 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
By the way, I had a look at the spreadsheet and it's looking great for all the signature participants who fulfilled their part of the contract with OPEN. It's only a little more than 30 people who are eligible for the pool of 12 million OPEN tokens for the signature campaign. We've all done a great job in picking such a strong and professional project.
How were you able to view the Spreadsheet? They seem to be private/locked. Can we request access? |
|
|
|
What happened with the translation campaign? Why did we get totally reduced percentage? Budget was obviously around 49-50 M tokens, and translation campaign should be getting 5 mil? So, we got somewhere around 42-43% of the proper sum. What went wrong?  You should also consider that the promised percentage was out of 100M tokens, not out of 50M. ;-) I pulled a little vigilante and email the CEO, the CMO and their team about it. If they thought they are going to get away with it and we won't notice... Looking at this, it's also possible that the token calculation was done prior to KYC and then later the non-kyc guys got reassigned 0 stakes but they didn't recalculate the tokens to the KYC passed/legitimate participants. |
|
|
|
|
They are now claiming that bounty distribution has started, but I don't think anyone has received anything. Meanwhile, they also say that they are working on the final spreadsheet. Whats going on? They have to make the spreadsheet public and then correct the discrepancies (if any) before sending the tokens.
|
|
|
|
Good Job! We'll let them know if they do any sort of foul play. |
|
|
|
Quote from the Telegram group community manager, from today, 16:06: "Unfortunately we cannot share the final sheet for some security reasons. However, you would receive an email for the same."
I guess this is going to be very... nontransparent distribution.
This is utter BS. I'm guessing they have either demoted the total bounty pool or haven't done their work properly. Either way, let's see. |
|
|
|
|
We bounty hunters don't see the same enthusiasm that your team had prior to the ico, every admin in the group was encouraging to do bounty telling that it was the best bounty campaign out there. Now please don't ditch the people who helped you get this project to where it is now.
|
|
|
|
|
Bounty manager- Why haven't Creative Videos updated in the spreadsheet board?
|
|
|
|
|
Man that's a lot of tokens there. I would also look at BAT and OMG. Seems to have good progress.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Well, this is absolutely horrible news. Blame these poorly conducted ICO's, leaking valuable user info. They should be held accountable
|
|
|
|
The appearance of Merit makes it difficult for many people to upgrade their grades!
Look, I don't have an issue with this idea. Rank upgrades should be "earned" and Merits should play a major role in that. My only disagreement is with regards to fact that all members were given an initial merit equal corresponding to their grade. The rule is basically assuming that all members have created "meritful" posts till now. |
|
|
|
No. Stop posting stupid suggestions.
Would appreciate if you could elaborate what you mean by "stupid" suggestions. FYI, its an observation & I thought this was an open forum. |
|
|
|
|
I think the intention of Merit system is good. But unfortunately I do feel that the idea to award a merit count equal to the minimum required for the respective rank to all members was probably not the right decision.
Why? Because, according to me, Merit count on any profile should reflect the quality of the posts made by that person, but actually it is NOT, here its also a function of account longevity.
Meaning of Merit as per legitimate sources;
"the quality of being particularly good or worthy, especially so as to deserve praise or reward."
The current rule is basically assuming that all members have created "meritful" posts till now. I understand there are plenty of senior members (especially active in this Meta) who deserve every single merit they have but there could have been another method to award Merits retrospectively.
|
|
|
|
|
Plagiarised White Paper - So never going near it.
|
|
|
|
|
I would put 30% in Stock Markets , 20% in Govt Bonds, buy a rentable apartment with 30% and lastly 20% in Crypto (mostly Ether, some NEO as well)
|
|
|
|
|
Looking for too much money in my opinion. But we wouldn't know if this is 100% genuine. Durov has not commented on this.
|
|
|
|
|
Both are great Ecosytem providers. Like the way NEO allows smart contract development in mainstream languages like Python & C#.
But Ethereum community is stronger & has got greater backing.
Would like to see both of them flourish.
|
|
|
|
|
NEO,OMG,REQ,ANT,DNT would be my top 5 (after ETH)
|
|
|
|
|
Source? Looks like fake news.
|
|
|
|
|
