Bitcoin Forum
August 20, 2019, 02:20:02 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Pages: « 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 [103] 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [BTC-TC] Virtual Community Exchange [CLOSED]  (Read 315984 times)
dexX7
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106
Merit: 1005



View Profile WWW
September 20, 2013, 04:55:38 PM
 #2041

Are you going to publish a statement regarding the Labcoin warning, burnside?

Dispite the underlying reasoning for the warning, it's obvious that it had an immediat impact on the market. I suggest to implement clearer rules for stuff like this - maybe something like "if vote ratio changes to (...), a warning is published on the security". This makes it more predictable and minimizes arbitrariness.

1566267602
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566267602

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566267602
Reply with quote  #2

1566267602
Report to moderator
1566267602
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566267602

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566267602
Reply with quote  #2

1566267602
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
pascal257
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 20, 2013, 05:18:25 PM
 #2042

Are you going to publish a statement regarding the Labcoin warning, burnside?

Dispite the underlying reasoning for the warning, it's obvious that it had an immediat impact on the market. I suggest to implement clearer rules for stuff like this - maybe something like "if vote ratio changes to (...), a warning is published on the security". This makes it more predictable and minimizes arbitrariness.
Agreed. Just publishing such a warning seems very unprofessional, although your reasons may be good.
xchrisxsays
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10



View Profile
September 20, 2013, 05:29:05 PM
 #2043

Wow burnside with the blindside. You just fucked a lot of people. Luckily, I am not one of them.
creativex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 20, 2013, 05:32:04 PM
 #2044

Are you going to publish a statement regarding the Labcoin warning, burnside?

Dispite the underlying reasoning for the warning, it's obvious that it had an immediat impact on the market. I suggest to implement clearer rules for stuff like this - maybe something like "if vote ratio changes to (...), a warning is published on the security". This makes it more predictable and minimizes arbitrariness.
Agreed. Just publishing such a warning seems very unprofessional, although your reasons may be good.

Disagree. Labcoin posted a news item 11 days ago that prompted a lot of buying. Time has proven that news item to be misleading...and that's being kind. Despite this, labcoin has released nothing official to clarify their statements. This obviously puts the exchange operator in a tough spot.

burnside
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1004


Lead Blockchain Developer


View Profile WWW
September 20, 2013, 05:55:42 PM
 #2045

Are you going to publish a statement regarding the Labcoin warning, burnside?

Dispite the underlying reasoning for the warning, it's obvious that it had an immediat impact on the market. I suggest to implement clearer rules for stuff like this - maybe something like "if vote ratio changes to (...), a warning is published on the security". This makes it more predictable and minimizes arbitrariness.
Agreed. Just publishing such a warning seems very unprofessional, although your reasons may be good.

I tried to keep the warning low key.  I thought it was fairly self explanatory.  That there was market impact confirmed my suspicion that some users were flying blind with the asset, so to speak, unaware of the seemingly hundreds of posts going through on the forums.

Several concerned citizens have come to me worried about the situation so I tried to contact the issuer via PM and hadn't seen a response.  After waiting several days I didn't feel like there was another option.  We'll remove the warning when I am confident their contract is being followed and I feel like we can trust that future news posts appearing on the site are going to be better thought out.  (Eg; the claim that there is mining going on but no proceeds to show for it.)


Disclosure; I have many thousands of LABCOIN and I have not sold any over the last month.

Cheers
FloatesMcgoates
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100


View Profile
September 20, 2013, 06:01:36 PM
 #2046

Are you going to publish a statement regarding the Labcoin warning, burnside?

Dispite the underlying reasoning for the warning, it's obvious that it had an immediat impact on the market. I suggest to implement clearer rules for stuff like this - maybe something like "if vote ratio changes to (...), a warning is published on the security". This makes it more predictable and minimizes arbitrariness.
Agreed. Just publishing such a warning seems very unprofessional, although your reasons may be good.

I tried to keep the warning low key.  I thought it was fairly self explanatory.  That there was market impact confirmed my suspicion that some users were flying blind with the asset, so to speak, unaware of the seemingly hundreds of posts going through on the forums.

