[ANN] ION [ION] | POS 3.0 | Mobile Gaming | Join the ionomy today! - page 495.

Mr-Coins

newbie

Activity: 154

Merit: 0

Quote from: skinnyboy on April 21, 2016, 07:32:52 AM

Quote from: Mr-Coins on April 21, 2016, 06:21:58 AM

Quote from: skinnyboy on April 21, 2016, 05:58:11 AM

Here's a question, leaving aside many others (& any negative bias):

How many of the purported features of this new coin, as described in the whitepaper, will be available on launch?

Upon launch the coin will have fully functioning POS3 and Masternodes (nothing like those BS Prime Controllers).

Also there will be working QT wallets as well as web wallets available through the Ionomy platform.

The coin code, QT and web wallets are currently being run on testnet. (I'm not fortunate enough to have access though.)

The whitepaper is long, are there any specific parts in particular that you would like to focus on?

I read the whitepaper over a week ago late at night on the return leg of a damned long journey & I don't have time to dig through and pull out specifics right now, but the masternodes bit from dash was only part of the list of features mentioned.

There was something about disproportionate staking again, if you lock your coins up in something or another which is exactly the same as the "stakers" first created by Garza, which has me curious, because it was a failed idea then and it'll screw things again if it's implemented here.

Ca anyone who has read the whitepaper recently throw up a list of the features this coin is supposed to have, to save me the agony of another long read?

Another question which your response brings to mind though is this: Didn't xpy.io or it's previous incarnation get robbed multiple times? In short, the question is: Do the ION web wallet dev team have the necessary skills and knowledge to build a functioning web wallet which won't be hacked?

Everything is built on fixed block rewards. There is no variable rate. That was a terrible flaw in XPY.

The masternodes have greater returns than wallets (because the're will be less of them and rewards are split 50/50) so people who invest in stakers are really investing in community masternodes, that's where the addition returns come from.

The platform will also be income generating (through subscriptions, features etc). As far as I am aware, XPY.io was never hacked, not even once.

docker

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: ocminer on April 21, 2016, 04:10:33 AM

Scnr

I remember that, unforgettable mate but was a long time ago

skinnyboy

full member

Activity: 223

Merit: 100

Quote from: Mr-Coins on April 21, 2016, 06:21:58 AM

Quote from: skinnyboy on April 21, 2016, 05:58:11 AM

Here's a question, leaving aside many others (& any negative bias):

How many of the purported features of this new coin, as described in the whitepaper, will be available on launch?

Upon launch the coin will have fully functioning POS3 and Masternodes (nothing like those BS Prime Controllers).

Also there will be working QT wallets as well as web wallets available through the Ionomy platform.

The coin code, QT and web wallets are currently being run on testnet. (I'm not fortunate enough to have access though.)

The whitepaper is long, are there any specific parts in particular that you would like to focus on?

I read the whitepaper over a week ago late at night on the return leg of a damned long journey & I don't have time to dig through and pull out specifics right now, but the masternodes bit from dash was only part of the list of features mentioned.

There was something about disproportionate staking again, if you lock your coins up in something or another which is exactly the same as the "stakers" first created by Garza, which has me curious, because it was a failed idea then and it'll screw things again if it's implemented here.

Ca anyone who has read the whitepaper recently throw up a list of the features this coin is supposed to have, to save me the agony of another long read?

Another question which your response brings to mind though is this: Didn't xpy.io or it's previous incarnation get robbed multiple times? In short, the question is: Do the ION web wallet dev team have the necessary skills and knowledge to build a functioning web wallet which won't be hacked?

Mr-Coins

newbie

Activity: 154

Merit: 0

Quote from: Phildo on April 21, 2016, 07:21:54 AM

Quote from: Mr-Coins on April 21, 2016, 04:07:55 AM

Quote from: altheshort on April 21, 2016, 02:28:49 AM

I suspect the only reason they've suddenly created an ANN thread for this is because the buying of their ICO has slowed down. They need to drum up more interest in the project to get more sales in; hence the press releases and this. Not surprising really given how limited the initial pool of 'investors' will have been from talkXPY/XPY.io.

For what it's worth I don't believe that Matlack and his team are scammers, but I do believe this is an ill conceived idea that will be dead in the water before long. With the greatest of respect, as this new team is mostly the same as the team behind XPY.io the best indicator of their potential success is what they did with that, and they hardly set the world alight. Honestly while they keep blaming XPYs ties to Garza for XPY.io's failure, they were fools to even try it in the first place, and even more foolish to stick with it as long as they did -- that for me calls into question the decision making of Matlack et al.

