indirect percentages are what it holds
the marketprice for the three core assets presumably includes the value of what it contains, this assumes the market fully understands all the holdings and this is debatable. it is quite possible that the value of the three core assets are not marketpriced with the assets it contains, but having these assets are only a plus.

[Proposed Change in Terms]

I would like to propose change the terms of the fund raising. I made an error in limiting the core assets to 10%, but it is impossible to know how significant this factor was in people's investment decision. In my mind, the SuperNET is optimal when it has the financing, revenues and advertising in balance and there is no way to achieve that based on the current funding levels.

I aim to solve this by guaranteeing to put into SuperNET a minimum of 241485 assets (24.15%) for all three core assets:

InstantDEX   241'485   1'000'000   24.15%   49   44.5   (has 30% of NXTventure) = 7.245%  
Tradebots     241'485   1'000'000   24.15%   27   20    (has 18.5% JLH) = 4.46%
NXTprivacy   241'485   1'000'000   24.15%   40   39    (has 30% cryptocard + 60% Privatebet) = 7.245% + 14.49% --> same as above

With 24.15% of each of the above three core assets, there is the following percentage that will be directly or indirectly owned:

InstantDEX 24.15% ---> shouldn't this be 17% of pure Instadex? cause then you are adding NXTventure %age twice
Tradebots (NXTcoinsco) 24.15%  ---> Same as above should be nearer to 20%
NXTprivacy 24.15%  ---> Should be nearer to 3% of pure NXTprivacy
Privatebet 14.49%   ---> 14.5% which forms NXTPrivacy === 14.5% of the NXTPrivacy asset too?
cryptocard 7.245%
NXTventure 7.245%
jl777hodl 4.46%

InstantDEX 10746082 NXT + Tradebots 4829700 NXT  + NXTprivacy  9417915 NXT  = 24993697 NXT @ .00008 = 1999.49 BTC
Current market value is right around 2000 BTC or around $1 million USD.

The account that issues an asset is simply the account that issues the asset. Sometimes I issue an asset from the operation asset's account. For example, the SuperNET acct NXT-MRBN-8DFH-PFMK-A4DBM is the one that issued the TOKEN asset 15641806960898178066. I issued the jl777hodl asset from my jl777 account because it made sense to me to do so. There is no requirement for this, for some strange reason I felt that issuing the jl777hodl asset from the jl777 account was a reasonable thing to do. What about this is unreasonable to you and makes you write in a accusatory tone. All you have to do is ask me about this, without couching it in terms to make me look like I am doing something unethical. Now, since the JLH (jl777hodl abbreviated) is going to be holding assets I certainly dont want to be commingling anything into it, so I created an acct just for this purpose and this is described in the asset description. this acct is NXT-2AHU-UXZW-K9Q2-HENLW.

So it seems that you started with the conclusion that I am a crook and are searching for "facts" that fit this theory. This is bad scientific method. The proper way is to form the theory that jl777 is a crook and then gather data to see if it confirms or denies this fact. So far all we have is confirmation that you mistakenly assumed that my personal acct was the JLH acct and the fact that I am using my personal acct for doing personal things like donating $33,000 USD worth of NXTprivacy to the BTCD community.

The text you quote is from an older version, cassius wrote the document and I missed the potential confusion, so as soon as somebody else pointed this out we modified it. If this text is still in the current version then I must have made a mistake in the uploading. I was having many connection problems that day (and most days). So I apologize for this error, I believe it has been corrected and you have an older doc. as far as my percentage of sharkfund, you can just look in the acct: http://nxtreporting.com/?a=NXT-SQ9J-JCAN-8XVY-5XN7K&c=USD
I have 521 sharkfund0 right now. I used to have 800+, but in order to pay for core assets held by the various operating assets, I had to swap a all my NXTventure, JLH and a big chunk of my sharkfund. I did most transfers within a few minutes, but there was one that had some hours gap. I forget the exact swap, but half was pending for some few hours. Now I am rounding, so when I see 6989495 or something like that I round it to 7 mil. It could be that for some marketrate swaps I am guilty of some fractional gains due to this rounding. If this is an issue, please specify which swaps I am guilty of having benefited from and I will refund the difference. Though, it would only seem fair that in the cases the rounding error went against me, I should get a credit, so I ask that you calculate all these roundings and the net difference between myself and the various assets, and this I will refund. Let me know if you think that is fair.

