Man, I'm so glad you replied! I had a good laugh at you last night when you posted the first reply. I'm happy to reply to you and address your once again insubstantial allegations and petty smears.
Again, another attempt at misdirecting away from Bryce getting caught plagiarizing a project to launch yet another scam.
Incorrect, you little weasel. You're projecting your own failings on me. Try to be a better person. I addressed your statement and asked you a highly relevant pair of questions which
you are attempting to misdirect from in your usual shady style.
I have provided concrete proof of Bryce's plagiarism. Not you, not ACGCrypto, and not even he has denied it. Knowing his long-time penchant for running scams, he is no doubt preparing to launch another one under the guise of "Tao 2.0"
Your long-time penchant for making
unjustified claims of scams, you mean. Be honest. Come on. And it's far from concrete outside of your wild, impotent imagination.
"Many here know how Github and how cloning a coin works, the coin was forked from another open source coin, and what?"
And many more don't know how it works. There are ways of performing a GitHub fork to properly accredit the source code. Bryce avoided doing that, hoping nobody would notice, instead telling his Slack followers about all the "hard work" he was doing.
Firstly, you are purposefully and dishonestly misquoting me, allow me to paste in what I
actually said:
I mean, one would expect that after all of this long experience shitposting on Bitcointalk and posting his articles for Coinclarity that he'd understand that the process of cloning one open source crypto from another generally starts with duplicating the repo and doing a mass search and replace of the name and coin symbol.
And in his feverish eagerness to joyously shout "sCaM!11" and post this thread, Nut didn't consider that maybe this alleged "plagiarism" might simply be literally how you fork a new crypto. Just a work in process, and that the readme file simply hasn't been edited yet because there were more interesting and important steps to take first, and it's not like the new network has been publicly launched yet.
Guess he didn't think of this much more reasonable explanation, but instead attacked and dragged people's reputation.
So yes,
you deeply dishonest person, I
did deny that using the readme file from an incomplete, in-process forking of a coin network is automatically and unambiguously an example of plagiarism, and provided an alternative explanation which you chose to ignore and misrepresent.
I didn't use the phrase "I deny it," but what I
actually said, which you misrepresented of course, clearly is a denial.
Let me expand, since you're pretending not to understand and there may be readers who fall for your bullshit if they're not familiar with how creating an altcoin works.
This is a link to an old coin cloning guide that's been around for years. You can find plenty of others with near-identical steps with a simple google search.
https://cryptocurrencytalk.com/topic/21854-how-to-clone-an-altcoin-scrypt-coin-edition-includes-largest-windows-guide-ever/The specific steps are for cloning a scrypt coin forked directly or indirectly from Bitcoin's codebase. The instructions use cloning Litecoin as an example, but the basic steps apply to any Bitcoin-derived codebase.
I went through a lot of the process years ago to teach myself more about how cryptocurrency works but ended up getting hung up on dependency issues so never completed it. But I understand the process fairly well and the steps are broadly similar for an Ethereum-derived codebase such as Tomo.
So, as I previously mentioned, the first steps of the actual cloning process are
4. The Clone
4a. Source Code
4b. Copy and Replace Litecoin
4c. Copy and Replace LTC
and then you continue with replacing other variables before firing up the network for the first time, etc.
So there's a process which doesn't include editing the readme file, which has nothing to do with getting the network to function and which can be easily edited later. Something any
reasonable person would assume will happen, presumably before the network is publicly launched, which as I have pointed out
has not happened yet.
Secondly, there are two ways I'm aware of to fork an open source repo. One is to click the fork button on GitHub, the other is to click the download button and edit the files locally before uploading the files to your repository.
Either is a legitimate way to fork open source software.
Yes, if one does the former, it puts a nice little link back to the original repo. I'm presuming this is what you're complaining he didn't do? Regardless of whether that little link is at the top, it's still quite clear from the commits where the code is derived from.
And since I'm willing to be more charitable with my interpretation of events than you are, I'm going to assume that there will ultimately be a copyright or similar attribution in the readme file or elsewhere at some point.
In fact, I will publicly state right here that I think Bryce should include a statement to that effect as it does seem like the correct way to do things. But I assume it was his plan anyway since I have no reason to believe otherwise.
Although either way, it
still wouldn't justify the claim that the project is a scam.
So no, this is
not sufficient evidence to cry plagiarism, and
certainly not sufficient evidence to label it a scam. Especially given, as has been established,
this is still a work in progress.
