Quote from: cryptoworldxtoken on October 20, 2017, 10:45:20 AM

Quote from: complexring on October 20, 2017, 02:33:20 AM

Quote from: cryptoworldxtoken on October 20, 2017, 12:17:59 AM

Quote from: complexring on October 19, 2017, 10:15:20 PM

Quote from: cryptoworldxtoken on October 19, 2017, 01:42:51 AM

Quote from: complexring on October 19, 2017, 12:17:00 AM

Anyway, I would like the so-called devs to address the statement they made saying that they were never going to do masternodes.

So, for all of those who are paying attention, lest they get scammed by them in the ICO ...

1) The devs claim they will swap to masternodes and do a 3:1 coin swap, reducing the supply.
2) People buy on the promise of masternodes. Yay! Go masternodes!!! Cheesy

3) After discovering the large "original" dev wallet, the devs announce they are going to instead do an ERC-20 token and not bother with the coin swap, because of unknown amount from the original pre-mine. There will be no swap at all, and you are SOL if you bought the coins on the old chain.
4) After complaining by some in the community, they say they will allow 25 more people (i.e. 300 total people on telegram, whereas they currently have 275) to be able to obtain an airdrop from the new ERC-20 tokens.
5) I say they promised masternodes at some point.
6) They say they never promised masternodes and point to their new plan (as of today even) that they will do this Proof of Hodling.
7) Some others are nice enough to point out devs' original statements so I didn't have to.

Cool

. Here we are again.

So who here who bought on the promise of masternodes wants to give their personally identifying information to these yahoos for an ERC-20 token?

I sure do not.

In addition, I would like what was promised: masternodes. Maybe we don't need this new team to go forward with this.

Finally devs : You're telling me that your team doesn't have the required skill sets to make a block explorer? How were you going to do a chain swap if you couldn't even manage that simple task?

Roll Eyes

Masternodes themselves, are not possible on ETH, so we are utilizing the exact same payout structuring and titling the smart contract concept as proof-of-hodl . Just like a masternode, if you hold the required amount - you are eligible for the extra staking(HODLing) rewards.This will proceed on the new eth chain. There will be no overall difference to the set up than it would have been on a seperate blockchain as originally planned with a swap out. We cannot engage our swap out as originally planned. We did not bother to develope a block explorer as we did not plan to proceed to utilize CWXT after the swap. A community member offered to assist to save us time and was having issues getting it to sync - due to the original dev remove portion of the source code. We had everything set up to engage a token swap up until the discovery of token centralization when a user was finally able to detect the problem with the explorer. We are proceed accordingly given the circumstances.

I would like to point out that your previous post doesn't address the fact that you made claims about masternodes in the past. You completely gloss over what I asked for in my post and state what you are currently doing. I get what you are currently doing. And it's not what you originally said when you announced the r.

I understand Masternodes are not possible on the Ethereum platform. When you initially announced a re-launch, you said masternodes with a 3:1 swap. You never said that this would be a token swap onto the Ethereum platform. You never said there would be an ICO.

Obviously, this changed in the last few days.

However, that doesn't excuse the fact that many people bought the CWXT token expecting a token swap. Now there is no token swap and those who bought CWXT are left bagholding.

Let's take a step back and see how this looks for newcomers to the community, especially when it comes to the fake block explorer.

There are very easy ways for you to accommodate those who bought coins and to do the swap to your new ERC-20 token (which is now to be ICO'ed when previously it was promised you wouldn't do that).

It's quite simple. Actually create a block explorer. None of this 'some member of the community created a scammy block explorer and we are concerned about the amounts that are in this one address' BS. If the other block explorer doesn't work properly, how do you know that there are all those coins to be worried about in the original developer's address?

Please answer my question regarding the block explorer. If it's fake, then how do you know those coins exist or are a problem?

In short, you do not know, so don't use it as an excuse to do a scammy ICO.

Again, to address your comments about masternodes, we originally planned to develope masternodes on our own blockchain with a new coin. but when the discovery was made regarding the original developer possesing a large amount a the supply - more than just what what in one known wallet, we had to pivot to ensure the protocol did not risk centralization and to ensure the security of our token investors on CWXT. There will still be a 3x reduction in supply. 60% of the supply is being given to cwxt community members, the other 40% ( which would have been swapped for the original devs stash if we engaged a swap) will be sold via an ICO to bring new community members to our protocol. We are giving 35,000 CWX to all community member that held CWXT. we have a registration form on our website to complete and have posted a blog regarding such aswell. We are allowing everyone to ALSO keep their CWXT ontop of gaining the free CWX. more details are on our website in the blog post.

As far as the block exploer. The original dev has opened statied he owns a large stake on that network

The original dev hasn't turned on his wallet since the first 2 weeks. How do you know he's coming back?

He's long gone.

We can still do a community take-over of this coin without doing an ICO on the Ethereum platform.

Looks like the second guy in the rich list (address CViTkvEegwcNWFvu2zCSDX8qYzM38hkZpV) has been active since you announced masternodes. You're going to let him down? As the self-proclaimed new leaders of this coin's community, you're going to promise one thing and do another, even though it's completely possible to do what you said you would originally do? How do you expect anyone to listen to you and believe what you say?

You've even admitted that you know what the problem is, but that it is too hard to do and that it's technically difficult, even though multiple people have told you that it's possible.

You're then using it as an excuse to launch your scammy ICO.

As mentioned above. The original dev has openly admitted he possesses more than just the one large wallet that was discovered. He owns a few more million cwxt. The second wallet is likely him aswell but no way to validate if he actually does control it, or which others he may control. Due to the high risk of centralization we have chosen to give each holder of cwxt that registers a limited amount of cwx at no charge. This way we are able to ensure one individual member( original dev) does not control a large portion of the market while still ensuring our current stake holders receive a stake of cwx, while also being able to retain their cwxt to do as they wish.

We are not here to scam anyone. We are dealing with circumstances as effectively as possible. Yes we can block the one main wallet from a swap - but we are unable to block the other large sums he controls also which is why we have chosen the route we have. We hope you all can continue to support us. If you choose not to, we can respect that aswell

I see that you mentioned that the original dev has stated that he controls the large address above. However, you provide no proof. In addition, there's no way for you to know how much he controls in the large wallet unless you create a block explorer.

Let's just fork the original dev out of that ONE large address with 77% of the supply. There's no need to do an ICO.

Also, I sincerely doubt the original dev is the second address ... In fact, I can provide proof if you really like.

Please answer my points that I bring up:

1) How do you know the dev is still active and would cause issues with a hard fork? What do we know? He hasn't posted in ages and his wallet address (the real identifying information that you can use as to whether activity exists) hasn't staked since mid-January.

2) You say you can block the large wallet, good. Then do it. Who cares if the original dev still has a few coins. I highly doubt he has anything beyond that main wallet. In fact, we'd be able to do some basic blockchain analysis to find out any addresses that are still associated to him. Totally doable as long as he never sent to an exchange, and then sold and rebought his own coin -- but really, who cares, throw up a rich list and allow people to sign addresses if they want to prove it's them and not the original dev ... I'm sure that we'll see that the large stake holders are not the dev's sybil and that we have a vibrant and diverse community.

3) Why would anyone from the community believe that you will do as you promise when your initial promise is doable, as you've so readily admitted? Why should the community follow you? All you've done is made broken promises, back-pedal and offer different plans than the original one promised. You then continue down this whole charade and expect people to buy into your BS, using excuses.

complexring

Posts

Merits