[ANN] [R3D] NEW UPDATES COMING SOON

[locohammerhead]

From my interactions with Stoner19 he is a good guy.  I trust him, I don't however trust the devs that wanted to stay anon.  That makes absolutely no sense to me at all.  Being anonymous has nothing to do with productivity since they won't be the ones providing the updates on the forums.  That would be Stoner.  Focus, again, has nothing to do with them being anon since Stoner will be handling that aspect.  


So I ask again since I saw pretty much a non-answer in the forum thread.  Why do the devs *have* to be anon?

Also from experience coins have a far better chance if the developers working on the project make themselves known.  It increases consumer confidence and gives us a good idea if they are indeed capable of doing what they claim.  The only real reason to stay anon these days is if the developers themselves are not sure if they can even accomplish the goals here and wish to maintain their reputations while possibly destroying Stoner19s.

I also do not see IoT in the timeline, just the normal blahh features like tor that have been done a thousand times by now.

Stoner19 I consider you a good friend but since this is a business decision, I must treat it as one.  So I will scrutinize every aspect of this project like I do for every project I consider a long term hold.

I sincerely implore you to reconsider letting the public (your investors, your source of funding) know who the developers are and what their specific tasks in the project are.  I know as someone who has to be extremely frugal with his funds, it makes things extremely hard for me when I don't know if I can trust the developers working on the project.

[CrazyEyes]

LOL. 4000 BTC.. well. There are always people who will invest, i will not hehe, i mean theres nothing new really.

[sigwo]

I have a question: which supporting codebase have you selected to go to launch with: 0.8, 0.9 or 0.11?

Bump.

Cheers

Graham

I'm willing to bet is a clone of Syscoin. Stoner19 PM'ed me a couple days ago to ask what https://github.com/syscoin/syscoin/blob/master/src/message.h meant. So I'm going with 0.8 codebase. We'll never know, because this will not hit 800BTC (the declared minimum to proceed).

[djm34]

This is a 4000 BTC crowdfund? Why so much?

+1. That's like 1.1 million. Such a large supply of coins as well..

I rather see a well funded project from the start, than a project that crawls to a halt due to lack of funds/resource.

yeah right, lets ask 1billion dollar right away... 
and get a company car... what about a ferrari as company car ?

ok, I smell the usual p&d scam... after bitbay and some others, this one... 

[SockPuppetAccount]

From my interactions with Stoner19 he is a good guy.  I trust him, I don't however trust the devs that wanted to stay anon.  That makes absolutely no sense to me at all.  Being anonymous has nothing to do with productivity since they won't be the ones providing the updates on the forums.  That would be Stoner.  Focus, again, has nothing to do with them being anon since Stoner will be handling that aspect.  


So I ask again since I saw pretty much a non-answer in the forum thread.  Why do the devs *have* to be anon?

Also from experience coins have a far better chance if the developers working on the project make themselves known.  It increases consumer confidence and gives us a good idea if they are indeed capable of doing what they claim.  The only real reason to stay anon these days is if the developers themselves are not sure if they can even accomplish the goals here and wish to maintain their reputations while possibly destroying Stoner19s.

I also do not see IoT in the timeline, just the normal blahh features like tor that have been done a thousand times by now.

Stoner19 I consider you a good friend but since this is a business decision, I must treat it as one.  So I will scrutinize every aspect of this project like I do for every project I consider a long term hold.

I sincerely implore you to reconsider letting the public (your investors, your source of funding) know who the developers are and what their specific tasks in the project are.  I know as someone who has to be extremely frugal with his funds, it makes things extremely hard for me when I don't know if I can trust the developers working on the project.

I understand the reasons for wanting to stay anonymous.  Taxes and legal issues mainly.  Still, it's something that is going to come with the territory if you are talking about $1 million.  I don't know what country the developers are from, but even if the funds are collected anonymously, good luck cashing out $1 million dollars in the states without drawing the attention of the IRS.

I have no problem gambling here and there on a shady looking project, but let me put it this way, I flicked 2 BTC at Bobs fucking Surplus and CIRC during it's ICO.  I don't feel confident putting a single satoshi into R3D as things sit right now.

