[ANN] QRL - Announcing the Quantum Resistant Ledger

[altcoiner555]

Slack link doesn't work. Please post correct working link.

[1713525686]

1713525686

[1713525686]

1713525686

[1713525686]

1713525686

[1713525686]

1713525686

[1713525686]

1713525686

[bcsuisse]

Why the hell would the dev sell QRL instead of the ETH/BTC he raised for the project? This is absolutely absurd unless he believes Ether has a better future prospect than his own tokens. The money raised during the ICO was supposed to be used for development. The fact that he is not using them is what's more alarming.

very easy sell at high price , drive the price down rebuy at cheaper price. have enough money to have more tokens after that + btc to use for team expenses. but yeah a bit weird. ?

[cryptoholic11]

Why the hell would the dev sell QRL instead of the ETH/BTC he raised for the project? This is absolutely absurd unless he believes Ether has a better future prospect than his own tokens. The money raised during the ICO was supposed to be used for development. The fact that he is not using them is what's more alarming.

very easy sell at high price , drive the price down rebuy at cheaper price. have enough money to have more tokens after that + btc to use for team expenses. but yeah a bit weird. ?

I'm pretty sure 99% of devs do this. It only makes sense especially when you know it's inevitable that it will be dumped...every coin goes through these roller coaster fluctuations so why wouldn't you sell and buy low esp if you're a dev and need to build more capital

[sammy007]

I can explain Peterson's rage quite

I believed I was going to be rich by 21,” he said. “I missed that day. I’m still working on it. I have the ability. I’m waiting for the opportunity to come up.



http://www.timesheraldonline.com/article/NH/20160401/NEWS/160409994

$100 per QRL Token or approximately $11.5 Billion is the value I assessed for this project

Nuff said. He wanted quick buck so asked for ridiculous salary and not deserved a "founder" position, but as just a boy hired to do paper job he didn't get rich quick enough again.

As Peter said on medium

he demanded the following: 480K QRL (his original agreed allocation), a further 19% of all remaining team funds = 1.5M QRL, a salary of 6700$ a month and discretionary control of 33% of the entire pre-sale funds.

Too much for a paper job guy which joined project month before ICO and all he did is bullshitting in slack and retweeting own tweets.
Very cool that such a rotten fruit filtered out of QRL project. There are tons of talented people around to do promotions and so called "business development".

However, after we successfully raised over $4.1 Million worth of BTC/ETH based on what the three of us had told the investing community about what and how we would do things, Peter and JP changed course and started breaking the promises they made to you as well as to me.

Development seems going on, see no troubles https://github.com/theQRL/QRL/commit/9b66b0ca3658ceb4afc3921137661ecfe59e351f

Perhaps most troubling is that Peter appears to have taken his allocation (1.4 million QRL) and moved over 90% of the funds to Bittrex.

It's none of your fucking business what people do with their coins. AFAIK there was no any agreement for how many years everyone must hold their stash.

I am going to continue to do everything in my power to compel Peter and JP to fulfill their promises and live up to their commitments.

Yes, please GTFO. You already made people poor and it will take 2 days for price to recover but damage you did to nervous system is irrecoverable.


So people, chill out, moving on.

I see from medium comments that this clown also works as public servant and not allowed to have 2nd job. Must be fired. Somebody call his owner and report his scam.

[Johnny00]

Thanks. Great buying opportunity

[z0n0]

Bad publicity is a good publicity.
Quantum Resistant Ledger definitely getting some attention now, it was so freakin quiet here.
Let's see where will take us this beef between the team...

[mikoko13001]

what a twat  GTFO hungry dog !

i have 65K QRL , gonna buy some 150K more at 0.30cts , its a gift .

After all, what's no killing you , makes you stronger !!

[BlockHedge]

Yes, please GTFO. You already made people poor and it will take 2 days for price to recover but damage you did to nervous system is irrecoverable.


So people, chill out, moving on.

I see from medium comments that this clown also works as public servant and not allowed to have 2nd job. Must be fired. Somebody call his owner and report his scam.

