Topic: www.gamebet.gg Launches GameBet Coin (GBT) eSports -- SALE OVER!!! - page 72. (Read 208232 times)
April 25, 2016, 04:54:20 PM
philakone dumbass. We know that this whale has near 1.5 mil coins now
April 25, 2016, 04:53:06 PM
philakone is talking mad dirty on gbt in the yobit troll box
April 25, 2016, 04:48:30 PM
I can be your best friend or your worst enemy
Yobit listens to Philakone.LOL , doubt anyone in Yobit has ever heard of Philakone let alone gives a shit what you say!!! Take your meds and sell your coins
April 25, 2016, 04:45:33 PM
lol, seems like things are getting interesting around here 
Wheelz my ss is all in on the Heat come bet against me
almost hope i lose, damn ss was burning a hole in my pocket.
Wheelz my ss is all in on the Heat come bet against me
almost hope i lose, damn ss was burning a hole in my pocket. 
April 25, 2016, 04:41:01 PM
Had to lol @ "yobit listens to philakone." Just love it when someone refers to themselves in third person.
Anyway I feel like spending some of my SS on nba for fun but not much action. Big action though with gg on the blazers/clips game tonight. Good luck all.
Anyway I feel like spending some of my SS on nba for fun but not much action. Big action though with gg on the blazers/clips game tonight. Good luck all.
April 25, 2016, 04:15:06 PM
Philakone. Meds or no meds today? still waiting on an answer.
I honestly think 90% of the newbie FUD accounts are Philakone. I personally think its best not to encourage the guy by engaging with him too much.
He's just an odd ball who thinks he's smart and playing everyone.....best ignore. Personally If I was the developer i would of told him to get lost a long time ago.
April 25, 2016, 04:10:43 PM
Something that needs to be addressed by the developers urgently. It's was asked at the beginning what are the legal protections that this profit share has for the investors?
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
Since when is the there any legal protection for anything and anyone in virtual currencies? It is the wild west where you are lucky to wake up the next day. You put money into something and hope for the best as long as you never put in more than what you can afford to lose. It is just that some coins are clear losers and other ones show more potential.
Thats not correct. Gamebet is a registered company selling tokens as profit share. People need to know they don't legally own anything. Plus YES we can be protected legally...If the developers choose not to then its a choice. All Im asking for is to have legal backing to what I've been sold...its basic customer protection and anyone who argues against that has strange alter motives IMO. Your point about Crypto is misplaced. The whole point of Crypto is you absolutely own the coin and no business or counterparty can make your coin void....thats the whole point. I'm not suggesting we have some right to make money I'm saying IF i'm sold something by a legitimate registered company I want to ACTUALLY own it not as an act of kindness....Like I said the site has a whole page protecting their interests...lets see them protect ours also as a sign of trust and commitment.
Gamebet as we have been told has employed lawyers so adding our protection is a formality.
https://www.gamebet.gg/#Home/Tos
Dannyman -
I am looking in to adding language to the ToS to include the GBT and what it means for the owners of the token; or creating a separate statement.
I need to put together some more details, but we will have something available on the site by Wednesday of this week.
Please PM me if you have any other questions.
Thank you. Plus I would also ask a brief summary on the thread to the meaning of the additions in laymans terms just so everyone understands clearly what it means for them. Please no legal loop holes hidden in legal jargon.
*I'm also curious about what is the boundary of 'profits' I mean is the profits int he company ALL profits or only profits from betting? What is money is made from advertising? or what happens is an investor hands the company 10million seed money? Would we really 'Own' 10% of the company in these kind of senarios?
April 25, 2016, 04:08:55 PM
Philakone. Meds or no meds today? still waiting on an answer.
April 25, 2016, 04:00:55 PM
Something that needs to be addressed by the developers urgently. It's was asked at the beginning what are the legal protections that this profit share has for the investors?
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
Since when is the there any legal protection for anything and anyone in virtual currencies? It is the wild west where you are lucky to wake up the next day. You put money into something and hope for the best as long as you never put in more than what you can afford to lose. It is just that some coins are clear losers and other ones show more potential.
