Why do you call bitcore a piece of crap? Because you did not have time to sell it expensive? Did you buy it expensive and still hold, and why are you angry? Or did you not have time to participate in good money with this coin?
Cause it is. Usless shitcoin with ponzi past, trading on scam exchanges.
Started to trade it in Sep 2017 with 25 mined coins, got ~3200 before I sold it, how do you think? Just can't understand how do people still believe in this complete dead project after all.
could you describe the "ponzi" nature of this coin's past in more detail? the Wikipedia entry of "ponzi scheme" begins with this statement : "A Ponzi scheme (/ˈpɒnzi/; also a Ponzi game)[1] is a form of fraud which lures investors and pays profits to earlier investors by using funds obtained from more recent investors." given that BTX never had an ICO and hence never had "investors," and given that owning BTX is not supposed to give you any sort of recurring source of income (like a dividend), it seems inaccurate to claim that this coin had a "ponzi past." please elaborate - perhaps we are using different definitions of the adjective "ponzi." for reference, here's the Wikipedia article :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_schemecould you describe the "useless" nature of this coin, given that one can use it to make online and offline purchases? to see where it can be used, go here :
https://bitcore.cc/resources/eco-system-2/ (scroll down to "services integrated with bitcore"). it lists kamoney, paytomat (a point-of-sale terminal in physical stores), cryptonaut, luckygames.io, and games4coins.
could you explain what you mean by "completely dead", given that this bitcointalk forum is obviously still active, the reddit forum is active (
https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcore_btx/ ), and the GitHub code repository for the coin was last updated 6 days ago ? (
https://github.com/topics/bitcore ) .
it would help readers of this forum to backup any claims you have with evidence; that would allow you to sway them to your side. I would suggest that, perhaps, people still believe in this project because the measurable evidence of its success which they are aware of (see the links I have supplied above) have not yet been sufficiently countered by measurable evidence of its failure. You say that you started trading it and got close to "3200" before you sold it. what does that mean? I assume that we are meant to interpret that statement as negative evidence, but the wording (at least to me) makes its meaning unclear.
Do not try to explain this to him. This person considers the Ponzi scheme all that has caused him a loss. The bubble and the pyramid are different things.
if you guys expert to explain things can you guys explain where we can find btx gateway and BTXM? they promised we will see them in 2018 right? and now they don't talk about those anymore. the main dev says ask about BTXM to another guy that left BTX team a long time ago! and now we dont know if anyone working on BTXM at all.and if it does when we can see it 2019 2020 2030 or 2100.
bubble? obviously, they made bubble on purpose with fake promises like big exchange BTXM gateway and...
you have a point about BTXM.
I've been a little out of the loop for the past month, working on other things. anyways, I came back and read this post. Then I went to bitcore's main website and did a search on btxm (
https://bitcore.cc/?s=BTXM ) . the matches which come up have nothing to do with BTXM. Now look on the right hand side of the page (at least on my desktop it is on the right hand side) - you will see archives of previous updates if you scroll down - for example, archives from January 2019, December 2018, November 2018, etc... I went through them. I did not find any mention of BTXM, even though I am pretty sure I read mentions of that business objective there in the past. If my memory is accurate about the BTXM references, then it seems that those references have been removed. I do remember that the person mainly responsible for that aspect of bitcore's strategy decided to leave the team at the end of last year.
I can think of two ways of interpreting this :
1. BTXM was a fake promise, as you suggest above, from the beginning.
2. BTXM was an attempt at furthering the success of bitcore, which failed for a number of undisclosed reasons, and the team has decided not to reveal those reasons and instead not dwell on a failure from the past.
I am more inclined to believe reason # 2. Businesses fail in some of their endeavors all the time, at least in my experience, so that choice seems to me more probable than choice # 1. What differs is the way in which companies respond to those failures. If it is true that BTXM was an honest attempt to further the business, which then failed, then it would perhaps have caused less consternation amongst the readers of this forum if the team had admitted the failure and moved on, rather when wiping out past mentions of it. It is possible that they explained what happened with BTXM in some of the other forums, such as Telegram and discord. I do not regularly check those forums, so if the explanation is there then I am not aware of it.
I am not inclined to believe choice # 1 because I see no need for it. Bitcore has real code behind it - I (and anyone else) can see it in GitHub. they have made changes to it to differentiate it from the original bitcoin code, mixing it with litecoin code, and it is a functioning, working cryptocurrency. It is not widely used, compared to bitcoin, but it certainly works, and it works quickly. It wouldn't make sense to me that the team would purposely mislead people with a 'fake' BTXM subproject, when they have a product that works - there would be no incentive for them to do that.
one of the things that I like about bitcointalk is that as long as you have a forum which is not self-moderated, posts cannot be deleted. (unless the person's account itself is deleted, I guess). some people don't like this, saying that 'trolls' then can run rampant with their own personal agendas for spreading FUD about a project. however, the philosophy behind "open" forums is that you let those people air their grievances, and then if you have evidence contradicting their claims, you present that. You don't wipe out someone else's opinions or rants, even if they are not rational - instead you point out the irrationality, thus letting ideas compete with one another. it's not 'efficient,' but it is honest, and it has the priceless benefit of allowing you to learn from past mistakes if it turns out you yourself were wrong in your point of view (whether you were presenting a grievance or responding to it).
I think the team has made great strides recently in integrating bitcore with so many other products during January and February, as evidenced by the posts that carlos (from the team) has been making to keep us up to date. I think mistakes have been made, such as with the sudden silence about BTXM, and that mistakes are to be expected from any company, and that is ok. I do appreciate both arvin and retaliator for airing their points of view - those viewpoints are important, and needed. and it is also needed for people to listen to what they have to say, and respond to it if they feel that doing so will further the conversation in some meaningful way.
in any case, as a developer, I know how having to respond to everything and explain everything takes loads of time away from other activities which would further a project along much more efficiently - so, for myself, I am not asking for an explanation from the team as to 'what happened with BTXM.' instead I will just share my thoughts on this issue, as elucidated above.
