[ANN] NeuCoin - Easy to use, free to try, focused on micropayments - Official

[rizzlarolla]

 ^
Have you tried spending more than you own, Nick?
Or can only Veegold get "credit" on his account?
His balance is (minus) -999 nokoin, How so?

No probs with you getting "lucky" btw.

[TibanneCat]

Don't know what you're all complaining about. I never spent a Satoshi on Neucoin and received 7,500+ coins for surveys. Currently estimated at about $60.00 USD. Basically the best surveys I have ever taken. I put 1500 grow in a 3-month growth account which will then be invested immediately into a 5-year growth account. I cashed out the rest for a pretty penny ( over 0.1 BTC ) .

So I am liking Neucoin so far.

You got nokoins for free but those who bought it at presale already lost half of their investment

and those who got it for free had to provide all sorts of personal details
everyone following this thread knows about nokoin founder's notorious past with spyware.

This coin has been riddled with problems since day one:
coin centralization, rampant hyperinflation, buggy code, zero utility, heavy censorship, undelivered promises, shady offshores, and the list goes on, all detailed in the pages of this thread (notice the countless 0 day sock-puppet accounts created by the founder)

Just 2 months since launch and this shitcoin is already on its death bed, even most of the team members already left because they don't believe in it anymore
Do you honestly think it will be around in 5 years? cash it out while it is still worth something

[jonald_fyookball]

wont this coin die already?

Or is Dan just going to leave
the buy walls up for years ?

(I guess he can afford to do that
since there's almost zero trading volume)

[LiQio]

wont this coin die already?

Or is Dan just going to leave
the buy walls up for years ?

(I guess he can afford to do that
since there's almost zero trading volume)

Interesting idea, you have to give him that.
He possesses almost all the coins and with just a few BTC he can "create" whatever price he wants for how long he likes 

[scam confirmed]

Did you notice all the change addresses the foundations have created !?!?

http://neucoin.io/richlist

Publicly visible addresses and verifiable transactions
Second, all NeuCoin tokens owned by the foundations, as well as all restricted NeuCoins (whether owned by founders, angel investors or service providers) will be held and mined in published addresses clearly visible and verifiable on the NeuCoin blockchain.

"clearly visible and verifiable" blah blah bullshit!

http://explorer.neucoin.org/overview

 

Sometimes it's really hard to distinguish between schameless lies and pure incompetence. I guess it's because they go hand in hand

[LiQio]

Did you notice all the change addresses the foundations have created !?!?
http://neucoin.io/richlist

Publicly visible addresses and verifiable transactions
Second, all NeuCoin tokens owned by the foundations, as well as all restricted NeuCoins (whether owned by founders, angel investors or service providers) will be held and mined in published addresses clearly visible and verifiable on the NeuCoin blockchain.

"clearly visible and verifiable" blah blah bullshit!
http://explorer.neucoin.org/overview

 

Just wanted to add: where is the monthly distribution report dear Neucon scammers?!
(Always like the occasional lie embedded in PDF, gives a balance to the usual HTML lies)

Sometimes it's really hard to distinguish between schameless lies and pure incompetence. I guess it's because they go hand in hand

LOL, yeah, they fit the cliché with every action.

Neucon: Where lies and incompetence go hand in hand.

[rizzlarolla]

Now huey (the creator of the block explorer, a task the neucon regime is not able to accomplish) is encouraged to create a "faked" block explorer rich list and has to defend the reality.


http://forum.neucoin.org/t/neucoin-block-explorer/1806/18

So, wtf IS going on with these block explorers?

Huey said "the blockchain never lies"
Well, at least one of them is lying.

nokoin.io states 3.95bn nokoin exist.
http://www.neucoin.io/richlist

nokoin.org state 3.39bn nokoin exist.
http://explorer.neucoin.org/overview

I had expected to see at least ~3.7bn in existence at this point, using nokoin own formula.
http://forum.neucoin.org/t/how-will-neucoins-be-mined-after-release/163/28
However,with the super compounding effect for the controllers of nokoin, nokoin.io's figure of 3.95bn is plausible.
On the other hand, nokoin.org's 3.39bn figure is several hundred million nokoin below their own projections.

So, are they holding back on staking, or have they just messed up the process of staking, or did they mess up the original figures, or is their blockchain just plain wrong?
(I think the figures are good as the first months nokoin growth was in line with expectations, as reported on this thread. the nokoin growth therefore must have slowed after month one. I dont know how to go back in time, now, to "easily verify" how many nokoin existed after month one on "todays version of events"  at nokoin.org explorer?)