Thats not correct. Gamebet is a registered company selling tokens as profit share. People need to know they don't legally own anything. Plus YES we can be protected legally...If the developers choose not to then its a choice. All Im asking for is to have legal backing to what I've been sold...its basic customer protection and anyone who argues against that has strange alter motives IMO. Your point about Crypto is misplaced. The whole point of Crypto is you absolutely own the coin and no business or counterparty can make your coin void....thats the whole point. I'm not suggesting we have some right to make money I'm saying IF i'm sold something by a legitimate registered company I want to ACTUALLY own it not as an act of kindness....Like I said the site has a whole page protecting their interests...lets see them protect ours also as a sign of trust and commitment.
Gamebet as we have been told has employed lawyers so adding our protection is a formality.
https://www.gamebet.gg/#Home/Tos
Dannyman -
I am looking in to adding language to the ToS to include the GBT and what it means for the owners of the token; or creating a separate statement.
I need to put together some more details, but we will have something available on the site by Thursday of this week.
We will also include the Costa Rican registration ID number and some of the documentation for GBT owners to view.
Long term we are looking in to moving to Panama, or one of the other foreign online gambling centers in order to gain more legitimacy. Locations like Panama, Isle of Man, etc.. have more advanced online gambling regulatory environments and it is necessary to gain legitimacy in the online gambling world. However, the monetary costs to do so are high, so this will be a long term plan as we "outgrow" our Costa Rican registration.
Sorry for the bad grammar, writing this up via my phone.
Please PM me if you have any other questions.
April 25, 2016, 03:53:26 PM
Hey guys, going to post some of the key points from the recent Discord meeting and look to address some of the things recently said in this thread.
I'm going to be frank with you. I'm honestly impressed how much you so avidly put forth false information. You know, we're not the only ones who make these mistakes right?
http://www.hltv.org/match/2302068-alternate-attax-platinium-uprise-champions-cup-season-4
Google this link and you'll see this was the original match, which was changed at last minute to vs. Dead Pixels
Secondly, what's this nonsense about if you bet on Platinum and Dead Pixels won you wouldn't receive anything? Where did we say this? Where are you drawing this conclusion from? Honestly, it's starting to seem more and more like you have some sort of agenda but I'm not here to speculate about that merely correct your false information. Stop thinking about your bets as in Attax vs DP and think about your bets in the sense T1 vs T2. T2 changed, yes, this is correct but you know what's still accurate? The odds of T1 vs T2! and that is what matters when placing the bet. HLTV lists Attax with an odd of 1.22 and we list them as 82%. You want to guess what 1/1.22 is?
I hate that this part of my post comes off as so harsh, but it's really getting tiresome how often you try to stir up drama. It's becoming increasingly hard to stay neutral every time you do this. We are working on handling this issue to ensure that our betters have sufficient information to place bets.
This was addressed in the previous weeks Discord meeting, we are in the process of ensuring the holders of GBT have legal accountability. I'll forward this to Doug (ddepker) and have him reiterate what he said last time during the Discord meeting as well as update you where we're currently at on this issue. Investor security is as important to us as it is to you. I apologize that this information wasn't posted in the thread sooner.
...
Do you see the issue? That $554 pool isn't Alternate Attax vs Platinum, but indeed Alternate ATTAX vs Dead Pixels instead. It goes back to me saying it's frustrating to not trust the site you're betting on because they have a history of incorrectly listing games for weeks now, with no improvement at all yet. Attax vs Platinum isn't a rescheduled game later either. No games of those 2 teams exist on gosugamers schedule. It's a non existent match.
So for this game, I bet on Platinum, who isn't even playing... if I had known Dead Pixels was playing (and I could've by checking gosu gamers first, but why the heck should I have to confirm who's playing on another site), I would've bet on Alternate Attax.
...
