How's this sound Bosman...
You refund shareholder BTC in exchange for GPC? Ie a reverse ICO.
This seems fair considering you pledge fairness and have not delivered. Clearly the bounty/dev costs are not an issue. If you're truly jaded right this wrong, or do so to the best of your ability with refunds.
Though, let's see what our community votes first...
I vote yes. I want a refund.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the current price still higher than what the ICO cost (at least on the selling side of things)? I can't fathom how anyone who got in on the ICO couldn't possibly be in profit by now. And we are talking about mighty sums of like .01-.05ish? I can understand some ICO coins requiring a buywall, but this surely isn't one of them. |
|
|
|
|
On the plus side, I guess the fact there are people still trying to buy in means there is definite demand out there. We'll find out more after the exchanges open, of course.
|
|
|
|
Code analysis is a component of determining the validity of a project yes, however, setting expectations and looking at the behavioral characteristics of new launch devs/promoters can shed light where it needs to be directed. As we have seen, a majority of scam coins dwell very little on the product they are offering and instead direct emphasis on promises of the unattainable. - Developing a reliable service to root out scams using a reliable and reusable template will provide a valuable service and add value to GPC (especially when partnered with others like CoinsSource and POD)
I feel I can add a unique perspective to the psychology of this space and root out the bad and identify the good. As this is a group application, if value is built and members like you contribute, we can attract the right resources to drill down the code.
Lets face it, its an information vacuum out there.
It is worthwhile to a certain degree, yeah... I just know I personally wish new coins were reviewed by a coder ... then I'd consider it a bit more trustworthy. I know one guy out there has been reviewing some coins for free, so maybe see if you can join up with him or something. I forget his username, but he's posted here in the altcoin forum a bit. The only other issue you may run into is that people may not care. I know it sounds odd, as people cry scam here seemingly all the time. But to them, scam means 'I lost money on this coin'. Not that the dev was pulling a scam. And a lot of times people seem to look the other way even when the coin they have invested in or promoting is clearly on the scammy side of things. I recall during the early days of the anonymity craze, certain coins, like liberty/dream/bank coin all made wild promises -- I believe all three promised zerocoin compatibility and in bankcoin's case, they threw in darksend. Nevermind that darksend wasn't opensourced yet, and zerocoin didn't actually exist. Even with those facts provided, people looked the other way. So long as the coins were being pumped, they turned a blind eye, cried 'fud' and so on. I don't mean this to sound like this project isn't worth doing. Just saying that you should have realistic expectations. Edit: And here is the guy doing code reviews that I was referring to -- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=748766.0 |
|
|
|
|
CoinsSource does the above to a certain degree, although I disagree with how they go about their trust rating thing.
I don't want to throw a monkey wrench into your plans, but there is one problem... same problem with CoinsSource reviews -- unless you have a coder analyze the code for the coin, reviews will be of limited help. Sure, they are better than nothing, but any coin can look great from the start, but if the code has a hidden premine, or looks shoddy, it won't matter much.
|
|
|
|
I really gotta get off the Trollbox and ask here... lol
Is the founder positions limited to one in a household?
Nope more members can have but you need separate wallets.. We also bagged up another 1 btc of Greenbacks their whitepaper is impressive.. cf622e99abf95f1c4b8572d6ec9c86e6db4a8b7f3b2ebb36172ed2ad95a8d032 I strongly suggest that you guys do the skype thing or some other way to verify if anyone wants more than one founder per household. And probably a max of 2/household would be good. You don't want a hoggy whale to claim 3-4+ founder positions all for himself. I threw a little bit at greenbacks myself, but as with all ipos, they can be iffy. Whitepaper is fine and all, but one never knows how those things turn out. At the least, they do have a somewhat nice wallet (which admittedly doesn't exactly mean much right now). |
|
|
|
Isn't DarkWallet a coin join implementation? If that is correct then I think my assertation that Zerocash will be more anonymous than that is correct.
