Search content
Sort by

Showing 20 of 39 results by supranetico
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: BitShares (wth?!)
by
supranetico
on 02/12/2014, 09:23:16 UTC

High level BTS history:
Protoshares was launched as a minable investment vehicle, along side AGS which users could donate PTS or BTC directly without mining.  50% PTS and 50% AGS is what made up the genesis block of BTS, this was quite fair.  Original plan was to have individual dac's such as BTS, Vote, Play, Music, etc... however this would divide the attention of the dev's too greatly.  Thus with PTS and AGS no longer viable, why not unite all the products under one umbrella?  Great win for investors, great win for the dev's who can concentrate on one super DAC with all the features of the individual dacs.  BTC and LTC were born competitors, BTS simply originated from PTS and AGS.


Um, no. High level history of BTS:
Protoshares was launched as a minable investment vehicle, ----devs underestimated the pump/demand and weren't able to mine enough to sustain themselves. so they introduced AGS to raise more money when the mine to fund failed. along side AGS which users could donate PTS or BTC directly without mining.  50% PTS and 50% AGS is what made up the genesis block of BTS, this was quite fair.  -- Distribution is not fair as 1 PTS ~ 1BTS was the original plan. Now AGS was raising funding in PTS too. So each PTS you donated meant 1 AGS to you. And (assuming parity for sake of simple explanation) 1AGS = 1BTS for you but....the PTS raised within the AGS framework also got their allocation. So it meant, 1 PTS donated = 1AGS=1BTS For you + 1 BTS for 3I because of the ownership. Yes they promised they wont use BTS earned from the raised PTS for any use but in crypto, promises mean shit. They should have burned it and reduced the total coin but they dint.  Original plan was to have individual dac's such as BTS, Vote, Play, Music, etc... however this would divide the attention of the dev's too greatly.  Thus with PTS and AGS no longer viable, why not unite all the products under one umbrella?  Great win for investors, great win for the dev's who can concentrate on one super DAC with all the features of the individual dacs.  BTC and LTC were born competitors, BTS simply originated from PTS and AGS.

There was no clear consensus on the "super DAC" and people had rejected the PTS rollup to BTS too. Those concerns have been ignored. So nope, not a great win for investors. Just my 2 cents to it.
Post
Topic
Board Speculation (Altcoins)
Re: BTSX+BitUSD vs NuShares+NuBits - which will win the USD peg war?
by
supranetico
on 27/09/2014, 14:25:16 UTC
Short answer - Neither
Long answer - Both of them have an inherited structured which relies of market management (more like manipulation) by largest holders - the fight to fix price to $1.

bitUSD does not depend on market "management", only people competing to make a profit. It assumes people act greedily and are not "fighting" any market forces (any deviation is an opportunity to trade profitably).
Here's the thing if people act "greedily" they should be acting greedy about their BTSX holding too. That would mean net shorts will always be higher than net longs - isnt that the case in the current market? There have been quite a lot of restrictions put in place to not allow people to short. Something like - you cant short below 5% (not sure) below the MA price or interest bearing etc. So BTSX on one hand believes people to act rationally (greedy) but disallows people to act on their own accord (based on their greed). How is that a good thing?

Problem with NuBits and BTSX is same, free market reign is restricted given, while talking about the market is free. Not a good combination.

Restricting shorts based on a price feed is not "restricting the free market". When you enter a contract for a difference, you and the other party have to agree on a real-world price.
Not having this restriction would be like forex allowing you to do naked shorts at a price other than the current market price for the real asset.

You're basically saying that an open-market exchange prohibiting selling boxes labeled "1 oz gold inside" when it actually has half an ounce inside is restricting the free market.
Huh? is all I can give for the example you gave. half ounce at price of 1 is clear scam and it will be restricted but is not same as not allowing people to short wherever they want. I am sorry but was the point of the thread to get an opinion or was it to throw absurd examples to support BTSX. If its latter, I leave the thread to you.
Post
Topic
Board Speculation (Altcoins)
Re: BTSX+BitUSD vs NuShares+NuBits - which will win the USD peg war?
by
supranetico
on 26/09/2014, 14:13:41 UTC
Short answer - Neither
Long answer - Both of them have an inherited structured which relies of market management (more like manipulation) by largest holders - the fight to fix price to $1.

bitUSD does not depend on market "management", only people competing to make a profit. It assumes people act greedily and are not "fighting" any market forces (any deviation is an opportunity to trade profitably).
Here's the thing if people act "greedily" they should be acting greedy about their BTSX holding too. That would mean net shorts will always be higher than net longs - isnt that the case in the current market? There have been quite a lot of restrictions put in place to not allow people to short. Something like - you cant short below 5% (not sure) below the MA price or interest bearing etc. So BTSX on one hand believes people to act rationally (greedy) but disallows people to act on their own accord (based on their greed). How is that a good thing?

