Bitcoin Forum

There's obviously some severe fudding happening to you and your community.

But it's nothing personal.

People do not like pr0metheus and bobsurplus. You've just been  caught in the middle of a war.

Maybe they dont like Bobsurplus because he has been scamming since 2010?

Google his name here about his company scam. It is common knowledge.

They associated and manipulated with scammers ofc people find it shady because it is
No legit people would associate and cooperate themselves with scammers or activity that is illegal
Just scammers would love this dan metcalf has no intention of ccreating something innovative he just wants your money.

Dan metcalf is a real son of a bitch, luring gullible noobs into schemes and giving products to pumpers to get him and his band of people money.


fuck these scammers

It's only that Dan was/is on the payroll of pr0metheus (fully admitted by Dan, no opinion or speculation), so no wonder he is out for good. His "explanation" that "it is public" is pathetically funny. It's like a rapist committing rape in plain view (only wearing a mask, just in case), pretending that it's ok because, well, everyone knew.

Amazing, simply amazing, the level of self-delusion.

Fortunately, he's done after this crypto harakiri. Anyone putting a penny on anything he does, in crypto and outside of crypto, fully deserves what obviously will come to him.

Not defending, but have the evidence that Dan "fully admitted" he was on pr0metheus's payroll? If you do this changes a lot.

dude trolling VRC isnt enough for u lol?

Yes. Both Dan and Prom have released public statements confirming their connection:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.msg9407509#msg9407509

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.msg9407751#msg9407751

In fact Dan himself goes as far to say that he considers Prometheus 'ethical'!!!

So after every XC holder screamed bloody murder that the screenshots of the skype combos were 'photoshoped', once they were confirmed to be real everyone simply switched their tune to 'What's wrong with that?', ROFL...

I've never seen a group of people so indoctrinated in crypto before. Synechist, Dan and Prom have these people by the balls and can shove whatever bullshit they come up with down these peoples throats. And they'll sit there and ask for seconds. It's unreal.

You've been around a while and you know what kind of scumbags exist in the altcoin world. This is a new level of delusion here.

ps: Scumbag bobsurplus is behind this shit as well. It's a scumbag convention and everyone's invited to fleece the noobs of their newly purchased BTC.

"It's different this time guys, Prometheus is ethical and this is going to be a real long term project! Just because him and his lacky Dan with his "code reviews" have left a trail of destruction the likes of which are monumental in the alt world doesn't mean it's going ot happen to us! To the mooooooooooooooooon!"

Orginial chat logs here btw: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=841223.0

Of course they thought those were 'fake'. Because who the fuck would follow these people? People who like being tied up in a gimp mask with a massive bag of XC shoved up their ass while the 'big players' toast to another successful pump?

You sound like some butt hurt bag holder. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yes dan chose to deal with the wrong people and was dragged into this mess.

Can only assume ignorance on dan's behalf. A smart project lead developer would not knowingly associate themselves with a few of the most hated members in crypto.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.msg9445945#msg9445945

I've never, ever been a bag holder for any coin.

You really think Dan was ignorant or oblivious to all that?

Consider this:  as outsiders, even you and I know about the shadiness of the people Dan worked with. How can Dan not know?  He had direct communication and dealings with those people not just once, but on multiple occasions.  He is fully aware of the unethical behavior that he is engaged in.

Man, some people are really brainwashed. Throwing all logic and common sense out the window just to support this guy.

Of course, just look at the Prometheus chat. That guy probably makes tons of money off his dumps. He had Dan on the payroll. Dan knew what he was doing when he did those "code reviews". Dan's persona has been specifically crafted to persuade people not in the know to trust what he says. But anyone who has been following alts knows that anything Dan touches turns to shit.

And we're supposed to believe him that he wasn't profiting off Prometheus' pumps other than his code review fees...

I'm not supporting him. I just don't believe a claim can be made againt him. All the evidence is hearsay.

Not that I am questioning @infinitechaos, but I am having trouble reconciling someone who doesn't know how to install a conf. file with someone who possesses 35 years coding experience involving "highly classified" military and government projects.

Something doesn't smell right here, and it's not Brian Fantana's Sex Panther aftershave.

https://i.imgur.com/CdWrZyq.gif

Actually no, the evidence are not hearsay.  The skype screenshots in which Prometheus states that Dan is a part of his team and is the dev of Hal has been confirmed to be true (by Prom himself).  How is that hearsay evidence?

Hearsay would be if a third party were to state:  "Prometheus told me that Dan is on his team and is the dev of hal" without Prometheus confirming that it is true.  See the difference?


It's funny, the line of defense from the start of all this up until now have been:
1.  Those skype screenshots are fake.  Dan is not working with Prom nor is he the dev of Hal.
2.  When the screenshots were confirmed to be true, the defense turned into:  Oh, Dan must of have not known that he was engaging in unethical behavior
3.  And now you're saying that all evidence were hearsay anyway

What's going to be the next defense now that I've explained why the evidence is not just hearsay?