Most of the early investors were XPY investors because of the ease of the swap option. I for one am thankful for Matlack (and his team) to have built XPY.io and to have tried where many others would not have even made an attempt. My XPY would have be truly worthless if it wasn't for XPY.io, so that project had value for hundreds of people that got scammed by Garza.

At least in the end I swapped my XPY rather than dumping them on to some poor unsuspecting buyer who thinks it might recover one day.

I hope we can discuss ION reasonably, on it's own merits and particulars as this way we will get much more use out of the discussion.

I admittedly have not followed everything the non-garza gaw crew has said, so I may have missed something, but how can you trust matalack? Or anyone who actually worked for GAW?

Looking at the info we have now, it is obvious that gaw was a scam from the first time they typed the word hashlet. How can anyone involved from that point be trusted with anything? They were either in on the scam, and shouldn't be trusted, or too stupid to see the scam, and shouldn't be trusted. What has matalack done to show he's trustworthy at all? Where is his explanation for his role in the Gaw mess? Why would you take part in his new venture without understanding his role in the last?

Matlack was scammed by GAW and lost a ton of money. Spent the following year trying to pick up the pieces and make the doomed project work.

A lot of people were scammed by GAW. I see no reason to distrust someone because they got scammed.

There's a 2,200 page GAW/XPY thread and if you can cut through all the Ego talk and noise, there's some useful tidbits in there.

Phildo

legendary

Activity: 1526

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Mr-Coins on April 21, 2016, 04:07:55 AM

Quote from: altheshort on April 21, 2016, 02:28:49 AM

I suspect the only reason they've suddenly created an ANN thread for this is because the buying of their ICO has slowed down. They need to drum up more interest in the project to get more sales in; hence the press releases and this. Not surprising really given how limited the initial pool of 'investors' will have been from talkXPY/XPY.io.

For what it's worth I don't believe that Matlack and his team are scammers, but I do believe this is an ill conceived idea that will be dead in the water before long. With the greatest of respect, as this new team is mostly the same as the team behind XPY.io the best indicator of their potential success is what they did with that, and they hardly set the world alight. Honestly while they keep blaming XPYs ties to Garza for XPY.io's failure, they were fools to even try it in the first place, and even more foolish to stick with it as long as they did -- that for me calls into question the decision making of Matlack et al.

Most of the early investors were XPY investors because of the ease of the swap option. I for one am thankful for Matlack (and his team) to have built XPY.io and to have tried where many others would not have even made an attempt. My XPY would have be truly worthless if it wasn't for XPY.io, so that project had value for hundreds of people that got scammed by Garza.

At least in the end I swapped my XPY rather than dumping them on to some poor unsuspecting buyer who thinks it might recover one day.

I hope we can discuss ION reasonably, on it's own merits and particulars as this way we will get much more use out of the discussion.

I admittedly have not followed everything the non-garza gaw crew has said, so I may have missed something, but how can you trust matalack? Or anyone who actually worked for GAW?

Looking at the info we have now, it is obvious that gaw was a scam from the first time they typed the word hashlet. How can anyone involved from that point be trusted with anything? They were either in on the scam, and shouldn't be trusted, or too stupid to see the scam, and shouldn't be trusted. What has matalack done to show he's trustworthy at all? Where is his explanation for his role in the Gaw mess? Why would you take part in his new venture without understanding his role in the last?

samm1129

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Looks like OP isn't contributing much to this thread.

Can we ask for a Dev. to join the thread and answer some earlier questions.

Mr-Coins

newbie

Activity: 154

Merit: 0

Quote from: Cayuga on April 21, 2016, 06:51:51 AM

Quote from: altheshort on April 21, 2016, 02:28:49 AM

I suspect the only reason they've suddenly created an ANN thread for this is because the buying of their ICO has slowed down. They need to drum up more interest in the project to get more sales in; hence the press releases and this. Not surprising really given how limited the initial pool of 'investors' will have been from talkXPY/XPY.io.

For what it's worth I don't believe that Matlack and his team are scammers, but I do believe this is an ill conceived idea that will be dead in the water before long. With the greatest of respect, as this new team is mostly the same as the team behind XPY.io the best indicator of their potential success is what they did with that, and they hardly set the world alight. Honestly while they keep blaming XPYs ties to Garza for XPY.io's failure, they were fools to even try it in the first place, and even more foolish to stick with it as long as they did -- that for me calls into question the decision making of Matlack et al.

