I would like to clarify certain inaccuracies with this post:

a) Block reward

"For Zcoin 20% of the reward for all blocks mined goes to the developers in the first four years, and thereafter 10% of the reward."

This is not true. For Zcoin,only 20% of the reward of all blocks mined for the first four years goes to five different wallets. There is no more 'tax' after the first four years.

These wallets are owned by 3 of the investors (Roger Ver, Tim Lee and one other investor), 1 to Poramin our lead dev and founder and 1 is a bounty wallet used to fund various Zcoin incentives. This includes hiring additional devs, our advisors, various bounties and part of the team's salaries. This completely stops after year 4. There is no '10%'. The 10% is what this 'founder's reward' represents of total supply when you add up four years of 20% of block reward. There is no more block reward funding after the first four years which should be self sustaining by then.

Founder's reward is probably a poor term for it. It doesn't really reward only the founders. It rewards the investors who fund the project and continue to support it, Poramin as the lead dev and founder and the bounty wallet used for various Zcoin developments as mentioned previously.

b) Claim that hack was an inside job

We are not denying that the hack happened of course and we have been very transparent about it. You can read everything here. https://zcoin.io/zcoins-zerocoin-bug-explained-in-detail/ We are of course upset that it happened and aren't making excuses for it.

We however note your Reddit post claiming that it was an inside job. Of course there is no way for us to complete disprove this. But let me share some info for you which I shared on your Reddit post but the original comment I was replying to was deleted by the author.

I'll repost what I have posted there with some further elaboration.

Bittrex told us about the market sale of the hacked coins to us when we found out about the hack. It was not even to one address or account but to multiple accounts created on Bittrex and did it spread out over time. You are free to contact Bill from Bittrex on this to confirm this is what he said to us. I am only stating what we have been informed as of course we have no way to verify this ourselves but we have no reason to doubt what Bittrex is saying.

We even received several PMs from the alleged hacker gloating at us.
I could post the screenshots but you might just say I doctored it or created it to absolve us but here it is in any case.

http://imgur.com/a/s0EfE

Interestingly username007 still exists on BCT and is still active but he has deleted every single post he has posted on our thread though you can probably see the replies somewhere in our thread. You can see that he has various alter egos as well https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1688024.msg16959459#msg16959459. Username007 was indeed the developer of Castellum and was the OP of that thread if I'm not mistaken.

We do highly believe it is him since Castellum was a Zcoin clone which he took down after the hack. When forking the code, he had definitely looked through the Zerocoin code and understood it well enough to exploit it. For evidence that Castellum existed, please see Romano's (VIACoin's lead dev) tweet on it (https://twitter.com/RNR_0/status/800292521456726016). The screenshot and message (which he signed off on) also reinforces this. He was also a constant troll on our thread such that I had to delete his posts.

Of course, it could be an elaborate drama we setup but I ask for you to examine the evidence above and then make a decision as to whether we really wanted this to happen a coin that we have poured our blood and sweat in and then to troll ourselves and to send nasty messages and create a Zcoin fork.

I hope this sheds more light on the circumstances surrounding the hack and that users make their own decision as to whether it was an inside job.