[BTC-TC] Virtual Community Exchange [CLOSED]

[bigdude]

Thanks for the new public share address feature!

No problem!  And sorry about making it mandatory, but I think it's pretty important.

Cheers.

I'm having a problem with this. I've set 2 different addresses, but it still says I have to set it up.

So I still can't trade.

What am I doing wrong?.

Need some help with this please

[burnside]

Thanks for the new public share address feature!

No problem!  And sorry about making it mandatory, but I think it's pretty important.

Cheers.

I'm having a problem with this. I've set 2 different addresses, but it still says I have to set it up.

So I still can't trade.

What am I doing wrong?.

Need some help with this please

You set it up in the Account page here: https://btct.co/account?tab=tab2  ?

All it needs is your BTC wallet address.

Cheers.

[dexX7]

Hi burnside,

is there a specific reason to disable the registration?

Would it be possible to include the Bitcoin address in /csv/trades from a user who sent shares via the internal share transfer?

Example:

572254,CIPHERMINE-PT,"transfer-in (dexX7)",1,0.06033000,"2013-09-17 03:28:40"

Changed to:

572254,CIPHERMINE-PT,"transfer-in (dexX7,1dexX7zmPen1yBz2H9ZF62AK5TGGqGTZH)",1,0.06033000,"2013-09-17 03:28:40"

[Anotheranonlol]

I have not been handed a list unless I missed it somewhere.

I hope the LABCOIN guys don't mind me disclosing this.  Over 85% of the 3 million shares have not left a specific account I know is held in the Labcoin name.  The other 15% could easily be held in any of the next few top shareholders, but I am not privy to who is who without some assistance.

Edit/add: and this account is not locked.  I will not lock it without a specific request from the owner.

https://blockchain.info/address/13kPwnvBdLoMPmYqYEXW5r8DSx7j4avg7G?filter=2

This is address of labcoin secretary. as you can see he was  poor guy before during his trollbox phase, collect 40btc in 4 months, gambling on satoshidice, since becoming swedish mouthpiece for labcoin & after succesful ipo he have taken ~960BTC from cold storage... amount which he have not deposited..this is more like 32%

[burnside]

I have not been handed a list unless I missed it somewhere.

I hope the LABCOIN guys don't mind me disclosing this.  Over 85% of the 3 million shares have not left a specific account I know is held in the Labcoin name.  The other 15% could easily be held in any of the next few top shareholders, but I am not privy to who is who without some assistance.

Edit/add: and this account is not locked.  I will not lock it without a specific request from the owner.

https://blockchain.info/address/13kPwnvBdLoMPmYqYEXW5r8DSx7j4avg7G?filter=2

This is address of labcoin secretary. as you can see he was  poor guy before during his trollbox phase, collect 40btc in 4 months, gambling on satoshidice, since becoming swedish mouthpiece for labcoin & after succesful ipo he have taken ~960BTC from cold storage... amount which he have not deposited..this is more like 32%

I'm not sure I understand what exactly you're trying to say?

[Anotheranonlol]

I have not been handed a list unless I missed it somewhere.

I hope the LABCOIN guys don't mind me disclosing this.  Over 85% of the 3 million shares have not left a specific account I know is held in the Labcoin name.  The other 15% could easily be held in any of the next few top shareholders, but I am not privy to who is who without some assistance.

Edit/add: and this account is not locked.  I will not lock it without a specific request from the owner.

https://blockchain.info/address/13kPwnvBdLoMPmYqYEXW5r8DSx7j4avg7G?filter=2

This is address of labcoin secretary. as you can see he was  poor guy before during his trollbox phase, collect 40btc in 4 months, gambling on satoshidice, since becoming swedish mouthpiece for labcoin & after succesful ipo he have taken ~960BTC from cold storage... amount which he have not deposited..this is more like 32%

I'm not sure I understand what exactly you're trying to say?

after successful ipo of labcoin you have proccessed withdrawal from 1KRj8opQ5y3h2dw8FjnskxuVZ5qtu5Uuid to theswede75 with amount higher than what he has deposited (total ~$120,000) you know where this balance has come from.

funds from public sales which were withdrawn from your exchange also are not spent on development of 130nm chips

[burnside]

https://blockchain.info/address/13kPwnvBdLoMPmYqYEXW5r8DSx7j4avg7G?filter=2

This is address of labcoin secretary. as you can see he was  poor guy before during his trollbox phase, collect 40btc in 4 months, gambling on satoshidice, since becoming swedish mouthpiece for labcoin & after succesful ipo he have taken ~960BTC from cold storage... amount which he have not deposited..this is more like 32%

I'm not sure I understand what exactly you're trying to say?

after successful ipo of labcoin you have proccessed withdrawal from 1KRj8opQ5y3h2dw8FjnskxuVZ5qtu5Uuid to theswede75 with amount higher than what he has deposited (total ~$120,000) you know where this balance has come from.

funds from public sales which were withdrawn from your exchange also are not spent on development of 130nm chips

So you're upset that we processed a withdrawal for an issuer after an IPO?  That's kind of how it all works.

