The main questions I'd have for the devs, which others have brought up too, is why do you assume if the ico is extended that it will make any real difference? Do you plan a marketing campaign or something?

And if not extended, why do you assume you can raise the funds on your own?

I'd need to see definite answers before putting any real money into this.

Since it'll be like 5-6 months or so before a working checkcoin is released, assuming you find the funding somewhere, you probably would have been better off going with something like the Nem model instead ... cheap stakes, put a max per person, and just get by with whatever sums are brought in. At the very least, I would expect the coin would have gotten a ton more exposure than it has.

The number of Monero threads, hype and shills, makes me much less likely to ever consider it. It's gone from a somewhat interesting, yet flawed coin, to an over-hyped coin with way too many people spreading false promises. These sort of threads annoy more people than help the coin, in my opinion.

Interestingly the price hasn't exactly skyrocketed after all of this hype either.

If someone was considering a cryptonote flavor, BBR appears to be the stronger bet anyway, if I had to be honest.

I've been on the fence whether I want to invest in this or not, but I do suggest that you should decide if you extend or not... BEFORE the current ICO ends. It'd just annoy people if you wait until the ICO is over, then tack on another month.

Looking at that roadmap I see sort of a major problem, whichever road you take. That long delay between wallet release/exchanges + development of geolocation software. 2-3 months is like 2-3 years in crypto time. You really need to put in some short term goals, or I expect a lot of dumping after the ICO ends.

Saying it won't be until Feb/April of 2015 before the product is fully functional is sort of a scary thought, to be honest.

Not bad then at all. I just assumed the cap stuff was figured in the initial payout.

As for the two household whales thing, I suggest some sort of verification for that, if you can manage it. Skype, blockchain check, social media, or all of the above... as otherwise some whales may have have multiple wives/husbands/dozens of children. As it could end up being 5% founder whale (or two) + several baby wallets, which was sort of the problem with the initial min/mid/max payouts.

Edit:
Then again, now that I think of it, it'd only be a problem if a whale owned 10% or higher ... that would be a mighty big whale.

So we are getting a 2nd dividend this month too? Or am I misunderstanding what you mean?
Is that sort of considered a bonus from the freebie payouts?

I'm pretty impressed with the first month's payouts overall. I really expected them to be sort of dinky to start with, and probably take 4-6 months to get going. And if they go up from here, I'll be really impressed.

Maybe it's just me, but it reads slightly xenophobic to keep mentioning that 'Made in the USA, traded in the US... Made by Americans' bit.

This isn't a handcrafted item made by artisans, instead of an assembly line from China. I don't see how it matters that the core team here are Americans.

Silly mindset. Since the coin isn't released yet, and if on the level, any sane dev would simply change the name of the coin. You can pick something similar, yet not exactly the same.
Change to UNITED CRYPTO CURRENCY, similar enough. Although perhaps still too similar to Unity, now that I think of it. I am sure you could come up with a decent sounding name that wouldn't confuse people.

Keeping Unity would do more harm than good, assuming you guys are on the level. Otherwise expect a similar reaction that Ethereum256 devs got.

Yeah, but underneath that it also states:

If by the 12th you have not replied we will pay the remaining addresses in QBK,

So if expecting payment in btc, and if you have not replied, it sort of sounds like you'll get paid in QBK only, regardless if you have one address or not? Or they mean if you are lazy, send in the addresses after the 12th, then you can just get QBK. I assume there has to be a cutoff date where payouts end.

I chose QBK for this first time around, so not a biggie to me. Just not sure if BTC people need to send it in, even if they have just one address.

For those receiving payment back in qbk and have only one used address in their wallet, do we even need to bother with that listunspent  stuff? I haven't sent mine in, figuring the devs have enough to check through as it is.

I didn't infer otherwise. I was just sort of stating the reason I feel some here are so eager to have crypti join it. It's not for the longterm health of the coin, or otherwise they'd take a wait and see attitude.

That's a good example. I wasn't even aware that accelerator 2.0 was expected tomorrow.

You can't expect people to wade through an entire thread to see what is being worked on, and when they may come to fruition. That's what roadmaps are for.

Those pushing the supernet idea simply want to cash out... now. It's the same sort of mindset when people wanted early trading here.

It doesn't really make a whole lot of sense for crypti to join supernet, but the best way to look at it, in my opinion, is to simply wait. If supernet takes off, and eventually could add something beneficial to the coin, then sure, the devs could consider it at that time. There is no real advantage to trying to join now, unless, again, some folks want to see a quick rise, dump their coins, and then walk away. And unfortunately way too many folks in crypto are like that nowadays.

Something I suggested a while ago, and assumed the devs would have done by now -- update their roadmap upon their website.

Wallet 2.5... is it still planned? Beta testing/screenshots for marketplace ... that has to occur at some point, right? The android wallet/rewards app mentioned recently... a rough estimate upon the roadmap could be useful too.

Just by listing upcoming stuff, even small stuff, it theoretically should help support the price of the coin.

The reason for going to overall percentage is precisely that reason ... it'd be too easy to game the system and have tons of mini/midi/max payouts.

I believe they are using an overall percentage with a cap on exchanges, as evidenced by the poll above this thread (and discussed here many times). Although I don't recall if the devs ever announced anything officially or not.

I'd keep expectations reasonable as far as the 1st payout goes.

You did remember to confirm the withdrawal on bittrex, through their email link, right?

Usually for Cryptsy delays I get the exchange listing they sent it, just that Cryptsy takes seemingly forever to acknowledge receiving it. They did have some issues with their wallets and delays a week or two ago, but assumed they fixed that by now.

Worst case, open a ticket on Cryptsy. They are usually pretty good with responding to tickets, or at least have been for me.

D.O.A. .... reminds me of that Ethereum256 coin ... a dev cashing in on a name, or attempting to.

Cutoff date for this month. Next month is another cut off date, and so on ... every month.

Are you getting trust rated by coins source too?

Thanks for the info.

Low key is fine with me, and actually preferred. High profile ICOs aren't necessarily where people make the most money. I wouldn't call any ICO a safe investment though... or any crypto for that matter. It's always a gamble.

The fact that mining occurs after the ICO is over (unless something was changed from the 1st page), is a bit worrisome. ICO + mining tends to be a bad mix, for obvious reasons.