POLL - which coins are scams as defined in the OP?

[TPTB_need_war]

Whoops:

"The other thing we added was the ability to create multiple-choice markets. In the alpha we only had binary yes or no markets."

It can be just a coincidence.

My point is they just decided to surely break Augur (although it was already doomed for the other reasons I enumerated). Whether the timing of my reading of that statement about the Augur beta is coincidence to the timing of my post, is not my point.

Lol. I think CfB was pulling a Mark Twain on me.

He must have meant that it could be just a coincidence and that I didn't really read that article before making the post yesterday. Clever way of insinuating that I might not have been clairvoyant.

[TPTB_need_war]

stoat the ETH pumper spamming the Altcoin Discussion forum with numerous pointless/duplicate threads about ETH, using one of his purchased BCT accounts (Minecache).

Ethereum spending some of the $millions that fools are handing them in the P&D to buy front page exposure on Bitcoin prostitutionnews sites.

Ethereum's bucket of cash also gives it an edge

Microsoft has $billions and it hasn't stopped their decline into irrelevance and Android marches on with 80+% global marketshare and Windows Phone has <1%.

No amount of cash compensates for stupid focus and myopic direction, which is the precise description of Ethereum.

stoat how many newbie accounts do you control?

Venture capitalists drank the Dapp Koolaid.

Dapp Koolaid:

Re: Arcade City Uses Ethereum to Decentralize Taxi, Delivery and Roadside Assistance

http://allcoinsnews.com/2016/03/14/arcade-city-uses-ethereum-to-decentralize-taxi-delivery-and-roadside-assistance-services-and-launches-mobile-app/

There is no way for a smart contract to form an objective consensus about events that occur external to a block chain.

All voting is a power vacuum that fails due to the Iron Law of Political Economics.

This press release is bullshit with no adoption and is merely to sell more ETH tokens to fools.

Augur and Slock.it and 99% of the apps/contracts announced for Ethereum are so flawed they can never work.

Furthermore, ArcadeCity does not use ETH for payment. Cash, credit card, debit, and Paypal are accepted.

The Ethereum integration is primarily to sell tokens to drivers, i.e. a way to do public offering (let's hope they comply with SEC regulations):

Arcade City will use Ethereum to issue ‘crypto-equity’ to drivers, allowing them to own up to 100% of the company by 2020.

It has nothing to do with using Ethereum to enable some new technology that improves upon Uber. It is about governance and creating a copycoin P&D in the Uber space.

More information:

http://cointelegraph.com/news/arcade-city-decentralized-blockchain-based-answer-to-ubera

They could use a block chain for drivers to sign a record of the price they are offering, and for riders to sign records giving reviews of the drivers, i.e. a decentralized database that verifies the signers so that reputation can't be faked.

But reputation can be Sybil attacked, unless a resource must be consumed in order to establish a reputation.

Payments from riders to drivers on the block chain would not be a consumed resource, because drivers could pay themselves from fake rider accounts. Proof-of-stake does not consume a resource and thus it has attack vectors.

The solution is for riders to form a Web of Trust, where they trust friends and friends-of-friends and this reputation is the only reputation they trust.

But none of this needs atomic Smart Contracts. All we need is a way to sign hashes on the block chain and keep the data on DHT. Which is I think the correct design for a 2.0 block chain.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Lol. I think CfB was pulling a Mark Twain on me.

He must have meant that it could be just a coincidence and that I didn't really read that article before making the post yesterday. Clever way of insinuating that I might not have been clairvoyant.

You overestimate my abilities.

[TPTB_need_war]

Peertracks runs on the Bitshares block chain

No, it has it's own chain (BTS clone)

I mean it runs on the same insolubly flawed technology.

Also Bitshares is a highly centralized platform

What platform isn't?

Physical cash.

Cash can be canceled by governments though.

The internet is decentralized because of the End-to-End principle which makes the network redundant and fungible.

As for a decentralized currency where no one controls it, no one has invented this yet (well except maybe me, but I haven't implemented my design yet).

Monero might be quite decentralized due to its CPU-only hash function which hasn't yet been implemented on an ASIC.

