Quote from: Trade Runner on Today at 07:57:19 AM

Ok, so here once again in clear words: Even if you would get it running from the technical side to create a complete different algorithm on top of the Bitcoin chain - it still would be a fake fork! You could also create a database with the balances of the BTC holders in the moment of creating your genesis block, and then giving all BTC holders their proportional airdrop. But what is the whole thing worth without any ICO? And just for getting the Bitcoin users attention creating a complete new blockchain on top of an existing, nearly 300 GB large chain what would have to be distributed as ballast for nothing within your new network? Who would be willing to participate in such nonsense? And the clear clarification of the implemented encryption method of SHA-256 on page 34 of your whitepaper was also just a typo of your marketing manager? Further at your website you're linking e.g. to Forbes with the note, they would write about your project. Looking at the linked site on Forbes Nikolai Udianskyi, mentioned as CEO of BTCU and co-founder of Coinsbit Exchange, is just talking about Bitcoin halfing. No word about Bitcoin Ultimatum. I call this a fake, as the whole whitepaper with website and (pre-) announcement is a fake, including the pretended Bitcoin fork. Hopefully this was now clear enough. EOD from my side.

I am impressed by your position. True. Now there are not many people who really think and analyze. But I ask you not to draw premature conclusions. Let's give our technicians a chance to do their job and present the finished BTCU coin. Then it will be possible to constructively talk about the pros and cons. In the meantime, it is too early to draw conclusions.