Before users start blaming Poloniex for 'allowing' trading they should make sure they are privy to the original agreement in place between Blocknet and Poloniex. Im confident this would change perception.
Second. The %10 discount would of had people dumping below ITO price anyways.. even if the market opened a week from now.
The back and forth bickering is ridiculous. Do research, and come to your own conclusions regarding your investments.
Topic: [ANN][Blocknet] truly decentralized exchange | token ecosystem infrastructure - page 353. (Read 1103293 times)
October 31, 2014, 10:55:41 AM
October 31, 2014, 10:55:02 AM
my 2 cents...
Blocknet has a good chance. Its a good idea and it has a good team behind it. I don't think that Dan would purposely damage his credibility after all the work that has gone into XC, partnerships, relationships, etc...
With that said, it is crypto and everyone should be aware that this is still a huge investment risk. It could all fail tomorrow, including bitcoin. If this is too much for you, simply invest in bonds, CDs, the Money Market... crypto isn't for you and FUD doesn't help the cause.
BTW... thanks to whoever/whatever is dumping below ICO. I'll baghold mine for a while and give the team a chance.
Blocknet has a good chance. Its a good idea and it has a good team behind it. I don't think that Dan would purposely damage his credibility after all the work that has gone into XC, partnerships, relationships, etc...
With that said, it is crypto and everyone should be aware that this is still a huge investment risk. It could all fail tomorrow, including bitcoin. If this is too much for you, simply invest in bonds, CDs, the Money Market... crypto isn't for you and FUD doesn't help the cause.
BTW... thanks to whoever/whatever is dumping below ICO. I'll baghold mine for a while and give the team a chance.
October 31, 2014, 10:19:17 AM
@synechist you are ignoring your DM and you're only counting the BTCs, smell like a SUPERNet type of thing, and we all know what happened with that...
Apologies. It got lost in the chaos. I've replied now.
+1 Now i'm much more positive
October 31, 2014, 10:16:27 AM
@synechist you are ignoring your DM and you're only counting the BTCs, smell like a SUPERNet type of thing, and we all know what happened with that...
Apologies. It got lost in the chaos. I've replied now.
October 31, 2014, 10:13:51 AM
@synechist you are ignoring your DM and you're only counting the BTCs, smell like a SUPERNet type of thing, and we all know what happened with that...
Huh?
October 31, 2014, 10:08:33 AM
Put up an article about the current situation :
http://www.cryptoarticles.com/crypto-news/blocknet-ito-subject-of-all-kinds-of-allegations-but-who-is-right
Unbiased, as promised
http://www.cryptoarticles.com/crypto-news/blocknet-ito-subject-of-all-kinds-of-allegations-but-who-is-right
Unbiased, as promised
Unbiased but you giving praised to someone is a scammer himself. "Spoetnik, a long standing member of the BitcoinTalk community, posted his thoughts on some of the ‘warning signs’ regarding BlockNet.". Spoetnik is a long standing member but he's has no credential. In this case Spoetnik is a scammer and dishonest himself, Trust: -4: -2 / +1(1)
Spoetnik also working for Cryptsy and craptsy is left out in this ITO, nuff said.
I don't support any dev working with many projects, yes, Dan is all about BTCs. He's also making ton of BTCs by reviewing the codes, he need to change this and stop working with many projects, most people would see this as greedy and scam. Focus on your XC and Blocknet from now. He need to stop this habit of making ton of BTCs or soon all his projects will considered as scam. Please no XC, Inc. crap, just another idea of making more BTC and diluting your current projects of XCurrency and Blocknet.
October 31, 2014, 10:02:58 AM
Hi Synechist,
Could you please tell me, how many BTC have been invested in the ITO ?
Thank you
Could you please tell me, how many BTC have been invested in the ITO ?
Thank you
October 31, 2014, 10:00:36 AM
Hi all
To clarify our plan of action regarding this FUD campaign:
We give it no credit.
It does not deserve a response beyond the single statement I made yesterday.
Nor do we intend to allow it to slow down our work. We do not feel it justifies any further time or energy, and so there is no reason to clarify matters regarding claims made about XC, the Blocknet, or Dan.
We're done with it. We're moving on with development.
Any further responses are likely to simply be re-quotes of this comment and yesterday's statement.
