[ANN][CRYPT] CryptCoin x11 + PoS | P2P Anonymity | 0% Premine | Commander

[WheresMyWallet]

I'm speechless (almost) with the lack of FUD today, looks like the work Mindfox is doing has stumped them.

All the FUDder are in a group meeting at the moment

Looks like their meeting ended, one has resurfaced

[WheresMyWallet]

Or another option - there is something seriously wrong with cryptcoin protocol and/or blockchain (because it adds 10 CRYPT to one address but it doesn't subtract 10 CRYPT from the address from where it was (supposedly) sent).

The exchanges would have picked up on this instantly, so that isn't the answer.

[pbremen01]

Or another option - there is something seriously wrong with cryptcoin protocol and/or blockchain (because it adds 10 CRYPT to one address but it doesn't subtract 10 CRYPT from the address from where it was (supposedly) sent).

The exchanges would have picked up on this instantly, so that isn't the answer.

Exchanges don't care or check from which addresses the coins come. They are only interested in that they get coins on the address that they control (they have private key).

I guess that there was human error (or multiple errors). You can't expect that the existing wallet will create "anonymous" transactions if this functionality hasn't been finished yet (and of course it cannot even theoretically be compiled in the executable file of the current wallet).

[WheresMyWallet]

Or another option - there is something seriously wrong with cryptcoin protocol and/or blockchain (because it adds 10 CRYPT to one address but it doesn't subtract 10 CRYPT from the address from where it was (supposedly) sent).

The exchanges would have picked up on this instantly, so that isn't the answer.

Exchanges don't care or check from which addresses the coins come. They are only interested in that they get coins on the address that they control (they have private key).

I guess that there was human error (or multiple errors). You can't expect that the existing wallet will create "anonymous" transactions if this functionality hasn't been finished yet (and of course it cannot even theoretically be compiled in the executable file of the current wallet).

The exchanges do care very much, they check the addresses vs confirmations all the time for double spends
That's how WC was caught out.

[tylerderden]

I'm guessing human error or payed shill or poor attempt to create something to fud about. 1 of the 3 or something else?

[WheresMyWallet]

I'm guessing human error or payed shill or poor attempt to create something to fud about. 1 of the 3 or something else?

Welcome back! I thought you had left, guess you missed us too much.

[pbremen01]

Or another option - there is something seriously wrong with cryptcoin protocol and/or blockchain (because it adds 10 CRYPT to one address but it doesn't subtract 10 CRYPT from the address from where it was (supposedly) sent).

The exchanges would have picked up on this instantly, so that isn't the answer.

Exchanges don't care or check from which addresses the coins come. They are only interested in that they get coins on the address that they control (they have private key).

I guess that there was human error (or multiple errors). You can't expect that the existing wallet will create "anonymous" transactions if this functionality hasn't been finished yet (and of course it cannot even theoretically be compiled in the executable file of the current wallet).

The exchanges do care very much, they check the addresses vs confirmations all the time for double spends
That's how WC was caught out.

I don't know what WC is and what technology it uses.

How can you check "addresses vs confirmations"? Confirmation is a number associated with one transaction. Address doesn't have any such number. Exchanges track confirmations.

It is not the job of an exchange to prevent double spends. They can't prevent or resolve any double spends at all. The network itself (protocol and/or blockchain and/or miners) needs to "resolve" double spends.

If CryptoNick's example is valid, then this actually means that CryptCoin network may actually allow double spends (but I seriously doubt this).

First CryptoNick spent 10 CRYPT for donation, but this probably didn't decrease amount of coins on his address (maybe it decreased number of coins on another address, but we don't know that). So that means that these 10 CRYPT coins may be sent second time to another addess. Voila - double spend.

[WheresMyWallet]

You'll have to ask him pbremen01.
He is probably one of the longest serving FUDders here who was always willing to voice his concern.
A U-turn from him was a surprise out of the blue.

[benthach]

Any new and update with CRYPT? i see lot and lot of people mining CRYPT like crazy but the price is low.

