Re: [ANN] ION [ION] | POS 3.0 | Mobile Gaming

Let's look at this a slightly different way. The ionomy team put a lot of emphasis on being professional, 'nice people', operating in a reliable, honest way. What I can't really grasp is why, given this, they seem content to leave a giant hole in their information sharing practices that will put most serious investors off.

At the very least there should be some sort of way of locking whale assets when information is given to them exclusively to act as a control against manipulation. By implementing something like this they could demonstrate that they are serious about their claims to be an honest operator in a largely dishonest environment.

if I am reading this correctly, YOU WAN TO FREEZE my account when I perform Alpha or Beta Testing on an Ionomy product? to demonstrate that I am an honest operator!!!

and this applying to all the other Atom Owners when they are involved in testing Ionomy products? Huh

Exactly. Why not? If your truly only in it out of the goodness of your own heart, offering your services for 'free' as you so kindly pointed out, surely you'd be happy to put your money where your mouth is if you believe in the project.

@altheshort Offering my service does not include my current invest funds.. I let my services as chatting with the Trolls demonstrate that I am an honest operator...

This kind of looks like a BCT Troll plan to discourage users being involved with "testing phase of all the Ionomy product"by locking their Ionomy account...

YOU are an honest operator

I'm still rolling with laughther that you want to disable user accounts base on their interest to "test".. Roll Eyes

You're missing the point, though it's probably deliberate. The point is that there should be some control in place to prevent those who get information before the public from acting on that information. How that would look in practice -- whether that would mean holding coins or assests in escrow until a public announcement is made, or an alpha program is complete -- doesn't really matter. It's the reduction in risk that such a system would bring in principle that I believe would be of benefit.

Do you think that would be a negative thing? If you do, perhaps you might explain why, rather than being flippant.