Actually you are a liar. Blatant one at that. I "flame" -or speak of- not a single coin above the trading level of BYC. Not a single one (BC goes above and beyond and my beef with that scam is quite old and it appears, although I am not sure for I have no further interest in it, that the scammers are out). I do criticize PROVEN scams, such as PINK -after having been quite a supporter, before I discovered the scam- and SEED, both of which trade much less than BYC. And I also criticize a few others (specifically NAUT, VRC, PESA and BRIT) all of which have significantly lower volume than BYC.

But you are a known liar and bob kiss ass, so nobody will be surprised this time around. Your reputation only grows and grows...

Took the words out of my mouth lordship... I would have only peppered the post a little bit to make it more... colourful.

Other than what you posted, as proven by numerous others (BC, VRC, Pink...) such a move is just the beginning of the final phase of the inevitable end. But hey, this project has been bent of harakiri by Brian Kelly for months now, so maybe there's a "higher purpose"? Whatever it is, this will be sticking the fork in it for sure.

If only it were true, that people like you think... but, like I said, it doesn't matter. I turn when turn is granted. And the mess of the launch warranted a sharp turn under any common sensical point of view... just like a turn back, now, with the behavior of the coin fully demonstrated even on not yet settled circumstances, I feel is fair and fully warranted. But this is just me and my opinion, no one has to follow them and thinking for yourself is precisely what I encourage.

I only debate you because you post irrational things that are completely irrelevant to BYC, but you are more than welcome to think as much as you want about anything you want.

My understanding from Zimbeck -who has proven to be quite shaky regarding truth, spotty at best- is that he is under no ob;ligation whatsoever beyond the delivery of the Bay-adapted Halo client with "smart contracts" and the "pegging" and decentralized market software. No exclusivity at all. As a matter of fact he has gone to some lengths to state that he is, first and foremost, a BlackCoin guy.

Are you implying he also sold Halo to Bitmarket? Anything is possible but personally I doubt it. And, in answering your question, theoretically, yes, Halo is available to anyone who pays whatever price Zimbeck sets. Since he says he's in it NOT for the money, he would need additional convincing, I presume.

If I have to gess, the double deposit idea, if anything would have been copied by Zimbeck from bitmarket, rather than the other way around, but that's just my opinion -or hunch, if you will-. Matters very little since in neither case it will be even remotely successful.

Which is what separates BYC from ALL the others: It's run for profit and with professionalism by someone who understand promotion and business in general, as oppose of geek coders with no experience in life whatsoever or geek coders associated with unsavoury characters. Hence the success.

If he lied about you or your work, it's between you too and quite impossible to prove either way. Nothing to do with Bytecent or scams, so your over reaction is far from justified other than in terms of racism, but since I cannot be sure about it, I will just leave as my opinion, fair enough? "Lying about donations" is simply a fallacy for he -as far as anyone knows- did with the donations what he could (or he feels the only thing he could do, since returning them was impossible). That's not lying. Not at all. KI -again- fully disapprove of the rout he took and it would have been much more acceptable if he would have return the money to the Foundation of BC but it did not exist at the time so he was in no-mans land, so ... again, not ideal but no scam whatsoever.

While I fully agree with everything you just posted here, still you are comparing a legitimate product with a scam, and that's somehow legitimizing it. There's no market, decentralized or otherwise, behind BAY. There will be "clunky software pretending to facilitate such just to allow the distribution of the last 33% of the BTER "sale", but nothing else. No merchants, no sellers of anything, no nothing. It is a SCAM, period. Wall to wall. Comparisons to legitimate projects are simple ludicrous.

All the names (A L L) posting in the CoinBlab forum are regulars on BickCoinTalk, so you can check their handles and posting history, don't play stupid, ok? And all are veterans, recognizable investors, no sockpuppets. And some eventually quite critical or IE's "peculiarities" some times.

As for you being racist, in this case, let me put it to you this way: IE has done NOTHING whatsoever for you to term him a "scammer". Absolutely nothing. He has not scammed you and has not scammed anyone you know... even going back to the donations for Wall Street Event that, although regrettable -and granting him the inclusion in my WALL OF SHAME-, are not a scam in any way, just a very bad and easy unilateral decision. You hate him for it? sorry, I don't buy. At the cost of maybe being wrong, I believe such level of hatred comes from a very recognizable origin and has to do with pigmentation and success... put together.

I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

In any case, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact he launched a very unique and so far amazingly successful coin, in spite of himself and many messy problems that I just learned somehow survive still. And this is about that very successful problem, not about racism -I wish- or past endeavors that you choose to name to fit your personal agenda.