Please do the same if you think that giving FUD credit has no warrant.
To clarify our plan of action regarding this FUD campaign:
We give it no credit.
It does not deserve a response beyond the single statement I made yesterday.
Nor do we intend to allow it to slow down our work. We do not feel it justifies any further time or energy, and so there is no reason to clarify matters regarding claims made about XC, the Blocknet, or Dan.
We're done with it. We're moving on with development.
Any further responses are likely to simply be re-quotes of this comment and yesterday's statement.
Please do the same if you think that giving FUD credit has no warrant.
October 31, 2014, 09:57:00 AM
@synechist you are ignoring your DM and you're only counting the BTCs, smell like a SUPERNet type of thing, and we all know what happened with that...
October 31, 2014, 09:55:57 AM
Put up an article about the current situation :
http://www.cryptoarticles.com/crypto-news/blocknet-ito-subject-of-all-kinds-of-allegations-but-who-is-right
Unbiased, as promised
http://www.cryptoarticles.com/crypto-news/blocknet-ito-subject-of-all-kinds-of-allegations-but-who-is-right
Unbiased, as promised
October 31, 2014, 08:47:30 AM
Honestly I could handling people dumping at the start of a fair launch but because I'm locked in at Bittrex, I'm feeling pretty F-in sour right now.
"Dumping" is not an appropriate description for the trading activity at Polo.
"Selling", in very small quantities, at a loss, is what's going on.
Do you seriously have an incentive to join in with this?
They did not respect the agreement with the Team that is why they are allowing selling. They do not look at the block-net in a good way since if block pull off a decentralised exchange they can close their business pretty much as this is what the all crypto community is waiting for.
October 31, 2014, 08:21:28 AM
Hi all
To clarify our plan of action regarding this FUD campaign:
We give it no credit.
It does not deserve a response beyond the single statement I made yesterday.
Nor do we intend to allow it to slow down our work. We do not feel it justifies any further time or energy, and so there is no reason to clarify matters regarding claims made about XC, the Blocknet, or Dan.
We're done with it. We're moving on with development.
Any further responses are likely to simply be re-quotes of this comment and yesterday's statement.
Please do the same if you think that giving FUD credit has no warrant.
To clarify our plan of action regarding this FUD campaign:
We give it no credit.
It does not deserve a response beyond the single statement I made yesterday.
Nor do we intend to allow it to slow down our work. We do not feel it justifies any further time or energy, and so there is no reason to clarify matters regarding claims made about XC, the Blocknet, or Dan.
We're done with it. We're moving on with development.
Any further responses are likely to simply be re-quotes of this comment and yesterday's statement.
Please do the same if you think that giving FUD credit has no warrant.
October 31, 2014, 08:20:18 AM
i'm still supporting blocknet and i think it's way more superior than the scam supernet but the only one problem i'm not support is the 2500btc, i think it is too much. i also believed they will not able to raise the 2500btc, probably 1000btc at best. i think it's best to return those sell on coingate to their respective participating devs. basically of those 5% of each coins which sell over coingate should returning to their developer.
I can't make much sense of your post but the minimum threshold for the project to go ahead is 850BTC which has already been achieved. In fact I'd wager that 1000BTC has been surpassed as well.
what i try to say is those 20% sells of participating coins over coingate should return to their respective dev for each coins. if you still don't get this then i think you're dumb.
I see you removed the part where you said you don't think it is fair that Dan gets all the money... Maybe then you have realized that he doesn't get all the money, all the devs share the money in their capacity to jointly develop the blocknet.
i have remove nothing. all participating coins should get something, i think it's best to return the 20% at coingate to them.
yeah I must have been seeing things then, that is more likely than a runaway troll in a forum...
please.
ignore.
October 31, 2014, 08:16:34 AM
i'm still supporting blocknet and i think it's way more superior than the scam supernet but the only one problem i'm not support is the 2500btc, i think it is too much. i also believed they will not able to raise the 2500btc, probably 1000btc at best. i think it's best to return those sell on coingate to their respective participating devs. basically of those 5% of each coins which sell over coingate should returning to their developer.
I can't make much sense of your post but the minimum threshold for the project to go ahead is 850BTC which has already been achieved. In fact I'd wager that 1000BTC has been surpassed as well.
what i try to say is those 20% sells of participating coins over coingate should return to their respective dev for each coins. if dan also want to keep then he's way to greedy. if you still don't get this then i think you're dumb.
