[ANN][STD] StandardCoin - BUILT-IN EXCHANGE - Permanently Rising Rate

[ghibly79]

The earlier investor is investor A not investor 1. Investor A is the one who joined the Price Valuation Phase.
Investor 1 is just an example, he re-present for all the Initial Investors, who hold 100m STD.

You cannot describe a hypothetical "Investor 1" withdrawing his funds without explaining exactly what investment that very same person made in the first place, and how many STD they got for that investment.

The Investor 1 got his 100m STD in the Price Valuation Phase, which costs him 40 BTC.

And then 100 mil more are mined and sold for 40 btc (cause value is fixed). Using those 40 btc initial investment. Then investor 1 wants to sell back his 100mil std, which costed him 40 btc but OH WAIT no btc are left.

Not a scammer, just bad "quality" post :trollface:

[Kreativekrypto]

Ghibly thank you for warning everyone with your numerous posts, also thanks for the negative feedback and trust. I will remove mine on yours after yours is removed. Once done just leave the thread you've been the best white knight you could and warned us all many times, so its ok to leave now. You're 35+ years old you should know better by now.

Standard thank you for fixing the calculation when do you estimate the multipool to go live?

[ghibly79]

Mods don't remove scams, you have to read and find out yourself (here my explanation).

I notified Tomatocage too.

Huh! It's not cool to misuse the trust system like that. What if everybody begin to do that?

We all get the scam accusations already. Are you going to give negative trust to everyone who doesn't agree with you?

No I'm not.
I'm tagging SCAMMERS. Maths there, no opinions, no "disagreement".
You can still choose to get scammed if you are fooled by a couple of simple formulas, your choice of course. But a fair warning may spare some distracted user to be a victims.

- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.

"Quality" of the post has nothing to do with this. It's a plain, blatant scam. It's a fraud, so op is not trustworthy. I'm perfectly in line with trust system guidelines.
Matematical proof here  --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=522874.msg5919351#msg5919351

No, you are misusing the system. There's no way around it. You clearly justify your negative feedback on the quality of his posts. Trust system is meant for trading. You can't redefine the rules how you like. I agree it's good to warn about scams, but nobody likes bullies.

Again: no. A bad quality but HONEST post will not be tagged. If he's trying to scam people money it has nothing to do with quality.
Are you just a troll or another OP sockpuppet?

Are you trying to bully me? What fucking sockpuppet? Fuck you really! From now on, I put you to my ignore list.

Ignoring me is legit, and pls do cause you are a waste of time anyway. Just don't falsely accuse me of abusing the system.

[hxmsam]

Nice catch Jomay. Dev let us know when the formula is corrected please.

[ghibly79]

Ghibly thank you for warning everyone with your numerous posts, also thanks for the negative feedback and trust. I will remove mine on yours after yours is removed. Once done just leave the thread you've been the best white knight you could and warned us all many times, so its ok to leave now. You're 35+ years old you should know better by now.

Standard thank you for fixing the calculation when do you estimate the multipool to go live?

I gave you a negative feedback because you gave me one first, falsely accusing me of abusing the system and abusing it yourself. Your opinion is not the problem: I'm not scamming anyone there so you can't leave a negative, while op is so negative feedback is deserved. Just to clarify.

And yes I can remove mine if you remove yours, that's reasonable.

[ghibly79]

It's so simple I'm amazed at people stupidity tbh.

Maybe numbers intimidate you?

Can be explained without numbers even: initial investors pour some btcs in and they receive some (not all) standard coins for that. Still the value of std is calculated by dividing btc invested by TOTAL MAX number of coins. But part of std coins are bought off others (miners). With whom bitcoins? Initial investors' (cause there are only those in the system). So now initial investors can't get back all their invested btc anymore, only the remaining.

If new investors come in and pour some more btc, when they sell back they'll get that same btc they poured in PLUS SOME MORE cause they raised the value by buying (by design it can only rise). And where are you getting those extra btc to pay them the premium? Again, from initial investors, who then lose money. On the other hand if initial investors sell back before new investors, new investors lose money instead.

Last seller will be left holding the bag and losing money. It's called a PONZI SCHEME

Stay away from cryptos if you have this poor understanding of basic (elementary school) maths and economics.

I'd tell you this:

Stay away from cryptos if you have this poor understanding of basic (elementary school) maths and economics.

[ghibly79]

Anyway I'll take kreativekrypto advice on one point: I did my best already and can move on.
Best of luck

[Kreativekrypto]

Done removed, its better to agree to disagree. Like stated though, you've warned us all just find another thread we understand and accept the risks.

[standardcoin]

Nice catch Jomay. Dev let us know when the formula is corrected please.

Already fixed it. I posted this earlier:

I've just fixed the formula on the Exchange page. We will use a new concept called: Step - AMC
Basically. The buying price will based on the next-step AMC, not the current one. This will make sure that all the new investors in the current round will buy at the same price.
Will deploy the new calculator in a moment.

[Iced]

Only question I have is what is the configuration file for this wallet (nodes) since I can't seem to sync...

I am willing to take the risk even if it is a ponzi scheme whatever...

[standardcoin]

Only question I have is what is the configuration file for this wallet (nodes) since I can't seem to sync...

I am willing to take the risk even if it is a ponzi scheme whatever...

try these nodes:
addnode=85.3.43.4:60391
addnode=134.3.176.190:52847
addnode=101.167.59.225:62175
addnode=83.82.233.102:62096
addnode=112.81.142.180:50138

[tibbyte]

Too well it all started. 

[Turpomann]

I redefine the rule system to my liking too. From now on I'm going to give positive trust points to all posts that I really like or those that I feel are getting unjustfied trust points until proven right. How do you like my new rule ghibly79?

[trdiablo]

I invested some BTC in Standardcoin and believe in it.
DEV seems to have spent a lot of time and thought into this.

Please don't tell me on 1 April when the price valuation phase ends that this was all just a April fools prank

[trdiablo]

I redefine the rule system to my liking too. From now on I'm going to give positive trust points to all posts that I really like or those that I feel are getting unjustfied trust points until proven right. How do you like my new rule ghibly79?

Don't feed the trolls

[ghibly79]

I redefine the rule system to my liking too. From now on I'm going to give positive trust points to all posts that I really like or those that i feel are getting unjustfied trust points until proven right. How do you like my new rule ghibly79?

Then YOU will be abusing the system One last time: I tagged a scammer, not a post "I don't like".

Btw check op trust rating again now.

Now let's move on, I wasted enough time on this. Just ignore me and go invest.

DEV seems to have spent a lot of time and thought into this.

That's for sure, the problem is some investors don't spend the same time thinking about it xD

[crossabdd]

try these nodes:
addnode=85.3.43.4:60391
addnode=134.3.176.190:52847
addnode=101.167.59.225:62175
addnode=83.82.233.102:62096
addnode=112.81.142.180:50138
It seems work.

[Moebius327]

I redefine the rule system to my liking too. From now on I'm going to give positive trust points to all posts that I really like or those that I feel are getting unjustfied trust points until proven right. How do you like my new rule ghibly79?

Sorry but I would like it very much when I see you guys burn into this ponzi, despite all the warnings.

[kache]

Selling, PM with offers:

[kache]

How about changing the abbreviation STD to something not so sexually transmitted? I know that most of the suitable ones are already taken, but something like STDC, SDD, SND are much better than STD for obvious reason. 

No such thing as bad advertising.