Do you see the issue? That $554 pool isn't Alternate Attax vs Platinum, but indeed Alternate ATTAX vs Dead Pixels instead. It goes back to me saying it's frustrating to not trust the site you're betting on because they have a history of incorrectly listing games for weeks now, with no improvement at all yet. Attax vs Platinum isn't a rescheduled game later either. No games of those 2 teams exist on gosugamers schedule. It's a non existent match.
So for this game, I bet on Platinum, who isn't even playing... if I had known Dead Pixels was playing (and I could've by checking gosu gamers first, but why the heck should I have to confirm who's playing on another site), I would've bet on Alternate Attax.
...
I'm going to be frank with you. I'm honestly impressed how much you so avidly put forth false information. You know, we're not the only ones who make these mistakes right?
http://www.hltv.org/match/2302068-alternate-attax-platinium-uprise-champions-cup-season-4
Google this link and you'll see this was the original match, which was changed at last minute to vs. Dead Pixels
Secondly, what's this nonsense about if you bet on Platinum and Dead Pixels won you wouldn't receive anything? Where did we say this? Where are you drawing this conclusion from? Honestly, it's starting to seem more and more like you have some sort of agenda but I'm not here to speculate about that merely correct your false information. Stop thinking about your bets as in Attax vs DP and think about your bets in the sense T1 vs T2. T2 changed, yes, this is correct but you know what's still accurate? The odds of T1 vs T2! and that is what matters when placing the bet. HLTV lists Attax with an odd of 1.22 and we list them as 82%. You want to guess what 1/1.22 is?
I hate that this part of my post comes off as so harsh, but it's really getting tiresome how often you try to stir up drama. It's becoming increasingly hard to stay neutral every time you do this. We are working on handling this issue to ensure that our betters have sufficient information to place bets.
Something that needs to be addressed by the developers urgently. It's was asked at the beginning what are the legal protections that this profit share has for the investors?
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
This was addressed in the previous weeks Discord meeting, we are in the process of ensuring the holders of GBT have legal accountability. I'll forward this to Doug (ddepker) and have him reiterate what he said last time during the Discord meeting as well as update you where we're currently at on this issue. Investor security is as important to us as it is to you. I apologize that this information wasn't posted in the thread sooner.
Ok thanks for the reply. I will keep on this subject though for the sake of myself and future investors. People must know what they invested in for good or bad so they can make informed choices. I don't want to cheerleader this company and years down the line after holding the company or new owners says yeah we are ending this profit scheme next month.
April 25, 2016, 03:51:37 PM
Like this game here that's live right now.
Do you see the issue? That $554 pool isn't Alternate Attax vs Platinum, but indeed Alternate ATTAX vs Dead Pixels instead. It goes back to me saying it's frustrating to not trust the site you're betting on because they have a history of incorrectly listing games for weeks now, with no improvement at all yet. Attax vs Platinum isn't a rescheduled game later either. No games of those 2 teams exist on gosugamers schedule. It's a non existent match.
Do you see the issue? That $554 pool isn't Alternate Attax vs Platinum, but indeed Alternate ATTAX vs Dead Pixels instead. It goes back to me saying it's frustrating to not trust the site you're betting on because they have a history of incorrectly listing games for weeks now, with no improvement at all yet. Attax vs Platinum isn't a rescheduled game later either. No games of those 2 teams exist on gosugamers schedule. It's a non existent match.
Luckily ALTERNATE aTTaX is kicking butt.
April 25, 2016, 03:51:14 PM
The devs had an asset, i have been told they bought out all the asset investors. And none of them are here complaining. the devs have a record of doing right time and time again, so I cant see why the devs would ruin a profitable business over a few hundred btc.
April 25, 2016, 03:46:58 PM
Something that needs to be addressed by the developers urgently. It's was asked at the beginning what are the legal protections that this profit share has for the investors?
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
I was wondering this myself, but no need to make it personal, I doubt the legal implications of a token based share structure are straight forward.
I don't see anything uncivil about my requests. This is about respecting the investors now and anyone who might own the tokens in the future. And of course its personal, I bought tokens that cost me real money. All I'm asking is 'Do I really own the future profits?'