I haven't kept track of DarkWallet, but don't believe it's trustless at this point. Just saying if they do get it all fancy and trustless down the road, it'd make anonymous alts sort of pointless. The only problem I have with Zerocash is that its devs seem to use a different timeframe than most in the cryptoworld use. By the time they actually make the thing, it may be too late. |
|
|
|
Whenever Zerocash is released I think it could be the best option as far as anonymity goes.
Otherwise, currently Darkcoin or Monero are probably your best bets.
Is there more to zerocash than a technical paper at this point? Due to the timeframe they used with that whole zerocoin thing, we may be looking at like 2016+ at the rate they seem to go. The biggest competitor anonymity-wise may be DarkWallet, assuming they get decentralized anonymity going there. And if so, they basically wipe out the advantage any anonymous alt has over btc. That's probably why Drk has swung to the DarkTor talk after they finish up the release candidates. |
|
|
|
I will announce first audit date one week before which gives bagholders a chance to move their coins..to earn maximum percentages.. We opened on the 10th so we wish to probably make first payment audit date on the 10th as we need a little time to generate some revenues. Just setting up the coin, building our reputation, especially after all the sabotage and fud attempts on our coin has taken up a lot of our time and energy, so we are just about picking up a groove and putting earning structures into place and trading the stability fund up etc.  . We will announce on OP and in posts.. . I will also talk to our webmaster to see if emails can be sent as well. I'll also assume the payment is actually 7 or so days (figure 8-10) after the audit date, correct? So one week early notice, then keep coins in for 7 days past the audit date... then payment after that. Make sure to stress folks need to keep in the coins to a certain date, otherwise you'll get annoyed people asking where their payouts are. So long as you pick the same exact date every month, I wouldn't think emails would be so necessary. Although I guess for the first payout, it's not a bad idea. |
|
|
|
Should we consider this timeframe for the monthly audit time each month? Basically asking what is the specific date the coins need to be registered by? I'd guess by the 31st (so last day of each month)? And then I assume we need to keep the coins in the wallet 7 days past that date. |
|
|
|
Yeah, the problem is this coin got sucker punched by a "wanna be" whale who didn't actually have enough BTC to really pump it. 340k or wherever the top was was nothing for this coin, but the guy obviously didn't have enough BTC to push it. I remember watching the action, and there was a small 2 or 3 btc sell that he never pushed through. That's why you saw him turn around and try offering a "subscription", so he could get some foot soldiers to put up BTC for him. Then he doesn't have to use his own BTC to pump it, and can dump on his groupies. Like a wanna-be wolong.
BC unfortunately followed the exact same pattern in the charts, but it was able to have a mega-pump much higher because there were a group of actual whales with actual BTC behind it.
I do wish the trolls were more effective...their action hasn't really pushed the price down much. We bottomed in the 30s and now I guess it will be slow decline over the next month, depending on what dev news releases do. I wouldn't mind loading up in the 10s but we may not get that opportunity.
I hope people don't take this as fud, but this is just how I see things. The coin was always fishy from the start. At first, I bypassed it, as that whole 'anonymity on the exchange' thing just felt like yet another dev trying to cash in on the anonymity craze. I then considered it because of DCM, strangely enough. DCM had devs who bailed with the IPO money, and our friend Bob was part of the problem there, not surprisingly. But he kept pushing Cloak. And Cloak kept going up (was around the 15-80K timeframe). It fell back into the 50s, and I had a brief discussion with Bob about DCM, and I'm not sure if it was meant as an olive branch, or Bob just wanted to keep pumping Cloak, but he mentioned whales were still on it (which could translate to he was still in it), and it'd makeup for DCM by putting some money into Cloak ... but he also stressed don't be too greedy. So we have yet another anonymity coin, with a moderated thread, initially with a countdown for releases (great for price manipulation), pushed by a known, how should I say this... let's say somewhat shady character. Folks go on fud wars, cheer Bob as he trolls other coins, which then brings trolls from said coins over here. I never saw a community so obsessed over other coins than their own -- I learned more about Drk in this thread than I did for Cloak. I mean, really, who didn't see all of the red flags? People blamed trolls/fud for a lot of the damage here, but it was sort of minimal to the background stuff whales were pulling. When Bob decided to take a 'vacation' from Cloak, it should have set off warning bells to get out then, assuming you hadn't already. Anyway, for those who still hold, I wouldn't tell them to sell, as at these prices what is the point? Might as well ride it out and hope for the best. But I wouldn't sink money into this unless it hits true rock bottom, and even then I'd be cautious. |
|
|
|
I'm going to say that OP should stay away from Cloak.
