Topic: s (Read 536 times)

Why do I getting a funny feeling that Leroy Fodor may be behind the SpaceGold thingy?

Glad to see that Sheldon Cooper is such a fan of the Lightning Network.


How's that moderator action working for ya so far?

I mean, I could call in some reinforcements who would blast your trust rating to kingdom come. I haven't even filed a formal Scam Accusation against you yet. You should consider yourself lucky I'm giving you the chance to fix your problems first.

Likewise.

If you:

- produce a non-plagiarized white paper
- remove the falsehoods about gold being returned from space on a regular basis

I will consider revising your trust feedback to a neutral score. Then the standing of this project will change from con artistry to an extremely shitty investment opportunity, which is a step up.


It's almost like you were being sarcastic, and still are.

Your last post is riddled with falsehood, so lets analyze them one-by-one:


Not 21 missions. The majority of these 21 missions are "incidental flybys" and failures. There is 1 successful sample collection from the Ryugu asteroid, which is thought to be comprised of nickel, iron, cobalt, water, nitrogen, hydrogen and ammonia (no gold).

"Hayabusa2 touched down briefly February 22, 2019 on the Ryugu asteroid, fired a bullet into the surface to puff up dust for collection and blasted back to its holding position, said officials from the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)."

There is also 1 successful sample collection from the Itokawa asteroid, which also showed zero gold.

That's it. 2 sample returns, neither of which contained gold.


Plans on papers. What guarantee do you have that anybody wants to do business with you?


Again, dependent on too many contingencies to be a viable business model.  


There are no "proven recovery techniques." So far the only thing that has been returned from an asteroid is dust samples.


No, the companies would perform their operations regardless of the funds raised here that you are throwing at them.


OK so like I said earlier, it would appear that an SGOLD token holder has to hold their token(s) for 240 months in order to fully capitalize on this. There are currently zero space mines. This might be the case for decades.


Again, investors have to wait 20 years to capitalize on this, all while hoping the Ethereum platform isn't totally obsolete by then.


Again, this is all extremely speculative. As somebody who has analyzed probably over a hundred ICOs and token-based projects over the years I'd say the chances of this one being successful are far slimmer than almost all of them. And the bar is set pretty low.

Come back again in 10 years after the first gold containing sample may have been returned to earth.

When I saw this picture was from a law firm website, this immediately came to mind:



Have you been injured as the result of space travel?

Were you the victim of:

- UFO abduction?
- unauthorized anal probing?
- non-consensual mind melding?

Contact atty. James Dunstan, Space Lawyer. He is licensed to practice in 6 different galaxies. No case too small, no Borg too large.

From the OP: "You are right that space travel is costly, but less costly now that SpaceX has developed the ability to recover their first stage boosters and reuse them."


Definitive proof that we're currently mining asteroids for gold _VVV

Dear Nutildah, I have certain difficulty and if you can help me, I'll really appreciate it.

There is this questionable project, proposing to mine gold from space meteorites etc. While we knows that golds and other precious metals are abundant in space, I still would like to know more about their project. But, as I consult to their WP, I saw that they're not really careful (or perhaps didn't care at all) with their WP, where they have certain typo, and can't even locate it despite claiming have been reading their own WP carefully. You would perhaps familiar with how they didn't realize their WP is.plagiarizing articles. This problem (simple typo aside) as I see, will rather have certain possibility of stirring problems as their line of works revolve around a situation where they act as an entity that lend funds (investors fund) to "space-miners", and they should review the loan application carefully. The idea is, if they can't even review their own WP, how could investors be sure they'll be extra careful with future loan applications?

But when I pointed this out, instead of simply admitting the mistakes and explaining how these typos happen (and the lack of knowledge of plagiarism) and how to prevent it on future case of loan application, the community manager act rather uncooperatively by keep evading direct answer with his infamous "logical fallacies". I would assume this very CM, which turns out to be a very rich and successful CEO (please don't ask me how his employee feels working for him, I don't want to "attack personally") is rather a fallacy-aholic, judging from how he always respond everything that against his project by breaking down sentences into several words and label them neatly with imaginative fallacy (a good member codenamed cool-bowtie rises a speculation that it perhaps his way of deflecting responsibility from mistakes) and accuse people who tries to prove the legitimacy of his project as Troll.

