Hi guys, I dont have time to do own research and would only need a quick info why the BCAP token is so iliquid?
It has been de-listed on Liqui exchange and now the volumes on EtherDelta exchange are only a few thousand USD daily. Any idea what is going on there?
Where could one sell the BCAP token; is EtherDelta a trustworthy exchange?

Hi guys, just wondering why the BCAP token is so iliquid?
It has been de-listed on Liqui exchange and now the volumes on EtherDelta exchange are only a few thousand USD daily. Any idea what is going on there?
Where could one sell the BCAP token; is EtherDelta a trustworthy exchange?

I'm interested too.

So you will actually check every profile that expressed interest so far? That sounds like a lot of work. Have you already had the project reviewed by some other notable folks in the industry? Do you have some good advisors for the project?

Thanks for sharing!

Seems like a pretty weak response from the Tezos team to me. It is obvious they have no clue what comes next.

I have this weird feeling they will somehow pay (aka "settle" with) Gevers for millions just to make him leave.

But that wont keep away all the lawsuits. Even if they win the lawsuits, the costs and complexity of it all can substantially impact the whole thing.

I see serious lack of leadership here.

I just read this link - but it does not explain anything for the Tezos investors. This petition is useless, like a tiger without teeth.

The question is what can investors do to either
A) know the project will continue as planned or
B) get the f**** money (eth) back.

It is obvious that:
- Arthur and Kathleen have no power to replace Gevers,
- Gevers has all the raised funds under control
- Foundation (led by Gevers) will most likely not easily buy the Tezos software from Arthur & Kathleen (due to dispute)
- Tezos project cannot be developed without the funds

Since A) is most likely not happening, plan B) in the form of a legal shitstorm is approaching.

Lots of people are joining class actions in the US. There are currently 4 (!) pending class actions.

I assume outside of US there could be similar lawsuits popping up, perhaps on the basis of breach of securities regulation (like in US) or general tort / contract breach (more likely in EU).

Meanwhile some folks are playing with the "futures" market for tezzies on the HitBTC exchange - which I assume can only additionally hurt ill-informed investors.

What will you guys do? Sue? Wait? Would you demand refund if you could?

Hi guys, those who have invested in Tezos, what is your current take on the situation?

Do you support the class actions and arguments / claims?

Will you join the class actions in the US?

If you are not US citizens / US based "investors", and want to get the "refund", what will you do?

Hi guys, I have a question for those who are more familiar with the Augur project. So Augur has this special reporting system, where reporters are paid to provide correct data regarding a specific event. On the other hand anyone can challenge their data input by posing a bond. The challenge is then resolved by all other participants (reporters, market makers, market creators etc.). If the challenge succeeds (as the data was indeed wrong), the market where the data was used is forked, leaving the reporter with a chain of useless coins.

How wrong am I in summing up this system? Please correct me

My question is if there is some clear data on how many times has this forking event actually occurred? Does it happen like everyday or only once a year or never at all?

Any insights would be much appreciated 

Good idea, however as someone mentioned it, we need a way to prevent competitors and "crazy" "witch-hunting" people away from posting irrelevant claims. Any ideas how to do that?

So far I have collected the following projects from this topic:

EthBooks ICO = team disappeared
Lydian Project = bounty campaigns not paid
OrenPlatform = team disappeared, bounty campaigns not paid
Verify = bounty campaigns not paid
HomeToken = bounty campaigns not paid
DeClouds
E-dinar
Solarflarecoin
Prcoin
ebitz
Lithum,
Monkey Capital
Ascendancy
PRO Commerce
AdsCash
Droplex
Beth
Confido = team disappeared

Hey, thanks for the scam projects names!

The link you posted is a list of what ICOindex thinks are scams. Is there more information regarding when do they consider a project a scam and (as you write) what they do with the money? Do you maybe know if ICOindex has a valuation checklist which they follow when evaluating projects?