Bitshares instant transactions aren't reliable, because there is only one designated confirmation node for each block period, so the performance of blocks can vary.

Poor performers get voted out, and are no longer permitted to form blocks. Only historically reliable block producers are allowed to mine.

Then it is not decentralized, permissionless. A permissionless system should be able to scale while still permitting slower nodes. In short, yeah you can guarantee anything with total control, but you also insure a power vacuum which is winner-take-all. It is an Iron Law of Political Economics.

But even your reply is technically ignorant, because the point I was making is that no one can guarantee that a node performs well 100% of the time. Nothing on the internet is perfectly reliable. The fault tolerance must be built into the system by allowing many nodes to confirm transactions simultaneously, not a synchronous queue as is Proof-of-Stake's idiotic design.

The Peertracks Note features is interesting. It might turn audiences in P&D targets though

Yes, if that particular artist wants to make his fans angry.

Some will pretend to be musicians and give the Peertracks a bad reputation.

It is also not clear if these are illegal unregistered securities under SEC law in the USA. I do know that in the case of airplane VIP memberships the Supreme Court ruled they were not subject to the Howey test. I will need to study that more.

Good point, I read that much of the ICO went to paying for lawyers.

I concluded they are illegal. The attorneys were idiots then.

Peertracks doesn't appear to do anything about enabling the unbanked to monetize music, which is one of my major goals.

Not sure what you mean, please explain.

I refuse to give my design away.

Peertracks is IMO too focused on just music. You are basically trying to turn the serious music fans into speculators. Yeah speculators here will think Notes are cool, but the actual music fans I think will perceive it to be a negative feature and an insult to love of music. You basically corrupt the musicians teaching then to do P&D instead of produce great music. Sigh.

Wrong business model.  "Notes" now called "MUSE" blockchain tokens are for speculators who pay for the decentralized mining network and stand to profit if the number of transactions (fees) increases to the point that more MUSE can be burned than are created on the blockchain.

Artists (not just musicians) make "coins" for their fans that can be redeemed for front row seats, back stage passes, limited edition swag, etc.

Just sell the band paraphernalia to the users. Don't obfuscate gambling and complicate a music distribution site so you can mix gambling with music.

[schlonged]

Hey TPTB, thanks for the valued feedback... let me see...

Peertracks runs on the Bitshares block chain

No, it has it's own chain (BTS clone)

I mean it runs on the same insolubly flawed technology.

Nothing's perfect, if it's good enough for Microsoft, then it's good enough for me.  Next..

Also Bitshares is a highly centralized platform

What platform isn't?

Physical cash.

Got pleanty of that, looking to diversify into crypto.  I should have said "What CRYPTO platform isn't."  Sorry sir, I'll try to be more precise next time I open my big mouth  

Bitshares instant transactions aren't reliable, because there is only one designated confirmation node for each block period, so the performance of blocks can vary.

Poor performers get voted out, and are no longer permitted to form blocks. Only historically reliable block producers are allowed to mine.

Then it is not decentralized, permissionless. A permissionless system should be able to scale while still permitting slower nodes. In short, yeah you can guarantee anything with total control, but you also insure a power vacuum which is winner-take-all. It is an Iron Law of Political Economics.

OK, so BitShares is decentralized (more than bitcoin and Ethereum), but it is not permissionless.  That's fine by me, let the winner take it all.  I'm a winner, and I want it all, and I will vote only for those miners who are winners with the ability to take it all, while simultaneously voting out slow nodes.  Competition, survival of the fittest,

Pure Unadulturated Laissez Faire Free Market Capitalism is what made this country great in the first place, and it's what I plan to re-instate to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAI!  Sorry, I can't resist a good grandstand.

Bottom line, is I am the owner, I am the shareholder, so only I should have the power and control over precisely who controls my property.  

"permissioned"?

yes exactly,

my permission

Peertracks

Just sell the band paraphernalia to the users. Don't obfuscate gambling and complicate a music distribution site so you can mix gambling with music.

Yeah, it is a bit complex.  It's also for managers who manage multiple bands, and have to distribute royalties.  It tracks who gets what so there can be no band break ups over who got paid more (because it's on the Satoshi certified transparent blockchain).  So yeah, it has some cool things for artists, fans, and managers.  Simple, it is not.  



