If the investment is legit, it will be a simple matter to prove. Frankly, one would expect it to be shown without asking.
How do you prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt so that you and other skeptics wouldn't be here asking follow-up questions?
And can you link me to a thread here where "proof is provided, it gets rubbished anyways".
But that's actually irrelevant...
People are making strides in this community. Some people like to rubbish those small steps towards mainstream acceptance. The crypto community moves forward and evolves with or without your approval. What happens to Digibyte does not depend on anything you or I will say here. So, why not just watch the community evolve rather than going to threads just to rubbish peoples advancements.
I'm sure there are projects you support. How about concentrating on moving those forward rather than thread-hopping to rubbish projects you have no interest in?
Let's start with the law, followed by a standard investment contract template and a study of financial contracts between investors and companies. Here are also several investment contracts that you can easily find using any search engines: Sample 1, Sample 2, Sample 3. I am also appending typical announcements by companies receiving external investments and funding: Sample 1, Sample 2, Sample 3. There is nothing 'unheard of' or 'overkill' about this.
So, can you now provide me a link to a thread here where "proof is provided, it gets rubbished anyways"?
With regards to your second paragraph, what on earth are you talking about? Digibyte gave no details behind the supposed USD $250,000 investment. How was the investment structured? Did the investor receive a few million coins from the developer? Did the investor receive an equity to the secret company behind the coin's development? What strides are you taking about here specifically? What advancements are you talking about here? What the heck are you actually talking about here? Are you saying members of the community have no right to request clarifications or ask for substantiation on claims made by thread starters? Do you want threads to be filled with just circle-jerking?
No, Tribesman. When you make bold and outlandish claims like this, you need to substantiate it. You need to address the concerns raised instead of stubbornly asking people to just accept what they are being told. You do not get to make false announcements to create a temporary price spike to facilitate your coin dumping. Do you realize that no other coin (with the exception of Monero, I think) has received private funding for development (not talking about ICO/IPO/ITOs)? This is staggering news - if true. But one week on, not a peep from the developers. Just bagholders with their silly arguments.
Registration statements and prospectuses become public shortly after filing with the SEC. If filed by U.S. domestic companies, the statements are available on the EDGAR database accessible at www.sec.gov. Registration statements are subject to examination for compliance with disclosure requirements.
Not all offerings of securities must be registered with the Commission. Some exemptions from the registration requirement include:
private offerings to a limited number of persons or institutions;
offerings of limited size;
intrastate offerings; and
securities of municipal, state, and federal governments.
Any comments?
Any how does this change anything?
Does it in any way nullify the existence of an investment contract?
Does it negate anything I've said previously?
Does it change the fact that I said some companies are required by law to file external investments?
Does it change the fact there are unlisted, private companies in the examples I provided?
Does it not prove you don't have a clue of what you are talking about?
Does it not show you are incapable of using a search engine (or at least, pretending to)?
I'll not be providing a link to anything. I'm not involving anyone else in this. Please take your victory and run. You win. Your victory, of course, still doesn't mean that anyone will take a blind bit of notice of your advice. But keep giving it. One day you'll hit the jackpot and actually get it right!
In other words, you lied.
You lied in an effort to defend an "investment" that is most likely non-existent.
You are no different from scammers that are blighting the crypto landscape.
For all we know, you could even be one of the anonymous people behind this coin. At the very lest, we know you are a bagholder by your ridiculously spirited defense of this 'investment'.
I am pleased to note though that the community did not fall for the scam, and people like you are unable to offload your coins at a profit at exchanges.
I'm always amazed at the mentality of people who do not balk at making a profit through lies and deception, at the expense of others.
@Digibyte, you had about two weeks to prove me wrong and demonstrate the investment is real. The fact that you have kept deathly silent and are just depending on a dishonest moron to defend you says a lot of your values.
This forum has many examples of private investments being rubbished by members like you. I say again, I'm not providing you with anything.
.