[ANN] Levelcoin - Proof of Stake / Proof of Burn Hybrid - Inflation Immune

[FrictionlessCoin]

The model of "fund now and develop later" doesn't seem to be working too well.

Develop first, show proof of concept,  distribute thru proof of burn. 

Then, if necessary,  gather funds for particular purposes, from funders, who have skin in the game and are therefore motivated to scrutinize development and cover (or refuse to cover)  additional expenses. This way funders continuously participate in project development , voting with money, instead of relying on devs decisions in distribution of ipo funds.

I could not agree more, very well said

Sound like a good approach.

Concurrent fund raising and development can work, based on progress. This is how most start-ups are funded, with seed funds coming in in stages.

I lost a coin in this, and knew very well the risk I was taking, posting red flags here all along. A number of us are interested in continuing this project. The last thing I want to see is other people deciding whether or not I have this option or dictating how a pre-sale is to be handled. I've come to crypto assets to escape that kind of crap.

We are trying to figure out the best way to fund our NEX project.  We are wondering if you had any insights on this. 

[td services]

These IPO scams are definitely bad, but crypto as a whole has not been widely adopted worldwide, and as long as there are new members joining the forums daily, you can expect new scams, each time more clever than the last, to continue showing up. Levelcoin received scam accusation immediately upon being posted and yet still managed to garner a sizable amount of bitcoins before running with the cash. This will not be the end, expect more in the coming days and unfortunately there is nothing anyone can do about them, we can shout scam all day long and people will still take the plunge. The only solution is for the administrators of this forum to implement a rule where NO IPO's or pre-launch fundraiser are allowed without a full public source code. That will settle it once and for all, and is it really that difficult for everyone involved? The legit devs won't have a problem uploading the source and the admins would simple need to make a sticky post detailing how this is rule will be enforced. If someone asked for an IPO and doesn't provide source, lock their thread and slap them with a warning, if they do it again, ban them.

Last thing we need are people dictating how new projects are to be launched or funded. What you are suggesting would lock everyone but developers or people with money to hires developers out from starting a project. I don't need you or anyone else to protect me from myself. I don't need other people making decisions for me.

I'm also paranoid enough to think these scams may be deliberate attempts to discredit the IPO model. LeoC started off viciously attacking a planned IPO, eMunie, and tried to extort another one, Ethereum. Given the disruptive nature of Bitcoin technology, we can expect people to show up with agendas to sabotage development of new ways of doing things which eliminate the need for parasitic intermediaries. There is also the opposition philosophical and political viewpoints, which believe that stealing from people is acceptable. It is quite possible that victimizing people by scamming them is considered a valid strategy to prove their points.

Also, there are even factions within the Bitcoin community. We have certainly seen a major outcry against the IPO pre-sale model from the start, and against any alternatives to the PoW mining model.

[td services]

The model of "fund now and develop later" doesn't seem to be working too well.

Develop first, show proof of concept,  distribute thru proof of burn.  

Then, if necessary,  gather funds for particular purposes, from funders, who have skin in the game and are therefore motivated to scrutinize development and cover (or refuse to cover)  additional expenses. This way funders continuously participate in project development , voting with money, instead of relying on devs decisions in distribution of ipo funds.

I could not agree more, very well said

Sound like a good approach.

Concurrent fund raising and development can work, based on progress. This is how most start-ups are funded, with seed funds coming in in stages.

I lost a coin in this, and knew very well the risk I was taking, posting red flags here all along. A number of us are interested in continuing this project. The last thing I want to see is other people deciding whether or not I have this option or dictating how a pre-sale is to be handled. I've come to crypto assets to escape that kind of crap.

We are trying to figure out the best way to fund our NEX project.  We are wondering if you had any insights on this.  

I like a steady increase on price per share during the pre-sale, like P_n=P_n-1^r , where each subsequent share price P_n is a fractional (or percentage) increase over the previous share price P_n-1. I'd prefer that shares may be resold at any time on the open market.