Thanks again for confirming my selections, however, my main question to everyone when I started this thread has gone unanswered this whole time, and I finally found an answer that should have been obvious to you all by now:

I'm searching for the best of breed (large cap) crypto companies in each niche market.  

I only came up with 8 niche crypto business sectors.  Please let me know if I am overlooking any sectors.  

1.   the largest (biggest market cap) data storage company is Maidsafe
2.   the largest records database company is Factom
3.   the largest social networking company is Synereo
4.   the largest music monetization company is MUSE
5.   the largest public Turing complete computer is Ethereum
6.   the largest anonymity solution (omitting DASH) is BitShares
7.   the largest file swapping service company is Florincoin (The Alexandria Project)
8.   the largest domain name company is Namecoin

Are there any crypto business types or governance structures that I have not considered?

Thanks in advance

What prominent crypto business sector am I missing?




anyone?



anyone?




Bueller?




Could it be maybe the coin that has doubled in value over this past week and is currently one of the top volume coins on earth!!

Syscoin! (P2P ebay marketplace)

Come on guys, throw me a fricken bone here.  I'm trying to build large positions based on limited capital, and you guys would rather compare shoe sizes than make money?!

I had to stumble upon this phenomenon myself:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1380978.msg14044856#msg14044856

P2P ebay (physical marketplace), is a business sector that was not on my list.  OK, I'm done crying.  Yes, I should not expect anyone else to do my DD.  So then what other companies becides SYS has a decentralized P2P marketplace?

I know that SYS can't be any more "fatally flawed" than the $6 billion coin.  And how flawed could it really be since Microsoft already approved it?  Good enough for me.  But I'm just wondering what other eqally flawed (but acceptable to someone on the level of Microsoft) options there might be hidden in this sector.

All right guys, this is a lot of work, and I'm a little disappointed, but I'm still not giving up.  I've narrowed down the imperfect but acceptable portfolio to bitcoin, BitShares, Namecoin, Peertracks, and now possibly Syscoin (pending further investigation) using Microsoft acceptance as a benchmark.  I'll never stop doing my DD.  And of course, thanks in advance!

[TPTB_need_war]

Software is not a fungible money. Software is not purchased for expectations of gains.

Your logic is that buying a bicycle is not an investment security even though it can be resold. Then nothing is an investment security by your test. Rather the Howey test looks at the relevant economic facts and ignores any such attempt at obfuscation.

Are attorneys in Europe really this dumb    

I just needed your comment. I didn't expect that you would change your position nor anyone expected that.

The most hilarious part about these trolls is that they argue from a retroactive point of view. Laws are never retroactive. According to TPTB's "expert lawyer opinion" pokemon cards were really a security because they appreciated in value due to demand after they were sold as a card game. Genius.

Well, he is not an expert and has the right to be wrong. Of course, noone seriously believes that TPTB is better than Ethereum lawyers but if one conforms to TPTB's rules then the one conforms to all possible jurisdictions. So TPTB's opinion is useful to some degree.

CfB I did not change my position. Your disingenuous attempt to assert that I am waffling is a despicable obfuscation tactic.

If you read the entire thread, you will see I have explained in great detail with quotations from the relevant Supreme Court decisions, that the Supreme Court has clarified that the Howey test is employed to distinguish an investment security from other scenarios which are not investment securities.

The key aspect of the Howey test is whether the individuals who are purchasing what is offered, are expecting to gain on the resale value due to the ongoing efforts of some group other than themself. This means they've placed their trust in a group (an ongoing enterprise) that is responsible for their future gains.

It is quite clear that ever since your ICO, that the future value of Iota's tokens is dependent on iotatoken and Come-from-Beyond, for example all the development work you had to complete from the time you sold the tokens until now and still ongoing work required. As well, you arguing with me here in this thread, indicates that you are responsible for the promotion and forming public opinion which determines the value of Iota's tokens.

Also one of the other key factors is that money paid for these tokens was transferred to this group, which the investors are depending on for their expectation of gains.

