Topic: VERITASEUM DISCUSSION THREAD - page 31. (Read 251024 times)

Reggie said as a token holder of VERI, I am an OWNER. So.....

Nothing makes sense to those that have no sense.
Whether there will be buyer to those domain names is none of my business.

You need to learn to accept contradiction.
And then figure out through reason and logic whether that contradiction is justified and fair.
If you cannot decide if something is fair or otherwise, you should ask questions first, instead of coming into a conclusion right away.
You don't know everything in this world.
Those things that you don't know of, usually makes no sense to you at first.

Update:
Your prayer was answered. But sorry it ain't 6000 words.

Update #2:
If I run a business, and a complete stranger come to me and suggest an idea that will help me make lots more money, I don't care if this stranger is dorky, stupid or idiot, I will accept his suggestion and implement it.

I was praying it would be you who answered...I spent the entire night reading your insane paranoid ramblings....thanx for the entertainment....I was thinking that they should rename the thread after you..."how to run a business that doesn't belong to you"...as to your response....I was sorely disappointed....it doesn't even make sense...I was hoping for better...i'll give it a go anyway...under your logic, those who sell domain names must search the entire world for any claim on the words, lest they be prosecuted...damn, computers have come a long way...they can do all that in the few nanoseconds after I click purchase at godaddy?...wow...I await your 6000 word response (w/ updates)

That's like saying selling firearms to terrorists is legit as long as the seller is not the one doing the firing/killing.

The gullible buyer/buyers stand a chance to get prosecuted.

I am a hodler. Few seem to truly understand the potential of Veritaseum.

I am a totally disinterested party....just passing through to check out veri for the first time....I may be wrong as well but I don't think he said he was gonna use them...he said he was selling them...there is no copyright or trademark law that forbids him from owning them, and if someone wants them, then he gets to set the price

UPDATE
EDIT: btw, just finished some initial reading and all I can say is I cant believe I missed this...finally something that actually DOES something...I'll wait for the dip I guess...

UPDATE #2
RE-EDIT: just finished watching the interview w/ clif high...now I will definitely be waiting for the dip...in the meantime, i'll go back and check out this ultra-juicy troll war...
I hope theres a lot of it

UPDATE #3  ya...super juicy and lots of it

ThesisFun, I believe Dorkie is correct.

© 2018 Veritaseum, Inc. All Rights Reserved

I could be wrong but I believe that you may have a problem with the use of the Veritaseum name. I bet you thought that you might hit the jackpot by scooping up a few Veritaseum domains? Best of luck to you.

Is that not an infringement of copyright/trademark?

I have multiple Veritaseum domains that I would consider selling or taking part of a project in trade or you could sit on for a few years as Veritaseum evolves.  Veri would be acceptable in trade.
PM me if interested and leave message on this.
Posting here as is relevant to Veritaseum and someone might not see otherwise.
Veritaseum.Exchange
Veritas.Exchange
Veri.exchange
Veri.trade

You are wrong.
The people (not part of the team) that buys the token as an investment proposition and become a total yes-man to everything Reggie says (regardless of right or wrong, doesn't mean he is 100% right or 100% wrong) without their own critical thinking, is who I refer to as intellectually bankrupt.

If you totally agree with everything I say without your own critical thinking from the beginning until now, while I may be flattered with my ego boosted having a total yes-man + ass-kisser follower like you, you would still be intellectually bankrupt to me.

There is no need to drag Reggie into the equation. He is not intellectually bankrupt like some of you guys here.

You know what. Would you believe me if I say I can start making all of you to agree with me unanimously in an instant, and sustain such behavior for a long time?
It's easy.
Just lend support to whatever Reggie says.
If he says no burning token, and I say "Yes, burning token is no good", then you will agree with me.
If he says the token is not a security but the market cap is still referred to, and I say "Yes, the market cap is relevant even though the token is not a security", then you will agree with me.
Get what I mean?

"Son"?
I prefer someone who is wise, not someone who is old.
Unless you are a wise person, it is totally irrelevant to me how old you are.
And how wise you are will be reflected in your behaviors.

At least my hunch was right, that you will mention it was Masiah's idea.


That is completely irrelevant.


If your inventory management is based on such business mechanism, then definitely not a prudent business practice to me to burn tokens.
But I don't think the main problem is burning the token.
The problem is you put limitation to your inventory management into requiring redemption as a way of "replenishing stock" to sustain the business.


Getting some extra token back in return for renting is not my main concern. My concern is that if you ever manage to sell all your 100 million tokens, that circulating supply will be large enough to cause a significant decline in the price of the token. Assuming if the entire world economy is worth $1 quadrillion, and your 100 million tokens are worth $10 quadrillion in market cap (despite it not security), your market cap would be overvalued by an excess of $9 quadrillion. I agree network effect exists in the increasing adoption and use case of the token itself (excluding price element). But there is no such thing as network effect in this valuation (including price element) as much larger circulating supply would cause a fall in token price in general.

VERI is not a security and never sold as an investment. I know. So you should not refer to the market cap of Veritaseum as if it has one.

We may not be burning inventory but I may be lighting cigars with $100 bills after beta release and more deals are announced!

Actually, I would never do that.... who am I fooling?

.


.

.

I don't smoke cigars.

