Quote from: Miiike on May 27, 2019, 10:35:22 AM

Quote from: zitoken on May 27, 2019, 03:19:08 AM

Quote from: Miiike on May 26, 2019, 03:13:11 PM

Quote from: zitoken on May 26, 2019, 01:00:59 PM

Quote from: Miiike on May 26, 2019, 08:11:13 AM

Well, now this is a worrying answer. What'll guarantee that you will not change your business activity once more? Deeming this "funding" as another failed test and move to other plan? it'll be troublesome for investors who studied your recent plan, think it is worth investing, buy some tokens, and then you once again go under for two months and resurface with "ok, the funding is not working, now we're proposing a paid online game reviewing".

Your points are valid, but remember this is a product based on feedback of our community and a hard work of a lot of study and research , and regarding the funding of Zitoken, team is investing their own capital to deliver the product.

Interesting, you imply that the change happen as a result of community's feedback, thus their request. Can you please tell us on what platform does this request and feedback occurred? Your bitcointalk thread were quiet for months prior to the change, your telegram is far even more concerning, created on January (and unless you deleted every chat prior) only active from the past few days, which is post-change, and topic is about airdrop.

Even more interesting, you mentioned that study and research also took a role on the change. While this is a positive thing for projects to grow, exception can always be made for project that took a whole different new course (and worse, happen before the previous idea even implemented), because we can infer that (because the concept is completely different from previous one) the previous one are not well thought, studied, or researched. Because, if you did your research and study, or even a simple thorough thought, then the change will be around tweaking the project instead of completely change them.

And about team, I'm glad you mentioned it, who are the team anyway? I don't see them anywhere.

Dear Miiike, Thanks for your feedback. Well, experiments are only experiments, not officials produtcs, and what we are announcing here is an official product indeed.

Regarding the team, we'll be glad if you check it out our whitepaper or website and look for "Team" , all members mencioned makes part of our businness, we are still small, but we'll be hiring new members in other stages of our business.

Initially you said that this project is based on community's feedback, which we can concur that the project's change is due to their request, but there were no evidence of such request, given your medias are all inactive for months before. You also said that the product is based on hard work of a lot of studies and research, which I'll be fair if we agree that the total "reconstruction" happen as a result of poor judgment on previous model (which should allow us to ask why such poor judgment happen in spite of the "hard work" of studies and research or question your competence) or that it happens because you didn't do your self acclaimed hard work of studies and research at all (which should entitle us to ask about team seriousness of the project, thus credibility).

It's also interesting to highlight how you state that experiments are just experiments, and not official product, (because) what you announce here is an official product. Now you became ambiguous. Previous model were explained here, as it used to be announced here, and because it is implied that experiments were not announced here, your statement should lead to a conclusion that the said model is an official product, yet it was totally deconstructed as if it was a failed experiment. There were not even a clear and official info about why the change. You don't even announce the change, you simply went under and resurface with whole different project, and pretend nothing happened previously.

You are most welcome to give your feedback on our project. Regarding clear information about change, our team had been talking to a wide range of people and consumers interested specially on blockchain games on geek events.

We realised that previous model it was not attending pains of the market based in this informations , the main difficult of game developers is to get support for their games and to be conneceted with games lovers.

So we decided to change it for an innovator and pioneer model, on which support this niche.