Pokemon cards are not software, they are physical collectibles similar to baseball cards. The major reason for obtaining these cards was not for depending on the ongoing efforts of a group to promote and provide value for these cards. To the extent these cards have risen in value, it is because of the inherent value of the cards when they were created, not due to any reliance on ongoing efforts of promoters and developers to raise their value over time.

Pokemon card values are a user-driven phenomenon. Iota token values are an iotatoken and Come-from-Beyond driven phenomenon (and the various early investors who also pump your tokens here in this forum and rave about Come-from-Beyond's reputation of creating Nxt). The users are depending on your development group to implement and monitor the coin ongoing. Heck your company is even providing centralized servers which are essential to the launch phase which will make or break the value of the tokens.

The USA Supreme Court has specifically stated it will ignore all such obfuscations and focus on the economic facts, which is whether the investors were depending on the actions of the sellers of the securities for the expectation of the gains on the value of the securities. The Supreme Court will also look as to whether the primary reason for obtaining the tokens was for an expectation of the gains, and not primarily for the use value of trading the tokens as a currency for some game or services.

None of the investors of Iota are using them to trade for services or in a game. They are HODLing them in expectation of selling them for an investment gain to greater fools, and they help to promote the tokens on these forums thus displaying their intentions and expectations.

If you two insist of writing stupid shit which exemplifies that you have not even read this thread entirely, and thus do not understand the Howey test, then you are being disingenuous and trying to fool your investors. Which is another fact to add to your culpability under the Howey test and USA securities law.

And yes I think Ethereum's lawyers are dumb shit. And btw, my father is very prominent attorney who has been a general counsel and run the entire west coast division for the world's largest oil company. I have not only inherited his IQ, but I also was exposed to numerous legal briefs and discussions with him over my teenage years which thus an imbued in me the ability to understand key salient points of the court's legal decisions.

I see many attorneys making some egregious mistakes with their comments about crypto currency within the context of the USA's Howey test. I have provided those refutations and clarifications upthread.

The Howey test is very simple. A security means the investor places his surety and trust in a ongoing enterprise to provide his expectation of gains. When buying a bicycle which I resell in the future, I don't depend on the efforts of some ongoing enterprise for the expectation for gains in the value of the bicycle. When I buy software which I resell one day, I don't buy the software to expect gains on the value of the software but rather I buy it primarily to use it. Duh! The SEC regulates these ongoing enterprises so they provide proper disclosures or that they limit their offerings to qualified investors who have at least $1 million in liquid net worth or who have proven they are sophisticated investors who understand well all the technologies and risks involved. Obviously from the dumb comments that speculators make on these forums, they are not all sophisticated. And I understand you did not check to make sure all participants in your ICO (that are USA citizens) had a liquid networth of $1 million.

[TPTB_need_war]

Nothing's perfect, if it's good enough for Microsoft, then it's good enough for me.  Next..

Microsoft has a horrible reputation of producing inferior technology.

Windows Phone has 1% market share. Microsoft is dying in the age of open source.

Also Bitshares is a highly centralized platform

What platform isn't?

Physical cash.

Got pleanty of that, looking to diversify into crypto.  I should have said "What CRYPTO platform isn't."

You disingenuously quoted me out-of-context. I wrote Monero is probably more decentralized because its CPU hash doesn't yet have an ASIC.

OK, so BitShares is decentralized (more than bitcoin

Hell no!

Apparently you did not understand what I wrote about Proof-of-stake requires that only one node can confirm all transactions for its block. No other node can compete with that designated node.

As for governance, clearly Proof-of-stake is most centralized design possible.

[Come-from-Beyond]

CfB I did not change my position...

You may be right or wrong. In any case it doesn't make sense to argue on that.

[TPTB_need_war]

CfB I did not change my position...

You may be right or wrong. In any case it doesn't make sense to argue on that.

No. You should explain why you thought I changed my position. So readers can decide if your logic makes any sense.

I suspect that you thought that because I wrote "Software is not a fungible money" that I had changed my position. That phrase was a terse response to iotatoken's point that Iota tokens are only software. Actually that phrase taken out-of-context would be incorrect, because Bitcoin is software and is fungible. The salient distinction as I clarified in my long post just a few moments ago, is that no one is depending on the control exerted by a group that sold us the Bitcoins for the expectation of gains in the value of Bitcoin. That is why Bitcoin is not an investment SECURITY. It is an investment or speculation, but not a SECURITY, because no one is depending on the efforts of an ongoing enterprise for the expectation of gains.