Thank you Reggie for your appearance on the forum. Hopefully, you will not let a couple of individuals take away your valuable time from moving the company forward.

Onwards and upwards for Veritaseum. I am looking forward to seeing Veritaseum become a market leader in many areas of business over the next number of years.

The FAQ was initially Masiah's idea, it just took time to implement because the site was not a priority at the time, the product was.

Your response to burning tokens was inaccurate, and verbose. You and Veritaseum are the same in regards to the VERI tokens. You are owners. You are both prospective buyers and sellers, but one thing that is true right now is that you are owners.

So, once again, as an owner, will you burn your own inventory?

Your thesis about recycling is academic. We obviously have not recycled your tokens if you are still HODLING them. We can't force you to redeem them, but even if we could we can't control the timing of the redemption.

Think about what would happen if we burned our inventory and then you decide not to redeem your tokens, or even if you do decide to redeem the choose not to redeem at a schedule that matches our need to acquire new customers. We're essentially out of business. Why? Because we foolishly burned out own inventory and revenue potential to satisfy a short sighted view of synthetically (and temporarily) raising the 2nd had price of our software licenses?
Does that sound like prudent business practices to you?

In addition, you defeated your own argument. If you can rent VERI and receive a token stream and your VERI back, you are in effect recycling your token. In and out (plus some) in and out (+ some)... Get it.

Listen! I'm a businessman. Not a short term thinker. I have no problem creating value the old fashioned way, through economic profit. I have no need or desire to burn my inventory to mimic the facade of increased value.
Or put another way, I'll burn my inventory right after you burn your!!!

https://frinkiac.com/video/S05E20/0VqepDAqQoiCSg0jDAWgxT9WRqM=.gif

You're right, it must be everyone else in the thread outlining their reasons why they disagree with you, including now the project owner, that are "intellectually bankrupt"


I think you'll find you've just made your first statement that everyone will agree with unanimously, take a bow son.

A self-appointed thought leader is far more noble than a scum like you that go around making accusations.
You imply you are someone that gives valid criticism?
Lol, I honestly have to 100% disagree.

But then I have to agree with you.
There is only 1 thought leader; which is why this person is a leader in the first place.
If my thoughts are widely admired and accepted, I wouldn't be a leader, but a follower of existing thought process.

A self-appointed 'thought leader' who stir the proverbial - a perfect fit for a mutual admiration society consisting of one. This is unlike those who give valid criticism when it is due and valid support when it is due. Yet, the 'thought leader' fails to differentiate between the two.

I have a very hard time giving suggestions on how to improve the product.
Last time I suggested having a FAQ on the website and even such simplistic suggestion was met with oppositions and I had to stand my ground firm.
Eventually, the FAQ got implemented and almost everyone praised Reggie for doing the right thing.
I have no problem if everyone forgets who was the real initiator of doing the FAQ, as long as money can be made.
It's not like my generosity will be appreciated even if given for free, so why fucking bother.
Now someone ask me what other ways to improve Veritaseum, I seriously ask myself why the fuck should I even bother to care.

Dude relax, you made your point. You're a thought leader. You seem bright, let's make this a productive place.

How about making suggestions on how to improve the product?

What other ways could Veritaseum provide value to the world?

What do you call a person that is the opposite of being an independent thought-leader? A dependent thought-follower?

What do you call a dependent thought-follower that also happens to be a total yes-man to Reggie? A Reggie's bitch?

I have substantial VERI. Despite that, I am not Reggie's bitch. I am an independent thought-leader.
Because of that, I am being opposed by several bitches here on whatever I say, regardless of right or wrong.

If I say 1 + 1 = 11, these bitches will say I am spreading FUD, a troll, a paid shill, etc.
If I say 1 + 1 = 2, these same bitches will still say the same thing about me (spreading FUD, troll, paid shill, etc).

Nevertheless, I am proud being an independent thought-leader, regardless of shitty circumstances.

I am glad at least you admit you have mental issue.
I am glad you still have a tiny bit of objectivity in you.

You like to take comfort dwelling in the idea that anyone that goes against you is a paid shill, that anyone that is not a paid shill would absolutely agree with you, even if you put up shit on display.
No, I get paid by no one.

But if you insist, okay, I got paid in the millions by HIVE.
Now I have enough money to buy several units of lambo.
I figured in this world of human dishonesty and corruption, it is very hard for me to be honest.
If I have to lie by saying I got paid by HIVE (even though I am not, even though I believe nobody here is) just to be able to deal with a corrupt shithead like you paulmaritz, then so be it.

If you behave like a shit, then you are a shit.
I hope you can take time to re-read what you wrote about me over and over again, and that by doing so it will come to your rightful and honest realization that your comments are full of false accusations.


You are indeed a very "funny" person. Despite being "funny", nobody is laughing.
Who are you to convey to me the idea that I might get paid for stirring whatever proverbial you personally perceive?
You would think I am not aware of any payment to me to shill?
Like I just wake up in the morning and then suddenly I feel compelled to give my opinion/suggestion for improvement?
And then in the afternoon when I check my bank account and to my surprise found some millions deposited into it by someone named "HIVE"?
And I need you to wake me up from some sort of trance or hypnosis that those deposit might be payment for me to shill?
Are you a totally fucking idiot?
If you want to argue, at least observe the line of good reason and logic.