[ANN] RoyalCoin - ROYAL

[kahaiwro]

ahahah free workers on the net.... great job

[pikkie]

ahahah free workers on the net.... great job

no bounty hunter here, but free translate services 

[kaicrypzen]

BTW. C-cex already Added the Coin to its Exchange. I don't think there is any Concern Remains.

Sorry but I think all the concerns remain. On the first thread run by doctor877, I wrote this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1639634.msg16524681#msg16524681:

In my opinion, this coin being listed on c-cex, the dev (or their representatives) having contacted c-cex (or not), c-cex approving the code, the dev being somehow renowed, the address having 50, 100 or 1000 BTC seem all irrelevant to establish trust within the community.

To me, what seems relevant is:
- A reputable escrow (even though it seems projects turned out to be scams even with that).
- A code base (a github account).
- A technical (white) paper.

For the time being, none of what I mentioned above seem to be satisfied (please correct me if I missed something).

Here are examples of recent crowdsales on c-cex:
https://c-cex.com/?p=xmo-btc
https://c-cex.com/?p=ncl-btc

(Check the sell orders and draw your own conclusions.)

I am not saying this project will turn out like those ... These are just examples of projects that lacked escrow, code and a technical paper.

Can you please address my concerns?

By the way we didn't get any statement from doctor877 about what really happened, moreover you have a trust feedback that says:

This UID has been bought and sold a number of times, you should do due diligence if considering trading as it may not be with the same person you previously did business with. (ie Alt of bazar165g u=316318 on 03 April 2016, 18:29:58)

[szafa]

C-cex already listed royalcoin https://c-cex.com/?p=royal-btc price funny.

[Ardenyham]

BTW. C-cex already Added the Coin to its Exchange. I don't think there is any Concern Remains.

Sorry but I think all the concerns remain. On the first thread run by doctor877, I wrote this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1639634.msg16524681#msg16524681:

In my opinion, this coin being listed on c-cex, the dev (or their representatives) having contacted c-cex (or not), c-cex approving the code, the dev being somehow renowed, the address having 50, 100 or 1000 BTC seem all irrelevant to establish trust within the community.

To me, what seems relevant is:
- A reputable escrow (even though it seems projects turned out to be scams even with that).
- A code base (a github account).
- A technical (white) paper.

For the time being, none of what I mentioned above seem to be satisfied (please correct me if I missed something).

Here are examples of recent crowdsales on c-cex:
https://c-cex.com/?p=xmo-btc
https://c-cex.com/?p=ncl-btc

(Check the sell orders and draw your own conclusions.)

I am not saying this project will turn out like those ... These are just examples of projects that lacked escrow, code and a technical paper.

Can you please address my concerns?

By the way we didn't get any statement from doctor877 about what really happened, moreover you have a trust feedback that says:

This UID has been bought and sold a number of times, you should do due diligence if considering trading as it may not be with the same person you previously did business with. (ie Alt of bazar165g u=316318 on 03 April 2016, 18:29:58)

About the Escrow. I want to say the ICO is done (as I said in the OP). and the coin is in Exchange now.. so there is no sense in doing escrow anymore.

about the Source codes and white papter, I'll ask the Devs and update the OP. they must have the source codes... (as I said I've been hired as a community manager. I am not fully updated with that)


and about my Trust feedback. I would ask you to read my feedback also(I've return to that guy). that feedback giving with a fake false reference and there is nothing truth about that.

Edit:
Soruce code: https://github.com/royalnath/Royal

it is already in the OP.

[kevin1234a]

[ParmaBTC]

BTW. C-cex already Added the Coin to its Exchange. I don't think there is any Concern Remains.

Sorry but I think all the concerns remain. On the first thread run by doctor877, I wrote this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1639634.msg16524681#msg16524681:

In my opinion, this coin being listed on c-cex, the dev (or their representatives) having contacted c-cex (or not), c-cex approving the code, the dev being somehow renowed, the address having 50, 100 or 1000 BTC seem all irrelevant to establish trust within the community.

To me, what seems relevant is:
- A reputable escrow (even though it seems projects turned out to be scams even with that).
- A code base (a github account).
- A technical (white) paper.

For the time being, none of what I mentioned above seem to be satisfied (please correct me if I missed something).

Here are examples of recent crowdsales on c-cex:
https://c-cex.com/?p=xmo-btc
https://c-cex.com/?p=ncl-btc

(Check the sell orders and draw your own conclusions.)

