THE BYTECENT DISASTER

[Kuriso]

I guess i should of posted my stuff here but I was just banned from IE's coinblab.com as well.  

Here is a link to the post I saved before i was banned.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=851666.msg9520996#msg9520996


IE said he launched his coin FUD free or TROLL free but he is actually deleting honest concerns and banning them from his forum.

[EmilioMann]

I wonder how many people still think barabbas and IE are the same person now. This post proves that they are different people, or that IE is an even bigger moron than I thought.

barabbas IS iconic express
He is crazy and has several personalities
Months ago he posted like ie but using the barabbas account in libertycoin thread. Many people saw it
This coin has several irreversible problems and wallet does not work.
Probably IE now going to disappear with the money from ico, leaving only Barabbas "the honest" to apply the next scam.

[barabbas]

I guess i should of posted my stuff here but I was just banned from IE's coinblab.com as well.  

Here is a link to the post I saved before i was banned.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=851666.msg9520996#msg9520996


IE said he launched his coin FUD free or TROLL free but he is actually deleting honest concerns and banning them from his forum.

With what is posted and the self-immolation that IE has chosen to perform, it is more than enough. In my opinion, BYC is a dead project. Investors should contact Bittrex and demand a refund, there's no other option.

I cannot believe IE is stupid enough to pretend that the already almost 20% "mined" is not causing dilution. At that level of de-lusion, any reasoning is futile.

[sdmathis]

I wonder how many people still think barabbas and IE are the same person now. This post proves that they are different people, or that IE is an even bigger moron than I thought.

barabbas IS iconic express
He is crazy and has several personalities
Months ago he posted like ie but using the barabbas account in libertycoin thread. Many people saw it
This coin has several irreversible problems and wallet does not work.
Probably IE now going to disappear with the money from ico, leaving only Barabbas "the honest" to apply the next scam.

Except for the fact that some people have said it, what evidence do you have that would indicate that they are the same person.

I'm definitely against lying scammers like IE, and I'm not a big fan of barbaras either, but as long as lies and rumors are spread around here without regard to the evidence, nobody will know who to believe.

[djm34]

I wonder how many people still think barabbas and IE are the same person now. This post proves that they are different people, or that IE is an even bigger moron than I thought.

barabbas IS iconic express
He is crazy and has several personalities
Months ago he posted like ie but using the barabbas account in libertycoin thread. Many people saw it
This coin has several irreversible problems and wallet does not work.
Probably IE now going to disappear with the money from ico, leaving only Barabbas "the honest" to apply the next scam.

Except for the fact that some people have said it, what evidence do you have that would indicate that they are the same person.

I'm definitely against lying scammers like IE, and I'm not a big fan of barbaras either, but as long as lies and rumors are spread around here without regard to the evidence, nobody will know who to believe.

Actually that would make sense   (don't know, don't care if true), but IE nickname is definitely burned this time and with "supporter" of bytecent saying things aren't ok, that also gives him also the possibility to let the coin die right away...

Then Barabbas by denouncing the other nickname, the owner might just want to save this one, so it can use it to promote or create other scam coins.
Keep that in mind if a Barabbas IPO coin comes out   (or if he wants to create another IPO to save bytecent investors)

[sdmathis]

I wonder how many people still think barabbas and IE are the same person now. This post proves that they are different people, or that IE is an even bigger moron than I thought.

barabbas IS iconic express
He is crazy and has several personalities
Months ago he posted like ie but using the barabbas account in libertycoin thread. Many people saw it
This coin has several irreversible problems and wallet does not work.
Probably IE now going to disappear with the money from ico, leaving only Barabbas "the honest" to apply the next scam.

Except for the fact that some people have said it, what evidence do you have that would indicate that they are the same person.

I'm definitely against lying scammers like IE, and I'm not a big fan of barbaras either, but as long as lies and rumors are spread around here without regard to the evidence, nobody will know who to believe.

Actually that would make sense   (don't know, don't care if true), but IE nickname is definitely burned this time and with "supporter" of bytecent saying things aren't ok, that also gives him also the possibility to let the coin die right away...

Then Barabbas by denouncing the other nickname, the owner might just want to save this one, so it can use it to promote or create other scam coins.
Keep that in mind if a Barabbas IPO coin comes out   (or if he wants to create another IPO to save bytecent investors)

What??? It amazes me to see the lengths that people will go to justify an illogical opinion.

Who knows. Maybe I'm wrong. But like I said earlier, if they are the same person, IE is an even bigger moron than I thought.

If this is a ruse and they are in fact one person, it's a plan that was hatched months ago when IE was still in good standing with the Blackcoin community.

[barabbas]

I wonder how many people still think barabbas and IE are the same person now. This post proves that they are different people, or that IE is an even bigger moron than I thought.

barabbas IS iconic express
He is crazy and has several personalities
Months ago he posted like ie but using the barabbas account in libertycoin thread. Many people saw it
This coin has several irreversible problems and wallet does not work.
Probably IE now going to disappear with the money from ico, leaving only Barabbas "the honest" to apply the next scam.

Except for the fact that some people have said it, what evidence do you have that would indicate that they are the same person.