Yes..there has been not one scrap of evidence that Dan has done anything wrong.
What we have is Dan, who has told everyone exactly who he is from the very beginning and been open.

On the other side we have a bunch of cowards posting anonymously on the internet.

There is no evidence that Dan did anything unethical.

There is only people like you saying he did something unethical but not saying exactly what is was.

If he did something unethical then you should be able to state what it was in a sentence or two.

The defense, as in Dan Metcalf's defense, has always been that he did no coding on HAL.
Dan's defense has never been any of the things you stated above.

In other words you are ignoring Dan Metcalf's own defense.

Here Dan explains his position. You need to deal with that.
http://www.coinssource.com/interview-with-dan-metcalf-regarding-recent-blocknet-concerns/

One of the hillarious things about the attack on Dan is that we have some people claiming he coded HAL and other people claiming he can't code at all.  ;D

The prometheus chat just shows Prometheus saying Dan Metcalf was  "hal dev"...what ever that means.

It could mean he was a dev who was looking at HAL's code.
This is the only interpretation that makes any sense, as we know that many coins had asked dan to look over their codes.
Why would they do this? Because they knew Dan was respected as a developer.

It makes no sense in the light of all the other things we know to twist this snippet to make out that Dan Metcalf was HAL"s developer.  ::)  ;D

I'm just saying those are what some supporters keep using as defenses.  I'm not saying those are Dan's defense.  His only defenses so far is just simply denying everything and calling everything FUD.  

Okay, so either Prom is lying or Dan is lying.  Are you saying that Prom lied about Dan being the dev of Hal?  What do you suggest would be the reason that Prom would lie about that?  Also, if Prom lied, then why did Dan claim that Prom was "ethical" in one of his statements?  There's a big inconsistency there.



I personally don't know if Dan can code or not, but Prom clearly stated that Dan was the dev of Hal in the skype screenshots.  I interpreted that as him being the main creator of Hal, regardless of whether he coded it or he had someone else code it for him.  Supporters keep saying everything was public knowledge.  Dan being the main guy behind Hal was not public knowledge.  And he did a "code review" for Hal under the impression that he was a third party who had nothing to do with Hal.  You honestly don't see anything wrong with that?


You're joking right?  How can you get "Dan was a dev who was looking at Hal's code" from something as clear as "Dan is Hal dev"?  That sure is a lot of blanks to fill in there.


Also, it's clear that Dan and Prom works together (Dan said so himself at the end of the interview).  I'm very curious how you feel about that.

It's
Prom trying to promote his coin by being sloppy at best and deceptive at worst. Having Dan Metcalf connected in any way to a coin was known to boost popularity.

I'd go with sloppy. But, we must remember this was a casual conversation and we have very little context, so we are having to "guess" what was precisely meant.

The thing is there is no other reason to think that Dan Metcalf was the HAL developer and a lot of evidence against this.
It's absurd really.


Of course if Prom asked Dan to look at the code then they must have done some "work" together.
But again, you could help here by being clear about what you mean by "works together", as that could mean many things.

The shame is that Dan actually provided a way where other coins besides his own coin might be able to work together and prosper.
Most of the time we see people just wanting one coin to prosper and other coins to die.

Dan's idea is that unless we band together and stop fighting IBM might steal our thunder,


We should stop fighting and work together.

So if this is the case, then why did Dan say that Prom was ethical in one of his statements?  

Also, how does Prom saying that Dan is the hal dev, after he did a supposedly unbiased code review for Hal, help boost Hal's popularity?  And this knowledge was not made public until now.  You realize your argument does not make any sense right?

I'm not sure I agree that we really have to guess a whole lot with a statement such as "Dan is Hal dev".  You getting "Dan was a dev who was looking at Hal's code" out of that is a bit of a stretch.


In one of the skype screenshots, Prom said:
"After SDC, would you guys be interested in working on a project with my Dev team?
Metcalf, West, and a few other anon devs"

This shows that Prom and Dan had a much closer association than just simply Prom asking Dan to look at a code.  As stated, they were a team.  This is what I meant by "works together".

lol i cant believe you people are not giving up. Half of you think he's running multiple coins, the other half think he cant code at all. Then you have some that think he is directly involved in pump groups. Prom was probably an ethical business person when it came to negotiating terms for code reviews. Thats what it means to be ethical if your doing business with someone. Do you really think he has the time to read over Prom's post history and see if he is an ethical poster? LOL. And with your last statement, clearly Prom is talking about BlockNET, he's just trying to make himself seem like a much bigger and important player in the industry than he really is, BlockNET was initiated by Dan, not prom. BlockNET will be a team of devs when all is said and done, although dan will be coding the basic protocol for it.

So negotiating to have Dan code review Hal while he was not an unbiased 3rd party and giving everyone else the impression that he had nothing to do with Hal, was ethical?


