[ANN][XOM] Coin and P2P Marketplace|Launched|AirDrop|Escrows|Reputation|and More

[OmniBazaar]

Are you aware that there is already another coin using this name?

Yes. We're aware. And our trademark attorney will be contacting them.

We had a trademark application for the OmniCoin name filed well before they launched their coin.

No, you didn't. You applied for the trademark in February 2014, whereas Omnicoin was originally released in December 2013. Please decide on a new name for your coin, because regardless of your opinion on our coin, it is a legitimate cryptocurrency supported by many members on HF and has a solid grounding. We realize there are some who voice their negative opinions of omnicoin, but we have recently restructured the Omnicoin team and are currently undergoing many new developments.

Please have a look at the posting date of this thread: http://www.hackforums.net/showthread.php?tid=3923174
You will notice that it was posted on 12th December 2013.

On Friday, February 07, 2014, a U.S. federal trademark registration was filed for OMNICOIN by OmniBazaar, Inc., Clearwater, FL 33758. The USPTO has given the OMNICOIN trademark serial number of 86187319.

So clearly we chose the name before you filed your trademark application. Please rethink your branding.

Thanks, Mesh.
Omnicoin Team.

Hi Mesh,

This isn't the place for either of us to discuss the legal points of this. No amount of discussion back and forth is going to change the facts of the matter.

So, let's take this to PM.

Rick
OmniCoin Team

[OmniBazaar]

Honor AGS and PTS,or BTS?

 

Yes. It's no secret that we are copying BTSX. (References to DPoS and TITAN are a dead give-away to anyone who knows BTSX.) But, we are also adding a few important features. Of course, OmniCoin will be open-source. So BTSX will be able to benefit from our work, just as we are benefitting from theirs.

Best,
Rick

[OmniBazaar]

Can you speak to the reputation system you are envisioning for this marketplace ? One of the things which made eBay a huge success is the reputation system, the feedback made public about transactions.

Really don't see the need for a new coin though. If the transactions are direct, without middlemen, the transactors (buyers and sellers) could decide which currency or coin to use.

We are building a reputation/rating system into OmniCoin itself, not just the OmniBazaar marketplace. We believe that for any reputation system to be reliable, and not able to be hacked and tampered with, the reputation information must be part of the consensus of the blockchain.

This is part of the reason for developing a new coin. If we provide enough useful features (like reputation and easy escrow) in the coin, and make it extremely easy to use in the marketplace, we believe it will become the coin of choice.

Two users could, as you point out, use any coin they might agree on (or even fiat). But, they would either need to know and trust each other, or figure out some other method to escrow the funds for the purchase. We intend to use the combination of OmniCoin features and OmniBazaar features to make buying and selling "frictionless".

[OmniBazaar]

The OmniCoin you're referring to flopped bigger than shit.

The [XOM] OmniCoin that will actually get rolled out with OmniBazaar is definitely usable - I believe several other threads in this forum identified that particular product as a 'shitcoin'.  OmniCoin [XOM] was developed far earlier than what you're seeing (and has several pending patents).

Ignorance is bliss. Made more money on that coin than you've probably made online.

Are you aware that there is already another coin using this name?

Yes. We're aware. And our trademark attorney will be contacting them.

We had a trademark application for the OmniCoin name filed well before they launched their coin.

Your trademark application was made several months after the initial launch in 2013.

Hmm...

I see on the OmniCoin.org web site that it clearly states that OMC launched in April 2014. Pre-launch discussions are different than use.

But, as I said earlier, this is not the place to discuss this. Nothing we say here will change the facts.

Best,
Rick

[Corleone1918]

how much btc are you want?

[MeshCollider]

The OmniCoin you're referring to flopped bigger than shit.

The [XOM] OmniCoin that will actually get rolled out with OmniBazaar is definitely usable - I believe several other threads in this forum identified that particular product as a 'shitcoin'.  OmniCoin [XOM] was developed far earlier than what you're seeing (and has several pending patents).

Ignorance is bliss. Made more money on that coin than you've probably made online.

Are you aware that there is already another coin using this name?

Yes. We're aware. And our trademark attorney will be contacting them.

We had a trademark application for the OmniCoin name filed well before they launched their coin.

Your trademark application was made several months after the initial launch in 2013.

Hmm...

I see on the OmniCoin.org web site that it clearly states that OMC launched in April 2014. Pre-launch discussions are different than use.

But, as I said earlier, this is not the place to discuss this. Nothing we say here will change the facts.

Best,
Rick

The website speaks of v2. Omnicoin v1 was the initial coin, but we rereleased due to some major issues with v1 due to bad planning. v1 was released in December 2013. V1 was not a prelaunch discussion, it was a fully functional coin. I can see that it might be slightly confusing for you.

