the chat room was informative not a lot of trolling.
Yeah ppl knew stuff. even prossy was informative then and not ranting that much. /me runs 
Topic: RAWX altcoin exchange (former mcxNOW) | LAUNCHED ON AUGUST 7 - page 15. (Read 25447 times)
I am still not sure RS is not involved in this but prospecta, you're going over line there. You don't know he is too and it's fair to give enlightened a chance.
So you're just going to ignore the fact this is not just a code re-use and is much, much more?
Classic diversion there, RS has taught you well.
Classic diversion there, RS has taught you well.
I can barely ignore something which doesn't exist, can I? Or is it even the only thing I can do? I don't know.
But as it appears to me I am sure you believe that you have made your point clearly and convincingly. So let the dear readers decide I would suggest.
Best of luck to you. I'll take a look when it's up. I did some trading there it was fast and simple to use.
The closing reopening and closing was painful. I lost money on fees. I think you are overly polite on why the exchange close but not wrong.
the chat room was informative not a lot of trolling.
The closing reopening and closing was painful. I lost money on fees. I think you are overly polite on why the exchange close but not wrong.
the chat room was informative not a lot of trolling.
Thank you very much. I am sorry you lost money on fees, but new game new luck
I am looking forward to opening soon as well
Best of luck to you. I'll take a look when it's up. I did some trading there it was fast and simple to use.
The closing reopening and closing was painful. I lost money on fees. I think you are overly polite on why the exchange close but not wrong.
the chat room was informative not a lot of trolling.
The closing reopening and closing was painful. I lost money on fees. I think you are overly polite on why the exchange close but not wrong.
the chat room was informative not a lot of trolling.
So you're just going to ignore the fact this is not just a code re-use and is much, much more?
Classic diversion there, RS has taught you well.
Classic diversion there, RS has taught you well.
I was talking about the "dump" you predicted. But I think we have reached an impasse here. Let the future enlighten us all! The future is what matters, right?
Speaking of future...
PREVIEW UPDATE: Thanks to iwillbuyall there is now a dark theme! I attached some screenshots below. He also made some good suggestions regarding UI design, many thanks for that as well!
https://rawx.io/screenshots.html
Speaking of future...
PREVIEW UPDATE: Thanks to iwillbuyall there is now a dark theme! I attached some screenshots below. He also made some good suggestions regarding UI design, many thanks for that as well!
https://rawx.io/screenshots.html
How does the fact I am going to migrate the FEEs support your claim that I am planning a huge dump? I can't see the logic here, sorry.
All you are doing is saying that I am a liar. OK, well that doesn't add much value to this conversation as long as you can't give a proof in any way. Just don't mistake a different view on something as a lie.
But again, you will be proven wrong about that dump. Am I then allowed to call you a liar as well? Actually you are even doing me a favor by warning about a potential dump, because that would allow me to buy back cheap fees.
To end this: all I can say is I have an absolutely clean record since 2011 and no one ever could rightfully call me a liar so far.
All you are doing is saying that I am a liar. OK, well that doesn't add much value to this conversation as long as you can't give a proof in any way. Just don't mistake a different view on something as a lie.
But again, you will be proven wrong about that dump. Am I then allowed to call you a liar as well? Actually you are even doing me a favor by warning about a potential dump, because that would allow me to buy back cheap fees.
To end this: all I can say is I have an absolutely clean record since 2011 and no one ever could rightfully call me a liar so far.
Maybe you need to re-read the posts and enlighten yourself.
1) I'm calling you a liar for saying that mcxNOW closed on good terms and without loss of funds.
1) I'm calling you a liar for saying this is just a simple code re-use of the old mcxNOW, when it is clearly so much more considering you're migrating mcxFEE.
You have a basically non existent record since 2011, you're another ghost.
Even your trust rating says you're a liar now
You are migrating mcxFEE, to try to claim this is a engine and backend only transfer is total bullshit and you are proving yourself to be a liar yet again.
How does the fact I am going to migrate the FEEs support your claim that I am planning a huge dump? I can't see the logic here, sorry.All you are doing is saying that I am a liar. OK, well that doesn't add much value to this conversation as long as you can't give a proof in any way. Just don't mistake a different view on something as a lie.
But again, you will be proven wrong about that dump. Am I then allowed to call you a liar as well? Actually you are even doing me a favor by warning about a potential dump, because that would allow me to buy back cheap fees.
To end this: all I can say is I have an absolutely clean record since 2011 and no one ever could rightfully call me a liar so far.
My post seems to have hit a nerve.
There are two great things about your latest post (from my standpoint):
1) I was already proved right about what I said in my previous post about you getting personal. I don't think that the smart people you wrongly believe on your side will be impressed by a big red font. So I can only hope that people are as smart as you say.
