This is exactly what people need to realize.

The chatlogs are real according to Prometheus' statement.  Which means Dan lied.  Or an alternative would be that Prometheus lied about Dan being the dev of Hal.  But that would be inconsistent with Dan's statement claiming that Prometheus is "ethical".  And besides, why would Prometheus need to lie about Dan being the dev of Hal anyways?  What could he possibly gain from that?

So the logical conclusion:  Dan lied.

Anyone see any other inconsistencies?

It looks like the xbridge code has been updated since they posted it, but why is it just commits from Christian Howe?  How come Dan isn't contributing to it?  I thought it was suppose to be his idea.

Seeing as everyone who has commented on this thread so far has full member status or above, let's try to keep it that way and make it a thread with mature discussion about what's going on. Any other full member, senior member or hero member should also chime if they can.

This way, no one can say that it's iust a bunch of "socket puppet" accounts trying to FUD. Obviously, anyone with strong evidence that could show that somehow all is this is not foul play should also come forward. We can be open to both sides of the discussion here as long they are reasonable.

As I've stated elsewhere, I think the only reason they still have supporters left is quite simple.  Those supporters are simply trying to protect their investment and/or are willing to be a part of the scam.  I guess it's also a possibility some are just that naive.  And in my opinion, that is what the XC guys are banking on.  Their strategy is to act innocent and hope to fish in more naive investors. This is what's really going on.  I highly doubt they will just simply give up and disappear.

The important thing is to better inform those who are unaware or the "newbies".

Or it was deleted because it exposed something that you didn't want to be exposed.  And yes, I do realize any image could be photoshopped.  I'm just pointing out that the one Dan posted more obviously was.

By the way, advertising that statement does not help Dan's case at all.  He endorses Prom as "ethical" in the statement.  Everyone, even the supporters know that's not true.

Yeah, I'm not a newbie account and my post still got deleted.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=841223.msg9414230#msg9414230

Wouldn't be surprised if this one got deleted too.

I posted this on the Blocknet thread and it got deleted:

Wow, I never thought I would say this publicly but after reading that statement, I have to say that Dan is an idiot.  Either that or he thinks everyone else are idiots.

Everyone here (including the XC/Blocknet supporters) know that Prometheus cannot be trusted.  For Dan to say that Prom is ethical is no different than saying that he supports Prom.

To look at it from a different perspective, let's assume Dan is oblivious to all that.  But that would be impossible because we, the outsiders, even know what kind of person Prom is.  How can Dan, who has had direct communication and dealings with Prom not know.  So therefore, there is only one logical conclusion...

Thanks for posting this, BTCDDev.  I think it clears up some of the misconceptions. 

So while others are posting pretty convincing evidence of what may be going on behind Blocknet, you're posting price charts as your evidence.  I guess it's case closed, you won.... 

I admit, there is always a certain degree of bias.  You're invested in Blocknet and I'm invested in SuperNET.  But no, I do not see blocknet as a direct threat.  And no, the accusations are not entirely baseless.  That's a very common theme among people screaming that something is FUD instead of trying to legitimately defend their views.  In my opinion, there is convincing evidence of the shadiness of the people behind Blocknet (a lot of which are posted in this thread).  Of course, there is by no means a "smoking gun", but there's enough of these bits and pieces of information around that I have formed a conclusion.

And no, this is not bashing.  This is taking some rather convincing evidence provided and forming an opinion on it.  I have not gone around and explicitly tell people to not invest in Blocknet and that it is a scam.  I'm just saying to be cautious.  At the same time, I have also not gone around promoting SuperNET and telling people to invest in it.  These things people can decide on their own.

If you're curious about my motivations, consider this:
If you go through my post history, which I assume you have a bit, you can see that I used to support Keycoin (quite sincerely, I might add).  This was when I was pretty much a newbie looking for a good project to invest in and was not aware of what was really going on.  Yes, I did profit from it, but that was pure luck on my part (i.e. I did not anticipate a pump/dump).  I subsequently discovered some odd things surrounding it and decided I did not want to take part in it anymore.  This led me to my current views on things.  My point is, I've been in the shoes of a "newbie" so I understand that whole mentality.  Although I was very lucky, there are others out there who may not be.  Which is why I say:  be cautious.