Thanks for that post Samm007, I am in agreement.  The greed of one person created a great buying opportunity.  This guy doesn't really want resolution (obviously) airing all this personal crap behind the team's back in public.  He can go be irrelevant again.  Think of the ego that guy must have to blow up his position and forego a very nice opportunity all to be a "founder" and get more money.  Sad, really.  But now I own more QRL, and the team gets to eject the poisonous cancer before MainNet launch which is likely a blessing in disguise.

[zoom2aditya]

Fcuk this joker. Hastily sold half of my qrl for dirt cheap price.

[mtx_demon]

Sorry for those one that dump the coins. BUT HOW CAN YOU TRUST IN AN EMAIL THAT THE GUYS NAME ITS NOT IN THE WEBSITE.
Please first of all find out what's really going on.
If you like to burn some money. Buying high and selling low. Please ASAP Just send some here I really need. I am struggling to buy my house with my wife. It's impossible nowadays in California.
Thanks everyone
Hahahahahaha

Anyways the project will keep going, but that was good the team seems to be willing to show the results really soon. And now we are free of this clown.

[ccc2011]

does anybody know if I can still deposit btc on bittrex?

I want to buy more qrl on monday :-/

[zoom2aditya]

Sorry for those one that dump the coins. BUT HOW CAN YOU TRUST IN AN EMAIL THAT THE GUYS NAME ITS NOT IN THE WEBSITE.
Please first of all find out what's really going on.
If you like to burn some money. Buying high and selling low. Please ASAP Just send some here I really need. I am struggling to buy my house with my wife. It's impossible nowadays in California.
Thanks everyone
Hahahahahaha

Anyways the project will keep going, but that was good the team seems to be willing to show the results really soon. And now we are free of this clown.

Because JP was handling everything right from pre ICO days. Most of the mail communication came with his signature.

[solid12345]

Bad publicity is a good publicity.
Quantum Resistant Ledger definitely getting some attention now, it was so freakin quiet here.
Let's see where will take us this beef between the team...

Honestly I never heard of the coin before I spotted the huge drop on bittrex and wondered what was up, then saw all the drama. I immediately bought in, at the minimum if it goes back to what it was 2 days ago it's a nice return. If it can get back to what it was in June an even nicer return. I imagine if the devs can come through and build a truly QT resistant coin it will make some waves in the crypto world.

[CCNCCN]

It matters a hell of a lot that the founders have dumped into investors.

It's a tactic understanding, when you raise money to use that money to further investment.  Not double dip on the people who supported you.  Its in extremely poor taste and a black eye for the project.

[Annabelle75]

Why the hell would the dev sell QRL instead of the ETH/BTC he raised for the project? This is absolutely absurd unless he believes Ether has a better future prospect than his own tokens. The money raised during the ICO was supposed to be used for development. The fact that he is not using them is what's more alarming.

/ SOAPBOX TIME /

Let's assume the best here, that the founder/developer has every intention of bringing the project to fruition. And add in some realities: This was his idea, he's a bright person. But even very, very smart people struggle greatly with rapidly-growing "startup" company formation, it's the real killer of most new companies, regardless of how good an idea or how competent the founding people involved are. It doesn't mean it's a "scam", just that lessons are being learned on the job.

Company formation takes experience -- usually hard-earned since you don't have the resources to hire someone that's already done it -- and mistakes are made. For instance, not defining roles well (lead developer retains password authority for all accounts and delegates use permissions down from there, basic inheritance), not giving percentages of the company for commodity jobs (for instance, social media manager as there are millions of highly qualified people available to do this, almost all willing to work remotely as self-employed-and-taxed individuals) that can be easily and inexpensively acquired. Starting your company, it's hard to resist rewarding people that work for you in the early days with obscenely huge percentages that would cost the typical investor huge sums to match.