There should be a board of elected directors to disburse funds to pay for development, marketing, and other costs. Voting should be PoS with stakeholder designated proxy as a default if not overridden on a particular vote by the stakeholder. Proxies may be chained or forwarded to other proxies. The presale may be terminated with advance public notice by a majority vote of the stakeholders, or run for a set time or to a set limit of total investment.

Before the pre-sale launches, there should be a short pre-launch sale where everyone can invest and be awarded shares proportional to investment, maybe one week. The share price is equal to what it would be if the same amount of total investment were made to reach that point according to the power law used for pre-sale.

A matching pool of development shares should be created to fund development in some proportion of the pre-sale shares sold, to be used later as the initial funding is used.

I would leave it to the community to agree on the actual numbers used in the fractional price per share increase, the proportion of development shares, the amount to be raised, the length of the pre-launch sale, and length of the pre-sale. Here, launch means start of pre-sale.

This is similar to conventional start-up funding except that there is a continuous ramp in share price as value increases and risk decreases instead of discrete jumps in share price at different funding rounds. Also, the opportunity for the general public to enter at the seed stage is new.

The term IPO is not really accurate since these pre-sales are actually seed funding.

[FrictionlessCoin]

I like a steady increase on price per share during the pre-sale, like P_n=P_n-1^r , where each subsequent share price P_n is a fractional (or percentage) increase over the previous share price P_n-1. I'd prefer that shares may be resold at any time on the open market.

There should be a board of elected directors to disburse funds to pay for development, marketing, and other costs. Voting should be PoS with stakeholder designated proxy as a default if not overridden on a particular vote by the stakeholder. Proxies may be chained or forwarded to other proxies. The presale may be terminated with advance public notice by a majority vote of the stakeholders, or run for a set time or to a set limit of total investment.

Before the pre-sale launches, there should be a short pre-launch sale where everyone can invest and be awarded shares proportional to investment, maybe one week. The share price is equal to what it would be if the same amount of total investment were made to reach that point according to the power law used for pre-sale.

A matching pool of development shares should be created to fund development in some proportion of the pre-sale shares sold, to be used later as the initial funding is used.

I would leave it to the community to agree on the actual numbers used in the fractional price per share increase, the proportion of development shares, the amount to be raised, the length of the pre-launch sale, and length of the pre-sale. Here, launch means start of pre-sale.

This is similar to conventional start-up funding except that there is a continuous ramp in share price as value increases and risk decreases instead of discrete jumps in share price at different funding rounds. Also, the opportunity for the general public to enter at the seed stage is new.

The term IPO is not really accurate since these pre-sales are actually seed funding.

Looks extremely complicated to set up.   Particularly the one that involves proxy voting and boards of elected governors.   

[Calogero Izotz]

The model of "fund now and develop later" doesn't seem to be working too well.

Develop first, show proof of concept,  distribute thru proof of burn. 

Then, if necessary,  gather funds for particular purposes, from funders, who have skin in the game and are therefore motivated to scrutinize development and cover (or refuse to cover)  additional expenses. This way funders continuously participate in project development , voting with money, instead of relying on devs decisions in distribution of ipo funds.

I could not agree more, very well said

Sound like a good approach.

Concurrent fund raising and development can work, based on progress. This is how most start-ups are funded, with seed funds coming in in stages.

I lost a coin in this, and knew very well the risk I was taking, posting red flags here all along. A number of us are interested in continuing this project. The last thing I want to see is other people deciding whether or not I have this option or dictating how a pre-sale is to be handled. I've come to crypto assets to escape that kind of crap.

Most start-ups don't take place in an atmosphere of coin fever, where psychological threshold for investing is very low and everybody is allowed to buy. Also developers usually aren't anonymous. What's happening here seems like a perfect opportunity for scammers.

I'm not for regulating anything, nobody should decide for you. What I wrote was meant more as advice for investors and should probably begin with "I suggest you invest in projects that do the following" 

I suppose that in near future, with introduction of additional features/layers in bitcoin  or contracts in ethereum (or similar protocols), distribution proof of burn will be replaced by tools that allow to secure and utilize funds in a trustless manner.

[northranger79510]

Well it is officially a scam coin.

[GreXX]

Well it is officially a scam coin.

