As mentioned before in previous write-ups I am an ‘advisor’ with ApolloCurrency.
Now, to clarify, that does not mean that I have control over the direction of the project. It means that I receive payment to help get the word out about the project and inform people on what it does.
With that being said, the purpose of this article isn’t to ‘ shill’ Apollocurrency to you or tell you to buy it. I never tell anyone to buy anything, because that’s never been my purpose. My function is to help make this project more understandable by using my knowledge on blockchain and skills as a writer to dissect the content in a way that is more digestible.
There are also things that I reach out to the team about and request improvements on. Believe it or not, in my specific function as an advisor to projects, I try my best to live up to that role.
So, I stay on top of any news pertaining to the coin, potential controversies, frequently asked questions by members in the group, as well as complaints surrounding the project and then aggregate that information and relay it to the ‘higher-ups’.
The purpose of doing this is to ultimately help them build a better project. I will discuss some of those things that I have brought up with the team, the statements that leadership has made to me as well as my own independent research within this article. The purpose of doing so is to quell some of the issues and misconceptions that people have about ApolloCurrency.
Again, my role is not to tell you that this project is perfect or that you should go out and buy some of these coins immediately. However, I will be frank in saying that I think the leadership on the project is genuinely attempting to improve the protocol itself rather than solely focusing on the price or hustling off some bullshit.
So, let’s just start with addressing all of the concerns that have been thrown out by the community.
Concern #1 — “The Website Makes This Project Look Like a Scam”
This is the most frequent response that I have gotten from people that have seen me advocate in favor of ApolloCurrency that had something negative to say.
You can visit the website here:
The idea behind this claim is actually fairly simple and, sadly, simple-minded.
What it boils down to is the fact that people don’t like the aesthetics of the website, so, in their minds, it must be a scam.
While I understand this convoluted logic to some extent, especially in the world of cryptocurrency, we must remind ourselves of the greater context here as well as the actual content on said website.
The Purpose of a Project’s Website is to:
- Give you all the necessary information about said project, which is what it does. You can download the whitepaper in various languages, get info on the team itself, visit the shop, receive raw metrics about the coin itself, see what exchanges that it’s on and download the wallet itself. You have to give ApolloCurrency credit for that, because they have had those things on their website since they were an ICO, while there are some projects that are currently valued in the billions that have yet to launch their own blockchain (they are still ERC20 tokens with a simple contract attached).
- The website does have SSL security and it’s hosted on an https from a locatable server on a /whois search. Those seem like minor things, but those are the trappings of a legitimate site.
Now, with that being said — the site is ugly. That’s my opinion as well. In terms of priorities? Not sure how high this actually ranks on the list and when looking at it from an objective point of view, I would think that it should be pretty low. I’ve spoken with the team about it as an advisor and a new one is under way.
In terms of the content on the website? Don’t expect that to change. Everything that’s actually needed to assess this project is already there. So, there’s no reason to become skeptical now.
It’s also worth noting that the aesthetic composition of a website has absolutely zip to do with a project’s viability and the knowledge/expertise needed to create a really good looking website is distinctly different than creating a good blockchain project.
And there a plethora of examples where a website did have a really good website design that turned out to be a complete fraud (i.e., LitePay and Monaco).
There are also projects that started out with really shitty looking websites that have somehow managed to thrive in the years since.
One example is the bitcointalkforums created by this guy named Satoshi Nakamoto.
“Apollo is a Scam”
You’d be surprised how many messages that I have received from people that are pretty much along the lines of,
“Why do you like Apollo? Isn’t that a scam?”
My response to that is that I have seen nothing that would indicate to me that the team is a scam. The code is functional, the wallet is functional and not one person that has taken a serious look at the code (without a conflict of interest) has been able to say anything negative about it.
Independent Code Audit
For good measure, I ran an independent code audit of Apollo’s source and I also sought the expertise of other individuals in crypto that have more of an understanding of this than myself, in order to truly assess the efficacy of the code on the chain.
I contracted the services of iVory, which is,
“a Software Development Solution provider and business consulting agency.”
I actually relayed this information directly to the project lead of Apollo (Stevie).
Below is his response:
Keep in mind, this is a personal and private communication that we had. I think if he, or the team were full of shit (for lack of a better term), then he wouldn’t be trying to sell me on the tech. He would just be singularly focused on making sure that the project is put in a good light and I can say that with confidence because that’s what a lot of other projects in the space wish to do whenever they liaise with me or request me to help their project expand.
I can say that, in my correspondences with Stevie, he has not relayed any troubling information to me or anything that would otherwise compromise the project or investor faith if it were known publicly.
What I know is what you know and I suspect if you were to ask Stevie about the project personally, he would tell you whatever he’s told me.
I didn’t want to make this article too long, because I think a lot of the negative statements that are being made about Apollo are fairly insincere in nature and lack a real basis in fact.
The indisputable facts about this project are:
- Apollocurrency has a functional wallet, readable whitepaper, its own blockchain that is operable at this very second as well as a consistently present and accessible project lead…plus a roadmap that they have adhered to. That’s more than a lot of projects can say, including a bevvy of them that are currently lodged in the top 20 right now.
- No users were promised things that they have not actually received (please don’t cherry pick a handful of folk that are new to blockchain and don’t understand how air drops work). You don’t have something going on here like what you saw with Litepay or Change, where the entire ICO just suddenly folded out of the blue.
- The project has been active for less than a month. In my opinion, that warrants at least some amount of time to grow and work out the kinks.
This might look like a shill piece, but it’s not — it’s a ‘let’s be fair and reasonable here’, piece.
If your greatest criticism of the project is that you don’t like their website and you think they have ‘too many’ individuals in their Telegram, then you are unnecessarily mislabeling the project a scam, and that’s a fact.
However, if you have some sort of concrete, demonstrable evidence to suggest that the project is fraudulent, then come forward.
I’m confident (and I’m sure the project leaders are as well), that you’ll find that this is not the case.
Whether you choose to buy ApolloCurrency or not is entirely up to you. But maligning a project out of the gate because you don’t like their website or their marketing is absurd.
If something is functional and it works, then it is legitimate. Period.