Or you're upset that they haven't spent it yet?  (take it up with them?)

What are you wanting us to do here?

[Anotheranonlol]

https://blockchain.info/address/13kPwnvBdLoMPmYqYEXW5r8DSx7j4avg7G?filter=2

This is address of labcoin secretary. as you can see he was  poor guy before during his trollbox phase, collect 40btc in 4 months, gambling on satoshidice, since becoming swedish mouthpiece for labcoin & after succesful ipo he have taken ~960BTC from cold storage... amount which he have not deposited..this is more like 32%

I'm not sure I understand what exactly you're trying to say?

after successful ipo of labcoin you have proccessed withdrawal from 1KRj8opQ5y3h2dw8FjnskxuVZ5qtu5Uuid to theswede75 with amount higher than what he has deposited (total ~$120,000) you know where this balance has come from.

funds from public sales which were withdrawn from your exchange also are not spent on development of 130nm chips

So you're upset that we processed a withdrawal for an issuer after an IPO?  That's kind of how it all works.

Or you're upset that they haven't spent it yet?  (take it up with them?)

What are you wanting us to do here?

it is already being taken up with them 

[btcash]

Still waiting for a statement why the registration is closed.

[Pale Phoenix]

There seems to be a problem with coinflow showing incomplete data for many issues, e.g. Labcoin. I've already posted in the coinflow thread, but thought I'd post here as well since coinflow graphs are linked from each BTCT security.

[Pale Phoenix]

I strongly disagree. There is no need for this. If you don't trust an issuer or you don't like the lack of financial information, then don't buy the shares.

How could more information for investors possibly be a bad thing?

There are certainly valid arguments against the idea (mostly from the issuers' perspective), but the "if you don't have blind faith, don't buy" bit of sophistry is not one of them.

[helixone]

There seems to be a problem with coinflow showing incomplete data for many issues, e.g. Labcoin. I've already posted in the coinflow thread, but thought I'd post here as well since coinflow graphs are linked from each BTCT security.

I suspect this is probably due to the recent change in the format that the IRC bot that reports trade activity outputs data. (It's now consolidating trades, and has added additional fields.) I've contacted the dev to point this out but haven't heard back yet.

-helixone

[odolvlobo]

I strongly disagree. There is no need for this. If you don't trust an issuer or you don't like the lack of financial information, then don't buy the shares.

How could more information for investors possibly be a bad thing?

There are certainly valid arguments against the idea (mostly from the issuers' perspective), but the "if you don't have blind faith, don't buy" bit of sophistry is not one of them.

I don't believe that more information is a bad thing. I believe that requiring more information is a bad thing. In my opinion, regulations should only be applied as a last resort because they generally cause more problems than they solve. Regulations are certainly the worst response to problems like this that are not well-defined.

[FloatesMcgoates]

I really think its time for Burnside to consider taking some action regarding labcoin. The type of scandalous behavior that they are currently exhibiting is exactly the type of activity that will bring regulatory entities such as the SEC down on btc-tc. Labcoin's presence on btct could really jeopardize btct's continued existence.

[xuanxuan3317]

I really think its time for Burnside to consider taking some action regarding labcoin. The type of scandalous behavior that they are currently exhibiting is exactly the type of activity that will bring regulatory entities such as the SEC down on btc-tc. Labcoin's presence on btct could really jeopardize btct's continued existence.

100%agree

[superduh]

I really think its time for Burnside to consider taking some action regarding labcoin. The type of scandalous behavior that they are currently exhibiting is exactly the type of activity that will bring regulatory entities such as the SEC down on btc-tc. Labcoin's presence on btct could really jeopardize btct's continued existence.

unfortunately, there is some truth behind this

[odolvlobo]

I really think its time for Burnside to consider taking some action regarding labcoin.

100%agree

I'm curious what actions you think burnside should take.

[creativex]

I really think its time for Burnside to consider taking some action regarding labcoin. The type of scandalous behavior that they are currently exhibiting is exactly the type of activity that will bring regulatory entities such as the SEC down on btc-tc. Labcoin's presence on btct could really jeopardize btct's continued existence.

