Topic: [UNMODERATED] CLUSTERCOIN Topic [OPEN DISCUSSION] - page 7. (Read 7448 times)

3 accounts created in a one month period (how many accounts were created during the bitcoin hype period?)
These 3 accounts posted in the same pattern, and then all were active again in MAY(4 posts in January)
said accounts were part of giveaway threads (how many accounts were part of the giveaways?)
It's not just giveaway thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=683158.20 In this thread, you can find Essex343 ShameOnYou and HarryT1923.

 
three ICO coins dev were in the same thread(which only several people involved), and quoted each other with some bullshit. 

its SCAM SCAM SCAM! trexx stop trading! DEV DELETE all message!

guys! follow me at twitter (free scam call)

http://twitter.com/zmi_zmi

DEV - you are a fucking scammer and I think that many people want to kill you for your scam!
Dev, what you say about bitcointal account? How much it cost account bitcointalk?
 What you say about USECOIN?
You dont get our money!



Guys - I didnt lost anything. I did not buy this shit coin, but I've been watching the market - I have a lot of free time and I want to warn you in the future. let's declare war on these developers to suck dick, I'm ready to make a contribution to the fund crypto police to see how they cut out the eyes of their deception

As much as I don't like it, hashtag is right here. Trex has to follow the terms, or that makes them a shady exchange. It sucks, but richie said if any proof can be provided that this is a scam they will act accordingly.

But right now, the clustercoin dev is a slick motherfucker, and has covered his ass with the terms, which screws us. We can't blame Bittrex if we got fooled by the clustercoin dev.

We should have made sure that the whole cluster concept was covered in the terms, and if they weren't, not give the asshole our money, but we did, and we can't blame Bittrex for that.

I'm more pissed at myself more than anything, how I didn't see this coming is beyond me.

The fact that the accounts were made at the same time, and then the lack of posts for the same amount of time, shows something, but not enough for Bittrex to break their terms of the contract.

We can't have Bittrex deciding what they want to follow in a contract and what they don't. That would personally save me a lot of money now, but would be bad business on their part.

Anyone boycotting Bittrex for doing their job to the letter, even with all the public pressure for them to act outside of the contract, says a lot about how professional they actually are if you ask me.

I for one will be looking much closer at the terms of every ICO in the future before I put my BTC into it that's for sure.

I am not sure.

Here is the latest post of mine he deleted.... what a scammer indeed.

Not just that but the dev won't even prove he hasn't bought that account by posting to the account's twitter feed here - (notice it's not been used since Nov 2013 - coincidence.. hmmm)...

https://twitter.com/IshmaelEssex

Yo Ishmael - Post a tweet about CLuster[fcked] coin, willya? For someone who wants their BTC, you don't seem to care much about any of the allegations around here.

I'm not too happy with the way this goin here
But why can everybody blame Bittrex for this.

They can only follow the terms right? Can they be changed as things go on?
Don't they have to release the 350 if they like it or not if the terms are followed?

Richie,


Do you have proof that the Usecoin dev is a scammer?

Can you reasonably say that this is not the same guy? From your standpoint, if it is obvious that this is the same guy, you should do something.

If not, well there really isn't anything you can do I guess.

Here's the problem:
"* Our ICO terms stated in the original ANN said the dev must deliver a working wallet, blockchain and blockchain explorer.  This is more than requested by some other ICO terms." ---> And why is that? The obvious issue is if you set a bar so low that anyone without a wallet/blockchain/blockchain explorer can open an ICO on your site, there is obviously something wrong with your site. How much time do you think will pass before you get branded as the cryptostocks of alt ICOs?

"* the ICO is based on the premise that the funds were to be used for future developments of the project. Not what was available today.  This was clearly stated in the ANN." --> Another of the issues. Say I were to escrow a deal between you and a dev developing an exchange called gittrex which other than a trading platform also lays golden eggs. Now that being the condition, don't you think it will be imperative for me to check if the conditions are met before releasing the money? Maybe say 10-15% of the money is paid for development costs. You would definitely say
"just having a trading platform and a working hot wallet system is obviously not enough. I paid for the golden eggs too and until that is delivered, dev is not entitled to the money, PoD or not". Isnt? Or would you want me to release the money once the platform is up?

This is an obvious scam.
Dev satisfied and there are hundreds of dissatisfied investors. Bittrex can easily reject ICO to restore the investor's money.
Must see, Bittrex Selected the Dev or hundreds of the loyal customer.

I lied, i'm obviously making one more post ... and i'm not shutting it down the discussion...  you all are welcome to it.  I wont' be doing it in this forum because I believe it to be toxic.  You are more than welcome to find me in the usual places if you'd like to discuss.

Chris/OCminer, you two are always thoughtful in your responses so I welcome a discussion with you on why you think its a scam. You guys know where you can find me. I will not engage in this discussion on this forum after this post.  

Here's what I do know as a fact, please find me and discuss if you have more facts.