Yeah, he definitely went AWOL as soon as the blackmail and matching wallets information came out. He made one response to try and save it but obviously realized he messed up. The part I find hard to believe is that LeoC was obviously involved considering he suddenly became non-existent on this thread at the exact same time after being VERY vocal (not to mention the wallet / blackmail issue), and yet yesterday when I looked at his activity, he is still posting on other threads. The nerve of some people is insulting.

This forum just seems like it caters to empowering shady people. The lack of any form of standards or regulations on the posting, marketing, and fund-raising of these altcoins is kind of unbelievable.

Is there any type of launch platform with built in escrow that you can use to find legitimate and vetted new coins? One where for instance the moderators who run the site require driver's license, phone contact, and other forms of proof? The first time I tried to create a Mt. Gox account I got denied because I didn't provide the right kind of utility bill with my address, they need something with that level of scrutiny.

I think new coins, if implementing new ideas and conducting proper and legitimate launches are a great thing for the community, but now that I have started looking into how many of them are scams and just downright unprofessional it kind of makes me want to steer clear of here altogether.

[td services]

Most start-ups don't take place in an atmosphere of coin fever, where psychological threshold for investing is very low and everybody is allowed to buy. Also developers usually aren't anonymous. What's happening here seems like a perfect opportunity for scammers.

I'm not for regulating anything, nobody should decide for you. What I wrote was meant more as advice for investors and should probably begin with "I suggest you invest in projects that do the following" 

I suppose that in near future, with introduction of additional features/layers in bitcoin  or contracts in ethereum (or similar protocols), distribution proof of burn will be replaced by tools that allow to secure and utilize funds in a trustless manner.

Yes, it was another poster who suggested adding restrictions on pre-sales. It is good to look for best practices in an offering. Implementing a platform for creating and funding start-ups as you suggest is a pet project of mine. Some of it is outlined in the funding model I posted above.

[td services]

I like a steady increase on price per share during the pre-sale, like P_n=P_n-1^r , where each subsequent share price P_n is a fractional (or percentage) increase over the previous share price P_n-1. I'd prefer that shares may be resold at any time on the open market.

There should be a board of elected directors to disburse funds to pay for development, marketing, and other costs. Voting should be PoS with stakeholder designated proxy as a default if not overridden on a particular vote by the stakeholder. Proxies may be chained or forwarded to other proxies. The presale may be terminated with advance public notice by a majority vote of the stakeholders, or run for a set time or to a set limit of total investment.

Before the pre-sale launches, there should be a short pre-launch sale where everyone can invest and be awarded shares proportional to investment, maybe one week. The share price is equal to what it would be if the same amount of total investment were made to reach that point according to the power law used for pre-sale.

A matching pool of development shares should be created to fund development in some proportion of the pre-sale shares sold, to be used later as the initial funding is used.

I would leave it to the community to agree on the actual numbers used in the fractional price per share increase, the proportion of development shares, the amount to be raised, the length of the pre-launch sale, and length of the pre-sale. Here, launch means start of pre-sale.

This is similar to conventional start-up funding except that there is a continuous ramp in share price as value increases and risk decreases instead of discrete jumps in share price at different funding rounds. Also, the opportunity for the general public to enter at the seed stage is new.

The term IPO is not really accurate since these pre-sales are actually seed funding.

Looks extremely complicated to set up.   Particularly the one that involves proxy voting and boards of elected governors.   

I would start manually with spreadsheets, implement in code as resources allow.

[campeck]

Damn....that sucks guys. 

[td services]

Damn....that sucks guys. 

Yeah, but that's why the returns are so high on the winners - a lot of risk.

[gu7008]

The model of "fund now and develop later" doesn't seem to be working too well.

Develop first, show proof of concept,  distribute thru proof of burn. 

Then, if necessary,  gather funds for particular purposes, from funders, who have skin in the game and are therefore motivated to scrutinize development and cover (or refuse to cover)  additional expenses. This way funders continuously participate in project development , voting with money, instead of relying on devs decisions in distribution of ipo funds.

I could not agree more, very well said

+1

[TheMightyX]

Well it is officially a scam coin.

