Yes with a fixed number of coins in circulation there is no way to tell him how many coins he will get. Maybe he didn't understand that the supply was fixed.

Will there be a guide on how to invest with an escrow?

Did you read the initial question that was posed? If so, you would have seen that the person bringing up the issue wanted to know the exact amount of Crypti he would get for his investment. The only way to do that would be to make a limit on investment amount AND total amount so that it could be divided up in order for each investor to know exactly how much they would get for the investment they were going to make. In essence, you would have to say that 1 BTC would get you 250,000 Crypti for instance, and then you would also have to say that because of this, and the fact that the max distribution is 75,000,000, we could sell 300 shares in the launch. 300 x 250,000 = 75,000,000. In order for someone to know exactly what they are going to get, this has to be the method used. That or you have to be willing to adjust the total amount being created in the genesis block based on how many units are sold, which then their stake fluctuates anyways because they might buy 2 shares, so 500,000, but then if we end up selling 500, their 500,000 is now much less of the total.

I don't want to discourage anyone from posting but please ensure you understand the conversation at hand and do your research prior to posting LordHavok. Also, please try to avoid being overly inflammatory for no reason at all.

You could say all you said without promoting Kora, a Qora clone. Qora is and will be better than Kora. This is marketing  

I am gonna invest in this too and hope for the best

Translation:

We want to use whatever method gets us the most BTC upfront, becuz after the launch, the expen$e$ start and there is little income for us then

If we set a 1 BTC limit per person and a 250 BTC cap with a ratio of X Crypti to Y BTC, there are a finite amount of spaces in the pre-sale launch to get in on the ground floor of Crypti. We want as many people as desire to do so to be able to be a part of this launch. We decided it would be best to let the market dictate how the pre-sale would unfold.

I think we are showing by our actions that we do listen and we want ideas and opinions from the community. It is of utmost importance to us.

If anyone has any ideas, please, bring them forward.

As per your quote at the bottom, i'm not sure I understand what you are referring to or how to respond to that.

Which went which route?

For me, limiting the amount of BTC per investor simply encourages gaming the system. Those who obey the rules are penalized by the 1 BTC cap, but those who choose otherwise will simply open up multiple wallets and send funds from several accounts to increase their stake. As I mentioned before, the only way to stop this practice is real world identity validation but I doubt most people on here want to send us drivers license or social security numbers!  

We had quite a few discussions as I previously mentioned about how best to do this and we decided on leaving it open ended. That is something we voted on, came to a decision, and feel comfortable with.

One parameter I know that BCNext set for Nxt IPO was that the upper limit for each investor was 1 BTC.

As per 500BTC, again it's not the final goal and we will be happy with any combination below it.

Finally, as per GreXX post the only "threat" that he meant (if it can be called that) that we will be forced to moderate the thread, if a hard to read font will be used. I don't really see him being "upset" anywhere, and it actually was first introduced by your post...

Based on the font size and color of this post, I feel as though this is a little bit immature in nature, but as is my policy, I will still try to respond in the event that you might be serious.

For starters, you make a point that I think is relevant, everyone is responsible for their own money and it is their internal decision how they choose to invest it. This goes back to one of my recent posts. As you said, we cannot guarantee investor profits and there is no feasible way anyone could do that.

As per the second part of your statement where you went off a cliff;

The honey comment is an entertaining one and I laughed a little bit so I appreciate that. If you believe we are greedy that is OK. Thank you for having an opinion on the matter but next time, please don't voice it so boisterously on our thread. 20 font in red is a little bit overboard don't you think?

As per the unknown escrow part, are you sure you want to say that? Maxmint is a very well respected and well known escrow on these boards and has done quite a few high profile launches. Your ill-informed comment here makes your entire post much less reputable and much more trolly in nature.

Again, please continue to post your thoughts and ideas here, but please do not do it in Red, 20 font or we will have problems. Thanks!

I really don't understand why everyone keeps throwing out the word greedy. As an investor, you are being rewarded with stake in the currency at the early stages for your support of future development. But, the current developers are responsible for ALL current development up to this point on their own dime. I think the people who put in the sweat and tears to make this thing a reality deserve some credit here. Without the development team, nothing exists.

Greed on our part isn't the issue here. Asking us to work for months for free with no compensation so that you can profit off of a product we created is greed. I don't think there is any stronger definition of the word. If you think the amount we are holding back for payment is too high, I understand your complaint and disagree.

I'm not trying to be offensive here and I have been very patient, but at this point my answer is simply this; If you disagree with the distribution model, which we have been very open to adjusting and are doing so based on community feedback, then walk. We can't please everyone, we are happy with where we are at, and if 1 or 2 possible investors have to walk for us to launch in the way that we think is equitable, then I guess that is the reality.

We have discussed the distribution ad nauseam in this thread already and explained our reasoning behind the numbers we chose. I also recently posted an update to how we will be scaling the 10% amount based on BTC earned. I think that is as far as we are willing and able to budge on this matter and I think it is a good compromise.

As per your other note, we didn't make it a binding rule that a developer couldn't invest in the launch as far as I know. I wish I had 100 BTC sitting around to invest in anything, lol. I personally have chosen not to invest anything additional because I don't want the coin to end up in the hands of a small number of people and also because I don't have extra holdings right now to put towards the launch. That being said, I can't control anyone else's actions and they will have to speak for themselves.

from here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=654463.msg7572817#msg7572817 , we can see that

0 BTC = 10%
50 BTC = 9%
100 BTC = 8%
150 BTC = 7%
200 BTC = 6%
250 BTC = 5%
300 BTC = 4%
350 BTC = 3%
400 BTC = 2%
450 BTC = 1%
500 BTC = 0%

guys, do you think this coin is value 500 BTC , or more.    If the final BTC is more than 500 BTC , how can you ensure the investor profit ?

each coin should limit the IPO amount .you just take care of you coin team , but careless the investor , we must be careful .

Its a only a software , but you want too much.