Quote from: Nxtblg on September 16, 2014, 05:05:07 PM

Quote from: Este Nuno on September 16, 2014, 10:12:28 AM

Do I agree with OP's conjecture? No. I don't think it follows from the evidence he presented. Even on as loose speculation it doesn't hold up because 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.

You're right. I'm trying to get away from my former life as a pedant, but I still have enough pedant power to chip in here. To be more than, the OP's surmise (might as well call it that) requires - at a minimum - documentation of the complete trade records of said assets plus either a well-reasoned argument or a standard algo that demonstrates why the trading pattern of these assets - over their lifetime of they being traded - is suspicious.

And that would require a lotta work plus some hard research & thinking. Frankly, I'm not going to blame the OP for punting away all the work it would require; he has a life and it's plainly unreasonable to expect him to put in a lot of work for free. Suffice it to say that I'm at least vaguely aware of the pitfalls and hidden responsibilities awaiting anyone who tries to play securities regulator on the Internet. The SEC's job is actually much more straightforward because the stock market is aged and there's many terabytes' worth of trade records that can be used to infer a reasonably tight set of statistical quirks that indicate malfeasance.

As of now - I'm guessing here - the total number of trades of all Nxt assets doesn't comprise a large enough statistical universe from which to draw reasonably solid inferences about trading patterns that clearly indicate something on the sly has taken place. So instead, and thanks to the time pressures we all have, we have to fly on opinion, supposition, conjecture and - yes - surmise. When flying blind's all you can do, you fly blind if you must. Or, you don't fly at all and learn to live with being ground-bound.

DISCLOSURE: I own 100 TOKENs, but it's far from the majority of my portfolio.

Really appreciate this post even though I even called you suspicious on the Simgate asset and jl777hodl having majority of them.

The evidence is clearly from the fact that cross asset holds in cases exceeds 50% which should be suspicious in itself but I guess we on BCT are so blind with "reputation only" that it requires empirical evidence from me and not from jl777. It is at best a "surmised" explanation.