Yeah, he definitely went AWOL as soon as the blackmail and matching wallets information came out. He made one response to try and save it but obviously realized he messed up. The part I find hard to believe is that LeoC was obviously involved considering he suddenly became non-existent on this thread at the exact same time after being VERY vocal (not to mention the wallet / blackmail issue), and yet yesterday when I looked at his activity, he is still posting on other threads. The nerve of some people is insulting.

This forum just seems like it caters to empowering shady people. The lack of any form of standards or regulations on the posting, marketing, and fund-raising of these altcoins is kind of unbelievable.

Is there any type of launch platform with built in escrow that you can use to find legitimate and vetted new coins? One where for instance the moderators who run the site require driver's license, phone contact, and other forms of proof? The first time I tried to create a Mt. Gox account I got denied because I didn't provide the right kind of utility bill with my address, they need something with that level of scrutiny.

I think new coins, if implementing new ideas and conducting proper and legitimate launches are a great thing for the community, but now that I have started looking into how many of them are scams and just downright unprofessional it kind of makes me want to steer clear of here altogether.

Watch what you say, in the cryptocurrency world the R-word (regulation) is considered a dirty word.

I'm all for no regulation, but it means we all have to work a little bit harder to make sure others don't get scammed.
I called this coin a scam on the 24th after stating my position. Unfortunately most of the people who were scammed probably understood that it was most likely a scam, but couldnt afford the very small chance of missing out if in fact it wasn't (like NXT).
The fact that LeoC hasn't come back here and apologized for helping levelCoin scam a bunch of people is disgusting.
When we get his IP info we can cross reference that with the WHOIS data from the registrar. If it is indeed the same city/country then we know who our man is and charges can be pressed.

[td services]

I'm all for no regulation, but it means we all have to work a little bit harder to make sure others don't get scammed.
I called this coin a scam on the 24th after stating my position. Unfortunately most of the people who were scammed probably understood that it was most likely a scam, but couldnt afford the very small chance of missing out if in fact it wasn't (like NXT).
The fact that LeoC hasn't come back here and apologized for helping levelCoin scam a bunch of people is disgusting.

Level Coin and LeoC seem to be the same person, or at least in collusion. LeoC used the same BTC address in an extortion attempt against Ethereum as was originally posted by Level Coin here to collect funding. This showed up when the BTC address was suddenly changed in the original post.

I considered LeoC's presence here a strong negative against investing, given his bad behavior elsewhere, but was just ignoring him as background noise. In hindsight, his first 2 posts within a few minutes of the Level Coin initial announcement and second post would be suspicious. Too bad LeoC doesn't choose to put his abilities to productive use - he is obviously intelligent and talented, just ethically challenged.

Con men seem to enjoy the challenge of their craft and maybe even the pain they cause their victims as much as the money they make. It is a sickness. A long time ago I once had a scammer come back with phony goods when he could have just more safely disappeared with the money because he wanted to see my reaction for his pleasure. Recently I tried buying some NXT directly from a scammer, wanting to do a direct trade to build my trust rating. He's been around here and Ripple, Peezr, Dannyy, Xiaoulis or somesuch. His signature is to send a final PM promising a refund before disappearing, sort of a final little prick to the victim to rub it in. I just gloat back that these are some real miserable losers and I'm a lot better off then them, both physically and emotionally.

[freigeist]

Watch what you say, in the cryptocurrency world the R-word (regulation) is considered a dirty word.

I'm all for no regulation, but it means we all have to work a little bit harder to make sure others don't get scammed.
I called this coin a scam on the 24th after stating my position. Unfortunately most of the people who were scammed probably understood that it was most likely a scam, but couldnt afford the very small chance of missing out if in fact it wasn't (like NXT).
The fact that LeoC hasn't come back here and apologized for helping levelCoin scam a bunch of people is disgusting.
When we get his IP info we can cross reference that with the WHOIS data from the registrar. If it is indeed the same city/country then we know who our man is and charges can be pressed.

Hello.

This guy had a profile with personal photo and info about location on the eMunie forum
which is currently down because od DDOS attacks.
I don't know if this was real data or fake data but the location mentioned there
was San Diego.

