Quote from: mrsaint on November 09, 2017, 07:05:45 AM

Why am I not surprised. Huh

They keep changing their terms and conditions as they wish, while we, the real "investors" (not their "private investors" nobody here cares about) have absolutely no say in it. Extending the ICO? What is the point of soft- and hard cap targets if you ignore them? What a farce. I am tired of utrust talking about what an "awesome" "community" we are. This is not about being awesome or about being a fanboy. This about people who trusted them with real money in hope that they do something of value. Until now, it's been just talk and wishful thinking, and even then, when people raised critical questions, questions remained unanswered.

For me the important step will how to get rid of my tokens without having to agree on their new terms that I haven't agreed on to begin with.

Quote from: mrsaint on November 09, 2017, 10:05:50 AM

Isn't it ironic when they say that utrust is not about the ICO, yet literally every single e-mail and press release speaks exclusively of the ICO? Meanwhile, how much did they talk (and show) about their product and development besides spreading thin air?

So they decided to extend the ICO - even though they stated previously with a lot of furor that by having reached the softcap they gained "technical and operational viability" with a "solid foundation to work from".

Quote from: mrsaint on November 09, 2017, 10:26:01 AM

Quote from: o48o on November 09, 2017, 10:17:06 AM

Good point... I also don't understand what's with all the drama. It's not the first time an ICO got extended.

What drama? The issue is that they keep changing the rules that they have set for themselves and for their investors. This extension was never satisfactorily explained, while according to their own words, the ICO had been a blast and delivered sufficient funds for a successful operation. The way how they keep changing things around with apparent ease is a sign of neglectance, in the best case, and a sign of disregard for their investors in the worst.

Not hard to reach the conclusion Kakumei doens't seem to be bothered with responding to what I see as what must be responded to. Ignoring intentionally or uninentionally is not done. To debunk, refute, clear up and so forth are traits a community manager should show as much as possible, which is not the case. Without condemning you Kakumei and also the ones you answer to it's my advice to review the current approach.

As for me I'm holding on to the big picture while not tripping over UTRUST's learning curve that they still very much face in my opinion. You have my support!