[dbkeys]

Can you speak to the reputation system you are envisioning for this marketplace ? One of the things which made eBay a huge success is the reputation system, the feedback made public about transactions.

Really don't see the need for a new coin though. If the transactions are direct, without middlemen, the transactors (buyers and sellers) could decide which currency or coin to use.

We are building a reputation/rating system into OmniCoin itself, not just the OmniBazaar marketplace. We believe that for any reputation system to be reliable, and not able to be hacked and tampered with, the reputation information must be part of the consensus of the blockchain.

This is part of the reason for developing a new coin. If we provide enough useful features (like reputation and easy escrow) in the coin, and make it extremely easy to use in the marketplace, we believe it will become the coin of choice.

Two users could, as you point out, use any coin they might agree on (or even fiat). But, they would either need to know and trust each other, or figure out some other method to escrow the funds for the purchase. We intend to use the combination of OmniCoin features and OmniBazaar features to make buying and selling "frictionless".

Do you envision a marking system similar to bitmark ?

[Aceman]

The OmniCoin you're referring to flopped bigger than shit.

The [XOM] OmniCoin that will actually get rolled out with OmniBazaar is definitely usable - I believe several other threads in this forum identified that particular product as a 'shitcoin'.  OmniCoin [XOM] was developed far earlier than what you're seeing (and has several pending patents).

Ignorance is bliss. Made more money on that coin than you've probably made online.

The OmniCoin you're referring to flopped bigger than shit.

The [XOM] OmniCoin that will actually get rolled out with OmniBazaar is definitely usable - I believe several other threads in this forum identified that particular product as a 'shitcoin'.  OmniCoin [XOM] was developed far earlier than what you're seeing (and has several pending patents).

Ignorance is bliss. Made more money on that coin than you've probably made online.

Are you aware that there is already another coin using this name?

Yes. We're aware. And our trademark attorney will be contacting them.

We had a trademark application for the OmniCoin name filed well before they launched their coin.

Your trademark application was made several months after the initial launch in 2013.

Hmm...

I see on the OmniCoin.org web site that it clearly states that OMC launched in April 2014. Pre-launch discussions are different than use.

But, as I said earlier, this is not the place to discuss this. Nothing we say here will change the facts.

Best,
Rick

Yes and you're ignoring my PMs about it when I try to take it to PM.

Are you aware that there is already another coin using this name?

Yes. We're aware. And our trademark attorney will be contacting them.

We had a trademark application for the OmniCoin name filed well before they launched their coin.

Your trademark application was made several months after the initial launch in 2013.

Hmm...

I see on the OmniCoin.org web site that it clearly states that OMC launched in April 2014. Pre-launch discussions are different than use.

But, as I said earlier, this is not the place to discuss this. Nothing we say here will change the facts.

Best,
Rick

That was the relaunch of it. If you did some research you'll see the original version was launched back in 2013.

[OmniBazaar]

Can you speak to the reputation system you are envisioning for this marketplace ? One of the things which made eBay a huge success is the reputation system, the feedback made public about transactions.

Really don't see the need for a new coin though. If the transactions are direct, without middlemen, the transactors (buyers and sellers) could decide which currency or coin to use.

We are building a reputation/rating system into OmniCoin itself, not just the OmniBazaar marketplace. We believe that for any reputation system to be reliable, and not able to be hacked and tampered with, the reputation information must be part of the consensus of the blockchain.

This is part of the reason for developing a new coin. If we provide enough useful features (like reputation and easy escrow) in the coin, and make it extremely easy to use in the marketplace, we believe it will become the coin of choice.

Two users could, as you point out, use any coin they might agree on (or even fiat). But, they would either need to know and trust each other, or figure out some other method to escrow the funds for the purchase. We intend to use the combination of OmniCoin features and OmniBazaar features to make buying and selling "frictionless".

Do you envision a marking system similar to bitmark ?

From a quick look, I don't see very much similarity to  Bitmark. The page I saw didn't mention a marketing system. If you can fill me in a bit on what the marketing system is, I would be glad to make a comparison.

EDIT: I justs noticed that you said "marking", not "marketing". But, I'm not familiar with their "marking" system either. Care to give me the ELI5 version?

Best,
Rick

[ivanst776]

nice ann, looking forward to this coin!

[OmniBazaar]

... (snip) ...

Hmm...

I see on the OmniCoin.org web site that it clearly states that OMC launched in April 2014. Pre-launch discussions are different than use.

But, as I said earlier, this is not the place to discuss this. Nothing we say here will change the facts.

Best,
Rick

That was the relaunch of it. If you did some research you'll see the original version was launched back in 2013.

I'm not going to comment any further here in the thread about the name issue. I am in communication, outside this thread, with the lead developer.

