Hello, Kernan, you wrote: K> Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S>> For simplicity, at the moment of passage on proof-of-stake and the master . K> I understand why is selected proof-of-stake and why exchange will go 1:1 differently each person received on pre-ico more than 1.000 tokens there can be a master , . S>> Think, it as that negatively can be perceived? K> as enclosed, I feel a certain attempt to throw. I think, many with pre-ico can argue also since they were included the first into the project took a risk maximum on itself on one conditions, and here bang! and conditions exchanged on less favourable. If WP was legally we mean, there could be problems. Probably about it it is necessary to write more in detail to us. Look as was: - Tokens exchange on coins 1:100 (capitalization as a matter of fact does not change, simply the dollar breaks into cents) - new coins, for 5 years capitalization of coins would double at the expense of appearance new As became - tokens exchange 1:1, the dollar remains dollar - new coins do not appear in the future, all capitalization is on sale on ICO - appear the master for 100.000 coins that in the future should lead to growth of demand for tokens (in a number of the countries the are obliged to be the master since honey the data cannot abandon country limits) I.e. anything did not change as a matter of fact, and the token became more favourable in long-term perspective. Or I do not understand something?