Phoenix will no longer be holding keys to shareholder funds


I understand. It would be a very hard route to search for people via ISPs anyway. Poloniex might be the only ones having valuable information here.

I don’t quite agree with this sentiment. If you run a discussion board which is the main exchange point for obviously illegal activity, then you cannot justify it simply by also allowing posts that call the scammers out, because the scammers have a larger incentive to scam than other people to prevent scam. I mean you also cannot run a dark market product platform but then tell the court that you are fine because you allowed to discuss the legal status of the products on your platform (even if you don’t make money from it).


You’ve always been the idea guy. What’s the best solution here.


I won’t make a unilateral, knee-jerk decision about this because of one opinion. But you are right, @Creon, if the forums are considered by most to solely be a vehicle for purposes that break from their original mandate, they are no longer useful.

I’ll post a topic and ask for wider community feedback.


The persons who keep this machinery running are @jooize and @Phoenix by afaik currently buying back those millions of stolen shares using BTC taken from NSR buyers over the last months. The only reason they do it (if they even do it as they post) is to make this particular post so people are lured into the believe that buying NSR or NBT is a good idea (Jordan even phrased this giant theft here as positive).

Banning these two people certainly would reduce their impact to a minimum, however, what is this forum then? If people decide to catch up on what is there (in an honest way) then there it surely still has some value. But if this forum is essentially dead if you remove those two figures from the stage, then I am asking myself why it should be kept alive.


This is just insane. And that is why I asked @Phoenix several times whether he is giggling while he writes his posts. Is that dude even serious at all? Imagine how he is making fun of people that might have invested some of their money into this project. How the hell can you call a giant theft of 1 billion NSR being dumped on the market a great buying opportunity? This is real comedy. Extremely sad comedy.


We could lock the forums and leave it up as a long form how-to guide on how not to run a blockchain. Some developers came to the chatrooms looking for abandoned blockchain projects to take over. There might be other groups. Though the voting aspect of nu makes it really difficult to jumpstart again without taking control of existing shares. There’s really no optimal solution though options exist

Liquidity Operations will continue regardless of this forum's future

Interesting. Maybe they are interested in the exchange support or branding, but with this share distribution and current exchange support it is hard to believe that someone is seriously interested in doing that.

Honestly I think the archive idea is pretty nice. And not just because of the bad things in the end, but also because of the great things that were achieved before. Nu wasn’t a bad thing that took a while to reveal itself, it was a good thing that became bad and people might be able to learn from that.


Well, it started out with quite a shady coin distribution if you remember that. “Special seed investors” is a standard term that found its way into Nu as much as into B&CExchange. And both projects are into shambles. Voting turned out to be a ridiculous mechanism under that circumstances, it is literally worthless. And as long as @JordanLee could mint the hell out of his majority stakes and sell it slowly to the market, everything was fine to him. He might have underestimated the consequences of the buyback scam he pulled off, but in the end he cashed in a lot of money over the course of the last few years.


I like this idea better than removing it completely. @CoinGame’s idea has my vote.

Liquidity Operations will continue regardless of this forum's future

This is very true, don’t forget the undisclosed architect salary he received in the early days as well as the compensation for his current activity. Sad to say, he is definitely the financial winner of this whole story with @jooize on place 2 and I would say @henry on place 3.

edit: on the other hand, he lost his entire wallet funds three times, so there is a real chance that his profits were redistributed to some 12 year old hackers.


Did the buyback NSR be abandoned?
The community gave up on the NSR?
Why can’t we roll it back?


And you know what @creon? Could you please provide evidence that @henry isn’t place 1, too? :wink:


@henry also cashed in for the development of that very basic BKS exchange and for many other things… And now the loyal @henry disappeared and with him some BKS from @Sentinelrv.


this explains attempts to shut the Explorer down together with forum.