Problem with NuBits and BTSX is same, free market reign is restricted given, while talking about the market is free. Not a good combination.
Post
Topic
Board Speculation (Altcoins)
Re: BTSX+BitUSD vs NuShares+NuBits - which will win the USD peg war?
by
supranetico
on 25/09/2014, 09:30:15 UTC
Short answer - Neither
Long answer - Both of them have an inherited structured which relies of market management (more like manipulation) by largest holders - the fight to fix price to $1.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 22/09/2014, 11:12:59 UTC
Yep, there are far, far, worse things out there than SuperNET.
That was not meant as a praise  Grin

Couple of other points....I don't really see SuperNET as an 'exit strategy' for NXT whales. SuperNET is going to bring a lot of extra services and traffic into the NXT eco-system, so holding either NXT or SuperNET will give good returns over the long term. Never forget that NXT (and SuperNET) are not about short term pump 'n' dump action, but about building stuff for the long term. NXT is barely a year old, and is very, very successful so far, so I don't think any whales are looking to exit just yet.

Just in case some of you guys haven't seen this yet, this diagram gives you an idea of what SuperNET is going to become.
Again like many things said in this thread solely your opinion - long term returns etc.

I am pretty sure that jl777 can pull this off (he's already got a massive team of devs/helpers from all the SuperNET communities helping out, btw) so the only question I'm asking myself (and others) is whether this will be the 'killer app' that finally takes crypto mainstream, or just a very cool system of united alt-coins ?

Either way, I'm prepared to put about 10% of my net crypto worth into it, and then see what happens...... 
Well for things to become a killer app they need to be noob friendly. Unfortunately for crypto majority of things don't even come close. Given that supernet explanation is confusing (or as some supernet supporters say - you don't understand jl777 vision), I don't see it becoming killer app (IMO Wink )
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: What Can Actually kill Bitcoin?
by
supranetico
on 21/09/2014, 20:50:16 UTC
1. Every altcoin has to invariably be pegged to bitcoin. So its fate is in some way tied to bitcoin. Until you have a coin big enough to exist independently and traded with USD, you are not going any where.

Not really, there are some coins that have direct fiat exchanging.
I'm not naming them though because I want to invest more in them first Smiley







Direct fiat exchanging doesn't mean they are not pegged to bitcoin. Their prices will be based on triangulation between XYZ/BTC and BTC/USD rather being a direct exchange between XYZ/USD. Even then good for you. Smiley
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: What Can Actually kill Bitcoin?
by
supranetico
on 21/09/2014, 20:40:03 UTC
Nothing as of now. There are two major issues:
1. Every altcoin has to invariably be pegged to bitcoin. So its fate is in some way tied to bitcoin. Until you have a coin big enough to exist independently and traded with USD, you are not going any where.

2. Lack of market. Some altcoins have their own "markets" but they are just convoluted implementations for any retail business to even look at. Then there are some who completely forget about that and think anonymity or some new mining algo is the way out. It isnt. Bitcoin took ages to reach even this stage of acceptance, so unless you have a great marketing plan or an idiot proof way to get retailers on your platform, forget about killing bitcoin.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 21/09/2014, 20:34:48 UTC
It might be an ideal way for NXT whales too but I am not going to comment on that. I have been trying to follow the supernet thread for sometime but the constant addition (or BSing) is making my head spin. Best of luck to any one investing in it. I hope you guys make it out safely Smiley

That said I have been watching some of the coins on the forum, and god there is so much shit to shovel through. These shitcoins make jl777 ipo seem like a diamond.
These include Umbrella backed and insured coin - wtf are those?
Then there was a new 50 BTC ICO for Volatility coin, track volatility and do what exactly? I am not even sure and people bought 50 BTC worth. If they paid me that much, I would have finished the digging and prepared a report instead. I have to say, so many morons on this forum.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Bitcoin is going down - What Altcoins to buy?
by
supranetico
on 20/09/2014, 07:21:04 UTC
Consider this - all altcoins are pegged to bitcoin, so they too are loosing in value with the price slide. Some might be holding or gaining, most probably due to either them holding their price or declining at a much slower rate.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 20/09/2014, 07:09:05 UTC
Do not lock this thread.
Doesn't really matter with fewer people interested in digging and less newer discussions not happening; this will anyways die off.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Cryptocurrency = Cults?
by
supranetico
on 17/09/2014, 19:30:48 UTC
what specific cult r u a member of @ OP ?

