Why Poloniex Has Rejected SuperCoin - page 22.

IPCoinz

member

Activity: 63

Merit: 10

Quote from: provenceday on June 15, 2014, 01:25:58 AM

Quote from: busoni on June 15, 2014, 01:06:28 AM

I would like to point out that I did not personally review the code, as many people seem to think. The person who did has very high standards and was not thrilled with what he saw, and he was overzealous in his criticisms. When I made this post, I firmly believed that the maximum supply was inflated. My intention with going public before contacting the devs was to make sure they did not have a chance to cover up the mistake or take advantage of the issue.

It is my responsibility to ensure that these issues are addressed correctly, so no fingers should be pointed anywhere but at me. I see now that I should have had another reviewer confirm the findings, and investigated sufficiently to make sure I understood all of the code myself before proceeding. I apologize for this misstep. There are still some parts of the code we're concerned about, so our investigations will continue, and I will talk to the devs privately about the anon feature.

This whole raising the standards for coins thing is in an early stage, and we are constantly improving our process. We believe strongly in integrity and transparency, and it has always been my intention to use Poloniex's position to improve the quality of crypto.

. it seems that's the real busoni . This one is who I will respect.

It is better to be safe than sorry. The truth will out and there is NO harm in a false alarm. If youre pissed because the coin dipped in price due to the Poloniex announcement then you are pissed because YOU lost a quick buck and you think YOUR easy money is more important than the long term integrity of the crypto world. Speculators are a much bigger problem than (and cause of) of scamcoins being made. Get it right, even if it hurts a little... And that goes for the know-it-alls challenging Poloniex's initiative too: humble yourselves and be not proud, even if it hurts a little

tuto

sr. member

Activity: 328

Merit: 250

Quote from: busoni on June 15, 2014, 01:06:28 AM

I would like to point out that I did not personally review the code, as many people seem to think. The person who did has very high standards and was not thrilled with what he saw, and he was overzealous in his criticisms. When I made this post, I firmly believed that the maximum supply was inflated. My intention with going public before contacting the devs was to make sure they did not have a chance to cover up the mistake or take advantage of the issue.

It is my responsibility to ensure that these issues are addressed correctly, so no fingers should be pointed anywhere but at me. I see now that I should have had another reviewer confirm the findings, and investigated sufficiently to make sure I understood all of the code myself before proceeding. I apologize for this misstep. There are still some parts of the code we're concerned about, so our investigations will continue, and I will talk to the devs privately about the anon feature.

This whole raising the standards for coins thing is in an early stage, and we are constantly improving our process. We believe strongly in integrity and transparency, and it has always been my intention to use Poloniex's position to improve the quality of crypto.

Busoni - This is great that you are going to speak with the Developer and that you have issued the above statement.
You really should put a link on the front page of the Polo website directly to your comment (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7319548) so that anyone clicking on the link can see directly to that post about the coin.

I, like most of the people with half a brain trading Crypto, appriciate your / Polo's efforts to ensure security and transparency within the AltCoin world.

With regards to most of the people bitching and moaning on the forums here, they can mostly be ignored, I had quite a bit of BTC invested in SUPER and I still do, the price has bounced back to where it was previously so really don't think its going to be much of an issue in terms of price, only the people who panic sold or panic bought will be affected, and those are people looking for a quick buck anyway.

The ONLY thing to take away from this whole fiasco is that perhaps you should have been less-zaelous when posting the REASONS why - A simple "We are not listing SUPER as we are unhappy with some of the code and need to speak with the DEVS" would have sufficed, would have save a lot of people time / money and most of all would have looked far better for POLO overall.

Keep up the good work with the exchange, you know I'm a supporter as are many others, just less "jumping the gun" in the future I think Wink

Dave/Tuto

bitcoinwonders010

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

also everyone valued your word alot even if you said it after he had covered up we would have believed you. you could have noted conversations taken screenshots of code so you could have proved it later. taking this step ha caused massive losses.

all i ask is you contact him asap and release a statement so we can get the ball rolling

bitcoinwonders010

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

thats great your talking to dev, could you hurry this process up as alot of damaged has already been done, nothiing can bring back the time, so we wanna move past this,

mistersushi

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: Spoetnik on June 15, 2014, 01:24:41 AM

i don't care.. i don't need lectures from idiots with zero programming skills..

i got this in grade 5
http://oldcomputers.net/trs80i.html

i don't need lip thx

go for it flop it on the table and spout off but don't cry when mines bigger though lol
i was playing PC games on Cassette tapes on my Trs80 in the 80's Cool

can we get back to the topic at hand or are we going to keep playing games ?

