Bitmain dropped 10 points when I became involved with them.
Canaan Creative dropped 3 points when I became involved with them.
Spondoolies' rating has risen over the same period, even during the problems of under performing SP30 preorders.
Please don't bring the minuscule dropping of points into discussion because I already showed the real reasoning for this small drop(this was just a small step out of many steps for getting Bitmain to the top). If you want I can always refresh your memory.
Uses own chips?
Delivered miners?
Uses preorders?
On time?
Quality Issues?
Refund Issues?
Communication
Ethics
Size
Which of these rating categories do you disagree with, on what company? What evidence can you provide to substantiate a rating change?
For start Ethics and your boss Bitmain. What evidence can you provide to back up this rating? Show me evidence of the size of Bitmain's own mining farm.
Spondoolies-Tech, I have nothing against you or Bitmain, but when I see stuff like this mentioned, or when I hear Bitmain say stuff like "We know things but we can't say", it reinforces my view that ASIC manufacturing has become nothing more that a classic old boy's network/oligopoly/OPEC of bitcoin and it annoys the shit out of me. A fantastic idea and technology that Satoshi had has been reduced to ASIC manufacturers careful treading, patting each other on the back, and refusing to whistleblow on each other. To an outsider, it seems like a careful pact has been formed which excludes the community from information they should have. It's the bitcoin community that placed you where you are now, and it's this same community's face you spit in when you refuse to share information you have regarding other ASIC manufacturers' business practices.
I only wish information flow regarding bitcoin would be as open as the blockchain.
Someone once said that Guy has a very good knowledge of the "T"s (threats) in this business. If you think that having a real life business that handles tens of millions of $ is simply done without knowing 1 or 2 things about your competitors then you are fooling yourself. The community overall will always be left out of some information because of its nature. If we are still at it why not advocate for the community to have all the information inside Bitcoin Foundation? We can extrapolate that to everything that touches Bitcoin because...
well it's the community and they must know everything. Even if it was for the community to get them where they are now they don't owe anything to the community. They provided a service that the community requested badly and paid premium amounts for it. Nothing else. This is just regular business practice. They see a need and they satisfy it with an added markup. Don't make it sound special when there is nothing special about it.
However, Spondoolies-Tech, you are better served not posting such things. There is no evidence either way that your statements are valid, but they certainly generate responses such as the above, and many companies fire their employees for such public commentary. It brings what may ultimately be unfounded attention, and fosters mistrust as Abracadabra noted.
The fact that dogie didn't deny it makes it good enough evidence
Am currently with Bitmain (weak terms, only designed to punish maliciousness/selling secrets etc)
So legally you can't use the information that you know to lower some of their ratings? Is this what you are saying?
Speaking more generally, I can understand some people's feelings but there isn't anything there. Some people take it too far and because they fell they'd be influenced, then they feel that I MUST be influenced. They project their own inability to remain neutral, aggressively, onto me and that's not right. I truly do not care what company is 1st, 2nd, 300th, what company goes out of business, what company makes $3 trillion. Companies will come and go, companies will do well and do badly and that's okay. What I do care about is that people don't get trampled on in the interim, and so I consider myself to work for the community primarily. Because of that, it doesn't matter who I am affiliated with because they still have to play with the same criteria everyone else does. I'm probably more critical on companies I do work with, if you want to refer to that as being biased.
They don't need to feel that you are influenced. When you apply a rating to punish one direct competitor of Bitmain 3 months later than you should right when Bitmain needed it the most it is more then obvious about your intentions.
Show Posts