I’d like to chime in on the censorship accusation.
A month or so ago there was a post about the level of abuse that was being posted in the forum.
In that post it was politely pointed out by several forum members that they didn’t find the tone or content of some posts acceptable. It was mooted that people should be more active in flagging posts that they found offensive. Since than I have been more active in responding to flagged posts, either by hiding or removing posts that did seem to just contain offensive language towards individuals or, in some cases, where I didn’t agree it the flag, just removing the flag.
I agree in the underlying ideal of Freedom of speech on the forum but that doesn’t and shouldn’t mean that anyone can say whatever they want at any time without any repercussions. If a post is obviously offensive and/or flagged by other forum members as such, I think such posts could reasonably expect to be hidden or removed.
Denying Freedom of speech would be banning posters because they expressed viewpoints that I disagreed with, not simply moderating some offensive posts.
That said, my free time for actively moderating the forum remains limited. That affects things in two ways. It means that offensive posts may well be around for longer than they would otherwise be. It also means that when I do check the flagged posts list, I tend to scan for offensive remarks and then make a decision on the whole post based on that. If that has meant that a post that hasn’t used offensive language has been unfairly moderated, I apologise.
@Ben I’m sure you can verify that my moderation activity has been almost wholly since the post mentioned above. Censorship has not been my aim, more effecting moderation requests made by a selection of forum members.
There continues to be two diametrically opposed views expressed here continuously (a microcosm of much of the politics I see discussed in the real world). I think both sides have some valid points and both sides have questions to answer. As expressed before my gut feel is that the truth lies somewhere between the two. My hope always was that we could arrive at some answers through civil discourse. My moderation attempts were only trying to achieve that.

My thoughts on the original post of this thread: I’m still finding the words. I’ll try to formulate them and post after the kids are in bed.


Understood. I didn’t say that I agreed or disagreed with those specific actions, just that I was not the one that had done them. That comment was before I saw that he was referring to specific examples from this thread, and not only things that had happened in the past.

That you made the choices you did is a different conversation, and not one for this topic.


@woolly_sammoth I would like you to answer my question: Is this, from the perspective of honest shareholders, an offensive post or not? It doesn’t say “fuck”, and it doesn’t say “idiot”, but to me, this is an extremely offensive post. You are narrow minded and probably not that clever. And therefore I understand that the only thing you are scanning for is “idiot” and “fuck”. Your brain does not allow for a deeper investigation. I am sorry for you, idiot.


To help you @woolly_sammoth find this offensive post more quickly, I flagged it myself. Is that cool?


Do you actually understand what you are moderating here? This is a massive scam going on. Three thefts within under three months, and shareholders, those who actually are honest and hopeful but not in any control of the network or in command of the actions that are taken, those shareholders have to swallow the pills. And you think your role is important because you hide posts? How ridiculous are you?


Yup, thanks @Mavo, exactly the kind of knee jerk name calling I’ve come to expect from you.
I’m well aware of your argument for what has taken place here and feel, along with several other forum participants that there are holes and inconsistencies with it. Why, if Phoenix is such a master scammer is he still here and posting? Why go to all the effort of creating support teams/white papers/automated bots and all the other infrastructure that came in the early days if the whole intent of the project was a con for a few grand? I’m sorry I just don’t buy it.
I agree that there have been many actions taken that could be seen as suspect but I prefer to take Hanlon’s Razor “don’t attribute to malice, that which can first be explained with stupidity” as a base line and work from there as evidence presents itself. So far I have seen no evidence that this latest loss/theft was anything other than a complete and total mismanagement of his wallets. Unacceptable? yes, to which the pre-emptive response has been the handing over of all funds to @jooize (no need to remind me of your thoughts their either @mavo, I’m familiar with them to the point of boredom), that doesn’t seem to me the action of a master scammer who just pulled off a heist. Perhaps I’m wrong and its all a cover but without any evidence for or against I will go with my gut.
I reiterate what I have written previously. I think the fundamentals of this project have merit. I will continue to work on projects to support it. I would like for everyone to pull in the same direction for once and with some civility if possible.