Sure, there has been a lot of work done already. A lot of us contributed funds out of pocket so fixcypt can disengage from other paying jobs and focus all his attention on ARK. I think it's been more than two months now, we didn't want to delay development until we have access to TEC funds.

ARK and its developers have many plans and ideas about improvements, and yes, some of them has been already implemented, but to be fair, ARK is more stable for the large reason of 51 delegates instead of 101, as the current codebase (lisk and ark) clearly has a problem keeping 101 nodes in sync.

When you have this kind of problems you either have to reduce the delegates, increase the blocktime or improve the codebase. For lisk reducing the delegates were never really an option, increasing blocktime were brought up, but Max felt it would be a step in the wrong direction. So they left with improving the code and that is the hardest.
ARK had the luxury to play around with every option before making a decision (there were several test before we picked direction) to reduce the delegate number, before future code improvements can be implemented, like forging uncles, that will hopefully allow even shorter block time without causing stability issues.

You are now contradicting yourself. You say you want lisk because lisk will rise 3x-4x and that ark will dump 6mill (we wont). The two are not that compatible expectations.

Ex-lisk guys? I certainly didn't leave lisk, neither are the majority of Ark members. Since when can you be only part of one projects community? (if you go to lisk chat, there are quite a few shift guys that are also there, and the other way around too. same for rise, and others.)
I'm willing to be part of anything that has prospects let that may be promising technology or promising investment, preferably both at the same time.

But again, I'm a man without any ideology besides rationality.

It will be a bit more time, because all refunds will be issued at the end of the refund period, (which will be only a reasonable length) not at the time of the request. This way escrows (including yourself) will have to do much less work.

Didn't I refute that already? I also starting to doubt that you invested anything let alone 200k, because you are pushing this really hard.

It's funny how 1500 BTC received considered failed these days.
Just saying, I know based on previous comments that you are just here pushing an agenda.

You think the lisk price will increase 3-4x by february? That would be something, but more than a bit unlikely.
But regardless if that would be true, initial ARK market cap should also be (almost) that much higher at launch, as ARK holds mostly lisk, so it would mean that the funds worth gathered by TEC has grown at a similar rate.
So, unless I'm missing something holding Lisk over Ark doesn't have greater possible growth in the next few months.

The current 0.4% extra doesn't change much, but you are right coinmarketcap should implement a lisk api call for changing supply. I'm sure they will get around to it.

You are right of course, not to mention the possibility of a good investment when you have an early stake in a low initial market cap coin. But I think everyone will make up their own minds.
Investors will always do what they think is best for them as it should be.

Now, that's speed.

It wouldn't have been difficult to implement it at all. It was decided to use long period median price because that is the hardest to manipulate. Look at lisk order book and how tin it is. A whale could have been easily take advantage of that and grab an unfair amount of ARK with a few transactions.

If you request a refund of course the coin you put in would be refunded. What do you expect? If you go to the shop and buy a product then return it do they give you back gold instead of your local currency?
If you put money into an investment fund do they make pay outs in oil?

The price fluctuation of the coin (or any asset) you used has nothing to do with us, expecting it to be is crazy logic.

No, there are no changes, just more details. The refund options of the TEC wasn't detailed in the original announcement, and now that the outcome is more likely we are releasing more details. At the beginning it was only stated that we refund anyone if we don't reach the minimum threshold.
And we will, if the minimum not reached, anyone can ask for a refund. The remaining participant will get their ARK coins, and the remaining coins will held until a later date to use for obtaining further funding.

As for funds from the escrow, the terms were established and agreed upon by the escrows before TEC started. After TEC ends escrow may release upon request an amount of fund  (no more than 20% of the total) to be used for establishing a legal entity and interim costs. This is so we don't run into the same problems as Lisk and have to wait for the creation of the foundation before we can grow.

I think you will find most information on our website https://ark.io/ including the whitepaper. There may be also some additional information in the first post of this thread, like link to interviews and current info. Between this two sources you should be able to find everyting about ARK.

Okay, then go to https://tec.ark.io/ and register.

I'm afraid you question didn't really make sense (to me at least). Could you ask it another way?
Do you want to get ARK tokens? If yes, tec.ark.io. You can participate with bitcoin or Lisk, not stratis.

I think you already did more to make an informed decision than 99 percent of the people will.
The problem is that it's a mess, because as you said there are too many hopefuls.

The best advise I can give you is to wait some time. See how uptimes develop for various delegates, thats a fair indicator. Wait for the lisk ecosystem to start producing something, so you can find good projects and through that good delegates. Right now everyone just making promises, planning projects that may never be realised. It's simply too early days if you want to vote based on merit.

If nothing else you will have much less delegates to choose from, because from that 800+ not 200 will be around a week from now.

If you want profit sharing delegates that will also sort itself out, but to be honest, I don't think as a model that will work. One or two may slip into 101, but it's just not a good business model. Too little profit for the node runner even less profit for the voters.

So good luck, thanks for being a thoughtful voter, but don't kill yourself over it. There will be opportunities to use your weight well.

In that case every participant will have an option added to their TEC account to request a refund and provide a refund address.
More details will be published later.

I still think this is just based on a misinterpretation that has been repeated so many times that it became a common mistake.

They could access ICO funds ever since they launched main net. This is supported by the fact that they did actually get out some money out of escrow a few months ago. They simply choose to leave the left of the money in because anything that they touch without being directly poured into a nonprofit foundation will be taxed harshly.

Hopefully that will happen soon, MME should take care of that. Either way I think at this point of time it's meaningless, so I didn't bother to ask at the last community meeting.

But neverless I still stand by my interpretation.

I think some of this confusion comes from this quote that has been misunderstood.


I think Max just meant that they are not allowed to lay a finger on it or be taxed, not not lay a finger on it because of escrow terms.

From part II of ICO terms:
https://blog.lisk.io/lisk-ico-terms-part-ii-3b50ab74c9b6

From part III of ICO terms:
https://blog.lisk.io/lisk-ico-terms-part-iii-604e55ad0102#.y0zu7djab

So the intent of escrow terms was clear.

There is also a fact that every time a genesis delegate signs a block it's log has a line like this:
And that's pretty much counts as forging in my book. Forging means signing a block. Who does it and if it has a block reward is meaningless in this context.