Two key areas oft overlooked: An arbitration clause for all disputes, and setting terms for time-based vesting of shares. And that time should be over a year -- either a year of development work before the ICO, or a year of service to vest 20%. Then 30% after two, and the potential to final 50% after three years of continual service. Nobody but the founding devs get a (small percentage) lump at the ICO if it's a first round of funding. That said, what the devs (and any angel investors) do with their vested shares is entirely fair game.

Publicly setting time-lines for vesting and having a third-party trustee administer share allocation would alleviate much of the ICO/crypto community's fears of scams.

There's always hugely egotistical people that want large percentages of startups even though they came on board after formation and didn't contribute to what is, after the fact, an obviously good idea. It's like being friends with the guy who invented the wheel -- you're lumping 50 kilos on your back, and she comes rolling by with twice that weight on a lovely wheeled cart and you're like "well duh, I could've done that". But you didn't, did you? The wheel wasn't obvious until some creative thinker did the hard part of dreaming it up. The core team needs to know how to protect themselves (and their investors' funds) before hiring. Know that you need to resist being "nice guys" and handing out obscene percentages to valued friends and employees -- it's a disservice to the both the brilliance of the idea and the hard-earned money investors give you. Grasping that once you take money, it's not your company anymore, it's a mutually beneficial arrangement for you and your new partners, whose individual importance is clearly defined with ownership percentages. As in investor, seeing that nearly a half million shares were give out for a few months of low fiat currency value work doesn't make me very happy.

Which brings us to setting non-competed and termination clauses -- another overlooked area, and a glaring flaw in new companies. In this case, "social media manager" job title is to spew the company line. Violating that is grounds for termination, loss of access to passwords for social media accounts, and forfeiture of non-vested shares. Failure to do that cost a lot of people a lot of value. Hopefully short-term.

Note that staffing firms and many companies set disputes resolution as an arbiter of their choosing, and your expense. Which is pretty lame, ICO companies can and should treat people better.

Lastly, global company formation is complicated, and a PITA. Still assuming QRL intends to deliver on their promises, it's very magnanimous of the dev to sell his personal shares to fund ongoing costs verses touching the ICO funds, which he shouldn't until the company or foundation is set up to control them.

/* ENDS SOAPBOX */

Apologies for the lengthy diatribe. If you assumed I learned all the above the hard way, that I lost a lot of relative value with the posting of a seemingly (hopefully!) ego-driven and useless view, and that I like this project and want to see it carry on, you were correct. ;-)

If you assumed I know or have ever spoken to anyone on the QRL team, you're wrong. I haven't. Just a chick who is alarmed at how fast passwords can currently be cracked on a couple of Tesla cards and thought this project would be a lot of fun to follow and invest in...

[altcoiner555]

120 BTC sell wall. Is that actualadvicebtc again?

[BlockHedge]

Why the hell would the dev sell QRL instead of the ETH/BTC he raised for the project? This is absolutely absurd unless he believes Ether has a better future prospect than his own tokens. The money raised during the ICO was supposed to be used for development. The fact that he is not using them is what's more alarming.

/ SOAPBOX TIME /

Let's assume the best here, that the founder/developer has every intention of bringing the project to fruition. And add in some realities: This was his idea, he's a bright person. But even very, very smart people struggle greatly with rapidly-growing "startup" company formation, it's the real killer of most new companies, regardless of how good an idea or how competent the founding people involved are. It doesn't mean it's a "scam", just that lessons are being learned on the job.

Company formation takes experience -- usually hard-earned since you don't have the resources to hire someone that's already done it -- and mistakes are made. For instance, not defining roles well (lead developer retains password authority for all accounts and delegates use permissions down from there, basic inheritance), not giving percentages of the company for commodity jobs (for instance, social media manager as there are millions of highly qualified people available to do this, almost all willing to work remotely as self-employed-and-taxed individuals) that can be easily and inexpensively acquired. Starting your company, it's hard to resist rewarding people that work for you in the early days with obscenely huge percentages that would cost the typical investor huge sums to match.

