Bittrex, Scammer or Scammed.

[rokkyroad]

"But at the current rate of scam, I would expect that Bittrex will soon be ready to make their grand finale, the infamous  "we got hacked" scam   "

I've been worried about this for awhile since exchange revenues went down. Needless to say, I've left nothing of value on Bittrex and a couple of others. We just got lucky with Mintpal and their recent hacking.
Everyone would be well advised to move assets to safety.

[ProGamer]

How are these scam coins added so quickly to exchanges while other coins are not?

[cassius69]

How are these scam coins adhd so quickly to exchanges while other coins are not?

word on the street: $1500 listing fee in btc behind closed doors.

[djm34]

How are these scam coins adhd so quickly to exchanges while other coins are not?

word on the street: $1500 listing fee in btc behind closed doors.

actually that's cheap   I would ask for 10% of the IPO revenue

[ProGamer]

i guarantee their staff are making these scam coins !
other wise they would be stopping them.

don't be gullible guys and don't let these exchanges play dumb with you.

they are ripping you off and playing stupid .

edit:
i already have posted numerous times about a LOT of suspicious shit with these guys (they make coins related crap)
and i don't want to retype out a wall of text all over again lol

That's what I believe too.
I believe that an exchange can make a mistake once in a while and add a loosy ipo scam but adding continuously ipo scam every 2 or 3 days... since a couple of week... ? well nobody is that stupid intentionally...
So yes I am pretty sure they are behind.

But at the current rate of scam, I would expect that Bittrex will soon be ready to make their grand finale, the infamous  "we got hacked" scam  

Now, may-be the profit generated by bittrex isn't large enough and it might be tempting to them to either generate their own crappy coin or just accept bribes to list coins which doesn't fall in their "selection procedure" (ie innovative etc...)

So for me, they are the scammer no the scammed... (obviously there are also people who keep buying in every IPO...   so scammed or scammer (or sock puppet ?)

It makes sense. I better withdraw before their grand finale.

Imagine the MT Gox screaming regulators and government agencies that would all come screaming in because a Bittrex is an American Company? I bet Bittrex is already being monitored by the US government so I doubt they would try anything.

[ebliever]

I've been altcoin mining and trading since early this year. Everyone involved in crypto for that long has some shrapnel in them.

That said, best wishes with your attempts to gain satisfaction. I do think the first exchange to publish strict guidelines on how it adds coins and the steps it takes to verify them will gain marketshare and trust. Of course scammers will work to find ways around any safeguards, but the absence of any real safeguards doesn't help the situation any.

Perhaps some sort of volunteer-managed "Altcoin clearinghouse" could even be developed, with each coin listed and a status on verification activities posted. It would be a quick reference for traders to see whether each coin has been vetted, to what degree, any issues that have come up, and so on. It could be ad-supported and if it is anything like I expect it would receive a ton of visits daily as a standard reference tool for altcoin traders.

[jasemoney]

You fell victim to a scam. So you should not be repaid what you lost. You invested into something that fell apart. Bittrex has no control over what happens to the markets. I feel bad for all the victims but this has nothing to do with bittrex at all. No matter what you do to prevent a scam, people will come up with clever ways to scam people. It's not bittrex's fault you and everyone else invested into a sh!tcoin and lost money. Now you want to be repaid? Im sorry, I feel bad for you....But its not how life works. You shouldnt get to "roll" back everytime someone makes a bad decision. Get over it and stop investing in shitcoins to make a quick buck.

This is like saying raped women are deserve to be raped because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time..

sorry but you cant go back to a time in which the girl wasn't raped. its terrible it happened but it can not be undone. same as now except as devils advocate i proclaim that getting raped is worse than neckbeards losing 100k.  you think anyone who got into facebook ipo at $38 was able to call up their broker and undo it when the price was $18 3 months later? Meanwhile it didnt go above the ipo price for another year...  as the trader in ALTCOINS you people should know firsthand that for no apparent reason your coin could turn out to be a scam, broken, hacked, attacked, left behind, or any other scenario that is pounding the 5-15 coins released daily into the dirt.  some of the biggest and "respected?" names in new coins have fallen apart in the last month ue to Dev leaving, Hacks, Hidden premines.  if this is your first month please get used to it. if its not your first month then im sure your used to it by now.
as always do your own research, dont invest more than you can lose, dont trust anybody, and dont expect the price to be the same when you wake up in the morning.