Okay, so assuming Prom was talking about Blocknet.  Then no matter what Prom's role is in Blocknet, he was still included in the project.  You're really okay with that and don't see anything wrong with it?

Maybe because one swallow does not a summer make. If Prom was merely sloppy why would that make him unethical?

A more pertinent question might be why you put the word the in front of the words "hal dev". Prom did not say he was the hal dev.  Go back and read it if you doubt me.
You will have to start again removing the word the

If we want to get to the truth we should look at all the evidence, not cherry pick facts. Donn't you agree.
And important facts are that Dan was reviewing many coins codes and was never the developer of these coins. The obvious inference is that he reviewed the HAL code , as he did with many other coins.
Not at all. It is in line with what Dan did on many occaisions. He reviewed coins. Were you aware of that?


So Prom talking about Blocknet. Is that surprising?

No it doesn't. And I don't think a reasonable person would jump to that conclusion if they looked at all the facts.
Can you give the context of that chat?

You need to get your timeline sorted out  

Those two things are not mutually exclusive. Note that "running a coin" does not imply crypto coding ability. He could simply use the same 3rd party contractor(s) he uses with XC to code other coins. Also note, that I'm not saying he is, or that he isn't, just correcting a fallacy you seem to share with many others.

The way Blocknet scam was exposed alongside Bitswift scam is one of the most important events in the altcoin history ! Guys this is the beginning of an new era , the community is finding out scammers and calling them out ! They plan more complex and elaborate scams but people are not buying it anymore !

I congratulate you all for doing this for the cryptos ! We need to weed out the scammers and it will happen, it's already happening, and only then will we be taken for serious by the mainstream.

We started cleaning our own backyard, and there's only forward now - LONG LIVE CRYPTO !

Um...the "mainstream" are taking some aspects seriously, but if you imagine IBM or Goldman Sachs care about the crypto community you are mistaken IMHO.

What we have seen here is not scammers being called but the dumb crypto community eating itself. What we see is people trying to cash in by following coin A and trashing coin B.
Meanwhile IBM ...are building there own "internet of things".

Here we saw something rare in altcoins, a successful developer with a vision for something that was beneficial to many coins not just his own coin...but the community here is often too stupid to even realise what is going on.

The vampire squid can see it.
http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/outlook/iot-infographic.html?cid=PS_02_89_07_00_00_00_01I

IBM can see it.
https://gigaom.com/2014/09/09/check-out-ibms-proposal-for-an-internet-of-things-architecture-using-bitcoins-block-chain-tech/

And Dan Metcalf can see it.
http://www.coinssource.com/interview-with-dan-metcalf-regarding-recent-blocknet-concerns/

Dan wants the crypto community to get this not IBM or Goldman Sachs. Yet some of the morons here can't see that.

I don't know why this all has to be so complex, when there's smoke, there's fire. Every single coin Dan has come running to offer help or do a code review for were prom pump projects. Halcyon, Aero, Key, and Util. Why has he not done code reviews for other outside coins? Whether he coded these coins personally and lied about reviewing someone else's work is irrelevant, the fact is the connection to Prometheus is very much real and that is disheartening.

I'd more give him the benefit of the doubt if had he ever done outside work for any coins with no proven ties to a pump and dump group because I seriously doubt prom was the only one constantly requesting his services but he hasn't. The ties are there, they are/were business partners or friends, you can't explain it any other way. Of course now they will come scurrying to deny it that they are only "acquaintances".

Probably cos they didn't ask him or he didn't have time. 
Some how that didn't occur to you?

Someone asks him to review their coins and pay him a pittance to do it and somehow that makes Dan the devil?

I'll post my comment that Synechist deleted from the blocknet thread here.

Lots of people have been observing XC since it was X11coin. And there general consensus always was that it was shady. As soon as Dan started doing those code reviews that was the final nail the coffin. The premine being drained and now the Prom revelations are just icing on the cake really.

People who are still have faith in Dan, Synechist and other XC connected people are suffering from post traumatic bagholder syndrome and should get professional help. Either that so they are a similar breed of douchebag who wants to prop this thing up as long as they can so they can unload on the next noobs that stumble upon the carefully crafted message of bullshit.

Well what more facts do we need. According to you with absolutely no evidence supplied the consensus is it is "shady".  ;D

There is a certain irony in that some alt coin supporters are so keen to punish people without supplying any sort of real evidence. There is no respect for due process or any sort of "fair trial".
It's incredibly ironic though I'm pretty sure the irony is totally lost on those who do this. ;D

I've been wondering how the BlockNet team arrived at the choice of coins to include in the BlockNet system ?

This 100%. These smear tactics are just that.

Well I think with a coin like XST we can put 2 and 2 together.
Dan did a review of XST's code, probably at XST's request. So they were already in touch with each other.
Plus XST has a feature or some features other coins didn't have AFAIK

Okay, "Dan is hal dev".  Having "the" in there doesn't change things that much.  I put "the" in there because I'm just trying to use proper english.  The meaning is the same.

