If this is true, why doesn't Attious now release the info about this beautiful simplistic idea. If Attious wanted to get back at the Devs for being kicked out, just leak the idea and other coins with better devs could jump all over it. Anyone can actually create a Commander clone after seeing the functionality. Nothing Intrinsic or Proprietary about commander until the ANON functionality is proven. Meanwhile dev's continue to be ANON instead of allowing ANON transactions. Put up your Wallets Dev's, show us how many coins you mined and held and didn't sell during your fraud debacle. Show us the Money!
Let me tell you why this is a shit comment. First of all, Attious isn't a cryptographer, he doesn't know about the anon design if he did he would have leaked it already, Mindfox is the mastermind of the anon design. Secondly, the devs showing their wallets won't prove anything as anyone can have multiple wallets containing their coins, so showing one wallet won't prove anything. Thirdly, please listen to yourself and what you're about to say before embarrassing yourself in public. lulzarz
LOL Crypt is the one embarrassing themselves. So Attious was just in charge of the passwords and the Devs got rid of him without explaining anything about the coin? Listen to yourself now! Attious knows nothing about this simple brilliant concept at all, yet was a Dev who got kicked out? You don't have to be a cryptographer to know the gist of what this supposedly beautiful simplistic idea is. And the DEV's are saying it is just an IDEA so leak the IDEA and get back at the dev's. This hasn't happened so I am beginning to think the Dev's are in on this whole charade (besides MindFox of course).
Do you understand that the wallets would need to have substantial coin that didn't move? All coin holders with substantial coin have sold off so if the DEV's have wallets with Substantial coin that did not sell off then this Ruse could be dispelled. If they didn't mine they are stupid and could not have any kind of promise for an anonymous solution since they didn't even setup miners to obtain their own coin. Do you see how pathetic it is to say they didn't mine any at all? Since no one would know the difference if the did. Showing us that they did is the first honest thing they could do and wouldn't look bad at all since I would expect any Dev to get in on the mining. It was a Free-For-All and is not considered pre-mining, but close to Insta-Mine at those block rewards.
Even if they show a wallet that they don't own it would have to match up with not selling the coin and still be a substantial amount. I am confused as to why you don't get this. The odds of the Dev's finding a wallet with substantial coin that didn't move are very slim, so if they put up wallets, we can trace the history on them and we can tell if they are truthful. Even if it is marginal we could get a better grasp on whether to believe they had anything to do with the Fraud.
You do understand that there was Fraud perpetrated? This group is implicated and needs to clear themselves, I am only giving an option that I feel is viable. And to top it off, instead they are Anonymous while their Wallet isn't. This is why there is a Coin in Coincidence.
Since Surly,
CryptoNick