[TheMightyX]

Watch what you say, in the cryptocurrency world the R-word (regulation) is considered a dirty word.

I'm all for no regulation, but it means we all have to work a little bit harder to make sure others don't get scammed.
I called this coin a scam on the 24th after stating my position. Unfortunately most of the people who were scammed probably understood that it was most likely a scam, but couldnt afford the very small chance of missing out if in fact it wasn't (like NXT).
The fact that LeoC hasn't come back here and apologized for helping levelCoin scam a bunch of people is disgusting.
When we get his IP info we can cross reference that with the WHOIS data from the registrar. If it is indeed the same city/country then we know who our man is and charges can be pressed.

Hello.

This guy had a profile with personal photo and info about location on the eMunie forum
which is currently down because od DDOS attacks.
I don't know if this was real data or fake data but the location mentioned there
was San Diego.

Do you have that information? (maybe check your temporary internet folder for pictures at the least)
Also can you give us a link to that thread?
edit: oh you are referring to LeoC. This may still be relevant.

[freigeist]

Do you have that information? (maybe check your temporary internet folder for pictures at the least)
Also can you give us a link to that thread?
edit: oh you are referring to LeoC. This may still be relevant.

Yes I was referring to "LeoC" aka Leonardo123 in the other forum.
I found a link to his profile but it won't open as the forum is currently down.
http://forum.emunie.com/index.php?/user/3754-leandro213/
I found the picture that he had in that profile but it could be fake.
Do you want me to PM the link or put it here?

[GreXX]

Well it is officially a scam coin.

Yeah, he definitely went AWOL as soon as the blackmail and matching wallets information came out. He made one response to try and save it but obviously realized he messed up. The part I find hard to believe is that LeoC was obviously involved considering he suddenly became non-existent on this thread at the exact same time after being VERY vocal (not to mention the wallet / blackmail issue), and yet yesterday when I looked at his activity, he is still posting on other threads. The nerve of some people is insulting.

This forum just seems like it caters to empowering shady people. The lack of any form of standards or regulations on the posting, marketing, and fund-raising of these altcoins is kind of unbelievable.

Is there any type of launch platform with built in escrow that you can use to find legitimate and vetted new coins? One where for instance the moderators who run the site require driver's license, phone contact, and other forms of proof? The first time I tried to create a Mt. Gox account I got denied because I didn't provide the right kind of utility bill with my address, they need something with that level of scrutiny.

I think new coins, if implementing new ideas and conducting proper and legitimate launches are a great thing for the community, but now that I have started looking into how many of them are scams and just downright unprofessional it kind of makes me want to steer clear of here altogether.

Watch what you say, in the cryptocurrency world the R-word (regulation) is considered a dirty word.

I'm all for no regulation, but it means we all have to work a little bit harder to make sure others don't get scammed.
I called this coin a scam on the 24th after stating my position. Unfortunately most of the people who were scammed probably understood that it was most likely a scam, but couldnt afford the very small chance of missing out if in fact it wasn't (like NXT).
The fact that LeoC hasn't come back here and apologized for helping levelCoin scam a bunch of people is disgusting.
When we get his IP info we can cross reference that with the WHOIS data from the registrar. If it is indeed the same city/country then we know who our man is and charges can be pressed.

Well let me clarify. I don't say regulation in any meaning regulating the currency, ideas, or development. Mainly just creating a site that regulates what gets featured, posted, promoted, or whatever. So for instance they pre-screen and validate identities and do a bit of mathematical analysis, then when the coin goes live they vouch for the creators that it's real and also provide a rating or gauge of the viability of the coin in the marketplace. Maybe even offer suggestions and additional guidance to the creators.

[td services]

quoting text to archive:

Hello Bitcointalk!

My name is David Elsinger and today I would like to present a new Proof of Stake/Proof of Burn cryptocurrency that is currently in development named Levelcoin. Why Levelcoin? The reason is because the coin is divided into two levels. Let me explain.

