TheMightyX
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
Vires in Numeris
|
|
April 24, 2014, 06:03:24 AM |
|
That's what I was thinking. Easy for a mod to give out the IP address's of the account. If indeed there is an FBI investigation then will want this information. I've contacted the admins before about previous scams and they are unwilling to do anything about it. The funny thing is because they are allowing these scams to happen they are partly liable and could be sued in a court of law. All though not aiding and abetting a criminal act they are willfully ignoring crimes which can put them in some hot water if enough people group together to form a class-action lawsuit (which in my opinion they should). heres an excerpt from http://www.ericgoldman.org/writings/websiteliabilityalert.htm on website liability : 4. Other Claims. Until the scope of the Communications Decency Act’s safe harbor is more fully understood, the range of potential claims against websites is impossible to define. If the safe harbor defense is not available, websites will need to develop other defenses, if they can, against claims for user-caused harms and attendant claims that the website knew of the harm and failed to take reasonable actions to prevent or remedy the harm. I'd like to start a petition soon but I'm still compiling data. If I can get everyones support I believe we can make this community a better place by imposing a set of community regulations that we can all agree on (like mandatory escrow, no self-moderated ANN threads, etc). The first step will be to organize all the data of the most recent scams, how many people were scammed, how much money, etc. Then create a thread explaining the situation, what we want to do about it, and put it to a vote. If we can steer everyone to that thread and vote we might be able to force some positive change. Can I get a show of support of how many would consider signing a petition/vote?
|
|
|
|
sonysasankan
|
|
April 24, 2014, 06:32:34 AM |
|
I trust u.
We are the same. I think no body will believe u again.But keep going.
Aren't you that scammer who stole everyone's money by running that pool?
|
|
|
|
sonysasankan
|
|
April 24, 2014, 06:46:02 AM |
|
So why did some people not use escrow? What was the reason for it?
Escrow fees. How much it was btw? 1% right? 5$ to keep 500$ safe is not bad at all and I'm not sure why investors were paying escrow fees, they should have demanded escrow service from dev on his own expense. In H2O Coin's IPO Dev paid escrow fees. i think ppl just be lazy and not familiar with escrow.
I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low. Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security. You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee). You might consider adjusting your terms. The next potential scam we have is Alter Ego Coin.... who is fond of saying "if you want escrow, then you go ahead" and other such red herrings when asked proper questions. I've been "trolling" their thread for a few days now
|
|
|
|
Jonesd
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1014
|
|
April 24, 2014, 09:03:40 AM |
|
So why did some people not use escrow? What was the reason for it?
Escrow fees. How much it was btw? 1% right? 5$ to keep 500$ safe is not bad at all and I'm not sure why investors were paying escrow fees, they should have demanded escrow service from dev on his own expense. In H2O Coin's IPO Dev paid escrow fees. i think ppl just be lazy and not familiar with escrow.
I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low. Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security. You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee). You might consider adjusting your terms. The next potential scam we have is Alter Ego Coin.... who is fond of saying "if you want escrow, then you go ahead" and other such red herrings when asked proper questions. I've been "trolling" their thread for a few days now Nice one. I'll warn some people as well
|
Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Block Bastards
|
|
|
MairaObergh
|
|
April 24, 2014, 09:14:04 AM |
|
I really think the best thing to do is to invest on something true when it's live, like Nemcoin. Or even ethereum. Stop gambling in these iffy coins.
|
|
|
|
TheMightyX
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
Vires in Numeris
|
|
April 25, 2014, 07:27:22 AM |
|
I really think the best thing to do is to invest on something true when it's live, like Nemcoin. Or even ethereum. Stop gambling in these iffy coins.
But if we didn't gamble on iffy coins, how would we become NXT millionaires?
|
|
|
|
Anon136
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
|
|
April 27, 2014, 02:52:44 AM |
|
So why did some people not use escrow? What was the reason for it?
Escrow fees. How much it was btw? 1% right? 5$ to keep 500$ safe is not bad at all and I'm not sure why investors were paying escrow fees, they should have demanded escrow service from dev on his own expense. In H2O Coin's IPO Dev paid escrow fees. i think ppl just be lazy and not familiar with escrow.
I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low. Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security. You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee). You might consider adjusting your terms. its not that. thats not why i personally require people to have their private keys. i do it because it allows me to use the blockchain its self for all of my accounting and thus cuts my workload atleast in half. that allows me to offer lower prices and services more customers in total.
|
Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
|
|
|
Jonesd
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1014
|
|
April 27, 2014, 03:29:03 PM |
|
So why did some people not use escrow? What was the reason for it?