Rick

[dbkeys]

Can you speak to the reputation system you are envisioning for this marketplace ? One of the things which made eBay a huge success is the reputation system, the feedback made public about transactions.

Really don't see the need for a new coin though. If the transactions are direct, without middlemen, the transactors (buyers and sellers) could decide which currency or coin to use.

We are building a reputation/rating system into OmniCoin itself, not just the OmniBazaar marketplace. We believe that for any reputation system to be reliable, and not able to be hacked and tampered with, the reputation information must be part of the consensus of the blockchain.

This is part of the reason for developing a new coin. If we provide enough useful features (like reputation and easy escrow) in the coin, and make it extremely easy to use in the marketplace, we believe it will become the coin of choice.

Two users could, as you point out, use any coin they might agree on (or even fiat). But, they would either need to know and trust each other, or figure out some other method to escrow the funds for the purchase. We intend to use the combination of OmniCoin features and OmniBazaar features to make buying and selling "frictionless".

Do you envision a marking system similar to bitmark ?

From a quick look, I don't see very much similarity to  Bitmark. The page I saw didn't mention a marketing system. If you can fill me in a bit on what the marketing system is, I would be glad to make a comparison.

EDIT: I justs noticed that you said "marking", not "marketing". But, I'm not familiar with their "marking" system either. Care to give me the ELI5 version?

Best,
Rick

I'm not the one to best explain the details of marking, since I'm only learning about it myself. So I can't give the easy "Explain Like I'm 5" (ELI5) version just yet ! My understanding is that you transfer coins to a person or identity with an attached reason for doing so. Example: "transfer 100 marks to John for successful transaction" or "for answering question" etc.

[OmniBazaar]

Can you speak to the reputation system you are envisioning for this marketplace ? One of the things which made eBay a huge success is the reputation system, the feedback made public about transactions.

Really don't see the need for a new coin though. If the transactions are direct, without middlemen, the transactors (buyers and sellers) could decide which currency or coin to use.

We are building a reputation/rating system into OmniCoin itself, not just the OmniBazaar marketplace. We believe that for any reputation system to be reliable, and not able to be hacked and tampered with, the reputation information must be part of the consensus of the blockchain.

This is part of the reason for developing a new coin. If we provide enough useful features (like reputation and easy escrow) in the coin, and make it extremely easy to use in the marketplace, we believe it will become the coin of choice.

Two users could, as you point out, use any coin they might agree on (or even fiat). But, they would either need to know and trust each other, or figure out some other method to escrow the funds for the purchase. We intend to use the combination of OmniCoin features and OmniBazaar features to make buying and selling "frictionless".

Do you envision a marking system similar to bitmark ?

From a quick look, I don't see very much similarity to  Bitmark. The page I saw didn't mention a marketing system. If you can fill me in a bit on what the marketing system is, I would be glad to make a comparison.

EDIT: I justs noticed that you said "marking", not "marketing". But, I'm not familiar with their "marking" system either. Care to give me the ELI5 version?

Best,
Rick

I'm not the one to best explain the details of marking, since I'm only learning about it myself. So I can't give the easy "Explain Like I'm 5" (ELI5) version just yet ! My understanding is that you transfer coins to a person or identity with an attached reason for doing so. Example: "transfer 100 marks to John for successful transaction" or "for answering question" etc.

I think I see what you are talking about, and the answer is yes. It is very easy for the sender to include in the transaction a message describing the purpose of the transaction, but this message will be visible only to the receiver. And the receiver of the transaction is anonymous to everyone but the sender. And, you can give people a simple name, like "Jane_Smith", as your receiving address (instead of an ugly string of numbers and letters).

I hope that helps.

Best,
Rick

[jokumat]

20B is creazy. investors can not earn money when it over 2sat .id better pass it.

No. The number of coins in circulation will be completely determined by how many people join and use  the OmniBazaar marketplace
We will give only a small (relative to the eventual 20 billion) number of coins to each person who joins OmniBazaar, and an even
smaller number of coins for referring a friend. We will distribute half the coins in this manner over, over the span of as many
months or years as it takes to distribute them all. We will distribute the other 10 billion coins as "reverse transaction fees" when
users conduct transactions with each other in the marketplace. In other words, during the initial distribution period, we will
essentially pay users a small OmniCoin bonus to buy or sell something in the marketplace.

We haven't finalized the numbers yet, but let's say we give 1,000 OmniCoins to each new user who joins OmniBazaar. This
represents one twenty-millionth (1/20,000,000) of the total eventual coin supply. That would be a much slower emission rate
than most other coins have. We could give 10,000 coins to each new user and still have a slow emission rate. We think this is
infinitely more rational and fair than most other recently introduced cryptocurrencies (especially the ones that generate all the
coins in just a few weeks to enrich the developers and their friends). And we believe this distribution plan will add liquidity at
the rate that is needed by the marketplace. As more people join, more OmniCoins will come into circulation. Similarly, we
estimate that users will do hundreds of millions of transactions in the marketplace before the "reverse transaction fee" pool of
coins is completely distributed.