Then you are correct and I am wrong in assuming that it was already on REGULAR (1440 coins a day) mining. Since I don't visit the forum at CoinBlab (was banned and I dont feel like circumventing the ban), I did not know that mining continues being highly irregular. In THAT -which I believe is purely technical, no scam or anything remotely like that-, I was wrong and it IS a problem. Especially because there's no chance in the world that IE will admit to the problem, he's pathologically built like that. That said, obviously banning a country is just trying to solve that particular problem, nothing scamy about it. Arbitrary? Indeed. We all know that IE is wired like a little dictator, so nothing surprising there. Important for the success of the project? Obsolutely not at this point. BUT, that said, some careful people should want to wait until the problem is fully solved. I can only imagine what the price reaction will be when there's no more clouds on the horizon...

The problem as I understood it though, in IE's world, is not so much the almost double mining of coins still daily and some "superminer" getting half od it in a particular geographic point. But I am not fully aware of all the details, so you must be right. Like I said, if even with those obvious problems the coin's price remains solid amidst a lot of liquidity, I can only imagine what it is going to do when it is fully regularized.

I am aware of ALL the FACTS, as you can learn in THE BYTECENT MESS, right here on these boards. But what I don't have is the burden of recism or other fobias that you and a few others seem to carry. Just by the sheer number of people invested in the coin, all with recognizable names and a long history in BTCT, you can see clearly -if you look- that no matter how modest the investment, 60 (actually some 67 BTC) doesn't leave much for IE to have "bought himself". He may have gotten a few thousand coins irregularly mining, that I don't know. If he did, that's censurable but, giving the proven trajectory of the coin pricewise, of no current significance on any level for new investors... like me.

But since you are never going to be convinced -his pigmentation is too dark, I understand-, I guess you are going to have to continue limiting yourself to spew your hatred and try to distort reality. Good luck with that. Or not.

Black coin was a disaster foretold AFTER he left. He MADE Blackcoin -with the unexpected help of the Black Hand-.

Both he and I foretold the price would be in singles soon when it was in the mid 40s... and the price is not even remotely done going down.

The only other coin he was directly associated with since was Libertycoin, a scam of Carlitos that actually stopped IE from making it the huge success it was bound to be if Carlitos would have gotten out of the way.

I know you don't like it -he's black after all-, but fact is that he has the Midas touch for Alts and clearly, irrefutably demonstrated with BYC.

Just to note that, after the messy launch and the measures that Iconicexpert was forced to implement (issue refunds) and, recently, the measures to eliminate the so called "superminer", I believe BYC to be one of the best projects, if not the best project in crypto.

There's only one reservation -and is of significance: About 145,000 coins were sold in the IPO (accounting the refund). To my understanding, there were 25-30% more (35-45,000 coins) mined irregularly since launch (meaning beyond the daily limit of 1440) so those are coins of cost ZERO. Meaning they can be dumped at ANY price for 100% profit. A significant part of them, I assume, have been dumped already and therefore transferred to "stronger" hands and therefore provided a better distribution, but it's impossible to determine. In any case, after over a month since launch, the bahaviour of the coin in the market has been remarkably solid in terms of price and liquidity making it a unique case in a sea of failures/scams. THEREFORE, I am back fully supporting this project -and invested in it also-. With a significant caveats... for what its worth: The censorship installed by IconicExpert in the CoinBlab forum is completely unacceptable and (pun intended) censurable. Not arguing to that.

But the main reason of my support -and investment-, besides the aforementioned, is, precisely, the professionalism and dedication of IconicExpert, as well as his talent for promotion. He "gets" it. He may fail at making of Bytecent even a mildly or minimally accepted currency in the real world, for that's THE holy grail of all cryptos, but he will indeed succeed at promoting it in the crypto world enough to double the current valuation several times in my estimation.

And that's why I am supporting the project and, again, for full disclosure, making a modest investment in it.

It appears that James still wants them somehow so expect at one point or another a huge rebound, a double or triple almost instantly... Of course that is likely to happen when the price has dwindled significantly even from current numbers. But I don't think we will see 500 sat in a very long long time. under 2000 though, to me a foregone conclusion.

But not just VRC, as I forecast about a month ago, ALL alts, in general, will be decimated to 1/4 or less of the then valuations. We are already quite underway in that direction in just a month or less. There's not even a remote justification for current valuations for something that has no value, no use and that is supported, basically, by pot-smoking, non-working jerkoffs with no access to money. And that's 85-95% of the alts demographics.

@ Yanakitu Tenatako

No, un fortunately you don't even come close to understand. I wish the problems of Serbia would be even remotely close to being banned from mining BYC. As for cheese, I swing trade and have only a 5 year old laptop so even if I mine all the time I would get a max of one or two coins a day. I make much more than that trading it.

So no, don't presume to know other people's motivations because you will err more often than not.