Now I'm going to turn this around ask YOU why you put in the words "was", "a", "who", "looking", "at", "code", and completely switched the order of "hal" and "dev" to finally get "Dan was a dev who was looking at Hal's code."

You see how ridiculous your argument is?

EDIT:  I just reread the screenshots, like you suggested.  Take a look at this one:  http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2 (http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2)

So they are talking about Dan in this one and Prom says:  "he was the anon dev for HAL".

I'm curious how you're going to interpret this one and how many words you're going to add.

Also, you never answered my question of why you think that Prometheus telling one person on skype that Dan is hal dev would boost the popularity of Hal.  This was your original reasoning for Prom claiming that Dan is hal dev.


Yeah, I'm fully aware of all the code reviews he did.  Most of which were Prometheus promoted coins.



So how do you define the word "team" then?


I'm sorry, but I feel like your logic/reasoning and definitions are just completely flawed in almost all of your arguments.

1) Dan drained the XC premine when there was a promise of transparency. And Synechist lied saying that it was drained by mid-September when in fact there was money being taken out of it up until late October according to the blockchain.

2) Dan has been consistently deceptive. If you honestly think that he doesn't frequently bend the truth and dodge legit questions then you're being willfully ignorant.

3) Dan deceived at best and lied at worst when directly asked if he had involvement in HAL by claiming he had no role in the development despite Promethus saying that Dan helped develop their anon. Even if Dan didn't physically write any code, he was involved in the development. It was confirmed by Prometheus that he was involved with more than just a code review.

His wording has consistently been deceptive. It is unethical period. Please explain how that is not unethical.

Dan doing a code review under the pretense of being an unbiased third party to lure unsuspecting investors in to a Prometheus pump and dump is the epitome of unethical behavior. How is could it not be?

4)Lie:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=841958.msg9396234#msg9396234


Dan's excuse when caught was that he was 'frustrated'...

5) He was confirmed to have loljosh launch the clone coin by both n00bnoxious and Synechist in my deleted post from the blocknet thread. Him saying he "assisted with some QT work" is a lie. Launching the chain is much more than "assisted with some QT work".

I'd seriously love to hear a defense of these actions.

And yes, lots of people knew about the shadiness surrounding XC for a very long time. Dan Metcalf already had one of the worst reputations in the alt scene. But XC supporters would never know that outside their circlejerk of a thread.

And to call it smear tactics is insane. It's mind boggling to see these shell shocked people continue to follow this group. It's wild to see these actions carried out while a group approves of them and applauds. It's like the Twilight Zone.

We all knew from the very start that the premine would be used.
What more proof do we need?  ;D

Dan said he didn't write any code but admitted he looked at the code. No problems here.

Because you claiming things are unethical doesn't make them so. ;D

You have no evidence Dan "lured" anyone. That is your fantasy.

No it's not. Is english your first language?

I already explained this. I said in the light of the other evidence it is the best interpretation. We know that Dan was reviewing many coins.
So it makes sense that it what he did with HAL too.

Alot of the questions being asked by dare i say, you trolls, have been answered already, but for some reason you choose to keep ignoring this. Marlo is trying to persuade people into thinking XC has been shady from the start, but investors that have been there since the beginning know this is far from the truth. Not only is this FUD, but alot of it is disorganized and contradictory, half of you think Dan cant code, the other half think he's XC and HAL dev. Seriously which one is it? The fact that there is this contradictory FUD, rules out dozens of troll posts that have already been made, because its either one or the other right? I've seen enough people arguing both sides of the story, and you know what, you are all idiots that don't know XC. You think you know XC, but the truth is, alot of these posts by trolls clearly show a lack of understand and knowledge about XC from its emergence to where it is today.

Yes, it is.  So now you're going to argue about grammatical correctness? I don't think you really know where you're going with your argument here.


No one is questioning whether or not he code reviewed for Hal.  We all know for a fact that he did.  What has come to light from those screenshots is that Dan is also "the anon dev for Hal".

Are you really having trouble following all this?  Sorry to sound mean, but I feel like I've been talking to a little kid.

Also, you haven't responded to this:

So here are my thoughts from an outsiders point of view (I have no involvement, or even really knowledge of what had happened, hell before this all blew up I had no idea who prom was until multiple people/sources state he is a P&Der, which is pretty scummy if you ask me).


Everything that was posted is very concerning, but to me stops short of scamming. Rather, i'd like to use the word scummy instead since Dan associates with prom.



I will say this however, and one more person to add to the list of people XC should have never been involved with was Jasin from Fibonacci. This one I can talk to at length considering I was the one who tried one last attempt to smooth things over between Jasin and his investors. Instead of helping, he completely stopped posting here and Litecointalk, along with delete his website. So he walked away with a cool mil or two of money.


