Quote from: HR on September 06, 2017, 11:46:51 AM

Quote from: key_z on September 05, 2017, 11:14:42 PM

Quote from: ChromaticStar on September 05, 2017, 10:15:08 PM

While I recognize the legal declaration that EOS tokens have no value, has there been any public statements that they will? The potential for EOS seems so huge that almost no one wouldn't invest in it if they could, but this legal stuff is really killing me. That would make this project a total gamble. Did they put that in there just in case the project fails to cover their asses, or do they really intend to issue EOS coins once they have a working blockchain platform?

To my knowledge they haven't made any public statements that they will - it seems as though it would contradict the intentional steps they've taken as precautionary measures.

Two possible approaches:

Gamble on the promise with the hopes of being rewarded with a gain that is commensurate with the additional risk taken

or

Wait until after the official EOS blockchain is released next summer and acquire actual EOS tokens/coins. You'll miss you on some gains but surely not the bulk of long-term value

Given that block.one/Dan seem to be motivated more by creating a game-changing platform than by making investors wealthy, I don't think there is a high likelihood of them providing any statement to allay the fears of prospective investors.

Not trolling, but there are a couple of details that I think should be added to this.

FAQ https://eos.io/faq.html

2. Who is building the EOS.IO Software?

"block.one, a Cayman Islands exempted company,"

23. Where do the proceeds from the EOS Token distribution go?

"Proceeds from the EOS Token distribution will be the revenue of block.one."

One of the big philosophical debates surrounding STEEM was whether or not you can call something a scam if they are openly telling you exactly what they're doing? STEEM ended up with a hugely unfair initial distribution and continues to be heavily skewed towards those who benefited from that very overt intentional "fast mine", but is recovering as early "whales" are cashing out (Dan Larimer included - https://steemdown.com/ ) and will likely do quite well in the future even though a very few made off with the early riches. Everything here looks very similar, perhaps even a little "shadier" since with this one you're betting solely on the man's "good word", and that in spite of there not being a single word out of his mouth about it.

Just saying. It is what it is.

noted, thanks for sharing.

could you go into more details about

" STEEM ended up with a hugely unfair initial distribution and continues to be heavily skewed towards those who benefited from that very overt intentional "fast mine"" ??

or point me to a link?