Sooncoin 100$ bot

I don't understand why anybody would see a coin they're holding at 70 and dump it down to 50.  Maybe they really needed the BTC fast and couldn't wait a few minutes?

Is the BTC address in your signature safe?

Any screencaps?  Anything else he did that could pinpoint his methods or identity?

You're talking to them now.  The dev abandoned the coin and recently offered to release a new wallet if we paid him.  I told him to get lost.

I have a shiny new website, Fractalcoin.us which hosts a blockchain bootstrap, source code, wallet downloads, detailed instructions for beginners who want to mine, and all kinds of links.  But I haven't ever shared that url before now because I'm waiting to get Fractalcoin added at CoinPayments.net, and waiting to get my online store running so I can offer a 25% discount for Fractalcoin.  

I also just donated 15,000FRAC to the faucet at MultiFaucet.tk, which is hosting our block explorer.

The coin supply stands at less than 800,000, and there will never be any more because PoW block rewards are over.  The mining now runs only on transaction fees.  

The DNS seeder is offline, it's hard to find connections, so I'm running multiple nodes and giving people my peers.dat.  Not many people are mining because of the small rewards.  We could use a change.

So if you need an initial distribution, you could accomplish that and absorb the other Fractalcoin at the same time.  

What kind of coin supply and block rewards are you looking at?  Fractal block reward reduction?

Would you be interested in doing a coin burn/swap from the original Fractalcoin and making it a relaunch for existing users?  It launched over a year ago, it's already listed on Cryptsy, and it would bring over a small but established base of users.

So true.  Haters just jealous. 


I'm stoked for this new coin launch, all these pathetic trolls will wish they had bought in cheap like us.  Gimme those cheap coins, CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP!

Has anybody else installed the latest Java, and then Nemwallet installer says there's no Java and quits?

You must have missed your maths lessons when you were 8 years old.  I'll help you:  $5000 to $10,000 per day for 12 months = millions of dollars


Now Mark can show up and say "Durrr people from England say maths but Americans say math!"

Then you can come back and respond to my facts with "Nuh uh".

crypto jerk has started a separate topic to discuss the Banx marketcap problems:


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1191240.0

Well Banx claims it took millions in IPO.  Are you saying the market data is false?  If so, I'm not the one who made it up.

And Banx admitted that they produced a shabby wallet, and ended up requiring all holders to transfer their funds to Banx.io, at which time there wasn't a wallet at all.

And Banx has only set up 1 ATM through their entire BanxATM company, which was supposed to be constantly funded with 35% of ongoing proceeds from share sales.  So they must be out of money.

So your criticisms of Ethereum apply equally to Banx.  Your words, not mine.






There are already dozens of unmoderated topics here about Ethereum.  There were 0 unmoderated topics about Banx, which is why I started this one.

Are you going to do justice and go tell all those people talking about Ethereum that they're trolls, and try to shout them down so nobody can discuss the facts about Ethereum?

Do you understand that what you've just done, by criticizing Ethereum, is the exact thing I'm doing by talking about Banx?  

crypto jerk - I think I've realized a major facet of the marketcap data that we've been overlooking, which is the effects of the share split and the absence of the subsequent price decrease that should have happened.


If 1,000,000 shares were sold at $1.00, for example, that would be $1,000,000 worth held by actual people other than Banx.  If they are then given an additional 1,000,000 shares for free, they now have 2,000,000 shares for the same $1,000,000, which means the shares have a cost of $0.50 each.


But Coinmarketcap doesn't show that all early investors got their shares for $0.50, so Banx is publicly advertising a 245% "ROI" using Coinmarketcap as evidence.  Is that misleading data, or a lie?  Either way, it isn't good when this investment is marketed to the public using Search Engine Optimization.

(The above screencap showing public advertisement and general solicitation is from Banxplatinum.com, which is shared on Facebook, Linkedin, and can be found with a Google search)

http://www.seoevaluate.com/archive/banxplatinum-com/

Banx took millions in ipo sat on it for 12 months produced a shabby wallet and now have run out of money.

