Chainlink Poolers Unite Or Prepare Wojacks

So how can we best communicate to them that if they don't comply they'll have the weaponized autism of hundreds of anons levied against them and will suffer the same fate of Clinton?

>>3421923
Seems like the smartest choices are to either refund the people who went over or send coins to everyone

The latest sentiment seems to be leaning towards refunding the entire pool if the cap was exceeded. Many people who were not accepted to presale and did not pool are upset.

We need to unleash the legions

>>3421923
Seems like the smartest choices are to send everyone back their ether and do the pre-sale over again so I can join in and enjoy the comfy ride.

MAKE THEM REGRET MESSING WITH OUR GAINS, START THE FUD ENGINE

yeah... that's not happening

you can get in on crowdsale still.

But the rest of us are seemingly fucked because our Eth won't be refunded until it's all over I'm guessing

Why don't they just refund the last transactions that made the individual pool caps exceed?

Refund all transactions that sent it over limit and give rest the tokens

Hope this happens, in my pool I sent my small amount of eth and 1 min after someone sents 144 eth so he can take it to the limit. Basically putting our pool at 3 over the limit.

I would laugh so hard if that greedy cunt misses out thanks to me

>>3421923
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

First of all they shouldn't have done the "up to 300" thing because the slots were clearly 100-500 and 500-2000.
Then the pools were poorly made, no indication of max limit on the link and it didn't close when it was filled so people kept sending over the limit.
It's their own fault really, lack of competence, organization and communication.
Post the slack link here and lets fucking obliterate their incompetent assholes.

I hate these fucking devs, dumb as fuck and this is supposed to be one of the genius projects out there?

Obsidian will shoot to the moon

>>3422476
There was indication of the max limit on the email linking you to your personal presale address. Pooling was not supposed to happen.

I hope all you retards that sent eth to a pool address get your eth returned. You really don't deserve anything, trying to cheat your way into presale then whining about it when you don't get your way.

>>3422476
slack.smartcontract.com
>Pooling was not supposed to happen.
Pooling was happening on the slack constantly with devs saying absolutely nothing against it. Was cleary they were turning a blind eye.

>>3421923

They said prior to the release of the addresses that you weren't allowed to share them publicly.

Every /biz/ pool was the result of an address being shared publicly.

Why should they honour this unambiguous breach of the terms of service?

You got greedy, /biz. You broke the rules. You don't deserve to be in the presale.

>>3422552
2nd part supposed to be a response to >>3422542

>>3422195

The people who shared the link violated the agreement, since they don't really know who shared it to begin with, they'd just refund everyone who used the link

File: heh.png (567KB, 600x595px) Image search: [Google]

567KB, 600x595px

Chainlinkers
blown
the fuck
out.

You should have just bought ODN like the rest of us cool dudes.

>>3422577
I know I'm repeating myself but this was also happening constantly on their slack with the devs not saying anything against it.

>>3422552
>Pooling was happening on the slack constantly with devs saying absolutely nothing against it. Was cleary they were turning a blind eye.
So what?
You can't break the rules of the presale then complain when they do something about it to protect the interests of their actual investors.

>>3422589

At this point I can't tell if everyone posting about Obsidian actually doesn't like it so they're getting everyone else to hate it too by being as obnoxious as possible

>was told that the address shouldn't be shared
>was told what the limit was
>biztard decides to share address and send eth over limit

biz will be biz

bunch of autistic fucks

File: link.jpg (36KB, 714x516px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 714x516px

the devs said pools are okay while purchase was running.
the purchase site said "you've currently sent XXX ETH and have XXX LINK".
>YOU HAVE LINK

and now this all is a maybe?
i don't care anymore, but if they refund they'll better do it ASAP.

>>3422592

they're probably busy doing actual work, regardless when you violate their agreement that's on you, not them.