2) You will be proven wrong about the dump because I don't intend to sell any of my FEEs. And that is because I believe in the exchange and put a lot of work in it.
I know that many people have been scammed. But I have never scammed anyone.
But well, I went through that process once already: slowly earning trust.
And I am willing to go through that process again.
There are two great things about your latest post (from my standpoint):
1) I was already proved right about what I said in my previous post about you getting personal. I don't think that the smart people you wrongly believe on your side will be impressed by a big red font. So I can only hope that people are as smart as you say.
2) You will be proven wrong about the dump because I don't intend to sell any of my FEEs. And that is because I believe in the exchange and put a lot of work in it.
I know that many people have been scammed. But I have never scammed anyone.
But well, I went through that process once already: slowly earning trust.
And I am willing to go through that process again.
I notice you are again steering away from valid points in order to just be a slippery weasel, very RS of you.
You are migrating mcxFEE, to try to claim this is a engine and backend only transfer is total bullshit and you are proving yourself to be a liar yet again.
The red text is funny OK.
How can you earn trust when all you've done so far is lie. Shame on you.
My post seems to have hit a nerve.
There are two great things about your latest post (from my standpoint):
1) I was already proved right about what I said in my previous post about you getting personal. I don't think that the smart people you wrongly believe on your side will be impressed by a big red font. So I can only hope that people are as smart as you say.
2) You will be proven wrong about the dump because I don't intend to sell any of my FEEs. And that is because I believe in the exchange and put a lot of work in it.
I know that many people have been scammed. But I have never scammed anyone.
But well, I went through that process once already: slowly earning trust.
And I am willing to go through that process again.
There are two great things about your latest post (from my standpoint):
1) I was already proved right about what I said in my previous post about you getting personal. I don't think that the smart people you wrongly believe on your side will be impressed by a big red font. So I can only hope that people are as smart as you say.
2) You will be proven wrong about the dump because I don't intend to sell any of my FEEs. And that is because I believe in the exchange and put a lot of work in it.
I know that many people have been scammed. But I have never scammed anyone.
But well, I went through that process once already: slowly earning trust.
And I am willing to go through that process again.
Please don't call me a liar. We clearly have a different view on some issues but that doesn't justify you accusing me of lying.
Maybe you have noticed that I never get personal here and even if that might be unusual in this forum I would very much appreciate if you could behave similarly.
Please acknowledge the fact that I was not responsible for any of the actions you mentioned and that there was no bug in the backend. That is all that matters for the future users of RAWX, because the backend is all that will be reused.
Maybe you have noticed that I never get personal here and even if that might be unusual in this forum I would very much appreciate if you could behave similarly.
Please acknowledge the fact that I was not responsible for any of the actions you mentioned and that there was no bug in the backend. That is all that matters for the future users of RAWX, because the backend is all that will be reused.
YOU ARE A LIAR!!!
This "backend only" crap is bullshit too. You're migrating mcxFEE over so there's clearly more going on here than just a quick code purchase, lucky for you crypto people as a whole aren't too smart so you and your silent partner RS can scam a whole new batch of noobs.
My bet is once you're up and running you'll do a fresh market dump of those shitty mcxFEE or whatever you rebrand them as. You will hold like 90% of the supply and do your best to entice a fresh new batch of people to unload that garbage on. I also predict many many promises that will never come to fruition on your wasteland of an exchange.
What's important is you've already lied by stating mcxNOW closed down on good terms, you clearly tried to gloss over the fact that mcxNOW closed down due to lost funds - whether you want to call it a "hack" or not barely matters.
Please don't call me a liar. We clearly have a different view on some issues but that doesn't justify you accusing me of lying.
Maybe you have noticed that I never get personal here and even if that might be unusual in this forum I would very much appreciate if you could behave similarly.
Please acknowledge the fact that I was not responsible for any of the actions you mentioned and that there was no bug in the backend. That is all that matters for the future users of RAWX, because the backend is all that will be reused.
I understand your anger very well and I won't defend RS here.
But I want to point out that I wouldn't call that a hack of the exchange.
First of all, only one altcoin was affected. Secondly, there was no bug in the exchange code. The problem was an incorrect handling of the fork and running the node.
What's important is that I will be the new operator and the only thing I will continue to use is the backend. Not the frontend, not the choice of altcoins and not the way of operating the exchange.
But I want to point out that I wouldn't call that a hack of the exchange.
First of all, only one altcoin was affected. Secondly, there was no bug in the exchange code. The problem was an incorrect handling of the fork and running the node.
What's important is that I will be the new operator and the only thing I will continue to use is the backend. Not the frontend, not the choice of altcoins and not the way of operating the exchange.