The XC team defended him pretty hard, at first as a dev and then as a contributor, and that along with all of this recent information makes XC seem very shady to me. Again just an outsiders perspective.

if you recall in the summer, Jasin was actually active in XC threads for some time, and even posted in the XC thread regarding the ASICS. He assured the team and some community members that everything would get resolved. People shut up after this point and that is ultimately why XC defended him for the time being. As the summer went on, someone else brought up that fact about Jasin and Fibonacci again (months later) and it was at that time that XC reassessed the situation. It was also at this time that the team realized that this might be a much bigger issue than they anticipated, seeing as how no progress was really made with the situation. They dumped him right at the end of summer and released a general statement to the public. It may seem shady to some people what took place, but just realize that the team did correct the situation as it was hurting XC. AFAIK, Jasin did not contribute anything to XC other than offering his coding services, which he never fulfilled. It was a no brainer to cut ties with him if he was causing XC more harm than good. Its just sad that people somehow still think XC is related to Jasin and his ASIC project. People cannot get into contact to talk with Jasin, so they just go to the closest thing Jasin was associated with in XC, and start spamming the boards with speculation about XC being part of the issue. That has never been the case as Jasin's project was completely separate and irrelevant to XC. XC will also not go out of its way to talk with Jasin regarding the issue as it is none of their business and does not pertain to their coin at all. I dont understand why this issue keeps being brought up every now and then like people think the teaam is magically going to help them get their money back from Jasin.

Crap like this happens all the time in the real world, you might unknowingly hire employees who dont have the best reputations arounde  whether they are work or personal matters. Teams dont really do in depth screening processes. It generally works by someone offering their services, a negotiation takes place, then they are on the team. As a coder in crypto, it wouldn't take long to join a team if you are offering your skills because every coin is looking for that extra bit of human capital. It just so happens that XC brought on board somebody that was offering their services, who also had some discrepancies with their personal life project. XC however did do the right thing and removed him seeing as how the issue had not been resolved over several months.

You really owe it to us to expand on this, It appears you have called Dan "scummy" but have made no attempt to justify that accusation.

Are you visually impaired or mentally challenged?


I thought TheMage was being kind when using the word 'scummy'.
Dan is complicit in the Blocknet scam. It doesn't matter how you, ProfX or Synechist try to twist the story.

The actual point not addressed:



Are you serious with this? Is there some sort of "XC community guide to not addressing the actual issues and deflecting arguments" written by Synechist? Why do you pick out only parts of statements and address them as if none of the other text exists?

And you sidestep every single point on the list there. Congrats. Maybe XC should hire you as Synechist's assistant in the propaganda department.

Or if you're trolling though, then hats off I guess. At this point it's getting a bit ridiculous. You keep saying there's no evidence despite the fact that I just posted evidence which you conveniently left out of your reply.

Was HAL pumped after the Dan Metcalf code review which was presented to people as if he was an unbiased third party? The whole purpose of a code review is to have an unbiased third party review the code. Insiders don't count.

you forgot to mention Bitcointalk is too by repeatedly hiding info on it.

i seen many topics with no substance on the matter added after mine and they left them here and deleted mine.
i even tried to pool all my info in one topic.. i guess to make it easy for them to nuke it in one shot.

my topic in my sig was deadly serious and not trolling and very on-topic for this board and FULL of truth and facts (proof)
and this place is complicit in the scam by hiding it !

i really do hope the fed's look hard at this place when handing out jail sentences.. these pricks deserve it !

If this place had any credibility it's looooooooooong gone.

Thanks for you input.  I'm curious, would you consider Dan doing a "code review" of Hal's anon code while giving the impression that he was an unbiased third party scammy or scummy?

As references, here is the skype screenshot (http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2 (http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2)) and here is the code review (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741728.msg8723167;topicseen#msg8723167 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741728.msg8723167;topicseen#msg8723167))




Yeah, adhitthana also conveniently ignored the part of my post in which I linked the specific skype screenshot where Prom said that Dan "was the anon dev for HAL". (http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2 (http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2))

And this is after he kept saying that some of the things Prom says can be interpreted different ways.  So I linked this for him and asked him what he thought of it, but he has ignored it since.

I agree with you, at this point I think adhitthana might just be trolling all over the place.



My conclusion after trying to converse and reason with some XC/Blocknet supporters is that there are 3 possibilities:
1.  They refuse to look at the details and question them because they are afraid of what it may mean for their investment
2.  They have looked at the details, but are really that naive and do not understand the implications of the information that have come to light
3.  They have looked at the details and understand the implications, but do not care that the people behind it are unethical (i.e. knowingly supporting the scam)

Lol, so you're on the side that thinks Dan is the super coder HAL dev as well as the XC dev? Hold on one second, let me find for you a troll that thinks Dan can't code. It would make for such an interesting debate. It would be like two retards fighting. And I find it ironic that you are calling us naive, chances are 99% of you haven't followed XC's development at all and are just regurgitating the same bullshit that other trolls began to speculate about. Not only that but going forward with the XC FUD would also seem to better your investment in SuperNET right. It's always a good thing to make your only major competitor look like a scam, deceiful, shaddy, that way you can capitalize. It's not surprising that the 3 major groups that are trolling XC are Super, SDC and DRK.