I'm definitely against lying scammers like IE, and I'm not a big fan of barbaras either, but as long as lies and rumors are spread around here without regard to the evidence, nobody will know who to believe.

Actually that would make sense   (don't know, don't care if true), but IE nickname is definitely burned this time and with "supporter" of bytecent saying things aren't ok, that also gives him also the possibility to let the coin die right away...

Then Barabbas by denouncing the other nickname, the owner might just want to save this one, so it can use it to promote or create other scam coins.
Keep that in mind if a Barabbas IPO coin comes out   (or if he wants to create another IPO to save bytecent investors)

What??? It amazes me to see the lengths that people will go to justify an illogical opinion.

Who knows. Maybe I'm wrong. But like I said earlier, if they are the same person, IE is an even bigger moron than I thought.

If this is a ruse and they are in fact one person, it's a plan that was hatched months ago when IE was still in good standing with the Blackcoin community.

You have to understand you are dealing with people that is clinically, officially, retarded. From that point of view, it all would make a lot more sense.

Back to topic, though: Out of the blue and in the middle of the night, the wallet, that had not synced previously, started "working". No changes whatsoever. Same computer, same internet connection, no conf. changes at all... strange. And VERY shady.

Additionally, all blocks are supposed to be 1 BYC, but 31125 -I believe, citing by memory- went with 92 BYC... why? are there any more "irregular" blocks?
Not that it matters since this thing is quite done in my opinion.

I have also found out, via Twitter, that Bittrex asked Patrick Nosker, one of the devs of Vericoin, to take a look at the code of BYC. He posted on Twitter that he did not find anything irregular -or words to that effect-. Not that it is relevant since the problem with BYC has nothing to do with any irregularity in the code, but with a hidden and obviously beneficial for some, irregular mining that is diluting the value of the coin by a huge percentage already and will continue for some time diluting it, which is completely unacceptable. Bittrex, REFUND INVESTORS! And don't allow this disaster to go on. It will be dead in a week as it is anyway and this way at least you will maintain credibility with your customers.

[barabbas]

Well over 20% diluted already. And going strong...

Amazing. Bittrex, stop this ridiculous madness!

[djm34]

actually I don't think bittrex should refund anybody on this one.
There were at least 3 threads warning people of the most probable outcome of this ICO.

So they all have been warned of the risk...

[Kuriso]

I've updated my post to add context to my messages. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=851666.msg9520996#msg9520996

Can anyone shed some light on how 156,793.0 BYC can be injected into the blockchain?  I'd really like to know the answer to this.  3109 blocks were mined at 1 block reward and on block 3110, 156,793.0 BYC were added to the coin count.  After looking at these blocks a bit more, it looks as though this part of the chain was being privately mined, stopped, coins added, and then public mining started.  There's minutes of time that past before the next block was mined. Is this right?

[barabbas]

actually I don't think bittrex should refund anybody on this one.
There were at least 3 threads warning people of the most probable outcome of this ICO.

So they all have been warned of the risk...

That is your opinion, of course. Everyone is warning of every ICO in many more than 3 threads and they, rightfully, have made refunds available to people that yet felt they had been conned, scammed or whatever you choose to call it.

In any case it would be to clean up their own house and not for the benefit of anyone, to issue the refund. They get their commissions anyway and everyone is satisfied. Those still -amazingly, there are some- in the project, will not cash their refunds and those who feel rightfully betrayed by the outrageous instamine, will get their money back and end of that part of the story. Any other outcome will cast a bad light on Bittrex... which needs such a thing as much as a pancreatic cancer, by the way.

[tempus]

actually I don't think bittrex should refund anybody on this one.
There were at least 3 threads warning people of the most probable outcome of this ICO.

So they all have been warned of the risk...

That is your opinion, of course. Everyone is warning of every ICO in many more than 3 threads and they, rightfully, have made refunds available to people that yet felt they had been conned, scammed or whatever you choose to call it.

In any case it would be to clean up their own house and not for the benefit of anyone, to issue the refund. They get their commissions anyway and everyone is satisfied. Those still -amazingly, there are some- in the project, will not cash their refunds and those who feel rightfully betrayed by the outrageous instamine, will get their money back and end of that part of the story. Any other outcome will cast a bad light on Bittrex... which needs such a thing as much as a pancreatic cancer, by the way.

Yes. And Bittrex did it for Blocknet... They should do it with Bytecent, too. I'm not invested, but Exchanges (and Investors) should set signs against all the shady ICOs.

But... mainly it's the stupidity of Investors. I don't understand why so many jump on those hypes.

[barabbas]

I've updated my post to add context to my messages. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=851666.msg9520996#msg9520996

Can anyone shed some light on how 156,793.0 BYC can be injected into the blockchain?  I'd really like to know the answer to this.  3109 blocks were mined at 1 block reward and on block 3110, 156,793.0 BYC were added to the coin count.  After looking at these blocks a bit more, it looks as though this part of the chain was being privately mined, stopped, coins added, and then public mining started.  There's minutes of time that past before the next block was mined. Is this right?

I don't know how it is done or any other technicals, but IE posted that instead of having given Bittrex the 3 million coins promised in his offer statement, he had decided to just mine the amount of coins sold in the ICO instead. This, in itself, as I have posted, is quite deceiving since the 2,840,000 coins were to be destroyed by Bittrex after the ICO. Instead, IE, unilaterally and arbitrarily, decided to just mine the 160,000 coins sold, leaving those 2,840,000 to be mined as part of the 33 million total that the coin will ever had. No one made a fuss about the moving of the posts halfway through the game, because the influence of those added 2,840,000 coins, spread over at least 57 years, don't influence the project that much, but they DO influence it nonetheless. And the other chief reason, by far the main one, was the statement that under no circumstances the mined coins per day would ever exceed 1440 ... which we all know by now is a total lie by IE.

Additionally, I have already noticed that at least one block, last night, 31025 I believe -but citing by memory- mined 92 coins instead of the usual 1. So there are other irregularities going on already and, probably, more to come.

[Kuriso]

I've updated my post to add context to my messages. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=851666.msg9520996#msg9520996

Can anyone shed some light on how 156,793.0 BYC can be injected into the blockchain?  I'd really like to know the answer to this.  3109 blocks were mined at 1 block reward and on block 3110, 156,793.0 BYC were added to the coin count.  After looking at these blocks a bit more, it looks as though this part of the chain was being privately mined, stopped, coins added, and then public mining started.  There's minutes of time that past before the next block was mined. Is this right?

I don't know how it is done or any other technicals, but IE posted that instead of having given Bittrex the 3 million coins promised in his offer statement, he had decided to just mine the amount of coins sold in the ICO instead. This, in itself, as I have posted, is quite deceiving since the 2,840,000 coins were to be destroyed by Bittrex after the ICO. Instead, IE, unilaterally and arbitrarily, decided to just mine the 160,000 coins sold, leaving those 2,840,000 to be mined as part of the 33 million total that the coin will ever had. No one made a fuss about the moving of the posts halfway through the game, because the influence of those added 2,840,000 coins, spread over at least 57 years, don't influence the project that much, but they DO influence it nonetheless. And the other chief reason, by far the main one, was the statement that under no circumstances the mined coins per day would ever exceed 1440 ... which we all know by now is a total lie by IE.

Additionally, I have already noticed that at least one block, last night, 31025 I believe -but citing by memory- mined 92 coins instead of the usual 1. So there are other irregularities going on already and, probably, more to come.

Yeah he lied and he willingly and knowingly launched BYC with the current difficulty allowing for more coins to be mined.  It wasn't just part of how the difficulty worked. "We had to start with a low difficulty to allow more coins to enter circulation, or it would have taken years before mining would have been "fair" for everyone. I did not mislead anyone or misrepresent the numbers."

You are correct on the irregularities.  I had seen some of that too.  There was a block last night with like 2.xx byc and another that was .xx byc.  I'd have to spend some time trying to find them.

[barabbas]

A few minutes ago in his twitter:

IconicExpert ‏@IconicExpert  9m9 minutes ago
Some of you are unhappy with the start of mining and we hear you. So we are considering a relaunch to address your concerns. Stay tuned...

There's hope to reverse this mess. Awaiting developments, but it seems some sense has made through his skull... perhaps Bittrex's common sense?

Edit to add:

IconicExpert, of course there's a GOOD option, a fair one: Relaunch with everyone with working wallets AND -this is MOST IMPORTANT, because it eliminates the issue altogether-, an strictly enforced limit of a maximum of 1440 coins mined per day. Do that and the issue fully disappears and the project continues as expected and with everyone in it cheering the fairness of the decision. It's the right thing to do. Have always been the right thing to do.

[scambust]

I'm IconicExpert. 

[barabbas]

Bytecent ICO investors: So far, your investment has been diluted by 21.25%, more than 1/5. That means that money, regardless at what price the market determines it's exchange, has been taken away from your pockets by the disastrous, arbitrary, instamined launch. Demand from Bittrex a refund of that IconicExpert relaunches in a fair, level field.

Besides, if there's no relaunch, the project is as good as DOA. Very simple.

[barabbas]

This is so amazing, really: Iconic's enormous ego is being stroked against doing the obvious right thing, by captcha-fillers that did not even invest any real money in the project.

Way to go IE...

[EmilioMann]

I wonder how many people still think barabbas and IE are the same person now. This post proves that they are different people, or that IE is an even bigger moron than I thought.

barabbas IS iconic express
He is crazy and has several personalities
Months ago he posted like ie but using the barabbas account in libertycoin thread. Many people saw it
This coin has several irreversible problems and wallet does not work.
Probably IE now going to disappear with the money from ico, leaving only Barabbas "the honest" to apply the next scam.

Except for the fact that some people have said it, what evidence do you have that would indicate that they are the same person.

I'm definitely against lying scammers like IE, and I'm not a big fan of barbaras either, but as long as lies and rumors are spread around here without regard to the evidence, nobody will know who to believe.

man, I was there and I saw it.
You can believe or not, but I and many others know that Barabbas and iconic expert are the same schizophrenic

[sofu]

https://twitter.com/CryptoCobain/status/532613610435280896


LMAO