[ANN] ION [ION] | POS 3.0 | Mobile Gaming | Join the ionomy today!

[WildShark]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test".. 

[altheshort]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

[synthgauge]

Nice to have a stake in ION. I was wondering how much money is needed to push ion price up 100 fold therefore making everyone yell like an angry big-assed kid. I wager nobody of u has seen 100x pump in crypto thus far, why not change the history and propel a random bitchcoin to 600 bux. I know, seeing ion trading on parity with btc will make u quote this post.

[WildShark]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

I don't see a problem with giving the testers access to their Ionomy account. The Ionomy account with ION & Electrons are  needed to play the games. The game testing group remains in a separate private room hidden to the public..

I'm in favor of having a larger amount of testers for each Ionomy product...

What Ionomy resource were you planning on withholding so the investor can be "honest"? turning off the right to use the Atom auction?

[altheshort]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

I don't see a problem with giving the testers access to their Ionomy account. The Ionomy account with ION & Electrons are  needed to play the games. The game testing group remains in a separate private room hidden to the public..

I'm in favor of having a larger amount of testers for each Ionomy product...

What Ionomy resource were you planning on withholding so the investor can be "honest"? turning off the right to use the Atom auction?

Look, I'm trying very hard to have an actual discussion with you here where others may have just gone 'sod it' instead. I've already said that the minutae of the implementation doesn't really matter since this is all hypothetical anyway, so don't try and switch the conversation on to inane questions about which resource I would 'withhold', or whether testers should work under the same agreement.

One last time, then: my point is that the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle would be of benefit. Do you agree with this? If not, why not?

[CryptoBuds]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

I don't see a problem with giving the testers access to their Ionomy account. The Ionomy account with ION & Electrons are  needed to play the games. The game testing group remains in a separate private room hidden to the public..

I'm in favor of having a larger amount of testers for each Ionomy product...

What Ionomy resource were you planning on withholding so the investor can be "honest"? turning off the right to use the Atom auction?

You are an incompetent moron. Learn to read and address the points that were brought up.

You do realize that potential investors visit this thread. They will know ou are a whale. You alone probably stopped several people from investing in ION. For a whale that represents a crypto coin, you are quite sad. You can't even answer simple questions. They see you are the type of person that influences the coin and they steer waaaaaaaaaay clear. You sir are damaging your own investment either through your stupidity or the fact you think it's funny. Either way it's your money YOU ARE messing with.

[owlcatz]

You are an incompetent moron. Learn to read and address the points that were brought up.

You do realize that potential investors visit this thread. They will know ou are a whale. You alone probably stopped several people from investing in ION. For a whale that represents a crypto coin, you are quite sad. You can't even answer simple questions. They see you are the type of person that influences the coin and they steer waaaaaaaaaay clear. You sir are damaging your own investment either through your stupidity or the fact you think it's funny. Either way it's your money YOU ARE messing with.

When I first saw his website, it stopped me from buying 10k worth of IONS.... (Ok, not really, but I certainly realized what a joke he was after all)!

[cybernetik7]

Great looking site. I'm not sure how I can buy without an account though, as your site says. Do I download wallet, fund wallet and get ION?

[korvas128]

Great looking site. I'm not sure how I can buy without an account though, as your site says. Do I download wallet, fund wallet and get ION?

You can buy ion from https://bittrex.com/Market/Index?MarketName=BTC-ION 

[suchmoon]

the possibility that one of the whales may, at some point, choose to act on said information for their own financial gain and to the detriment of smaller holders.  

This. Insider trading is a crime not because the SEC may jail you for it, it's the other way around - you go to jail because it's a crime. So even if the SEC doesn't regulate crypto (yet; the great works of Garza et al may change that) this doesn't mean insider trading in crypto is a good thing. If anything - crypto bagholders should be more vigilant for that sort of shit because the Big Brother isn't likely to police it for them.

Great looking site. I'm not sure how I can buy without an account though, as your site says. Do I download wallet, fund wallet and get ION?

You can buy ion from https://bittrex.com/Market/Index?MarketName=BTC-ION  

Perfect example of a so-called whale being unable to comprehend and/or answer a simple question

[korvas128]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

I don't see a problem with giving the testers access to their Ionomy account. The Ionomy account with ION & Electrons are  needed to play the games. The game testing group remains in a separate private room hidden to the public..

I'm in favor of having a larger amount of testers for each Ionomy product...

What Ionomy resource were you planning on withholding so the investor can be "honest"? turning off the right to use the Atom auction?

Look, I'm trying very hard to have an actual discussion with you here where others may have just gone 'fuck it' instead. I've already said that the minutae of the implementation doesn't really matter since this is all hypothetical anyway, so don't try and switch the conversation on to inane questions about which resource I would 'withhold', or whether testers should work under the same agreement.

