[ANN][STD] StandardCoin - BUILT-IN EXCHANGE - Permanently Rising Rate

[standardcoin]

The earlier investor is investor A not investor 1. Investor A is the one who joined the Price Valuation Phase.
Investor 1 is just an example, he re-present for all the Initial Investors, who hold 100m STD.

You cannot describe a hypothetical "Investor 1" withdrawing his funds without explaining exactly what investment that very same person made in the first place, and how many STD they got for that investment.

The Investor 1 got his 100m STD in the Price Valuation Phase, which costs him 40 BTC.

[Turpomann]

Mods don't remove scams, you have to read and find out yourself (here my explanation).

I notified Tomatocage too.

Huh! It's not cool to misuse the trust system like that. What if everybody begin to do that?

We all get the scam accusations already. Are you going to give negative trust to everyone who doesn't agree with you?

No I'm not.
I'm tagging SCAMMERS. Maths there, no opinions, no "disagreement".
You can still choose to get scammed if you are fooled by a couple of simple formulas, your choice of course. But a fair warning may spare some distracted user to be a victims.

- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.

"Quality" of the post has nothing to do with this. It's a plain, blatant scam. It's a fraud, so op is not trustworthy. I'm perfectly in line with trust system guidelines.
Matematical proof here  --> https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=522874.msg5919351#msg5919351

No, you are misusing the system. There's no way around it. You clearly justify your negative feedback on the quality of his posts. Trust system is meant for trading. You can't redefine the rules how you like. I agree it's good to warn about scams, but nobody likes bullies.

Again: no. A bad quality but HONEST post will not be tagged. If he's trying to scam people money it has nothing to do with quality.
Are you just a troll or another OP sockpuppet?

Are you trying to bully me? What fucking sockpuppet? Fuck you really! From now on, I put you to my ignore list.

[Kreativekrypto]

Ghibly thank you for warning everyone with your numerous posts, also thanks for the negative feedback and trust. I will remove mine on yours after yours is removed. Once done just leave the thread you've been the best white knight you could and warned us all many times, so its ok to leave now. You're 35+ years old you should know better by now.

Standard thank you for fixing the calculation when do you estimate the multipool to go live?

[hxmsam]

Nice catch Jomay. Dev let us know when the formula is corrected please.

[Kreativekrypto]

Done removed, its better to agree to disagree. Like stated though, you've warned us all just find another thread we understand and accept the risks.

[standardcoin]

Nice catch Jomay. Dev let us know when the formula is corrected please.

Already fixed it. I posted this earlier:

I've just fixed the formula on the Exchange page. We will use a new concept called: Step - AMC
Basically. The buying price will based on the next-step AMC, not the current one. This will make sure that all the new investors in the current round will buy at the same price.
Will deploy the new calculator in a moment.

[Iced]

Only question I have is what is the configuration file for this wallet (nodes) since I can't seem to sync...

I am willing to take the risk even if it is a ponzi scheme whatever...

[standardcoin]

Only question I have is what is the configuration file for this wallet (nodes) since I can't seem to sync...

I am willing to take the risk even if it is a ponzi scheme whatever...

try these nodes:
addnode=85.3.43.4:60391
addnode=134.3.176.190:52847
addnode=101.167.59.225:62175
addnode=83.82.233.102:62096
addnode=112.81.142.180:50138

[tibbyte]

Too well it all started. 

[Turpomann]

I redefine the rule system to my liking too. From now on I'm going to give positive trust points to all posts that I really like or those that I feel are getting unjustfied trust points until proven right. How do you like my new rule ghibly79?

[trdiablo]

I invested some BTC in Standardcoin and believe in it.
DEV seems to have spent a lot of time and thought into this.

Please don't tell me on 1 April when the price valuation phase ends that this was all just a April fools prank

[trdiablo]

I redefine the rule system to my liking too. From now on I'm going to give positive trust points to all posts that I really like or those that I feel are getting unjustfied trust points until proven right. How do you like my new rule ghibly79?

Don't feed the trolls

[crossabdd]

try these nodes:
addnode=85.3.43.4:60391
addnode=134.3.176.190:52847
addnode=101.167.59.225:62175
addnode=83.82.233.102:62096
addnode=112.81.142.180:50138
It seems work.

