Well no, that was me being kind by giving you a chance to gracefully and professionally admit you made error in composing your proposal. It was much better than what will come next. But it seems you prefer to proceed by attacking personally. I'm bored playjng words with you, so let's proceed straightforward with the issue:
I am sure you understand what I tried to point out, which mistake you made, and how could it be a mistake. Whoever follows and read this thread can. If you still can't, then it speaks a lot about your project. People need to take note on this.
It was a small issue, really, but it became rather crucial because that was an opening to the main issue: staking. Right next to it, you state that you discourage staking, where your project itself is a staking activity. I'll give you another chance, with all the facts that I've pointed out, explain how does your project different than a staking program?
The obvious answer will be: no, there is no difference. Because your project itself is a staking program. It either shows how you contradict yourself or says that you have little to no effort to do a research for the field you're trying to offer. And how could someone offered a business with barely any knowledge about it? Well, that's obviously because they didn't take it seriously because they know it won't last long enough to worth their time, in other word, they know it'll only last for a short period of time. i.e. scam is on the horizon.
Name 1 project? Really? Easy: Moozicore.
Now, as I already said the big word, it's time to add another topic for you to answer: team. You want to prove that you're not a scam project? Show me your team details. Taking up from where we left them, you conveniently missed how I asked you to reveal these "two PhD in finance."
You did not provide anything. You are just talking like a non serious person. and we are thinking now to deal with people like you we should hire a primary teacher.
I failed to see how what I provide is relevant to the topic we currently discussing, but if I have to answer that, I provide links and references that is necessary to support my arguments, pointing out things according to facts. Again, people can easily see this. And again, if you failed to see this, it speaks volume of the quality of the project or, at the very least, the quality of the team or whoever mandated to answer on this thread. Also, how can I be seen as someone not serious? Dude, I spent time doing research, giving links and screenshoting pages. If that is not a seriousness, people need to update their definition of serious.
And, in regards to primary teacher, sure, if your team sees it fit to hire a primary school teacher as your community manager, who am I to argue? You are allowed to hire anyone you sees fit, as long as they're capable to answer queries here.
Speaking of which... none of my query is answered. You're not trying to evade again, are you? My questions are easy: I wanted to know
how you see your project is different than a staking program, which you strongly oppose and
your team details. You previously mentioned that there are two PhD in finance on your team, we can start with them.
and about "moozicore" we did not found anything like our project on this site
https://tokensale.moozicore.com/ You are just promoting some of yours **** which we dont allow again.
If you again try to promote anything of yours in this thread we will report to the moderators.LOL. Wait, what? You asked me to give one example, and that's exactly what I do. And then you said I promote their project? Because I merely provide you with you what you asked? You're ok, dear? The project cleared their ICO years ago, how could I even promote such project?
And oh,
]this is what comes out if you simply google "moozicore staking". I wonder how could you failed on such an easy task.