What's important is you've already lied by stating mcxNOW closed down on good terms, you clearly tried to gloss over the fact that mcxNOW closed down due to lost funds - whether you want to call it a "hack" or not barely matters.
I have no anger, profits withdrawn from mcxNOW over the years bought me a house
- I'm just more interested in people knowing the truth of course (plus I do love the lols).Could you not argue there indeed was a serious exchange code flaw...I mean I'm no coding loser but doesn't the QT broadcast messages that can be used to halt trading?
As for the "only one coin therefore not a hack" comment...I mean wtf...so when BTER lost all that NXT it wasn't a hack? lolwut
I do not really care for the past as long as it does not influence the future too hard but for me a hack is actively modifying the behaviour of a system. New to me is that mcxnow had wallet nodes on the 1.8 chain running.
If so the 1.8 hardfork influenced the the wallets exchange backend unintenionally which is no hack. If this has been the case I call it a design flaw of the exchange backend since it trusted the wallet node too much.
However, if I hardfork a coin which I maintain I would make really sure that all system relevant entities have moved to the new chain before I broadcast the magic message to the network to invalidate the old chain.
did doge had such mechanics on the 1.7 chain or has it them even on the current?
if not this is what you have to expect from almost any copyclones you invest into in the cryptoscene today.
I understand your anger very well and I won't defend RS here.
But I want to point out that I wouldn't call that a hack of the exchange.
First of all, only one altcoin was affected. Secondly, there was no bug in the exchange code. The problem was an incorrect handling of the fork and running the node.
What's important is that I will be the new operator and the only thing I will continue to use is the backend. Not the frontend, not the choice of altcoins and not the way of operating the exchange.
But I want to point out that I wouldn't call that a hack of the exchange.
First of all, only one altcoin was affected. Secondly, there was no bug in the exchange code. The problem was an incorrect handling of the fork and running the node.
What's important is that I will be the new operator and the only thing I will continue to use is the backend. Not the frontend, not the choice of altcoins and not the way of operating the exchange.
What's important is you've already lied by stating mcxNOW closed down on good terms, you clearly tried to gloss over the fact that mcxNOW closed down due to lost funds - whether you want to call it a "hack" or not barely matters.
I have no anger, profits withdrawn from mcxNOW over the years bought me a house
- I'm just more interested in people knowing the truth of course (plus I do love the lols).Could you not argue there indeed was a serious exchange code flaw...I mean I'm no coding loser but doesn't the QT broadcast messages that can be used to halt trading?
As for the "only one coin therefore not a hack" comment...I mean wtf...so when BTER lost all that NXT it wasn't a hack? lolwut
To put this simply, it was possible to deposit v1.7 DOGE (mined at like 3 difficulty) onto mcxNOW, and then withdraw v1.8 DOGE (i.e. the "real" DOGE mcxNOW owned).
Essentially the entire mcxNOW valid DOGE balance was withdrawn, it wasn't just a case of lots of fake DOGE appearing and being dumped for BTC - the valid DOGE the exchange owned were actually withdrawn too.
This is a little known fact that RS tried very hard never mention - the valid DOGE balance was also withdrawn.
you and pod did that aswell. What was that dudes name again ? hero something right? Essentially the entire mcxNOW valid DOGE balance was withdrawn, it wasn't just a case of lots of fake DOGE appearing and being dumped for BTC - the valid DOGE the exchange owned were actually withdrawn too.
This is a little known fact that RS tried very hard never mention - the valid DOGE balance was also withdrawn.
I understand your anger very well and I won't defend RS here.
But I want to point out that I wouldn't call that a hack of the exchange.
First of all, only one altcoin was affected. Secondly, there was no bug in the exchange code. The problem was an incorrect handling of the fork and running the node.
What's important is that I will be the new operator and the only thing I will continue to use is the backend. Not the frontend, not the choice of altcoins and not the way of operating the exchange.
It will pretty much stay the same. On the old exchange 75% were emitted to FEE holders and 25% were paid out as interest. Maybe the percentage of fees to go into interest will be reduced. But we will see about that.
However all coin pairs will generate fees that FEE holders will benefit from. Whether payout will happen every 6 hours or more frequently is yet to be decided.
But I want to point out that I wouldn't call that a hack of the exchange.
First of all, only one altcoin was affected. Secondly, there was no bug in the exchange code. The problem was an incorrect handling of the fork and running the node.
What's important is that I will be the new operator and the only thing I will continue to use is the backend. Not the frontend, not the choice of altcoins and not the way of operating the exchange.
Awesome to hear. Looking forward to seeing it in action! Can you also shed some light on how the FEEs will work? Like will it be the same as before, paying the appropriate portion of ALL coins every 6h, or how is it being changed?