Super is a direct competitor and anything said to hurt block is useful for your sake. I even recall the BTCD dev tried to make a persuasive post claiming that BlockNET was in fact a scam and that SuperNET was not. Good job at marketing your project fuckface.
SDC has a terrible track record for trolling other coins that may appear to offer better technology or that will hurt profits for the few bagholders, this makes it the 5th time with XC. There is a 35 page thread that proves this as well on the main page.
DRK has always had a hateful relationship with XC. It was so bad that Evan and Dan had to make a joint statement to call off the FUD wars. It is not the least bit surprising to see some DRK fanboys taking shots at XC during this smear campaign.

Yes, I am invested in SuperNET.  I've never tried to hide that.  But no, I do not feel that Blocknet is a threat.  As far as I'm concerned, it's not even a competition.

And yes, I actually have been following XC's development for quite some time.  If you look at my post history, you can see that I used to be involved with Keycoin, which Dan also code reviewed.  This is how I first heard about Dan and XC.  However, after discovering that there were some odd things surrounding it, I followed my gut and decided to end my support for Keycoin.

Instead of constantly using the defense that "competitors are just out to FUD" (which is a rather weak defense btw), why not analyze some of the information that we actually have.  There's obviously a lot of things going on at once, so let's simplify it and look at one thing at a time.  Since adhitthana has not been able to respond to this, maybe you can:

Skype screenshot with Prom saying that Dan "was the anon dev for HAL" (http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2 (http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2))
HAL code review (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741728.msg8723167;topicseen#msg8723167 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741728.msg8723167;topicseen#msg8723167))

What do you think this means and what are the implications?

Sorry I did not nor do I follow XC threads, nor did I even thought the two projects were intertwined. The relationship at the beginning was understandable, Jasin was a "known" person. And it's easier to trust known people. It just seemed to me he was hanging around a lot longer than he should be providing consultation or whatever it was called.





I know you have been berated by the community, you should know im not one so there is no need to have a defensive tone. Its the association that seems scummy as EyesWideOpen pointed out. If this prom person is really a well known P&Der, and this was well known, and Dan or whomever (I guess maybe just Dan? Sorry im dont know whos role is what here aside from him lol) had knowledge of it, it would have been in his best interest to avoid him at all costs. It's hard in the alt coin world to gain trust, and just like real life as ProfX pointed out, there are just some people you dont associate with. I guess I'm saying is Dan or whomever should have known better, do you agree or disagree with this statement (unless im missing something)?


Let me put it into a better perspective (well an extreme one but a perspective non the less). I'm making an exchange (yes the one in my sig, Koinyx). How do you think the community would react if I decided to have Mark K or Alex green (moolah) on my team as consulting or some other non coding form (marketing, customer service, whatever)? The answer is pretty obvious, it would be a backlash.





It really depends on a few factors such as was he paid, directly by someone or indirectly by building up trust for a pump and dump.







Im not here to troll or yell or accuse at all. I'm merely giving my opinions and thoughts, and they are leaning towards something not smelling right. I'm sorry, to me there is something going on with the relationships and pictures of convo's that seem to be very discouraging.

Wait, did you even carefully read the screenshot and the code review I posted?  If you did, I don't think you would be considering that.

I guess this just goes to prove my point that some people really do not see the implications of this.

There are many possible scenarios indicated by the language that Dan has used to describe his relationship with HAL. I personally think he has at least some coding ability, and potentially lots, but we do know that he outsources a large amount of his coding. Dan repeatedly made statements like "I didn't code for HAL", which may very well be true statements. There exsits many possibilities in between where he could have still developed for HAL, but outsourced the actual coding. Prometheus mentioned that Dan 'took the HAL anon to another level', he may have designed it and had Christian Howe code it. He may have not done that, and simply worked with Promethus on a strictly theoretical level, outlining the tech while Prometheus paid his own man to code it(although the 'Dan's coin' talk from both Prom and Coinada makes this seem less likely). So while there are many different scenarios that might have taken place - and we're obviously not going to be getting the full truth anytime soon - either Prom and Coinada are lying about Dan's involvement in HAL, or Dan had some level of involvement in it.

If Prom and Coinada are not lying, then was it unethical for Dan to do a code review for HAL?

If Prom and Coinada are lying, and Dan had actually had zero involvement with HAL specifically before the code review ,would it be ethical for him to review HAL's code considering by this time he was already involved with Prometheus?