If they really wanted to do it, here's how they would have done it:


1.  Premine Uro and make it PoS or very low PoW block reward
2.  Put all premined coins for sale @ ~ urea market rate
3.  Put all proceeds into buy orders @ ~ urea market rate
4.  If any companies want to use it for trade, it's always liquid


        OR, to avoid the devs selling all that premine and holding the money -


1.  Uro arranges the first trade between two companies
2.  Company A puts $100,000 into escrow to be used for Urocoin buy orders @ ~ urea market rate
3.  Uro transfers the corresponding amount of premined Urocoins to Company B
4.  Company B delivers the urea to Company A
5.  Company B has a stack of Urocoins they can spend directly or sell into those buy orders
6.  It's actually backed by that $100,000 buywall and the fact that no more coins are created without more cash
7.  The only reason to invest would be if you think the price of urea is going up


 
Do you notice the difference between that and what actually happened?  There would be no need for speculation, pump-n-dump, bitcointalk hype, or conferences with anybody except buyers and sellers of urea.

If you're not going to fix the price, then you might as well just use Bitcoin.  All they did was create another imitation of Bitcoin, that works exactly like Bitcoin, that can't do anything extra that Bitcoin doesn't already do.

#6:  He says the coin is only sold privately, because of SEC regulations, and that's why he can't advertise and market it all over the internet.

Then what is this?










#7:  He says, "I've never targeted Banx to be sold to existing crypto people."


Then why your constant efforts to stay listed on CoinMarketCap.com, a website that is only for crypto people?

Why this solicitation to the bitcointalk community?





Altcoin exchange?  Mining farms?  Less than 1% of people in the world even know what either of those things are.  It's directed ONLY at crypto people.






Does anyone think I need to watch the rest of this desperate 50-minute video, when it's full of the same blatant lies he's already been selling us here?

If you see any conflict between the apparent facts and what Mark says, just remember:  Some people lie for money.  It's that simple. 

The video response still doesn't add up.

#1:  He says BanxShares aren't a share in BanxCapital.  But he already sold them to people and told them they were buying shares of the company.



#2:  He says he cancelled mining because people mined over 6 million coins and dumped them on C-Cex.  But mining was cancelled before the first day BANX was announced at bitcointalk, and all Banx representatives have previously argued vehemently that BANX was not available at C-Cex at launch.  The dates don't match between his story and the documented facts.  

Plus he already stated that miners got about 45,000 coins.  Not 6 million in 1 week, and not weeks later when the coin was traded at C-Cex.  Mining was cancelled after 1 week, which was the week before BANX was announced.  

As for there being more than 6 million coins in existence, someone had examined the blockchain and asked the devs about that - it's quoted in this thread.  The devs said no no no, there are only 6 million shares.  So if anyone ninja-mined extra shares and dumped them on C-Cex, it was the BANX devs themselves.  Coincidentally, they used that to invalidate the shares held at C-Cex and had an excuse to move all coins exclusively to their own exchange.  So if there was hacking and exploitation of the coin, who benefited more than Banx?



#3:  He says 6 million shares weren't enough, so he increased it to 12 million.  But the ICO has been going for 12 months and they're still not sold.  How was it "not enough"?

Then he says it's okay because he doubled everyone's shares that they already held.  But now he has twice as many shares to sell before the ICO ends.

Plus it means that everyone who already bought got their shares for half-price, while the shares did not decrease in price after the supply was doubled.  In fact the price has been raised several times.



#4:  He says Banx only sells to private investors.  Is that what they do at C-Cex?  What about at Banx.io?  They don't even require their users' names.  How is it private?



#5:  He says, "I don't know where you get this from runpaint, you must be dreaming...'And if they don't intend to comply with U.S. regulations,' he says, 'Why does the BanxPlatinum account require a U.S. Social Security Number' - it doesn't, I don't know where you've dreamed that up"

Well Mark, maybe in your own Banx ANN topic, from a person named Mark Lyford.  Heard of him?

If you sell at 200, just know that you won't be buying any back from me until at least 800.  But that's okay, because I don't think you'll have to wait very long.

I think crypto jerk started this thread because the other topic got clogged up, somehow, by people changing the subject for some reason, as if they wanted to distract from the issues by creating useless arguments.

So please take it back to the other topic if you want to discuss your failed attempt to dox me, your insistence that I am in England, and my subsequent counter-trolling tactics which have continued to glean more information from you. 

So gie et a rest, this is the last time I'll comment orf-topic in this thread, mucca.  See yeh on the other one, hae a noice day innit.