XMR and DRK are the way to go. Both have proven anonymity. The 'instamine' related to DRK should not be an issue. Even if DRK succeeds trolls will call upon it again in the future.
As far as DRK goes one should wait for Kristov A. to finish his audit and the coin goes open source (if anyone has his doubts).
I think that RC5 comes in 2-3 months at most.
Dark ToR is also a very interesting concept, you should read about it.
Dark ToR is interesting and if they pull it off, could save Drk from just being 'one of the crowd' of other anonymous coins. As a disclaimer, since I stated from the start that people would simply state coins they hold are the best, I still hold some Drk ... I held some Cloak but sold it before the audit came out (saw giant red flags with that coin from the start)... and hold no cryptonote coins. The thing I dislike about Drk however are the price fluctuations... or another way to say it is what appears to be price manipulation. After several months of calm at the beginning, it basically went to full blown whale/manipulation territory, with pumps, flash dumps, pumps again... repeat as necessary... etc. All the release candidates made great checkpoints for pumps/dumps. After RC5, hopefully things stabilize a bit. Until that Dark ToR stuff comes, anyway. From a purely technical standpoint, ring signatures may be a stronger form of anonymity. Just, they come at a price. I also am not sure why Monero gets all the attention it does, when Boolberry has a gui wallet + pruned their blockchain issues a bit -- yet it's only valued at a small percentage of what Monero goes for. I half expect a new cryptonote coin to waltz in one day, with an all-singing/dancing gui wallet, fixed bloat issues, and beat both of them. |
|
|
|
Hi Everyone, Thanks for all the great info, it's helping me get my head around all this. There's also a new anonymous POS coin called 'CLOAK' Kind of a noob question here, but what does "POS" mean in this context? Also, I don't understand the "instamine" controversy with DarkCoin and how it effects things in the future. Or if it's even a concern at this point. Proof of stake. Problem with Cloak is, their anonymity solution isn't what they claimed it would be. It's supposed to be trustless, yet isn't. Their audit failed, and now the devs are scrambling to start all over again. I think they are on v3 or something with PoSA.... or in other words, there is no way you should consider that coin currently. Not only is it not at a stable price (it got dumped to smithereens), they don't even have a trustless anonymity solution in place yet. The instamine issue with Drk makes great fud food, but I expect isn't a real issue at this point. Folks have done blockchain analysis and the early coins have been mostly redistributed by now. Not saying there aren't giant whales still, just that whether the coin had that instamine issue or not, it may not have mattered. Again, if I was you, I wouldn't choose any anonymous coin right now for what you want to do with your online store. Wait a month or two, see how RC5 does... see if a cryptonote coin fixes their issues... or Boolberry gets more attention (terrible, terrible name). |
|
|
|
The real tragedy here is coins, with 300-1500 BTC ICO's that promise the world way ahead of their proposed development schedule are being allowed to go to market with little to no consequence. If my intention was to scam, this would have been the way I would have approached it. I attempted to do the exact opposite. Think about that.
I am waiting for a responsible, verifiable party, to approach me to look at rebooting the project. I will notify everyone once that person(s) have been discovered and initiate the transition.
This was a novel experiment that I felt could change this space for the better. Instead, I (we) have learned that the majority of those in the alt space only care for quick profits and manipulation to achieve those profits.
