Topic: [ANN][ICO] Spectiv: DECENTRALIZED VIRTUAL REALITY (OLD THREAD) - page 29. (Read 87405 times)

Answer me 2 questions spectiv team

1) Why just 5 days ago you were going around asking for money from investors, giving them a 100 percent bonus in a desperate attempt at that time a few weeks before your ICO even started. This has scam written all over it. And now then to make matters worse, you move your date to December. There is no excuse for going around asking money from investors 3 weeks before you even make it public, and giving a 100 percent bonus to them and not that to everyone else.

2) How do you call that a preview, all you did was take a 360 youtube video, run a little overlay on it and paste it on your website. I would highly suggest getting some real developers on your team. With VibeHub lightyears ahead of you and about to spend a lot of money for there  official ICO which starts in 4 days. You guys really messed up here in so many ways.

Highly upsetting, and I'm not sure who the founders are but it seems to me the people running this ship have no clue what they are doing in crypto and better yet for Virtual Reality technology for that matter

Why can't I access the link here? it says, "400. That’s an error." "The requested URL was not found on this server. That’s all we know."
Please fix it, I used  google chrome and opera to access it, but still error.

sorry, you can't

Why is that hard cap a bit too much? In the end it all depends on how they are going to use those funds assuming they really collect $40 mio. I wouldn't say that a hard cap is bad in any way if you have a responsible and talented dev team.

The ICORating Agency gives the Basic Review of The Spectiv Project.

http://icorating.com/project/230/spectiv/review

Our Basic Review aims to give investors an overview of the project's strengths and weaknesses. The Basic Review is an analysis without audit and investment highlights rating estimation, giving only the rating grade for the project's long-term investment potential.

It's a hard cap, I think it's good to see a high hard cap because if they cannot reach that and they were able to reach the
minimum cap they would still gonna start the development. They have prepared for this so we just have to trust the team, it will be successful.

There is no pint in rushing the ICO. I agree that 40M is a bit too much for the hard cap. They should reconsider that too.

Why was the ICO date changed from august to December?

Can't find any information about it.

EDIT: I just read their update.  I am happy that they have changed some things in their project.  I will be checking what is going on closer to the date so see what other changes have been made.  I still think that a ~$40m hard cap is too high though and is just going to deter investors.

Yes dev is right, we can not use signatures for 24 weeks, we will not have the opportunity to earn money, signature is my most desired job, and 3% is very worthy to support this project. No need to rush in any case, most importantly ICO can be successful

Aha, interesting comments, you just said you will support this project to the end, but you change you signature to support another project. No offence, it is ok to do so since this bounty campaign is paused. And I also change my signature, but I will back two months later.

They have closed their signature campaign for this month, and will reopen in October on the 20th

Sir results of this week of signature compaign will be accepted?

For now the campaign is stopped first and certainly the stake will not increase each week until later in open again for the campaign in October

Nah read carefully on their announcement , they clearly stated there.
It's placed on bottom of the announcement.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1975254.1300

That is, if I remove the signature, will I still receive bets on a weekly basis? Or I'll stand for a pause until I'm signed back?

Sorry for my question, but can I participate these 2 months in other signature?

How's the demo for the project working? Do we have any E.T.A (dates) for the project demo launch yet?

By the way, when I can see the updated bounty table by the blogs&media on bitcointalk?

Don't think you're quite right there.

BOINC has been around for 15 years. GridCoin has been around almost 4 years. They have been associated with BOINC the entire time. Although moved to the current DPoR model in 2014.

Neither SONM, or the shard of it (drugdiscoveryathome), have been around as long. If anything, drugdiscoveryathome tried to create a BOINC project of their own. But there were "goings on" between them, and SONM, where they started out, but then got kicked out.

But my point stands. GRC is not ETH based. Has never been ETH based. And has been around LONGER than ETH.

One tried to absorb BOINC. Probably not realising GRC was already so well established. The other tried to create their own BOINC project as a SONM prototype/test bed. They were part of same team (probably, it all looks a bit shady) at some point. None of it worked out in the end. The BOINC people were not very impressed with them. BOINC is not driven by profit. Never has been. It's driven by science enthusiasts, and always has been. GRC is seen as a nice bonus by some of the long standing BOINCers. But most are more interested in the science than the money. They ran it for free for over 10 years without any incentive ....

Maybe you can't see or understand that, but that is how it is. Money isn't everything to everyone.

Thread on the BOINC forum here discussing the demise of drugdiscoveryathome here: https://boinc.berkeley.edu/dev/forum_thread.php?id=11747

All very off topic as regard to Spectiv. But you're still mostly wrong on this one.

I doubt you, dev has not given us instructions to take off the signature, and come back again.
Can you guarantee it?