[unusualfacts30]

From my interactions with Stoner19 he is a good guy.  I trust him, I don't however trust the devs that wanted to stay anon.  That makes absolutely no sense to me at all.  Being anonymous has nothing to do with productivity since they won't be the ones providing the updates on the forums.  That would be Stoner.  Focus, again, has nothing to do with them being anon since Stoner will be handling that aspect.  


So I ask again since I saw pretty much a non-answer in the forum thread.  Why do the devs *have* to be anon?

Also from experience coins have a far better chance if the developers working on the project make themselves known.  It increases consumer confidence and gives us a good idea if they are indeed capable of doing what they claim.  The only real reason to stay anon these days is if the developers themselves are not sure if they can even accomplish the goals here and wish to maintain their reputations while possibly destroying Stoner19s.

I also do not see IoT in the timeline, just the normal blahh features like tor that have been done a thousand times by now.

Stoner19 I consider you a good friend but since this is a business decision, I must treat it as one.  So I will scrutinize every aspect of this project like I do for every project I consider a long term hold.

I sincerely implore you to reconsider letting the public (your investors, your source of funding) know who the developers are and what their specific tasks in the project are.  I know as someone who has to be extremely frugal with his funds, it makes things extremely hard for me when I don't know if I can trust the developers working on the project.

I understand the reasons for wanting to stay anonymous.  Taxes and legal issues mainly.  Still, it's something that is going to come with the territory if you are talking about $1 million.  I don't know what country the developers are from, but even if the funds are collected anonymously, good luck cashing out $1 million dollars in the states without drawing the attention of the IRS.

I have no problem gambling here and there on a shady looking project, but let me put it this way, I flicked 2 BTC at Bobs fucking Surplus and CIRC during it's ICO.  I don't feel confident putting a single satoshi into R3D as things sit right now.

and lets please not forget bobsurplus BitBay where David (trusted developer) got involved which he managed to get out of and kept working on it but current price is still 200x less than ICO (250 sat). So to be honest I'm not sure if I would trust ANYONE with that much money regardless if it's well known dev or not.

[gjhiggins]

I have a question: which supporting codebase have you selected to go to launch with: 0.8, 0.9 or 0.11?

Bump.

I'm willing to bet is a clone of Syscoin. Stoner19 PM'ed me a couple days ago to ask what https://github.com/syscoin/syscoin/blob/master/src/message.h meant. So I'm going with 0.8 codebase. We'll never know, because this will not hit 800BTC (the declared minimum to proceed).

Thanks for the pointer. I'll be looking into it, not with the intention of cloning, but out of technical curiosity. Which, to be objective, might well have been the focus of your correspondent's interest, too.

fwiw: “Syscoin is a crypto currency that is universally merge-mineable and offers a unique variety of services including aliases, data storage, marketplaces and certificate management directly on the blockchain.” Despite the range of services, apparently they are currently focused on the “Syscoin Millionaires Club Hat Design Contest”. Now, that will rattle some cages, I'm sure.


Cheers

Graham

[djm34]

From my interactions with Stoner19 he is a good guy.  I trust him, I don't however trust the devs that wanted to stay anon.  That makes absolutely no sense to me at all.  Being anonymous has nothing to do with productivity since they won't be the ones providing the updates on the forums.  That would be Stoner.  Focus, again, has nothing to do with them being anon since Stoner will be handling that aspect.  


So I ask again since I saw pretty much a non-answer in the forum thread.  Why do the devs *have* to be anon?

Also from experience coins have a far better chance if the developers working on the project make themselves known.  It increases consumer confidence and gives us a good idea if they are indeed capable of doing what they claim.  The only real reason to stay anon these days is if the developers themselves are not sure if they can even accomplish the goals here and wish to maintain their reputations while possibly destroying Stoner19s.

I also do not see IoT in the timeline, just the normal blahh features like tor that have been done a thousand times by now.

Stoner19 I consider you a good friend but since this is a business decision, I must treat it as one.  So I will scrutinize every aspect of this project like I do for every project I consider a long term hold.

I sincerely implore you to reconsider letting the public (your investors, your source of funding) know who the developers are and what their specific tasks in the project are.  I know as someone who has to be extremely frugal with his funds, it makes things extremely hard for me when I don't know if I can trust the developers working on the project.

I understand the reasons for wanting to stay anonymous.  Taxes and legal issues mainly.  Still, it's something that is going to come with the territory if you are talking about $1 million.  I don't know what country the developers are from, but even if the funds are collected anonymously, good luck cashing out $1 million dollars in the states without drawing the attention of the IRS.

I have no problem gambling here and there on a shady looking project, but let me put it this way, I flicked 2 BTC at Bobs fucking Surplus and CIRC during it's ICO.  I don't feel confident putting a single satoshi into R3D as things sit right now.

I am going to make a coin the bring peace everywhere in the world (and with a nice full page OP), ICO 20billions... don't hesitate, trust me, it will work  

[locohammerhead]

From my interactions with Stoner19 he is a good guy.  I trust him, I don't however trust the devs that wanted to stay anon.  That makes absolutely no sense to me at all.  Being anonymous has nothing to do with productivity since they won't be the ones providing the updates on the forums.  That would be Stoner.  Focus, again, has nothing to do with them being anon since Stoner will be handling that aspect.  


So I ask again since I saw pretty much a non-answer in the forum thread.  Why do the devs *have* to be anon?

Also from experience coins have a far better chance if the developers working on the project make themselves known.  It increases consumer confidence and gives us a good idea if they are indeed capable of doing what they claim.  The only real reason to stay anon these days is if the developers themselves are not sure if they can even accomplish the goals here and wish to maintain their reputations while possibly destroying Stoner19s.

I also do not see IoT in the timeline, just the normal blahh features like tor that have been done a thousand times by now.

Stoner19 I consider you a good friend but since this is a business decision, I must treat it as one.  So I will scrutinize every aspect of this project like I do for every project I consider a long term hold.

I sincerely implore you to reconsider letting the public (your investors, your source of funding) know who the developers are and what their specific tasks in the project are.  I know as someone who has to be extremely frugal with his funds, it makes things extremely hard for me when I don't know if I can trust the developers working on the project.

I understand the reasons for wanting to stay anonymous.  Taxes and legal issues mainly.  Still, it's something that is going to come with the territory if you are talking about $1 million.  I don't know what country the developers are from, but even if the funds are collected anonymously, good luck cashing out $1 million dollars in the states without drawing the attention of the IRS.

I have no problem gambling here and there on a shady looking project, but let me put it this way, I flicked 2 BTC at Bobs fucking Surplus and CIRC during it's ICO.  I don't feel confident putting a single satoshi into R3D as things sit right now.

and lets please not forget bobsurplus BitBay where David (trusted developer) got involved which he managed to get out of and kept working on it but current price is still 200x less than ICO (250 sat). So to be honest I'm not sure if I would trust ANYONE with that much money regardless if it's well known dev or not.

Correct it's extremely hard to trust verified devs with that sort of money let alone anon devs and sockpuppet made a good point as well.  Cashing out 1 million without catching the eye of the IRS or some other financial regulatory institutions.

Can we at the very least know how many devs are working on this project?

[cryptohunter]

These sorts of projects are just open for scams.

It should work like this.

4000 BTC taken by bittrex. (if sold out)

That 4k split to 10 of the highest rated most known escrows on this board. 400 BTC each.

These UNKNOWN devs can then request the btc in stages from the escrows via public board with details of their plans and the BTC they require.

[locohammerhead]

These sorts of projects are just open for scams.

It should work like this.

4000 BTC taken by bittrex. (if sold out)

That 4k split to 10 of the highest rated most known escrows on this board. 400 BTC each.

These UNKNOWN devs can then request the btc in stages from the escrows via public board with details of their plans and the BTC they require.

This would be agreeable for me.

[hughbt]

These sorts of projects are just open for scams.

It should work like this.

4000 BTC taken by bittrex. (if sold out)

That 4k split to 10 of the highest rated most known escrows on this board. 400 BTC each.

These UNKNOWN devs can then request the btc in stages from the escrows via public board with details of their plans and the BTC they require.

They could do this by using their own tech. Shareholders could vote on r3d network if they want to finance new plans.

[Kushedout]

I don't understand what the fuss is all about when it comes to the amount requested. 1 million evaluation is nothing when working on a project with a given the details above, between 3-5 devs (guessing), if this is what they will be working on full time for more than a year.  Now with that said, on the anon dev side of things, I am sure they have their own reasons to stay anon, right or wrong. The important question is, as stated couple of post back, what will be the Conditions of distribution? If funds are released as goals are met, I see no problem.  Also, what happens to the devs once they "complete the project" or funds run out or what happens to the remaining funds if the project stops for whatever reason.

[BigCat45]

The problem is not even one dev wants to go 2-3% premine in escrow and then work for the increasing value of his own holdings. Everybody wants BTC, and NOW. Why work after that, right?

[chesthing]

800 btc minimum? if this ico is a success price will plummet, mkt cap way too high for anon dev's and this silly-ass roadmap.

[SockPuppetAccount]

I don't understand what the fuss is all about when it comes to the amount requested. 1 million evaluation is nothing when working on a project with a given the details above, between 3-5 devs (guessing), if this is what they will be working on full time for more than a year.  Now with that said, on the anon dev side of things, I am sure they have their own reasons to stay anon, right or wrong. The important question is, as stated couple of post back, what will be the Conditions of distribution? If funds are released as goals are met, I see no problem.  Also, what happens to the devs once they "complete the project" or funds run out or what happens to the remaining funds if the project stops for whatever reason.

Thats the thing.  The ICO guidelines right now are "If over 800 BTC worth are sold and a working client is released, boom, all the BTC is released to the team", that's it.  They literally have zero obligations besides delivering a clone coin with no new features implemented, setting up some seed nodes, and slapping the logo on the wallet.  They could just walk after that.

I really wish the ICO wasn't so hastily launched because there are plenty of workable solutions that would make people more comfortable, such as escrow as proposed by cryptohunter.

[tempus]

Agreed but the days of investors willingly handing over thousands of BTCs to anonymous developers based on nothing more than a rough outline of the project and a bunch of promises are long gone.  This project could crawl to a permanent halt if at any moment the developers decide, fuck this, let's just take our million dollars and abandon the project with zero repercussions.

In general I agree with all what you say but there is one reason I'll watch closely and maybe invest... It's Stoner19 himself. I don't know him well enough to know his real identity but well enough that I'm completely sure that he is reputable, serious and professional. And Non-Anonymous Devs are absolutely no guarantee that a project is not a planned Scam. I think the most known example is Paycoin and there are some others. I think it's doubtable to raise that much BTC in a short timeframe but if it should start... I absolutely believe the BTC will be used for the best of the project and that it will be under full-time-development of professionals.  

[gjhiggins]

I'm willing to bet is a clone of Syscoin. Stoner19 PM'ed me a couple days ago to ask what https://github.com/syscoin/syscoin/blob/master/src/message.h meant. So I'm going with 0.8 codebase.

Thanks for the pointer. I'll be looking into it...

Ah, I'd missed a key posting: http://syscoin.org/the-next-evolution-of-syscoin-decentralization/ the Syscoin team has switched to Bitcoin Core (0.11, I'd imagine) and are rewriting the market, etc. code from scratch (v. sensible move, imo).

For a bit more relevance to the ongoing discussion: the Syscoin team's premine has mostly been spent, they have full-time jobs and are developing the coin in their free time. There's a weak inference from the team's membership of the Syscoin Millionaire club: that they each have significant coin holdings but it's just as likely they were grandfathered in.


Cheers

Graham

[Vagnavs]

I don't understand what the fuss is all about when it comes to the amount requested. 1 million evaluation is nothing when working on a project with a given the details above, between 3-5 devs (guessing), if this is what they will be working on full time for more than a year.  Now with that said, on the anon dev side of things, I am sure they have their own reasons to stay anon, right or wrong. The important question is, as stated couple of post back, what will be the Conditions of distribution? If funds are released as goals are met, I see no problem.  Also, what happens to the devs once they "complete the project" or funds run out or what happens to the remaining funds if the project stops for whatever reason.

Thats the thing.  The ICO guidelines right now are "If over 800 BTC worth are sold and a working client is released, boom, all the BTC is released to the team", that's it.  They literally have zero obligations besides delivering a clone coin with no new features implemented, setting up some seed nodes, and slapping the logo on the wallet.  They could just walk after that.

I really wish the ICO wasn't so hastily launched because there are plenty of workable solutions that would make people more comfortable, such as escrow as proposed by cryptohunter.

+1. Completely agree. Too many red flags.. Some questionable posts, nickname not helping either.

[chesthing]

"nickname not helping either."

His nickname is perfect, he must be wasted thinking he's going to get 800+ btc. What's going to happen is he's going to lose his bittrex ico fee instead.