Is the difference between the two because nokoin.org rewrite (their) history every month (on "distribution day") and nokoin.io doesn't obey?
After all, when nokoin team rewrite history, that then makes it "true".
Even when nokoin team are not rewriting, every tx is is based on the 51% attack. The controllers say it did or did not happen. NOBODY else gets a say. If you disagree, (when finding a block) you will be orphaned?

Also
Veegolds' transaction history on the two explorers deviates on distribution day, Oct 23rd, coincidence?
http://www.neucoin.io/address/NSx81GyspxWA5H8z7MHam9dezptCKBqzkC
I don't think Acorn would have deliberately robbed Veegold, but could a bug in the reorg/rewrite be to blame?

What is going on? Can anything about nokoin be trusted?
Probably not....   unless you FULLY trust the team. (mostly gone or hiding behind "Acorn" for anonymity)
As Sandrine said,(Apr 25) "Pre-mined cryptocurrencies like NeuCoin reintroduce a trust factor during a part of the distribution phase, while the Foundations still hold the majority of the coin. It is a paradigm Bitcointalk members do not like."

[tempus]

Now huey (the creator of the block explorer, a task the neucon regime is not able to accomplish) is encouraged to create a "faked" block explorer rich list and has to defend the reality.


http://forum.neucoin.org/t/neucoin-block-explorer/1806/18

So, wtf IS going on with these block explorers?

Huey said "the blockchain never lies"
Well, at least one of them is lying.

nokoin.io states 3.95bn nokoin exist.
http://www.neucoin.io/richlist

nokoin.org state 3.39bn nokoin exist.
http://explorer.neucoin.org/overview

I had expected to see at least ~3.7bn in existence at this point, using nokoin own formula.
http://forum.neucoin.org/t/how-will-neucoins-be-mined-after-release/163/28
However,with the super compounding effect for the controllers of nokoin, nokoin.io's figure of 3.95bn is plausible.
On the other hand, nokoin.org's 3.39bn figure is several hundred million nokoin below their own projections.

So, are they holding back on staking, or have they just messed up the process of staking, or did they mess up the original figures, or is their blockchain just plain wrong?
(I think the figures are good as the first months nokoin growth was in line with expectations, as reported on this thread. the nokoin growth therefore must have slowed after month one. I dont know how to go back in time, now, to "easily verify" how many nokoin existed after month one on "todays version of events"  at nokoin.org explorer?)

Is the difference between the two because nokoin.org rewrite (their) history every month (on "distribution day") and nokoin.io doesn't obey?
After all, when nokoin team rewrite history, that then makes it "true".
Even when nokoin team are not rewriting, every tx is is based on the 51% attack. The controllers say it did or did not happen. NOBODY else gets a say. If you disagree, (when finding a block) you will be orphaned?

Also
Veegolds' transaction history on the two explorers deviates on distribution day, Oct 23rd, coincidence?
http://www.neucoin.io/address/NSx81GyspxWA5H8z7MHam9dezptCKBqzkC
I don't think Acorn would have deliberately robbed Veegold, but could a bug in the reorg/rewrite be to blame?

What is going on? Can anything about nokoin be trusted?
Probably not....   unless you FULLY trust the team. (mostly gone or hiding behind "Acorn" for anonymity)
As Sandrine said,(Apr 25) "Pre-mined cryptocurrencies like NeuCoin reintroduce a trust factor during a part of the distribution phase, while the Foundations still hold the majority of the coin. It is a paradigm Bitcointalk members do not like."

That's really weird. My calculation, with compound interest, would be for 70 days:

100% per year = 0.27% per day

3,000,000,000 * (1 + 0.27/100) ^70 = 3,633,262,031 NEU

So, it would be near what you say: "I had expected to see at least ~3.7bn in existence at this point"

Maybe it's a decreasing interest rate to avoid compound interest. But the question would be still what's wrong with one or both BE's.


Kind of funny is: It seems, nobody cares anymore about those questions. The team knows that Neucoin is done (is there still a team btw?). Some Investors maybe still hope but how many Investors do they have? The forum shows also a decreasing activity.

There are so many points, and every single point would be a huge scandal in every legit project, but it's totally normal for Neucoin that things are wrong and nobody cares.

[rizzlarolla]

Now huey (the creator of the block explorer, a task the neucon regime is not able to accomplish) is encouraged to create a "faked" block explorer rich list and has to defend the reality.


http://forum.neucoin.org/t/neucoin-block-explorer/1806/18

So, wtf IS going on with these block explorers?