SUGGESTION WOW 
it could be reasonable for the exchanges to only allow the posting of up to 1% of the total coins per 24 hours per account. if a dev who controlled a 5% premine wanted to drop the bomb it could take 5 days for them to do a drop as 1% was posted to their account each day.  We could get more extreme by only allowing 1% of currently emitted coins if the exchanges wanted to read a block explorer/moneysupply.  im not an expert but im sure this could be done.  its like depositing a check in an atm, you get 100 bucks right now and the rest when the bank verifies it.

[peter378]

Did poloniex have some deposit limit that stopped a qora scammer? It seems like a good idea.

[Nxtblg]

Perhaps some sort of volunteer-managed "Altcoin clearinghouse" could even be developed, with each coin listed and a status on verification activities posted. It would be a quick reference for traders to see whether each coin has been vetted, to what degree, any issues that have come up, and so on. It could be ad-supported and if it is anything like I expect it would receive a ton of visits daily as a standard reference tool for altcoin traders.

Just to let you know, setting up a clearing house means doing some legwork for a future regulatory agency. That's exactly the chain of progress that led to the SEC being placed over what are sometimes called "Self-Regulatory Organizations" (dealer associations, exchanges, and of course clearing houses.)

As long as you're cool with it, fine and dandy; I'm more-or-less reconciled to something like that happening. I'm making my point so that you and anyone who likes your idea can go ahead with eyes opened.

If you're interested, try tracking down a full-length book on the full history of the New York Stock Exchange or of Wall Street in general.

[Nxtblg]

"But at the current rate of scam, I would expect that Bittrex will soon be ready to make their grand finale, the infamous  "we got hacked" scam   "

I've been worried about this for awhile since exchange revenues went down. Needless to say, I've left nothing of value on Bittrex and a couple of others. We just got lucky with Mintpal and their recent hacking.
Everyone would be well advised to move assets to safety.

To be quite blunt, there's a damn good reason for doing so even if the endgame isn't a grab and run. By doing so, you send a signal - the only signal that matters; declining volume and lower trading revenue - to Bittex managers that it's high time they cleaned up their act and got choosy about new listings.

I can't join you right now, as Bittrex is the only major exchange that lists Quebecoin which I'm trying to pick up right now, but I can say this flatly:

As the head dev of NFD, I have now lost all interest in getting NFD listed on Bittrex. In fact, a teeny part of me would prefer that they don't list NFD.

Their listing policy has gotten so bad, I'm a little bit worried about NFD being tarred by the same brush! 

Feel free to quote me on this.

[Nxtblg]

There are so many better analogies that exist, so don't bring that weak sauce in here.

The trouble with it is: even though it's weak sauce logically, it's one of the biggest hot buttons in the psyche of a normal male. The earlier poster comes across as something like a half-crazed Vietnam-vet type belting out: "Okay! You come home and someone is raping your sister..."

If you wave around the red herring, don't be surprised if someone like me smells something fishy...

[ebliever]

Perhaps some sort of volunteer-managed "Altcoin clearinghouse" could even be developed, with each coin listed and a status on verification activities posted. It would be a quick reference for traders to see whether each coin has been vetted, to what degree, any issues that have come up, and so on. It could be ad-supported and if it is anything like I expect it would receive a ton of visits daily as a standard reference tool for altcoin traders.

Just to let you know, setting up a clearing house means doing some legwork for a future regulatory agency. That's exactly the chain of progress that led to the SEC being placed over what are sometimes called "Self-Regulatory Organizations" (dealer associations, exchanges, and of course clearing houses.)

As long as you're cool with it, fine and dandy; I'm more-or-less reconciled to something like that happening. I'm making my point so that you and anyone who likes your idea can go ahead with eyes opened.

If you're interested, try tracking down a full-length book on the full history of the New York Stock Exchange or of Wall Street in general.

I'd rather have a voluntary website that people can use or ignore as they wish, then wind up having the government set up some onerous set of regulations. The idea I floated above would just be a tool people could use or ignore as they wish. Over time if it was successful, exchanges might come to rely on it (more or less), giving it some weight/authority. But as I envision it, it would all be free-market and voluntary in nature - no one would force an exchange to pay attention to the information on it, and people could pay attention to it or ignore it at their peril.

