Great, I like Gold. When can we buy the Gold crypto coin ?

Join to telegram and ask about if they got licence to operate money business. You will be banned immediately.

They cannot do this without proper applications and permits. Yet, there is no single information about that.

Don't believe me. Go ahead and ask them!

Crypto isn't regulated.

I acutally doubt he needs to hold a finaincial / securities license .

Its fairly deceptive to lie about this. Which he did until their was fairly good proof that he was lying. My question would be what else has he lied about. This doesn't show a good sense of character. Given whats out there now, I would suggest the larger companies people where talking about populous targeting would be able to read all this information and I would think it would turn more then one of two of them away from Populous. Best thing that can happen here is Nico steps aside and lets someone else coming in as CEO and sail the ship.

Of course he will remove his post. Why would he let other community members know that he gave into the FUD.

Some guy replied to populous tweet today with the link

This just reminds me about BitConnect case. Many were yelling that it was scam and many other were defending. At the end...

You know how it ends.

Wow, are you now speaking on behalf of scammers out there? What makes you think scammers are perfect? If so, then why are many of them still getting caught and jailed? Do you think they already know they will get arrested? If so, then why do you think they still try?

Why keep saying beta is coming soon? Why cannot say beta is still many months ahead to be conservative? Why give false expectation? Why give false hope?

Why do you think the token lock up is for? Can't you think?

And wow, you don't even have any idea what you are talking about and yet you keep making comments as if you know. Who are you to speak on behalf of scammers? What makes you think you are very familiar with the mentality of scammers? Were you a scammer too?

What makes you think that scammers will have higher chance of getting away if the amount involved is small? Are you out of your mind?

No sh!t, Sherlock.  And what event prompted many to move their ERC-20 tokens from their wallet near the end of that time period?... The EtherDelta DNS hack.

So, I practice good safekeeping of my tokens and I am not rewarded with the PXT tokens.

Whatever.  Crooked is as crooked does.

my advise to you guys is go an see the TV show "American Greed" . Ive watch every season and quickly you get to understand the forumula of a lot of scams. This follows a very similar pattern some of them very simple and ran for years. GOOGLE "tom Petters" thats just one of the top of my head. I consider myself an expert in scams. Ive read alot of the books from enron to books about worldcom. To the Bernie Madoff scam. This certainly has alot of the red flags you typically see.

For those who think "why wouldn't he just take the ICO money and run". Scammers don't think like that. The biggest pay day for nico is to unlock those 10mil coins and sell them. Even then let the project die off and start another one. Building the platform to a basic level with delayas will get him there.

THe constant lies about deal and the dishonesty surround the LGC deal. Fishy looking invoices from that deal. Alot of statement from that deal don't add up.

LGC: said the statement was unauthorized however they never corrected at the time. tThe invoice from LGC that populous produced was clearly fake and had commers in the wrong spots. Nico has a quesrtionable past. Delays that clearly where known about well before the date. Nico's likedin profile says he was running companies while clearly injail.

People in the bounty program getting ripped off. A string of broken businesses. The list could go on. All this stuff isn't the stuff of a legitimate operation.

I've been in PPT since the ICO.  Then came the EtherDelta scare so I moved my PPT to another wallet address in December.

So here comes Populous announcing that they are going to airdrop PXT for all the holders of PPT.  (this is where I get f*cked.)

Yep, I moved the PPT before their airdrop date and and after the "hold" date, just because the ether addresses was used frequently on ED.  So I kindly send an email to Populous explaining - no response.  Then I see their twitter info on how to claim PXT, etc.  I do so - still no response.  I repeat - still no response.  Now I hear they are removing the claim form.  Oh, well, I guess I don't rate.

I realize that the PXT likely isn't worth much, but dammit!  It's just the concept of being told one thing and then experiencing something else.

So I read what I hope is FUD on this forum thread but my experience is screaming to pay attention to not what they say, but what they do!

Populous, I'm pissed. 

Just to clarify, myself (and others in this thread) are not calling 'scam' - *some* of the posts here are but not all. And I do believe that some of the negative posts are from the competition, no doubt in my mind about that.

The point I was making (and others) is that whilst there is no sign of wrong-doing, at the very least, there is a corporate governance issue which needs to be addressed. It won't go away.

None of the subsequent replies appear to be 'playing-the-ball' on this and are instead trying to play-the-player.

And FYI - you don't need to execute an exit from a scam or ponzi (again, not proposing PPT is such) if the scheme becomes so big, profitable and dare I say it 'un-touchable' there is absolutely no need for an exit. The biggest and best schemes littered down history had no exit plan, they just keep on going until there is an 'event'.

Taking a risk based approach to investment you could argue, if the supposition in the steem video is correct (and it has not been proven that it is), that the risk of such a future 'event' is far higher for PPT than it otherwise should be. This is what good governance helps protects investors from.

How real is that Jack Lee appointment can be determined by contacting the real Jack Lee directly for clarification.

I have provided my professional advice on invoice discounting / factoring process for Populous’ consideration.  Since I have already completed my advisory tasks, today (Feb 12) I have resigned from the Honourable Advisor position of Populous.

I take this opportunity to thank you for the cooperation extended to me by the company.

If Populous is legit, then I would admit being wrong. That is a very simple thing to do.

I think that a ICO project can developed strongly or not depends on community so much. A Ico project is known by many people before do ICo that the opportunity of success is very high

Noteworthy extracts:

Hive Project has entered into new partnerships and signed letters of intent covering the huge Turkish and Latin American markets, bringing liquidity to millions of SMEs faster!
We have been invited to attend the DFW — Digital Finance World in Frankfurt, the beating heart of the European financial world!
We have also had fintech companies from the USA contacting us in an effort to forge partnerships, which we continue to pursue

Before using personal insults please consult the U.K Financial Conduct Authority fit-and-proper handbook. The handbook is to be used as a guide for U.K based financial services companies which fall under the jurisdiction of the FCA such as, lending companies and companies involved with the movement of capital.

https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/FIT.pdf

"The FCA will have regard to a number of factors when assessing the fitness
and propriety of a person to perform a particular controlled function, as
more particularly described in ■ FIT 2 (Main assessment criteria).

The FCA would expect firms that are required to assess the fitness and
propriety of staff being assessed under FIT to have regard to substantially
the same factors as those outlined in ■ FIT 2.

In the FCA's view, the most important considerations will be the person’s:
honesty, integrity and reputation;
competence and capability; and
financial soundness.
In assessing fitness and propriety, the FCA will also take account of the
activities of the firm for which the controlled function is or is to be
performed, the permission held by that firm and the markets within which it
operates.
A relevant authorised person assessing the fitness and propriety of staff
being assessed under FIT should consider:
(1) the nature, scale and complexity of its business, the nature and range
of financial services and activities undertaken in the course of that
business; and
(2) whether the candidate or person has the knowledge, skills and
experience to perform the specific role that the candidate or person is
intended to perform."

Hence, I will stick to my original hypothetical conclusion that if indeed a CEO or Managing director of a company had been placed under her majesty's pleasure for 4 years for fraudulent money transfers and was then put in charge of a $1bn USD listed company which primary function is money transfers then, yes this would be perceived to be a major governance issue.

This is all hypothetical.

I am simply asking the question, which remains un-answered - is the Steem article (which I have not written) FUD ? and if so what evidence can be presented to demonstrate it is FUD? the longer the question remains un-answered the bigger the problem gets.

If it is FUD then good luck to the PPT team and all the best.