Huey said "the blockchain never lies"
Well, at least one of them is lying.

nokoin.io states 3.95bn nokoin exist.
http://www.neucoin.io/richlist

nokoin.org state 3.39bn nokoin exist.
http://explorer.neucoin.org/overview

I had expected to see at least ~3.7bn in existence at this point, using nokoin own formula.
http://forum.neucoin.org/t/how-will-neucoins-be-mined-after-release/163/28
However,with the super compounding effect for the controllers of nokoin, nokoin.io's figure of 3.95bn is plausible.
On the other hand, nokoin.org's 3.39bn figure is several hundred million nokoin below their own projections.

So, are they holding back on staking, or have they just messed up the process of staking, or did they mess up the original figures, or is their blockchain just plain wrong?
(I think the figures are good as the first months nokoin growth was in line with expectations, as reported on this thread. the nokoin growth therefore must have slowed after month one. I dont know how to go back in time, now, to "easily verify" how many nokoin existed after month one on "todays version of events"  at nokoin.org explorer?)

Is the difference between the two because nokoin.org rewrite (their) history every month (on "distribution day") and nokoin.io doesn't obey?
After all, when nokoin team rewrite history, that then makes it "true".
Even when nokoin team are not rewriting, every tx is is based on the 51% attack. The controllers say it did or did not happen. NOBODY else gets a say. If you disagree, (when finding a block) you will be orphaned?

Also
Veegolds' transaction history on the two explorers deviates on distribution day, Oct 23rd, coincidence?
http://www.neucoin.io/address/NSx81GyspxWA5H8z7MHam9dezptCKBqzkC
I don't think Acorn would have deliberately robbed Veegold, but could a bug in the reorg/rewrite be to blame?

What is going on? Can anything about nokoin be trusted?
Probably not....   unless you FULLY trust the team. (mostly gone or hiding behind "Acorn" for anonymity)
As Sandrine said,(Apr 25) "Pre-mined cryptocurrencies like NeuCoin reintroduce a trust factor during a part of the distribution phase, while the Foundations still hold the majority of the coin. It is a paradigm Bitcointalk members do not like."

That's really weird. My calculation, with compound interest, would be for 70 days:

100% per year = 0.27% per day

3,000,000,000 * (1 + 0.27/100) ^70 = 3,633,262,031 NEU

So, it would be near what you say: "I had expected to see at least ~3.7bn in existence at this point"

Maybe it's a decreasing interest rate to avoid compound interest. But the question would be still what's wrong with one or both BE's.


Kind of funny is: It seems, nobody cares anymore about those questions. The team knows that Neucoin is done (is there still a team btw?). Some Investors maybe still hope but how many Investors do they have? The forum shows also a decreasing activity.

There are so many points, and every single point would be a huge scandal in every legit project, but it's totally normal for Neucoin that things are wrong and nobody cares.

Of course this calculation is near impossible to work out accurately. Deliberately so.

Kourosh stated he expected 8bn nokoin at end of 12 months, that is 5bn nokoin created. (possible 150bn nokoin after 10 years)

The interest rate is 100% in month one, 97.5% month two, 95.9% month 3.
However, the team billions are staking and therefore compounding almost every minute.
So, even though the monthly rate decreases, the compounding means the reward recieved each month increases.

Yet Alex Higgins has only received 38 nokoin pos reward on his 450,000 nokoin holding!
http://forum.neucoin.org/t/public-pos-stakes-being-orphaned-by-foundation-account-stakes/2289

But, as the, er, "team" control most ~97% of nokoin, the effect of nokoiners being unable to stake would be minimal on total nokoin numbers.
That would not account for the missing hundreds of million nokoin.

I think your figure of 3.633bn nokoin is a realisticly achievable and expected number.

However Tempus, as you say, "There are so many points, and every single point would be a huge scandal in every legit project, but it's totally normal for Neucoin that things are wrong and nobody cares."

Pretty much sums it up.

[scam confirmed]

[jonald_fyookball]

Karpeles in Jail.

Josh Garza being prosecuted.

Dan K next?

[alexhiggins732]

The wallet puts the official money supply at 3394656794.950989 neu. It matches is what is on the official explorer.

Could totally be possible the neucoin.io total includes orphaned transactions it has not reconciled.

[alexhiggins732]

https://i.imgur.com/4KxeKrk.jpg

Thanks that's an awesome portrait of me. I am going to frame it on my wall!

[rizzlarolla]

The wallet puts the official money supply at 3394656794.950989 neu. It matches is what is on the official explorer.

Could totally be possible the neucoin.io total includes orphaned transactions it has not reconciled.

Does the wallet not follow the chain of most trust - i.e. whatever the, er, "team" tells it?
(your blocks were orphaned by, er, "team" - now your wallet believes they never happened, in effect)

Anyway, there is a difference of over 570 million nokoin between the explorers.
That is a lot of orphaning.
Much more than the (nearly) 400 million "officially" created.
So, if that were the case, I would expect to see a fairly consistent "over accounting" on large staking addresses on nokoin.io
Not so.

NdoQ1quvqEnkNMqtSzVhTKiLrbDuKQYQz6 for example, has a higher balance shown on nokoin.org than nokoin.io.
That is the wrong way around for the orphan scenario.
Some other large addresses are like this, but also some are the other way round.
(and there is "only" a few million difference between balances on the explorers, nothing like the 570 missing millions)
No consistency there.

But also approx 250 million nokoin were created in the first month (as projected), yet only 150 million in the 5 weeks since. (not as projected)
The creation process was projected to speed up, not slow down.

And it does seem "things" happen on "distribution day", 23rd of the month, as you have found, to your cost.

So, I think still unanswered, "are they holding back on staking, or have they just messed up the process of staking, or did they mess up the original figures, or is their blockchain just plain wrong?"

[alexhiggins732]

Does the wallet not follow the chain of most trust - i.e. whatever the, er, "team" tells it?
(your blocks were orphaned by, er, "team" - now your wallet believes they never happened, in effect)

Yep... I have been give different reasons for the high orphan rates. First it was longer block chain... provider a counter example. Then first come first serve due to network latency... provided counter examples. The latest reason is due to earlier timestamps (ntime) on the blocks/transactions, which is just not true, but provided counter examples. Only reason remaining is "trust" which is based on entirely on the amount of funds in the wallet that created the addres..

Anyway, there is a difference of over 570 million nokoin between the explorers.
That is a lot of orphaning.

Yes a lot.  In just the last month over 1000 POW blocks orphaned (that 1,141,000 million coins)  and over 100 PoS stakes orphaned... don't have the total on those.

Much more than the (nearly) 400 million "officially" created.
So, if that were the case, I would expect to see a fairly consistent "over accounting" on large staking addresses on nokoin.io
Not so.

NdoQ1quvqEnkNMqtSzVhTKiLrbDuKQYQz6 for example, has a higher balance shown on nokoin.org than nokoin.io.
That is the wrong way around for the orphan scenario.
Some other large addresses are like this, but also some are the other way round.
(and there is "only" a few million difference between balances on the explorers, nothing like the 570 missing millions)
No consistency there.

No if neucoin.io has a lower balance orphaning would total explain.

EG. Block is mined, both explorers would credit the miners account balance. When the block is orphaned by a PoS for that account if neucoin.io doesn't reorganize nuecoin.io will have the lower balance for that account. Nuecoin.org does reorganize and the PoS account is credited with the stake while the miner's balance is debited. Hence a possible explanation for the higher balance on the nuecoin.org explorer.

I haven't look into the inconsistencies and the only possible explanation I can offer up is neucoin.io not handling the reorganize. It is certainly possible the larger accounts such as NdoQ1 are orphaning stakes from smaller accounts... but not sure.

But also approx 250 million nokoin were created in the first month (as projected), yet only 150 million in the 5 weeks since. (not as projected)
The creation process was projected to speed up, not slow down.

A possible explanation for this the originally projected monthly drop in interest rates is exactly following what was projected. The decrease isn't actually done on a monthly basis but instead done every 43,836 blocks. So the third drop in interest rates is to occur after 132,000 blocks are on the chain. So it was projected. using the 9/11 date on the genesis block there would be 131,508 blocks on the chain at the start of the 4th month. If we take a month to be 30 days, then we 7 days from the 90 day marker... about 76% or the way through the month. Taking the current block height of 111599 -87672 (the block for the second month) we are only 23,927 blocks into month 3. That's only only about 54.6% of the way into the month( again being 43,836). So clearly block generation isn't happening as fast as project. I have seen the projected coin creation rates but I am sure they were tied to this. Do you have a link to that?

And it does seem "things" happen on "distribution day", 23rd of the month, as you have found, to your cost.

So, I think still unanswered, "are they holding back on staking, or have they just messed up the process of staking, or did they mess up the original figures, or is their blockchain just plain wrong?"

Can only speculate. I can say sometimes when pow blocks are not orphaned it seems to cause a "hiccup" in the staking from the foundation accounts. Its even more noticeable when 2 or 3 successive POW blocks are mined. Why?