Several concerned citizens have come to me worried about the situation so I tried to contact the issuer via PM and hadn't seen a response.  After waiting several days I didn't feel like there was another option.  We'll remove the warning when I am confident their contract is being followed and I feel like we can trust that future news posts appearing on the site are going to be better thought out.  (Eg; the claim that there is mining going on but no proceeds to show for it.)


Disclosure; I have many thousands of LABCOIN and I have not sold any over the last month.

Cheers

Has there been any progress on the issue of share locking?
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 1007


View Profile
September 20, 2013, 06:50:01 PM
 #2047

Still waiting for a statement why the registration is closed.

+1

+2
dexX7
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106
Merit: 1005



View Profile WWW
September 20, 2013, 06:54:56 PM
Last edit: September 20, 2013, 07:10:32 PM by dexX7
 #2048

I tried to keep the warning low key.  I thought it was fairly self explanatory.  That there was market impact confirmed my suspicion that some users were flying blind with the asset, so to speak, unaware of the seemingly hundreds of posts going through on the forums.

In case you or someone else (mightaswellallowanonymous and creativex especially) got me wrong: I'm absolutely in favor of the warning at the moment - Labcoin is highly speculative right now and the last thing I'd like to see is newbs getting burned by thinking "Lab is as safe as AM" or so. Sure everyone should do his own research etc., but it's not all that "black and white".

But my point was another one and of course no accusation or complain, but only suggestion to implement guidelines on when warnings are issued or lifted as well as when and how a security is going to be frozen. And one example might be be (probably not the best): "if moderator vote ratio is negative or below x, post an automated warning" or so. Wink

radiumsoup
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 356
Merit: 255


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 01:07:05 AM
 #2049

I tried to keep the warning low key.  I thought it was fairly self explanatory.  That there was market impact confirmed my suspicion that some users were flying blind with the asset, so to speak, unaware of the seemingly hundreds of posts going through on the forums.

In case you or someone else (mightaswellallowanonymous and creativex especially) got me wrong: I'm absolutely in favor of the warning at the moment - Labcoin is highly speculative right now and the last thing I'd like to see is newbs getting burned by thinking "Lab is as safe as AM" or so. Sure everyone should do his own research etc., but it's not all that "black and white".

But my point was another one and of course no accusation or complain, but only suggestion to implement guidelines on when warnings are issued or lifted as well as when and how a security is going to be frozen. And one example might be be (probably not the best): "if moderator vote ratio is negative or below x, post an automated warning" or so. Wink
exactly this. The warning itself appeared to be a vote of no confidence from the exchange, and NOBODY was expecting it. The inference was that you had some sort of inside knowledge that you wanted to get across by hinting to everyone without coming right out and telling everyone that there was a problem. A moderator voting mechanism would be good, I think - and 24+ hour notice on the news tab would be preferred as an announcement that a vote is pending. That will give the market time to figure out what's going on without a big "THAR BE PROBLEMS HERE" getting thrown up all of a sudden.

I think the market was more spooked that this unprecedented warning came on suddenly, and less that people were unaware that there were issues.

PGP fingerprint:   0x85beeabd110803b93d408b502d39b8875b282f86
burnside
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1004


Lead Blockchain Developer


View Profile WWW
September 21, 2013, 01:55:12 AM
 #2050

I tried to keep the warning low key.  I thought it was fairly self explanatory.  That there was market impact confirmed my suspicion that some users were flying blind with the asset, so to speak, unaware of the seemingly hundreds of posts going through on the forums.

In case you or someone else (mightaswellallowanonymous and creativex especially) got me wrong: I'm absolutely in favor of the warning at the moment - Labcoin is highly speculative right now and the last thing I'd like to see is newbs getting burned by thinking "Lab is as safe as AM" or so. Sure everyone should do his own research etc., but it's not all that "black and white".

But my point was another one and of course no accusation or complain, but only suggestion to implement guidelines on when warnings are issued or lifted as well as when and how a security is going to be frozen. And one example might be be (probably not the best): "if moderator vote ratio is negative or below x, post an automated warning" or so. Wink
exactly this. The warning itself appeared to be a vote of no confidence from the exchange, and NOBODY was expecting it. The inference was that you had some sort of inside knowledge that you wanted to get across by hinting to everyone without coming right out and telling everyone that there was a problem. A moderator voting mechanism would be good, I think - and 24+ hour notice on the news tab would be preferred as an announcement that a vote is pending. That will give the market time to figure out what's going on without a big "THAR BE PROBLEMS HERE" getting thrown up all of a sudden.