* Our ICO terms stated in the original ANN said the dev must deliver a working wallet, blockchain and blockchain explorer.  This is more than requested by some other ICO terms.
* the ICO is based on the premise that the funds were to be used for future developments of the project. Not what was available today.  This was clearly stated in the ANN.
* the whitepaper was laid out along with the source code of the available wallet for everyone to decide before investing in the ICO.

None of these things have changed since people decided to invest based on their research.  In fact, the dev has already agreed add additional requirements by doing PoD (not going to get into the validity of it, but it is another way to raise the bar).  Bittrex makes no guarantees beyond ensuring that the coins you have purchased arrive in your wallet.

The other anecdotal things I've seen is:

* 3 accounts created in a one month period (how many accounts were created during the bitcoin hype period?)
* said accounts were part of giveaway threads (how many accounts were part of the giveaways?)
* dev isn't responsive enough (do you know how much time WE have spent engaged with the community with people that insist on FUD).

This is the data I have.  In the world where FUD allows for market manipulation, we have to operate on facts.  And, as I have stated many times, everyone has agreed to hold funds until PoD is completed.

thanks,
Richie

the least he could do is tweet from "his" twitter account and prove that it's not a purchased account, but he won't even do that. i'm surprised he left my post up asking him to do so tho, as he deletes everything else that questions him.  (I just started looking at this coin today actually, and don't care either way, just sick of scam-coins all the time, especially with ICO's).

I also told him i could not wait to see some "user-populated geo clusters" in action!!! (Deleted of course LMFAO!!!)

Scamdev deleted my post, so posting it here for whatever its worth

It is not yet proven to be a scam i just wanted to Post the things that bugged me as i got no answer in the original topic and my posts got deleted.

Maybe it is all Good..  Will See in the next 24 to 48 hours.

Bittrex still holds the 350 btc so we should be on the Safe side i think

Thanks Ocminer

When you say something, we know its for real.

When I seen the unmoderated thread I was thinking it was just the fudders back to work.

When I seen who started the thread, I was like, oh shit, I just lost some money!

Many of us don't have the ability to look over the code. Thanks for letting us know what you found.

My question is how can Bittrex release the BTC when it has been proven that this is a scam?

I really like Bittrex. I would really like to just to see them do the right thing, more than to just get back my .5 BTC.

If the dev had any integrity, he would re-launch the coin, especially since it's still in alpha stage. As of recently he's started to refer to the coin as an "experiment", "idea" ect.. all warning signs of, "I most likely won't follow through with this project til' the end".

GUYS! Its a SCAM! dont buy it!

You can choose to do that and I respect your decision to do so.  But at the same time by flooding the SEC and other bodies which govern finance you are going to only hurt our crypto environment as a whole.  I get you want to take action but at the same time bringing a flood of regulation to this marketplace I feel would do more harm then good

I second that in every point, Dev tells a lot about technical innovation but the wallet currently is practically just a clone of a clone of a clone without anything new. This was the origin for my suspicion too.

Bittrex definitely has a hand in these coins, I would go as far to say they have made 5 digit figure payouts.

The temptation is to big to make huge profits and get financially backed for life, retire early.

People try to ride the waves in crypto, Bittrex just ride the crypto community.

They probably wont be around in 6 months time, most likely sell up.

Yeah, I wanted to believe this was "real" and scooped up some of the post-ICO coins cheap.  But, I also went down the same road.  I compiled the daemon and was going to put it up on my pool to mine it, then compiled the QT wallet to get an address to mine to, and that was the first red flag for me.  The QT wallet is very poor, they changed the background /some style stuff but it doesn't work right on Linux, changing between tabs they "overwrite" on top of each other.  So that begs the question of whether these guys actually have the skills to build their "cluster" idea.  I can clean up the wallet so its usable for me, but why bother.

But the other big red flag is like you said, once you try parsing the guy's responses, it is kind of technical bullshit.  But it could be real too.  I dunno.  I really hope this isn't a scam.  But the dev has done nothing to help the situation, nor has Bittrex other than passing the buck of responsibility.  Unfortunately they are indeed a US company, and as much as they may like to think so, it isn't so simple to duck responsibility.

My other concern, regardless of whether scam or not, is that as I thought more critically about their idea/design, I'm not sure it can really be built or work the way they are thinking.  I don't believe that multiple independent forks is the way to go about solving transaction processing performance/speed, because it breaks Satoshi's consensus mechanism, and I don't clearly understand how Cluster intends to solve that.

IMHO, if it was a legit ICO, the dev and his team would be all over that thread leading up to, through, and after the ICO closing posting updates and videos, social media etc.  Instead its just been dead.

I didn't spend more than I can afford to lose, I scooped up the coins as a casino bet that I hope pays off.  But if I were less technical and had read the CLUSTR announcement and put a whole bunch of BTC into it, I'd be pretty pissed at the way the whole thing is being handled.