Level 1 (LV1) coins are the name of the currency that will be distributed via the pre launch fundraiser. These are the coins that will be on exchanges and can be bought and sold. These coins will generate four additional LV1 coin per week for every 1,000 LV1 coins that you own (updates fractionally on the blockchain every 15 seconds and are rounded up to the nearest millionth). This means that in one year of holding 1,000 LV1 coins, you will receive roughly 200 LV1 coins, or 20% per annum. Doesn't seem like much? Keep reading.

Level 2 (LV2) coins can only be obtained by burning Level 1 coins. For every 1,000 LV1 coins that are burned you will receive one LV2 coin. These coins can not be exchanged, sold, or discarded by any means and will be attached to the wallet indefinitely. Each LV2 coin will generate twenty LV1 coins per week. In one year of holding one single LV2 coin, you will receive roughly 1,000 LV1 coins. This equates to achieving a 100% ROI within a year. Much better isn't it?

All coins have diminishing returns.This is to punish hoarding. After the ROI is met, coins will generate 1% less Level 1 coins per month. This is multiplicative and not additive, so reaching a point where a coin stops generating is unlikely anytime in the near future. This is a good thing and will keep both the exchanges and the amount being burned higher than it would be without diminishing returns.

This cycle is revolutionary in the sense that someone holding LV2 coins will generate coins at a fast rate and cause inflation, yet to get LV2 coins they would need to burn LV1 coins and that would cause deflation. In every case of inflation, there is a stronger deflation to counteract it. This may very well be the first currency, both fiat and crypto, that has a built in mechanism to eliminate inflation on a very large scale. The cherry on top is that this deflation is instant, whereas inflation is dragged out over a long period of time. Let me give you an example:

Assuming a constant demand, a typical Proof of Work or Proof of Stake coin will lose a vast amount of value as the supply of coins on the market increases. A Proof of Burn coin on it's own will forever be attached to a Proof of Work or Proof of Stake coin and by association will also lose value over time, again noting that this assumes a constant demand. Levelcoin on the other hand has evolved to use a combination of the best features of Proof of Stake and Proof of Burn. This has lead to a system that is highly resistant to inflation and may in fact have the opposite effect. Assuming a constant demand, the value of Levelcoin will likely increase as more and more people burn their LV1 coins, causing supply to dwindle.

Nothing like this has been tried before and should the system work as planned, any founder will see an enormous return on investment. There is very little incentive for users to "pump and dump" or to flip in and out. This coin caters more towards loyalists, and considering that there will not be botnets nor ASCI's to deal with, everyone will have an equal opportunity to take part. The system is built around simplicity. Have you noticed how all new self proclaimed "next generation" currencies are getting more and more complex, both in their algorithm and distribution methods? There is no need for that, and Levelcoin aims to prove that. Google had the right idea by creating a simple search engine, and look where that got them!

Those who have faith in the currency and are in it for the long haul will reap enormous benefits from burning their LV1 coins to obtain LV2 coins and then selling the LV1 coins obtained via interest on an exchange that will likely be proprietary. Or they could choose to burn those new coins and compound their interest while at the same time creating scarcity for LV1 coins. The choice is yours. There will always be demand due to the fact that LV2 coins can not be obtained in any way other than by the purchase and burning of LV1 coins.

As a disclaimer, I will not be holding any of this currency so there will be absolutely zero dilution. My funding will be entirely based on pre launch fundraiser. Currently I am in the coding phase, there are still some kinks to work out and I have to apply every scenario possible to ensure that this system is not exploited in any way, though from what I have tested thus far it seems highly unlikely.

The success of this coin lies entirely on its initial demand, that's where I need your help. I had initially thought of using Kickstarter to fund this project but decided to go this route as it seems to be sufficient. I will be accepting BTC and LTC for the pre launch with a time frame of approximately half a month after which absolutely no additional coins will be distributed, though I reserve the right to cancel the pre-sale at any moment should I feel too many LV1 coins will be sent out.

If you are interested in purchasing LV1 coins at 100,000 LV1 coins per BTC or 2,850 LV1 coins per LTC, then please send the allotted amount to the below address and please PM me both your sending address and the TxID along with an e-mail address that I can use to contact you. All purchases will be kept 100% confidential.

