hilariousandco, Mitchell,Vod,Ognasty Bitblisscoin.com could be a scamsite

[RUSSIAN LEGION]

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.

[bitblisscoin]

Hi, thank you for bringing this up. As one of the dev. team members I'd be responding on the above accusations.


1. If you read our white paper, you'd see that we are an eCommerce, Lending platform and Cryptobookstore.

Like our predecessors like Bitconnect, Davor, Goldreward, Polynetwork, they deliberately don't state
their dev. Team, they were also called scams but you see them doing well and loved by many.
So you are not the first to make such an accusation but I emphatically state that BitBlissCoin is NOT a scam.


2. 50% of the traffic is from Nigeria? That's laughable.
What does that tell you?

It means we advertised on facebook to some African countries.
Precisely, South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya and finally to the United Kingdom, USA etc

Please where is it a crime to advertise to these undeveloped African countries?


3. Again if you read our white paper, precisely page 8, the 2nd and 3rd problems we are
addressing with our cryptocurrency BitBliss Coin and our CryptoBookstore are:

- The Problem of the Unbanked
- The Need for Financial Literacy in Cryptocurrency

Millions of people with the above problems are domiciled in African countries.

If you search google trends for bitcoin, you'd see that African countries
make the top 10 list of countries searching for information
on bitcoin and cryptocurrency.

See: https://trends.google.co.uk/trends/explore?q=bitcoin

So does it make business sense to target them for our adverts and also target other countries?


4. Our domain name being private, please check our predecessors again.
If its good for them, then its good for us. We can open it up and put a purchase a virtual address but we keep our address private rather than that deception. If this makes us a scam, then the other lending platforms doing well must be scams as well. But then again, not everyone agrees that lending platforms are not scams.


5. At the moment, our programmers are working on a new UI but our website is not disrupted hundreds of new registrations are still ongoing for our ICO launch on January 29th, 2018 at 4pm GMT


6. ALU is running a business and there's no crime in that and we did not offer him a $1M to scam people. Several steps of the way, even when we had some challenges we communicated for months and he was helpful even down to recommending the graphics designer for our ANN here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2697915.0


Hell no, is BitBlissCoin a scam. But then again you are entitled to your own opinions.


Bitcoin, Bitconnect were also called scams but now "J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon Now Says He Regrets Calling Bitcoin a 'Fraud'":

http://fortune.com/2018/01/09/jpmorgan-jamie-dimon-regrets-calling-bitcoin-fraud/


Thanks for reading and this massive publicity.

BitBlissCoin Team

[Quickseller]

hilariousandco, Mitchell,Vod,Ognasty

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

[OgNasty]

I have nothing to do with this at all. Not sure why I’m being mentioned. I’m not a mod here.

[Lauda]

Bitcoin, Bitconnect were also called scams but now "J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon Now Says He Regrets Calling Bitcoin a 'Fraud'":

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.

I have nothing to do with this at all. Not sure why I’m being mentioned. I’m not a mod here.

I think he jusrt lissted DT members.

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.

NO TEAM  behind this project

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.

[bitblisscoin]

Bitcoin, Bitconnect were also called scams but now "J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon Now Says He Regrets Calling Bitcoin a 'Fraud'":

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.

I have nothing to do with this at all. Not sure why I’m being mentioned. I’m not a mod here.

I think he jusrt lissted DT members.

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.

NO TEAM  behind this project

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.

Yes Laura. You are absolutely right

[RUSSIAN LEGION]

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

[mrsray]

its been over 2 months and i can not withdraw my btc!!!!
i don't want to hear you are working on the feature .. I want to know EXACTLY when you will be making the withdrawal feature function

I have asked repeatedly and been told over and over to hold tight, the feature is coming... that is on the few times i have gotten a reply, mostly i am totally ignored

if not a scam, why is there no withdrawal?

[OgNasty]

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

[aTriz]

Ico wasn't a scam, was a fail. They spent more than 1 BTC in marketing and basically had 2 investors and barely anything invested.

its been over 2 months and i can not withdraw my btc!!!!
i don't want to hear you are working on the feature .. I want to know EXACTLY when you will be making the withdrawal feature function

I have asked repeatedly and been told over and over to hold tight, the feature is coming... that is on the few times i have gotten a reply, mostly i am totally ignored

if not a scam, why is there no withdrawal?