Well I don't know about the guy you were dishing out lip to, but if it makes you feel any better, I'm not an idiot with zero programming skills.

I remember the TRS-80. Was quite popular.

Here's my first one, about 5th grade; cut my teeth on Commodore BASIC:
http://oldcomputers.net/vic20.html

Was a buggy POS, so ended up with one of these with a couple 5-1/2 floppy drivesm and a couple of Atari STs. Learned more BASIC--memory registers, data structures. Learned to use a Hex editor to hack games. Learned how to defeat copy protection schemes (for backup purposes). Then a couple Atari STs.. learned to hate BASIC and spaghetti code.
http://oldcomputers.net/c64.html

I think the topic at-hand has been resolved anyway.

cyberhacker

legendary

Activity: 1330

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cyberhacker on June 15, 2014, 02:00:46 AM

Quote from: supercointeam on June 15, 2014, 01:56:14 AM

Quote from: cyberhacker on June 15, 2014, 01:40:19 AM

and i am also expecting more plans on further decentralization anonymity.

We believe big problems can better solved as parts, lets complete first our phase 1.

yes! step by step.

but polo suddenly raise standard to ask alt coins to implement features immediately after launch.

stricter than mintpal/btc-e!

POLO is getting much more mainstream i would say. and they didn't ask drk, xc, vrc to prove their integrity when they are still in BETA.

Phase 1 alpha is good, and we are moving on.

People are enjoying watching how POLO is acting to this matter.

jakiman

legendary

Activity: 1638

Merit: 1011

jakiman is back!

lol @ https://twitter.com/DiamondDoge/status/478009875478634496

btcsup

member

Activity: 93

Merit: 10

Spreading lies about innocent cryptos is not a good manner especially for an exchange dev. Your job is not this.

provenceday

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1000

Quote from: landslide on June 15, 2014, 01:35:19 AM

Quote from: maryvale on June 15, 2014, 01:28:46 AM

Quote from: busoni on June 15, 2014, 01:06:28 AM

I would like to point out that I did not personally review the code, as many people seem to think. The person who did has very high standards and was not thrilled with what he saw, and he was overzealous in his criticisms. When I made this post, I firmly believed that the maximum supply was inflated. My intention with going public before contacting the devs was to make sure they did not have a chance to cover up the mistake or take advantage of the issue.

It is my responsibility to ensure that these issues are addressed correctly, so no fingers should be pointed anywhere but at me. I see now that I should have had another reviewer confirm the findings, and investigated sufficiently to make sure I understood all of the code myself before proceeding. I apologize for this misstep. There are still some parts of the code we're concerned about, so our investigations will continue, and I will talk to the devs privately about the anon feature.

This whole raising the standards for coins thing is in an early stage, and we are constantly improving our process. We believe strongly in integrity and transparency, and it has always been my intention to use Poloniex's position to improve the quality of crypto.

lmao, it is not the problem of standard, it is also not the problem to ensure good quality of coin code, it is the problem whoever reviewed the code, have no basic idea how the coin code works - this is a serious problem.

Please, I used Poloniex a lot and I liked it (I traded a lot there), but I am surprised at what has happened. It certainly degraded Poloniex. Next time please use a qualified person to do review, not a high school kid who have no idea what he's talking about.

In my previous posts, I showed how the MAX_MONEY is used in the code:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7315515

and how total coin is calculated:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7315840

and as a staff of Poloniex, please make responsible claims. Whoever made that claim, apparently have no idea of the coin code.

Exactly, the above comments are right on the spot! Busoni, your irresponsible and wrong claim damaged SuperCoin's reputation (and yours of course), you should publicly appologize to the community!

At least, Another announcement on poloniex website!

provenceday

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1000

Quote from: maryvale on June 15, 2014, 01:28:46 AM

Quote from: busoni on June 15, 2014, 01:06:28 AM

I would like to point out that I did not personally review the code, as many people seem to think. The person who did has very high standards and was not thrilled with what he saw, and he was overzealous in his criticisms. When I made this post, I firmly believed that the maximum supply was inflated. My intention with going public before contacting the devs was to make sure they did not have a chance to cover up the mistake or take advantage of the issue.

It is my responsibility to ensure that these issues are addressed correctly, so no fingers should be pointed anywhere but at me. I see now that I should have had another reviewer confirm the findings, and investigated sufficiently to make sure I understood all of the code myself before proceeding. I apologize for this misstep. There are still some parts of the code we're concerned about, so our investigations will continue, and I will talk to the devs privately about the anon feature.

