That is quite possible... Or I could hold off up until a point where key questions have been answered (and benefits outweigh the risks) to invest long-term. In the meantime i'll day-trade

Not always... A reputable miner would greatly reduce risk factor of something going wrong (so it is a good thing) BUT you can't just blindly claim it is "worth exactly what it is for".


Umm... Yes I will keep pointing out potential pit-falls. Stating that a future contract may not always mature ticks you off? Really? You can shill all you want (and that is your right) but I also have a right to be skeptic. See, the good thing with being a skeptic is - I evolve as/if evidence and facts emerge

"I'm assuming the gold contracts and the speed at which they are fulfilled have something to do with the circulating supply and the issued coins , duh ...... that's why I say its the same ... " - I call BS. I repeat: Future contracts are not the same as gold bullion. You need not make assumptions. That is a fact. I keep stating the obvious (but it seems I have to). Reason I insist on pointing this out is because gold mining companies have been known to lie (fraudulently) about gold deposits they "discover" and selling a bill of goods (specifically in future contracts & ETFs) to unsuspecting investors (Google Bre-x if you need an example). Guess what happens to investors in such cases? They lose a ton of their $$. And this  just one example on how things could go wrong (in general any contract can end up voided - that's just a fact of business). Another example: If cryptobontix are depending on crypto mining to get money for buying these future contracts - what if for some reason their crypto mining doesn't take off as planned? Or slows down? Then what?
If DIG is backed by futures instead of gold bullion (even temporarily), it is perfectly OK BUT then it is good that it is made clear that's what is happening  instead of shouting "gold bullion" all over the place and calling anyone who asks for clarification a "tard" or "idiot". Being backed by future contracts (even initially) doesn't make DIG a bad coin - it just lets people decide better how much to risk.
A gold backed DIG in my opinion means this: I should, be able to exchange my DIG - at any given time - with x grams of gold (predetermined) OR an equivalent amount  in fiat currency - at current gold market prices - for x grams of gold. Now that would be the real power of a gold backed crypto. In short - I would buy DIG at 1$ if it truly is backed by real gold bullion under lock and key AND openly audited by any of the big 4 firms, because it will be the most non-volatile way to store my crypto. - The buying low and selling high (day/week trading) is a secondary issue.

"Investing in gold through future contracts or exchange-traded funds (ETFs) is not equivalent to owning gold...With gold and silver futures contracts, the seller is committing to deliver gold to the buyer at the contract expiry date. Until the delivery happens, the buyer will not own the gold, and will only be an owner of a paper gold contract. " - Quoting Investopedia. You asked me to google - I just did. Here is the link for reference (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bullion.asp). But we already knew that entering a "contract to own gold in the future" is not the same as having gold bullion under lock & key in the bank. But you had to go on a needless rant...

" fact is , this plan is not only well liked in crypto world,  it's something that people have wanted to accomplish for  long long time & its only now with blockchain & smart contracts that it's really possible" - What is this that was not possible before? Gold backed currency? Possibility to purchase gold bullion? - I can see the clear advantages of a gold backed crypto currency but Gold back currency is not a new phenomenon. Again to make things clear: Those of us who were skeptical from the start about this project had the right to do so because there was little credible information available publicly. Cryptobontix as acknowledged as much and promised to be more forthcoming going forward. Don't confuse Skepticism and Cynicism. I ask for evidence, I ask for objective truths... That's what a skeptic seeks. A cynic would never care for evidence.

Yes. And again - the fact that it is neither mineable nor and ICO is a problem for a lot of people. Do some research and figure out why.
As for the the gold bullion vs future contracts they are not the same thing (fact). Entering into a future contract is NOT the same as owning gold. So you need to tell us (if you know) what will back DIG. Is it future contracts or gold bullion. Simple straight-forward answers are enough - people here just need the facts and they can draw informed conclusions fast and easy.

Also, to be honest - arguments like yours are putting cryptobontix and its products in a bad position (unnecessarily). Most of us skeptics just need straight forward, objectively verifiable answers + transparency. When you stretch facts, make assumptions and (honestly) shill, you do a disservice to to cryptobontix and its team. You make skeptics like myself feel less trustful and keep distance. Why not allow readers in this forum to be informed of facts as they come? It's fine if cryptobontix is planning to mine Gold 1, 2 years down the line (as per their roadmap) BUT that means at this very moment, DIG is not backed by gold - and it won't be when a contract to mine gold is signed (even though such a contract would be a huge step in the right direction).

Future contract? Really? So contracts can't be voided then? Sure, so DIG is backed by "future" gold bullions? Let them state this in their marketing and see how far DIG will go  . A gold backed currency requires real gold locked away - not futures. A $ backed currency needs $$ locked away (banked), and audited by a reputable firm. So it terms of backing currency - yes, unmined gold is worth as much as fish in the sea.
Also there is a reason I put premine in quotes ("pre-mine" / "air-drop") - so it seems to me you either have poor understanding of English or intend to mislead

Think I read in the Telegram page that it should be listed in a couple of weeks?

Gold in the ground is worth as much as fish in the sea buddy - don't kid yourself.
Can it be listed on other exchanges? Yes, of course! But again, until it is listed in others...
"And I think that was your low btw" - sure it could be, and if so, I'll be wrong and I'll have missed out...
"THIS was not and is not a ICO" - Exactly. And neither is it mineable. Which means that someone is sitting on 2.8b DIGs which they can sell when price is good? See how that is not a positive argument for DIG? Have seen coins lose adoption overnight because news came out that there was a pre-mine/biased airdrop. Well, DIGs "pre-mine" / "air-drop" is 2.8billion our of 3 billion. This is a problem.