One last time, then: my point is that the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle would be of benefit. Do you agree with this? If not, why not?

In theory what your suggesting makes sense nothing wrong with a bit of self regulation especially if your a long term bag holder like me

The problem though is implementation and how it would be police'd.

Today and in the short-term this for me is not a problem because as the market continues to grow it kinda self regulates.

For instance if a whale decides to take a massive dump today I'm certain the volume of ION or ATOMs would get snapped up and that whale would then have problems trying to buy back in. Or if the whale decides to buy big-time then the price increases which is something that benefits everybody.

[altheshort]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

I don't see a problem with giving the testers access to their Ionomy account. The Ionomy account with ION & Electrons are  needed to play the games. The game testing group remains in a separate private room hidden to the public..

I'm in favor of having a larger amount of testers for each Ionomy product...

What Ionomy resource were you planning on withholding so the investor can be "honest"? turning off the right to use the Atom auction?

Look, I'm trying very hard to have an actual discussion with you here where others may have just gone 'fuck it' instead. I've already said that the minutae of the implementation doesn't really matter since this is all hypothetical anyway, so don't try and switch the conversation on to inane questions about which resource I would 'withhold', or whether testers should work under the same agreement.

One last time, then: my point is that the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle would be of benefit. Do you agree with this? If not, why not?

In theory what your suggesting makes sense nothing wrong with a bit of self regulation especially if your a long term bag holder like me

The problem though is implementation and how it would be police'd.

Today and in the short-term this for me is not a problem because as the market continues to grow it kinda self regulates.

For instance if a whale decides to take a massive dump today I'm certain the volume of ION or ATOMs would get snapped up and that whale would then have problems trying to buy back in. Or if the whale decides to buy big-time then the price increases which is something that benefits everybody.

Thanks for answering, even though the question was primarily aimed at sharky. I appreciate that, irrespective of whether I agree with you or not.

[CryptoBuds]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

I don't see a problem with giving the testers access to their Ionomy account. The Ionomy account with ION & Electrons are  needed to play the games. The game testing group remains in a separate private room hidden to the public..

I'm in favor of having a larger amount of testers for each Ionomy product...

What Ionomy resource were you planning on withholding so the investor can be "honest"? turning off the right to use the Atom auction?

Look, I'm trying very hard to have an actual discussion with you here where others may have just gone 'fuck it' instead. I've already said that the minutae of the implementation doesn't really matter since this is all hypothetical anyway, so don't try and switch the conversation on to inane questions about which resource I would 'withhold', or whether testers should work under the same agreement.

One last time, then: my point is that the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle would be of benefit. Do you agree with this? If not, why not?

In theory what your suggesting makes sense nothing wrong with a bit of self regulation especially if your a long term bag holder like me

The problem though is implementation and how it would be police'd.

Today and in the short-term this for me is not a problem because as the market continues to grow it kinda self regulates.

For instance if a whale decides to take a massive dump today I'm certain the volume of ION or ATOMs would get snapped up and that whale would then have problems trying to buy back in. Or if the whale decides to buy big-time then the price increases which is something that benefits everybody.

Maybe you don't have to hold their coins and assets hostage. Maybe while they are receiving whale priveleges they are frozen from trading on the exchanges. Not quite sure how that would work out, but it's a thought to help take the worry out of the whale advantage.

[WildShark]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

I don't see a problem with giving the testers access to their Ionomy account. The Ionomy account with ION & Electrons are  needed to play the games. The game testing group remains in a separate private room hidden to the public..

I'm in favor of having a larger amount of testers for each Ionomy product...

What Ionomy resource were you planning on withholding so the investor can be "honest"? turning off the right to use the Atom auction?

Look, I'm trying very hard to have an actual discussion with you here where others may have just gone 'fuck it' instead. I've already said that the minutae of the implementation doesn't really matter since this is all hypothetical anyway, so don't try and switch the conversation on to inane questions about which resource I would 'withhold', or whether testers should work under the same agreement.

One last time, then: my point is that the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle would be of benefit. Do you agree with this? If not, why not?

In theory what your suggesting makes sense nothing wrong with a bit of self regulation especially if your a long term bag holder like me

The problem though is implementation and how it would be police'd.

Today and in the short-term this for me is not a problem because as the market continues to grow it kinda self regulates.

For instance if a whale decides to take a massive dump today I'm certain the volume of ION or ATOMs would get snapped up and that whale would then have problems trying to buy back in. Or if the whale decides to buy big-time then the price increases which is something that benefits everybody.

Maybe you don't have to hold their coins and assets hostage. Maybe while they are receiving whale priveleges they are frozen from trading on the exchanges. Not quite sure how that would work out, but it's a thought to help take the worry out of the whale advantage.

