I do not like many things in I3 and I say them publicly with a hope they will change for better!
Let me tell you what I really do not like:
-Starting an IPO for 10 MIL US Dollars;
-Giving no clue what the company will actually do(not with the money, in general);
-Appearing on the 3rd day and saying – 'Sorry for the delay, I was drunk from the IPO party 3 days ago';
-Disappearing again with hardly any explanations…
and you should not like those things more than me – your name is on their joke of a site…
PS I think I am done with this topic.
[edit] added 'do'
-Starting an IPO for 10 MIL US Dollars;
So you don't like that they set a maximum funding goal as well as a minimum funding goal. This contrasts to Invictus which did not set a maximum funding goal or a minimum funding goal. Why is this something evil for swarm to do and fine for Invictus to do? What exactly is evil about setting an ambitious maximum funding goal? Remember, that's the point at which they say they will stop taking money from people, not some arbitrary amount being demanded.
-Giving no clue what the company will actually do(not with the money, in general);
If you don't know what the company does, you shouldn't invest. Nobody is forcing anybody, what exactly is the problem? Swarm is pretty clear about what they are, they are a crowdfunding platform that generates custom tokens for projects. If you buy the Swarm token, whenever a project launches on the swarm platform 1% of the tokens (or it might be 1.5%, not looking at numbers) are distributed to all holders of swarm tokens... just like protoshares, except they actually have the tech ready and are doing it. If you have a problem with swarms concept, you should have a big problem with Invictus because Protoshares IS THE SAME THING except Invictus decides where all the money goes and it doesnt look like they've done a very good job. If your concern is that you can't understand it, are you saying that they should have this all together when you do not expect the same from Invictus? Ask a new person if AGS/PTS/BTS/BTS_X/BTS_ME is clear, it's not. Swarm at least hasn't created a giant hairball of confusion, they just have initial "what is that" confusion. Do you really want to argue this point?
-Appearing on the 3rd day and saying – 'Sorry for the delay, I was drunk from the IPO party 3 days ago';
.....this is really a point you want to hang your hat on? Things are confusing in early days, I would assume you'd be sympathetic.
-Disappearing again with hardly any explanations…
Unless you do something crazy like email them at their advertised email addresses, skype the founder, join their hipchat, etc. etc. again do you really want to argue about communication competency?
and you should not like those things more than me – your name is on their joke of a site…
I already gave them shit for not being understanding of a confused guy who came into their chat, yelled a bunch and got himself kicked. It was the wrong thing to do and they'll suffer his hate for it. My name is on the site because I believe crowdfunding is an exceptionally important area that cryptocurrency is just about to disrupt, and Swarm is an ambitious attempt executing towards that vision. That's the quote I have on the site, I'm totally comfortable with my exposure. I'm not part of the company, they've never paid me any money and they've listened when I cautioned them about things like releasing the token without attaching any value to it (which eventually wound up being the 1% distribution).
Of course you're done with the topic, I'm asking you to back up your hate with some actual data and all you've got is that you want Invictus to succeed and anyone pointing out the reasons why that chance is slipping away are the enemy. You are blinded by your investment, and your behavior is to the detriment of the entire community you wish to protect.
Show Posts
