Quote from: supranetico on September 16, 2014, 05:37:10 PM

Quote from: Este Nuno on September 16, 2014, 04:40:46 PM

Maybe I missing something but I don't really see how the amount of shares issued in an asset like sharkfund0 really matters. The assets are listed to raise capital that gets invested back in other currencies/assets that the fund manager decides are acceptable for the fund. At least that's the way I think it operates, I'm not an expert on jl777 assets at all. But from my reading and learning about superNET and his assets I have never gotten the impression that he's attempting to deceive or hide information from people regarding them. That's where me and you differ I think, you seem to think that he's intentionally attempting to deceive potential investors about the nature of his assets.

I can only say Huh? and offer you something like this. Say ethereum team offers 10million coin for sale (ethereum cause they call themselves DACs rather than coins), out of which only 1.4million is sold. And it is such that, 0.532 million of coins is held by Vitalik. Now tell me what is wrong with the picture? (hint distribution)

I for one having been saying that its fine if you want to invest in Supernet ie"agree to disagree". But you kept piling on "op doesn't understand" or "what proof you have of a pump?" whereas it was already stated. So thankfully, that got through you that I am fine with you not agreeing but please abstain from stating things emanating out of it as facts.

Except that Ethereum is not an investment fund that uses capital raised to invest on behalf of shareholders where as sharkfund0 is as far as I know. Distribution of an investment fund?

If I created my own investment fund named fishfund0 tomorrow and issued 10000 shares at 1 BTC each and only ended up selling 20 shares then I would have 20 BTC in capital to invest with. And if 10 of those share were either bought by me or issued to me through the terms of the fund then it wouldn't make any difference what so ever in how the fund operates. 9980 outstanding shares or 100000. It's not a cryptocurrency or anything like Ether, or even XRP.

"please abstain from stating things emanating out of it as facts." I have no idea what you're referring to here and if you'd like to give me an example of me claiming something to be a fact that's not just my supposition, please do.

Quote from: supranetico on September 16, 2014, 05:37:10 PM

Quote from: Este Nuno on September 16, 2014, 04:40:46 PM

This is where I don't think you're understanding me. Before when I qualified the lines of code statement with "(his words)" you perceived that I meant that as some sort of praise towards him and thought that was some sort of statement of deference to him(your "jesus" comment before). I meant it to mean that I haven't independently checked that fact out at all so it should be taken with a grain of salt. I know how github works and I know how meaningless lines of code are as a metric which is why I was trying to convey the fact that he could simply be saying that as something that's 'technically true' but doesn't necessarily mean much.

With regards to Bitmark marking will be integrated in to superNET, but each marking adoption does all the marking transactions locally and then hashes them in to a merkle tree and records them in the Bitmark blockchain a specified times.

(ready for a shocker? I'm part of the Bitmark core team(not a dev yet though) and we decided not to join superNET, but superNET can still integrate marking as anyone can since it's free software and we will assist them in implementing it.)

Yes, BBR will have to be converted like you say. And that part of superNET does serve a similar function as ripple, but as you can see in my list it's quite a bit more than just a collection of gateways.

I try to be objective, but I also have come to like the idea behind superNET. Doesn't mean that I'm not interested in the truth.

Ok my bad on the comment then. Its difficult to read motives when you are throwing things like "op doesn't understand". Though I am scratching my head, whats so shocking about Bitmark not deciding to join and you being part of it? hm....you mean how I called you an unreliable "objective" observer? Read the first line of this para.

As for the long list, its basically gateway for crypto + fiat along with intergrated exchange (how many coins have that in their wallet?). Maybe bitmark's reputation system and privatebet will be something new. And what is that exactly worth? 10k BTC?

I thought you might be surprised that we decided not to join superNET considering you've been portraying me as a "kool aid drinker" this whole time.

The speculative value of superNET comes from the potential profits that are expected to be paid as dividends to shareholders. The intention is to become a portal for every user of crypto. To the point where people won't need to use any other wallet than the one they have that has the superNET GUI integrated in to it. If crypto continues to grow and superNET works out how it's intended to it's not too hard to imagine that having a share in a service such as this might be profitable. It's definitely risky like every thing in this space, and no one is making any guarantees.