A total of some 67 BTC were purchased, accounting for the 7 something that were refunded (including mine), so the extent of the "threshold" had to have been very minimal. No matter how much you would wish for it to be a scam, fact is it's evident it wasn't and it isn't. That's why is successful, much as it hurts you.
Your personal aversion (or racism) notwithstanding. Sorry, facts are facts.

The obvious and quick answer, that you choose to ignore through cheap demagogy James is that all of those are REGULATED. Just like crypto is about to be. Everything has its good and its bad and one should hope-admittedly many times against the obvious evidence- that the positives of progress will outweight the negatives.  Demagogy though always has led and always will lead to the latter.

First to market in this case will mean first to failure ... but it is unfortunately an inevitable process.

Oh I "let" you have any personal views you want, what I don't "let" you is getting away with the INEVITABLE consequences of bot decentralized markets and storage since, inevitably, they will attract illegal activities and, therefore, law enforcement with disastrous effects for everyone involved, including those dealing in legal activities (loss of money and loss of stored property).

I am well aware of the pitfalls of government and democracy itself, but history teaches us that even with those pitfalls it triumphs over anarchy -which is totally inviable- and dictatorship so as long as people support democracy in the US -which is where I live, but not "mine" in any way shape or form- and most of the rest of the world, the world is going to have to live according to laws and rules supported by evolving and alternate majorities. That is a FACT, especially in Law Enforcement, regardless if I like it or not.

As you are fully aware of, regulation is coming imminently to crypto in both the US and Europe. Necessary and positive in the end so, yes I fully support it. And, as long as those are set by democratically elected governments, I support the enforcement of the laws against those who provide playing fields for the crooks and deranged of the world under the cover of "protecting privacy". Every individual I know of, except maybe Howard Hughes, through history, has been more than willing to give up any trace of privacy in exchange for fame and fortune, so, in the end, it is all fake and a monumental lie...

But those are higher philosophical matters not necessarily appropriate for discussion here. What should be discussed, with facts at hands -as I have tried- are both the inevitability of illegal activities in any decentralized environment and the corresponding Law Enforcement action that will follow, since they will have dire effects in the quality of people's investments.

PS.- my personal position on political corruption is not very relevant, is it? But if you know of any decentralized or not solution to it, that would be a net, super or not, that I would fully support. Meanwhile, by voting people that I believe are not corruptible (Ha!) or by not voting anyone, I try to choose the best one to rule -temporarily-. And it bis a privilege still absent in most of the world, by the way... but since you seem to have all the knowledge and the key to full fairness -as well as the financial resources- why don't you come to the forefront and change the world by way of publicly decrying its many pitfalls? You know, Buffet, Gates, Zuckerberg and others are in fact doing it (or trying at least). You seem to be doing... what, creating "assets" like Kevondo's radio, to string people for their money?

The way you frame the question makes it absurd. First of all, someone has been gaming the mining of Bytecent and whatever banning of countries IE has done, it has been to preserve, precisely, the fairness of the mining, which is key to the success of Bytecent, so it has not only been done to be absolutely fair to the real investors, not the crooks, but to protect and benefit every investor in the coin, whether miner also or not. So some country or countries cannot mine Bytecent, big fucking deal, there are hundreds of other coins, invest on those.

And by the way, many companies are forced to not sell their products in many countries by laws of those countries of by directyion from the companies themselves for a myriad of reasons. Companies -must like cryptos- when successful, need to make money, be profitable. By mandate. Nor democratic or "fair".

I would also remind you that no decentralized market will be ever allow to operate by law enforcement as proven by  'Operation Onymous' last month (17 people arrested in several countries, millions seized). So the whole thing is just a trick to get investors' money without any real-life use, much like "anon" was a few months back and decentralized cloud storage seems to be now. None of that shit will ever have any real life use.

It is EXACTLY the same (requires double deposit--from the buyer and the seller, just like BAY). Only "difference" seems to be the use of TOR as opposed to the encryption provided by BAY which is not only vulnerable to hacking but already in the hands of the Bobsurplus hackers --the Taiwanese connection.

And both are bound to fail miserably because no seller is going to put an amount similar to the price of whatever goods or services are being sold and no buyer is going to deposit DOUBLE the amount of the price of those goods and services. It is quite absurd in BOTH cases and none will survive.

But BAY is not designed to survive at all, it is designed to scam money from stupid investors. And on that racket, it has succeeded already... albeit at a much lower level than intended.

On a separate matyter since we have you here, the plans for Vericoin on the SuperNET still include decentralized cloud storage? maybe another ad-hoc decentralized market? I'm sure you have heard of STORJ, since Supernet's OPAL will rent their HDD... it is obvious that there's duplication there...