~CfA~
Short answer: None

Long Answer: None. Many coins on BCT suffer from this behaviour which I find intolerable - you can't "demand" respect which many devs do and pat themselves on the back.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 17/09/2014, 19:19:24 UTC
I was going to lock this thread but have decided against it.

Anyone wanting to crunch the numbers you can start with
1. "share of the total" is basically how much a particular price adds to the "holding company/asset total". Normally, value should reflect the constituents + a premium or a discount on the future prospect. Example - Nxtprivacy is priced at 9% discount over the holding, jl777hodl is at 8% premium, whereas sharkfund0 is at whopping 35% premium.


2. If you invest 10000 NXT into jl777 or sharkfund0, what will you finally buying and what cost? example - NXTPrivacy holds 40% cryptocard and 60% private bet, investing in NXTPrivacy and privatebet at 10% both means you buy 10% privatebet + how much more %age of privatebet + cyrptocard?

3. From above if the holding company pricing = constituent asset + premium or - discount, how would buying a constituent affect the asset price? or how would buying the asset affect the constituent price? Where does the money flow to?
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 17/09/2014, 19:00:56 UTC
I have been quite clear with my intentions early on, people are free to not believe me and invest, convincing was never intention of this thread. The title set was - "Read before investing in SuperNet" not "Supernet is a scam, run run run!!". So I feel attempts by some supernet people unwarranted and concerning -- that alone is enough for me to not invest - aside from my concerns about jl777, I am not going to be part of any coin community which thinks shouting down a person trying to present a contararion view is the way to go about. Yes that means I have hardly got coins into which I invest in but I am happy with what I got.

Cool...but the people who are at least apparently shouting you down are "pre-burned" too. Sadly, the typical critic 'round here is someone who seems impervious to counter-arguments; that's why they're pegged as FUDsters and trolls. They're pegged that way because they act that way. And you were lumped in with the rest of them; that's the reason for the shouting. FYI if you're baffled. 
Not really baffled, rather sad over the period of time. Normally there are ANN threads where I say something, people start FUD, FUD, FUD, and I keep my mouth shut and move on. Then there was winning proclamation that "oh, we chased the guy away!" and lot of chest thumping. I don't really mind it.

But this was not SuperNet ANN thread and neither this was not an all-out attack. I thought people would read properly and have better sense which obviously they dint, this was not something which went down well with me about Monero and now not with SuperNet.

In any case, nice discussion with you on this. Thanks.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 17/09/2014, 16:07:46 UTC
The only person, I actually engaged was Este Nuno, because he wanted "proofs", I even called him a moron for doing that. If he is happy with what is there in front of him and wants to invest, it was his prerogative. This has been repeated a large number of times. People who want details can dig and find out. I for one, frankly don't have the time to spoon feed the details. Hence giving up on replying to him. Hell I might even lock this thread for good cause there is no more discussion required. Anyone who wants to know more can do their own research.
Still thanks for the warning.

I just wanted to say, explicitly, that the warning didn't result from any bad experience here - you might say I came in "pre-burned" Wink
Meh, I am not going to do the numbers for anyone who doesn't want to do it. shout as they may.  Frankly dont care cause its people's money to burn.
 
most of the assets from jl777 are holding companies and holding companies holding another companies holding another companies are fishy even in the real world - in a "ponzi" kind of way.

In your opinion. Really, that's all you have with respect to that unorthodox set of assets. It's fishy to you, but that's a value judgment on your part. My own value judgment is, "that's the man's style." Believe it or not, I actually spent a full day doing due-diligence on Supernet - and at the end I plunked down only half a Bitcoin!

Essentially, I'm trying to think like a lawyer (which I'm not) in a way that I hope proves to be to your benefit. You do stick out from the usual gang of critics because you're not bullheaded about what you write. Smiley

At least not to me... Wink
I hope you do understand how holding companies are structured and supposed to work when you made the unorthodox holding comment. Not just a wiki page definition as to what they actually are. I remember jl777 giving a keiretsu comment and he was taken to the woodshed.