I can only speculate but one possible explanation: There is clear latency with the large accounts PoS stakes. Say a block is mined, it gets broadcasted across the network and peers clients begin generating a PoS stakes are generated using the mined block as the previous block hash. Then 30,60, 120 seconds later a Foundation stake hits the network. Orphaning the mined block. All the other peers must now "reset" to use the foundations PoS stake. If they did already mint a PoS stake and already sent it out the block chain these might not even show up as orphaned shares to many nodes on the network... certainly the wallet the generated would receive a reorganize. Combine that with the fact if a PoS stake is orphaned the wallet just doesn't attempt to immediately mint another stake. Instead the waiting game begins. This also lowers the effective compound interest rates which in turn a a whole will reduce future PoS staking and in turn make slow down the rate of block generation. Of course this and the obvious fact that several thousand blocks themselves have been orphaned and hence not making it onto the chain and hence not contributing the amount of funds created and hence not staking and hence not generating compound interest either. I highly doubt this rate of orphanage was factored into the original projects.

[alexhiggins732]

And a few more possible reasons:

The projections probably made assumptions about the distribution of survey coins and other coins that were most likely off.

It was probably assumed that these coins would contribute to growth with some high percentage transferring to growth accounts. That probably didn't happen and instead I have a feeling a good portion of that distribution was either sold or are being held in private wallets  The same for many pre-sale buyers.

I would suspect many private held private wallets probably just aren't staking. It's pretty clear the neucoin didn't think as many people would choose to hold privately and instead would go for the growth account option.

[peonminer]

Name:   Sandrine89
Posts:   37
Activity:   37
Position:   Jr. Member
Date Registered:   February 03, 2015, 10:08:55 AM
Last Active:   September 04, 2015, 05:40:45 AM

Scam confirmed?

[LiQio]

And a few more possible reasons:

The projections probably made assumptions about the distribution of survey coins and other coins that were most likely off.

It was probably assumed that these coins would contribute to growth with some high percentage transferring to growth accounts. That probably didn't happen and instead I have a feeling a good portion of that distribution was either sold or are being held in private wallets  The same for many pre-sale buyers.

I would suspect many private held private wallets probably just aren't staking. It's pretty clear the neucoin didn't think as many people would choose to hold privately and instead would go for the growth account option.

You should add some numbers here. Given the distribution I'm not sure that this ^ would explain the huge difference.

My take is that they messed up the Peercoin code by modifying stuff they have no clue about. And with Koubiac gone all the knowledge was gone as well. The professional scammer Daniel Kaufmann didn't care, because he wanted to make money. After postponing the launch he decided that instead of giving up, let's give it a shot. But with only web-developers left in the team and an entirely f*cked up project (code, community, team, distribution design, public perception, economic design) this undertaking is obviously pointless. A normal coin would move towards a market price of zero, because people would jump ship. But due to no third party holding any noteworthy amount of Neucon and the regime buying the coins at a fixed rate we just see their BTC-account diminish (for now).

I'm really curious about the timestamp orphan explanation they will give you.

[jonald_fyookball]

And a few more possible reasons:

The projections probably made assumptions about the distribution of survey coins and other coins that were most likely off.

It was probably assumed that these coins would contribute to growth with some high percentage transferring to growth accounts. That probably didn't happen and instead I have a feeling a good portion of that distribution was either sold or are being held in private wallets  The same for many pre-sale buyers.

I would suspect many private held private wallets probably just aren't staking. It's pretty clear the neucoin didn't think as many people would choose to hold privately and instead would go for the growth account option.

You should add some numbers here. Given the distribution I'm not sure that this ^ would explain the huge difference.

My take is that they messed up the Peercoin code by modifying stuff they have no clue about. And with Koubiac gone all the knowledge was gone as well. The professional scammer Daniel Kaufmann didn't care, because he wanted to make money. After postponing the launch he decided that instead of giving up, let's give it a shot. But with only web-developers left in the team and an entirely f*cked up project (code, community, team, distribution design, public perception, economic design) this undertaking is obviously pointless. A normal coin would move towards a market price of zero, because people would jump ship. But due to no third party holding any noteworthy amount of Neucon and the regime buying the coins at a fixed rate we just see their BTC-account diminish (for now).

I'm really curious about the timestamp orphan explanation they will give you.

Dan supporting the price is like when you've bought a website from someone and its dead but you're still paying domain registration and hosting cause you might do something with it in the future so you keep it alive

[thoth-Atlantian]

Let this thread die already, Scam confirmed... no point circle jerking over the finer details. It will slide away for a year or so then pump all of a sudden, we all know the way it goes,  lets get over it and move on