@CryptoBuds Which exchange??  I like to also hear more about "taking the worry out of the whale advantage"

[altheshort]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

I don't see a problem with giving the testers access to their Ionomy account. The Ionomy account with ION & Electrons are  needed to play the games. The game testing group remains in a separate private room hidden to the public..

I'm in favor of having a larger amount of testers for each Ionomy product...

What Ionomy resource were you planning on withholding so the investor can be "honest"? turning off the right to use the Atom auction?

Look, I'm trying very hard to have an actual discussion with you here where others may have just gone 'fuck it' instead. I've already said that the minutae of the implementation doesn't really matter since this is all hypothetical anyway, so don't try and switch the conversation on to inane questions about which resource I would 'withhold', or whether testers should work under the same agreement.

One last time, then: my point is that the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle would be of benefit. Do you agree with this? If not, why not?

In theory what your suggesting makes sense nothing wrong with a bit of self regulation especially if your a long term bag holder like me

The problem though is implementation and how it would be police'd.

Today and in the short-term this for me is not a problem because as the market continues to grow it kinda self regulates.

For instance if a whale decides to take a massive dump today I'm certain the volume of ION or ATOMs would get snapped up and that whale would then have problems trying to buy back in. Or if the whale decides to buy big-time then the price increases which is something that benefits everybody.

Maybe you don't have to hold their coins and assets hostage. Maybe while they are receiving whale priveleges they are frozen from trading on the exchanges. Not quite sure how that would work out, but it's a thought to help take the worry out of the whale advantage.

@CryptoBuds Which exchange??  I like to also hear more about "taking the worry out of the whale advantage"

Oh, hi sharky. Welcome back. Since your memory seems to be playing up, taking the worry out of the whale advantage is what we've been discussing for the last 48 hours or so. If you re-read the posts above that should bring you nicely up to speed.

[CryptoBuds]

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products?

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service  does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test"..  

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.

I don't see a problem with giving the testers access to their Ionomy account. The Ionomy account with ION & Electrons are  needed to play the games. The game testing group remains in a separate private room hidden to the public..

I'm in favor of having a larger amount of testers for each Ionomy product...

What Ionomy resource were you planning on withholding so the investor can be "honest"? turning off the right to use the Atom auction?

Look, I'm trying very hard to have an actual discussion with you here where others may have just gone 'fuck it' instead. I've already said that the minutae of the implementation doesn't really matter since this is all hypothetical anyway, so don't try and switch the conversation on to inane questions about which resource I would 'withhold', or whether testers should work under the same agreement.

One last time, then: my point is that the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle would be of benefit. Do you agree with this? If not, why not?

In theory what your suggesting makes sense nothing wrong with a bit of self regulation especially if your a long term bag holder like me

The problem though is implementation and how it would be police'd.

Today and in the short-term this for me is not a problem because as the market continues to grow it kinda self regulates.

For instance if a whale decides to take a massive dump today I'm certain the volume of ION or ATOMs would get snapped up and that whale would then have problems trying to buy back in. Or if the whale decides to buy big-time then the price increases which is something that benefits everybody.

Maybe you don't have to hold their coins and assets hostage. Maybe while they are receiving whale priveleges they are frozen from trading on the exchanges. Not quite sure how that would work out, but it's a thought to help take the worry out of the whale advantage.

@CryptoBuds Which exchange??  I like to also hear more about "taking the worry out of the whale advantage"

You're literally too ignorant to have a conversation with. You NEVER understand the point of what is being said and respond with something so far off the mark it's laughable, every single time.

Like alltheshort said, read back the last few pages. Believe it or not, YOU were involved in the conversation. Did you forget already?

[altheshort]

Like alltheshort said, read back the last few pages. Believe it or not, YOU were involved in the conversation. Did you forget already?

Well, describing sharky as involved in the conversation may be stretching it.

I do like to try and follow the conversation here, but can you guys start chopping off the walls of text a bit? Thanks!

Yeah, sorry about that. I've been travelling a lot the last couple of days so most of my posts have been from my cellphone when I can't be arsed to fish my laptop out -- I guess I get a bit lazy and editing quotes on a cellphone on here is a pain. I'll try and keep it concise in the future.

[owlcatz]

I do like to try and follow the conversation here, but can you guys start chopping off the walls of text a bit? Thanks!

Yeah, sorry about that. I've been travelling a lot the last couple of days so most of my posts have been from my cellphone when I can't be arsed to fish my laptop out -- I guess I get a bit lazy and editing quotes on a cellphone on here is a pain. I'll try and keep it concise in the future.

no problem man, I do appreciate your comments, was just trying to keep it a bit less cluttered... Best luck on the travel!

[kashish948]

Was this an ICO?

[owlcatz]

Was this an ICO?

i don't think so but it's a "spinoff" from XPY ex-devs afaik, so ..... yeah....