Why premined altcoins are considered scam-coin?

[WaffleMaster]

there is no such monster as a scam coin. People call them scams because they have no patience and cant wait to see how the coin develops.

There are definitely coins made just for the sole purpose of the devs to offload as much as possible on people and then ditch the coin...ICO scams used to be a big problem but now generally escrow is the only way to do an ICO because of all the scammers . There is some meme of one guy getting BTC60 and then laughing at all the people he scammed with his fake coin.

[Dajackal]

there is no such monster as a scam coin. People call them scams because they have no patience and cant wait to see how the coin develops.

There are definitely coins made just for the sole purpose of the devs to offload as much as possible on people and then ditch the coin...ICO scams used to be a big problem but now generally escrow is the only way to do an ICO because of all the scammers . There is some meme of one guy getting BTC60 and then laughing at all the people he scammed with his fake coin.

That meme is priceless. Ive seen it say way more then 60 btc. Back in the day that dude made his rounds on many a thread.

[gustav]

He scammed 167btc with a presale on that coin, then posted pictures of him spending the money. That one was pricelss. lol

[Cyaren]

Because the founders will be pretty much in control of the market, and when they decide to get out of the coin, the market will crash and therefore the coin is dead and nobody will ever use it.

Especially the coins which adds nothing to the crypto scene. They are the shittiest of the shitcoins.

[ArticMine]

...

With all the respect but FinCEN can kiss my ass. Cryptocurrencies don't need government bullshit of any sort but a fair system that can work to exchange services and commodities at service of people in the real world.

Which is a perfectly valid reason to avoid a pre-mine, and the government entanglements it brings.

[Sniper44]

because of thee dangers they are having!
when you invest in an altcoin the only thing that you care about is the profit and the future that it goes up in a pump.
but when there is a huge premine like eth or many other coins there is always a big risk that the premine owners will dump their coins on the market to get out and crash the price again like eth

[bathrobehero]

If I start to annunce the currency as public and put all these premined coins in a reserve wallet that cannot be used by me but is used by a service where each user can get freely a fixed amount of these coins. This would be way more fair than let all the monetary base to strongest miners and there are tons of technological way to avoid that developers or greedy people can scam other users using multiple account getting more coins that allowed.

You are completely out of touch with crypto.

Every single free distribution model can be (and is being) exploited and that is a fact. This is why we have a such a difficult and safe way of creating new coins called proof of work.

And as I said earlier, there's no such thing as all coins going to superminers. Every element of the market gets just as much coins as they invest in either electricity and mining time or BTC (buying on exchange).
There's no "few powerful miners controlling all", everyone has a fair chance to buy mining equipment and use it. You're argument is like saying some people have more money to invest so crypto is unfair.
In essence, your superminer argument is short sighted and even childish.

if u knew how many pow coins are scams, only the tehcnology matters. some miners are pissed they cant instamine with botnets anymore thats all.

You do realize it's not 2012 anymore, right? CPU mining is long dead.

[ArticMine]

...

You do realize it's not 2012 anymore, right? CPU mining is long dead.

This is news to me. I have found blocks using a CPU in 2016.

[MicroGuy]

I have noticed that the community pay much attention to the fact a coin is premined but i haven't clearly understand the reason why this is necessarly evil.

Satoshi Nakamoto premined over 1,000,000 bitcoins, but you'll NEVER read that on Coindesk. lol

The value (pure and simple) of any cryptocurrency is in its network effect. Focus on network effect and forget about these silly notions.

~~

[gustav]

I have noticed that the community pay much attention to the fact a coin is premined but i haven't clearly understand the reason why this is necessarly evil.

Satoshi Nakamoto premined over 1,000,000 bitcoins, but you'll NEVER read that on Coindesk. lol

The value (pure and simple) of any cryptocurrency is in its network effect. Focus on network effect and forget about these silly notions.

~~

btc wasn't premined. It was just stealthlaunched and ninjamined on very low difficulty.

[WaffleMaster]

He scammed 167btc with a presale on that coin, then posted pictures of him spending the money. That one was pricelss. lol

LOL yes this is the meme picture that was posted by the scammer with a big red 167 Bitcoin below it. So priceless one of the biggest scams in the history on here I think!

