This is just another clone of SC wallet,nothing new.
The wallet is indeed just a fork of some other coin. But that is irrelevant because the wallet only serves as a place to store the BLOCKs while the tech is being developed to exchange them for NHZ assets.
How is this irrelevant when the wallet is almost the only criteria if the ITO is successful or not. See:
* Once the ICO is over we will verify there is working wallet, blockchain, and block explorer.
Block explorer is even easier to clone than a wallet, so this simple task of cloning some other wallet is what allows the funds of 0.3-1 million US$ to be spent or not. At least be honest about that it is relevant, when the dev team haven't troubled themselves to write the whitepaper what they want to develop. Pretty graphics with some marketing mambo-jumbo is far from optimal development starting point.
The wallet is *not* a criterion for the ITO's success.
How does an interim wallet have any bearing on the Blocknet's tech? It doesn't.
If you don't like what we offer, don't buy it. It's as simple as that. We've been very clear what we have and what we don't yet have.
How the wallet is not a criterion, when the only three things Bitttrex wants done to release all BTC to developers after the ITO are:
1) wallet,
2) blockchain,
3) block explorer?
They explicitly stated Bittrex will not check anything else before they send BTC to you. What are you talking about? It's easy to say "if you don't like it don't buy it", but that's not the answer. Everything you do with this ITO will reflect on the community, so when somebody in the future want's to do something similar, but to do everything right, people will always point to eventual failure/success of this project. That's the reason we try to reason with you guys not to do this without proper software specification or whitepaper, it should be bad for future projects if you fail spectacularly, and the way you are doing things you are on the path to do exactly that.