ICO Update: EtherInc (aka eInc) or “Can we get a do over?”

The ass clowns 🍑🤡 at Tokenicide recently learned that Ethereum whitepaper appropriating blockchain startup EtherInc (a.k.a. “eInc”) has rescheduled its ICO.

Again.

Is it true that the “third time’s the charm?”

Apparently not, because this is the FOURTH public token sale date they have announced…

Angry Face Saying "Are You Fucking Kidding Me"
We wish…

Can We Get a Do Over? And Another? And Another?

We can understand an ICO reboot if there are massive technical glitches that wreak havoc on your launch. Like maybe a hack that resulted in contributions being stolen. Or anything outside the founders’ control. But that’s not what happened with eInc (or EtherInc, or whatever). You can read all the details in our first ICO Review of eInc, but the tl;dr version can be expressed as follows:

Rocky & Bullwinkle - Bullwinkle says, "Hey Rocky! Watch me pull an ICO that doesn't suck out of this plagiarized whitepaper!"

Rocky & Bullwinkle - Rocky says, "But that trick never works"

Rocky & Bullwinkle - Bullwinkle says, "This time for sure!"

Rocky & Bullwinkle - Bullwinkle pulls poop emoji from whitepaper

Here’s a summary of everything that has transpired since we first stumbled across the project:

  • Our first review of eInc (or EtherInc, or whatever), was published on April 23, 2018, after the project had already postponed its ICO once.
  • A few days later, the project was taken offline, the plagiarized whitepaper re-drafted, the website relaunched, and the public sale scheduled to begin on June 25, 2018.
  • A few days ago, we learned that eInc postponed the token sale again, with the public sale scheduled to start on July 15, 2018.

The 5th T for EtherInc

We typically try to cover the 4 Ts in all of our reviews, i.e., Team, Technology, Token and our own personal “Tilt,” but we ultimately decided it just wasn’t worth our time or yours. Instead, the only T applicable to this project is “Tragic.” And not just because it needed multiple “do overs” after we discovered that they lifted 79% of their whitepaper from the Ethereum Whitepaper.

Image shows results of plagiarism check - 79% of EtherInc whitepaper taken from Ethereum whitepaper

The real tragedy here is that there are people in the ICO support services industry–including all the advisors still on the project–who are willing to continue supporting it. Apparently shame is an even rarer commodity than original whitepaper content over at eInc (or EtherInc , or whatever).

Kermit Drinking Tea Meme - Seven ICObench advisors and not one of them bothered to mention the team's whitepaper was shit. But that's none of my business."
What Kermit said…again

Conclusion

In our first review, we concluded with the suggestion that “[t]his may not be a scam.”

We may have to rethink that conclusion. 🤔

Our Honest AF Rating on this project (again) is a 0.1 –  Epic and total failure.

eInc

0.1

Team

0.5/10

Tech

0.0/10

Token

0.0/10

Tilt

0.0/10

Pros

  • Conclusive proof that ICObench is a joke

Cons

  • Unimpressive team
  • Entire board from ICObench
  • The plagiarism may be gone, but the ones who did it are still there
  • Please make it stop

Post Author: Grant

Entertainment, Social Media & Cryptocurrency Attorney; ICO Advisor; Founder of Antipodal Talent 美中人才; U.S. Army Veteran

9 thoughts on “ICO Update: EtherInc (aka eInc) or “Can we get a do over?”

    Steven Bodnar

    (June 29, 2018 - 11:57 am)

    Postponing ICOs is fine. There is no need to rush into a DOWN market. This article claims the whitepaper was plagiarized. This article defames individuals who I work with at eInc. I have a substantial position in eInc. I hold their actual tokens in my wallet. This article is at best poor journalism and at worst, defamation. Tokenicide should actually INTERVIEW the team before making sweeping assumptions as to what role the advisors are playing – eInc is allowing ICOs to be launched on their platform as well as other businesses. Having ICO Bench advisors for whatever purpose provides them access to ICO deal flow. Now that is established I’m seeking legal options for remedy as this article goes beyond satire and my token holdings are going to be negatively impacted by this.