I have been quite clear with my intentions early on, people are free to not believe me and invest, convincing was never intention of this thread. The title set was - "Read before investing in SuperNet" not "Supernet is a scam, run run run!!". So I feel attempts by some supernet people unwarranted and concerning -- that alone is enough for me to not invest - aside from my concerns about jl777, I am not going to be part of any coin community which thinks shouting down a person trying to present a contararion view is the way to go about. Yes that means I have hardly got coins into which I invest in but I am happy with what I got.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 17/09/2014, 12:50:38 UTC
Really appreciate this post even though I even called you suspicious on the Simgate asset and jl777hodl having majority of them.

Water under the digital bridge. Smiley

Thank you

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.

Let me be more precise - this time briefly. Smiley All you have at this point is evidence that there's cross-ownership. In and of itself, all you've shown is that James' assets are indistinguishable from a collection that in part serves as a set of holding companies. Holding companies are 100% legitimate in the outside world, and have been so for ~ a century if not more.

Sorry, but to someone who uses Occam's Razor in my admittedly pro-James way you've only demonstrated that James has a liking for a complex cross-ownership structure whose assets are a hybrid between operating and holding. In my opinion, that's all you have. As for anything that would demonstrate shenanigans with respect to valuations, I saw nothing. Hence my admittedly strict use of the word "surmise."

But before I go, I did compose that "unreasonable" part as a disguised warning to you. There are some people around here that are demanding, and you might find yourself feeling obliged to work a lot for free without quite knowing why. "Know When To Draw The Line."  Smiley

Um, no, I have more than enough evidence and its all there in the op. They say "devil is in the details" and it would get an astute thinker to go through whats been presented and what I am getting at. I think the op already says something along the line that - "you might interpret what has been written in your own way. but if you need help get someone else to help you". most of the assets from jl777 are holding companies and holding companies holding another companies holding another companies are fishy even in the real world - in a "ponzi" kind of way.

I like that you admit to the colored glasses but then in a similarly expressed opinion, I would say I am not pro or anti anyone, but then people find it difficult to believe as I am obviously spreading FUD (it is a newbie account right? so why bother).

The only person, I actually engaged was Este Nuno, because he wanted "proofs", I even called him a moron for doing that. If he is happy with what is there in front of him and wants to invest, it was his prerogative. This has been repeated a large number of times. People who want details can dig and find out. I for one, frankly don't have the time to spoon feed the details. Hence giving up on replying to him. Hell I might even lock this thread for good cause there is no more discussion required. Anyone who wants to know more can do their own research.
Still thanks for the warning.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Cryptocurrency = Cults?
by
supranetico
on 16/09/2014, 17:54:54 UTC
Everyone is a shill for whatever Cryptocurrency they own or support. Even I am guilty of that myself, although I try my best to remain objective nonetheless.

Some people are much worse than others though, over time you will figure out the people that are subjective and the people that are objective, and form your opinions with this in mind. It can take a long time to learn people's posting habits though, and it requires a lot of reading. If you don't spend a lot of time in these subforums I would take everything you read with a grain of salt.
I think its fine if one supports his/her own currency, its just that people go into the "FUD" "FUD" mode which concerns me. I am trying to learn how to separate wheat from chaff but its too difficult when you get slammed for asking dev a difficult question,
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Cryptocurrency = Cults?
by
supranetico
on 16/09/2014, 17:51:58 UTC
One has to understand, currently crypto is like 2001 Internet boom, many don't understand whats going on and are ready to throw tons of money into it. Just like 2001, there are going to be millionaires and some people are going to make profit but the general junta is going to suffer.

No it's not.  Dot.com at its' peak was $7 trillion of wealth.  Crypto currencies at the moment is $6.8 billion.  Still a long way to go to get to where the internet was in the 1990s, when only 2% of the world's population was using it.


Hate to rain on your parade but a lot of the dot.com people like Mark Cuban and Kevin O'Learhy are eccentric and jerks as it is, make them decades younger and give them internet anonymity and many of those dot.com types would probably be trolling on BTT.


what? The comment was on throwing money on bleeding edge technology without understanding it, not the market cap.

I see a post which makes an half assed attempts at being smart and want to go in the "jerk mode".
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 16/09/2014, 17:47:12 UTC
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.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 16/09/2014, 17:37:10 UTC
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.

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?

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).

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.
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Read before investing in SuperNet ICO
by
supranetico
on 16/09/2014, 16:27:43 UTC
Edited.