Hi guys, recently I stumbled upon this article:

https://medium.com/metamask/metamask-security-advisory-and-bug-bounty-for-seed-phrase-concern-bbd95ab63210

Apparently there is a serious security bug at Metamask and people have lost all their balances. Does anyone have any experience with this? Any solutions on the horizon?

Please share your thoughts!

Hi, are there any functioning storage blockchains where one can currently "sell" free disc space?

After my quick research it seems that neither FileCoin, nor SIA nor MaidSafeCoin have a working product for people who want to rent out their free disc spaces.

Perhaps I am mistaken. Do you guys know more about this?

Hey guys, wow, I see there is a real pain point here Lots of good answers so far.

One more question: who else do you think is mostly affected by scam ICOs? So obviously there are investors who lost the money and on the other hand bounty hunters / marketers who did the work (promotion) without payment.

Are there any other stakeholders that we are missing out?

If you dont use escrow, why should anyone trust you will really send the money?

If you use the escrow but not pay the delivery boy a fee, why should anyone even bother to do work/delivery for you?

I dont get it.

Yeah I think thats a good point. Piggy-backing on an a "notable" cryptocurrency network gives hard-forkers an advantage in terms of existing users and brand awareness. But these are marketing reasons.

I actually asked this question in another thread, but still:

My question is, from a technology perspective, why do these projects need to fork the bitcoin blockchain and why dont they just start a new one, with their own consensus and other rules? What is the technological benefit in staying on / forking the bitcoin blockchain?

If there is absolutely none, then this is just "stealing" the brand name.

But on the other hand, how would the initial/core/true team actually ever improve the technological parameters when they wished so? Would they need to always start a new chain and forks would (should) not exist?

Do you think ppl will hodl btc during the fork, to get the extra monies in case of a currency split?

If so, then price could easily jump way above the 7200$ where it rests right now.

Thats an interesting point. Piggy-backing on an a "notable" cryptocurrency network gives hard-forkers an advantage in terms of existing users and brand awareness. But these are marketing reasons.

My question is, from a technology perspective, why do these projects need to fork the bitcoin blockchain and why dont they just start a new one, with their own consensus and other rules? What is the technological benefit in staying on / forking the bitcoin blockchain?

Yes, along with argumentation also evidence should be supplied.

Moreover, perhaps we need a definition of scam here in crypto. I would say there are 2 categories: Fraud (team takes money and runs) and incapacity (team keeps promising, but it is clear they cannot deliver/are fighting and are only wasting money&time).

For instance, an example of fraud would be PayCoin. An example of incapacity are current events at Tezos.

What do you think?

Hi community members! Here you can write down projects that are scams. Argumentation will be appreciated.

This way we can have a record of all frauds in one place!

I dont understand. I assume Ethereum foundation had many funds at the time of the fork and kept them even after the fork. The fork of the blockchain is not a fork of the foundation.

But thats besides the point. My question goes to who and how controls those funds and what is the purpose of those funds.

For instance I hear Agrello also has a  foundation which holds 10% of the tokens. They say they need it so that the system can run. When the reserve is out, they will buy more agrello tokens from exchanges. But that doesn't really answer any of my questions above.

Hi guys, I've been thinking about why do many ICOs actually create a non-profit foundations? For instance Ethereum has the Ethereum foundation in Switzerland; according to their webpage the purpose is to "promote and support Ethereum platform and base layer research, development and education..." But this is not really specific and it doesn't seem very transparent to me.

In some other projects I have seen that they use the non-profit foundation for:
- being the open / inclusive / community driven organization
- developing and holding the IP
- being the parent organization to for-profit companies

My initial questions are:
- how does the decision-making process happen in such foundations (how is it more democratic than in for-profit companies)
- how does the non-profit foundation transfer the developed IP to a for-profit company (for free? with what kind of license?)
- who holds the assets raised at the ICO: non-profit foundation or for-profit company?

Does anyone has any experience in this field or "insider" knowledge?

I would love to hear your opinion on this and get new information!