Quote from: mikeywith on July 10, 2019, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: nutildah on July 10, 2019, 11:16:00 AM

They were the victims of thieves who took advantage of weaknesses in the coins' respective code

Wrong,they were the victims of their own weak security and lack of seriousness in protecting their clients' funds, every POW coin is subject to being attacked, there is a little to nothing that can be done about it on a code level , some methods like the "delay function" proposed by zen may make the attack a bit harder and that's all about it, the biggest part of responsibility is on the exchange itself.

I feel like you just jumped in without reading much of the backstory on Monacoin's implementation of Lyra2REv2 because you just parroted what has been said ad nauseum already. Its like, no shit, they should have been on the lookout for irregularities in the blockchains of the coins they are trading. There's lots of things that can be done -- for starters, the Monacoin devs could fix their faulty calculation of difficulty retargetting, yet they never did. From Reddit:

Quote

The bug is the quite similar as Verge had a month ago. Increasing block age for deposits will not fix it, but increasing the block confirmations actually secures you from the attack aniway. Exchangers and online services should increase it above 100. (There is difference as in Verge the timestamp itself was faked - here a different algorithmic error plays role, which the developers must first find).

Monero DID make changes to their wallet software after a theoretical exploit was confirmed to exist and reported to developers by Livecoin. So what are you talking about "nothing to be done"...? Your statement is 100% inaccurate.

Quote from: mikeywith on July 10, 2019, 01:55:00 PM

(stuff not worthy of response deleted)

tl;dr IMO Livecoin is not scam per se, but when investors lose their funds due to terrible security measures, it does not matter how you label them - they are as good as scammers, one does not have to directly steal your money, locking you out of your funds for saying stuff about them on Twitter or being too bad in protecting your funds are some great ways an exchange can follow to be considered a scam.

It really does matter how you label them. That's what labels are for. Despite the fact that OP is a prick and had months to withdrawal his coins (except for MONA, as nobody can), I still agree that's not a good excuse to lock him out of his account. I've said this from the very beginning. Don't know why you're again just repeating what has been said since the start.