[gustav]

He scammed 167btc with a presale on that coin, then posted pictures of him spending the money. That one was pricelss. lol

LOL yes this is the meme picture that was posted by the scammer with a big red 167 Bitcoin below it. So priceless one of the biggest scams in the history on here I think!

Not even close to the biggest scam. Just the most bold one in the aftermath.
I think the biggest proven scam so far was paycoin with his 150 million marketcap, right?

Also several potential scamcoins are still on high value on CMC.

[WaffleMaster]

Not even close to the biggest scam. Just the most bold one in the aftermath.
I think the biggest proven scam so far was paycoin with his 150 million marketcap, right?

Also several potential scamcoins are still on high value on CMC.

Well, yes I was monitoring Paycoin every step of the way. I almost actually got into it as an investment funny enough. As for the profits I'm sure they made off with more than 167 Bitcoin but we can't really know for sure. The marketcap can be 1 trillion for all I care and if nobody is buying it in volume that market cap means nothing lol

[AndreaF]

If I start to annunce the currency as public and put all these premined coins in a reserve wallet that cannot be used by me but is used by a service where each user can get freely a fixed amount of these coins. This would be way more fair than let all the monetary base to strongest miners and there are tons of technological way to avoid that developers or greedy people can scam other users using multiple account getting more coins that allowed.

You are completely out of touch with crypto.

Every single free distribution model can be (and is being) exploited and that is a fact. This is why we have a such a difficult and safe way of creating new coins called proof of work.

And as I said earlier, there's no such thing as all coins going to superminers. Every element of the market gets just as much coins as they invest in either electricity and mining time or BTC (buying on exchange).
There's no "few powerful miners controlling all", everyone has a fair chance to buy mining equipment and use it. You're argument is like saying some people have more money to invest so crypto is unfair.
In essence, your superminer argument is short sighted and even childish.

if u knew how many pow coins are scams, only the tehcnology matters. some miners are pissed they cant instamine with botnets anymore thats all.

You do realize it's not 2012 anymore, right? CPU mining is long dead.

You try to negate the reality.

1) It's a FACT that few people can get access to ultra-powerful hash miners
Most of people CANNOT invest tons of money in superminer for speculation, I have a high end home PC pretty expensive and if I compare ,u hashrate to top miners of most popular pools its power i light years distant not even in the same universe.

2) The concept of miners contribute to the currency has sense when the hash power is proportional to the blockchains needs, if there is overmining speculation becames a way to grab as much coins as possible. This concept is very easy to understand. There is monstrous power used in most popular coins mining for few transactions. So say that is only a meritocratic reward is bullshit, It's a gredy game for who has most power.

3) Is for you is fair that few richest people that can affort mining cloud controls most of the money, you have to consider fair also that original developers control most of the coins. To me fairness means a proportional distribution among people... According to you isn't clear what means and what is the "merit concept".

[gustav]

You try to negate the reality.

1) It's a FACT that few people can get access to ultra-powerful hash miners
Most of people CANNOT invest tons of money in superminer for speculation, I have a high end home PC pretty expensive and if I compare ,u hashrate to top miners of most popular pools its power i light years distant not even in the same universe.

2) The concept of miners contribute to the currency has sense when the hash power is proportional to the blockchains needs, if there is overmining speculation becames a way to grab as much coins as possible. This concept is very easy to understand. There is monstrous power used in most popular coins mining for few transactions. So say that is only a meritocratic reward is bullshit, It's a gredy game for who has most power.

3) Is for you is fair that few richest people that can affort mining cloud controls most of the money, you have to consider fair also that original developers control most of the coins. To me fairness means a proportional distribution among people... According to you isn't clear what means and what is the "merit concept".

Can you tell me why the next person should pay money for a coin that you got for free? Is that fair for the person that buys that coin from you later? Please explain.

[bathrobehero]

...

You do realize it's not 2012 anymore, right? CPU mining is long dead.

This is news to me. I have found blocks using a CPU in 2016.

Sure, but CPU mining is irrelevant next to GPU and ASIC mining.

You try to negate the reality.

