Why do I need to tell you that? It is an irrelevant question to the indisputable fact that, just like bitcoin, Leocoin is only pseudo-anonymous, it is absolutely not "truly anonymous" as it has an unencrypted public blockchain displaying every single transaction and address from Genesis block to now. Just. Like. Bitcoin.

But, then, I see you are simply reverting to your usual tactic of attempting to obfuscate the issue through deflecting it elsewhere.

So, back to the question you have failed to answer and are attempting to dishonestly avoid;
Which part of this statement is *not* a lie?

Let's break it down nice and simple for you so you don't get confused:

"Through the use of advanced cryptography and encryption methods," - This implies the transactions are encrypted, when the truth is only the public/private key process involves encryption. The blockchain, as I mentioned is entirely unencrypted and open to public analysis.

"we have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency" - As I already pointed out, LEOcoin is merely pseudo-anonymous, so it is utterly dishonest to claim it is, "truly anonymous".

"in contrast to others which are anonymous only on a superficial level" - Remember the term I keep using to describe LEOcoin's true state on this subject, 'pseudo-anonymous'? Yeah, it means that the coin network is only anonymous on a, you guessed it, SUPERFICIAL LEVEL.

So, three assertions, all proven to be lies.

Not only that, I brought this to your attention six months ago. This isn't something you can wave off, it is a fraudulent claim which intentionally misleads the public. Why is it still being touted as true when it is a lie and you know it is a lie?

If you actually bothered to read the link I gave you it is perfectly clear why negative ratings are the weapon of choice against scammers and those who support them.

That IBG is getting fewer new scam threads with much shorter lifespans is evidence enough that this community action works.

Which part of that explicit claim is *Not* an outright lie?

"We have managed to make LEOcoin a truly anonymous digital currency"

Bollocks.

Freedoge, perhaps this will help you better understand that this is a community action, not a forum rule:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1381105.0

In that it is a community action you can quit demanding that staff attend to your displeasure and simply accept that you are being held to account for your actions by the community.

Ponzi schemes *need* people to post encouraging comments in order for them to function. This policy of marking users who help these scams function is extremely effective at limiting their propagation, particularly when it comes to the fact it is no longer worthwhile for scammers to buy senior forum accounts with which to fraudulently vouch for their operation.

That scammers are trying to hide in other forum sections isn't sufficient as most experienced users are quick to flag them as a likely ponzi and then they are moved into IBG and dealt with accordingly.

BTW, not all threads in IBG are scam operations, just most of them.

You *kindly* asked me to remove the rating?

So I can add liar to the description of your untrustworthy behaviour?

You responded in thread by giving an excuse for supporting ponzis which does not hold up to scrutiny, namely, that EVERYONE knows how ponzis work and that it is 'like gambling'. Neither of which are true statements. Ten minutes later you posted that I should be banned from the forum.



"Someone must stop this scam obsessed individual" - Stated as though it means something really profound. Pro-tip: It doesn't.

You were the one making claims about how the pre-mine supposedly protected the network from 51% POW attack, I merely pointed out that assertion was false. Or, to use the dreaded vulgar vernacular, that assertion was indeed bollocks.

So what about the continued lies about anonymity?


You said you'd look into why it was being touted as such, did you?

And you can find an explanation from rat4 on how he successfully attacked POS/POW Mintcoin here:


Why do you think Mintcoin switched to pure PoS? Your claim that a botnet can't fork the network because of the pre-mine is false. The question is whether you are intentionally making this claim in order to wave off questions about the pre-mine or you are being fed this excuse by the people who hold the pre-mine.

So, again, why is Leocoin still claiming this, six months after I challenged you on it?

You can evade the issue by saying you didn't write that, but as "The Leocoin Foundation" you are basically choosing to ignore a fraudulent claim being made to the general public on the actual leocoin.org website!