It will pretty much stay the same. On the old exchange 75% were emitted to FEE holders and 25% were paid out as interest. Maybe the percentage of fees to go into interest will be reduced. But we will see about that.
However all coin pairs will generate fees that FEE holders will benefit from. Whether payout will happen every 6 hours or more frequently is yet to be decided.
To touch on the DOGE situation, I can confirm what you've said is true (at least in terms of the forking happening, and there being ample time prior for it to be updated on his end). "Hacked" isn't the proper word, though... it's more like negligence. And in this case, it was indeed costly. I was lucky in that I wasn't affected by the situation. And I believe this is when he did the haircut, correct? I know a couple users volunteered decent sums to help cover losses, but the entire situation was a pretty dark one (I remember being highly against a haircut, even though it wouldn't affect me, just on the basis of principle).
To put this simply, it was possible to deposit v1.7 DOGE (mined at like 3 difficulty) onto mcxNOW, and then withdraw v1.8 DOGE (i.e. the "real" DOGE mcxNOW owned).
Essentially the entire mcxNOW valid DOGE balance was withdrawn, it wasn't just a case of lots of fake DOGE appearing and being dumped for BTC - the valid DOGE the exchange owned were actually withdrawn too.
This is a little known fact that RS tried very hard never mention - the valid DOGE balance was also withdrawn.
If that doesn't constitute "hacked" I don't know what does???
All in all mcxNOW lost about 150 BTC + of coins. The only reason there wasn't a huge haircut is the fact they managed to work out who took most of the funds, doxed him, and he caved and gave most of the money back. Lucky for most it was a chickenshit that took it all.
And with all of that, on to the RAWX topic. @Enlightened, are current FEE holders going to be invited to the closed beta?
Yes, all FEE holders qualify to take part in the closed beta.
Awesome to hear. Looking forward to seeing it in action! Can you also shed some light on how the FEEs will work? Like will it be the same as before, paying the appropriate portion of ALL coins every 6h, or how is it being changed?
mcxNOW did not shut down with a good reputation contrary to your claims.
it left a sour taste in many mouths..
Mind to elaborate?it left a sour taste in many mouths..
You really don't know? Or are you just pretending not to know?
RS was very rarely present in the final months, when DOGE was due to fork from v1.7 to v1.8 he was warned multiple times of upcoming fork in chat and chose to ignore it. He then went AWOL for 2 weeks.
In this period, DOGE forked, this allowed users to mine the v1.7 at next to no difficulty and transfer them all to mcxNOW to dump on unsuspecting noobs who though it was real DOGE and people with bots running.
Even better, an epic fuck up with the way the fork was done meant you could actually withdraw DOGE on the v1.8, whilst depositing to credit your balance with v1.7's.
It was a spectacular shitstorm and after it unfolded RS threw his toys out of the cot and shut down. Technically mcxNOW was indeed hacked IMO.
How do I know all this...well I mined some v1.7's didn't I.
Do not trust this exchange, stay far far away.
Also I must point out mcxNOW was fast in 2014, but by modern exchange standards it would be nothing special.
To touch on the DOGE situation, I can confirm what you've said is true (at least in terms of the forking happening, and there being ample time prior for it to be updated on his end). "Hacked" isn't the proper word, though... it's more like negligence. And in this case, it was indeed costly. I was lucky in that I wasn't affected by the situation. And I believe this is when he did the haircut, correct? I know a couple users volunteered decent sums to help cover losses, but the entire situation was a pretty dark one (I remember being highly against a haircut, even though it wouldn't affect me, just on the basis of principle).
mcxNOW did not shut down with a good reputation contrary to your claims.
it left a sour taste in many mouths..
Mind to elaborate?it left a sour taste in many mouths..
You really don't know? Or are you just pretending not to know?
RS was very rarely present in the final months, when DOGE was due to fork from v1.7 to v1.8 he was warned multiple times of upcoming fork in chat and chose to ignore it. He then went AWOL for 2 weeks.
In this period, DOGE forked, this allowed users to mine the v1.7 at next to no difficulty and transfer them all to mcxNOW to dump on unsuspecting noobs who though it was real DOGE and people with bots running.
Even better, an epic fuck up with the way the fork was done meant you could actually withdraw DOGE on the v1.8, whilst depositing to credit your balance with v1.7's.
It was a spectacular shitstorm and after it unfolded RS threw his toys out of the cot and shut down. Technically mcxNOW was indeed hacked IMO.
How do I know all this...well I mined some v1.7's didn't I.
Do not trust this exchange, stay far far away.
Also I must point out mcxNOW was fast in 2014, but by modern exchange standards it would be nothing special.
And with all of that, on to the RAWX topic. @Enlightened, are current FEE holders going to be invited to the closed beta?
Yes, all FEE holders qualify to take part in the closed beta.
Jump to: