|
Apologies for deleting your post mig5000.
It contained barrabas's post.
Also I think it's best to drop that particular thread of the conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
Barrabas, you're no longer welcome here.
Go and paste your deleted comment in a FUD thread.
It's where it belongs.
|
|
|
|
Really text proof? Did you just not go on a long winded explanation of how all that can be faked yet you claim it as proof.
ah no but this is some clear proof here https://gist.github.com/atcsecure/cf6a478ef3169cefdc6dabout why this all started, and yeah I have the skype screenshots to back it up too! I'm very disappointed with what I am reading there. At what point were you planning to tell that to all the XC investors? Just spring it on us with an announcement?  Absolute not, it would have been done by a consensus vote of XC holders and only then if it was "approved" would it have happened Wow, that would've been an interesting merge. Sounds like it would've been beneficial to both sides. What was the reason given by SDC for backing out? I know it was the influence of the whales but what was the "official" reason? As far as I know the SDC devs actually believed the stuff that the SDC holders told them. If this is the case I respect their decision not to merge, and to leave the Blocknet. On the other hand, now that the truth is out I hope for two things: - that the SDC devs will no longer communicate AT ALL with those scumbags - that the SDC devs consider the options we've given then anew. Hmm, after all those discussions I'd be very surprised if SDC dev just blindly believed the SDC whales without verifying everything. Obviously you know more about the ins-and-outs of the whole debacle but my guess is they threatened to dump their coins if they didn't get their way. A collaboration with XC would've limited their ability to manipulate the price of SDC to pump it. These pump-and-dump groups are killing crypto. Combining the talents of both teams all pulling towards the same goal would've been exciting. Oh well. I still have every faith that Dan will bring XC to the top. Yes I agree Also, that entire conversation completely legitimizes XC and it's tech. It's an incredible piece of information. Thanks for sharing this guys. I for one would have been thrilled to expand with SDC tech, but now I'm not so sure anymore. It would mean merging communities as well, and they don't seem to match  btw, what where those new options? - that the SDC devs consider the options we've given then anew.
We haven't formally offered a merge a second time. On the other hand I'm not aware that the offer was ever retracted. And its benefit is still apparent. At the moment its greatest appeal (personally) is that it would flout the deceitful intentions of the SDC trolls. And they would, naturally, be completely ostracised from the SDC/XC communities henceforth. Just a thought though... there's no actual move toward a merge at this point. |
|
|
|
Really text proof? Did you just not go on a long winded explanation of how all that can be faked yet you claim it as proof.
ah no but this is some clear proof here https://gist.github.com/atcsecure/cf6a478ef3169cefdc6dabout why this all started, and yeah I have the skype screenshots to back it up too! I'm very disappointed with what I am reading there. At what point were you planning to tell that to all the XC investors? Just spring it on us with an announcement? Absolute not, it would have been done by a consensus vote of XC holders and only then if it was "approved" would it have happened Wow, that would've been an interesting merge. Sounds like it would've been beneficial to both sides. What was the reason given by SDC for backing out? I know it was the influence of the whales but what was the "official" reason? As far as I know the SDC devs actually believed the stuff that the SDC holders told them. If this is the case I respect their decision not to merge, and to leave the Blocknet. On the other hand, now that the truth is out I hope for two things: - that the SDC devs will no longer communicate AT ALL with those scumbags - that the SDC devs consider the options we've given then anew. |
|
|
|
Why did everyone(especially you) vehemently deny that the chat logs were genuine? 1) I denied the validity of the entire smear campaign. 2) More specifically, I denied the validity of numerous pastebins and whatnot due to their being modified. 3) I denied the truthfulness of 00Smurf's screenshots because of (a) their having been cut in such a way as to present Prometheus in a negative light (b) their having been presented in the context of a smear campaign that guaranteed they would be misinterpreted. 3b is the subtlest point yet. Texts have two layers: the physical marks on a screen and the meaning they convey. In 00Smurf's case, the physical marks were probably only altered by cutting out sections. However the interpretive layer - the meaning - of the text was heavily and deceitfully modified by the smear campaign that it is a part of. Let me get this straight: you admit that the screenshots were not altered except being croped, but they must be fake because what is written there (the meaning) is unbelievable? Is that what your answer sums to? How much nonsense should we swallow before these responses become laughable? No, you've not grasped the point I made. Go and read it again. If the ontology of texts is not a familiar field to you, you might need to think quite hard here. I'll help you out with a simple example. Let's say I create a newbie account and post in this thread. My post simply reads "Scam!" Now let's suppose I was actually talking about XYZcoin, but for whatever reason, I didn't mention that. In this circumstance, the omission makes my post look like I'm talking about the Blocknet. This is a case of the second layer - the interpretive layer - changing a text. The same physical sentence becomes, in one context, a remark about XYZcoin, and in another context, the Blocknet. Now apply this to 00Smurf's screenshots. The same thing is happening: releasing in the context of a smear campaign, their meaning changes. They were leaked in this context in order to support the smear campaign. Therefore they are deceitful and present manifest falsehoods. Do you get me now? Do you understand why I called them "internet trash"? Because they are. |
|
|
|
Why did everyone(especially you) vehemently deny that the chat logs were genuine? 1) I denied the validity of the entire smear campaign. 2) More specifically, I denied the validity of numerous pastebins and whatnot due to their being modified. 3) I denied the truthfulness of 00Smurf's screenshots because of (a) their having been cut in such a way as to present Prometheus in a negative light (b) their having been presented in the context of a smear campaign that guaranteed they would be misinterpreted. 3b is the subtlest point yet. Texts have two layers: the physical marks on a screen and the meaning they convey. In 00Smurf's case, the physical marks were probably only altered by cutting out sections. However the interpretive layer - the meaning - of the text was heavily and deceitfully modified by the smear campaign that it is a part of. Let me get this straight: you admit that the screenshots were not altered except being croped, but they must be fake because what is written there (the meaning) is unbelievable? Is that what your answer sums to? How much nonsense should we swallow before these responses become laughable? No, you've not grasped the point I made. Go and read it again. If the ontology of texts is not a familiar field to you, you might need to think quite hard here. |
|
|
|
[snip]
Is there any proof this is fake? If it is not photoshoped and it is true, people should be warned. There was so many red flags about this project, this is a nail in the coffin. Whoever supports scammers should know he will be also marked as scammer when the dust settles and the truth is revealed.
Itod, this morning the veracity of that pastebin was established by an opponent of the Blocknet. Here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.msg9418340#msg9418340It shows who the people are behind this smear campaign. So you're right, people should be warned about Mr Boh, Longandshort, Trollsroyce, Soepkip, and any projects they support. |
|
|
|
So they exposed the truth about Dan.
Nope. The truth about Dan's code reviews and collaborations was made public at every point on the XC thread. There was nothing to expose. What they did is make it look like it was a dirty secret, when it wasn't. How does the fact that this information leak was premeditated take away from the fact that it's all now confirmed to be genuine? What's happened is that Prometheus has been subject to smear campaigns in the past that make him out to be a P&D scammer. Linking Dan to Prometheus therefore appears to wreck Dan's reputation. But the truth is that Prometheus is no paragon of virtue, but he is not a pump-and-dump scammer either. And Dan's link to coins Prometheus funds has not been a secret at any point. So what's all the fuss about? Hearsay about Prom; true records of conversations that have nonetheless been cut to put Prom in as negative a light as they can; another coin doing its best to destroy the competition. We have nothing to hide. Bring it all out. There is nothing to fear from the truth. How was Dan being involved in Halcyon public information? Why would someone involved with the coin do a supposedly unbiased code review? It was made public in the XC thread. There was even a press release about it. Why did everyone(especially you) vehemently deny that the chat logs were genuine? 1) I denied the validity of the entire smear campaign. 2) More specifically, I denied the validity of numerous pastebins and whatnot due to their being modified. 3) I denied the truthfulness of 00Smurf's screenshots because of (a) their having been cut in such a way as to present Prometheus in a negative light (b) their having been presented in the context of a smear campaign that guaranteed they would be misinterpreted. 3b is the subtlest point yet. Texts have two layers: the physical marks on a screen and the meaning they convey. In 00Smurf's case, the physical marks were probably only altered by cutting out sections. However the interpretive layer - the meaning - of the text was heavily and deceitfully modified by the smear campaign that it is a part of. Aero, Key and Halcyon are three of the most infamous pump and dumps. Prometheus' MO is already well known. - Is it? How so? Though a smear campaign? - There are many, many pumpers in crypto. I'm personally aware that several groups were pumping Hal, and that they were not in communication. - Just because something that Prometheus funds is dumped, it does not imply that Prometheus dumped it. None of this being related to him is an issue really. But the fact that Dan is involved with this scene goes directly against the image of unbiased and "one of crypto's best" that XC has been trying to portray him as. Well, this is the whole point that I'm contesting. Dan does work with Prometheus. But that does not imply that he's involved in a pump and dump operation. The truth is that he is not involved in a pump and dump operation. In the XC thread before it was closed not one person was saying "yeah, we all knew Dan was involved in Halcyon!". It was quite the opposite actually. If fact you deleted posts saying that. - I don't moderate the XC thread. - See the above press release about Dan being involved in Hal. - See the above posts about the two interpretive layers. Claims about Dan's involvement in Hal turn into FUD if uttered in an interpretive context that implies that such an association is illicit. |
|
|
|
I've got to say. This whole nonsense thing going on, is pretty fucking stupid. After going through the facts, the only thing that's been accused against Dan was him being apart of a pump group, which was denied by both the pump group and him. So exactly WHAT are the trolls FUDDING for? Bitcointalk is turning into the new Batman's Asylum.
Where has the pump group denied Dan is a part? would be nice to have all the actual evidence in one place. Also, if Prom is part of a pump group, how is he not a pump and dump scammer as stated by Syn? There is a vast difference between being a "pumper" (as Prometheus calls himself) and pumping in a manner that scams people and/or tricks people into investing into something worthless. - No coin gets noticed unless it is pumped. It is an unfortunate but real feature of the crypto landscape. Therefore a pump is pretty much essential marketing for a coin. Therefore pumps aren't necessarily evil, and pumpers aren't necessary dumpers and/or scammers. - Prometheus has continued to support financially the development of coins *after* they've been pumped. Look at Keycoin. - As long as a coin has genuine tech, ongoing development, and transparent communication about its future, it's not a scam. This appears to be the case with coins that Prometheus has funded, with the exception of Crypt, where the developer abandoned the project (which is unfortunate, but not within Prom's control). - Prometheus's official statement on the smear campaign testifies how he exits without dumping. Only idiots or people with malicious intent dump on an illiquid market. You get a terrible price for your coins, and you create a panic that prevents you selling the rest of your coins at a decent price. So Prom's testimony is prima facie plausible. My contention is that Prometheus is not a scammer. Neither is he a pumper and dumper. That is, he does not exploit the public by tricking them into buying a coin, and then abandon it. This is my opinion. I may be mistaken. But it appears to me that Prometheus has been the victim of a prior smear campaign by the same people, and that the public in general has been duped by this prior campaign. |
|
|
|
9:52 AM <•MrBoh> coindada said the devs are all planing on making abusrd btc offf this...
9:54 AM <•MrBoh> he seems worried its gonna backfire on him though
9:54 AM <•MrBoh> the way hes talking... saying "if we can pul it off" This can also be taken 2 ways. I mean if the blocknet team could "pull off" the ITO and make Blocknet a reality, Then they would make a lot of BTC, it doesn't necessarily imply scam, the only person who implies it as a scam is Mr Boh. This sort of thing is what the entire smear campaign hinges on. Using rhetoric, they import the a priori supposition that Prom is a P&D scammer, and then use it to try to destroy Dan. The screenshots 00Smurf leaked read both ways. They only look awful if you unconsciously accept the rhetoric about Prom. (I'll reiterate that no-one's trying to make Prom out to be a paragon of virtue; he's just not a P&D scammer.) |
|
|
|
So they exposed the truth about Dan.
Nope. The truth about Dan's code reviews and collaborations was made public at every point on the XC thread. There was nothing to expose. What they did is make it look like it was a dirty secret, when it wasn't. How does the fact that this information leak was premeditated take away from the fact that it's all now confirmed to be genuine? What's happened is that Prometheus has been subject to smear campaigns in the past that make him out to be a P&D scammer. Linking Dan to Prometheus therefore appears to wreck Dan's reputation. But the truth is that Prometheus is no paragon of virtue, but he is not a pump-and-dump scammer either. And Dan's link to coins Prometheus funds has not been a secret at any point. So what's all the fuss about? Hearsay about Prom; true records of conversations that have nonetheless been cut to put Prom in as negative a light as they can; another coin doing its best to destroy the competition. We have nothing to hide. Bring it all out. There is nothing to fear from the truth. |
|
|
|
@Synechist
You appear to be responding to this drama with triumphant declarations that fail to actually support your argument in any way.
Your immediate reaction was to claim that "logs can be faked", yet you haven't provided any actual evidence that shows the logs were faked and, what is more, you allude to having logs of a couple of conversations that could 'vouch' for Prometheus, but you're not actually posting them.
Surely if you had actual evidence to either dismiss the allegations or, for that matter, support the credibility of those you are trying to defend, why simply continue to talk about it and not actually show it?
"Logs can be faked" - Umm... did you not see my post above? An opponent to the Blocknet with access to the SDC troll channel just validated the prior pastebin that winteriscoming5 leaked. - Prior to this I was explicit that winteriscoming5's pastebin is no more verifiable than any of the junk perpetrated by the people behind the smear campaign. |
|
|
|
MrBoh and Longandshort are trolls that have spread FUD campaigns against several altcoins such as LXC and XST in the past. Tranglee received word of their plan to discredit the BlockNET and destroy Dan's reputation on October 21st, days before this FUD campaign erupted. Oh god this never ends with these guys. The 3 big 80% coin owners-bagholders of ShadowCash (pookie, trollsroyce and longandshort) overrode their dev's decision to break with trolling and cooperate with other coins by forcing him to remove SDC from the Blocknet. To take it even further they have begun subtle fud trolling of the blocknet. This will become more viceral and obvious as time moves on. It will peak with a website yes website they are building purely for the point of discrediting and fudding the blocknet and its founding coins. Who does that? Make a website replete with fake pastebin quotes, gifs, and other smear items, and fud threads? Wouldn't the resources and effort of this be better off to make zk-snarks work and promote SDC? Seriously these guys must have small penis syndrome. Oh look XST,Fibre, Blocknet has a smaller penis than ours!  Mark my words this shit is real and you can quote this thread when they start their full on trolling of Blocknet and it's coins. Same for when the websit goes live. You heard about it here first.  There is no denying that the evidence and facts are public knowledge regarding Dan, XC, and BlockNET... but are you really going to let these trolls, who have a reputation of FUD campaigns, interpret that information for you? It is clear what their objective is. Well this is something. An opponent of the Blocknet just validated the pastebin that winteriscoming5 posted above: Check this out:  Here's the incriminating pastebin:  And here's a clone of it just in case someone deletes it: https://artikel-140.nl/bin/?d3c334bdb593cdec#CIjbr05jDkGDyFHk0YGl64PWwPU4bTAKaYY/Bjvgmio= |
|
|
|
Crypto Boh = Mr. Boh = Pookielax31 from shadowcoin/shadowcash community I'd like to be clear that I have nothing against ShadowCash as a technology (i.e. I think it is legit) and I also have nothing against its developer, Rynomster. In fact, my experience of him is that he's a nice guy. The smear campaign we've all witnessed has been planned and propagated by a bunch of SDC bagholders/pumpers. The dev team is not implicated at all as far as I'm aware.
I had access to the screenshots that were leaked a few days ago. Oddly enough they were presented back then as pastebins of IRC chat logs. Whatever these materials originally were, this smear campaign has been a long time coming and I have no reasonable doubt as to its origins. LOL Thanks for the heads up. Oh, wait... You left us loyal XC holders out to dry. "This dumping makes no sense at all...it's so illogical." It's clear you don't have our backs. I'm done covering yours. I did not leave anyone out to dry. What makes you think that the dumping *prior* to the start of this smear campaign was related to some trolls making up a pile of internet trash? But the real issue here is the matter of my "having your backs." I'm done nannying the XC community. Nannying doesn't respect you as adults and it places an intolerable tax on my time. The general expectation that people have some sort of right to information that'll help allay their fears is unfounded. I'm absolutely sick of being made to respond to every little piece of useless nonsense that's somehow made someone in the community worried. Think independently. Recognise internet trash for what it is and ignore it. Do not stoop to the level of trolls by retaliating. If you can't master your fears then just get out. |
|
|
|
Question for people who don't plan to accept Bittrex's refund offer:
You've all been asking for facts to prove the so called 'FUD' that Dan was behind Halcyon. Many of you(including myself) asked Dan straight up whether or not he was involved and he repeatedly denied it.
If by 'public information' it meant that people in this inner circle of Prometheus and other people in the know knew that he was the guy behind Halcyon then that's pretty weak. [No, code reviews were announced publicly in the XC thread and occasionally in press releases.]
Your answers are in bold: I wanted to make a clear and concise statement about all of this mud slinging going around.... As everybody involved with XC's knows I did numerous freelance projects, some of which Prometheus was involved in, like KeyOS and Halc. Yesterday I was so frustrated with everything that was ALREADY PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE [stated on twitter and in the XC OP/ANN] being portrayed as some type of scam.. Accusing me of being Prometheus, accusing me of being the dev. of numerous coins and half the coins in blocknet... that I simply answered no to any and all questions. None of these allegations are true, I am DAN METCALF and I have never used any other account than ATCSECURE on this forum. Nor did I ever participate into any scam's, nor would I ever... the comments about XC's POW being stopped because I was paid off is a complete fabrication. What I find most interesting about this amount of FUD is that all the information was already public, and to think that I have all these alias's on this forum is complete insanity. My full statement on the matter can be viewed at http://www.atcsecure.com/blog/Official_Statement.pdfAlso blocknet's assets and funds will be held in escrow and released as development progress's. Blocknet is not a scam, but a legitimate project and proof of concept code will be available shortly. Sincerely, Dan Metcalf |
|
|
|
Synechist fuck your code of conduct seriously.
XC has been getting fudded more than any coin out there and people are losing $ because of boh and co. SDC effectively has way more shit bags than any other community, and it's only fair play to dig some dirt and expose these retards.
Boh and co are shit bags who have no limits. I'm tired of you guys being so kind and cool every time you get kicked in the balls.
Let's just remember that it's not fair to associate SDC bagholders with SDC itself, or their development team. Every coin community has their bad apples. I have mixed feelings about their team, transparency is not there and it smells a little fishy especially with the leak of those images. mr boh is an investor not part of the team, just as longandshort is an investor. Agreed. I can't state enough that the SDC dev team is not implicated here.
I would like to assert (again) that I do not believe that the SDC dev team is implicated in any of this.
I also think their tech is legit. And Ryno is a nice guy in my experience.
They just have some disgusting hangers-on who, for one reason or another, appear to have some degree of influence over strategic decisions (like leaving the Blocknet).
|
|
|
|
Synechist fuck your code of conduct seriously.
XC has been getting fudded more than any coin out there and people are losing $ because of boh and co. SDC effectively has way more shit bags than any other community, and it's only fair play to dig some dirt and expose these retards.
Boh and co are shit bags who have no limits. I'm tired of you guys being so kind and cool every time you get kicked in the balls.
I'm not telling you what to do. Do as you please. But do not associate yourself with either XC or the Blocknet if you attack other coins. I want nothing to do with FUD or abuse of any form. |
|
|
|
It's great and all that you are offering bittrex customers a refund, but what about those that bought elsewhere? Why not open up the idea of having deposits enabled at bittrex so we can get a refund if we wanted? Is that too much to ask? You could leave withdrawals closed though!
Bittrex will not allow that. If you want a refund, there are two options: - if we raise less than 850 BTC, everyone will get a refund. - you can sell your BLOCK on Poloniex now. |
|
|
|
I ask everyone here to not respond to this by attacking the SDC community.
We do nobody any good by stooping to the levels of the perpetrators of the smear campaign against us.
Perhaps we can all adopt this for the Blocknet:  |
|
|
|
|
I ask everyone here to not respond to this by attacking the SDC community.
We do nobody any good by stooping to the levels of the perpetrators of the smear campaign against us.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
