To quote probably almost everybody here as this will be related to their concern and (some were, surprisingly) support of your business model, where does the fund to pay passive income come from?

I don't think I'm quite understand your tokenomic now. How much was the amount prepared and sold during presale?

And then for the 30% ratio issue, I thought there will be only 10B token ever created for this project? If you'll issue 30% token from the amount sold on ICO (I assume this means presale+phase1+phase2), and ICO has 10B allocation, doesn't that mean there will be 13B token? Unless the 30% were taken and cut directly from the amount bought by ICO participant

I am somewhat scared to imagine what'll be the price of LTX once it's on binance, almost induce me to panic buy right now when it's still low, because when (not if) it got to binance, there will be fireworks. Nonetheless, although I am somewhat confident that LTX can, I'd still like to point out there is another way to be listed on binance.

I'm not sure if they still do this or not, but in the past if we managed to be top few performing token on their DEX, there will be chances we got voted to be on their CEX. Perhaps it's a faster way to go kaboom with our price?

My bad, I remembered the zeroes wrongly when I switched tab. Nonetheless, the question still remains. Dev, were the rest of tokens unsold (from both sale stages) as well as the other 1 billion minus bounty allocation simply will be not-minted or will it still be generated and allocated for other things?

And, Fujiati, no, stage 2 is at 0.003, my bad, another zero mistakes. God, something wrong happened with me this morning.

Hmm... were this "benefits" made on-the-go when I asked you what other thing you have or was it already there from the beginning? Sounds like an improvised decision. Can you show us your email chain discussing with Visa for this matter? Or any proof that the plan were already there since the beginning and not just made up?

And while we're at it, to save you from future suspicion that your plan were "made on-the-go", please, don't be shy to tell us more about this "there is [sic] many ambition for our project"

This is kinda interesting, I don't think there will be any other rounds. If you read and compare info on their ann and website, you'll learn that they'll only issue a maximum of 10,000,000,000 (ten billion) token, divided 30% for development and 70% available for distribution.

It means there will be 7,000,000,000 available at most to be owned. From this number, we know 3,000,000,000 were allocated for phase 1 at 0.0002 and 3,000,000,000 were for phase 2 at 0.0003. We also know 500,000,000 were allocated for bounty. That leaves us with another 500,000,000 unallocated.

Dev, were this amount spent on presale or they simply just for reservoir and were not meant to be used (thus, were not minted, given the 10billion max supply were the most will ever be minted, which imply there is a possible case that amount were never reached)?

And how do you suggest we assess their capability to achieve goals if there were no exact point to measure it? Suppose they achieve (let's say) LAtoken in one year, should we say they're serious in pursuing their goal, although other project with same caliber and resources could manage to achieve the same goal in three month? An unclear roadmap will only bore to the infamous "soon-coin", I believe you know what I mean.

If they target top exchanges, wouldn't that means they'd better aim fof the highest one? Like binance. It'll give them a good exposure and possibly an instant pump to aid the recent dip.

If you read their medium, you'll know that it's not a typo, it stands for holdAirdrop so it's not interesting in a sense of "funny because they do typo."

Dev, do I get it right that the only benefit of buying 1billion token of TKS were being entitled to an art? From an unspecified artist? That's it?

Banning IP address is not a preventive measure, banning them after they scam is rather useless because it's already happened. They've got the money, they won't mind being banned, they can just get a whole new set of tools and they can get around this... "solution". And yes, you can filter them. But, then again, how could you really have been thinking about this idea for years and still have no solution to it? There are ways to prevent user scamming using your platform, and the truth that you didn't have any solution up to this second indicate (at least for me) either you didn't care or you haven't really think about it.


Your examples are all invalid. All of the cases you gave, nakamoto, Buterin, and CZ were merely contributing the ideas, they just gave a concept. You, on the other hand, facilitate people. Certainly you can see the difference in your case and theirs?

If you can't, let's pull an extreme case to be compared with your example, Cain killed Abel, giving mankind the concept and ideas of murdering people. He didn't facilitate them with the method, or the tools. He only let them aware that there is a possibility of what they can do, but they still didn't know how, or with what. Certainly no one blame them for the killings happen today. You, on the other hand, put knives to their hand. You gave the necessary tools to perform the action, without preventive measure to keep them from killing.



As this seems to be your main weapon to fight the arguments of the necessity of preventive measure, "oh, we don't need preventive measure, people need to #DYOR, if they're scammed on the project that runs in our platform, it's their fault because they didn't do the first rule of investing: research. Maybe they're not into trading.", let's talk about this.

