assume from their B3 chats).

We heard yesterday Ergo finally admit they never found out who the #1 wallet was... what we all knew..Jamie’s team kept changing their mind... and that they persuaded Josh to release the FN early.. And we heard from Ergo that indeed someone tipped off the #1 wallet, meaning this person is potentially close to the team.

It was clearly amateur hour and people are suffering today because no one took the time to vet the code and follow the roadmap that any sane developer would do before releasing to a community of over 20,000 users, and while Jamie had a tremendous influence it also tells us there was no leadership structure in place.  Ergo can say he protested the decision by Jamie and Josh to update the wallet but someone has to take responsibility and make the final decision.

One positive point is @kdog’s appointment but regardless we don’t know what she might discover.. She might stick with it, or also get frustrated and leave.. it way to early to tell.  So no one should be getting excited.. the hole is way too deep.

That’s just delusional. This coin is nowhere close to being one of the most successful coins in history. Quite the opposite.

So what is a scam..Definition of scam. : a fraudulent or deceptive act or operation.

Ok now what are the facts:

We know Jamie Woodruff lied to the entire community about the death threats to generate additional hype.  We know he mentioned Evan had very little coins when he didn’t.  We can confirm that by Evan’s screenshot of the conversation.. which of course he never shared until the falling out.. thus he coluded with Jamie on that lie. This itself is incredible given Jamie’s label as a ‘ethical hacker’ ..nothing ethical here.

We know the team lied about knowing who the #1 wallet was.. Apparently they never knew.. and so there was no negotiation with the #1 wallet which is the opposite of what they told us. and they simply froze their coins.. leading Cryptopia to rightly delist the coin.  So they lied to us about that as well.

We also were told the wallet update was small issue and Cryptopia would be back online shortly. Another lie.

We know they didn’t honor the original plan to keep the pos at 10,000% until block 80k as the website.

We know that the team promoted the coin as being the same team that put together bitsend and bitcore.. and we know limxTec, a German based company, has flatly said this is not the case..  This is now a different team and LimxTec are not involved and they have protested this in the discord only to get banned.

We know anyone expressing anything critical about the coin will get banned from the discord chat.

We also hear HODL to the moon.. when we know .. that many of the key promoters of this coin have been cashing out.. see.. Hamez in discord as he’s been investigating that.

We know that Ergo / Borngreat are also promoted ember coin and CHC... two other coins that ended in disaster.

I could go on and on...This is what we know... so does any of the above some fraudulent or deceptive..  I would argue yes..  Clearly information was withheld from the community to avoid a panic, lies were told and so forth... thus a deceptive operation or scam.

This team cannot be trusted at this point.. and avoid any youtubers telling you otherwise.. end of story.