I believe it would be difficult to classify some of these statements as something other than intentionally misleading.

Mining started Posted: 9 days ago

And here it comes, finally, today we are proud to announce the starting of mining operations in time with our roadmap.  
The last week has been extremely busy and work is still in progress to bring online the whole hashing power.

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.

The website will be updated this week in order to show our live hashing rate and dividends will be paid every two weeks.
More pictures of the laboratory setting where the hardware is currently deployed will be also distributed. Complete installment will be shown when our final premise will be ready. We're still considering some business aspects, including only focusing on the upcoming 65nm version for what concerns bulk chip sales. We plan to take a final decision regarding this issue during the next month.

We want to say thanks to all investors who trusted us during this long endeavor.

Labcoin Team

That's their latest official release. They waited several days after that official release to slowly announce in a piecemeal fashion on a thread that moves several pages every day that they're not meeting their official claims. They've still not updated their website or even the OP in their discussion thread to reflect their current status.

Despite the shadiness, the only statement in their contract they're obviously violating is this one and it's pretty generic:

- Regularly communicate the project financials to share holders in a way that lets share holders evaluate the performance, capital outlay and future of the project.

[Deprived]

I'm pretty drunk so take anything I say with a large pinch of salt.  I like the transparency on this fund (though it invests in mining so will make a loss anyway).  If the fund has ANY captal tied up in labcoin then get it out : it's not possible to distinguish between scammers/incompetents but they're definitely one or the other.

I had maybe 800 BTC of bids on Labcoin at IPO.  Not because I thought they were great or anything - but because I thought they'd sell out and I could sell at a profit.  I was correct - as were any number of other people doing the same thing.  Don't confuse that with them being worth leaving cash tied up in for any period of time.  They have an entirely uninformed shill/puppet account posting contentless posts to drive the market up.  There's absolutely no sensible reason why, if they were genuine, they'd have such a dick-head making posts in their name.  So we know they're either shit or bent.  It doesn't matter which they are - neither is worth tieing cash up in.

Labcoin was free cash if you flipped the IPO (doesn't matter if you sold to real idiots or pretend idiots played by the asset issuers - you made the same amount of BTC) and something to totally ignore thereafter.  Those with more courage than me may have made more thereafter - I'm a coward and tend to take free cash rather than cash with a risk attached : there's so much given away that there's no justification for taking on risk.

In case the previous is unclear let me make it plain.  If you have Labcoin shares (and don't have inside knowledge) you ARE a fucking idiot.  There's no grey area on that.  There's no wiggle-room of "well it seems better than other shite investments".  They have a total incompetent making posts on their behalf.  Can't speak for other business owners but if I hired a total incompetent it would be because I wanted misleading posts made (if I wanted accurate posts then I'd hire someone competent - not rocket science).  If a company wants misleading posts made then why, oh why, would you believe ANYTHING they say?

I have no idea at all whether swed099 (or whatever his name is) is a sock-puppet, a noob or just an idiot with no direct line to genuine information.  It doesn't matter WHICH it is - just that it's one of them.  Specifically he's supposedly the PR but has no information worth making posts about - which makes the role meaningless.  Now that's not a new development in BTC 'finance' - as I've had a few beers let's piss a lot off people off rather than just a few

MPEx also have a PR - who will happily make a thread about a BBET bet that AMC (Ken's company that wants to confuse itself with ASICMINER but is a year late to the party) not repaying investors within 6 months but fails to link to any bet that it won't, itself, repay IPO buyers within even a few years (I'd take the NO side on that bet if you can't guess).  There's something hilariously amusing about a company that is unlikely to ever return profit to investors bragging about hosting bets regarding another dismal attempt to be an 'investment'.  I don't have any great hopes of AMC ever making a profit but I'd rate the likelihood of them making a profit (defined as investors receiving back dividends exceeding the highest price paid for shares sold by the company) as higher than the same being the case for those who got caught out at the top of BBET bids (for which I'd assign a 0% chance).  Statistics can be used to try to make any point you want - but I'd be really cautious personally of accusing someone else of something (failing to return IPO price withing 6 months) that rather clearly applied to the entity from which the accusation was made.  No doubt I got that wrong and there'll be a slew of posts proving how MPEx investors make back 150% of share price PA.

[Deprived]

If there's anyone I haven't offended please feel free to post (detailing why you aren't offended) and I'll make a genuine effort to offend you.  Wouldn't want anyone feeling left out.