I can see what you mean about such an idea leading by degrees to a more formal, controlling body. But I think you'll wind up at that conclusion faster if you don't do anything and people continue to fall victim to scams leading to an outcry to government to "help." At least with this approach people would be able to fight the encroachments as they started coming up. (I'd certainly be inclined to do so, as they crossed the line from voluntary to coercive/punitive attempts at regulation.)

[cassius69]

its not like 'regulation' is going to be up to us.

when the powers that be want their cut it will happen.

[ebliever]

its not like 'regulation' is going to be up to us.

when the powers that be want their cut it will happen.

I disagree with a fatalistic attitude. We can fight and at least try to win. We can fend off stifling controls by showing external regulation is unnecessary by having the crypto community develop its own tools to police itself. But if we don't, when people are scammed and they see little interest or resources within the community to make things right or prevent it from happening again, then they naturally run to government and demand government "do something."

Control freaks in government may "do something" sooner or later anyway, but we'll have a better shot at fighting them if we don't have a portion of the crypto community allying with them and egging them on in the first place.

I'm not a coder and have little/no competence in website development, but I wouldn't think the informational website I described would be very difficult. Just a list of coins, with a page for each, with a set of criteria for each coin. Some of the info could be the standard info found elsewhere (name, symbol, launch date, current and projected coin supply, POS/POW, algorithm, etc.)  But the real value would be answering questions (with links/citations wherever possible) like:
1. Open source?
2. Vetted? By whom?
3. Development team/contact info. (W. notes on other coins they have been or are involved with.)
4. Premine.
5. Rich list.
6. History of blockchain issues.
7. History of thefts of the coin.
8. History of scams involving the coin.
9. History of Changes to Dev. Team. Why?
10. History of Changes in Coin Characteristics (POW to POS, changes in coin supply, interest rate, etc.)
11. Exchanges carrying it, when listed (or de-listed).
Etc.

Even partial information on a partial list of coins would be helpful to get things started. And additional criteria could be added as we learn from scams and issues that come up, going forward.

I might just pick a few coins and start researching them to do kind of a demo of this idea, though I don't really have the time/expertise to fully flesh it out. But since the site could be ad-supported and should be quite useful/popular, this could be a good opportunity for someone to tackle.

[Nxtblg]

Perhaps some sort of volunteer-managed "Altcoin clearinghouse" could even be developed, with each coin listed and a status on verification activities posted. It would be a quick reference for traders to see whether each coin has been vetted, to what degree, any issues that have come up, and so on. It could be ad-supported and if it is anything like I expect it would receive a ton of visits daily as a standard reference tool for altcoin traders.

Just to let you know, setting up a clearing house means doing some legwork for a future regulatory agency. That's exactly the chain of progress that led to the SEC being placed over what are sometimes called "Self-Regulatory Organizations" (dealer associations, exchanges, and of course clearing houses.)

As long as you're cool with it, fine and dandy; I'm more-or-less reconciled to something like that happening. I'm making my point so that you and anyone who likes your idea can go ahead with eyes opened.

If you're interested, try tracking down a full-length book on the full history of the New York Stock Exchange or of Wall Street in general.

I'd rather have a voluntary website that people can use or ignore as they wish, then wind up having the government set up some onerous set of regulations. The idea I floated above would just be a tool people could use or ignore as they wish. Over time if it was successful, exchanges might come to rely on it (more or less), giving it some weight/authority. But as I envision it, it would all be free-market and voluntary in nature - no one would force an exchange to pay attention to the information on it, and people could pay attention to it or ignore it at their peril.

I can see what you mean about such an idea leading by degrees to a more formal, controlling body. But I think you'll wind up at that conclusion faster if you don't do anything and people continue to fall victim to scams leading to an outcry to government to "help." At least with this approach people would be able to fight the encroachments as they started coming up. (I'd certainly be inclined to do so, as they crossed the line from voluntary to coercive/punitive attempts at regulation.)

I honestly would prefer an all-voluntary approach. But I'm enough of an amateur historian of these things to offer a different opinion.

Bureaucrats are organized people, detail-oriented, who admire thoroughness. I actually respect them, as people, for that. They're also known for not showing initiative. In a democracy, that's how it should be. The democratic-regulatory State we live under was designed to leave the initiative-taking to elected politicians, at least theoretically elected by the people. Bureaucrats are expected to stay within the bounds of their authorizing mandate. That isn't always the case, as I'm sure you've come across, but there's still an expectation that this sequestration of initiative is the way things should be. Changing the rules, instead of passively enforcing them, should be confined to elected officials that are - at least theoretically - accountable to the electorate via elections.

I know that your approach is common-sensical, and even jibes with the mantra of our times: "The government is in place to do for the people what the people can't do for themselves." But consider the issue from the point of view of a bureaucrat.

Since bureaucrats are organized and orderly people, they would prefer a largely orderly market to maintain and guide, which includes landing on crooks (however defined by their enabling legislation.) So the typical bureaucrat will take a look at this here place and conclude, "Gawd, this is like Somalia. The only way we can secure an orderly market is if we send in a gunboat. And since we don't have a gunboat handy, we shouldn't try at all."

And then they'll say to the people who are crying for help, "Sorry, but we lack the authority to do that. All we can do is issue official warnings saying in plain language that this marketplace is high-risk, very volatile, and interlaced with crime. It's something like the inner city of marketplaces, and is about as anarchic. Other than that, we can only offer sympathy and good time-tested advice."

But on the other hand...if they see a cleaned-up marketplace, one with clearing houses etc., they'll say: "Yep, we can regulate this. We'll do it in the same way that the Securities and Exchange Commission regulates the investment markets. It'll take some doing to craft out appropriate enabling legislation, by elected officials of course, but we already have a working template in the SEC. The time has really come for alternate cryptocurrencies to grow up."

I do see your point, but in a different way. If the cries for help reach elected politicians and sway them, they will swing into action. But any action, given the 'Somalia-esque' nature of the altcoin scene, will more likely be outright illegalization...using the now-potent hot buttons of "terrorism" and "money-laundering" as an enabling mantra.   

So, as I just noted, you do have a valid point. I'm not trying to deter you at all from pursuing your plan: if anything, I'd like to encourage you. You might well own/operate the altcoin's answer to the all-private Consumer Reports. If you can make a living providing that service, that'd be great!

I'm just giving you a history-based heads-up, that's all. Proceed as you will!

[TwinWinNerD]

You guys realize, that there was NO successful launch hosted on bittrex. MIL was the best example for this.

Bittrex will host EVERY shit if they get a cut. Sad but truth!

[Nxtblg]

You guys realize, that there was NO successful launch hosted on bittrex. MIL was the best example for this.

Bittrex will host EVERY shit if they get a cut. Sad but truth!

Not if it bring them into disrepute enough to take a piece out of their trading volume and commissions. At some point - and I'm sure that point is approaching - the easy BTC will cost more than it's worth.

Remember Mintpal!

[TwinWinNerD]

You guys realize, that there was NO successful launch hosted on bittrex. MIL was the best example for this.

Bittrex will host EVERY shit if they get a cut. Sad but truth!

Not if it bring them into disrepute enough to take a piece out of their trading volume and commissions. At some point - and I'm sure that point is approaching - the easy BTC will cost more than it's worth.

Remember Mintpal!

That is the problem. Most exchanges are very shortsighted. Because if they collapes they can just get "hacked" and start over as a new exchange...

[jasemoney]

You guys realize, that there was NO successful launch hosted on bittrex. MIL was the best example for this.

Bittrex will host EVERY shit if they get a cut. Sad but truth!

Mil was polo by the way

[ebliever]

Perhaps some sort of volunteer-managed "Altcoin clearinghouse" could even be developed, with each coin listed and a status on verification activities posted. It would be a quick reference for traders to see whether each coin has been vetted, to what degree, any issues that have come up, and so on. It could be ad-supported and if it is anything like I expect it would receive a ton of visits daily as a standard reference tool for altcoin traders.

Just to let you know, setting up a clearing house means doing some legwork for a future regulatory agency. That's exactly the chain of progress that led to the SEC being placed over what are sometimes called "Self-Regulatory Organizations" (dealer associations, exchanges, and of course clearing houses.)

As long as you're cool with it, fine and dandy; I'm more-or-less reconciled to something like that happening. I'm making my point so that you and anyone who likes your idea can go ahead with eyes opened.

If you're interested, try tracking down a full-length book on the full history of the New York Stock Exchange or of Wall Street in general.

I'd rather have a voluntary website that people can use or ignore as they wish, then wind up having the government set up some onerous set of regulations. The idea I floated above would just be a tool people could use or ignore as they wish. Over time if it was successful, exchanges might come to rely on it (more or less), giving it some weight/authority. But as I envision it, it would all be free-market and voluntary in nature - no one would force an exchange to pay attention to the information on it, and people could pay attention to it or ignore it at their peril.

I can see what you mean about such an idea leading by degrees to a more formal, controlling body. But I think you'll wind up at that conclusion faster if you don't do anything and people continue to fall victim to scams leading to an outcry to government to "help." At least with this approach people would be able to fight the encroachments as they started coming up. (I'd certainly be inclined to do so, as they crossed the line from voluntary to coercive/punitive attempts at regulation.)

I honestly would prefer an all-voluntary approach. But I'm enough of an amateur historian of these things to offer a different opinion.

Bureaucrats are organized people, detail-oriented, who admire thoroughness. I actually respect them, as people, for that. They're also known for not showing initiative. In a democracy, that's how it should be. The democratic-regulatory State we live under was designed to leave the initiative-taking to elected politicians, at least theoretically elected by the people. Bureaucrats are expected to stay within the bounds of their authorizing mandate. That isn't always the case, as I'm sure you've come across, but there's still an expectation that this sequestration of initiative is the way things should be. Changing the rules, instead of passively enforcing them, should be confined to elected officials that are - at least theoretically - accountable to the electorate via elections.

I know that your approach is common-sensical, and even jibes with the mantra of our times: "The government is in place to do for the people what the people can't do for themselves." But consider the issue from the point of view of a bureaucrat.

Since bureaucrats are organized and orderly people, they would prefer a largely orderly market to maintain and guide, which includes landing on crooks (however defined by their enabling legislation.) So the typical bureaucrat will take a look at this here place and conclude, "Gawd, this is like Somalia. The only way we can secure an orderly market is if we send in a gunboat. And since we don't have a gunboat handy, we shouldn't try at all."

And then they'll say to the people who are crying for help, "Sorry, but we lack the authority to do that. All we can do is issue official warnings saying in plain language that this marketplace is high-risk, very volatile, and interlaced with crime. It's something like the inner city of marketplaces, and is about as anarchic. Other than that, we can only offer sympathy and good time-tested advice."

But on the other hand...if they see a cleaned-up marketplace, one with clearing houses etc., they'll say: "Yep, we can regulate this. We'll do it in the same way that the Securities and Exchange Commission regulates the investment markets. It'll take some doing to craft out appropriate enabling legislation, by elected officials of course, but we already have a working template in the SEC. The time has really come for alternate cryptocurrencies to grow up."

I do see your point, but in a different way. If the cries for help reach elected politicians and sway them, they will swing into action. But any action, given the 'Somalia-esque' nature of the altcoin scene, will more likely be outright illegalization...using the now-potent hot buttons of "terrorism" and "money-laundering" as an enabling mantra.   

So, as I just noted, you do have a valid point. I'm not trying to deter you at all from pursuing your plan: if anything, I'd like to encourage you. You might well own/operate the altcoin's answer to the all-private Consumer Reports. If you can make a living providing that service, that'd be great!

I'm just giving you a history-based heads-up, that's all. Proceed as you will!

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I think I'm at fault for using the wrong word, leading to a misperception on your part. When I commented about an "altcoin clearinghouse" all I meant was an informational website, nothing more. As I envision it, information would be collected either wikipedia-style or with a staff of some sort (with some method of vetting the information, and the integrity of the leadership would be key) on each coin. The goal of the site would be to share information on the characteristics of the coin, details on scams/thefts/fraud related to the coin, technical issues/major bugs, missed milestones/broken promises from devs, and so forth. Links/citations would be provided for all the information. The idea would be to provide a sort of overall risk assessment related to investing in the coin, so far as non-market factors are concerned.

People could do what they want with the information, the site would simply be for reference and hopefully make it a little harder for scammers to operate successfully and save some people from them. Optionally the site could also have a section devoted to exchanges, how they operate, thefts and scams on each one, and so forth. That would help encourage them to clean up their act, be more transparent, stop shady practices that burn customers while profiting the exchange and so forth.

It's hard for me to see how such a website could lead directly to government control, instead I would hope it could be used to head things off. "See, we don't need increased regulation because scams have fallen 40% since the Crypto Clearinghouse started operation, and they have more projects on the way to get the word out on the latest scams so we expect that trend to continue..."

I've started drafting my ideas for this project; I'm about to head out on vacation but when I get back I may start a thread on it and try to get the ball rolling, if people see the value in it.