You again miss the point, it does not require a 'stake' to mine a PoW block. There is no requirement for PoS in a POW/POS hybrid. So if a botnet has >51% hashing power it can double-spend and pretty much dictate the blockchain. How does this pre-mine 'protect' the blockchain from this? Answer: It doesn't, so stop saying it does.




You've been that busy for the last six months you couldn't possibly spare any time to address the outright fraudulent lies being spouted on your coin's .org website?


It is painfully obvious to anybody else witnessing this conversation that you are desperately clinging to the "if you can't speak nicely then I will ignore you" dishonest response to questions you don't like.

Stake? Leocoin is proof-of-work, why are you bringing 'staking' into this when discussing the, alleged, botnet?

Seeing as you're insisting on making an arse of yourself when it comes to failing to understanding the technology, why the fuck is this still on the leocoin website when I already told you months ago it was bullshit or, seeing how upset you get about the use of vulgar expression,  an outright fucking lie?


You said this fraudulent claim would be removed when I first challenged you on it, but there it still is.

*raises hand*

Ummm, I'd just like to point out . . .that's bollocks.

As you were, whatever it is you're pretending to do in this thread.

I figure it's probably because the negative rating is harming his ability to sell his account 'package':

Funny thing, consequence.

Free speech is not freedom from the consequences of that speech and if you choose to freely behave dishonestly then you will be held to account for that.

But I know how much you assholes hate being held to account and like to resort to screeching diatribe about how bitcoin is supposed to be an anarchist utopia with no central authority but, guess what? Bitcointalk is not bitcoin and this is a community action.

Ok, heads-up, people!

For some time now a group of concerned forum users have been working to tag with negative rating any people who operate, promote or even post of their participation in the ponzis found in the cess-pool of scammery known as the 'Investor Based Games' section of this forum.

The OP of this particular thread is attempting to circumvent this by conducting the development stage of his ponzi platform as a 'testnet'-based operation. Given that his ultimate goal is to develop a fully-operational 'bitcoin doubler' he clearly isn't going to remain on the testnet and, as such anybody who publicly assists him in creating his service is showing tacit support for his eventual scammery.

The following warning is usually to be found in IBG ponzi threads but I will post it here, too, as it is just as important to make it hard for these fuckers to setup and organise themselves as it is to stifle their sock-puppetry shilling once they are operational.

The rules of the following will apply to posts made from this point forward:

Public Service Announcement -
This is just another Ponzi/Pyramid Scam
Do Not Invest!

Those who choose to post of their participation
support or encouragement for this scam will
be tagged with negative trust for proving
they wish to help the scammers operate this
Ponzi in return for a share of the funds stolen
from other users. Thereby proving they are not
trustworthy forum members.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

Well, seeing as this is clearly just the preliminary stage of a later mainnet ponzi operation, this PSA stands:

Public Service Announcement -
This is just another Ponzi/Pyramid Scam
Do Not Invest!

Those who choose to post of their participation
support or encouragement for this scam will
be tagged with negative trust for proving
they wish to help the scammers operate this
Ponzi in return for a share of the funds stolen
from other users. Thereby proving they are not
trustworthy forum members.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

So everybody wins? Wow you and your math 'wizz' buddy suck at math.


There, the bold part is a more truthful representation.

I'm sure they are, namely, you receiving a share of an ever-increasing 'wager' amount that isn't going to end well for your players but should, as you planned, be fairly profitable for you.

By definition ALL ponzis will stop paying because of math. So your claim is bullshit.


The creation of a Social Fund with which to distribute benefit in various forms to society is nothing like a ponzi. You don't contribute to social security in order to 'win' more in return than you pay in, you contribute because it is your civic duty as a citizen of the society you are part of to help fund such services.

^^^ The.Fuck?

Seriously?

Truly the statement of a professional investment platform manager, right?

You are running a ponzi scheme, that is a fact in the absence of any evidence to the contrary. Math will dictate to you that your scheme will collapse at some point.

Rabid homophobic outbursts are not going to change the cold facts of your reality, namely, that you cannot pay back everybody who sends their money in to your scheme.