so korvas is telling lies then and whales do get information the public doesnt get about the ionomy vision?
Me telling lies is something you need to decide for yourself
well one of you is telling lies. wildshark says whales get inside info you say whales dont. cant be both.
you shouldnt be telling lies because you acuse others of doing it and that would be hypocritical wouldnt it?
so from that i infer that you are incluned to agree wildshark is a liar? is this correct?
Korvas continually contradicts himself. Here's just one example from only a few days ago where he talks about getting information early. His post history has many others, but to be honest I can't be bothered to trawl through it.
And yes I do have a superior knowledge of the situation but
A) If it's not announced by IONOMY it's not for me to say
B) Sharing information if it's not already known to slack users would for various reasons be just plain stupid
by that quote korvas admits ge has info slack doesnt which would be from whale status. there is potential insider trading happening. another red flag.
this is a lie from korvas which means without justification he has no right to acuse others of lies and try to take the moral high ground. thanks altheshort
I agree. To me it doesn't matter if it is legally defined (as yet) as potential insider trading, which is what Sharky appears to be hung up on. In essence, regardless of it's legal definition, the set up whereby they discuss advance information (about matters as significant as delays to products, as they did with Gravity) with a select group who are also the largest holders of the tokens leaves open the possibility that one of the whales may, at some point, choose to act on said information for their own financial gain and to the detriment of smaller holders. It's foolish, and the fact that the team are apparently ok with sharing information in this manner with no formal controls in place shows their naivety, in my opinion. This is crypto; it's largely unregulated. It's idiotic and shortsighted to just trust that the whales won't act out of self preservation because they said they wouldn't.
@altheshort I have access to info prior to the public because I am a Whale and entitled to Alpha test the Ionomy products prior to release... All Founders have access to the info when they Beta testing the Ionomy product.
Thes Whale & Founder services are provided to the Ionomy Team for free!!
Whale and Founder services are free? LIE!
None of the Whales or Founders get paid. They contribute their service for free. Having your input into the platform heard and used benefits the Ionomy products..
Look, this discussion will go around in circles because none of the whales will directly address the inherently dodgy looking nature of their relationship with the team, and most people who are fully in possession of the facts about that same arrangement likely won't invest. The discussion isn't about whether you get paid, frankly I wouldn't give a shit even if they're paying you in nuggets of golden turd shat out of a goats arse, particularly since you apparently gave them advice about 'Crypto Gravity', which has a grand total of 19 players so far this week. You know exactly why it looks dodgy and has the potential to be dodgy, you're just trying to weasel out of confronting it.
Anyway, I've said my piece.
TLDR; Whales (group of most invested individuals) get exclusive access to information direct from the team in charge before lesser investors and general public, leaving 'ion' open to manipulation in a scenario with similarities to insider trading.
for this to be Insider Trading,
the information needs to be related to the security that is being traded. Ionomy stock is not open to the public. Atoms are not a security, just a token that produces Electrons...
Oh, sharky. Firstly, if you read what I wrote carefully you'll notice I said 'with similarities to'. I said that because I'm fully aware that the SEC hasn't assessed atoms (to my knowledge -- perhaps you can correct me if I'm wrong) and adjudged them to be or not be a security, so I cannot say with good conscience that it is, as defined legally, insider trading. But that does not proclude the fact that the way the information you exclusively get could be used might, hypothetically, lead to you gaining benefit similar (there's that word again) to that of an inside trader.
Regardless of its (current) legal standing, I, along with presumably many others since there hasn't been an explosion in investment in the Ionomy, believe it to be a risky and foolish arrangement.