[Moebius327]

I redefine the rule system to my liking too. From now on I'm going to give positive trust points to all posts that I really like or those that I feel are getting unjustfied trust points until proven right. How do you like my new rule ghibly79?

Sorry but I would like it very much when I see you guys burn into this ponzi, despite all the warnings.

[kache]

Selling, PM with offers:

[kache]

How about changing the abbreviation STD to something not so sexually transmitted? I know that most of the suitable ones are already taken, but something like STDC, SDD, SND are much better than STD for obvious reason. 

No such thing as bad advertising.

[jomay]

The earlier investor is investor A not investor 1. Investor A is the one who joined the Price Valuation Phase.
Investor 1 is just an example, he re-present for all the Initial Investors, who hold 100m STD.

You cannot describe a hypothetical "Investor 1" withdrawing his funds without explaining exactly what investment that very same person made in the first place, and how many STD they got for that investment.

The Investor 1 got his 100m STD in the Price Valuation Phase, which costs him 40 BTC.

And then 100 mil more are mined and sold for 40 btc (cause value is fixed). Using those 40 btc initial investment. Then investor 1 wants to sell back his 100mil std, which costed him 40 btc but OH WAIT no btc are left.

Not a scammer, just bad "quality" post :trollface:

Hi ghibly79,
you are incorrect regarding the 40BTC - the price guarantee does not guarantee the initial investment. In essence the investment of initial investors and other investors buying from the reserve is used to implement the guarantee of ALL investors and miners.

This coin is not a scam if the exchange and BTC reserve run by the dev is trustworthy and hopefully the BTC reserve is secured against hacking. But there are other concerns, as I have described in my original post https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=522874.msg5908692#msg5908692 . Point 1) was addressed by the dev, but I believe the others remain.

I'm not endorsing this coin, I'm just having fun watching people struggling with math or full of greed, fanboys and all that jazz. Popcorn, please!

[Turpomann]

I redefine the rule system to my liking too. From now on I'm going to give positive trust points to all posts that I really like or those that I feel are getting unjustfied trust points until proven right. How do you like my new rule ghibly79?

Don't feed the trolls

ghibly79 is the troll here. He made 50 posts about this being scam. I just hate arrogant bastards who think they on own exclusive right to bend the rules to their liking.

[NickPortland]

Whatever the truth behind this coin you cannot just abuse the trust system.

If BTCtalk had any mod team worthy of that name, you'd be already banned ghibly.

[standardcoin]

The earlier investor is investor A not investor 1. Investor A is the one who joined the Price Valuation Phase.
Investor 1 is just an example, he re-present for all the Initial Investors, who hold 100m STD.

You cannot describe a hypothetical "Investor 1" withdrawing his funds without explaining exactly what investment that very same person made in the first place, and how many STD they got for that investment.

The Investor 1 got his 100m STD in the Price Valuation Phase, which costs him 40 BTC.

And then 100 mil more are mined and sold for 40 btc (cause value is fixed). Using those 40 btc initial investment. Then investor 1 wants to sell back his 100mil std, which costed him 40 btc but OH WAIT no btc are left.

Not a scammer, just bad "quality" post :trollface:

Hi ghibly79,
you are incorrect regarding the 40BTC - the price guarantee does not guarantee the initial investment. In essence the investment of initial investors and other investors buying from the reserve is used to implement the guarantee of ALL investors and miners.

This coin is not a scam if the exchange and BTC reserve run by the dev is trustworthy and hopefully the BTC reserve is secured against hacking. But there are other concerns, as I have described in my original post https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=522874.msg5908692#msg5908692 . Point 1) was addressed by the dev, but I believe the others remain.

I'm not endorsing this coin, I'm just having fun watching people struggling with math or full of greed, fanboys and all that jazz. Popcorn, please!

Point number 2: The stored STD is not just reduced, it can also be filled up by investors taking their profit, so if 90% of the stored STD are sold, the selling rate really makes no sense but if some of the investors are dumping their coins, the price will make sense.
Point number 3: AMC can not go up easily, that's why a help from multipool is very important. This pool will keep mining and increase AMC.
Point number 4: Yes, price can fall below GER if the dev is not trust worthy. Just like any exchange, when you entrust your money with them, there is a risk that they will take your money and run away, unless the income that fee generates is much more worthy for the exchange.