Quote from: babykayho on September 26, 2015, 06:50:20 PM

Quote from: shapetwist on September 26, 2015, 06:30:04 PM

Quote from: mrcashking on September 26, 2015, 05:24:06 PM

Quote from: NextGenCrypto on September 26, 2015, 04:33:16 PM

I think you guys should all try actually READING the OP and you will see this is nothing but a bunch of cloned tech put in a fancy looking OP to fool all of you morons. On top of that, adding 2FA? Big. Fucking. Deal. They obviously succeeded and I'll be referencing this thread in the future to identify all the sheep.

Keep losing that BTC on worthless projects guys, good work!

I don't see any cloned tech being mentioned. Can you point me to a few coins that have done this before. It would really help me on my decision of if I want to own a few more masternodes.

Well, I'd not give much attention to that guy. But anyway, it's kinda true that's it sounds and looks based of other failed alt projects. With a lot of innovations added. Truth is, none of those innovations were demonstrated through example code or practical exposure, but by prose. Which is something anybody can do. Anybody can ask for 1000 BTC via an ICO and claim to offer such innovations, if only they're believable to some point. How many of you here have researched for the project's viability?

For a 200 BTC ICO, I'd expect a bit more skepticism from the investors. More information does not hurt; in fact, if legit, would cause a faster sell out.

I don't know what to think of this, to be honest. It smells a little, which is not good. But it offers something great, which makes it tempting.

According to this scale, I'd say make your own judgement before investing.

It's really hard to predict what the next tremendous coin will be. It really is just a gamble, but gambling is fun. Grin

Not really. You can calculate gambling odds, whereas here you have to make a judgement whether or not to believe in the feasibility of the project, among other factors.