April 25, 2016, 03:45:48 PM
Hey guys, going to post some of the key points from the recent Discord meeting and look to address some of the things recently said in this thread.
I'm going to be frank with you. I'm honestly impressed how much you so avidly put forth false information. You know, we're not the only ones who make these mistakes right?
http://www.hltv.org/match/2302068-alternate-attax-platinium-uprise-champions-cup-season-4
Google this link and you'll see this was the original match, which was changed at last minute to vs. Dead Pixels
Secondly, what's this nonsense about if you bet on Platinum and Dead Pixels won you wouldn't receive anything? Where did we say this? Where are you drawing this conclusion from? Honestly, it's starting to seem more and more like you have some sort of agenda but I'm not here to speculate about that merely correct your false information. Stop thinking about your bets as in Attax vs DP and think about your bets in the sense T1 vs T2. T2 changed, yes, this is correct but you know what's still accurate? The odds of T1 vs T2! and that is what matters when placing the bet. HLTV lists Attax with an odd of 1.22 and we list them as 82%. You want to guess what 1/1.22 is? If you bet on T2 (which we incorrectly listed as Platinum I'll admit due to that being the initial listing on many other sites) - it's no different than had you bet on Dead Pixels.
I hate that this part of my post comes off as so harsh, but it's really getting tiresome how often you try to stir up drama. It's becoming increasingly hard to stay neutral every time you do this. We are working on handling this issue to ensure that our betters have sufficient information to place bets.
This was addressed in the previous weeks Discord meeting, we are in the process of ensuring the holders of GBT have legal entitlement. I'll forward this to Doug (ddepker) and have him reiterate what he said last time during the Discord meeting as well as update you where we're currently at on this issue. Investor security is as important to us as it is to you. I apologize that this information wasn't posted in the thread sooner.
...
Do you see the issue? That $554 pool isn't Alternate Attax vs Platinum, but indeed Alternate ATTAX vs Dead Pixels instead. It goes back to me saying it's frustrating to not trust the site you're betting on because they have a history of incorrectly listing games for weeks now, with no improvement at all yet. Attax vs Platinum isn't a rescheduled game later either. No games of those 2 teams exist on gosugamers schedule. It's a non existent match.
So for this game, I bet on Platinum, who isn't even playing... if I had known Dead Pixels was playing (and I could've by checking gosu gamers first, but why the heck should I have to confirm who's playing on another site), I would've bet on Alternate Attax.
...
Do you see the issue? That $554 pool isn't Alternate Attax vs Platinum, but indeed Alternate ATTAX vs Dead Pixels instead. It goes back to me saying it's frustrating to not trust the site you're betting on because they have a history of incorrectly listing games for weeks now, with no improvement at all yet. Attax vs Platinum isn't a rescheduled game later either. No games of those 2 teams exist on gosugamers schedule. It's a non existent match.
So for this game, I bet on Platinum, who isn't even playing... if I had known Dead Pixels was playing (and I could've by checking gosu gamers first, but why the heck should I have to confirm who's playing on another site), I would've bet on Alternate Attax.
...
I'm going to be frank with you. I'm honestly impressed how much you so avidly put forth false information. You know, we're not the only ones who make these mistakes right?
http://www.hltv.org/match/2302068-alternate-attax-platinium-uprise-champions-cup-season-4
Google this link and you'll see this was the original match, which was changed at last minute to vs. Dead Pixels
Secondly, what's this nonsense about if you bet on Platinum and Dead Pixels won you wouldn't receive anything? Where did we say this? Where are you drawing this conclusion from? Honestly, it's starting to seem more and more like you have some sort of agenda but I'm not here to speculate about that merely correct your false information. Stop thinking about your bets as in Attax vs DP and think about your bets in the sense T1 vs T2. T2 changed, yes, this is correct but you know what's still accurate? The odds of T1 vs T2! and that is what matters when placing the bet. HLTV lists Attax with an odd of 1.22 and we list them as 82%. You want to guess what 1/1.22 is? If you bet on T2 (which we incorrectly listed as Platinum I'll admit due to that being the initial listing on many other sites) - it's no different than had you bet on Dead Pixels.