If this seemingly unlikely course of events look place, it still reflects very poorly on Dan. All of those code reviews did. Even when we as a community naively assumed that he was in fact an unbiased third party. The community at large certainly did not know about his connection with Prometheus. If you think that would have been ignored after reading the XC thread where multiple members put forth the belief that XC was somehow different and not associated with the shady underground of altcoins, then you weren't paying attention. The XC echo chamber shielded many of those community members from the true opinions of people, but I can guarantee you that you could mention XC on any trollbox or non XC thread and hear some real opinions about XC and Dan Metcalf. If you think I'm lying, I'd advise you to try it sometime posing as someone making a legit inquiry about XC and watch the reactions you get.

I've been following XC since the 500k bubble. To say that the community at large hasn't widely considered XC to be shady would be either a lie at worse and ignorant at best. Everything from the loljosh clone launch, to the defense of Jasinlee, to the closed source and moderated threads, and then the kiss of death code reviews gave XC and Dan one of the worst reputations among people in the community not directly involved in pump groups(who if course couldn't care less about ethics). The code reviews specifically - even before all of these new revelations about the Promethus connection - were already widely considered desperate and damaging to Dan's personal reputation. There's a reason he's not going to be doing code reviews anymore. And it's certainly not the thousands of dollars he was receiving that's making him stop, he knew what kind of lasting damage they were doing.

You and Dan a use a similar strategy of replying 'which is it, Dan can't code, or Dan is the lead developer for HAL? Dan is Prometheus, or am I Wolong now?' attempting to avoid the points by taking speculations from other people which are irrelevant to the current point and attempting to use them to make peoples specific unrelated arguments seem absurd. I can tell you are close to XC and Dan, for a while I thought you might be Dan himself, I'm not sure. Doesn't really matter though.

Without the FUD meme that's been used to brainwash XC supporters in to ignoring even the slightest consideration of evidence, or even question things with some basic critical thinking skills, would XC even be around today? Debate and discussion that could even just potentially imply some negativity towards XC is outlawed, and the results are kind of amazing. The true believers are seemingly immune to even questioning any idea that might result in XC being negatively impacted. It's on a level that I've never seen before in altcoins and it's actually kind of fascinating. The only thing that gives me some pause is that a lot of these true believers are actually sock puppets, but I'm pretty sure that I can tell there are still a significant amount of legit individuals. I'd like to see how long XC can keep this thing going. Price will likely have little effect on people now as most will already consider it not worth the damage to their ego to sell their bag, and it's XC's specialty to sell followers on the idea of green pastures just around the corner. But as the financial incentive goes away for the XC team, the effort that it takes to maintain the community delusion will begin to fade. XC isn't going to magically become a successful altcoin now, especially not after this. It's just question of when it will finally fade away.

Some very good points here.  It's funny that some of us are trying to analyze all this and considering multiple possibilities, while all that some of the XC/Blocknet supporters could consider is that everything must be FUD.  Brainwashed is probably an appropriate term here.

The observations that you made in your last paragraph are some of the same ones that I have made.  I guess I should add sock puppet accounts to my list of possible types of supporters.

The actual point not addressed:

It was not addressed for two reasons.
!. You provided no evidence.
2. Even if it is true you are nitpickning. You have nothing really solid to go on so you are clutching at straws. So what if the XC PR guy whilst hastily replying to loads of posts made that slight error.
Get serious.

Yes I'm serious as explained above. You are not.
You guys aren't serious, All you have done is inundate the XC PR guy with all manner of inaccurate complaints  and then when one small error is made by someone to jump on it and pretend you care.
If you guys really cared you be complaining about the multitude of real scams.
As I keep saying. Dan is working on something that if successful will provide an avenue for many coins to succeed.
This focus is very important because as Dan rightly pointed out, unless altcoins stop fighting and work together, IBM..or some other entity that cares nothing for the many altcoins will steal our thunder.


What are you doing for altcoins?

Yes but only one scenario makes sense in the light of the other evidence.
We know that many other coins asked Dan to review their code.
You suddenly want to make this case different.
No we don't know that.
What we know is that in making a coin they are all based on Bitcoin to large degree, so any smart person would get a third party to do the grunt work.

This is all that happened but for some reason you don't even have this very basic understanding of what actually happened...

It's called "Ochams Razor". The simplest explanation is the best explanation
You will consider any explanation no matter how imbecilic, and ignore the obvious explanation
Dan was asked to review many coins, and so he reviewed HAL.

Some how you want Dan to be merely a reviewer of all the other coins but suddenly, when it suits you, he stops being a reviewer and becomes the developer of HAL. ;D


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

http://www.reddit.com/r/XCofficialreddit/comments/26qqrq/xc_premine_wallet_made_public/


There was no communication what so ever until some one in October noticed that the funds had been spent. No accounting made of what these funds were spent on.

You know these things but you seem to be just trying to extract the maximum amount of time out of me in making me dig up every single quote... :D

I also seem to remember that the last 12k taken out in late October were used to buy BLOCK. But I don't have the time right now to find the quotes. I could be wrong on that one. You could save me the time and just tell me if you remember that being the case.