This whole raising the standards for coins thing is in an early stage, and we are constantly improving our process. We believe strongly in integrity and transparency, and it has always been my intention to use Poloniex's position to improve the quality of crypto.

lmao, it is not the problem of standard, it is also not the problem to ensure good quality of coin code, it is the problem whoever reviewed the code, have no basic idea how the coin code works - this is a serious problem.

Please, I used Poloniex a lot and I liked it (I traded a lot there), but I am surprised at what has happened. It certainly degraded Poloniex. Next time please use a qualified person to do review, not a high school kid who have no idea what he's talking about.

In my previous posts, I showed how the MAX_MONEY is used in the code:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7315515

and how total coin is calculated:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7315840

and as a staff of Poloniex, please make responsible claims. Whoever made that claim, apparently have no idea of the coin code.

It's true, it seems the person who review the code do not know much about Altcoin! Maybe he is a good coder But he is new to Crypto world!!!

landslide

sr. member

Activity: 616

Merit: 251

Quote from: maryvale on June 15, 2014, 01:28:46 AM

Quote from: busoni on June 15, 2014, 01:06:28 AM

I would like to point out that I did not personally review the code, as many people seem to think. The person who did has very high standards and was not thrilled with what he saw, and he was overzealous in his criticisms. When I made this post, I firmly believed that the maximum supply was inflated. My intention with going public before contacting the devs was to make sure they did not have a chance to cover up the mistake or take advantage of the issue.

It is my responsibility to ensure that these issues are addressed correctly, so no fingers should be pointed anywhere but at me. I see now that I should have had another reviewer confirm the findings, and investigated sufficiently to make sure I understood all of the code myself before proceeding. I apologize for this misstep. There are still some parts of the code we're concerned about, so our investigations will continue, and I will talk to the devs privately about the anon feature.

This whole raising the standards for coins thing is in an early stage, and we are constantly improving our process. We believe strongly in integrity and transparency, and it has always been my intention to use Poloniex's position to improve the quality of crypto.

lmao, it is not the problem of standard, it is also not the problem to ensure good quality of coin code, it is the problem whoever reviewed the code, have no basic idea how the coin code works - this is a serious problem.

Please, I used Poloniex a lot and I liked it (I traded a lot there), but I am surprised at what has happened. It certainly degraded Poloniex. Next time please use a qualified person to do review, not a high school kid who have no idea what he's talking about.

In my previous posts, I showed how the MAX_MONEY is used in the code:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7315515

and how total coin is calculated:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7315840

and as a staff of Poloniex, please make responsible claims. Whoever made that claim, apparently have no idea of the coin code.

Exactly, the above comments are right on the spot! Busoni, your irresponsible and wrong claim damaged SuperCoin's reputation (and yours of course), you should publicly appologize to the community!

jorrr

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

boycot poloniex! first cloak coin not listing and now this huge mistake.

How can you trust them with your precious BTC???

maryvale

sr. member

Activity: 254

Merit: 250

Quote from: busoni on June 15, 2014, 01:06:28 AM

I would like to point out that I did not personally review the code, as many people seem to think. The person who did has very high standards and was not thrilled with what he saw, and he was overzealous in his criticisms. When I made this post, I firmly believed that the maximum supply was inflated. My intention with going public before contacting the devs was to make sure they did not have a chance to cover up the mistake or take advantage of the issue.

It is my responsibility to ensure that these issues are addressed correctly, so no fingers should be pointed anywhere but at me. I see now that I should have had another reviewer confirm the findings, and investigated sufficiently to make sure I understood all of the code myself before proceeding. I apologize for this misstep. There are still some parts of the code we're concerned about, so our investigations will continue, and I will talk to the devs privately about the anon feature.

This whole raising the standards for coins thing is in an early stage, and we are constantly improving our process. We believe strongly in integrity and transparency, and it has always been my intention to use Poloniex's position to improve the quality of crypto.

lmao, it is not the problem of standard, it is also not the problem to ensure good quality of coin code, it is the problem whoever reviewed the code, have no basic idea how the coin code works - this is a serious problem.

Please, I used Poloniex a lot and I liked it (I traded a lot there), but I am surprised at what has happened. It certainly degraded Poloniex. Next time please use a qualified person to do review, not a high school kid who have no idea what he's talking about.

In my previous posts, I showed how the MAX_MONEY is used in the code:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7315515

and how total coin is calculated:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7315840

and as a staff of Poloniex, please make responsible claims. Whoever made that claim, apparently have no idea of the coin code.

provenceday

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1000

Quote from: busoni on June 15, 2014, 01:06:28 AM

I would like to point out that I did not personally review the code, as many people seem to think. The person who did has very high standards and was not thrilled with what he saw, and he was overzealous in his criticisms. When I made this post, I firmly believed that the maximum supply was inflated. My intention with going public before contacting the devs was to make sure they did not have a chance to cover up the mistake or take advantage of the issue.