      Grant

      (June 29, 2018 - 3:46 pm)

      Thank you for your wonderful comments. We would respond as follows:

      1. The eInc whitepaper that was accessible from their website on 4/23/2018 (when we wrote our first article) was most definitely plagiarized. Posting a revised version doesn’t change the fact that eInc posted a plagiarized whitepaper as their own work and asked people to give them money based on it. 😐

      2. If we were gunning for a Pulitzer, then we might take offense at your characterization of our work as “poor journalism.” But since we’re not, your reference to what we do as any kind of journalism made us laugh out loud. Thank you for that. 😊

      3. There might very well be some parts of the article you don’t agree with but nothing that would qualify as defamation. At least not in any court of law that might have jurisdiction. Not to mention the fact that you’d have to deal with the issues of standing, proving damages, etc. If you REALLY want to throw good money after bad to test that theory, we certainly won’t stop you. In fact, we would love the opportunity to meet an attorney who was desperate enough to take such a shitty case. 😂

      4. Finally, you don’t seriously think that what we write on our website has any substantial impact on the markets at all, do you? Come on, now. That’s just silly. 😜

    icopussy

    (June 30, 2018 - 10:48 am)

    @Steven Bodnar ” Having ICO Bench advisors for whatever purpose provides them access to ICO deal flow” Having ICO bench advisor only purpose is for money grab… Come on man, people are not stupid anymore… your project is nothing but flip out if you ever reach exchange..

    Steven Bodnar

    (July 1, 2018 - 5:33 am)

    You both need to respect what kind of authority I command and you will learn the hard way because I have very deep pockets.

      Seriously Man?

      (July 2, 2018 - 3:05 pm)

      What authority? You mean your money man? You keep writing stuff like this in a public forum and you won’t have it for long. This is just sad. Be classy, don’t threaten people with ambiguous legal actions. Your authority is as good as your rep and right now that shit is going downhill and fast.

    jason

    (July 1, 2018 - 6:27 am)

    @grant a little butthurt? you seem like you asked them for a deal and they rejected you . this whole article is just you venting dude, also you havnt been in the market long enough to know what kind of market it is . less moaning becuase you didnt get a deal or something more of the reviewing please.

      Grant

      (July 1, 2018 - 6:48 pm)

      @jason First off, thank you for the free online psychological assessment. That was very generous of you and only a complete asshole would complain about how inaccurate it was under the circumstances. So I won’t do that.

      However, I will point out that in failing so miserably in the task you set for yourself, you actually did a great job of exposing your own cynicism. And that’s something we have in common. But cynicism and corruption are two very different things.

      It may come as a surprise, but none of us are doing this for self-enrichment. On the contrary, we’re all doing quite well as a direct result of having the privilege of working in this industry (legitimately). Which is why we feel obligated to write about it when we see people fucking it up.

      The good news is that we will continue to review projects as you have requested, and thank you for taking the time to read our shit and share your comments about it.

    Ken LA

    (August 20, 2018 - 9:46 am)

    First I would like to start with ALL of Etherinc team remaining professional to these ABSOULUTE INSANE allegations. I MEAN LOOK at the reviews of previous ICO “gamechangers” that had and ARE AND ABSOULUTE joke. I’m not even a current investor but I have been around since the beginning so I have my personal respect for certain “names” that have accomplished Alot VS just ungeard of. No ones. I usually wouldn’t bother especially on a company I’m not apart of yet but WOW talk about u ethical here. Sad really.. I’ll pass the word to anyone I know that matters that’s of they have even heard of this company. My advise show respect to all. Esp if your job is a OPINION!!

      Grant

      (August 20, 2018 - 9:53 pm)

      Actually we have regular jobs and don’t get paid for any of this. We stand by everything we’ve said about Etherinc, from the first review to this one. If you can explain how it is acceptable for a project to publish a whitepaper where 80% of it is plagiarized from the original Ethereum whitepaper as if it were their own, please tell us.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.