Uhhh.. what?  That link you posted doesn't even contain any argument.  I'm definitely open for alternative perspectives and I was expecting something a bit more convincing, but I guess I gave you too much credit.

You just proved my point.  I never said BlockNET was a scam.  All I'm saying is the people behind it are quite shady.  And it's something that newcomers need to be aware of and come to their own conclusions before they invest.

Also, yes I am invested in SuperNET, but did I even mention SuperNET in my post or try to compare SuperNET to Blocknet, saying one is better than the other?  I think you failed to see the point of my post.

Honestly, if there wasn't so much shadiness and controversy surrounding Blocknet, I would have probably invested a little bit in it myself.  Although it is not a novel idea, it is still something that has not been fully realized in the crypto space yet.  But when investing, you're also investing in the people behind it.  And as of now, I can't say I can trust the people behind it.  That is my opinion.

Here's a thought guys:

There's really no point in trying to argue with the investors/supporters of BlockNET or any associated coins about the shady nature of this whole thing.  No matter how much proof or logic is used, they will either refuse to believe it or come up with something to disprove it because they are financially invested.  It's a very strong bias.  No investor will admit (at least publicly) that what they are invested in is scam/shady.  It just doesn't happen.

The real goal should be to better inform the people who have not yet invested or people who are deciding whether to invest or not (i.e. the newbies or the unaware).  That's really how these guys profit from their pumps anyways (and now, the ITO).  At the moment, I do not have an answer of how to best achieve that.  Maybe someone here has ideas.

Honestly, if the admins and mods of this forum were truly decent, they would sticky warnings about this type of stuff.  Like a "must read" thread before investing and perhaps keep a running list of known/confirmed scams and/or coins and projects under questioning.  But I suspect that will never happen around here.

It is quite sad isn't it?  I think it's quite clear now that their whole objective is to create a big pump.  They could care less about investors.

It's a shame there are so few honest projects out there that get hardly any recognition.  I really believe SuperNET can change that for the better.

Thanks for posting that.  Definitely confirms a lot of my suspicions and hopefully many other people's suspicions.  Although it's not definitive proof that BlockNET is a scam, it does reveal that some of the people behind it are shady as hell.  Investors should approach with caution.



Here's an idea.  How about creating something of actual value instead of being deceitful in order to pump and profit from naive people.  This type of mentality is exactly one of the reasons why Bitcoiners despise the altcoin community and why crypto in general has not advance as much as it should.

I think there is truth to all that.

From experience, I can say that anything associated with this Prometheus person should be avoided or be taken with high caution.  Dan Metcalf has also been shady in my book for various reasons that I discussed elsewhere.  It's really no doubt that it's the shady/dark side of the altcoin world at work here.

Edit:  Looks like one of the coins (SDC) has officially exited Blocknet due to concerns that were raised:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=840916.msg9384759#msg9384759

Bitcoin has been "copied" hundreds/thousands of times by scammers.  That doesn't make Bitcoin any weaker or less relevant.  What no one can make a copy of is Satoshi.  Along the same lines, no one can make a copy of jl777. 

Unless of course, James has an identical twin brother who is equally as intelligent, then someone could kidnap Jame's twin brother and force him code for them.

No, that was a good point by James.  It's kind of BS that happened.

It is a shame SuperNET did not get better marketing and more attention.  But on the bright side, it's a good thing that it's not built on hype.  In the crypto world, hype always ends badly it seems.  Probably because it tends to attract to the wrong crowd.

Yeah, I don't remember how exactly it works either.  Hopefully James can provide us with more detail of what will happen now that the buy wall is gone.

On a different note; just listened to your interview podcast.  Very insightful stuff and nice explanation of SuperNET.  Keep it coming