[ANN] [ICB] IcebergCoin ❄︎ Big Update 27.11.❄︎ In-Wallet Tradebot❄︎ [MALWARE?]

[Icebergcoin]

Launch date ?

Market in Bittrex will be opened tomorrow and mining phase will begin about 11 July

[1715447316]

1715447316

[1715447316]

1715447316

[meccoin4me]

still not tomorrow??

cant wait to buy!!

[niki25]

I must write here, im seeing your signature in all threads haha
What are your features?
I mined TAC and Your best point is POS

Perhaps the algo which suits some miners better and distributes the coin in a manner that's slightly more fair.
But after 7 days of mining it's over and PoS starts. And... that's all?
Whitepaper mentions the possible future features but it's just a list of features unrelated to each other and already existing in other coins, so even the ideas are nothing new, and there is not a word about what purpose will the coin and wallet serve or what problem does it tackle, or anything of any value about the features mentioned.
Without anything to back your pretty much undefined intentions with, no serious investor will come within miles of this coin, so you need to think fast about this:

- What problem not addressed by any other coin on the market can we tackle with a unique approach and go on to design and deliver an innovative, working solution that would serve some sort of a purpose to the public?
- Realistically thinking - if we don't come up with ideas backed by convincing theoretical knowledge and present them within a couple days, it would be a miracle to sell even as much as 1% of the IPO, as the proposed Market Cap valuation is currently far beyond delusional. What reasoning is your supposed Market Cap value based on, anyway?

These problems need to be addressed and then we can talk about a coin that could survive past its first few weeks.

Don't worry, I still think this has potential - but these questions need to be asked and need to be addressed!

Developers - why haven't you addressed any of these concerns? Please respond.

Now,our first priority is to launch this coin.
We have a hard work ahead and we are working hard to launch accordingly to our plans.
This coin is not a copypaste coin,it has been rebuilt because it is the first coin NIST5 PoW/PoS and many features has to be recoded.
We have many plans,but,first we have to finish the most important thing.
We actually know which one will be the next step, but we are not going to publish it. We don't want fall in pump and dump schemes. We have seen in the last weeks a lot of examples of that, any dev publishes an announce of a next feature, suddenly everybody buy, later everyday sell, and after that people forget about this coin and begin to look for the next one to pump. That's not what we are looking for.

We are not going to change the ICO marketcap because we,the team, have discussed it many times and we consider that it is a fair price for everyone.
We don't care if nobody buys, we don't care if we sell 0.1 BTC or 90 BTC in the ICO,we prefer to sell 0.1 BTC with a fair price,than 90 BTC with a low price,because this would make investor dump the coin. The objective of the ICO is to give the chance to investors of buying at a fair and realistic price,unsold coins will be destroyed by Bittrex.

Nice explanation, there were some people waiting something like this

[Auxi]

Price could be higher than DARK?

[psychocoin]

We are not going to change the ICO marketcap because we,the team, have discussed it many times and we consider that it is a fair price for everyone.
We don't care if nobody buys, we don't care if we sell 0.1 BTC or 90 BTC in the ICO,we prefer to sell 0.1 BTC with a fair price,than 90 BTC with a low price,because this would make investor dump the coin. The objective of the ICO is to give the chance to investors of buying at a fair and realistic price,unsold coins will be destroyed by Bittrex.

So, we are meant to accept that $300,000 (500 BTC) is a fair price for what looks like a couple weeks worth of effort, tops, of rehashing other people's code without any innovations?

You say it's a realistic price - if it is then you must have evidence you used to assess it, that we (the investors) can verify to be true. There's gotta be something? Cause if there isn't then it's just as realistic as 100000000 BTC which I, too, just pulled out of my ass.

"We have discussed this" or anything of the sort is not an argument, especially because you have near zero credibility or accountability, your anonymous claims cannot inspire confidence in anybody.

