the qibuck coin debacle.
You mean the biggest news XC's had in its existence so far? Developing a web 3.0 platform? With Qibuck, its first client, funding it? Man, you guys can be hard to please. Did you not read the press release? |
|
|
|
[This does not mean that we are no longer in touch with him.] ...we are regularly in touch with him, he contributes to discussions over Skype, I don't care if you talk to him. What is his role in XC? Can't you please give an unambiguous response? and we continue to have every expectation that his ASIC problems will be resolved in due course. I don't care about your expectations of Jasinlee. Your expectations about him are 100% irrelevant. How is this unambiguous? - "As you might see from the website, Jasin is no longer listed as a team member in an official capacity. So, no." Furthermore it is not irrelevant to be candid about both our continued interaction with Jasin and our expectations about Jasin's ASIC project. In fact, it is pretty important that we remain candid about this, since it would be bad faith if we were to lead investors to think that his lacking an official capacity with XC meant that he was not in communication with us. |
|
|
|
- Whether Jasin is officially an XC dev Is Jasinleee and XC developer? Yes or no? or merely associated with XC, In what way is he "associated" with XC? Talking to people in discussions on skype does not make someone "associated" with XC. Come on...you need to make some unambiguous statements about this. Be clear. As you might see from the website, Jasin is no longer listed as a team member in an official capacity. So, no. [This does not mean that we are no longer in touch with him.] ...we are regularly in touch with him, he contributes to discussions over Skype, and we continue to have every expectation that his ASIC problems will be resolved in due course. |
|
|
|
Let's see how many of you remember the old school BBS days - XC Currency in Ansi Art!!!  Hah! Great. |
|
|
|
This thread is entertaining. Seems like Synechist is the PR person for jasinlee as opposed to XC. As an outsider, he's done more damage than good here IMO. Frankly, I don't get it as usually businesses/companies etc will distance themselves from people that have controversy swirling around them and yet here they're embracing him.
I'll just put this here and perhaps some people should think about it "Thou doth protest too much".
Fair point. You're right that I've done something unorthodox. My reasons for it are as follows: - Whether Jasin is officially an XC dev or merely associated with XC, his reputation affects XC. So I can't really separate them much. - This thread is clearly an attack on XC (cf. the title). - In my personal capacity I strongly object to scam accusations that lack solid justification. |
|
|
|
I'll let you have the last word in the previous exchange and will update the OP with a summary of your defense of jasinlee, definition of what a scam is, etc when I get a chance and am no longer on my phone.
Teka you are more than welcome to give input on if I miss represent the summarized content of XC reply to my accusations.
Edit: just realized I did not change the title as you asked. See if the current one is something you feel is more accurate
This caught my eye: 'The devs claim that all the features that exist in XC that are going to Cachecoin will be redeveloped by Jasin.' Cache had planned Anon before we were in collab with them. None of their Anon features have anything to do with XC even though they seem similar. Cache will only share POBC with XC and even that plan is in very early stages. I also would like you to remove any attacks against xc like ' Don't walk but RUN from XC ' . I'm more than happy for you to even move this thread to scam accusations if you want but I think XC shouldn't be targeted. After all, you claim that the financial loss you suffered was with Jasin not XC so therefore you shouldn't focus on XC. I will be happy to tie all the dots together on why it is toxic to have someone who has misrepresented the truth over and over again involved in a closed source anon coin project. By my goal is not a scam accusation about asics. It is a warning about jasins involvement in projects where his ethics will cost investors money. Perhaps then you should mention all the projects Jasin is associated with, rather than just XC. But since Jasin has no executive influence over XC's course, since he has no control over the premine, and since he has not created any of XC's current technology, Jasin therefore could not turn XC into a scam/fraud if he tried. Therefore I ask that you remove mention of XC from this thread's title. |
|
|
|
Seems to be a common trait in any coin thread.
Accuse the accuser of FUD and mud-slinging; then cover up with more FUD and mud-slinging. Its a fud-mud-slinging freeforall ... lol.
You're right that it's a common trait. On the other hand, I'm reserved about accusing people of FUD, and I substantiated my accusation here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=770801.msg8693843#msg8693843 |
|
|
|
Umm, old document. I have stated my view explicitly above. |
|
|
|
That's somewhat refreshing to hear. Among Jasin's actions, which one(s) specifically constitute fraud?
I have not read the entire Fibonacci thread. I have read long parts of it (and several other threads) pertaining to when things went wrong.
I am not relying on what Jasin tells me as the truth. I am simply refraining from declaring "scam" upon manifestly insufficient evidence.
In my opinion the reasonable and ethical course of action is to remain in civil (and non-accusatory) communication with Jasin as he resolves the problems.
I cannot see you actions (that is, persistent hounding of him) as anything other than brutally unethical.
You do realize fraud is worse than scam, don't you? Uh, both are awful. Nah, you just admitted to actually not reading the whole story, even though this has come up in XC threads multiple times. Just a tip, your response many months ago should have been:
"I take all accusations seriously and will be reviewing the entire situation and then discussing it with Dan & the team" and actually done that. But instead you've just chosen this filibuster route without being informed. Huh? In what world is it necessary to read the entire Fibonacci thread? I've asserted that I read the bits where things went wrong, that is, the relevant bits. So I did review the entire situation. Not that I have any sort of executive capacity, and not that I consider myself required to. But I did anyway. I consider myself well-informed on this topic. And, being well-informed, I consider your actions brutally unethical. |
|
|
|
I'll let you have the last word in the previous exchange and will update the OP with a summary of your defense of jasinlee, definition of what a scam is, etc when I get a chance and am no longer on my phone.