Now, the problem is he decided to refuse answering me (which for a while, I conclude as a lost case as I didn't see how should I bother spending time asking someone who refuse to answer), but then I realized that, perhaps I can ask someone else to ask for me and see if he'll answer or he'll cling to his ultimate weapon of troll and fallacies despite the legit and crucial questions.

If you don't mind, kindly ask (for me and for the future investors) about how long is his payback period, and how will this PP be affected by the very long ICO of five YEARS. If he label you as troll as well and refuse to answer, I think the community may start to wonder why he kept evading answers and can begin to conclude how good is this project is.

I notice you edited every single one of your messages to claim that the negative trust I gave you was "bogus." It certainly was not. I told you about the plagiarism and pointed out the original sources of your white paper material. You denied it. Thus, your negative trust was earned.

Quoted for posterity:


240 months after production starts? So that's 20 years after the first gold has been mined from space by a company that you are invested in! You expect people to be invested in your company for a bare minimum of 21 years! Assuming it only takes a year to get a satellite your company has invested in to get to an asteroid and successfully find gold... It could take much, much longer.


As I said earlier, this is not true. It's never happened. Gold particles may have been found in an asteroid sample, but you don't produce evidence of this. Your claim is thus baseless.


But you currently have no contracts in place with these companies, correct?


Again, this is highly speculative. Its zero tons at the moment.


Not backed by an asset. Its an investment in a project which may yield zero assets, thus the tokens are not backed by anything except expectations.


 

Pheeewww buddy. This was an awful sales pitch. I feel creeped out after reading it. There are so many problems with your plan. Here's the biggest ones:

1. You expect to form partnerships/contracts with "space gold" mining companies.
2. You are certain the ones you do form contracts with will be successful.
3. Even if they are, you expect your investors to wait for over 20 years to redeem their tokens for real gold.
4. You assume the Ethereum platform will still be around in 20+ years and not replaced by better technology.
5. You didn't take the time to write your own white paper -- without investing the time it takes to create your own white paper, how do you honestly expect investors to be patient for 20 years while waiting for your project to bear fruit?

There's just far too many contingencies to make this a viable plan. Why wouldn't investors just invest in the asteroid mining companies directly?

Nope. Not "as a result." You were "attacked by trusted parties" because you denied having a plagiarized white paper. You could have copped to what happened instead of claiming I was engaging in "logical fallacies." Its highly unlikely that anybody who approached you has an account with the standing of mine. I just look through ICO announcements, analyze their white papers and find inconsistencies. If your claim has evidence that I am somehow linked to these other accounts who offered to help promote your project, list them here and let the public do research and come to conclusions on their own.


Its not just "similarities", its word-for-word copy/pasting. Thanks for not making me have to post a formal Scam Accusation against you, which I was about to do until I read this message. I reserve the right to do this in the future because some of your claims about gold already being brought back from space (for the purposes of being sold) are simply untrue. If my claim is incorrect, please post some evidence that refutes it.

What you're proposing is an extremely risky, theoretical and long-term investment model. This is not suitable for cryptocurrency.

This guy claims to be an academic. He should have more respect for the white paper process. I'd say at least half of his white paper is plagiarized. Then to have the pompous attitude he does. Not a good combination.

BTW, mass spectrometry is not the same thing as "refining." Its used to analyze the contents of a sample. The entire idea is a load of b.s. If he tried to go public he'd immediately be sued for fraud.

Thanks for taking the time to go through the WP. Couldn't bring myself to give it a second glance after going through their CEO's background and realizing that he's a failed has-be. Probably saw ICOing as the easiest route to that castle in the sky he's been fawning all his life over. Hopefully, he's going to rant one more time before ejecting himself out of the community. I've got popcorns...

I pointed out to you exactly what was plagiarized.


Good. Fuck off. Find some other place to run your scam.

OK, so zero. There's zero gold that's been "mined and refined in space." ZERO. Therefore, you should have produced zero tokens.


No, its not. As a matter of fact its NEVER happened. Some of earth's gold may have come here from meteorites. That's not what you're talking about, however.


OK but so far you have no contracts with ANY of these highly-experimental companies, none of which have brought back a single gram of gold, and aren't expected to for many years.

This project seems like an outright fraud. I'm giving you one chance to refute the plagiarism claims above or any of the claims made in this post before tagging you as a scammer.

Warning: white paper contains several instances of plagiarism:

From the white paper:


Original source:


From the white paper:


Original source:


These are but 2 of many.

OP please revise your white paper and credit your sources or better yet, come up with your own words, or I will tag your account as promoting plagiarism.