Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

I personally have been

Let me stop you there. You are about to do what you frequently do, which is claim something that runs contrary to reason and without evidence. There may be market manipulation but you are the one claiming it is a bot and, more importantly one that is buying high and selling low, which is counter-intuitive to anything other than some nefarious plan by somebody to throw thousands of dollars away for no good reason other than to, as you claim, 'destroy' your coin.

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

If I buy multiple blocks, the Market creates a Buy and sell-wall that is executed 30 minutes later.

What do you mean the market creates a Buy and Sell wall that is executed 30 minutes later? That's a meaningless statement. What 'walls' exist? A 'wall' is when someone posts a large buy OR sell order to either create a floor to lift the coin or a ceiling to stop the coin from rising while they try to accumulate more coins below that price. If there existed a large buy at 100 Satoshi and a large sell at 120 satoshi, that is simply normal profit-taking trading, not a 'wall'. What is more, you are asserting that it is the other way around! That there are buys high and sells low!

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

Falsely accusing someone of fixing a market is a crime. I will not expose myself to that.

Dude, your lack of knowledge and understanding regarding the law has already been highlighted, but let me remind you again of another aspect of it, crypto markets are not regulated, there is no law being broken even if you are intentionally manipulating the trading market.

Besides, if you have sufficient reason to believe that somebody is guilty of anything, even if it turned out they were not, as long as your written statement can be shown to not have been derived from malicious intent, you're not guilty of Libel either. It's not against the law to make an honest mistake when making an assertion about a fact you had reason to believe was true.

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

The night I audited the coin, there was an individual with a username that has not sent in an address.

So? I'm sure there are plenty of people who once were and who are no longer, in your IRC channel list who lost interest in the coin or, at the very least, lost interest in playing your bizarre game of 'conspiracy'. This is not evidence of any sort.

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

when I bring unfavorable news, there is a dump immediately, forcing the coin lower.

Guess what? That's *exactly* what happens in trading markets. You post bad news, people are going to dump before others do. So that's not evidence of anything either.

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

The person I suspect had a grand argument about Bot use and how blackballing a wallet is illegal.

Again, I don't hold any of your absurd coin and I'll willingly challenge your claims towards the right to blackball a cryptocurrency wallet. In fact, any dev that starts talking about blackballing wallets is essentially taking a huge stinking dump all over the future of his currency. You want to play central-bank? You want to hold the threat of disapproval-resulting-in-user-wallet-blackballing over people? No wonder your coin is being treated like a pariah, because you haven't the slightest clue how much damage the mere discussion of such things does to a, supposedly, decentralised coin.

You don't even have any evidence such a thing was happening yet you were discussing blackballing a wallet?

VRC had *every* reason to blackball-by-proxy (blockchain rollback fork) after the Mintpal hack, every reason, yet look at the crap they have received for doing so. You want to make unfounded allegations about piddly little amount of your coin and discuss blackballing wallets for it?

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

BitTrex is not releasing the person responsible for these transactions, but confirm the bot exists.

Please post evidence of Bittrex acknowledging the existence of a buy-high-sell-low bot in your market. I have already spoken to them about it and they certainly did not confirm such a thing. This seems like your usual "I spoke to . . . .about . . . ." false-association fallacy whereby you assert a condition exists solely on the basis that you spoke to another party about the subject, but you omit to clarify that the other party certainly did not confirm anything of the sort.

Let me remind you what they said to me when I enquired about your buy-high-sell-low bot:

Quote from: Bittrex support

We did speak about this, and if there is a bot doing that... there is nothing we can do... it is a free market. I can't see why anyone would waste money doing that though.... Serves no real purpose.

There is a huge different between them saying you spoke with them about this and them actually confirming it existed. Also, them saying that 'if there is a bot doing that . . . .there is nothing we can do', is not confirmation of the existence of your claimed buy-high-sell-low bot either, it is simply them saying that there would be nothing they can do no matter whether a bot is buying high, selling low, or whistling dixie on your market, as they operate in free-market trading conditions.

Again, none of this is evidence of the existence of a buy-high-sell-low bot. Unless, of course, you have a different answer you got from them, one where they confirm that such a thing existed in your market. Do be careful Travis, you do know that if you post the content of an email you received from them that shows them actually confirming the existence of a buy-high-sell-low bot on your market, I will contact them to get confirmation that those words are theirs.

The markets might be unregulated but posting that somebody wrote something in a communication with you that they did not, is actually illegal.

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

My IP has been scanned a couple times and the accusations of my involvement have stopped.

Your IP has been scanned? WTF are you talking about, that's meaningless.

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

I have also tweeted both sets of news, good and bad. The bot responds to news, suggesting human intelligence.

It suggests that people are selling coins when they hear bad news and buying them if they hear good news. That's called market forces, that's what traders do. No bots needed.

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

I do not feel right about keeping that profit if people think I made the bot.

Travis, you claimed the bot was buying high and selling low, you'd have a surplus of BTC, not TRUST. If a buy-high-sell-low bot existed (which there is no evidence it does), anyone and everyone could buy its sells and sell into its buys until it eventually bankrupted its owner.

Quote from: mitchellmint on July 16, 2014, 08:44:32 PM

Do you have a second round of questions?

No, we're still on the first round because your answers make no sense and you have still failed to present evidence of your claimed buy-high-sell-low bot.

Quote from: Leesminer on July 16, 2014, 11:36:32 PM

I have to say I have never seen a Dev answer questions so directly and with what seems honesty and good will toward investors......

Are you even reading what he is writing? His answers are nonsensical. He is destroying this coin in front of your very eyes.