A "logical reason" would be people wanting to stay the hell away from an anonymous developer who's few public actions include ripping off Bitcoin's source code, bugs and all, stripping off the attributions, reformatting it, and passing it off as "built entirely from scratch".
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151160.msg12128046#msg12128046Wake up people. It's way too easy for scumbags to operate and to scam in this environment, where people throw money at anything that claims to solve the world with no due diligence. Be more discriminating.
Your efforts are starting to look depressing, I stopped commenting in your shitcoins thread after 24 hours because trolling is just not for me, but it seems you can cope with being a troll.
Or, perhaps, you were trolling and I am not.
Look at the code.
You gave John a negative trust rating on BCT, and I quote: "at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code"
You know that Bitcoin had no POS code in it to begin with? You know that it's not a lightly edited code to begin with? You can call it whatever you want, but this negative trust rating is complete trolling.
There is a link to a reference there. The reference cites specific sections of code, which are, at best, lightly edited (but mostly just reformatted).
I never claimed, nor do I claim that the entirety of VNL is copied from Bitcoin or Peercoin or anywhere else, but portions of it certainly are, and are both missing the required (and ethical) attributions and also is misrepresented as "built from scratch
in it's entirety" (emphasis added here).
If after reading this you believe my trust is inaccurate in some specific factual way let me know and I will consider modifying it. Indeed I
will modify it if you make valid points and I find them credible.
It is not trolling, it is factual, and it is relevant.
"at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code"
This was your comment with the negative trust rating. Read it again. Stop fabricating explanations on your trolling when someone points it out.
I modified the negative trust rating to clarify that
significant portions of the code are ripped off from Bitcoin, and not the whole thing. It still points to the reference page where additional supporting details and evidence are posted.
Thank you for pointing how the manner in which it was previously (though unintentionally) unclear.
So now that you have seen the huge bias that you have versus the project, read the whole trust rating again and delete it.
It is correct and accurate as far as I know at this point.
If you have contradictory information on the matter of the ripped-off Bitcoin code, please provide it.
As you have seen I'm willing to revise anything that is unclear or inaccurate.