20 Billion is a big number, but we plan to spread that over a large number of people over a considerable amount of time.

what does prevent "users" from creating multiple accounts to get more coins? One person can "join" many times..

[OmniBazaar]

20B is creazy. investors can not earn money when it over 2sat .id better pass it.

No. The number of coins in circulation will be completely determined by how many people join and use  the OmniBazaar marketplace
We will give only a small (relative to the eventual 20 billion) number of coins to each person who joins OmniBazaar, and an even
smaller number of coins for referring a friend. We will distribute half the coins in this manner over, over the span of as many
months or years as it takes to distribute them all. We will distribute the other 10 billion coins as "reverse transaction fees" when
users conduct transactions with each other in the marketplace. In other words, during the initial distribution period, we will
essentially pay users a small OmniCoin bonus to buy or sell something in the marketplace.

We haven't finalized the numbers yet, but let's say we give 1,000 OmniCoins to each new user who joins OmniBazaar. This
represents one twenty-millionth (1/20,000,000) of the total eventual coin supply. That would be a much slower emission rate
than most other coins have. We could give 10,000 coins to each new user and still have a slow emission rate. We think this is
infinitely more rational and fair than most other recently introduced cryptocurrencies (especially the ones that generate all the
coins in just a few weeks to enrich the developers and their friends). And we believe this distribution plan will add liquidity at
the rate that is needed by the marketplace. As more people join, more OmniCoins will come into circulation. Similarly, we
estimate that users will do hundreds of millions of transactions in the marketplace before the "reverse transaction fee" pool of
coins is completely distributed.

20 Billion is a big number, but we plan to spread that over a large number of people over a considerable amount of time.

what does prevent "users" from creating multiple accounts to get more coins? One person can "join" many times..

There is probably not a completely reliable way to prevent this type of Sybil "attack", but there are several possible ways to make it more difficult. If I recall correctly, for example, I think Stellar tracks IP addresses, and limits the number of accounts that a "family" at one address can create. I think they also restrict creating new accounts through TOR (which makes sense).

We have not settled yet on exactly how to handle this issue, and would be glad to get community input on this. Anyone have any bright ideas they would like to share?

Good question. Thanks.

Rick

[vfilchef]

There is probably not a completely reliable way to prevent this type of Sybil "attack", but there are several possible ways to make it more difficult. If I recall correctly, for example, I think Stellar tracks IP addresses, and limits the number of accounts that a "family" at one address can create. I think they also restrict creating new accounts through TOR (which makes sense).

We have not settled yet on exactly how to handle this issue, and would be glad to get community input on this. Anyone have any bright ideas they would like to share?

Good question. Thanks.

Rick

Here is one idea https://forum.nemcoin.com/index.php?topic=2620.msg8259#msg8259

[biophil]

Honor AGS and PTS,or BTS?

 

Yes. It's no secret that we are copying BTSX. (References to DPoS and TITAN are a dead give-away to anyone who knows BTSX.) But, we are also adding a few important features. Of course, OmniCoin will be open-source. So BTSX will be able to benefit from our work, just as we are benefitting from theirs.

Best,
Rick

Rick,

I'm sure you know that's not how it works. If you don't give 10% of your coins to AGS and 10% to PTS or BTS, you'll incur the wrath and repudiation of the BitShares community. You can try to hide behind your idea that "BTSX will be able to benefit from our work"; but I guarantee you that no AGS donator will see it that way.

What you're doing is this: you're looking out at the pool of people who "get" crypto, and you're singling out a particular group (AGS donators) who really really get crypto and you're saying "we don't want you to be a part of this community. Everybody else, come and get it! But we're going to ensure that you AGS donators never have anything to do with our project."

If that sounds like a smart move, go for it - but know that you will certainly alienate one of your biggest potential client bases.

[djm34]

"OmniBazaar -- Removing Middlemen and Bankers from E-commerce"
... and replacing them by an unknown newbie... 

[Bisha]

If you're forking BitShares, I don't know why you don't simply use BitUSD and other assets which provide stability for the end user instead of just getting a new coin, just because.

[CLains]

Only allowing wealthy investors fund your project, -8 points.

Kickstarter such that normal people get NO equity in your business, -7 points.

Forking BitShares code without mentioning BitShares explicitly even once, -8 points.

Not honoring the BitShares consensus of 10/10 to PTS/AGS holders, -6 points.

Screen shots that look horribly designed, -7 points.