I dont't see how its wrong. He's stated his conditions early on. Agreed they were unconventional. You chose to take part in the IPO and then expect it to be like a conventional IPO? That doesn't sound very fair to me. People knew what they were getting into... there was no escrow and that was explicitly stated, and still people gave him their BTC. I guess he had a reputation and other trusted member vouching for him strengthened that. Hence the IPO volume grew rather large. But that does not mean he has an obligation to reward early investors... especially when you had the option to be a late investor. You voluntarily took the gamble, and you own the consequence of it... be it profit, loss or scam.
I've already said I understand people will view the ethics differently, but people still need to take this into account in their calculations.
The top investor has 3BTC in this, do you think he will feel the same as you if he only gets a few coins because the IPO has gone on for an unreasonable amount of time?
Also, why set a date of guaranteed entry into the IPO of only ten days when the IPO could go on to till "judgement day"? If he is honest in his ambition to get as many people involved as possible, why not promise a month or a year? Seems like he was trying to induce a rushed investment and then ask everybody what the panic was.
It's tantamount to lies by omission.
Gloss it as you wish, people still need to have this bought to their attention.
You are assuming from the standpoint of an IPO holder of a regular POW coin. This is not a case like that where a miner can mine for half a day and earn what you have after the IPO.
You are also taking the ipo entry out of context. Peaople in the forum wanted a certain date that the ipo will be guranteed to remain open, so they could plan their withdrawals from other investments, etc. So he gave a date that was ample time ahead. That is not indicative of the IPO closing close to that date. You simply assumed that. If im working on a new previously never done project and if I say it definitely will not finish in a month, that does not mean it will in 45 days. It could also mean 3 months or 6 months even. So if after 45 days, you start accusing me of being late, that is your problem man.
I don't need to pacify you. You got involved in the IPO when it was clearly mentioned that there will be no closing date. It was also pretty evident that there was no incentive for early investors. So you telling him to "take a look at the rewards" makes no sense.
And so what if he induced a rushed investment. You are speaking like as if the people who bought in are underage kids who had no minds of their own.
I never asked you to pacify me......... man.
As I already said, I am pointing out something that potential investors should know about since it is by no means clear from the OP that the dev is trying to maximise his IPO takings rather than asking for what he needs to complete the project - this is not the usual way an IPO works and it is not made clear by the dev. In fact, posts on his thread asking about when the IPO will end get deleted by him......... it's a reasonable question........ why would he do that?
The dev has already said that the IPO could go on until after the coin hits exchanges, meaning that he will be the only one able to trade (with his 60% premine as well as the investors 40%) because investors coins will not have been distributed. Is that also reasonable? Is that ok because the dev didn't explicitly state that he wouldn't do it?
In life and law there is an expectation of reasonable contract, many things are considered to be taken for granted unless explicitly stated as otherwise. The dev is playing with this expectation and semantics to justify his attitude.
What if the dev fucked off tomorrow with the $45,000 saying that the project has collapsed? Would this be ok by you because he didn't explicitly state that he wouldn't fuck off with the money?