So, I just found this, interesting.

You are doing the same exact thing as Nxt (most of the functions are exactly the same), but improved where it was suggested (Ed25519, address handling, built-in gui, alias transfer...) while claiming you don't know much about Nxt, ok, that's fine...
But you also make the distribution (IPO) the exact same way as Nxt, which is for most people the biggest (and only) problem with it, so it will end up the same, everyone will be butthurt about not being "initial stakeholder" and calling a scam. If you are trying to improve something, why not also use a different type of distribution which is a big problem with pure PoS? I just don't understand this.

What's also not clear to me, is why the IPO ended a long time before the release? If you want to go the way of IPO, make it so it at least seems fair. I'd suggest go completely other way - as suggested, rewards for running nodes etc., maybe just partial IPO to fund the development, but this seems like an interesting project that will probably end up hated the same way as Nxt (probably even more since you had the option to avoid it).