Considering your confusions, maybe the NXTsharks acct NXT-ZWW7-PSXW-89TR-AA67Z is not known to you. This is the acct that issued the sharkfund0 and if you look at it you will see that it has 8'625.0026 sharkfund0 assets. But these are assets that it has issued and not sold. You can also find out that a total of 10000 sharkfund0 were issued, so subtracting them we get 1374.9974 sharkfund0 which makes my 512 to be 37.236434047075% of the total. So if all these sharkfund0 goes into the SuperNET, then 3.7% of BBR is in the SuperNET. However, the actual total is higher as the other assets that I swapped the sharkfund0 with are having more of the sharkfund0, so we will get more contributions indirectly. i dont have a way to estimate the exact figure, due to uncertainity as to the total core assets to be put into the SuperNET, but it will probably end up being around 5%. If the 10% amount is something that you are feeling strongly that is needed, this could be solved by using the proceeds to directly purchase the 5%

You are using a word that is indicating fraud, this I take offense at. Now the ponzi is an unsustainable system where the existing owners are paid by the new buyers and the only way this can keep working is to always get new buyers. I didnt bother to answer your accusation of fraud as this is nonsensical when applied to my assets. I am not selling the asset promising returns of X% and funding this X% return by selling more assets. Since you continue to accuse me of fraud with no basis, I suggest you can do your own homeworks to fund out which of my assets are owning which of the other assets using the blockchain. I have better things to do than make reports when the reports are already there for everybody to see. So, one asset owning another is not a ponzi and yes you should "dig" up this info because I dont do GUI. If the data is already there for everyone what use is it for me to waste my time on it?

I have written my contingency plan and it is in this thread and since you continue you accusatory tone even after my continue requests to use this "innocent until proven" guilty philosophy and also that you have only demonstrated my generous donations and your lack of understanding of how the NXT assets are working (this is ok, but you should understand the facts before jumping to conclusions). I have stated that this thread contains the latest up to date info, this is an obvious thing as this is the official SuperNET thread, where else would the latest info be? So, generally speaking I am getting direct access to 1% of the funds, which is about 30 BTC at current levels and in this case putting in 300BTC, so I would be losing access to ~270 BTC. For this, I dont thing any contingency plan is needed as if something is happening to me, the SuperNET is gaining 270 BTC. For the other 99%, I have stated that we are going to have to find the escrow methods during the fund raising process, which is 2 to 4 weeks from now. Since I am not getting access to most of the funds, I though this would be acceptable.

The wrinkle was that an unexpected amount of NXT came in via AE (20 million NXT!) and I have had personal access to this 1600 BTC all day. You can see that it is all still there. I could have just disappeared with 1600 BTC, yet I continue to tolerate all these questions which could have been asked in a respectful manner that I feel I have earned. I think that I have at least earned the right to not be interrogated like some crook, but rather just asked factual questions without biasing the reader by using words like "ponzi" when it has no behavior like ponzi that I can even think of. Anyway, you probably didnt even bother to read the post I made about finding the NXT community escrows for this 20 million. Since I figured the people like you will feel that I am a flight risk with all this NXT, I thought it best to get it taken care of as soon as possible. Just think, 1600 BTC just there and all I have to do is go send NXT and its gone. Does it affect your opinion at all that I could have already taken all this money, but havent and instead am spending all this effort answering your accusatories? The community is making a discussion on who in the community should be holding this and I am not participating in it so as not to be accussed of tampering with the selection process.

The process to get money out of escrow is described, but I know you are kind of lazy and dont like to do much reading so I will repeat it. For the previously defined (and updated by this thread) uses of the funds that were prior to the first funds being received, a post to this thread that conforms to these defined uses will be all that is required. Then one of the trustees posts that they approve it and then they get confirmed as the one to pay, then they pay. This avoids the possibility of double payment. the procedure is open for all to see. If anything suspicious is happening, I am assuming somebody would protest and then we will use common sense to resolve such matters. I do not have to be specifically involved in these things if it is following the right procedures, but I would think that most trustees would wait for confirmation from me to prevent some random person trying to spend the escrowed funds. All the procedures are not spelled out as SuperNET is not a fiat based corporation, it is a crypto organization. We will use common sense and logic to resolve things.