As it stands, you could disappear with the ICO profit as soon as it's sold without any repercussions, the investment of fools who bought it would be worth zero and there would be nothing anyone could do about it.

What evidence can you provide which ensures this cannot happen?

In addition, you claim you are intentionally not going to inform the community about any of your plans. How is that supposed to inspire confidence? I think it does the exact opposite.

Do you have anything you can say to convince people that you are not delusional?

[atleticofa]

There is no investment whitout risk. I feel comfortable investing on this coin, I spoke with devs on IRC and I have good vibrations about the future.

Nobody forces anyone to invest. Look at NXT, I was following them at the begining and I didn't invest because I thought it was going to be a scam, now I hate me when I remember that.

I will trust in this tip of the iceberg, and I will wait to see the upcoming hidden part

[psychocoin]

There is no investment whitout risk. I feel comfortable investing on this coin, I spoke with devs on IRC and I have good vibrations about the future.

Nobody forces anyone to invest. Look at NXT, I was following them at the begining and I didn't invest because I thought it was going to be a scam, now I hate me when I remember that.

I will trust in this tip of the iceberg, and I will wait to see the upcoming hidden part

People who invest based on nothing more than 'good vibrations' will lose most of the time, you know that, right?

I know there's always risk, but is it not reasonable to expect that the dev will do anything in their power to mitigate the risk? They are currently doing the exact opposite.

[dare88]

There is no investment whitout risk. I feel comfortable investing on this coin, I spoke with devs on IRC and I have good vibrations about the future.

Nobody forces anyone to invest. Look at NXT, I was following them at the begining and I didn't invest because I thought it was going to be a scam, now I hate me when I remember that.

I will trust in this tip of the iceberg, and I will wait to see the upcoming hidden part

People who invest based on nothing more than 'good vibrations' will lose most of the time, you know that, right?

I know there's always risk, but is it not reasonable to expect that the dev will do anything in their power to mitigate the risk? They are currently doing the exact opposite.

The dev is explaining it in the main post.

Bittrex will supervise everything, and make sure that everything is right before giving any BTC.

Is not Bittrex enought credibility for you?

I can't understand why are you just saying fools about this project, when you have the signature of Icebergcoin.

Are you suporting it or not?

No sense  

[Natium]

There is no investment whitout risk. I feel comfortable investing on this coin, I spoke with devs on IRC and I have good vibrations about the future.

Nobody forces anyone to invest. Look at NXT, I was following them at the begining and I didn't invest because I thought it was going to be a scam, now I hate me when I remember that.

I will trust in this tip of the iceberg, and I will wait to see the upcoming hidden part

People who invest based on nothing more than 'good vibrations' will lose most of the time, you know that, right?

I know there's always risk, but is it not reasonable to expect that the dev will do anything in their power to mitigate the risk? They are currently doing the exact opposite.

Do the people on 2009 had any warranty about bitcoin? People risked their money, even paying electricity bills for something that had no profit. Now some of those people are rich.

An example of it:
http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/29/5156246/7-5-million-bitcoins-on-hard-drive-thrown-away-in-uk

[hokus_pokus]

Well done. Can't wait to mine it

[leduc]

google trad french

[Astrax5]

Can't wait for tomorrow!!! 

[nanoprobe]

There is no investment whitout risk. I feel comfortable investing on this coin, I spoke with devs on IRC and I have good vibrations about the future.

Nobody forces anyone to invest. Look at NXT, I was following them at the begining and I didn't invest because I thought it was going to be a scam, now I hate me when I remember that.

I will trust in this tip of the iceberg, and I will wait to see the upcoming hidden part

People who invest based on nothing more than 'good vibrations' will lose most of the time, you know that, right?

I know there's always risk, but is it not reasonable to expect that the dev will do anything in their power to mitigate the risk? They are currently doing the exact opposite.

I understand your concerns but it's really pretty simple. Insinuating that the devs might do this or that is a waste of time. If you don't feel comfortable risking your money then don't. I'll be putting some BTC into the ICO and take my chances. Might be a home run, might strike out. I don't risk anything I can't afford to lose.

