Quote from: td services on February 01, 2014, 10:13:18 PM

Quote from: FrictionlessCoin on February 01, 2014, 09:47:45 PM

Quote from: Gorgoy on February 01, 2014, 08:45:54 PM

Quote from: Calogero Izotz on February 01, 2014, 05:28:52 AM

The model of "fund now and develop later" doesn't seem to be working too well.

Develop first, show proof of concept, distribute thru proof of burn.

Then, if necessary, gather funds for particular purposes, from funders, who have skin in the game and are therefore motivated to scrutinize development and cover (or refuse to cover) additional expenses. This way funders continuously participate in project development , voting with money, instead of relying on devs decisions in distribution of ipo funds.

I could not agree more, very well said

Sound like a good approach.

Concurrent fund raising and development can work, based on progress. This is how most start-ups are funded, with seed funds coming in in stages.

I lost a coin in this, and knew very well the risk I was taking, posting red flags here all along. A number of us are interested in continuing this project. The last thing I want to see is other people deciding whether or not I have this option or dictating how a pre-sale is to be handled. I've come to crypto assets to escape that kind of crap.

Most start-ups don't take place in an atmosphere of coin fever, where psychological threshold for investing is very low and everybody is allowed to buy. Also developers usually aren't anonymous. What's happening here seems like a perfect opportunity for scammers.

I'm not for regulating anything, nobody should decide for you. What I wrote was meant more as advice for investors and should probably begin with "I suggest you invest in projects that do the following"

I suppose that in near future, with introduction of additional features/layers in bitcoin or contracts in ethereum (or similar protocols), distribution proof of burn will be replaced by tools that allow to secure and utilize funds in a trustless manner.