Direct funding is currently set to end in TWO DAYS. Limited time offer to receive 1.5x the amount of coins!
Funding will also include access to the closed beta which will last two weeks.

Pre-Launch funding addresses:
BTC- 1Padc5wujXQamfR8r2Dig45BFh7SiT2AE4
LTC- LPn7WpdnZ3MSdDajbFMsJuVi44BeYEauKG

These funds will be used in a variety of ways. The most obvious would be to help fund development. As you can see, I do not have a coin logo, website or anything shiny and glittery to show for this. I am building the wallet from the ground up and have not used source code from any other cryptocurrency. I am a coder and that is all I know how to do. At this time I need a graphic designer, a web designer,a marketing manager and someone who specializes in creating graphs and charts to illustrate how the system works. These roles will be funded via the pre launch fundraiser.

Once I have an official web site and forum I will be accepting volunteers for administrative and moderator roles. These roles will be given first and foremost to the top investors should they accept.  A small portion of the funding will be set aside to purchase LV1 coins at market price should the price fall to unreasonably low levels, consider this a sort of "buyback" protection against sharp declines. And lastly of course I will retain a couple of BTC/LTC for myself because I feel I deserve it. If you plan on using any of my ideas for your own project, please feel free to leave a donation!

Thank you for your time and consideration! Please show your support in the comments below.

David Elsinger, Levelcoin Dev


Current Founders
el****sy - 1 BTC
fr****e - 1 LTC
ri*** - 0.053 BTC
gk***y - 0.5 LTC
vh*********els - 1 BTC
l*** - 1 BTC
ka****13 - 0.02 BTC
da***t - 0.1 BTC
da*****ox - 0.1 BTC
ko****s - 0.1 BTC
m*****k - 1 LTC
be***r - 0.51 BTC
al****s - 5 LTC
je******4 - 0.4 BTC
ma*******9 - 5 LTC
t*****y - 0.02 BTC
l*****s - 0.005 BTC
b******r - 0.3305 BTC
ir*********c - 0.5 BTC
co****r - 0.3 BTC
s*****n - 0.219 BTC
i****v - 0.15 BTC, 10 LTC
b*****r - 0.3 BTC
t********w - 1 BTC
l******n - 6 LTC
a*******! - 0.2 BTC
s******y - 1 BTC
d******k - 1 BTC
ob******e - 1 BTC
se********m - 7.8 LTC
h******m - 0.1 BTC
r***n - 0.3 BTC
b********3 - 1 BTC
q****r - 1 BTC
a*****d - 0.7 BTC
u***4 - 10 LTC
p**********u - 1 BTC
d*** - 1 BTC
m******e - 1 BTC
t********s - 1 BTC
f******t - 30 LTC
m****w - 1 BTC
d*****w - 0.1 BTC
y******p - 1 BTC
g*******r - 1 BTC
p********r - 0.05 BTC

This cycle is revolutionary in the sense that someone holding LV2 coins will generate coins at a fast rate and cause inflation, yet to get LV2 coins they would need to burn LV1 coins and that would cause deflation. In every case of inflation, there is a stronger deflation to counteract it. This may very well be the first currency, both fiat and crypto, that has a built in mechanism to eliminate inflation on a very large scale. The cherry on top is that this deflation is instant, whereas inflation is dragged out over a long period of time. Let me give you an example:

Assuming a constant demand, a typical Proof of Work or Proof of Stake coin will lose a vast amount of value as the supply of coins on the market increases. A Proof of Burn coin on it's own will forever be attached to a Proof of Work or Proof of Stake coin and by association will also lose value over time, again noting that this assumes a constant demand. Levelcoin on the other hand has evolved to use a combination of the best features of Proof of Stake and Proof of Burn. This has lead to a system that is highly resistant to inflation and may in fact have the opposite effect. Assuming a constant demand, the value of Levelcoin will likely increase as more and more people burn their LV1 coins, causing supply to dwindle.

[LiquidNitrogen]

Amazing, I have had the same concept for a coin for a couple months would like to see this implemented... i would like to buy some level coins