[psychocoin]

There is no investment whitout risk. I feel comfortable investing on this coin, I spoke with devs on IRC and I have good vibrations about the future.

Nobody forces anyone to invest. Look at NXT, I was following them at the begining and I didn't invest because I thought it was going to be a scam, now I hate me when I remember that.

I will trust in this tip of the iceberg, and I will wait to see the upcoming hidden part

People who invest based on nothing more than 'good vibrations' will lose most of the time, you know that, right?

I know there's always risk, but is it not reasonable to expect that the dev will do anything in their power to mitigate the risk? They are currently doing the exact opposite.

Do the people on 2009 had any warranty about bitcoin? People risked their money, even paying electricity bills for something that had no profit. Now some of those people are rich.

An example of it:
http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/29/5156246/7-5-million-bitcoins-on-hard-drive-thrown-away-in-uk

This is completely unrelated, because people who read the Bitcoin White paper or closely examined the code and REALLY understood it had MUCH more than a 'good vibration' to go with. It was clearly revolutionary. Not all revolutionary things are a quick profit, so there was still some risk but long term - everyone who understood the implications AND were prepared to wait however long it takes to reach mainstream attention... Well, those few people would end up multiplying their investment by orders of magnitude, depending on when they bought in. And deservedly so.

That is nothing like what we see here. It could be slightly different but that's up to the dev.

[psychocoin]

There is no investment whitout risk. I feel comfortable investing on this coin, I spoke with devs on IRC and I have good vibrations about the future.

Nobody forces anyone to invest. Look at NXT, I was following them at the begining and I didn't invest because I thought it was going to be a scam, now I hate me when I remember that.

I will trust in this tip of the iceberg, and I will wait to see the upcoming hidden part

People who invest based on nothing more than 'good vibrations' will lose most of the time, you know that, right?

I know there's always risk, but is it not reasonable to expect that the dev will do anything in their power to mitigate the risk? They are currently doing the exact opposite.

The dev is explaining it in the main post.

Bittrex will supervise everything, and make sure that everything is right before giving any BTC.

Is not Bittrex enought credibility for you?

I can't understand why are you just saying fools about this project, when you have the signature of Icebergcoin.

Are you suporting it or not?

No sense  

So, what are the exact conditions when 'everything is right' and coins are released? Can Bittrex have any control over what happens after that? They can't, and that is my concern precisely.

It can't be long before up to 96 BTC (I have to correct myself previously mistaking 500 BTC for being the amount that ICO is worth but that doesn't change my point) is released (probably even before the PoW ends) and the developer would be absolutely free to cash out up to $60,000 because it's already in BTC, not ICB - they don't even have to wait long enough for price to reach its potential before dumping. The amount is actually many times more than the highest premine % ceilings that the community ever tolerate as acceptable, why would this be an exception?

Then they just walk away forever with no repercussions. They could then release their next copycoin, because if people keep falling for that, it's tempting to keep doing that when you get $60,000 for what is a few weeks of work at most, isn't? I highly doubt that Bittrex have any information about the dev's real life identity, which would be something that would change the situation.

I do support it, but how much more I will invest in it, if anything at all, depends on the level of competence presented by the developer's answers. I'm sure I'm not the only one like that.

[runrren]

IcebergCoin will be a nice coin, I have pay attention on it some days

[bulehi]

NIST5 is a good algorithm ,we are waiting for it .

[cecoin]

I cannt open the link just now, when will it be on bittrex ? All of us are waiting.

[atleticofa]

"We want to be 100% transparent, so there will be a public address holding the investments."

[psychocoin]

"We want to be 100% transparent, so there will be a public address holding the investments."

That by itself does not mean anything. They can still move the funds without any worries, all it means is we will see when exactly it happens and how much coin was there. And that does not even change the amount of dev's profit.