Teka you are more than welcome to give input on if I miss represent the summarized content of XC reply to my accusations.
Thank you. Much appreciated. Please remove XC from the thread's title, and also the word "scammer" and anything to do with scamming. Removed scam terminology to be more accurate. Is jasin a developer for XC? I choose to leave the OP as accurate and fair as I possibly can. I will interface with teka if he/she so desires. You are welcome to carry on your word games with others if they wish to entertain you. As you might see from the website, Jasin is no longer listed as a team member in an official capacity. So, no. On the other hand we are regularly in touch with him, he contributes to discussions over Skype, and we continue to have every expectation that his ASIC problems will be resolved in due course. So please remove the word "XC" from the title. After all, why is there a good reason to target XC here? |
|
|
|
most certainly smells like a scam. If Jasin is truly unable to respond due to a personal issue, then it's advisable that he communicates it. Either himself, or through someone else.
Excellent post. This is constructive. "Smells like a scam" is the most truthful representation of your perspective we've had so far. If I didn't know Jasin and was coming from your perspective I'd say the same thing. Yet "smelling like a scam" is worlds away from being shown to be a scam. That's the crucial fact here. This thread accuses Jasin of being a scammer. This is manifestly unjustified. As for Jasin being unable to respond, well, you've now heard from me. You're very welcome to calm others' nerves by spreading the word as to the reason for his silence. |
|
|
|
I'll let you have the last word in the previous exchange and will update the OP with a summary of your defense of jasinlee, definition of what a scam is, etc when I get a chance and am no longer on my phone.
Teka you are more than welcome to give input on if I miss represent the summarized content of XC reply to my accusations.
Thank you. Much appreciated. Please remove XC from the thread's title, and also the word "scammer" and anything to do with scamming. |
|
|
|
While you want to defend it as a mismanaged project, that's fine and good if it helps you sleep at night and serves your cause.
As far as whether it's a scam or not, I actually say it's no scam, it's fraud. Most legal definitions say it's some sort of intentional misrepresentation of fact or concealing information from someone who is relying on truthful information and is harmed by that action.
Are you honestly saying you've read through all of the Fibonacci thread and say those conditions aren't meant when reading through Jasin's own posts, especially those leading up to the "big updates", his subsequent disappearance and then the mystery theft? Well, you know you're being dishonest with us and yourself.
You rely on what Jasin tells you as the truth. Would you not admit that he might be not telling you the truth? What if that was the case?
But, i give you credit by trying to distract the discussion by labelling me as BRUTALLY UNETHICAL... I really will cherish that one.
That's somewhat refreshing to hear. Among Jasin's actions, which one(s) specifically constitute fraud? I have not read the entire Fibonacci thread. I have read long parts of it (and several other threads) pertaining to when things went wrong. I am not relying on what Jasin tells me as the truth. I am simply refraining from declaring "scam" upon manifestly insufficient evidence. In my opinion the reasonable and ethical course of action is to remain in civil (and non-accusatory) communication with Jasin as he resolves the problems. I cannot see you actions (that is, persistent hounding of him) as anything other than brutally unethical. |
|
|
|
Do you guys have problems with substantiating by any chance?
You're really not as good at this as you think you are. Perhaps, but if the best you guys can do is call my posts "wordplay", you've got nothing. If you had a case for Jasin being a scammer, it would be pretty simple to establish. Why? Because you'd have proof, and proof is a pretty simple thing. What you really have here is a long story that amounts to nothing. |
|
|
|
Because a coder of his stole the wallets... yes I know the facts. It's pretty rough all round. You have not read the threads. According to Jasin all funds were returned to him. So... because I assert that a coder of his stole the wallets, you conclude that I'm not aware that the funds were returned? Ha ha. #reasoningskills While I can appreciate your wordplay and your interest in defending jasinlee. If I was an objective investor your replies would scare me off even if the OP did not. Perhaps, or perhaps not. That's not your concern though. For any others wanting clarification or proof who don't want to read the links I provided post here. Responses to synchillis are pretty pointless as I'm sure you can tell.
Who's synchillis? |
|
|
|
I only chimed in because someone here is insistent that Jasin ... took money from imaginary people, and that hundreds of pages of posts is not substantive.
No, Jasin took money from real people. That's perfectly clear. And then his project got into a mess. And now he's slowly straightening it out. |
|
|
|
Why people like you always call everything "FUD"??
childish wordplay sessions To denigrate my posts without saying why they are "childish wordplay" is to not substantiate your claim. Do you guys have problems with substantiating by any chance? |
|
|
|
you are just narrowly defining "proof" as how you see fit and then judging it as invalid
Yes I am. This is why: Accusing people of scamming is a serious and highly damaging thing. It should not be done lightly or without proof. |
|
|
|
-Hundreds of pages of complaints of posts from forum members who have not received what was promised for their payment. a) XC had hundreds of pages of FUD. b) Delayed payment does not constitute a scam. -Members who are voicing their complaints have wide range of registration dates, posting patterns and times. Yes, I believe that the majority of these are legitimate. Nobody disputes that Jasin's project got into a mess. -Jasin has not posted a response in the thread in a week and a half since his last post. The reason for this is personal. Therefore unfortunately I cannot disclose it. But his silence by no means constitutes an abandonment of the ASIC project. You are either very naive, stupid, or being paid very well. Take your pick.
I'll take the third option. That would be sweet. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