I am not saying this project will turn out like those ... These are just examples of projects that lacked escrow, code and a technical paper.

Can you please address my concerns?

By the way we didn't get any statement from doctor877 about what really happened, moreover you have a trust feedback that says:

This UID has been bought and sold a number of times, you should do due diligence if considering trading as it may not be with the same person you previously did business with. (ie Alt of bazar165g u=316318 on 03 April 2016, 18:29:58)

About the Escrow. I want to say the ICO is done (as I said in the OP). and the coin is in Exchange now.. so there is no sense in doing escrow anymore.

about the Source codes and white papter, I'll ask the Devs and update the OP. they must have the source codes... (as I said I've been hired as a community manager. I am not fully updated with that)


and about my Trust feedback. I would ask you to read my feedback also(I've return to that guy). that feedback giving with a fake false reference and there is nothing truth about that.

Edit:
Soruce code: https://github.com/royalnath/Royal

it is already in the OP.

Code:

<---Start Signature--->
I am Ardenyham Owner of this account from Bitcointalk and today's date is 14/10/2016
<---Address--->
1JVsG2jbFjteiRgLS9Svjw9UMK33xVTkKd
<---Signature--->
Hz8EqM/R5EO92Y7g2eC4mKhyKuUdfEHd31LPnPLApIRAcYotoCeBYtRe8+lqmgcp91ur9ldWbJzAJMyVOtDuUrU=
<---Signature End--->

http://www.coinig.com/?adr=1JVsG2jbFjteiRgLS9Svjw9UMK33xVTkKd&msg=I+am+Ardenyham+Owner+of+this+account+from+Bitcointalk+and+today%27s+date+is+14%2F10%2F2016&sig=Hz8EqM%2FR5EO92Y7g2eC4mKhyKuUdfEHd31LPnPLApIRAcYotoCeBYtRe8%2Blqmgcp91ur9ldWbJzAJMyVOtDuUrU%3D

so....   
could you sign a message from another address i found to be your?

15xmRfv9KxFqQdZf2bkXsWRGKDe6YtDwKT

thanks


I

If you want to clear all fakes here its very easy

sign a message from another address i found to be your?

15xmRfv9KxFqQdZf2bkXsWRGKDe6YtDwKT

If you do it there will be not doubt about you...

[Dassi]

@kevin1234a Nice picture...

I was thinking, what is the price and market volume of royal coin at present?

[spain cool]

EMIRG,SPORT,NCL,XMO, ROYAL I think it is the same person

[googlebtc]

X13 I thought was pretty good

[ParmaBTC]

X13 I thought was pretty good

nice post.... in line with your history....
thanks

[kaicrypzen]

About the Escrow. I want to say the ICO is done (as I said in the OP). and the coin is in Exchange now.. so there is no sense in doing escrow anymore.

Yes indeed ... Yet all those coins whose ICO was held on c-cex that plummet to 1 sat ... By the way what's up with the prices and the amounts? Did we get any numbers concerning the total supply or the ICO price?

about the Source codes and white papter, I'll ask the Devs and update the OP. they must have the source codes... (as I said I've been hired as a community manager. I am not fully updated with that)

Edit:
Soruce code: https://github.com/royalnath/Royal

it is already in the OP.

Sorry to say, but that source code looks more like a joke than anything else, all the bitcoin, novacoin, zerocoin, ppcoin related files that it contains were pushed 2 days ago, I doubt it was ever built. Some files still have other coins' names in them ....

I think you must have some faith in this coin for being its community manager. Let's say I am a potential investor, can you give me any reason to invest in it?

and about my Trust feedback. I would ask you to read my feedback also(I've return to that guy). that feedback giving with a fake false reference and there is nothing truth about that.

Yes, I was a bit hasty about that, sorry.

[Ardenyham]

I think you must have some faith in this coin for being its community manager. Let's say I am a potential investor, can you give me any reason to invest in it?

I am just getting paid for this job that's why I am doing this.
about the investment I would say Investment time is over. the coin is on trade now, this is Trading time now.
now you should see and follow the market, charts and walls, and maek your own discussion.

[kaicrypzen]

I am just getting paid for this job that's why I am doing this.

Well, if this turns out to be a scam, this'll give you some bad reputation. Maybe that's why doctor877 quit (got fired) (yet we don't know if they sold their account or what).

about the investment I would say Investment time is over. the coin is on trade now, this is Trading time now.
now you should see and follow the market, charts and walls, and maek your own discussion.