What if they do? What if people #DYOR or DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH, they know when and where to invest their money, they did research for it first and know if the projects are capable for long term run or not, and this is the next dialog happened:

"I DID MY OWN RESEARCH and found this project is powered by STVKE. You know, that platform who launched ABC, DEF, JKL, MNO, PQR, STU that turns scam? Yeah, I don't think I'll invest on this. No, thanks."

"But this project, GHI, were legit. They have solid team."

"Still a no, I don't want to TAKE MY OWN RISK betting with project that's launched from platform with such reputation."

And this scenario happens over and over to the future projects launched on your platform. Do you think people will invest to launch their project on your platform, then? Or be associated with you?

I'm not sure if you have thought about this thoroughly and simply didn't care or you just missed this possibility, but here's a fact: the project's performance and legitimacy will directly reflected to your reputation. If you didn't have preventive measure to avoid scam launches, the more scam projects you "helped", the uglier your name will be. Despite the disclaimer, people will still associate you with the failed/successful projects.  Given you've been thinking about this for YEARS, it'll be shameful if you said you missed this possibility, given the length of time you had to think.

Nope, I'll still ask here. Telegram were not for everybody's consumption, they need to know the channel to gain information, and it can be deleted and removed, etc. This one is more accessible and permanent.

Now, you haven't answer my question about how will you use ICO to raise awareness.

And your point number 2 contradict yourself. You previously said you'll launch regardless of ICO results, thus you didn't really need ICO. And now you said you need them?

Yes, people still needs to do their researches when investing on anything, but that doesn't mean you didn't need to set any preventive measure to stop that from happening in the first place. You facilitate them, more or less you'll still be affected by all of those projects' reputation. If they're scamming people under your platform, don't you agree that people will see you as supporting and encouraging the creation of scam projects, given you facilitate them on the first place? People who previously didn't know how to create projects and token (and didn't run their scam project because of it) were now be available to. Hadn't it ever crossed your mind to put some ways to stop scammers using your platform?

You said that you've been having this concept since before scam waves, means it's around 2018, and for 3 or more years you concepting this project, you never thought about the preventive measure, even once? It's rather strange, because it was your threat, and it should be already on your analysis.

Of course, it'll be a completely different case if what you're trying to say is that didn't care at all about the legitimacy of any project you facilitate as long as they pay and give income to your project. Is that what's on your mind?

Honestly, you don't really need much effort to tidy up this thread, there are community manager services that has more than enough skills to create adequate ANN. That'll be a challenge if your project didn't have reliable details

This one is also interesting. While you're answering this Dev, tell us too how does you generate enough profit to pay for expenses and covering box with higher value if each boxes were guaranteed to be no loss (which, for your side means you made no profit)?

I would like to beg to differ for point number 3, they just created a fake promotion, as I described on my previous post, they created several alt accounts on telegram and switching between the accounts, asking and feigning interests. And when confronted, they said it was their marketing strategy or something, I don't think that can be counted as promoting images since they "promote" the brand tom themselves

Can you please upload a smaller resolution images for your ann? This one seems still too easy too read and didn't hurt my eyes enough. On technical matters, your token is a fork/rebrand/whatever from YOC, or... what?

Do you mean you didn't really need fund raised from ICO? Is it because you've already funded? I don't really see how you can use ICO to raise awareness. You can hold ICO and still raises zero awareness because no one knows or visiting your page. If you wanted awareness, what you do is a marketing, not ICO. So how exactly do you plan to use ICO just to raise awareness?

Hmm... I don't think I understand you correctly. Were you trying to say there is no preventive measure to stop people from creating fake projects to stole money using your platform? And that when it happens, the parties that should be blamed were the scammers (because they're scamming) and the scammed (because they didn't do research), and you, as a facilitator shouldn't take responsibility at any level, although this happens under your roof?

The earlier part of your text, about thinking of this idea before rugpull season, I don't see how that's relevant, the exit scam season has been here since 2017 or 2018, not just this year with DeFi, so if you're trying to say you have the concept since 2018, that just show how rather poor your concept is, because even with three years of drafting concept, with lots of failed project that you can use as your development materials, you still didn't come out with a way to prevent those negative side of crypto in your platform other than "people should learn to hold themselves accountable for being scammed".

Really? That's your advise? What kind of advise is that? The correct advise would be they need to stop creating new projects. They got one shot and they messed it up. It's people's money they took from, not an ATM, they can't just popping in with new names and new "ideas" once the old project runs out of cash and crashed, especially ones that has such poor presentation like this.

Is this a rebrand, then? What'll be the fate of your old project? Its old website were replaced by this one and thread seems dead (with a very discouraging last post, if I may add).