Your "evidence," as always has been the case with you and your various alt accounts and I assume associate(s), is pathetic and insubstantial.
As I mentioned, and as you quoted before you scrapped and reposted your reply,
You know what's funny? It's funny how Nutildah is so blinded by his 5-6 year long rage-on for Bryce, and his constant frustration at how there's literally no scam in Tao, and that Bryce has the approval of the government regulators that Nutildah hates, that he jumped the gun and blew his load over nothing.
Oh, and just to avoid having my time wasted by you trying a weak-assed semantic argument like you attempted in your earlier post:
For months he (and you) said he was doing a fork of Ethereum, then surprise, he cloned TomoChain
Forking Tomo is doing a fork of Ethereum in exactly the common parlance way that forking a coin from Litecoin or Peercoin, etc. is doing a fork of Bitcoin. Those two examples are derived, directly and indirectly respectively, from the Bitcoin codebase.
Tomo is derived from the Ethereum codebase. So forking from it is forked from Ethereum in the same way. So the statement stands.
I didn't know specifically which codebase he's using until recently; as I have mentioned previously in the Tao thread, all I am doing is passing along in good faith the information posted in the slack.
If this issue didn't matter so much, you wouldn't be here, pathetically attempting to dox me. How does knowing my real life identity in any way change the fact that Bryce is a scammer and notsofast is a scam supporter? It doesn't.
I am not attempting to dox you.
I have not posted your name, I don't have any idea or care what your address is, nor would I post it if I knew. Nor do I think anyone else should publicly dox you or anyone in your personal life.
You
have, however, revealed what I have suspected for a long time: that there was one person lurking behind multiple accounts, using them dishonestly to harass, attack, and smear me and Bryce, and now NotSoFast.
That is your MO,
your dishonesty is directly relevant and why I brought it up.
Just because you libel someone as a scammer does not make them one. Just because you libel me and NSF as "scam supporters," does not make it true.
Especially coming from a documented liar like yourself.
And from what I've seen right here on Bitcointalk, you appear to have engaged in at least one actual case of fraud. Your actions in that case
seem to very likely be illegal in many jurisdictions as you posed as multiple people in an intentionally deceptive fashion. It also seems likely that those actions were also illegal by violating US securities laws.
That's my belief and I'm not a lawyer, but I will provide evidence in a bit.
So since your MO is to act in an unethical and perhaps even illegal fashion, and then virtue signal by posing as a scam buster to hide your misdeeds, then yep it's relevant and is not an evasion.I’ll post details about this below, starting under a double HR. In the mean time, back to your post
No.
I'm not going to speculate on tangential claims I have no familiarity with. You can take that up with NotSoFast
if he cares to answer them.
All you are doing is the exact misdirection you falsely attribute to me. Once again, this is part of your MO.
All I said was that he's owned Tao for a while. That's what "he's been a low key supporter" means. And I mentioned he recently spoke about it on his twitter feed. You're the one who has tried twisting that into something else.
As usual.
notsofast may have just been an unwitting participant and I'm not saying he necessarily did anything wrong
...
Again, it could be possible that @notsofast was again just an unwitting participant in another scam.
Hey look! You
can manage a minimally charitable interpretation! Good for you! Keep it up, man. You can become a better person when you actually try!
Now, let’s get to YOU. It has come to my attention that you are posting on
at least two accounts. You have used those accounts, and possibly others, to stalk the Tao thread and engage in what I would describe as targeted harassment for literally years.
You have made unfounded claims and personal smears, and I asked you the following question in my last post:
That said, I have a question. Since you try to present yourself and the accounts you're aligned with as "scam busters," I wonder if you'd comment on the ethics and honesty of using sockpuppet accounts to your advantage.
What do you think of using multiple accounts to brigade a thread and constantly harass other users? And what do you think of let's say, using a high profile account to endorse and support an ICO while secretly being a member of the ICO team?
I wonder if you'll actually respond to this question, or if you'll just delete this comment as you've done with other comments in this thread? Let's see.
Of COURSE, you ignored the question and attempted to redirect to other topics which is exactly what you accused me of in some classic projection.