[Come-from-Beyond]

CfB I did not change my position...

You may be right or wrong. In any case it doesn't make sense to argue on that.

No. You should explain why you thought I changed my position. So readers can decide if your logic makes any sense.

I suspect that you thought that because I wrote "Software is not a fungible money" that I had changed my position. That phrase was a terse response to iotatoken's point that Iota tokens are only software. Actually that phrase taken out-of-context would be incorrect, because Bitcoin is software and is fungible. The salient distinction as I clarified in my long post just a few moments ago, is that no one is depending on the control exerted by a group that sold us the Bitcoins for the expectation of gains in the value of Bitcoin. That is why Bitcoin is not an investment SECURITY. It is an investment or speculation, but not a SECURITY, because no one is depending on the efforts of an ongoing enterprise for the expectation of gains.

I'll answer in the main thread, no time on duplication of posts.

[jibble]

TPTB

Sorry if this is an annoying question that may have been answered in a previous post but could i get a detailed example of a sybil attack on the maidsafe network, like what exactly would someone do. Like i know how and what a sybil attack is but the safenetwork has been specifically planned to not be attack proof but make it survive and more resilient to attack with the logic that no system will be attack proof but making it mathematically improbable to be able to attack it to such a degree as to cause any real damage.

The favorite way they would explain this would likely be : a ant colony , killing a few ants doesn't do much damage to the entire colony and recovers quickly , trying to destroy the whole colony would be extremely expensive and  costly and would require more resources than the network has , so a small network would be easier perhaps to successfully attack but the larger the network the hard it is .

It's not a blockchain so not the same as the other decentralized storage coins.

To be able to make any bad decisions within one of the groups of nodes you would require control of 28 out of 32 nodes to control that group of nodes decisions , which would be 87.5% of the new nodes being created just to stand a chance to hopefully, randomly getting control of a single group of nodes, even then that groups nodes would still need confirmation of another close group of nodes, which would be even harder to gain control of, because if you are in the example creating 87.5% of new nodes as an attack to try and randomly end up with control over 28 nodes in a random group of nodes, you would then need to somehow have the first group of nodes close in XOR space to the second else they wouldn't confirm the decisions off of each other, meaning you might need to somehow take control of 10 groups of nodes before you have 2 that are close enough to each other to validate what you want to do

The same for data , your nodes in your group and in a secondary group would need to confirm your delivery of data that you delivered in order to reward you , if they find out you are not delivering, downgrade reputation and perhaps kick you from the group, so even when pretending to deliver data instead of actually delivering it would require control of 87.5% of at least 2 groups of nodes, that are assigned in XOR space completely randomly.  

[TPTB_need_war]

Sorry if this is an annoying question that may have been answered in a previous post but could i get a detailed example of a sybil attack on the maidsafe network, like what exactly would someone do.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1393560.msg14167046#msg14167046

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1393703.msg14158348#msg14158348

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1393703.msg14166341#msg14166341

[TPTB_need_war]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1393560.msg14167046#msg14167046

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1393703.msg14158348#msg14158348

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1393703.msg14158348#msg14158348

Glitch in the Matrix.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1393703.msg14166341#msg14166341

[TPTB_need_war]

An altruistic altcoin will win:

James Paterson, the youngest senator ever to be elected in Australia at 28-years-old, has boldly stated, “I’m not here for personal power and advancement.” He is a member of the Liberal Party and says he is there to pursue “radical reforms,” which include throwing out the national curriculum in schools, for they are indeed pointless, and reimposing a debt ceiling. He also wants to get rid of the “official” talking points used by politicians and embrace what he calls respect for the voters’ intelligence by speaking plainly.

Perhaps the 51.6-year cycle of the Economic Confidence Model is indeed what some call the third generational shift. The hippie generation of the Clinton era simply laid down their marijuana and lined their pockets as did the generation of politicians before them. They even took the corruption to new heights. Historically, it is the third generation that gets fed up with the last two and turns it all upside down. Perhaps this is just time.

