You come across as bitter because you missed out on the early development.  Hope you are equally critical of Bitcoin since the founder holds 10% or any coin with a defined premine of 10%.   But lets take your conspiracy point by point to let the world know your opinion is just that, an opinion.

The opening date of mining was announced WEEKS before with a working wallet.  Anyone with the gumption to mine on hour one could have.

The December issues were affecting everyone on pool equally, but the pool when having connection issues reverts to solo.  While there is a marginal benefit in my belief to the solo miners in such occasions, its not much.  In the end, high hash rates are still high hash rates.

There is no proof who owns Masternodes.  Yes, it's likely the dev and some early backers have more than people that came to the coin later.

Coins with massive numbers are easier to comprehend.  Which is more, .0000001 or .0000001?  Trick question, both are the same, but you have to look closely, versus 100,000 and 100,000.  Instantly recognizable.  The market takes into consideration coin volume and price, although small prices do seem "cheaper" and may confer a small price benefit in aggregate.

The coin has been un-naturally constrained by the difficulty of the two markets that it is at.  But now, if you want to put a tin foil hat on, this coin would have to be in cahoots with two moderately sized markets who make far more off of their normal business than any pump and dump collusion with a small end coin could bring.  It's just not reasonable to believe.


I all can say to those looking at Biblepay (or really any coin) is do your research, and know that every coin has a few vocal supporters like me, and a few vocal detractors like adrianbits.  Make your own conclusions but try and get all the facts first.

Regardless, to the point of the thread, the only way this is an ICO is if you consider all coins that are Masternode ICOs.