I think the market was more spooked that this unprecedented warning came on suddenly, and less that people were unaware that there were issues.

It's not unprecedented. I think there's just more attention on this issue than there was on previous issues I have posted warnings on.
superduh
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 01:58:32 AM
 #2051

burnside, labcoin seems to be a first for you - first special script ipo and first traders beware warning! let's see what else they'll be a first in.

ok
Ukyo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 21, 2013, 02:19:51 AM
 #2052

burnside, labcoin seems to be a first for you - first special script ipo and first traders beware warning! let's see what else they'll be a first in.

If all are lucky, a raging success who's IPO originated on BTCT. Smiley
ThickAsThieves
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 21, 2013, 02:46:18 AM
 #2053

I get "Xcoind backend failure at 1966" while trying to create an Ask order.
burnside
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1004


Lead Blockchain Developer


View Profile WWW
September 21, 2013, 02:59:08 AM
 #2054

I get "Xcoind backend failure at 1966" while trying to create an Ask order.

bitcoind issue... it should be back now.
radiumsoup
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 356
Merit: 255


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 04:01:01 AM
 #2055

It's not unprecedented. I think there's just more attention on this issue than there was on previous issues I have posted warnings on.
that doesn't really justify it Wink

PGP fingerprint:   0x85beeabd110803b93d408b502d39b8875b282f86
VolanicEruptor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 21, 2013, 04:21:53 AM
 #2056

Burnside, can you see IP addresses of the party involved with issuing shares? 

Duffer1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 227
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 21, 2013, 04:57:35 AM
 #2057

Burnside, can you see IP addresses of the party involved with issuing shares?  
He's OP.  He sees all.  Never assume otherwise.
EFS
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142
Merit: 1192



View Profile
September 21, 2013, 05:17:03 AM
 #2058

Will you open registration again? Everybody asked the same question, why don't you answer or did I miss the answer?
AngelSky
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 537



View Profile
September 21, 2013, 12:39:02 PM
Last edit: September 21, 2013, 05:07:00 PM by AngelSky
 #2059

Officially posted on BTCT:
Quote
Posted: 2 months ago
Regarding shares owned by the Labcoin founders and developers.
Due to inquiries LABCOIN has received from investors, the founders and developers involved in the LABCOIN project has decided to voluntarily lock in 75% of all shares owned by the LABCOIN core team for 12-months.
Quote
Mining started Posted: 12 days ago
We're currently averaging about 2 TH/s in solo mode, and expect to deploy at least 4 TH by monday 16, to reach gradually 50 TH within October.

Status:
- Shares not locked.
- Where are the 4TH/s ? The 2TH/s ? Dividends ?

From the "Asset Issuer Terms of Service:" of BTCT:
"If you are proven lying on your contract, your asset issuer information, or in any communication with the exchange, your asset will be frozen indefinitely, all assets you hold on the exchange will be frozen, and your asset will most likely be delisted."
"You are responsible for following through on your contract. Do not promise anything you cannot deliver."
"If found in violation of these rules, you will be given a warning and will have 7 days to come into compliance. If you do not comply your asset will be delisted."

People complaining about burnside's warning should keep an eye on that.

Finally, as "Rannasha" said:
The problem with that clause is that delisting only hurts investors. Labcoin already has their IPO money, whether they're listed or not.

This is the only reason why burnside is protecting shareholder's interest by not delisting this >20x lying Labcoin. Right ?
EskimoBob
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000


Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank


View Profile
September 21, 2013, 02:34:47 PM
 #2060

Please, keep security specific drama in so called official threads. Posting a link here, to a specific problem, is not a bad idea but lets not threadcrap this thread so it become useless as most forum threads around here. Smiley

If you feel that issuer has scammed you, please use Scam Accusations sub forum (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=83.0).
Sorry, no one can "freeze" Labcoins or anyone else assets to punish them. Welcome to BTC world.

While reading what I wrote, use the most friendliest and relaxing voice in your head.
BTW, Things in BTC bubble universes are getting ugly....
Pages: « 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 [103] 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!