It is my responsibility to ensure that these issues are addressed correctly, so no fingers should be pointed anywhere but at me. I see now that I should have had another reviewer confirm the findings, and investigated sufficiently to make sure I understood all of the code myself before proceeding. I apologize for this misstep. There are still some parts of the code we're concerned about, so our investigations will continue, and I will talk to the devs privately about the anon feature.

This whole raising the standards for coins thing is in an early stage, and we are constantly improving our process. We believe strongly in integrity and transparency, and it has always been my intention to use Poloniex's position to improve the quality of crypto.

. it seems that's the real busoni . This one is who I will respect.

Spoetnik

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1011

FUD Philanthropist™

i don't care.. i don't need lectures from idiots with zero programming skills..

i got this in grade 5
http://oldcomputers.net/trs80i.html

i don't need lip thx

go for it flop it on the table and spout off but don't cry when mines bigger though lol
i was playing PC games on Cassette tapes on my Trs80 in the 80's Cool

can we get back to the topic at hand or are we going to keep playing games ?

mistersushi

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: Spoetnik on June 15, 2014, 01:11:38 AM

oh please your going to TRY and lecture me on the code ?

should i quote myself when i commneted earlier on bitcoinprc.cpp on line 100 previous pages back ?

i know more about it than 99% of you so stfu noobs.

i AM a coder in c/c++ so sit down and shut the fuck up and let the coders talk about code kids.
my programming resume is longer than many little shits here commenting have been alive i am sure.

all you guys are doing is using the bury the truth method and to harp and push false info to cover up bad behavior.
a classic and very formulaic response..
one that wears people down so they give up and you win public opinion by pushing propaganda until he other side gives up.

don't you dare *try and lecture me on the code kids ..that is hilarious !

Just in case you're talking to me, I've been programming since the early '80s, and I don't give a fuck about SuperCoin, or who you think you are or how long you've been on the forums. You're wrong.

Spoetnik

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1011

FUD Philanthropist™

oh please your going to TRY and lecture me on the code ?

should i quote myself when i commneted earlier on bitcoinprc.cpp on line 100 previous pages back ?

i know more about it than 99% of you so stfu noobs.

i AM a coder in c/c++ so sit down and shut the fuck up and let the coders talk about code kids.
my programming resume is longer than many little shits here commenting have been alive i am sure.

all you guys are doing is using the bury the truth method and to harp and push false info to cover up bad behavior.
a classic and very formulaic response..
one that wears people down so they give up and you win public opinion by pushing propaganda until he other side gives up.

don't you dare *try and lecture me on the code kids ..that is hilarious !

Collegestudent

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

The blockchain is the future

Please recheck Cloakcoin. You did a mistake there as well

busoni

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Owner of Poloniex

I would like to point out that I did not personally review the code, as many people seem to think. The person who did has very high standards and was not thrilled with what he saw, and he was overzealous in his criticisms. When I made this post, I firmly believed that the maximum supply was inflated. My intention with going public before contacting the devs was to make sure they did not have a chance to cover up the mistake or take advantage of the issue.

It is my responsibility to ensure that these issues are addressed correctly, so no fingers should be pointed anywhere but at me. I see now that I should have had another reviewer confirm the findings, and investigated sufficiently to make sure I understood all of the code myself before proceeding. I apologize for this misstep. There are still some parts of the code we're concerned about, so our investigations will continue, and I will talk to the devs privately about the anon feature.

This whole raising the standards for coins thing is in an early stage, and we are constantly improving our process. We believe strongly in integrity and transparency, and it has always been my intention to use Poloniex's position to improve the quality of crypto.

kidyubyub

sr. member

Activity: 440

Merit: 250

http://taas.fund

Quote from: mistersushi on June 15, 2014, 12:57:44 AM

Quote from: jakiman on June 15, 2014, 12:53:29 AM

Quote from: kidyubyub on June 15, 2014, 12:46:11 AM

Quote from: Cohle on June 15, 2014, 12:32:00 AM

I don't see this tweet on his page.

Check out @BryceWeiner's Tweet: https://twitter.com/BryceWeiner/status/477935417137065984

Which is funny, because this is the guy who tweeted that LibertyCoin had hidden coins due to MAX_MONEY just a few weeks ago. Then he started backpedaling. I wanted to thank him because it lead to a certain douchenozzle named IconicExpert making even more of a liar and fool out of himself.

Really? I don't keep up on such things. I'm just a noob in crypto, but this is very interesting.

Topic: Why Poloniex Has Rejected SuperCoin - page 22. (Read 43236 times)