The latter point should have been kind of obvious just based on all the quick pump/dumps run on Bittrex for the past several months. Part of the coin's problem may have been timing. If you did this several months ago, before Comm/ITC, perhaps it would have taken off better. Comm is a good example of the community driven coin ... and at first, got a lot of community people involved. Yet they basically ran into the same problem you did, without a real dev team -- coders -- there was nothing really added to their coin as unique features go. It also didn't help that their 'lead dev' more or less did nothing at all. Saying a coin is run by the community or group is all well and good, but look around here. I mean, really, this alt scene has been described as a cesspool, and it's not that far off. You can get good people, but it'll be hit or miss if any of them sign up to help a coin or not. And finding coders... unless a coder is paid in a LOT of the coin he is working on, I'm not sure why he'd bother. You either need a coder onboard, or btc to pay a coder. Otherwise, a coin just sort of sits there in no-man's land. |
|
|
|
He took around 3? BTC in IPO plus all the GPC he had (and of course u will never know how many he sold the first days, dont u?) because was all premine... im not angry because of the lost (0.1 BTC not much) but because i think he didnt give his "best shot" or any shot at all. I dont know him but i was reading here all the time "he is good dev" "we can trust him" and even with the price down as it is since 3 or 4 days after the launch i was holding (what i normally do with POS coins) and because all this good comments. And now he say is leaving?
Where is thi "08/09/14 - Project "X" is in testing and will be announced 08/12/14 8 PM EST. This is a technical feature/upgrade, not a hiring announcement. Can't wait to blow your socks off"?
You really did dude, u really blow my socks off.
They are different types of scams. Dont u think?
The 3 btc from the IPO was a donation. He was upfront from the start that it meant the money went to him for starting and running the coin. That said, he also spent at least some of that money on the coin itself. He paid for the block explorer, mobile wallet + paid to pump the coin. Project X was the mobile wallet. I don't think he should have kept it secretive as people's imaginations are always greater than reality. I expect a number of people were expecting it to be something bigger, although beats me why... as the coin hasn't been around long enough for any giant projects yet. And yeah, there are certainly different types of scams. But again, usually a scam makes it a bit clearer as to how the dev made money from it. If he was scamming, logically he would have promised anonymity + other fancy features. I think it'd be the first 'scam' where a dev promises basically nothing besides a coin release, doesn't really have a clear path to raking in a lot of btc, yet still gets called a scam. |
|
|
|
|
People are simply going to state what coins they own, and that one is the 'best'. So to be honest, expect very few valid replies here.
One of the Cryptonote coins may be the strongest as far as anonymity goes, as ring signatures are pretty solid, but it does have some issues, primarily bloat. Monero gets all the attention, but Boolberry probably is the better coin -- it has a gui wallet and I believe cut down on some of the bloat issues.
Drk, assuming it passes its audit, would also be considered worthwhile ... especially if they do that Dark Tor thing the dev talked about.
Then you have XC (someone else would have to give an objective opinion on that one, as I haven't followed it).
There are other coins that claim anonymity, but haven't paid much attention to them ... Pinkcoin claimed it, Cloak sort of had a version working, until they failed their audit as far as it being trustless, and more or less have to start over from the beginning (assuming they even bother at this point). Not sure what other coins claimed anonymity or not, besides the simple mixer types of coins.
Anyway, you'd want a stable coin that people would spend, not worried about it as far as an investment goes. That will be tricky, as pretty much that seems all people do here is consider these things investments. You may wish to wait until Drk gets past RC5 and goes open source, or a cryptonote flavor truly fixes their bloated blockchain issue. And in Monero's case, gets a wallet that an average person would even bother using.
|
|
|
|
Honestly... this is what i could call "SCAM" and the worst is that people are accepting that so easily. I bought this GPC at 1000 bits because of the whitepaper, promises of development and all the news here that @Bosman was posting and now he say it is leaving, why? Because was all a big scam? It is the only thing i could think right now. Im out of this and wherever i see ur name again @Bosman i know now, it is all fake and scam. Normally i dont write this kind of post but i think now is the best moment to start doing it.
