Both myself, and @intelliguy of steemit have talked about serious flaws with coinmarketcap.com which seems to be the go-to-source for how well coins are doing.

The crypto industry relies too heavily on this site which is flawed.

I’ll give a quick example, and I’d really appreciate it if some other people do their own research. Look at the points…

Go to www.coinmarketcap.com and look at the page. Look at all the asterix * down the page – these denote pre-mined coins and coins that are not mineable (but given by ICO, etc) In the drop down box at the top, you can select under Currencies “Filter Non-Mineable and Premined” Look at the list again, and you see Peercoin as #15 Now question – Ethereum had a hard fork, and gave birth to Ethereum Classic (ETC) as well as (ETH), they are both ahead of Peercoin even though these chains are the same, but with different issues, Should they get 2 listings? They are the same genesis block with same starting chain! Question again, GMC (Game Credits) the announce thread they point to on that coin points here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1266597 (Nov 27, 2015)

But the real announce thread is instead here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1010745.0 (April 3, 2015)

But if you look, the April 3, 2015 thread first post admits that GMC was actually released (Feb 14. 2014)

THERE IS AN UNSPOKEN PROBLEM IN THE CRYPTOCURRENCY INDUSTRY.

Bad launch coins, have either:

a) renamed themselves

b) relaunched themselves

c) FORKED themselves

d) RE-EDITED their original bitcointalk threads to change or delete original information. Changed logos, launch information, deleted posts, moderated threads, re-launched new threads (hiding their history). An example of this is DASH and Darkcoin. Search the bitcointalk threads showing right now. The only way to see the truth is to go to web.archive.org and pull up old snapshots of the forum pages. No one does that…

coinmarketcap.com isn’t showing these inconsistencies and are helping bad coins flourish. These coins could have been launched (and have been re-launched) under different names, with buggy code, with premines because of developers, ninja launch, unfair launch, and bug launches.

The coins in distribution for many of these coins are held by developers and people that were aware of the launch and how to mine them before any one else did. When you can pre-mine coins before any one else figures out how to get them, you can buy/sell to your self on exchanges pushing up the price artificially to only pay exchange fees and dump coins slowly to every idiot that buys/sells them. That’s how you pump a coin price and then get rid of them over time. It’s possible when you can control the way a coin is launched and mined.

This is a serious cancer in the legitimacy of which coins are shown.

It is no secret that Peercoin had one of the most fair launches “ever”… pre-announced 9 days before genesis back in 2012 and even if Sunny King were to mine coins, he had to do so, just like everyone else.

(Not only that, but even after the source code for Peercoin with the genesis block was launched, mining still waited 5 full minutes before mining began UTC, which gave time for everyone to download, compile, and start mining even after the full code was released) — THAT is how a fair launch of a coin works. Even then, it was SHA256, so if you knew how to mine and compile a Bitcoin wallet, you could surely download, compile, and mine a Peercoin wallet.

Most coins with strange algorithms (other than SHA256) when released with out good CPU/GPU miners (unlike Peercoin) where advantages were given to the developers who had miners “on the ready” for these new algorithms where ready in advance before the public. These new algo developers where still ahead of the rest of the public so they could mine more before their coin release. Many coins were ,launched with the developers mining before most people even understood the new algo.

No one ever is talking about the fraudulent coins on coinmarketcap.com and these same coins rank higher than Peercoin (no one talks about the problem except me and @intelliguy). It appears every one is taking things at face value which hurts legitimate coins.

We all need to conduct our own personal investigation. It’s not hard to check out this data and observe how facts, figures, coins and chains are obscuring the real data. It is no wonder why we rank so low. We’re not a scam coin. We haven’t forked, been renamed, and re-launched multiple times… Our chain runs from the genesis block unlike many others.

I have no idea why only me, and @intelliguy on steemit seems to realize this…

Go look at DASH. It’s actually Darkcoin, where the initial launch benefited the developer where he premined a bunch of coins before the real wallet was released.

Go look at GMC… It was really launched 2014, but coinmarketcap only accepts the Nov 2015 release…

Go look at most of these coins listed… there are huge problems in their history. Why are people investing in these coins? Because no one does research and coinmarketcap.com isn’t showing the real truth. Their business model obviously shows they are going to list all coins… and get advertising revenue by doing so… even at the expense of not doing a public service by showing the truth.

We have a real problem – let’s look at this…