Now if you had read the official thread you would have also seen that for non-standard expenses, there is a decentralized voting that will be used to approve or decline the spending request. There are three threshold levels 50%, 2/3rds and 90%, the threshold needed is specified in the voting info. if there is some controversy over this, we have a majority wins prevote for the three thresholds and the ones with the most weight is the threshold that is used. The voting weight is the number of SuperNXT assets one has.

The proposing of the vote is something that will probably need to be filtered and at first I imagine that I would be the one to formally propose a funding vote. However, there is no reason this has to be me, as soon as somebody has some good ideas for funding, they should post it here. If I am sensing that the community is divided over the issue I would be compelled to hold a vote. Now this function is really something anybody can do. You just have to notice that either everybody is agreeing or not. So this is one task I look forward to have somebody else do.

f you read this thread and I think the other investors would prefer that you spend an hour reading the thread than me spending two hours responding to questions that would have been answered had you read the thread, you will find that the method for escrow requires that one of the distributed escrow holders accepts the spending request and presumably requiring the appropriate documentation. In cases where there are sensitive details the common sense thing to do is PM the sensitive details and redact the public post. If the spending request is appropriate, the trustee posts his approval and then gets a confirmation to spend. this is a treasurer function and another task that I do not need to be involved in, though the original request for funding is probably something I will always be doing as this is of critical importance, to know where the money is going. We are in the process of doing this for the NXT. I also posted in this thread, but nobody has followed up on it yet. In any case the amount of NXT raised is surprisingly a bit more than half the total so it makes sense to take care of that first. If we cannot find the BTC trustees, I am sure we can have the NXT trustees also hold some BTC too.

I am also planning on using companies like Xapo and Coinbase for some portion, bter for another, but for this we have 2 to 4 weeks yet to solve and not knowing the magnitude of the offering, it is not possible to make any coherent plans. I would not have predicted 26 million NXT would come in the first day, so any plan made would have been wrong. I like to be efficient and solve the problems that need solving and using my experience, judgement and common sense to figure out the best thing to do.

The mgwCOIN assets are issued by the MGW asset. They represent the COIN held in multisig deposit accts. so I did indirectly issue the mgwLTC asset, but this asset is 100% backed by LTC. That was my point. you keep saying my assets are vapor, and list mgw assets, which indicated you are not understanding as the mgw assets are 100% backed by the corresponding crypto

Please do not just make up something and present it like a fact.
txids 13869109530637325948 and 18177681832696022121 are for 500 and 24500 NXTprivacy assets from my personal acct NXT-DE2F-W76R-GL25-HMFPR into the BTCD donation acct NXT-DE2F-W76R-GL25-HMFPR
So you falsely accuse me of taking assets from the JLH account all the while pretending you are being factual.

I have not taken any BBR out of sharkfund0, that would be wrong. There has to be marketrate swaps to move assets between two different accts. I have been careful to always follow this. Please find a single case where I have taken anything from one assets holding to any other that was not done at marketrate. And please do not just state you stole this from this fund, without any proofs.

the plan is to put sharkfund0 assets that I own personally into SuperNET acct. since the BBR is in the sharkfund0 holdings if the sharkfund0 goes into the SuperNET, then the BBR is effectively inside SuperNET.

I have disclosed that I did not have so much InstantDEX (7%) and that this would not be able to match the other core assets. I saw that there was a meaningful amount of InstantDEX on the orderbooks and as I was consolidating the assets (I disclosed this also) I was able to increase my personal holdings of InstantDEX so it will most likely be able to be balanced with the other core assets. I did all this BEFORE any funds were raised and I am not doing any market actions during the offering.

So please dig up all these "proofs" of unethical behavior. I am confident I will refute every single one of your "proofs" as I hold myself to a higher ethical standard.

I presume you are declining my offer to do any real work, so this makes it clear you attempt was to smear my honor.
Thank you for revealing yourself so clearly to everyone.

My offer stands for you to help document all the transactions I have done. I predict you will either not return, or come up with some excuse, or more likely post more "proofs" about all my unethical shenanigans that dont exist.

