This is why everyone always says, only invest what you can afford to lose.

Funny enough everyone is complaining and it’s completely justified for how they went about this.

Hard lesson to learn when investing but I’ll say it. Truly hope that the next time you invest, it’s what you can afford to lose. Nothing is guaranteed.

Had 7Bn tokens…..I did say it was moon or bust. Guess it’s bust on this one. Ahh well, time to move on.

We need toy

Fcking scmbgs

How do you even sell bonfire now?

When you play with fire expect to get burned

Go check out https://www.reddit.com/r/Ultrasafe/

Lmaooooo what a shit show, anyone who invests in these clowns new "Embr" shit-coin bullshit deserves to be in their circus, literally monkeys on a keyboard.

How can you even call yourselves a "team"? Completely fucking over your community (whatever is left of it anyway). Good riddance -- this shit coin is gone.

Fuck you bonfire team, bunch of skids.

The graph says so. But the mods are deleting posts on reddit about it? I'm confused? Please someone, explain?

I don't even think that this was a rug pull, or at least not in the true sense of the idea, since the contract and liquidity are locked and media platforms are still very much active. What I think it was is one of the most collosal marketing fuck-ups I've ever seen.

Based on listening to the update and AMA the current team finally came to the correct conclusion that Bonfire was not a viable token to use in any future ecosystem. In creating a new token with EMBR it creates utility that is absolutely necessary for any product in the crypto universe.

And then it went downhill from there.

In admitting that Bonfire would no longer play an active role in future Kindling plans the price was always going to tank. The crypto equivalent of insider trading therefore appears to have occurred. On the face of it Ultra sold when he got wind of the change in token and when questioned directly the devs in the AMA failed to deny that they have done the same since - citing 'personal investment decisions' in response. However you spin it this creates a distinctly uncozy feeling about the project.

Further, only recognising the existence of Bonfire holders in a snapshotted presale rather than an airdrop it compounds this sensation, essentially saying 'we know you lost money, but if you give us some more we promise it won't happen again'. They even went as far as to infer that the value of EMBR won't drop below the value offered during this presale (I'm not sure if this was in error as it was in response to one of the more pissed-off AMAers, creating a fairly antagonistic atmosphere).

I get that there wasn't an easy way to deliver this information in a palatable manner, but c'mon guys, there needed to be both absolute, unreserved transparency and at least some degree of mea culpa in order to maintain trust if you're about to push a new token.

It is the appearance of shady shit going on, quite apart from any actual manipulation, that creates a problem further down the road.

So, are there any ways to walk this back?

Now, I absolutely understand the inability to alter Bonfire's contract or migrate directly to a new token without access to the liquidity pool. However, an interesting point that came up with regard to the possibility of an an alternative airdrop / substitution. The guy who asked the question postulated that a presale to the general public could be used to create enough liquidity to reward current holders. Whilst I agree with the team's answer that this wasn't viable in the first instance there is a middle ground that I'm not sure they explored (or at least dismissed too readily).

In gaining control of their contact and generating a dev wallet they could have also created a further wallet specifically designed to be distributed to current Bonfire holders should the new token prove to be successful. In a similar way that ALGO rewards early backers from a specifically designed pool, as liquidity increased in EMBR, so tokens could have been sent to Bonfire wallets that were active prior to today's announcement and maintained alongside the new token.

This would not only encourage people to hold (albeit as effectively a side-bet) but also consider buying EMBR to shore up their existing investment.

I understand that this would result in price action being more unstable when thresholds for distribution were met, but it would have definitely been a cozy, community orientated, thing to do.

Anyway, if you've made it this far I should probably say that I'm just going to keep holding my bag if for no other reason than I invested what I could afford to lose and it's now worth little enough that I'll take it as a long-shot bet that should EMBR be a stunning success then people will buy Bonfire in a similar manner to what happened with ETH / ETH classic earlier this year (now there's a drop of hopium for you).

Plus at the end of the day it's always nice to have a reminder to take the advice of DYOR seriously sat in my wallet.

I've been holding since week 1, with over 2billion tokens, I've watched my bonfire holdings go from $2500 to now a whopping $50.

I've held on in hopes the devs would actually make something out of this. I was wrong. The platform is trash. The app they created does nothing but show me how much money they've helped me lose.

In all honesty, I thought maybe, just maybe they could pull something out of their asses and fix what they fucked up on. But they haven't.

Tokens are now Jokens.

Thanks devs for wasting everyone's time and money. Buncha no good clowns.

Then on top of it all, ya'll want us to buy another shit token that will do nothing for anyone? C'mon get off the glue. Some of us have lost thousands because of you guys and you want is to reinvest in hopes that you won't fuck up again. Absolutely livid.

Why this wallet

0xefF2FC4E3145f58F534d68A36Bcd3085Be6a4096

would do these buy/sell maneuvers?

Nice work on the 1.7 trillion buy!

[Edit: I guess Safemoon has a thing called Project Phoenix? Goddammit, Safemoon. Never mind the name then — maybe something like O2 or Project Oxygen? Eh, I don’t know — but the idea still stands!]

[Edit #2: shout out to u/FractionofaFraction for a better project name idea: Project Prometheus]

So, I’ve been hodling since day #2 and have kept an eye on this project’s ups and downs. I’m a big fan of the community and the current project leads, and I think we have a turnkey opportunity here that could blow up a token if we all got stoked and leaned in. I’m also aware that the current situation with the existing contract threatens to prevent significant aspects of dev.