I hope they refund everyone in the pools that went over, but hold up their funds for at least a month till they get refunded

Good job morons

ok faggets here is the rundown, because the power of autist is too op, i as a millionare crypto investors can recognize ur power,

i have a lot riding on this because it will x30(insider knowledge but pretty obs)
so i will tell u what they cant

in return i expect u faggets to behave

basically every link is a smart contract n once u go over the limit ur contract is void, that means every eth gets return to the original wallet, this was hard coded in and CANNOT be changed which is why everyone was warned of this b4 hand and they specifically said NO pools

However they are trying to make a work around so only those who went overboard get their eth returned, but as u can imagine they are a small team r are extremely busy because this will be a x30, literally everyone is on their ass trying to ride the wave with them (investors, hedge fund n sht), so u faggets need to be patient

>>3422552
I saw that too, if they haven't acted decisively against this behaviour yet then I dont expect them to do anything later on.

>>3422710
youre a fucking retard, thats now how it works. These addresses are clearly wallets, not contracts. thus it is completely up to the devs what happens to the money in the wallets.

>>3422744
>doesn't know that wallets are contracts

>>3422744
>These addresses are clearly wallets, not contracts

[_] does understand how smart contracts work
[X] does not understand how smart contracts work

>>3422765
>>3422767

The addresses were just regular wallets with no extra contract code retards.

File: guy-with-drink-laughing.jpg (34KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x600px

>>3422744
>calls me a retard of the bat
>proves hes a retard right after

File: Di0B7QgP.jpg (24KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 512x512px

>>3422744
>>3422767

>smartcontract.com doesn't use smart contracts

They're going to execute contracts on the ETH in those wallets.

How else was each sending address going to get link back otherwise?

>>3422710
Let us gno how we can help

When it was happening they were cagey and kept repeating that the LINK would be sent to the individual contributing addresses, implicitly condoning pooling, when they had every opportunity to explicitly say it's not OK. They said it was 'not recommended' but specifically only because it raises the possibility of sending to a scammer. Now there are these pussies in this thread who are butthurt that they weren't resourceful enough to get it on the action that they want to try and ruin the party. The party will not be ruined. The early supporters and contributors will be paid LINK.

>>3422931
>The early supporters and contributors will be paid LINK.

Source plx

Sounded like there is a big debate within the team, based on OP's post

Personally hoping they refund whatever went over the limit and send out the rest. Their fault that they sent out confusing messages.

>>3422973

Not /biz/s fault that they pooled publicly shared addresses even though it was specifically stipulated that people weren't to publicly share addresses?

File: 1504910257565.png (203KB, 349x491px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 349x491px

Cheaty weebs who can't make an honest dollar about to get BTFO.

>>3423002
You obviously weren't in the slack diring the pre-sale. It was a lot like it is now - no clear communication, vague statements and the users have to read between the lines. Autistic to pretend otherwise after the fact

this is confirmed bancor 2

Oh well, as a poorfag who saw an amazing opportunity there with the presale, I just want to get either LINK or refunded in time to participate in the ICO (at least try to)...

>>3423146
This ain't some shitty ETH token.

>>3423146
yup. if chainlinkers wanna see their fate, look no further than TNT. it's basically exactly the same thing "omg big company connections, omg the tokens are used to power nodes" and it's below ICO price right now. lmao

>>3422931
They should at the very least come out and say definitively one way or the other, this bullshit is pissing me off. At least if they said everything is being refunded I'd know that I better try to get in on the crowdsale with the original amount I tried to purchase in the presale.

>>3421923
NOOOOOOOOOO. Don't do this to us neets!!!!

>>3423171
You should prepare for the worst and hope for the best anon. Get some more ETH while it's cheap. I'm still optimistic though

>>3423227
I've got plenty of ETH, I just don't want to get double down on LINK. While I do think LINK will do well I already purchased the amount I'm comfortable with, I don't like having more than 10% of my portfolio in any single altcoin.

>>3423275
Wew lad I'm at 50% and considering more

>>3423170
TNT didn't have a working product, and they still don't

They better clarify this shit fast and if they're going to refund, refund ASAP.

I could've fucking doubled that money if it wasn't sitting in their wallet.

That's the fucking problem.

If you read in between the lines of what the team members in slack were saying for first 3 weeks, pooling was acceptable, but not recommended.

Now it seems like they are twisting their words. Stupid fucking Rory. Our eth is gonna be tied up until this shit is already 3x ico on exchanges.

Me for example, I applied for pre-sale very early. I did not get accepted but apparently that now qualifies me for whitelist. But I won't have any fucking eth for the whitelist cause it's all sitting in these goddam invalid pools

Is there a minimum contribution to the crowdsale?