Escrow fees. How much it was btw? 1% right? 5$ to keep 500$ safe is not bad at all and I'm not sure why investors were paying escrow fees, they should have demanded escrow service from dev on his own expense. In H2O Coin's IPO Dev paid escrow fees. i think ppl just be lazy and not familiar with escrow.
I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low. Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security. You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee). You might consider adjusting your terms. The next potential scam we have is Alter Ego Coin.... who is fond of saying "if you want escrow, then you go ahead" and other such red herrings when asked proper questions. I've been "trolling" their thread for a few days now Nice one. I'll warn some people as well It was a scam as well. Well spotted!
|
Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Block Bastards
|
|
|
escrow.ms
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004
|
|
April 27, 2014, 05:27:23 PM |
|
I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.
Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security. You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).
You might consider adjusting your terms.
I never said It's a mandatory requirement, you can check my other IPO's Most investors didn't sent any keys to me, If it's hard use can send funds and ask escrow provider about it. But I will sure remove that requirement from future escrow upon one condition which is, if user wants refund he need to prove that he sent those funds from his wallet. Most escrow providers encourage users to send funds from their own wallet due to security and for refund process. (Ie: If some investors account got hacked, he can simply ask escrow provide to give refund on different address) In this IPO,I think main issue was fees.. (Anon136, please don't mind) which was.. My fees are 0.02BTC or 0.9% which ever is greater and it will be taken off the top when ever i release or refund those coins.
If some investor wants to send 0.1 btc, 0.02 BTC is too much. https://blockchain.info/address/1KFtdiVELBcaVtaueqf8RJBkoZnjHbshKA
|
|
|
|
Anon136
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
|
|
April 27, 2014, 05:49:11 PM |
|
I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.
Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security. You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).
You might consider adjusting your terms.
I never said It's a mandatory requirement, you can check my other IPO's Most investors didn't sent any keys to me, If it's hard use can send funds and ask escrow provider about it. But I will sure remove that requirement from future escrow upon one condition which is, if user wants refund he need to prove that he sent those funds from his wallet. Most escrow providers encourage users to send funds from their own wallet due to security and for refund process. (Ie: If some investors account got hacked, he can simply ask escrow provide to give refund on different address) In this IPO,I think main issue was fees.. (Anon136, please don't mind) which was.. My fees are 0.02BTC or 0.9% which ever is greater and it will be taken off the top when ever i release or refund those coins.
If some investor wants to send 0.1 btc, 0.02 BTC is too much. https://blockchain.info/address/1KFtdiVELBcaVtaueqf8RJBkoZnjHbshKA That's how much I value my time. The amount they send doesn't effect the amount of time it takes to process their order and handle the necessary customer service and it doesn't change how much I value my time.
|
Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
|
|
|
Gingermod
|
|
April 27, 2014, 10:58:10 PM |
|
I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.
Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security. You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).
You might consider adjusting your terms.
I never said It's a mandatory requirement, you can check my other IPO's Most investors didn't sent any keys to me, If it's hard use can send funds and ask escrow provider about it. But I will sure remove that requirement from future escrow upon one condition which is, if user wants refund he need to prove that he sent those funds from his wallet. Most escrow providers encourage users to send funds from their own wallet due to security and for refund process. (Ie: If some investors account got hacked, he can simply ask escrow provide to give refund on different address) In this IPO,I think main issue was fees.. (Anon136, please don't mind) which was.. My fees are 0.02BTC or 0.9% which ever is greater and it will be taken off the top when ever i release or refund those coins.
