cryptodevil, you must remember one thing. Inherently all coins have a risk that the dev can be bad, dump and bail. There are dev attributes that contribute or mitigates the risk - lets call it dev stats. Dev stats is an important risk indicator. Most coins have anonymous devs which places a high risk value against that indicator. Those are the coins with the biggest risk of a bad dev that dumps and bails. The Trust dev made his identity public. This is a mitigating factor for the dev stats risk indicator. In addition, the dev's previous work and track record further reduces the value of the dev stats risk indicator. He will be well aware that if he lies, deceives, dumps, bails or does anything wrong his ass is on the line and the L will know where to get him. This places Trust at a lower risk than the other countless coins with anon devs. It is not to say that a venture cannot fail even if the dev identity is known. It is just that the risk is lower in such a case that the dev stats indicator would be the trigger of it. What does have a big impact is if people spread fudd which can have a big impact on a coin as well and could very well be the trigger of a failure.

You might have your reasons why you want Travis's coin to fail, but shouldnt you at least give him some credit for doing this venture with his real identity? Do you really think there is a bigger risk of this dev scamming than an anonymous dev? Perhaps you should rather attack those coins with the anon devs.

Wow, very good news indeed!

I am with SrsCrypto on this. Not because I am a bag holder. I am not. I mined ZS at the start so I am still in the green, even at 1000 sats. I support SrsCrypto because I have come to known CG over a last number of months as someone that will not just bail on the community or his coin. CG is a committed and skilled dev. This is just his style and if you don't like it sell and move on to coins that hype with empty promises and features that do not work. There you can p&d and become bag holders.

There are 2 options.

1. CG does not return, but that would be because of the community's hate speech towards CG and not because he bailed on the coin. Maybe the community's attitude got him pissed off big time to the extent that he stuffed everything. I would completely understands this because why work hard and sacrifice personal time and family life for a selfish community that does not like his style? Perhaps with this option he can say FU and let the whiners become bag holders because the community told him FU and showed him the finger. If he does not return it is the community's own fault. (Unless of course something bad happened and a bus ran him over)

2. CG returns and continues with his coin, development and plans. (if he decides to eat up the community's $%#^$).

I would go with option 2, because MP was never part of the strategy but the community forced a MP listing because they thought they could get a p&d and make a quick buck. Everybody knows that coins that go to MP gets dumped. ZS does not need anything but Bittrex. Bittrex is becoming the superior exchange in anyways. In his own words he said if you don't like surprises, then sell off. ZS is not there to make a quick buck. I am going to say another controversial thing: Mining with Bitcoin ASICs cost a lot of money especially if you own ASICs - which probably places this community at a certain level of maturity including financial maturity. So mining a few coins and nothing comes of it is no big deal. Those top accounts have probably done the same as I did by just parking and staking their coins for later until CG is ready, they probably do not have to sell because they don't need to. I am parking my ZS - if CG returns great, if he doesn't also fine.

Maybe there are some people that put a lot of BTC in it at 10k. But those obviously did not follow the rule of don't invest what you cannot afford to lose. They are probably the ones that screamed for a listing and paid for MP votes to dump on a rise.

From the look of things the Trust dev team is jacked with their finger on the pulse, which is something that few coins can say.

A trading bot appeared on Bittrex that bought a bunch of Trust and was dumping down at regular intervals in order to lower the price. The purpose of the bot seems to have been to drive the price down to 1 sat and to kill the coin. This is the reason why every time the coin started to rise in price there was a dump. Normally, devs would not know what to do and bail. In this case, the dev team stood up and took action to identify the offending accounts. The dev team managed to identify the bot behaviour and related accounts in order to protect the community's investments.

As per the statement above it seems that the issue has been addressed and trading can continue again to the natural market related levels it should be and not the artificial low levels it traded on due to the bot manipulation.

Normally, a dev would bail if things heat up in the middle of a battle. Not this Trust dev team. I have the highest respect for this dev team for looking after the community and sorting things out, in order to protect everyone's investment.

Thank you very much.

It is not our problem then if you are a LOL bagholder and cannot see the truth.

I agree, the Minerals team is much more professional.

Cost of mining was 400

Just stake. POW finished.

He was very active today on IRC. Dnt believe the twitter fud.

If I am not mistaken it is the top address on the block explorer rich list?

It is normal miner dumping in the early stages. Assists with distribution.

I agree with you that the MIN community is much stronger.

The problem is gearing.  At a low value of 4000 sat movements in price has a very big impact on the value of total holdings.  If the floor was first set at a much higher level like 40k, movements in the price have a much lesser impact on value of total holdings. A price movement of 2000-4000 is the same as a price movement of 20000-40000. Price movements between 2-4k are more likely than price movements of 20k-40k. If a dev delays with something or a hiccup occurs, a price drop of 40k to 35k could happen at the higher levels.  On the other hand, the same event could cause a 4k-2k drop at the lower levels. That is why I said that there should have been first some effort to get to a much higher price floor and build long term from there.

Maybe. Unfortunately the odds are against long-term when it comes to alt-coins. There are exceptions like LTC and DRK. It needs something really special for an alt-coin to survive long term.

In hindsight you should have done anon first taking a couple of days - quick win. Coinier said he had a programmer that could do it in a day or two. Price would have gone up to 20-30k floor. After that you could have spent the weeks doing betting and price might have moved between 10k-30k. Now you spent the weeks on betting, another coin got to market first and MIN doesn't have anon either. Now the price did not go above 6k much and is going down on the charts.

I also mined from the start.

Well what is there to say? Price is too low to sell. So people are probably doing other stuff or playing other markets while keeping a tab open in their browser looking here once in a while. At some point something will happen, just don't know when. Hopefully it will be something big and spectacular. CryptoGir might just surprise everyone.

As the price goes up more resistance is met. If there is a lot of buy support following the advancing frontline, the green circle will become more than the red circle. If the frontline moves fast without the required buy support, it will meet a lot of resistance and red will be more than green