I may have used the wrong wording, what I meant by investing was buying ...

Given the facts and the lack of solid information, and unless some new information comes up and/or the devs make their case, I think this is a likely scam.

I am a bit confused though, I don't know if you deserve a negative feedback for being the community manager , you are (in a way) promoting it. I mean, given what we've discussed, don't you think this lacks basic trust foundation and has too many red flags for it to be legit?

(Of course if the account belongs to one of the scammers devs, my question is a nonsense )

[TillKoeln]

all the bitcoin, novacoin, zerocoin, ppcoin related files that it contains were pushed 2 days ago, I doubt it was ever built. Some files still have other coins' names in them ....

i would say, if this is your biggest Problem, then is everything fine.
if i remind correct LiteCoin & DogeCoin share the same Genesis hash

however lets start from the Scratch. :-)
you know blackcoin, NovaCoin,PeerCoin,LiteCoin,Bitcoin

-you find bitcoin inside for the case that every Coin is a simple BitcoinClone
-you find LiteCoin inside the SourceCode for the reason that it is build from Bitcoin
-you find NovaCoin inside the sourcecode for the reason that it is build from LiteCoin
-you find BlackCoin inside the sourcecode for the reason that it is build from NovaCoin  
-you find Peercoin inside the sourcecode for the reason that it is build from blackcoin.


aditional info .. you find in the Novacoin source still LTC remainings
- you find in the Blackcoin source still NVC and in the peercoin still BlackCoin


uhmmm so. ^^  i type so much text, that i forgot the reason for your Problem :-)
but yeah like i on the top allright said .. if this is the biggest/only Problem ..
then is everything fine.




kindly regards
Tillkoeln



edit: RoyalCoin has a Unique Genesishs hash ^^

very intresting post. i never knew that much. is that true?

just as an example ...
Blackcoin src. novacoin-x.pnghttps://github.com/rat4/blackcoin/blob/6117db58ce9f54166411bcc97bf57ad4b48dca66/src/qt/res/icons/novacoin-128.png
every wallet has the Copyright © 2009-2014 The Bitcoin developers ^^
on PeerCoin if you compile the mac Client-
 it Display on specific Icon size the black coin logo
and much more. ^^
the Novacoin makefile. from 2009 Display Bitcoin.exe instead of Novacoin.exe
https://github.com/novacoin-project/novacoin/blob/4405b78d6059e536c36974088a8ed4d9f0f29898/makefile.vc#L70
https://github.com/novacoin-project/novacoin/tree/4405b78d6059e536c36974088a8ed4d9f0f29898

kaicrypzen are you there ?

[Valdemar]

directly c-cex  , not bad

[innominatus]

all the bitcoin, novacoin, zerocoin, ppcoin related files that it contains were pushed 2 days ago, I doubt it was ever built. Some files still have other coins' names in them ....

i would say, if this is your biggest Problem, then is everything fine.
if i remind correct LiteCoin & DogeCoin share the same Genesis hash

however lets start from the Scratch. :-)
you know blackcoin, NovaCoin,PeerCoin,LiteCoin,Bitcoin

-you find bitcoin inside for the case that every Coin is a simple BitcoinClone
-you find LiteCoin inside the SourceCode for the reason that it is build from Bitcoin
-you find NovaCoin inside the sourcecode for the reason that it is build from LiteCoin
-you find BlackCoin inside the sourcecode for the reason that it is build from NovaCoin 
-you find Peercoin inside the sourcecode for the reason that it is build from blackcoin.


aditional info .. you find in the Novacoin source still LTC remainings
- you find in the Blackcoin source still NVC and in the peercoin still BlackCoin


uhmmm so. ^^  i type so much text, that i forgot the reason for your Problem :-)
but yeah like i on the top allright said .. if this is the biggest/only Problem ..
then is everything fine.




kindly regards
Tillkoeln



edit: RoyalCoin has a Unique Genesishs hash ^^

very intresting post. i never knew that much. is that true?

[PCindy]

I found old thread about Royalcoin, (SCAM detected) ...and now has handle with other id =D
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1639634.0

[jimlite]

Ok, it's X13 algo. So why the hell can't I mine it? 100% ICO? If that is the case there are better blockchains to use for ICO scams.

[gembira]