1) Dan drained the XC premine
We all knew from the very start that the premine would be used. The actual point not addressed:
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.
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. 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? 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? |
|
|
|
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.
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. |
|
|
|
Bullshit. They defended him as a business man for months before taking his name off their website. How many months exactly? And he is guilty, Of what? Just interested And who decided he was guilty? he has gone complete silence with millions of dollars. If that's true it's not good. And your shitcoin is already going down the drain so stop lying to defend the piece of shit Jasinlee and the shitcoin scam XC
Why is XC a scam? I've heard many times it is but I've never seen any good evidence. |
|
|
|
I think Spoetnik knows he went too far and is feeling sheepish to say the least.
Sure the damage is done but one has to accept responsibility. We all know the feeling of power and bravery we get hiding behind a pseudonym.
If you fuck up you fuck up. Own up to it and suffer the consequences. Real men do not run away.
I feel for Spoetnik because he had all these people here encouraging him, but it's unlikely those people would ever have to be held accountable, but Spoetnik could possibly. |
|
|
|
More details too much to ask?
In short mods are deleting proof that are clearly groups behind some coins who scam people on and on. Now Spoetnik lost his spirit finding his thread deleted. What you may not realise is that if someone defames libels or slanders someone here the anonymous coward who does it might not be held accountable, but the administrator of the forum might be. Having loose cannons spewing out crap on the forum is probably a risk they are not wanting to take. Why should the owner or administrator of the forum take the risk of being sued because of some idiot posting crap? Why don't you start your own forum and take on that risk yourself? Well then with that logic the admins and owner are accessories to all the crimes that take place here on a daily basis. Legally it's certainly a possibility, yes. I'd suggest it's a probability. It's quite clear that some peoples reputations have been tarnished here, and that this site played a crucial role in allowing it. Most of the posters are anonymous....so the buck should stop somewhere. A lot of forums, particularly those in the USA would not have allowed this to go on, because they would be aware that they themselves could be held responsible. Or...do you imagine the law would see them as completely innocent? |
|
|
|
More details too much to ask?
In short mods are deleting proof that are clearly groups behind some coins who scam people on and on. Now Spoetnik lost his spirit finding his thread deleted. What you may not realise is that if someone defames libels or slanders someone here the anonymous coward who does it might not be held accountable, but the administrator of the forum might be. Having loose cannons spewing out crap on the forum is probably a risk they are not wanting to take. Why should the owner or administrator of the forum take the risk of being sued because of some idiot posting crap? Why don't you start your own forum and take on that risk yourself? |
|
|
|
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. 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. No it's not. Is english your first language? 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? 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. |
|
|
|
1) Dan drained the XC premine
We all knew from the very start that the premine would be used. 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. What more proof do we need?  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. Dan said he didn't write any code but admitted he looked at the code. No problems here. His wording has consistently been deceptive. It is unethical period. Please explain how that is not unethical. Because you claiming things are unethical doesn't make them so. 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? You have no evidence Dan "lured" anyone. That is your fantasy. |
|
|
|
The other thing that might be worth realizing is the only people who are going to respond to posts like these are the people who have some form of investment in this coin whether it be financial or emotional. They have everything to lose and nothing to gain by presenting these facts. XC can say whatever BS they want but I don't trust a single soul in this wild west world we live in.
Yep..I have some XC, but not that many. You can check my posting history. I have always been open that I had a certain amount that I was holding and from time to time traded XC around too. I've been buying a few more here, but I'm prepared to lose whatever I invest, as I know that even Bitcoin is a highly speculative investment. Altcoins are extremely speculative.  As you will see from other posts of mine here. I would prefer the alt coin community to benefit from blockchain technology rather than the vampire squid or IBM. But we need to stop fighting with each other if that is to happen. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=846801.msg9455225#msg9455225 |
|
|
|
I've been wondering how the BlockNet team arrived at the choice of coins to include in the BlockNet system ?
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 |
|
|
|
Lots of people have been observing XC since it was X11coin. And there general consensus always was that it was shady.
Well what more facts do we need. According to you with absolutely no evidence supplied the consensus is it is "shady". 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. |
|
|
|
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?
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? |
|
|
|
A huge scandal has affected the Litecoin community and is going to explosed…in a face of those who are holding or are about to buy XC Jasin Lee became recently the biggest scammer in Litecoin history by scamming more than 2,000,000$ with a fake/fail ASIC project ( Fibonacci) https://litecointalk.org/index.php/topic,2702.0.htmlThis guys is also full member of the XC dev team: No he is not. Will you please stop telling lies. He was a member but when this came to light they got rid of him. But as with everyone Jasin is still innocent till proven guilty. You should re-considered the integrity of these people and really questioned wether or not this project is just an other pump and dump coin. No we should realise that when some one starts a thread like this with a brand new account it could easily contain bullshit  |
|
|
|
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.
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_01IIBM 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. What do you foresee the future of Blocknet being? How do you plan to progress forward after all these attacks have occurred?
Dan: IBM is about to launch its own Blockchain project and when they do, all of these altchains will have no chance to compete unless people unite together |
|
|
|
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?
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? You need to get your timeline sorted out |
|
|
|
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.
So if this is the case, then why did Dan say that Prom was ethical in one of his statements? Maybe because one swallow does not a summer make. If Prom was merely sloppy why would that make him unethical? Also, how does Prom saying that Dan is the hal dev, 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. 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? You will have to start again removing the word theI'm not sure I agree that we really have to guess a whole lot with a statement such as "Dan is Hal dev". 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. You getting "Dan was a dev who was looking at Hal's code" out of that is a bit of a stretch. Not at all. It is in line with what Dan did on many occaisions. He reviewed coins. Were you aware of that? 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" So Prom talking about Blocknet. Is that surprising? 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". 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'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. 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. 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. 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, IBM is about to launch its own Blockchain project and when they do, all of these altchains will have no chance to compete unless people unite together We should stop fighting and work together. |
|
|
|
Of course, just look at the Prometheus chat.
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. |
|
|
|
So I have some exciting news...
Anyone feel like buying a few more BLOCK with altcoins?
I don't think it is a good idea to move the goalposts |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