James
 

All my accts are published
All my tx are on the blockchain
I do occasionally do market rate swaps to rebalance and focus a particular asset to a specific area
I dont have time to play games with the orderbook, so while you are more intelligent than most of the people accusing me of unethical behavior, the fact that you think mgwLTC is an asset of mine indicates you are not quite understanding of things

Now I have heard the many requests of people to better understand the assets. Since it sounds like you are already doing some analysis, do you want to work together so we can get some nice understandable documentation. I dont do GUI and I consider this sort of like a GUI, so I guess this is financial GUI.

If you are really interested in protecting people instead of just trying to smear my reputation, I expect an acceptance of this. We can do all the discussions of the internal transactions here, in the open. I have nothing to hide

James

That "suspicious" 2.5% of NXTprivacy was my donation to the BTCD community. We had a fund raiser to help pay for some bounties and I offered to match the value of the donations with some of my personal NXTprivacy. With the BTCD price going up about 3x from the time I made this offer last month, I decided to just send in the entire 25000 NXTprivacy I had allocated for this donation, before the BTCD price increase would prevent me from being able to match with the 25000 NXTprivacy.

I know I am just so evil

James

P.S. If you look at any NXT acct with more than 100K NXT in it, my guess is that they probably have at least one, if not many of my assets. For some reason, the fact that they have gained over 125 million NXT in the last 4 months has made them popular.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keiretsu

The assets represent ownership. proxy assets like JLH are to perform a single-throw multiple pull function, eg. buy one asset get two dozen. It is a convenience thing and like a sector fund, so you dont have to research all the assets to know which to buy. It wont get the best ROI compared to a single asset, but it also wont get the worst. It will get the capitalization weighed average

I am estimating year end to be done with debugging of all except Privatebet. most of the coding for the rest is done. I can only point to MGW for a project I have completed in the crypto space.

Since you are comparing SuperNET to ponzi, it is clear you dont understand it is asset backed. So when you actually understand something about SuperNET, then I would be happy to answer any specific questions you have.

James

Don't jump on a thread and insult everyone by calling them greedy or accuse them of not having due diligence. And then to top it off hope for everyone's down fall.

Charming.

Actually I am doing it right now - buying SYS in small chunks and I have already set some of my sell orders, however I won't be sharing exact prices, because I think I've already told too much. Anyway, there is still lot of room for more traders, so I don't risk anything. The lower the price, the bigger my profit. Buying for 200 and selling for 250 would be better than buying for 400 and selling for 450.

"Its nice that I have a looong list of people to add to my ignore list now -- any coin I see these idiots on goes to my junk box"..this makes no sence to me according to your 3 day activity here, i don't insult your opinions btw, free speech ;-)
i have 0 people on ignore list...

new account.. only commented on syscoin. Do I need to say more

says account with 8 posts,registered 3 days ago.. LOL

I'll address your points.
1. I'm talking about crypto in general. Refunds are just not part of the landscape. You buy, you take the risk. I know of no other ICO close to as large as SYS.
2. Again, the trust in Moolah should be taken as is. He promised to buy back if nothing was delivered to his terms. Read the fineprint HIS terms. Not yours, not mine, HIS. He set the deadline and what counted as an acceptable level of wallet status. It will reach that and the ICO will be released. People may have mis-interpreted Moolah to mean, if you're not 100% happy with your purchase at any time in the future irregardless of what happens, he will buyback your portion of the ICO. He never claimed such a thing. B uy walls, refunds, they all mean that people can exit without being responsible FOR THEIR OWN RISK.
Moolah and Sys devs are not beholden to anyone who makes a claim after they signed the agreement of the ICO.

The price WILL go down. People are angry. Devs made a fumble. But again, the risk was the shareholder's to bear. I for one am holding my coins as I believe this coin will last.

Agreed. I see absolutely no reason to give a refund. No other crypto refunds and they have been KNOWN SCAMS. This coin is not a scam, the ICO was final. Deal with it and start spreading good vibes about SYS. Cause there ai'nt no other way you're getting back an ROI otherwise.

Also to those who don't know math... premine is based on total coin supply to be minted. Not total supply at any given minute. 

Good idea...... But ultimately that is Devs call (if they get it...... moolah is under no obligation to do that  I think.... It's either give it to devs or refund back)
Devs have been repeatedly saying that they are in the for the long run... So if everything fails then as the last resort thy should do it.