If some investor wants to send 0.1 btc, 0.02 BTC is too much. https://blockchain.info/address/1KFtdiVELBcaVtaueqf8RJBkoZnjHbshKA Better to risk a little money rather than a lot
|
|
|
|
Gingermod
|
|
April 28, 2014, 12:43:46 AM |
|
That's what I was thinking. Easy for a mod to give out the IP address's of the account. If indeed there is an FBI investigation then will want this information. I've contacted the admins before about previous scams and they are unwilling to do anything about it. The funny thing is because they are allowing these scams to happen they are partly liable and could be sued in a court of law. All though not aiding and abetting a criminal act they are willfully ignoring crimes which can put them in some hot water if enough people group together to form a class-action lawsuit (which in my opinion they should). heres an excerpt from http://www.ericgoldman.org/writings/websiteliabilityalert.htm on website liability : 4. Other Claims. Until the scope of the Communications Decency Act’s safe harbor is more fully understood, the range of potential claims against websites is impossible to define. If the safe harbor defense is not available, websites will need to develop other defenses, if they can, against claims for user-caused harms and attendant claims that the website knew of the harm and failed to take reasonable actions to prevent or remedy the harm. I'd like to start a petition soon but I'm still compiling data. If I can get everyones support I believe we can make this community a better place by imposing a set of community regulations that we can all agree on (like mandatory escrow, no self-moderated ANN threads, etc). The first step will be to organize all the data of the most recent scams, how many people were scammed, how much money, etc. Then create a thread explaining the situation, what we want to do about it, and put it to a vote. If we can steer everyone to that thread and vote we might be able to force some positive change. Can I get a show of support of how many would consider signing a petition/vote? I'll do whatever it takes to clean this fucking place up. People should also be aware of a few things. I have not played with this website a lot but: https://bitiodine.net/You can link and batch wallet addy's from this web site. I'm sure it will make things much easier for the FBI, IRS or anybody that wants to compile a list of wallet addy's that are connected. If anybody is stupid enough to think they cannot be found by using BTC or any Crypto is just that - STUPID. Also, there is a website about to launch: http://www.shitcoins.infoI can't wait to start listing Scam/Shit Coin's here. This also means that we'll have back-up when informing people that it is a scam. I learned A LOT from EDG scam and I will be a LOT more careful in the future - Live and learn but... I'll still keep looking for this little fuck. I know s/he is reading this and probably even posting here, still. You can only hide for so long....... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BitIodine.net BitIodine.net Wow, that website looks very nice! I hope it lives up to its message, too many crappy coins flooding the market. I'm very sorry you lost what I am assuming is a large amount to this scam. It pains me to say, but the FBI and/or interpol simply doesn't care about cryptocurrencies and that's the way it's supposed to be; for better and for worse. Only in situations of money laundering, identity theft, phishing, viruses, credit card theft, etc will the FBI get involved. The IRS has classified Bitcoin as property for taxation purposes and FinCEN regards it as a currency for regulatory reasons. I assure you, no one but yourself has the opportunity to regain your money and bring justice to those who destabilize this community! Adding to this I am all for the anti-shitcoin revolution and would love to join you in defeating the cynical forces that thrive on innocents.
|
|
|
|
sonysasankan
|
|
April 28, 2014, 10:32:58 AM |
|
I really don't think any of those sites are going to have any impact on cleaning this mess. As long as stupid people exist, shitcoins will hold value. You cannot expect innovation to be considered valuable by those that do not understand them or care to. That's like an atheist preaching to the choir boy. There is no "enlightenment" awaiting them with proper information, simply because you are assuming they value shitcoins because of some sort of misinformation they received and you can correct that my providing proper information.
|
|
|
|
BitsBitsBits
|
|
April 28, 2014, 10:36:23 AM |
|
The daily income of new altcoins is spreading like a disease, slowly taking off market cap of bitcoin and litecoin day by day.
Only the innovative and new idea coins are worth looking into, really.
|
|
|
|
Jonesd
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1014
|
|
April 28, 2014, 11:18:06 AM |
|
The daily income of new altcoins is spreading like a disease, slowly taking off market cap of bitcoin and litecoin day by day.
Only the innovative and new idea coins are worth looking into, really.
I agree! I'm starting a foundation to help strengthen a small selection of coins and work as a community to strengthen the image of altcoins in general. Might be worth looking into: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=576714.0
|
Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Block Bastards
|
|
|
Untitled87
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
|
|
April 30, 2014, 04:34:36 AM |
|
someone just gave him $46 bucks.
|
|
|
|
jly77
|
|
April 30, 2014, 04:45:38 AM |
|
You have to release the coin as you promised. We all payed the IPO!!! Now at your part you must release the wallet!!!
I don't think you know how theft works. +1. This shit coin is so obvious a scam ! Can't believe so many people "invested" it.
|
|
|
|
Nxtblg
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 30, 2014, 10:40:13 AM |
|
I really don't think any of those sites are going to have any impact on cleaning this mess. As long as stupid people exist, shitcoins will hold value. You cannot expect innovation to be considered valuable by those that do not understand them or care to. That's like an atheist preaching to the choir boy. Or the choir boy preaching to the atheist.
|
|
|
|
Gingermod
|
|
April 30, 2014, 09:54:59 PM |
|
I really don't think any of those sites are going to have any impact on cleaning this mess. As long as stupid people exist, shitcoins will hold value. You cannot expect innovation to be considered valuable by those that do not understand them or care to. That's like an atheist preaching to the choir boy. Or the choir boy preaching to the atheist. Here we go...
|
|
|
|
mileva
Member
Offline
Activity: 77
Merit: 10
|
|
May 08, 2014, 03:23:20 AM |
|
How great of a lie!
|
|
|
|
|