Two key areas oft overlooked: An arbitration clause for all disputes, and setting terms for time-based vesting of shares. And that time should be over a year -- either a year of development work before the ICO, or a year of service to vest 20%. Then 30% after two, and the potential to final 50% after three years of continual service. Nobody but the founding devs get a (small percentage) lump at the ICO if it's a first round of funding. That said, what the devs (and any angel investors) do with their vested shares is entirely fair game.

Publicly setting time-lines for vesting and having a third-party trustee administer share allocation would alleviate much of the ICO/crypto community's fears of scams.

There's always hugely egotistical people that want large percentages of startups even though they came on board after formation and didn't contribute to what is, after the fact, an obviously good idea. It's like being friends with the guy who invented the wheel -- you're lumping 50 kilos on your back, and she comes rolling by with twice that weight on a lovely wheeled cart and you're like "well duh, I could've done that". But you didn't, did you? The wheel wasn't obvious until some creative thinker did the hard part of dreaming it up. The core team needs to know how to protect themselves (and their investors' funds) before hiring. Know that you need to resist being "nice guys" and handing out obscene percentages to valued friends and employees -- it's a disservice to the both the brilliance of the idea and the hard-earned money investors give you. Grasping that once you take money, it's not your company anymore, it's a mutually beneficial arrangement for you and your new partners, whose individual importance is clearly defined with ownership percentages. As in investor, seeing that nearly a half million shares were give out for a few months of low fiat currency value work doesn't make me very happy.

Which brings us to setting non-competed and termination clauses -- another overlooked area, and a glaring flaw in new companies. In this case, "social media manager" job title is to spew the company line. Violating that is grounds for termination, loss of access to passwords for social media accounts, and forfeiture of non-vested shares. Failure to do that cost a lot of people a lot of value. Hopefully short-term.

Note that staffing firms and many companies set disputes resolution as an arbiter of their choosing, and your expense. Which is pretty lame, ICO companies can and should treat people better.

Lastly, global company formation is complicated, and a PITA. Still assuming QRL intends to deliver on their promises, it's very magnanimous of the dev to sell his personal shares to fund ongoing costs verses touching the ICO funds, which he shouldn't until the company or foundation is set up to control them.

/* ENDS SOAPBOX */

Apologies for the lengthy diatribe. If you assumed I learned all the above the hard way, that I lost a lot of relative value with the posting of a seemingly (hopefully!) ego-driven and useless view, and that I like this project and want to see it carry on, you were correct. ;-)

If you assumed I know or have ever spoken to anyone on the QRL team, you're wrong. I haven't. Just a chick who is alarmed at how fast passwords can currently be cracked on a couple of Tesla cards and thought this project would be a lot of fun to follow and invest in...

Great response and right on point.  The founder was too focused on delivering the project and assumed all those on board were of the same mindset.  Unfortunately you can't always see behind the motivations of some people and greed can be easily hidden, for a time.  CCNCCN is looking at the whole situation through a very narrow lens.  Not spending ICO raising funds until an actual company formation is formed is the right move.  Ideally this will now be a higher priority for the team.

[CCNCCN]

If the team are interested I am happy to share the work on this I did for XBY.  May help point them in the right direction depending on where they got to with it.  I understand this isn't simple stuff and the right advisers, legal and financial setup are crucial.


However, I am surprised that people are buying that >$1m worth of QRL needed to be cashed out to support the project for 3 months.  It doesn't add up in the slightest.  We also still have very limited details on the type of company or foundation setup.   The best way to handle internal accusations like this is to come clean on all the accusations, the good and the bad.  Leaving it to fester will be an open sore that could get infected.

[altcoiner555]

Weird that the devs are not posting here, and seems impossible to get a link to slack.

[SirJEsq]

A disgruntled employee, that is all.  JP responded and all we can do now is continue believing in QRL while JP& co. knows ears and eyes are heightened.

With that said, attacking the former employee is silly in my opinion.  So you lost some money...as if it's not gonna bounce right back.  Buy more coins and stop crying. Development is continuing as usual.