[TPTB_need_war]

This coin has a 15 second conf time bitocin is 600... just that alone their is a 40x increase in network capacity

Hey technological idiot. Please stop writing about things you do not understand. Because some n00bs might believe you.

Decreasing the block period, does nothing to decrease the propagation delay for any particular block size. Since the orphan rate is function of both propagation delay and block period, it is wash in terms of one must use smaller block sizes at lower block periods, in order to have the same resistance to centralization of mining (due to the economies-of-scale around winning your own blocks more often, thus avoiding the lost hashrate on orphans and waiting for propagation).

[TPTB_need_war]

4.   the largest music monetization company is MUSE

What the fuck is that?

Okay this is Peertracks and apparently the Bitshares asset is MUSE.

Turn [it] Down For What?

Just Let it Go

Best viewed with:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCcrggG8u_8#t=85
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTcL2Lg0RcU#t=33

[d57heinz]

well i like how you posted what you said in your thread but not what i had to say.. Thats funny.. what are your intentions.. What are your views of the system of money in general.. How is it that those that hold over 1 btc when their is over 7 billiion people any different than the system we were supposed to get away from.> Looks to me btc is going to be a safe haven only for the rich when the current system inevitably implodes..  for those of you wondering where this guy is getting his info from.. how about you list the sources.. And hey try not to look so butthurt that eth took over the stagnant btc or the "lite" version of btc...   Drag your feet and bitch and moan about dick sizes.. oops i mean block sizes and  watch these that think they are entitled to btc drive it right into the dirt..  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1394842.msg14239189#msg14239189

good luck with your thread..which is nothing more than hot air.. Maybe you should try contributing to your precious btc so that it doesn't fail..  

EDIT.  wheres the option for all of the above.. this poll is biased!  in all these coins someone stands to gain at the expense of others loss.  So does that qualify as a scam???

[TPTB_need_war]

My prior analysis of Synereo is linked from the following thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1361721.0

One excerpt:

Now that I have basically digested the Synereo white paper (not all the math formalisms are understood in minute detail which will require some more time for study, but I get the overall concept), I want to write down some of my thoughts about Synereo's design and in the context of how I am thinking about priorities for any major paradigmatic shift in social networks.

1. Per the post upthread where I elaborated, I do not think the attention model of a social network can be tied to Synereo's crypto currency AMPs, nor should it, nor will that be compatible with allowing each user to choose their own attention model. There may be a use for crypto currency in social networking but it is not to hard code an attention model for what is supposed to be an individual user choice paradigm for a social network. I suppose instead Synereo could offer their attention model as one of the variants users can choose, but I think it will be a failure for the reasons I stated upthread. I think we will need free market competition between attention models in order to find out what works well and what doesn't. Also I think this means we can't assume nodes obey some global process calculus.

2. Users will not run a social network hosted from their own decentralized home computers ephemerally connected by asymmetric bandwidth ISPs as is the initial planned focus on Synereo. Fugetaboutit. They will signup quickly (and/or download the mobile app) just like Facebook or any other mainstream social network. Thus they will have their data and nodes hosted and thus just fugetaboutit this nonsense about censorship resistance in the white paper, except perhaps in terms of encrypted sharing (but later the government will demand a global decryption key as they have for streaming encrypted voice and video communications in the USA, Uk and rest of the 5 Eyes countries). See my prior post upthread for where I think this political-economic battle over private rights is headed.

3. ...

[TPTB_need_war]

Rimbit

premined 100%

Perfect name for the perfect scam.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=rim-licker

[TPTB_need_war]

I added Rimbit to the poll. The poll already has 141 votes, so the relative Rimbit percentage must be rebased accordingly (especially since voters can't change their prior votes unless I reset vote count to 0).

Please consider adding Marcelo Karlsson. He has scammed $150,000+ from potential Bitcoin investors by lying about Rimbit versus Bitcoin+other CCs, lying about his intentions+plans for Rimbit, and selling illegal and prohibited Perks on Indiegogo.

INDIEGOGO - The best place to get your Rimbit - Get it now while it's easily affordable - Your Choice - Click Here

I have reported to Indiegogo your illegal selling of investments as Perks.