I've refunded you via PM.

[mrsray]

I would like to confirm I have been refunded TYVM

[ibminer]

Ico wasn't a scam, was a fail. They spent more than 1 BTC in marketing and basically had 2 investors and barely anything invested.
--snip--

I'm confused. 2 investors?

Yes we have a list of partners, which participated in the first investors private sale.
At the moment they are private. We don't have any public ones at the moment
but we have contacted some which we'd like to keep under the wraps
until the partnerships are formed.

7. Round 1 ICO starts at $0.85/BIBC Today!
Get 5% Purchase BONUS extra + 5% Referral BONUS

YES, definitely, we would hit our hard cap. We are on round 2 and out soft cap is already half-reached.
Our soft cap is $5,000,000

Currently smart investors have grabbed 3,111,374 BIBCs.

3,111,374 * $.85  = $2,644,667.90 invested


EDIT:
Additionally, there was apparently a pre-ICO sale for 3 days (really *hot* ICO here ), which of course sold out. 660,000 BIBC ("$510,000 raised") here ?   
Nope, no scammers here. /s

[aTriz]

 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.

[ibminer]

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.

You are ok with ICOs stating false information about how much they have raised to other potential investors... and you would call this a marketing strategy?

[aTriz]

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.

You are ok with ICOs stating false information about how much they have raised to other potential investors... and you would call this a marketing strategy?

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

[ibminer]

This is nothing but deceitful nonsense. What you call a "marketing strategy", I would call fraud.

Scammer: a confidence game or other fraudulent scheme, especially for making a quick profit; swindle.
Swindle: to obtain money or property by fraud or deceit
Fraud: a person or thing intended to deceive others, typically by unjustifiably claiming or being credited with accomplishments or qualities.

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

No, you are not forced to do anything you do not want to do here, especially when someone is being fraudulent.

[Quickseller]

This is nothing but deceitful nonsense. What you call a "marketing strategy", I would call fraud.

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.

[Lauda]

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...

That is absolute, pathetic nonsense. The people who post these threads for others are not vouching for their content, the same way that they are not vouching for the success of the project. Neither one is up to them, and never was. Anyone claiming otherwise has no idea what they're talking about/is showing a clear lack of knowledge and experience.

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.

This is only fairly clear evidence that you are a baboon.

The only thing atriz became wiser is he add lauda his group so he can eliminate the possible critics that could paint him bad.

From the looks of it, both of them are for sale for the right price. It really is disgusting.

Here's yet another nice example of your lies. This is most certainly not the case (at least not for me), and I know that you've attempted to bribe me with at least one shill.
No comment on the case as I await for the bandwagon. The rational and solely objective input is welcome/being further awaited.

[ibminer]

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.

No.
https://imgur.com/a/pFd3v
It was a marketing strategy and they triedlied to say they raised so much in just a day or 2.

I doubt they raised anymore then 1 BTC.

(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.

[Lauda]

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.

It is a global issue, thus we can't blame anyone individually for it.

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??

Maybe. I've seen projects hire members solely to post the threads (i.e. not campaign managers), thus I'd say that this more likely (than some other reasons?).

If we want to call this a "marketing strategy" then it should be identified as a "scammers marketing strategy".

I think he just stated the way that they called it (although I can't be sure).

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."

This one is not on ALU, but solely on aTriz. People seem to make *unusual* assumptions as to how ALU works, although some of those aren't because of malevolent intent (unlike QS's).

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 can't really objectively comment on the whole matter, despite my awareness of the inherent bias (welcome to evolutionary flaws). However, I have scolded the youngling for his naivety and errors in judgement (regardless whether the reader believes that they were malevolent in nature or not) as soon as I've read that post.
For the reference: I had no information about any kind of "marketing strategy" (prior to this thread/post), nor did I ever really look into that project as I haven't managed any aspect of it.
Update: Many edits. Slumber.