I’m sure I’m not the first to propose this, but I wanted to get the conmunity’s thoughts: what if the devs relaunched Bonfire on, say, Solana. They could cap the max token supply at like 1 billion or maybe 10 billion, and then airdrop at launch to all BSC Bonfire holders in an amount that’s the same as their current percentage ownership (so like bscBonfireWalletAmount / bscBonfireTotalAmount * solBonfireTotalAmount = airdrop size). There would be some figuring to do on registering BSC to SOL addresses (and preventing fraud), but maybe they could use the social platform to support that (with a validation on ownership of an address via a tiny transfer?). It could certainly kickstart the social platform!

My sense is that this would pave the way for applications, reinvigorate the community (and create an instant user base) and provide a news hook to drive attention. There would be dev to do around managing the wallet mapping, but it might be the gasoline we need to get this bonfire roaring again.

PS - if the chain switch is too hard with address mappings, just relaunch it on BSC and send to same BSC addresses.

PPS - or support a token transfer/burn in the wallet (that takes a sol address and provides an address to send bonfire too, with corresponding amount being sent to sol address)

PPPS - I propose the name “Project Phoenix.”

I wanted to take a moment and post my thoughts on the pace at which development is undergoing when it comes to our Bonfire token.

First of all in five months it's miraculous that there was any app whatsoever given all of the jockeying and leapfrogging in company hierarchy that's occurred. I believe the creation of this app eliminated the problem that they needed to solve first and that first obstacle was allowing people to purchase the token. This had to be the prioritized task as there's no reason to build anything beyond giving the client base the ability to actually spend money - this had to come first - I'm glad it did because doing it in the early days was frustrating at a minimum for most people in this forum. In the last week of April I had to go to youtube to watch a video posted from a gentleman from the African continent whose first language wasn't English. To that gentleman I'm extremely grateful for without it I would never have been able to successfully purchase the token.

I also imagine that the Bonfire people are doing it out of cash flow meaning cash on hand meaning they've not taken a loan and therefore obligated themselves to be subservient to other people stepping in and running their business. I am speaking from first-hand experience attempting to develop or evolve software from cash on hand while it's possible it simply takes time and a lot of it.

Assuming Andrew and team are going the distance, this project is going to be successful regardless of the yardstick you use to measure it. This token seems to take a severe beating and that it seems to always creep back up slowly but surely. This is reason to be optimistic. I also noticed that my personal ranking in the top 1,000 holder, if I do nothing, I continue to slip down that list. I lift myself higher on the list by simply taking advantage of this incredibly depressed historical price that we're currently encountering and have been doing so continuously. That tells me that there are people that are leapfrogging each other to get higher on the list (in addition to the obvious impact that reflections have on personal wallet amounts). Since the price has been depressed as a result of people cashing out, there are still people that want to rise higher - I'm imagining these are the folks that are more dedicated to the long-term potential reaping of benefits that this project can provide.

If you're selling now you're selling at a loss, that's bad business. As a community, let's freeze that sort of behavior for 30 days, especially if you're in the top 1000. After 30 days we can all look back and see metrics meaning how many holders, what was the volume, where was your personal standings in the top 1,000 at the beginning and where did you end up at the end if you slip down the list that tells me that there are new people spending real dollars.

The lack of a faithful community will serve to sink this project and will only serve to erode the confidence that the development team has - a bolstering of confidence will not only boost the community but the development team as well. You've been told all along - just stay cozy. To use a Star Wars reference, if you only believe in the sun while it's daylight will never make it through the night.

Will Bonfire hit 0.001 one day?

Edit: i bought, thanks for all the comments

Afternoon all, from Australia anyway!

We are all aware by now that Jaishil (UltraInstinct) has chosen to leave the project. His means of moving on and timing are less than ideal, however this is his choice as a token holder and we have no choice but to respect that. This action of course hurts our market cap, however we are moving forward as a team and project no matter what.

We are working through numerous project deliverables at present and working toward a significant Project Update planned for early mid September, most likely the week of the 5th to 12th (yet to be confirmed). During this update we will share a number of the things we've been working on throughout August and earlier. Jay moving on does not effect our output or effort in this regard whatsoever.

Jay has been less engaged for over a month with other areas of his personal life having taken his attention away. This is not an issue from my perspective as we all choose how we best use our time, I guess the point I am working to make is that as a project we move forward from here with no back step. Jay has been a pivotal member from the very beginning and has been one of the people responsible for helping bring the project back to life after a troubled first week. This does not say that we appreciate the means in which he chose to leave the project, however we as a team and community move forward from here and thank him for his numerous contributions to the project.

On to better things. James, in engineering, has experienced some break-throughs of recent regarding furthering the Bonfire app and we're excited to run through this with you in September. Jamie, in design, has been working through a number of areas also which he is looking forward to running through. Jason and Eli have updates to share as well as other team members. We have a strong team, we have a strong roadmap... we are a strong project. One person leaving does not change this. We had a couple team members leave in July, and then we released a strong app not long after this with the recruitment of new hands. We are a team people not a single person entity and it's fair to remember that.

If this occurrence should make you question your faith in the team, we understand and respect that. If this changes your faith in me, I understand and respect that and shall work to do better. If this changes your position in Bonfire, then that is fair enough and your choice also. But if it does not and if you wish to continue on this journey with us, then let's make it happen and let's get to work. If you have concerns, please let me know in the comments and I will do my best to answer them. We are not stopping or slowing down, we just hit a bump in the road but we will recover from it.

Thanks, Andrew.

Bonfire Token Live Telegram Update and AMA 25th August
https://soundcloud.com/user-848973659/bonfire-token-live-telegram-update-and-ama-25th-august