No need for the name calling, I was just trying to answer your question. Your argument has been thrashed out a million times already. If you think it's too much then don't invest, no one is forcing you. It's as simple as that.
October 31, 2014, 08:16:04 AM
i'm still supporting blocknet and i think it's way more superior than the scam supernet but the only one problem i'm not support is the 2500btc, i think it is too much. i also believed they will not able to raise the 2500btc, probably 1000btc at best. i think it's best to return those sell on coingate to their respective participating devs. basically of those 5% of each coins which sell over coingate should returning to their developer.
I can't make much sense of your post but the minimum threshold for the project to go ahead is 850BTC which has already been achieved. In fact I'd wager that 1000BTC has been surpassed as well.
what i try to say is those 20% sells of participating coins over coingate should return to their respective dev for each coins. if you still don't get this then i think you're dumb.
I see you removed the part where you said you don't think it is fair that Dan gets all the money... Maybe then you have realized that he doesn't get all the money, all the devs share the money in their capacity to jointly develop the blocknet.
i have remove nothing. all participating coins should get something, i think it's best to return the 20% at coingate to them.
October 31, 2014, 08:13:42 AM
i'm still supporting blocknet and i think it's way more superior than the scam supernet but the only one problem i'm not support is the 2500btc, i think it is too much. i also believed they will not able to raise the 2500btc, probably 1000btc at best. i think it's best to return those sell on coingate to their respective participating devs. basically of those 5% of each coins which sell over coingate should returning to their developer.
I can't make much sense of your post but the minimum threshold for the project to go ahead is 850BTC which has already been achieved. In fact I'd wager that 1000BTC has been surpassed as well.
what i try to say is those 20% sells of participating coins over coingate should return to their respective dev for each coins. if you still don't get this then i think you're dumb.
I see you removed the part where you said you don't think it is fair that Dan gets all the money... Maybe then you have realized that he doesn't get all the money, all the devs share the money in their capacity to jointly develop the blocknet.
October 31, 2014, 08:11:44 AM
i'm still supporting blocknet and i think it's way more superior than the scam supernet but the only one problem i'm not support is the 2500btc, i think it is too much. i also believed they will not able to raise the 2500btc, probably 1000btc at best. i think it's best to return those sell on coingate to their respective participating devs. basically of those 5% of each coins which sell over coingate should returning to their developer.
I can't make much sense of your post but the minimum threshold for the project to go ahead is 850BTC which has already been achieved. In fact I'd wager that 1000BTC has been surpassed as well.
what i try to say is those 20% sells of participating coins over coingate should return to their respective dev for each coins. if dan also want to keep then he's way to greedy. if you still don't get this then i think you're dumb.
October 31, 2014, 08:10:03 AM
Honestly I could handling people dumping at the start of a fair launch but because I'm locked in at Bittrex, I'm feeling pretty F-in sour right now.
"Dumping" is not an appropriate description for the trading activity at Polo.
"Selling", in very small quantities, at a loss, is what's going on.
Do you seriously have an incentive to join in with this?
They did not respect the agreement with the Team that is why they are allowing selling. They do not look at the block-net in a good way since if block pull off a decentralised exchange they can close their business pretty much as this is what the all crypto community is waiting for.
October 31, 2014, 08:08:58 AM
i'm still supporting blocknet and i think it's way more superior than the scam supernet but the only one problem i'm not support is the 2500btc, i think it is too much. i also believed they will not able to raise the 2500btc, probably 1000btc at best. i think it's best to return those sell on coingate to their respective participating devs. basically of those 5% of each coins which sell over coingate should returning to their developer.
I can't make much sense of your post but the minimum threshold for the project to go ahead is 850BTC which has already been achieved. In fact I'd wager that 1000BTC has been surpassed as well.
October 31, 2014, 08:08:01 AM
Honestly I could handling people dumping at the start of a fair launch but because I'm locked in at Bittrex, I'm feeling pretty F-in sour right now.
"Dumping" is not an appropriate description for the trading activity at Polo.
"Selling", in very small quantities, at a loss, is what's going on.
Do you seriously have an incentive to join in with this?
Jump to: