Quote from: opt-out on July 27, 2014, 02:22:07 AM

Quote from: sgi02 on July 26, 2014, 07:22:29 PM

Quote from: jyap on July 26, 2014, 01:00:28 AM

By the way, I mentioned to Bryce that the 25,000 NAUT was probably split into multiple addresses and not in the one address.

So here he sent the 25k NAUT to Bittrex. You can see from the multiple inputs that it was in multiple addresses.

Funds can split like that if you transact from a wallet.

So you're telling me, the funds set aside for this coins future, are better suited in an exchange wallet then a standard / offline / cold storage wallet? There are a number of coins out there with public addresses of funds that are verifiable at a moments notice, why do we have to search for that information here? It's great the NAUT is accounted for 'somewhere', but lets not be so naive to think that exchanges are the safest place to hold a large quantity of coins. In this day and age exchanges have all seen their fair share of security breaches and coins stolen. It would be a shame if the same happened here...

XDQ is used for arbitrage between XDQ/NAUT (AllCrypt), and BTC/XDQ (Bittrex and others). To take advantage of those disparities funds must sit on those exchanges - pulling out of cold storage and transferring to each exchange takes too long and the opportunity is lost. I can't say if those funds are in active trading now or not - but, since the fund set a minimum price of XDQ - some NAUTS would have to sit on an exchange to offer that. At today's volume, 25,000 NAUTS alone could move the market substantially - smart arbitrage between XDQ/NAUT/BTC (especially with 25,000 NAUTS) could raise and stabilize the price of XDQ.

My post history will show that I've changed my mind about proof of existence of the funds-> Dev's industry reputation is worth a lot more than 25,000 NAUTs. XDQ's industry potential is worth a lot more than 25,000 NAUTS. Regardless of where the funds are they would have to be moved - ANY movement out of a public address would cause some sort of market response - best to let them do what they were designed to do...

Please pardon me if im being brash...

Your arguments of arbitrage are noble, but bullshit. This was never stated in the OP (I checked to see if it was updated). I understand the technique of using arbitrage, but this strategy was never documented in the blueprint of the coin; its a (somewhat) sound idea, but it's also a gamble no matter which way you try to spin it.

Cliche = Your post history of 4 is all but worthless when you're trying to defend the integrity of this coin. The dev is responsible for updates and PR within the community, not you. New accounts bringing biased opinions about a coin always throw red flags for senior members and investors alike.

One more thing... The NAUT buyback address for XDQ is fully funded again... Good on Bryce, taking care of that for the second time. Lets see what happens next month.

Quote from: jyap on July 26, 2014, 01:00:28 AM

By the way, I mentioned to Bryce that the 25,000 NAUT was probably split into multiple addresses and not in the one address.

So here he sent the 25k NAUT to Bittrex. You can see from the multiple inputs that it was in multiple addresses.

Funds can split like that if you transact from a wallet.

I'm glad you're the new face of PR for Bryce, he doesn't update this thread very often. Dirac is advertised as a "Revolution in crytocurrency and finance". For anyone proficient in bitcoin, I think I speak for everyone in saying that we understand how a wallet / public address works. Don't try and trivialize the situation for people who don't know any better. The funds were gone for a while and now they're back. Everybody can feel free to take that as you will.