And Syncechist did not make an error. He said he was told by Dan himself were drained by mid-September. Now I'm going to have to find this quote because I worry a lot of the things I bring up in these points will be edited out/deleted.

Before I go waste some more time finding what Synechist said, if you simply don't care whether these people are ethical or unethical then there's little point in hashing out all the specific things that have happened. Because I'm going to assume that if you've been following XC, you either don't care or your cognitive dissonance is at a level where short of Dan just walking away with peoples money, you'll believe in XC no matter what.

Here's where Synechist relayed the information that Dan told him: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=630547.msg9384143#msg9384143

Why 12k was spent in late October has yet to be addressed even though very many of even the hardestcore XC believers specifically asked for an accounting.

What Synechist would say would be something a long the lines of "The premine was spent on exactly what it was meant to be spent on: community development and XC development.". Perhaps it was, but given that there was zero transparency even after it was stated that there would be, there's no accounting of that what so ever.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=630547.msg9380810#msg9380810


People in XC will say things like this before but as time goes on they have a short memory.

See, I feel that with everything I've witnessed, the simplest and most likely, and most obvious explanation is that Dan et al. haven't acted in an ethical manner. And it takes a full time PR guy like Synechist to keep everything from falling apart.

I don't  think there is any evidence to support that.

People feel all kinds of things but that doesn't make what they feel true

Wow, you are either totally trolling or totally do not understand what I've been saying.  WE ALL KNOW THAT DAN CODE REVIEWED FOR HAL.  This has been established.

Here's his code review:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741728.msg8723167;topicseen#msg8723167 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741728.msg8723167;topicseen#msg8723167)

What I've been trying to tell you is that he has ALSO always secretly been the dev for HAL (as stated in the skype screenshot).  What this means is that his code review was unethical because he did it while giving people the impression that he had nothing to do with Hal's development.

Here's the screenshot again:  http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2 (http://imgur.com/a/1xbWq#2)

Do you understand now or do I really need to explain this step by step?  I've repeated myself like 4 times already.

It's funny, you were the one who told me to go back and re-read things (which I did), yet you probably haven't even carefully read any of the stuff yourself.

Even more peculiar is the fact the neither Prometheus nor Dan have denied the obvious business deal, so to speak, between them. Specifically they both had admitted every time they have been asked (but one in which Dan blatantly lied only to correct the lie that came -according to his own words- out of "frustration"), that Dan was indeed being paid by Prometheus to perform code reviews of several coins including those you mention. Obviously Prometheus timed the reviews to facilitate the dumps and obviously also Dan knew everything about it whether he was also benefiting from the pump and dumps -besides the payments received for the code reviews-, or not. That cannot be more unethical and is certainly illegal in the real world and would mean jail time for the perpetrators.

This is not opinion, no hearsay, certainly not FUD or any of the other rhetoric used by Dan's minions; this is just common sense applied to the parties own admissions. They don't negate the screen shots' content. They don't say any of the IRC's posted are false... the minions do.

As you say, it cannot be simpler... except that since it isn't in the interest of those who either participate in the P&D groups associated with Metcalf or his current projects, therefore, it has to be complicated. They want it to be complicated enough to loose the less amount of money possible in their ill-conceived investments. And they will delude themselves and deny any and all evidence to the most irrational limits imaginable... if they cannot excise it by decree like the dictator synechist does on his turf.

Fortunately, only people that wants to be taken for a ride will board those rides from now on.

Dan Metcalf denied it.
It's perfedctly uunderstandable a person would get frustrated under the circumstances we have seen.
Merely claiming something is "obvious" doesn't make it so.
That is exactly what it is actually. You giving your opinion then claiming it is not an opinion does not magically transform it.  ;D

There is another option  ;D

And I'm saying that does not fit when we lok at all the evidence.

Except the screen shot  did not say he was the dev. It doesn't say he even did 1 line of coding for anyone. Let alone HAL.

No he was open about the fact he reviewed the coin. There is no evidence he did anything more and a lot of evidence against that.

That screenshot does not mention HAL and it does not mention Dan being the dev of HAL.  ???
I makes no mention of Dan having done even one line of coding.

It mentions a "project". Most likely the Blocknet.

Are you trolling?

why so many noise with this?? i thought we all knew from the start that 90% of alts are pump and dump... and that the devs are the same ones thats why they release new shitcoins with newbie acc..  :-\

Are you?
Why did you post an alleged quote from someone but did not give the source of the quote?

It's from the screen shot you were referring to!

Now that he finally refers to the screenshot after avoiding it a few times when asked directly, he goes and say that he can't see mention of hal and Dan being the dev when Prom clearly states it?

Yeah, he is totally trolling. I refuse to believe that somebody could be that stupid.  But then again, I could be proven wrong here.

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

Bittrex market opens up soon.  Wonder how the market will react.