1) It's a FACT that few people can get access to ultra-powerful hash miners
Most of people CANNOT invest tons of money in superminer for speculation, I have a high end home PC pretty expensive and if I compare ,u hashrate to top miners of most popular pools its power i light years distant not even in the same universe.

2) The concept of miners contribute to the currency has sense when the hash power is proportional to the blockchains needs, if there is overmining speculation becames a way to grab as much coins as possible. This concept is very easy to understand. There is monstrous power used in most popular coins mining for few transactions. So say that is only a meritocratic reward is bullshit, It's a gredy game for who has most power.

3) Is for you is fair that few richest people that can affort mining cloud controls most of the money, you have to consider fair also that original developers control most of the coins. To me fairness means a proportional distribution among people... According to you isn't clear what means and what is the "merit concept".

Fair means everybody can mine it not that everybody gets the same amount. What you're talking about is socialism.

You basically have an issue with everyone who invests more than you do while you could invest as much money as you have and become a superminer yourself.

[BitcoinHodler]

premined altcoins are bad or even bad enough to be considered as scam coins because it gives control over the altcoin to a few people who own the premined coins so they can swing the price as they see fit and be sure that the price will always swing in their favor not the rest of us as investors.

[AndreaF]

You try to negate the reality.

1) It's a FACT that few people can get access to ultra-powerful hash miners
Most of people CANNOT invest tons of money in superminer for speculation, I have a high end home PC pretty expensive and if I compare ,u hashrate to top miners of most popular pools its power i light years distant not even in the same universe.

2) The concept of miners contribute to the currency has sense when the hash power is proportional to the blockchains needs, if there is overmining speculation becames a way to grab as much coins as possible. This concept is very easy to understand. There is monstrous power used in most popular coins mining for few transactions. So say that is only a meritocratic reward is bullshit, It's a gredy game for who has most power.

3) Is for you is fair that few richest people that can affort mining cloud controls most of the money, you have to consider fair also that original developers control most of the coins. To me fairness means a proportional distribution among people... According to you isn't clear what means and what is the "merit concept".

Can you tell me why the next person should pay money for a coin that you got for free? Is that fair for the person that buys that coin from you later? Please explain.

WOW you haven't understand anything of what I have said. If someone create a fair distribution of premined coins obviously this distribution must be FREE so this fair distribution can be the kickstart to create a fair virtual monetary system for all people. This is what I'm saying.

- If developers premine all monetary base and sell to other users is UNFAIR since the developers get the control of the monetary supply
- If developers doesn't premine and the mining is based only on hash power, this is also UNFAIR, since the big companies that can use server farms to mine the coins take the control of the monetary supply.

[gustav]

You didn't answer the question where a coin that was issued for totally free derives its value from and why anyone would ever pay money for it or why it would be fair to take money for something you received for free. Please answer that question.

Also you seem to be unable to understand that even if the coin is distributed for free it can be a scam.
Also there is no such thing as a fair central distribution.

Maybe you would want to send privatekeys in the mail to 6 billion citizens of the world for free, maybe then i'd be interested but i doubt you can raise the funds to do that.

To me you make the impression of someone who's testing the waters for their next premine-coin. Save yourself the headache. It's not gonna fly.

[AndreaF]

You didn't answer the question where a coin that was issued for totally free derives its value from and why anyone would ever pay money for it or why it would be fair to take money for something you received for free. Please answer that question.

Also you seem to be unable to understand that even if the coin is distributed for free it can be a scam.
Also there is no such thing as a fair central distribution.

Maybe you would want to send privatekeys in the mail to 6 billion citizens of the world for free, maybe then i'd be interested but i doubt you can raise the funds to do that.

To me you make the impression of someone who's testing the waters for their next premine-coin. Save yourself the headache. It's not gonna fly.

Trust is what gives values to a virtual currency or any currency that isn't based to a physical commodity and is based on how considered fair is the system. If people accept that the system can work and is fair. If the monetary system is democratic and accepted. Where is the scam? If someone not accept the system nobody force him to exchange services for cryptocurrencies.
  
Dollars are paper that worth only some cent, but people accept their value so you can use them to buy.
This would be a system way more fair if developed correctly.