Quote from: thereverseflash on May 11, 2016, 04:38:54 PM

Quote from: traumschiff on May 11, 2016, 03:21:46 PM

Quote from: seedtrue on May 11, 2016, 03:19:56 PM

Quote from: traumschiff on May 11, 2016, 03:16:56 PM

Quote from: thereverseflash on May 11, 2016, 02:16:04 PM

Quote from: pharesim on May 11, 2016, 01:17:29 PM

I've never seen one of the steemit guys advising anyone to buy in. The OP doesn't even contain links to exchanges. Instead, it promotes the free signups.

Your definition of a fair currency distribution wasn't met, you made that point clear. It would've been possible to do so without showing that you have no idea of what steem is in the first place.
Let me highlight this gem, to add it to the historical records Kiss

Quote from: traumschiff on May 10, 2016, 04:13:49 PM

you might want to migrate to an official steem forum.

....

If you would have read half of my comments you wouldn't have wasted time on this wall of bullshit. Sugar coating, avoiding and giving out free lunch money only works with people who have no income and are uneducated.

Everyone has read your comments until you started repeating yourself and making invalid points that have already been proven otherwise.

Run along now the adults are talking.

You never invalidated any of my points. Anyone with half a brain can read through our convo here and decide.

Talking around something or trying to give it a new definition doesn't count as invalidating.

You assume there is some "old definition" that is objective and universally agreed upon. Please, define some terms. It is impossible to reason with someone who refuses to actually define terms in an objective way. Once we have some terms defined, then we can look for logical constancy or inconsistency in positions.

Kind of funny how you use the word objective, while the only one in this conversation who isn't biased to this project (or to any competitor) is me. The only one refusing to be objective here is you, since you are paid to contribute to this project and to this thread.

I am calling the launch methods (relaunch after miners crashed, lack of instructions, wallets) very shady, I am also calling the description of the previous ANNs shady together with the "no premine/no instamine and fair launch" and I am also stating that every investor who dares to touch the project on exchanges will get dumped on while you are converting STEEM to BTC to fund your work. I am also calling the lack of information about these in this (now 4th) ANN shady. I am being 100% objective while stating this and I have exactly 0 hidden agendas while doing so, because I am not invested in any competitor project and I am just here because I follow the development of altcoins.

You got a problem with my objectivity? How about yours? I will keep repeating these things until you start to understand them. Nothing you stated in the half page wall of text you responded before actually invalidates or answers these points. You can write "b-b-but we need funding somehow.... w-w-we mined them and we also work for them" all you want, but that doesn't change the fact on how your shares were mined or how you fail to give proper information for any potential investor in the current ANN thread.

To say something positive aswell, the project itself, the codebase and everything else would be good and it would have a future. The way you chose to run the "funding" of the project (which is also explained in the blogpost) is against the general idea of crypto-currencies and fairness. So many projects didn't need to do it, so many developers managed to rent miners (hash) or whatever, because they knew that they will stick to their project and it will be worth a lot more.