SuperNet, are you in?

[robinwilliams]

No, we don't get your supreme nosense Spoetnik, please gtfo or elaborate a minimum.

if you don't get it then your playing dumb i think..

i could start a coin and have an IPO on it and buy the coins myself and pay me the bitcoin to get the IPO'd coins
and then i could run around the internet saying some investers bought a lot of coins and wow look how popular my coin is !!111
but in reality .... I BOUGHT THEM !
and i paid myself as an illusion to sucker in greedy bag holders.. who will be consumed and devoured *eventually.

i am not trying to be mean or anything but are you slow or brain damaged or something ?
do you think i just invented that concept here and now ?

So, can I take it that you and JackpotCoin won't be joining in the SuperNET ?

jackpot, supernet, spotniek all in the same sentance ... haaaaaaa!!!!!

supernet dumbest shit iv'e ever seen

[1715418591]

1715418591

[Marlo Stanfield]

In this thread: People who have no idea what their talking about or what superNET even is.

People complain about all the "shitcoins" around and now we have a viable contender for something that can come together and make inferior coins irrelevant.

And spoetnik: You apparently have no idea what's going on as usual. You don't bother to read up on things before you post. And since these are shares, buying up more shares does not attract more "greedy bagholders" as you put it. Each share bought makes the others a lower percentage of the total. This is not a cryptocurrency. Read up.

[Spoetnik]

In this thread: People who have no idea what their talking about or what superNET even is.

People complain about all the "shitcoins" around and now we have a viable contender for something that can come together and make inferior coins irrelevant.

And spoetnik: You apparently have no idea what's going on as usual. You don't bother to read up on things before you post. And since these are shares, buying up more shares does not attract more "greedy bagholders" as you put it. Each share bought makes the others a lower percentage of the total. This is not a cryptocurrency. Read up.

dumbest comment of the day.

it's a "share" so i can't be a bag holder 

[ShroomsKit_Disgrace]

@Marlo Stanfield,
fair comment, I hope our beloved troll Spoetnik could get a hint on what is SuperNet, and why it is totally different fro ma coin IPO.

[Marlo Stanfield]

In this thread: People who have no idea what their talking about or what superNET even is.

People complain about all the "shitcoins" around and now we have a viable contender for something that can come together and make inferior coins irrelevant.

And spoetnik: You apparently have no idea what's going on as usual. You don't bother to read up on things before you post. And since these are shares, buying up more shares does not attract more "greedy bagholders" as you put it. Each share bought makes the others a lower percentage of the total. This is not a cryptocurrency. Read up.

dumbest comment of the day.

it's a "share" so i can't be a bag holder 

You're claiming that people will be suckered in by someone purchasing shares in their own IPO. Why would someone want that? The lower amount of shares held means a higher percent of dividends paid to shareholders. You're confusing this with an IPO of a cryptocurrency where the supply is limited. The supply of shares in this case is effectively unlimited. So what you were saying up thread does not apply.

I'm not saying that it's impossible that the value of UNITY shares goes down over time. You're postings always consist of you spewing your preformed opinions on things while you fail to read in to what is actually going on before posting.

[Spoetnik]

In this thread: People who have no idea what their talking about or what superNET even is.

People complain about all the "shitcoins" around and now we have a viable contender for something that can come together and make inferior coins irrelevant.

And spoetnik: You apparently have no idea what's going on as usual. You don't bother to read up on things before you post. And since these are shares, buying up more shares does not attract more "greedy bagholders" as you put it. Each share bought makes the others a lower percentage of the total. This is not a cryptocurrency. Read up.

dumbest comment of the day.

it's a "share" so i can't be a bag holder 

You're claiming that people will be suckered in by someone purchasing shares in their own IPO. Why would someone want that? The lower amount of shares held means a higher percent of dividends paid to shareholders. You're confusing this with an IPO of a cryptocurrency where the supply is limited. The supply of shares in this case is effectively unlimited. So what you were saying up thread does not apply.

I'm not saying that it's impossible that the value of UNITY shares goes down over time. You're postings always consist of you spewing your preformed opinions on things while you fail to read in to what is actually going on before posting.

so it's free ? wow great gimme some then..

[Marlo Stanfield]

In this thread: People who have no idea what their talking about or what superNET even is.

People complain about all the "shitcoins" around and now we have a viable contender for something that can come together and make inferior coins irrelevant.

And spoetnik: You apparently have no idea what's going on as usual. You don't bother to read up on things before you post. And since these are shares, buying up more shares does not attract more "greedy bagholders" as you put it. Each share bought makes the others a lower percentage of the total. This is not a cryptocurrency. Read up.

dumbest comment of the day.

it's a "share" so i can't be a bag holder 

You're claiming that people will be suckered in by someone purchasing shares in their own IPO. Why would someone want that? The lower amount of shares held means a higher percent of dividends paid to shareholders. You're confusing this with an IPO of a cryptocurrency where the supply is limited. The supply of shares in this case is effectively unlimited. So what you were saying up thread does not apply.

I'm not saying that it's impossible that the value of UNITY shares goes down over time. You're postings always consist of you spewing your preformed opinions on things while you fail to read in to what is actually going on before posting.

so it's free ? wow great gimme some then..

Would you rather be the only shareholder of a company and get 100% of the profits, or would you rather be one of one hundred shareholders and receive 1% of the profits?

Do you see now how the dev buying more to trick people in to buying it doesn't make any sense when someone is selling shares in an asset backed investment?

And why you think my post implied that shares in superNET were free, I have no idea.

[statdude]

How much has SuperNET raised on BTER?

[devphp]

How much has SuperNET raised on BTER?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=762346.msg8781189#msg8781189

[Fernandez]

Can't decide whether its worthy investing in it. Has too much of a single point of failure, and sounds like an elaborate, organized pump and dump.

[ShroomsKit_Disgrace]

Can't decide whether its worthy investing in it. Has too much of a single point of failure, and sounds like an elaborate, organized pump and dump.

If so, just wait to sell just before the dump. Profit! 

[devphp]

Can't decide whether its worthy investing in it. Has too much of a single point of failure, and sounds like an elaborate, organized pump and dump.

Invest a little, as much as you are ready to lose. Accumulate more on dips as your certainty grows, it will be available to trade on NXT Asset Exchange after the sale is over. Or sell, if you certainty lessens

[johnmatrix]

SuperNet is a collective of approved cryptocurrencies which will share a single architecture, and from what I understand, the capitalisation of SuperNet will comprise of a percentage of the approved cryptocurrencies within it, mitigating the risks if one of the coins doesn't succeed. Hopefully there'll be a mechanism to prune off such coins.

Who are the devs? And how many of them are involved?

[devphp]

Who are the devs? And how many of them are involved?

You should ask here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=762346.0

[Este Nuno]

SuperNet is a collective of approved cryptocurrencies which will share a single architecture, and from what I understand, the capitalisation of SuperNet will comprise of a percentage of the approved cryptocurrencies within it, mitigating the risks if one of the coins doesn't succeed. Hopefully there'll be a mechanism to prune off such coins.

Who are the devs? And how many of them are involved?

James(jl777) is the core architect of superNET and has development support and assistance from crypto_zoidberg(Boolberry lead dev) and coinsolidation(Bitmark lead dev). As well as a team of 3 or 4 dedicated people working on the superNET GUI programming. And this will likely be expanded further as time goes on.

[fairlay]

Fore those of you how have missed this: we just set up predictions on SuperNet on our prediction market. This numbers can not be influenced by sock puppets only by predictions on or against SuperNet.
We do not recommend or advise against an investment of SuperNet.

 https://www.fairlay.com/event/category/bitcoin/altcoins/

Prediction Markets
https://www.fairlay.com/predict/registered/new/supernet-in-top-10-of-coinmarketcap/
https://www.fairlay.com/predict/registered/new/supernet-in-top-5-of-coinmarketcap-before-2016/

Just a short explanation for those of you how are new to Fairlay. Fairlay is a prediction market where user can predict on the outcome of events. The willingness of user to predict on or against an event can result in a pretty good forecast of events, have a look at: https://www.fairlay.com/event/category/bitcoin/altcoins/

To make it concrete: if you want to predict on SuperNet click on one of the events. Choose "yes" and fill in a odds. Odds are the multiplier. If you choose 3.5 that means you would get 3.5 your money back (if you are right). If you place 1 BTC and you win you will get back 3.5 (minus 2% fee on the netwinning of 2.5). However, you need to find someone taking the other site of the bet. That is why we have "suggest odds". They result from the current order book of this event. We have a "covert" suggested odd. Under this condition someone else is already willing to offer a bet. If you place a bet with this odds it will be directly matched. If you choose the "open odds" you basically make a new offer. It is basically like buying at market price or placing a buy-offer and waiting for it to be cleared.

You find the full order book under "show additional information". If trading starts a graph will appear as well.
Some might find the "advanced form" easier - there is also a "help me" button that will guide you through the process.


Finally a explanation how we came up with the percentages from the odds. There is a direct conversion possible between the odds and the percentage. Lets say you prediction on the coinflip. The percentage is 50%, 50% thus you want to have 2 times your money back if it should be fair. Thus odds of to convert to 50%/50%. If you bet on a dice roll and bet on 6 your winning chance is 1/6 = 16,66%. You would like to have odds of 6. The formula is 1/odds  = percentage. That is the way we calculate the likelihood of an event based on the odds people are willing to predict on it.

[supranetico]

I did a longish of jl777 holding's here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=780481.msg8795729#msg8795729

Problem is he holds most the "assets" he "donated" to Supernet ICO are majority held by his own assets ie by proxy. And he has asked for 500 BTC for "2000 BTC worth" of his own assets.

If you are willing to pay so that one can get rich by:
a. buying a shit load of coins, pumping them and then dumping it on you
b. dumping an asset (or coin) held by someone

then yes you must buy the SuperNet ICO.

[Este Nuno]

I did a longish of jl777 holding's here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=780481.msg8795729#msg8795729

Problem is he holds most the "assets" he "donated" to Supernet ICO are majority held by his own assets ie by proxy. And he has asked for 500 BTC for "2000 BTC worth" of his own assets.

If you are willing to pay so that one can get rich by:
a. buying a shit load of coins, pumping them and then dumping it on you
b. dumping an asset (or coin) held by someone

then yes you must buy the SuperNet ICO.

No. At least attempt to tell the truth.

That only happens if and only if superNET reaches a very high market cap and gains a high market cap position relative to the top cryptos.

It's clearly a win-win for investors with James taking on a large amount of risk with a relatively small reward that happens only in cases of extreme success.

[supranetico]

I did a longish of jl777 holding's here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=780481.msg8795729#msg8795729

Problem is he holds most the "assets" he "donated" to Supernet ICO are majority held by his own assets ie by proxy. And he has asked for 500 BTC for "2000 BTC worth" of his own assets.

If you are willing to pay so that one can get rich by:
a. buying a shit load of coins, pumping them and then dumping it on you
b. dumping an asset (or coin) held by someone

then yes you must buy the SuperNet ICO.

No. At least attempt to tell the truth.

That only happens if and only if superNET reaches a very high market cap and gains a high market cap position relative to the top cryptos.

It's clearly a win-win for investors with James taking on a large amount of risk with a relatively small reward that happens only in cases of extreme success.

Huh? You obviously are one of the guys on the Kool aid.

Did you read the long thread I posted on asset holdings? He already holds the majority of the assets which you prompt as "large amount of risk" ie they came at little to no cost to him. So where is the risk he is taking? Instead he is asking for 500 BTC or hoping the Supernet association will cause an increased interest in those assets for him to clear out.  There is no win-win, just loss for the investors.

That is the truth. If you still believe otherwise, its your money to burn.

[Este Nuno]

I did a longish of jl777 holding's here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=780481.msg8795729#msg8795729

Problem is he holds most the "assets" he "donated" to Supernet ICO are majority held by his own assets ie by proxy. And he has asked for 500 BTC for "2000 BTC worth" of his own assets.

If you are willing to pay so that one can get rich by:
a. buying a shit load of coins, pumping them and then dumping it on you
b. dumping an asset (or coin) held by someone

then yes you must buy the SuperNet ICO.

No. At least attempt to tell the truth.

That only happens if and only if superNET reaches a very high market cap and gains a high market cap position relative to the top cryptos.

It's clearly a win-win for investors with James taking on a large amount of risk with a relatively small reward that happens only in cases of extreme success.

Huh? You obviously are one of the guys on the Kool aid.

Did you read the long thread I posted on asset holdings? He already holds the majority of the assets which you prompt as "large amount of risk" ie they came at little to no cost to him. So where is the risk he is taking? Instead he is asking for 500 BTC or hoping the Supernet association will cause an increased interest in those assets for him to clear out.  There is no win-win, just loss for the investors.

That is the truth. If you still believe otherwise, its your money to burn.

No, I'm trying to look at it objectively. I don't see how setting a conditional reward for being in the top 5 or 10 market cap values is a loss. Either UNITY NAV increases enough that holders have gained a massive amount of ROI and he gets a reward or he gets nothing and loses whatever the current value of those shares are.

The assets them selves are not valueless considering the amount of work that's been been put in to developing the technologies that they're based on. And the other assets which hold significant amounts of crypto.

The thing about superNET is that it intends to generate profits as a functioning gateway for crypto through fees and contextual advertising of useful services. So in order for those performance metrics to be hit people buying superNET are going to want to see it begin to show promise in those areas. And superNET succeeding is all predicated on James' technologies working as he intends them to, so all of this still has to come together for superNET to get to that level.

And I've read your post and the spreadsheet but I don't see how setting a performance based metric like that is a bad thing. It sounds more like you're arguing as if he were putting in 2000 BTC worth of assets now and directly receiving back 500 BTC right away, not when UNITY is multipled by x times in value.