[WheresMyWallet]

Any new and update with CRYPT? i see lot and lot of people mining CRYPT like crazy but the price is low.

Nothing concrete it seems atm, but people seem to have been accumulating coin all day today.

[pbremen01]

i support

Excellent! What do you support? This coin? competing coin? pumpers and whales? the devs? your wife?

[damiano]

Looks like someone doesn't want the price to go up just yet.
My guess is a bit of accumulation going on here before some news.

I'm doing a little accumulating myself... I feel the news is coming, and the current prices @ under 60K is great

The fact that this coin does have a chance to get on btc-e is huge. 

[tylerderden]

I'm guessing human error or payed shill or poor attempt to create something to fud about. 1 of the 3 or something else?

Welcome back! I thought you had left, guess you missed us too much.

Nah man just out making some btc to buy back in eventually but i dont see the point in letting money sit idle or going down do you?

[WheresMyWallet]

I'm guessing human error or payed shill or poor attempt to create something to fud about. 1 of the 3 or something else?

Welcome back! I thought you had left, guess you missed us too much.

Nah man just out making some btc to buy back in eventually but i dont see the point in letting money sit idle or going down do you?

Nope idle money doesn't work for you

[cozk]

If the anon feature and the BTC-e rumors are true this coin will be the next thing.

Devs are relatively credible but there is alot a lot of FUD, lets say chances are 50/50 that the rumors are true.

It has half the coin cap than DRK and DRK is valued at 10$. Crypt could go between 5$-25$ ea.

Looking at it that way its worth a 5-15% of your portfolio investment.

If you win you win big and if you lose you lose little.

/protip

[Waldozaur12]

Crypt have so much potential and this is main reason for massive FUD. But Crypt is strong. There no is bad coins there is only bad people.

[googs84]

Even Cinni is trying to take Mindfox onto their team by offering him 0.25 and raising money.... Why would a competing coin offer a developer of another coin money to join their team... Because they know he is on to something big!

[tristartek]

Done, i'm out. going to ride super. good luck.

roll on the floor laughing, super is an obvious shit coin, crypt anon feature is already being implemented and soon to be officially released.

daydreamer.

Better play Lotto.

Hitler said the same thing.

[tristartek]

Or another option - there is something seriously wrong with cryptcoin protocol and/or blockchain (because it adds 10 CRYPT to one address but it doesn't subtract 10 CRYPT from the address from where it was (supposedly) sent).

The exchanges would have picked up on this instantly, so that isn't the answer.

Exchanges don't care or check from which addresses the coins come. They are only interested in that they get coins on the address that they control (they have private key).

I guess that there was human error (or multiple errors). You can't expect that the existing wallet will create "anonymous" transactions if this functionality hasn't been finished yet (and of course it cannot even theoretically be compiled in the executable file of the current wallet).

Super has anon onw.  Why dont you go fud their thread jackass.  Or wait..is it your goal to only fud crypt, that has nothing yet and its in the works still?  Dont bash work that hasnt been created yet paulsnoker.  We should release your phone# so everyone can call you to ask questions.

[tristartek]

Or another option - there is something seriously wrong with cryptcoin protocol and/or blockchain (because it adds 10 CRYPT to one address but it doesn't subtract 10 CRYPT from the address from where it was (supposedly) sent).

The exchanges would have picked up on this instantly, so that isn't the answer.

Exchanges don't care or check from which addresses the coins come. They are only interested in that they get coins on the address that they control (they have private key).

I guess that there was human error (or multiple errors). You can't expect that the existing wallet will create "anonymous" transactions if this functionality hasn't been finished yet (and of course it cannot even theoretically be compiled in the executable file of the current wallet).

The exchanges do care very much, they check the addresses vs confirmations all the time for double spends
That's how WC was caught out.

^^^ 100% true.  Obviously the math genius doesnt know how things work. He only knows how to quote lame reddit posts because he is from VRC.