Topic: UseCoin Scam - page 2. (Read 9017 times)

You know this how? Did Bittrex not undertake the initial distribution of the pre-sold coins?

So Bittrex had a million and a half unsold use sat in a trading account on the day of the launch and nobody thought to ask why?
The hole just got deeper. I strongly advise you to stop digging. Perhaps a little due diligence would be in order.

Bittrex obviously has been offering ICOs on their exchange, basically as a form of escrow. That would be the logical answer.

Usecoin was not one of them, by the way.

Wasn't involved in this mess, thank goodness, but amid a growing number of questions about the extent of Bittrex's involvement in these failed ICOs, I'm curious, came across this Bittrex message from earlier this year and asked the following question.



Looking forward to Bittrex's answer.

It seems there's almost always some little detail that is missed or swept under the rug until after the launch, whether it's usecoin, clstr, sys, storj, etc.
Most people aren't motivated to scrutinise until there's an immediate interest in doing so, or are simply blinded by the potential upside until it's too late.

i do agree i found it really suspicious they were sleeping while dev was dumping. what timing. someone was saying it was looking like a scam the day before but he got bullied for being a fudder

i actually made money on it but lost money buying at 600sats thought it was fud. lost the profit. luckily no capital. feel sorry for others

Only said the first part not the second.

That's why we have regulation. People who resent government, regulation, and the police don't do so because they support anarchy. It's because they want to impose rules that work to their own personal advantage. In the 'alt' world freedom has come to mean being free to prey on the weakest and least advantaged.

Bittrex should have been aware of the volume of Use being deposited to their exchange. It wasn't an insignificant amount. They should also have launched an investigation before releasing the BTC (if they have indeed been released). And for better or worse they still have a lot of documentation that could be used to trace the scammers. They also have the wallet addresses for the withdrawal of the scammed funds. So Bittrex might have been caught napping, but they also chose to nothing for the protection of their clients.
I shan't be back.

A non-profit foundation is a charity if it solicits donations. And charities have to be registered as such.
Looking at their website, they're raising funds by selling a coin like any other, based on a new technology. Whether that technology is delivered or not remains to be seen. If it is genuine then it will be traded with the same risks as any other coin. But scam IPOs could still damage the success of it's launch. I'm surprised that major platforms like Cryptsy and Mintpal are even touching these anonymous IPOs. They should be left to flounder in the marginal exchanges. But then Mintpal and Cryptsy have lost 75% of their volumes in the last few months. Still taking around $125,000 dollars a day each though. Which is reason enough to exercise restraint and due diligence before accepting coins on their platforms.

the scam could have been easily caught out if bittrex was online. i think the problem here was that we were misunderstanding that the coins had been destroyed. we should have cleared that first before the ipo being released. we just need to make sure the next ipo we need to make sure that any remaining coins are destroyed. i think dev got greedy because he saw the coins were worth shit loads

BTC has been quite weak all year - perhaps in anticipation of this. It will certainly be devastating to the alts world if it happens.
This is a scary - and plausible - scenario. And we're all collectively to blame. We had a chance to make the most of a true free market (one of the few left in this world) and really botched it.

No BTC's too big to go down with the alts. But the alts are dead without the exchanges.

Well, they're set up like a non-profit foundation, no? And they have good lawyers - they've made it look like an ICO (and sound like one), when the reality of how it's set up makes it a virtual donation.

You mean a registered charity? Because it's illegal to solicit donations without being a registered charity.

Ethereum isn't a scam - the problem is that their ICO isn't structured like an investment where you can expect much of an ROI. It's set up more like a donation.

Tell it to silk road. These altcoin scams are becoming more frequent and audacious, so they're bound to attract the attention of the authorities. They're enacted with the tacit cooperation of Exchanges and other online service providers, who are vulnerable to having their premises raided, their servers seized, their businesses disrupted, and their clients financially  inconvenienced. Thgey're no longer sole traders or small gangs operating independently behind a wall of pseudo-anonymity.

Take Syscoin, for example. I had my fingers slightly singed when trading opened on Mintpal, but I managed to bail out with most of my funds intact. Many others have lost substantial amounts. The coin was released with a laughably dysfunctional wallet, by any altcoin standards, because the developers had no intention of delivering a working product. Moolah handled the escrow, and the developers claimed to have returned the released funds. So now Moolah are holding the spoils and the developers are screaming that they need the funds to deliver a working product. Moolah have offered their support in this endeavour, and meanwhile the price has tanked and the volume has dried up. Mintpal supported the release, and they've taken a big hit on volume as a consequence. Moolah operate out of London as a legitimate financial services provider. So if the Serious Fraud Office come knocking on their doors demanding to know the whereabouts of the 'Devs' and the escrowed funds, Moolah will turn them in without batting an eye.

In the meanwhile the 'investors' are growing more angry because the escrowed funds are neither being returned nor used to develop a working coin. And the whole sorry tale is documented in the pages of Bitcoin Forum. You may think it's all a storm in a teacup, and the 'devs' broke no laws. But people are being conned to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, which makes it a matter for the authorities; and investigations could destroy the whole altcoin scene, by targeting the exchanges. Shouldn't surprise me if one or two of the big players are MtGoxed before the end of the year if this continues.

Of course the best time to begin investigating these scams is when the coins are first announced, and the 'devs' are active online. So mark my words, there are fun times ahead.

No, none of that will work. Servers can be purchased with BTC, IP addresses can be masked behind VPN's and botnets. You would totally be wasting energy for NOTHING. I seriously doubt any real crime has been committed and that no authority would even take on the case. Why? You are trading a non-regulated currency system on an exchange where the TOS state no one is responsible for your money except yourself.

Seriously, I'm out around .12 BTC roughly a tank of gas on this scam. I can afford that, having invested in other coins and made money on the IPO upswing. I would have made .3 or .4 BTC on this upswing had I set my sell orders a little bit lower. Greed struck me this time. My sells were at 4000 sat, setting them to 3500 or so would have gotten me out and put some BTC in my wallet. Lesson learned.

could you check   essex343   https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/essex343-133160  this guy's IP, tks

so when usecoin de listing this

I had an cruel experience with this currency as well, glad that this thread exist.