Quote from: supranetico on September 16, 2014, 05:37:10 PM

Quote from: Este Nuno on September 16, 2014, 04:40:46 PM

Those are the relevant assets for the proposed deal.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing that you've made people aware who were not aware that James holds significant portions of his own assets. It makes sense to me for someone operating a fund such as sharkfund0 or jl777hodl to own a large percentage of them in order to maximize your own profits and incentives.

I think it's somewhat obvious that James would own a large portion of his own assets, but if that's not obvious to people then that's fine. What you've done here is good information for anyone who was unware, but I think it could have been presented in a better manner.

Relevant assets for the proposed deal?

what you say now and said earlier are in clear conflict. First you say "OP was not aware that jl777 has been open about his asset ownership and the asset cross ownership and has not made any attempts to hide those facts. It's listed in the superNET OP." meaning jl777 has highligted all his dealings and people on his thread are aware of it that too in the thread op and I was in the wrong., now you say only what is relevant?

As I said, you flip flop so often its quite clear (IMO Wink

) where your sympathy lies.

Lets say even if those are "relevant" actually do some maths and see if the calculations he gave hold up (now before you ask me for proof, for once be an objective observer and do some digging).

I don't understand what you're getting at here. You said specifically: "Where does it talk about him about sharkfund0 or jl777hodl's holding? No where."

He's putting in his assets, one of which include 4.46% ownership in jl777hodl. He owns the assets he's putting in. I don't see what sharkfund0 has to do with this exchange considering there's no purchase of shares as far I know. Only a transfer of asset between James and UNITY.

Where's the deception?

I don't think I flip flop. You've implied from the beginning that there has been some sort of intentional deception on James' part regarding his ownership in assets related to him. And you've also accused him of doing much worse than that based on absolutely nothing that implies any of the things you've accused. I've maintained from the beginning that I have not observed him to be deceptive at all in his communications regarding his assets. If you want to show me that I've been misreading or ignoring his posts feel free to show me where I'm wrong.

Quote from: supranetico on September 16, 2014, 05:37:10 PM

Quote from: Este Nuno on September 16, 2014, 04:40:46 PM

The wealthy individuals comment is just my perception based on a bit of reading on the NXT forum where people tend to speak of investing large amounts of NXT and BTC in these type of assets. I could be wrong, I don't know enough about the NXT community to say definitively, which is why I said there "seem to be". Just what it looks like from what I can tell.

I can be objective and still have opinions too, right? Based on all of my readings thus far and watching how he's handled manners related to money, I personally think it's unlikely that it's something he would do. Again, this is where we seem to differ because you've drawn completely different conclusions than I have and seem to think he's some sort of scam artist. Nothing we can do here but wait to see how things play out.

Yes you can be objective and have opinions but not present them as facts.

The whole wealthy thing is your perception, and if you follow the "facts" - the largest owners of sharkfund0 (again to rake this up, why I am mentioning this is because of the 400% returns) - is that the largest "wealthy" owner of sharkfund0 is jl777 himself. The largest holder after his fund are:
NXT-G9WM-6HNW-FMF2-6T8M2 @ 12.5%. Though this account holds most of the jl777 assets only, I still refrained from making a wild guess and saying this was his too
NXT-3R28-ZBCB-E8GT-C34JC - @ 10%

rounding up more than 85% of the issue. So I am still finding the whole "largest owenrs" of nxt part unbelievable.

You know, again in the realm of "agree to disagree", it could also mean that NXT AE is full of shitty assets no one wants to hold. Anyone wanting to utilise AE needs to depend on jl777's asset. Something like cryptsy on cryptostocks.com

Edit: Anways I am tired of debating this out with you. But if you think reputation and "not showing any signs" is good enough, do read up on Allen Stanford - his name was synomous with Standford university even when he was not associated with it.

Again, please show me where I've used language that implies that I presented that as a fact. I try to specifically make sure that I don't do such things, so if you have an example please quote it. In this instance I said "seem to", but you keep insisting that I presented that as a fact when I think should have been fairly obvious that I was just making an observation that is probably right based on the amount of money that gets invested in these assets, but isn't something that I would ever try to pass off as anything more than 'likely'. The "wealthy" part comes from the fact that there are many holders of large amounts of NXT in the NXT community and the market value of their NXT is often significant. You can claim that you think that James is the on who holds all those other accounts that hold significant percentages in sharkfund0 or any other asset, but from what I can tell there are real people in the NXT community who do actively invest in the AE(and presumable some of James' assets as well considering their market caps). Someone more involved with the NXT community can elaborate more on this perhaps.