I hate that this part of my post comes off as so harsh, but it's really getting tiresome how often you try to stir up drama. It's becoming increasingly hard to stay neutral every time you do this. We are working on handling this issue to ensure that our betters have sufficient information to place bets.
Something that needs to be addressed by the developers urgently. It's was asked at the beginning what are the legal protections that this profit share has for the investors?
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
This was addressed in the previous weeks Discord meeting, we are in the process of ensuring the holders of GBT have legal entitlement. I'll forward this to Doug (ddepker) and have him reiterate what he said last time during the Discord meeting as well as update you where we're currently at on this issue. Investor security is as important to us as it is to you. I apologize that this information wasn't posted in the thread sooner.
April 25, 2016, 03:39:49 PM
Something that needs to be addressed by the developers urgently. It's was asked at the beginning what are the legal protections that this profit share has for the investors?
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
Since when is the there any legal protection for anything and anyone in virtual currencies? It is the wild west where you are lucky to wake up the next day. You put money into something and hope for the best as long as you never put in more than what you can afford to lose. It is just that some coins are clear losers and other ones show more potential.
Thats not correct. Gamebet is a registered company selling tokens as profit share. People need to know they don't legally own anything. Plus YES we can be protected legally...If the developers choose not to then its a choice. All Im asking for is to have legal backing to what I've been sold...its basic customer protection and anyone who argues against that has strange alter motives IMO. Your point about Crypto is misplaced. The whole point of Crypto is you absolutely own the coin and no business or counterparty can make your coin void....thats the whole point. I'm not suggesting we have some right to make money I'm saying IF i'm sold something by a legitimate registered company I want to ACTUALLY own it not as an act of kindness....Like I said the site has a whole page protecting their interests...lets see them protect ours also as a sign of trust and commitment.
Gamebet as we have been told has employed lawyers so adding our protection is a formality.
https://www.gamebet.gg/#Home/Tos
April 25, 2016, 03:29:44 PM
keep selling philakone. you wont be able to out play me in this market. You'll sell most of your coins. Then I'll throw up a massive buywall, that you wont be able to sell through and you'll never get them back at the price you sold them for. Good luck though.
Happy for ya
Hope that fueled your ego by posting that.It did.
Just curious. are you taking your bipolar disorder meds this week?
April 25, 2016, 03:21:20 PM
keep selling philakone. you wont be able to out play me in this market. You'll sell most of your coins. Then I'll throw up a massive buywall, that you wont be able to sell through and you'll never get them back at the price you sold them for. Good luck though.
April 25, 2016, 02:52:22 PM
Something that needs to be addressed by the developers urgently. It's was asked at the beginning what are the legal protections that this profit share has for the investors?
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
I was wondering this myself, but no need to make it personal, I doubt the legal implications of a token based share structure are straight forward.
April 25, 2016, 02:52:05 PM
Something that needs to be addressed by the developers urgently. It's was asked at the beginning what are the legal protections that this profit share has for the investors?
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
Since when is the there any legal protection for anything and anyone in virtual currencies? It is the wild west where you are lucky to wake up the next day. You put money into something and hope for the best as long as you never put in more than what you can afford to lose. It is just that some coins are clear losers and other ones show more potential.
April 25, 2016, 02:41:16 PM
Something that needs to be addressed by the developers urgently. It's was asked at the beginning what are the legal protections that this profit share has for the investors?
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
There are pages of legal talk on the site clearly explaining the status of the gold and silver tokens on the site but no mention of GBT.
My concern is this and everyone who wants to hold this token long term that at any point in the future the developers could change the conditions even getting rid of the profit share scheme. The developers were very evasive of this question when asked and I think it's time it was addressed. It's simple, they add some legal protection for those who bought into the company or they don't. If they don't then actually you aren't protected or are future holders of the token....in fact they can be rendered worthless. This should of been addressed at ICO so now we are at Mercy of developers to legally put in place what they actually promised by word.
Balls in developers court now....
Jump to: