I m asking hilariousandco , michel, VOD,Ognasty , have a look at this website and is it clear everything looks like a scam.no team behind this project, no legal entity.


Possible scammer https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1601988

ANN  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2697915.40

https://bitblisscoin.com

whitepaper https://bitblisscoin.com/files/whitepaper-bitblisscoin.pdf

You can say this guy from Nigeria going to scamm everyone on this forum,

50% trafic from this site IS FROM NIGERIA

NO TEAM  behind this project
and they going to offer debit card to everyone .
when we asking them about the team . here their answer

Quote from: Kardon on January 06, 2018, 01:07:00 PM
I did not find information about the team in white paper.
where it can be found?
the project looks very interesting and promising, but I would like more information

White paper gives generalised information about the Dev team, there's no specific information about the team for protection and obvious reasons.

Thank you.

If you plan to do something legally why you cant publish the name and pic of your team members.



Whois , they hide behind a domain Privacy
Date: 2017-11-07T13:24:04.0Z
https://www.namecheap.com/domains/whois/results.aspx?domain=BITBLISSCOIN.COM


and the saddest thing , they find ALU services to promote their project, sometimes in the life you have to say no, even if they offer you $1M to do a job.

Are you saying these people are involved in this scam, or are you addressing this thread to these people?

I wouldn't use Bitconnect in an argument where you're trying to defend yourself. That shit is a true scam and many will get burned from it.

Looks like it. Newbies often confuse these things; sometimes they even include me in PMs addressed to forum staff.

---

I don't see a strong case here.

While I personally try to avoid working with such projects (in any way), that does not necessarily have to mean that it is (or will be) a scam.

january 14th i opened a scam acusation againt this project because the project did not have any team behind it .Now noone can withdraw their btc.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2697915.msg33782063#msg33782063


The last time the potential scammer was online March 03, 2018, 01:57:21 AM

Looks like aTriz started the ANN thread.  Maybe start asking questions there.

I would like to confirm I have been refunded TYVM

 No.


https://imgur.com/a/pFd3v

It was a marketing strategy and they tried to say they raised so much in just a day or 2.

I doubt they raised anymore then 1 BTC.

No, but when I'm 2 weeks into a bounty program I'm basically forced to go along with it.

I want to say a couple of things about this comment.

These types of ICOs will generally only benefit the investors of said ICOs if they raise a lot of money. It doesn't necessarily need to be oversubscribed, sell out, or have any specific percentage of coins sold, however there is a reason why these companies are trying to raise the amount of money they are. If you are claiming a lot of money is being raised via an ICO when in fact (nearly) no money is being raised, you are substantially misrepresenting the risks associated with with investing because if you are the 1st investor, not only does the underlying business model need to be solid, and upon execution, profitable, but also many others need to believe in the business plan sufficiently to invest their own substantial money, otherwise the management will likely not even have the opportunity to try to execute (and be profitable), and your investment will likely be worthless.


Another cold, hard fact about most ICO investors (IMO) is that most of them lack the capability to truly understand the risks and potential benefits of investing in a particular ICO. I suspect that many ICO investors use investor interest of others of a particular offering to gauge risk/benefit of a particular ICO. I believe the thought process is that if many others are investing, then surely the ICO is a good investment. Again, misrepresenting investor interest specifically harms investors because it makes them believe said investment is less risky than it is in reality.

In both of the above examples, there is very specific consumer harm.

I would note that ibminer's above examples are not the only fraudulent statements made regarding that ICO. There are other fraudulent statement in the OP that aTriz himself posted, such as "all monetary transactions with BIBC are processed through secured servers, so users have no need to worry about any risks..."

I would point out this is not the 1st (maybe only is a better word, I'm not sure) time that aTriz has been a part of this kind of fraudlent misrepresentation. He previously vouched for alia's gambling script that was very clearly worthless, and did not work as advertised. I think this is fairly clear evidence that aTriz's word is for sale to anyone willing to pay the right price, and as such is worthless.

Maybe "vouch" is not be the best word, but without disclaimers disassociating a campaign manager from the ICO, it is misleading, certainly to new members who probably don't even know campaign managers exist. This may be more of a global issue with managers/ICOs though. I'm not sure why campaign managers need to post the announcement themselves? is it to bring more credibility to the ICO because of their higher rank??  As a suggestion, prepare the post and send it to the ICO owner to post it from their [newbie] account/Copper. They can then announce whoever as the campaign manager and define his/her actual role with the ICO and that they do not endorse the validity of the ICO. This would be a little more transparent.

Regardless of that, the fact that aTriz was aware of this "marketing strategy" and was ok with it, to say the least, is disappointing - and alarming.

(FTFY - I'm not sure what this image posted was supposed to be showing, it's an empty album for me)

aTriz has obviously known this ICO was fabricating numbers since the pre-ICO in order to trick investors into eventually thinking there was over 3 MILLION dollars raised when there was apparently only 1BTC ($9,000-$10,000) raised

If we want to call this a "marketing strategy", it should be identified as a "scammers marketing strategy". Is this how other managers run their campaigns?  I've been giving aTriz a very large benefit of doubt with his alia encounter and the unusual behavior and apparent naiveness displayed multiple times, but this seems inexcusable.

No campaign manager should be seeing this as a marketing strategy and letting it go unhindered, especially from a group like ALU whom centers themselves around being "Trusted. Experienced." The sole purpose of this strategy is to deceive investors into thinking an ICO has more financial support than it actually does and is a classic way for scam ICOs to bait investors. Both smart & dumb investors look at the financial support of an ICO, with good reason, and when you combine the speed at which these supposed investors were fake investing, and the seemingly fake hype in the thread about all of their investors... it's just deceitful and untrustworthy behavior, a campaign manager that sees this, accepts it as marketing, and does nothing - also not trustworthy.

Actions speak louder than words, and a handful of aTriz's recent actions are concerning to me. I can understand the reluctancy Lauda, but you must have similar disdain here. I really can't believe you would have knowledge of this type of behavior from a campaign manager and be ok with it, especially given your support for my feedback when looking into Deja who was conducting similar shady behavior and lying about invested funds.

I'm eager to hear other opinions.