I do not completely agree with you, imho xpy.io was the only way for them to keep the community together. The plan for a new coin and business model was probably already finished when xpy.io v1 started. The continuing failure of the xpy devs to repair the wallet, come up with features that where originally described in the wallet just accelerated the process which led to this ICO. OT: I think this ICO and business model has a chance to succeed but this will depend on how the team will deal with the TOS in gamestores, then again I am not worried about that. The coin itself has nice features, and there will be a working wallet and blockchain, or I will eat my shoes Wink

Cayuga I hope your shoes taste nice!

The wallets and blockchain are already active on testnet and have been for some weeks. Unfortunately, I do not have access to them so I can't comment on features outside of the whitepaper.

P.S. If someone wants to invite me to test I will gladly accept. I am usually able to break things quite quickly.

Cayuga

newbie

Activity: 54

Merit: 0

Quote from: altheshort on April 21, 2016, 02:28:49 AM

I suspect the only reason they've suddenly created an ANN thread for this is because the buying of their ICO has slowed down. They need to drum up more interest in the project to get more sales in; hence the press releases and this. Not surprising really given how limited the initial pool of 'investors' will have been from talkXPY/XPY.io.

For what it's worth I don't believe that Matlack and his team are scammers, but I do believe this is an ill conceived idea that will be dead in the water before long. With the greatest of respect, as this new team is mostly the same as the team behind XPY.io the best indicator of their potential success is what they did with that, and they hardly set the world alight. Honestly while they keep blaming XPYs ties to Garza for XPY.io's failure, they were fools to even try it in the first place, and even more foolish to stick with it as long as they did -- that for me calls into question the decision making of Matlack et al.

I do not completely agree with you, imho xpy.io was the only way for them to keep the community together. The plan for a new coin and business model was probably already finished when xpy.io v1 started. The continuing failure of the xpy devs to repair the wallet, come up with features that where originally described in the wallet just accelerated the process which led to this ICO. OT: I think this ICO and business model has a chance to succeed but this will depend on how the team will deal with the TOS in gamestores, then again I am not worried about that. The coin itself has nice features, and there will be a working wallet and blockchain, or I will eat my shoes Wink

Mr-Coins

newbie

Activity: 154

Merit: 0

Quote from: Mrdeeds on April 21, 2016, 06:44:33 AM

@Mr-Coins
Do you happen to know if they are planning mobile wallets? Looks logical to me. But I don't think I read this somewhere before.

I know the XPY.io web wallet was updated recently to work great on mobile, iOS, iPad etc So the ION platform will naturally build upon this experience.

However, as for an offline wallet, I saw that there is a bounty for this feature. But there is no active development on this as far as I am aware.

Mrdeeds

member

Activity: 122

Merit: 10

@Mr-Coins
Do you happen to know if they are planning mobile wallets? Looks logical to me. But I don't think I read this somewhere before.

Mr-Coins

newbie

Activity: 154

Merit: 0

Quote from: skinnyboy on April 21, 2016, 05:58:11 AM

Here's a question, leaving aside many others (& any negative bias):

How many of the purported features of this new coin, as described in the whitepaper, will be available on launch?

Upon launch the coin will have fully functioning POS3 and Masternodes (nothing like those BS Prime Controllers).

Also there will be working QT wallets as well as web wallets available through the Ionomy platform.

The coin code, QT and web wallets are currently being run on testnet. (I'm not fortunate enough to have access though.)

The whitepaper is long, are there any specific parts in particular that you would like to focus on?

skinnyboy

full member

Activity: 223

Merit: 100

Here's a question, leaving aside many others (& any negative bias):

How many of the purported features of this new coin, as described in the whitepaper, will be available on launch?

Mr-Coins

newbie

Activity: 154

Merit: 0

Quote from: o0o0 on April 21, 2016, 05:22:00 AM

Quote from: suchmoon on April 20, 2016, 08:01:10 PM

Quote from: Mr-Coins on April 20, 2016, 01:50:17 PM

What makes you think Mordica is involved?

He's the guy posing with Garza in a picture of a warehouse pretending that it's a mining farm.

@Mrcoins

You didn't address this and its a direct question. Remember mordica was the guy that did their hardware... and TADA he stood with garza pretending there was hardware when there wasn't even in a dark warehouse video... queue spooky music remember that? and the this is my house paint in pink he proclaimed?

So heres 2 simple questions you can answer and don't avoid them

1. Do you believe Joe Mordica to be a stand up honest guy you can trust in crypto?

2. If Joe Mordica is in ion then do you believe by past actions that he is trustable in it and thus others should accept that?