You are violating their policies as well ostensibly selling illegal unregistered investment securities to USA investors.

Indiegogo has replied:

Hi there,

Thank you for sharing your concern with us. At this time, the campaign is under review to ensure that it adheres to our Terms of Use (http://www.indiegogo.com/about/terms). We will follow up with you if we have any further questions.

So what happens now? We will include the information you have provided along with all other information at our disposal in our review of the campaign. In some cases, we will contact the campaign owner to have them edit their campaign and it will remain on our platform. If the project doesn't follow our rules, we may remove the campaign. We may also restrict the campaign owner's future activities on Indiegogo.

To protect our users' privacy, we're unable to share the action we take. At Indiegogo, we take the trust and safety of our community very seriously, and we greatly appreciate your patience and understanding throughout this review process. To learn more about Indiegogo’s Trust & Safety effort, please visit: www.indiegogo.com/trust

Please note that you do not need to contact us again. Doing so would create a new ticket and prolong the process. Thank you again for taking the time to get in touch with us and for helping to keep Indiegogo a safe and secure platform.

I replied in email:

In addition to numerous instances in the comments and write up on the Indiegogo campaign of Rimbit promoting the future rise in value of the Rimbit tokens it is selling on Indiegogo, there is also this additional evidence on Bitcointalk.org (the prominent crypto currency speculation forum):

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1417914.msg14373357#msg14373357

Rimbit is clearly in violation:

Prohibited Perks

Campaign Owners are not permitted to offer or provide any of the following as a Perk:

• any form of "security" (as such term is defined in the Securities Act of 1933);
• any form of financial incentive or participation in any profit sharing;

Also Rimbit lies on its Indiegogo page:

We took our Inspiration from Apple!

Rimbit does exactly the same things as Bitcoin, but in such a way that it has removed all the complication, industrialization and centralization

We removed all the junk associated with Bitcoin

As Bitcoin is now starting to fail due to mining, will you have Rimbit, the most logical Champion to Bitcoin that has been built to last forever.

It is the only currency that has a future that can be passed down through Generations!

Bitcoin gained in value over the years, can Rimbit do the same?

Bitcoin went from nothing to over $300 plus [...]

The same can be said about Rimbit, so all it takes to make Rimbit soar, is for everyone to promote Rimbit around the world. The more people doing that, the quicker it will grow and the higher value it will get.

For example, Etherium has skyrocketed to $13 in a year and that is all due to its community getting behind the coin.

The answer is again a matter of being Simple.

We want to keep all of Rimbit out of Corporate hands, so we dont end up like Bitcoin.

Compare what Rimbit writes here in this forum:

We are now discussing getting some Corporate Investors to take Rimbit to the next level.

Some of the features Rimbit does have are:

• Premine - No guessing the future as all coins are available for the consumer

First option was to give it away.
This did nothing for the value, nor did it help develop the coin, even though we do admire people working to create free software, but also knowing these people have bills to pay

The second option was to premine 100%, an option that we didnt want to do, due to public opinion, but we did want to do, because it solved many issues surrounding crypto.
We could pay for developers, staff and services needed to run a coin
We could setup a system that when the community started to increase in numbers, that the community could start taking over the daily operation of Rimbit and get paid to do it as we slowly started taking a backseat to the community, thereby moving it from full centralization to a community group managed decentralized coin.

[...]

We dont believe we need any whizzbang features, because Rimbit is built just to be a simple currency

But, as we decided to take the big chance of going against everything Crypto by doing what we did, We knew that there would be an inherent dislike

[...]

Rimbit's shareholders are its members

Not to mention they are lying about being the first to sell an ICO, do proof-of-stake, and to use stake to do governance voting. Bitshares and Nxt already do this.

I caught Rimbit changing the title of their Indiegogo campaign, ostensibly to hide the fact they were just scamming on the jealousy emotions of speculators:

This is Google's cache of https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/we-are-the-future-for-crypto-currency. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 3 Feb 2016 12:57:45 GMT.

Missed out on Bitcoin - Here is your Second Chance

The current campaign title is:

Revolutionary and Established Digital Currency