Best case scenario: DIG is a coin backed by Gold deep in the earth's crust. It will be years before that gold is out and provably sitting in a strong room somewhere.
Worst case scenario: Whoever is holding the 2.8billion (3billion - 202mil), is taking everyone for a long ride as she/he/they smile all the way to the bank. Anyways,  not a lot people in this world of crypto have the patience to HODL that long for a well marketed, well researched, well publicised, low supply coin trading at Binance let alone a poorly marketed, sketchy at best, 3billion supply,  1$-ish max coin trading at Livecoin... But hey, what do I know... Am just a guy waiting to (yet again) buy low and sell "When the next news is out..." 

The irony of comparing this project to BitConnect is hilarious!  . Also, Where are my fellow day-week-traders? I am eyeing a 0.000001BTC / DIG by end of week when we can buy and wait for next hype ...

Sure, whatever rocks your boat my friend. 

Stating facts is not always FUD. I repeat: No one knows WHO is behind this project - yet. When they come out publicly then we will all know. That is a fact NOT FUD.

No one knows WHO is behind this project. Until they publicly lay claim - no one knows. Don't be intellectually dishonest.

So in short you are investing in Ronnie Moas. That is fine, it's one way to do it (although I strongly disagree with). I do listen to all opinions and views including in forums like this BUT finally make a decision on my own. One key point I pay attention to is the actual team working on a given project. Who they are, what they've done before, what they have to lose if the project tanks etc etc. So far, no one knows (factually speaking) who is really part of or behind cryptobontix team - why? Because as of now they do not want to be known. That is a huge red flag irrespective of ones bias given that their projects are neithe decentralized nor open source and thus can't be independently scrutinized / verified.

We can talk UNY/DIG volumes all day long but fact of the matter is, any average person can issue an ethereum token within hours if not minutes and therefore talk on volume / amount, this billion, that billion don't really matter because again - anyone can create and issue a token within a short period. Whitepapers used to mean something a few years back but not anymore either - why? Because anyone can get a whitepaper written within days or even plagiarize an existing one (we've seen this happen before). What this means is, you can really only sensibly bet on the team behind a project. It is therefore surprising  to skeptics like myself how you could conclude that it is something to HODL when we don't even know who is behind the project.

On the 400-600% short term gains - I agree that it is a good way to trade especially when you are skeptical of a project.

Don't want to go back and forth with you on this but I'd welcome you to mention the flaws in what I said (for the benefit of the community if nothing else).

Somebody asked where the skeptics were - I answered. I did say here before that I was getting out before the swap. Anyone who bought in at .02,. 03 and got out anytime close to swap had a very decent ROI. You all talk about RM and how you are here because of his (likely paid for) hype of UNY and that is fine. That's what most rookies do. It's what Trevon Jame's followers did till they found themselves on the wrong side of bitconnect. Here's some advice that any average crypto trader will tell you : If you are a "week trader" - buy the rumor/hype and sell the news... If you are a HODLER - invest in the team NOT the coin / token. So for those purporting to HODL UNY/DIG, who are you investing in? Who is DIG's team made of? Other than the "admin" who turns out to be one of the original UNY team members, nobody knows who the rest of team is made of. So those hodling are investing in a myth... White papers, promises by the likes of RM are just words... Until there are names and faces that own this publicly and who can be scrutinized and tested publicly, who can face legal jeopardy if they circumvent the law then you are investing in a myth that involves gold deep in the earth's crust.

As the "admin" promised, we will have more news soon. He's promised amazing news in a few weeks... Before then, if DIG will be trading, it'll be worth considering whether to once again "buy the hype" at the low and then "sell the news" in a few weeks when this big news arrives. Take a hint.

Some of us skeptics dumped UNY at its highest  . How much is your DIG trading for now? Oh wait, not yet trading yet. And also, still possible scam... Bitconnect was an elaborate "coin" with lots of magical promises yet it ended a scam - but there are people who made millions out of it (the clever / lucky ones who got out in time).
Let me tell you how this will go... DIG will start trading soon, and a lot here will expect it to shoot from nothing to 1$ overnight. It won't. It will likely drop to as low as UNY was before the hype. The cycle will repeat itself... When DIG gets hyped, the same skeptics who love trading will buy in at whatever bottom price, it will rise by a couple of cents, maybe more, then we will get out. This is not a coin to HODL. This is Yobit level stuff at best. So stop daydreaming and get wiser next time buddy.
(Reason skeptics went silent is because we had done our due diligence in warning the naive. At this point, that shipped has sailed and so we move on. What I like is the fact that now that the hype and shilling has gone down, people here are sobering up and are starting to ask valid reasonable questions about all these craze)

Sure but is Timothy McGarvey of arbitrade.ua the same (as claimed by some here) Timothy McGarvey of arbitrade.io? If yes - then strange that he would have two companies located in different continents with websites having same name yet dealing with different services... If No, then it's such a huge coincidence that two different Timothy McGarvey's are directors of two unrelated companies by same name Arbitrade.

I however appreciate you sharing screenshot of your communication with him.