Joe Mordica is not in ION or Ionomy project.

I'd like to add, I have never had any dealings with him, not even in XPY, so I have no idea what type of guy he is. But, he is irrelevant as far as ION goes.

THIS is constructive discussion. This is valuable and worthwhile. If there is something I do not know the answer to, I will go find out.

ocminer

legendary

Activity: 2688

Merit: 1240

Scnr

Mr-Coins

newbie

Activity: 154

Merit: 0

Quote from: altheshort on April 21, 2016, 02:28:49 AM

I suspect the only reason they've suddenly created an ANN thread for this is because the buying of their ICO has slowed down. They need to drum up more interest in the project to get more sales in; hence the press releases and this. Not surprising really given how limited the initial pool of 'investors' will have been from talkXPY/XPY.io.

For what it's worth I don't believe that Matlack and his team are scammers, but I do believe this is an ill conceived idea that will be dead in the water before long. With the greatest of respect, as this new team is mostly the same as the team behind XPY.io the best indicator of their potential success is what they did with that, and they hardly set the world alight. Honestly while they keep blaming XPYs ties to Garza for XPY.io's failure, they were fools to even try it in the first place, and even more foolish to stick with it as long as they did -- that for me calls into question the decision making of Matlack et al.

Most of the early investors were XPY investors because of the ease of the swap option. I for one am thankful for Matlack (and his team) to have built XPY.io and to have tried where many others would not have even made an attempt. My XPY would have be truly worthless if it wasn't for XPY.io, so that project had value for hundreds of people that got scammed by Garza.

At least in the end I swapped my XPY rather than dumping them on to some poor unsuspecting buyer who thinks it might recover one day.

I hope we can discuss ION reasonably, on it's own merits and particulars as this way we will get much more use out of the discussion.

Mr-Coins

newbie

Activity: 154

Merit: 0

The logic of so many people...

Bob is a scammer. Bob scams Jane. Therefore Jane is a scammer.

So flawed. Do you see it?

Can we get a reasonable discussion here?

I swapped all my worthless XPY for ION. I would like to participate in all reasonable discussion about this project.

sylph93

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: altheshort on April 21, 2016, 02:28:49 AM

I suspect the only reason they've suddenly created an ANN thread for this is because the buying of their ICO has slowed down. They need to drum up more interest in the project to get more sales in; hence the press releases and this. Not surprising really given how limited the initial pool of 'investors' will have been from talkXPY/XPY.io.

For what it's worth I don't believe that Matlack and his team are scammers, but I do believe this is an ill conceived idea that will be dead in the water before long. With the greatest of respect, as this new team is mostly the same as the team behind XPY.io the best indicator of their potential success is what they did with that, and they hardly set the world alight. Honestly while they keep blaming XPYs ties to Garza for XPY.io's failure, they were fools to even try it in the first place, and even more foolish to stick with it as long as they did -- that for me calls into question the decision making of Matlack et al.

A++
To start ION with honor, hand off XPY with honor as well.

altheshort

full member

Activity: 214

Merit: 113

I suspect the only reason they've suddenly created an ANN thread for this is because the buying of their ICO has slowed down. They need to drum up more interest in the project to get more sales in; hence the press releases and this. Not surprising really given how limited the initial pool of 'investors' will have been from talkXPY/XPY.io.

For what it's worth I don't believe that Matlack and his team are scammers, but I do believe this is an ill conceived idea that will be dead in the water before long. With the greatest of respect, as this new team is mostly the same as the team behind XPY.io the best indicator of their potential success is what they did with that, and they hardly set the world alight. Honestly while they keep blaming XPYs ties to Garza for XPY.io's failure, they were fools to even try it in the first place, and even more foolish to stick with it as long as they did -- that for me calls into question the decision making of Matlack et al.

SwedishGirl

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Looking for shmexy coins!

So it's all about scams lately? After Lisk and Waves, nothing interesting to see...

Mrdeeds

member

Activity: 122

Merit: 10

Quote from: Piston Honda on April 20, 2016, 10:52:02 PM

hahahaha fuck this scam piece of shit!
may as well lock the thread. gtfo with this crap.

not to mention don't even bother trying to touch gaming/streaming because bitswift is setting up now to already lock that area of the biz down Wink

You really didn't even attempt to read the op did you? Wink

Topic: [ANN] ION [ION] | POS 3.0 | Mobile Gaming | Join the ionomy today! - page 495. (Read 473154 times)