Topic: [ANN] Levelcoin - Proof of Stake / Proof of Burn Hybrid - Inflation Immune - page 4. (Read 44839 times)

Do you have that information? (maybe check your temporary internet folder for pictures at the least)
Also can you give us a link to that thread?
edit: oh you are referring to LeoC. This may still be relevant.

Hello.

This guy had a profile with personal photo and info about location on the eMunie forum
which is currently down because od DDOS attacks.
I don't know if this was real data or fake data but the location mentioned there
was San Diego.

Level Coin and LeoC seem to be the same person, or at least in collusion. LeoC used the same BTC address in an extortion attempt against Ethereum as was originally posted by Level Coin here to collect funding. This showed up when the BTC address was suddenly changed in the original post.

I considered LeoC's presence here a strong negative against investing, given his bad behavior elsewhere, but was just ignoring him as background noise. In hindsight, his first 2 posts within a few minutes of the Level Coin initial announcement and second post would be suspicious. Too bad LeoC doesn't choose to put his abilities to productive use - he is obviously intelligent and talented, just ethically challenged.

Con men seem to enjoy the challenge of their craft and maybe even the pain they cause their victims as much as the money they make. It is a sickness. A long time ago I once had a scammer come back with phony goods when he could have just more safely disappeared with the money because he wanted to see my reaction for his pleasure. Recently I tried buying some NXT directly from a scammer, wanting to do a direct trade to build my trust rating. He's been around here and Ripple, Peezr, Dannyy, Xiaoulis or somesuch. His signature is to send a final PM promising a refund before disappearing, sort of a final little prick to the victim to rub it in. I just gloat back that these are some real miserable losers and I'm a lot better off then them, both physically and emotionally.

Watch what you say, in the cryptocurrency world the R-word (regulation) is considered a dirty word.

I'm all for no regulation, but it means we all have to work a little bit harder to make sure others don't get scammed.
I called this coin a scam on the 24th after stating my position. Unfortunately most of the people who were scammed probably understood that it was most likely a scam, but couldnt afford the very small chance of missing out if in fact it wasn't (like NXT).
The fact that LeoC hasn't come back here and apologized for helping levelCoin scam a bunch of people is disgusting.
When we get his IP info we can cross reference that with the WHOIS data from the registrar. If it is indeed the same city/country then we know who our man is and charges can be pressed.

+1

Yeah, but that's why the returns are so high on the winners - a lot of risk.

Damn....that sucks guys. 

I would start manually with spreadsheets, implement in code as resources allow.

Yes, it was another poster who suggested adding restrictions on pre-sales. It is good to look for best practices in an offering. Implementing a platform for creating and funding start-ups as you suggest is a pet project of mine. Some of it is outlined in the funding model I posted above.

Yeah, he definitely went AWOL as soon as the blackmail and matching wallets information came out. He made one response to try and save it but obviously realized he messed up. The part I find hard to believe is that LeoC was obviously involved considering he suddenly became non-existent on this thread at the exact same time after being VERY vocal (not to mention the wallet / blackmail issue), and yet yesterday when I looked at his activity, he is still posting on other threads. The nerve of some people is insulting.

This forum just seems like it caters to empowering shady people. The lack of any form of standards or regulations on the posting, marketing, and fund-raising of these altcoins is kind of unbelievable.

Is there any type of launch platform with built in escrow that you can use to find legitimate and vetted new coins? One where for instance the moderators who run the site require driver's license, phone contact, and other forms of proof? The first time I tried to create a Mt. Gox account I got denied because I didn't provide the right kind of utility bill with my address, they need something with that level of scrutiny.

I think new coins, if implementing new ideas and conducting proper and legitimate launches are a great thing for the community, but now that I have started looking into how many of them are scams and just downright unprofessional it kind of makes me want to steer clear of here altogether.

Well it is officially a scam coin.

Most start-ups don't take place in an atmosphere of coin fever, where psychological threshold for investing is very low and everybody is allowed to buy. Also developers usually aren't anonymous. What's happening here seems like a perfect opportunity for scammers.

I'm not for regulating anything, nobody should decide for you. What I wrote was meant more as advice for investors and should probably begin with "I suggest you invest in projects that do the following" 

I suppose that in near future, with introduction of additional features/layers in bitcoin  or contracts in ethereum (or similar protocols), distribution proof of burn will be replaced by tools that allow to secure and utilize funds in a trustless manner.

Looks extremely complicated to set up.   Particularly the one that involves proxy voting and boards of elected governors.   

I like a steady increase on price per share during the pre-sale, like P_n=P_n-1^r , where each subsequent share price P_n is a fractional (or percentage) increase over the previous share price P_n-1. I'd prefer that shares may be resold at any time on the open market.

There should be a board of elected directors to disburse funds to pay for development, marketing, and other costs. Voting should be PoS with stakeholder designated proxy as a default if not overridden on a particular vote by the stakeholder. Proxies may be chained or forwarded to other proxies. The presale may be terminated with advance public notice by a majority vote of the stakeholders, or run for a set time or to a set limit of total investment.

Before the pre-sale launches, there should be a short pre-launch sale where everyone can invest and be awarded shares proportional to investment, maybe one week. The share price is equal to what it would be if the same amount of total investment were made to reach that point according to the power law used for pre-sale.

A matching pool of development shares should be created to fund development in some proportion of the pre-sale shares sold, to be used later as the initial funding is used.

I would leave it to the community to agree on the actual numbers used in the fractional price per share increase, the proportion of development shares, the amount to be raised, the length of the pre-launch sale, and length of the pre-sale. Here, launch means start of pre-sale.

This is similar to conventional start-up funding except that there is a continuous ramp in share price as value increases and risk decreases instead of discrete jumps in share price at different funding rounds. Also, the opportunity for the general public to enter at the seed stage is new.

The term IPO is not really accurate since these pre-sales are actually seed funding.

Last thing we need are people dictating how new projects are to be launched or funded. What you are suggesting would lock everyone but developers or people with money to hires developers out from starting a project. I don't need you or anyone else to protect me from myself. I don't need other people making decisions for me.

I'm also paranoid enough to think these scams may be deliberate attempts to discredit the IPO model. LeoC started off viciously attacking a planned IPO, eMunie, and tried to extort another one, Ethereum. Given the disruptive nature of Bitcoin technology, we can expect people to show up with agendas to sabotage development of new ways of doing things which eliminate the need for parasitic intermediaries. There is also the opposition philosophical and political viewpoints, which believe that stealing from people is acceptable. It is quite possible that victimizing people by scamming them is considered a valid strategy to prove their points.

Also, there are even factions within the Bitcoin community. We have certainly seen a major outcry against the IPO pre-sale model from the start, and against any alternatives to the PoW mining model.

We are trying to figure out the best way to fund our NEX project.  We are wondering if you had any insights on this. 

Concurrent fund raising and development can work, based on progress. This is how most start-ups are funded, with seed funds coming in in stages.

I lost a coin in this, and knew very well the risk I was taking, posting red flags here all along. A number of us are interested in continuing this project. The last thing I want to see is other people deciding whether or not I have this option or dictating how a pre-sale is to be handled. I've come to crypto assets to escape that kind of crap.

Sound like a good approach.

I could not agree more, very well said

yeah i see the admins possibly just getting rid of altcoin section altogether to get rid of the IPO scamming issue.
there have been rumblings of big changes coming, new board s/w redesign, etc