I always find it interesting how people define scams here. There are obvious ones, when devs don't deliver ipo coins... devs who take ipo money and then don't spend it on the coin ... devs make grand promises of features, then bail ... hidden premines, hidden viruses... a number of different flavors of scam. But if an investor loses money, is it a scam? I have difficulty figuring how how Bosman scammed anyone exactly. He took in around 3 btc, which he stated upfront was a donation, spent a decent portion I expect on the block explorer + mobile wallet + pumping his own coin (in retrospect, I consider that a mistake). If he made any money from trading, it was probably offset somewhat from his expenses supporting the coin. I do think he probably should stick it out. But if a dev gives it their best shot and it doesn't work out, does it equate to a scam? Just wondering why people may feel that way. And losing your money because you decided to buy the coin at a high does not equate to a scam. It was a bad investment decision, but not necessarily a scam. |
|
|
|
|
LfEyUB426neoFBa9DeCRqqW57Uaxg2ywnu
If truly giving LTC away for free, thanks!
|
|
|
|
If anybody's curious, the final numbers from my pre-launch sweep buys are 5.12M XCR purchased at an average of 2950 satoshi each, starting from zero XCR in hand at a 2200 satoshi exchange rate. That's almost exactly three XCR IPO maximum individual allotments for a 5% total stake at 3.35 times the IPO price of 880 satoshis. I missed the IPO several weeks ago. Time will tell if I got a hodl deal today, or not.
For way of comparison, an IPO 5% stake in NXT (its maximum individual allotment) cost 1 BTC at 2 satosi each. A week after the NXT IPO closed, 2Kool4Skewl purchased one-third of a NXT IPO maximum individual share at 100 satoshis each - a 50X price bump in seven days. Today NXT is 6000 satoshi each after coming down from a recent high of around 12,000 satoshis each. 2Kool4Skewl made 60-120 times his money after paying a 50X premium for NXT a week after its launch. NXT itself has gone up by a factor of 3000-6000 since its launch 10 months ago.
Remember that XCR is ten times rarer than NXT. If XCR is as successful as NXT has been to date, its unit price in ten months should be ten times NXT's price now, or 60,000-120,000 satoshi.
And XCR has 750 BTC ($375,000) from the IPO for dev team "salaries" and a 15% holdback of coins (currently worth $150,000 or so) for product development - neither of which NXT had at its start. There are other advantages in XCR's favor as well.
Most of all, XCR has an emphasis on the CRYPTOCURRENCY part of "2nd Generation Cryptocurrency", with the intent of having merchants accept the coin so it can become electronic money among users. In contrast, NXT is mainly focused on various crypto asset exchanges. Nothing wrong with that - but there's a lot more people with smartphones out there who want to buy a hamburger than an electronic stock certificate.
I'm hodling. XCR is going in a new and exciting direction, following the "road not taken" by NXT - and that will make all the difference.
Nice post and interesting viewpoint. Too often with cryptos I have found myself thinking how I didn't get the best price on a coin -- perhaps I missed an IPO or a dump -- rather than thinking that even at a somewhat higher price, it may still be a really good value. Something I should keep in mind more often. And I knew the Nxt IPO was cheap (unfortunately it was before my time here), but didn't realize it was that cheap. |
|
|
|
One has to be extra-dumb to dump on the market like this. Some patience would have made that person quite a bit richer.
More for me I guess!
2014-08-22 05:57:21 Buy XCR/BTC 0.00002017 BTC 30,000.000000 XCR 0.6051 BTC
2014-08-22 05:57:21 Buy XCR/BTC 0.00002101 BTC 30,000.000000 XCR 0.6303 BTC
2014-08-22 05:57:21 Buy XCR/BTC 0.00002262 BTC 30,000.000000 XCR 0.6786 BTC
2014-08-22 05:30:47 Buy XCR/BTC 0.00002379 BTC 30,000.000000 XCR 0.7137 BTC
I suppose some folks always buy on rumor and sell on news, even though it's sort of asinine to consider a coin's release 'news' to sell on. |
|
|
|
How does the counterwallet exchage work? Tried to sell some storj there but transactions were pending for hours, full sell order appeared after a few hours and now some of it is pending again. I can't even cancel the order.
You can cancel it, but you need a little btc in your account to do so. And a little btc to move it off the wallet... basically need some btc dust in there to do anything at all. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