But I know for certain that you post as both Nutildah and Coinclarity. I know this from a mountain of evidence you yourself have posted here on Bitcointalk as well as on Coinclarity and elsewhere. All of which has been archived, including a couple pieces of evidence you’ve hastily deleted to try to cover your ass such as a certain beach photo.I will now answer the above question
in your own words from all the way back in 2014:
Of course its unethical to pretend you are something you are not in order to make money. Again, it doesn't matter if everybody else is doing it, its wrong to be an impostor. Its not a matter of opinion. You're just trying to excuse bullshit behavior to make yourself feel better.
You're being legalistic I think. He's doing what you and I are doing but with leverage with multiple accounts. Now, if he's using those accounts to launch a fraud coin and giving it legitimacy by using 5 hero accounts then yeah, that would be both, illegal and unethical.
But if he wants to use them to earn money and in some cases shift opinion and influence of a thread in his direction then I really don't see why that's bad.
Legalistically, there is no line between the two scenarios you just stated. It is all fraud if you are using impostor accounts to speak on your behalf.Not only do I know you have engaged in this very same behavior to brigade the Tao thread, but you have done so while shilling for at least one ICO right here on Bitcointalk:
Selected comments from the YuTu ICO pre-ann
Benefits for Supporters:
Several ways to make bank off our platforms:
- Trading YuTüCoin (YTC)
- Purchasing PAQs for mining/hashing yAltcoin yaltz or futurely selling lower ID # PAQs for a handsome profit
- Buying and selling yaltz
- Registering a basic YouTube channel so to become an affiliate
YuTü.Co.in is a bona fide entity here for the very, very, very long haul.
A Super Bonus was just added to the OP. Please read so that you early astute supporters don't miss out.
Once does not need to invest mega bucks so to handsomely ROI with YuTü.Co.in's Pre-ICO. A mere U$100 could be enough to set financial freedom for early supporters for life, with those having deeper pockets exercising the no-risk U$500 package. Take a look-see at the OP and don't be afraid to ask questions or express concerns.
YuTü.Co.in is gonna be one helluva entity, enriching supports and YouTubers alike. With that, I suggest you get on board and enjoy the ride, else watch the train leave the station from the platform from where you're standing or, in your case, most likely sitting, puffing away on Pall Malls.
Here’s where you come in, first hiding behind your CoinClarity account:
Hi Bruno,
The idea is beginning to make sense to me. I thought I would post my question here so you can answer it for the rest of us slow learners.
Are yaltz still being generated for yALTs that don't have PACs aimed at them?
What form will your coin (YTC) take? Will it be a token or if its a coin, it sounds like you're planning on using a Proof of Work-type algorithm?
Yes, the site relatively sucks in its current iteration as I've formally addressed and alluded to on its home page from the get-go. Thanks to onboarding Team Member [Coinclarity, real name redacted —ACG] and speaking in length with him on the phone, that will soon change.
Yep, I can vouch for this -- I'm a writer for a crypto website and a long-time enthusiast, and Bruno fan as well. We discussed how to remedy and take action on at least one of the points mentioned in the above post.
And here you are with your Nutildah account, acting like you’re just discovering the thread and commenting for the first time, even though you’re already part of the team.
This is what is called a plant or a shill, as I’m sure you know. Something “YuTü.Co.in” has said elsewhere in the thread isn’t being done. Hmmmm.
Here’s a link to an article to be clear about how I’m using the term shill in this context, to avoid ambiguity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShillLooking good Bruno! I'll find a way to involve myself with this somehow or another. In a good way, I assure you.
Yes, how could you find a way to involve yourself in an ICO when you’re already part of the team?
And here is where you, aka “Coinclarity” post an “article” attempting to legitimize “YuTü.Co.in” with your little blog.
This is a tactic you use over and over where you use yourself as a source to attempt to legitimize your claims
As a point of contrast, in the Tao thread I have used external sources whenever I possibly could to corroborate statements. The fact that I was able to corroborate statements I saw Bryce making early on about Tao is what convinced me to put some of my own money into it, despite the fact that I was actually highly skeptical about him back in 2016. Hi guys,
In case you missed it, this was an interview I did with Bruno Kucinskas a short while back. If you want to gain some insights into the mind of YuTü.Co.in's creator, consider giving it a read.
https://coinclarity. com/an-interview-with-bruno-kucinskas-the-anti-scammer/
And then here you are back with your Nutildah persona, once again acting as if you aren’t involved in the project and are just “helping out”
Hi guys. I made my own avatar for your campaign which I am wearing out of my own free will, without participating in the bounty campaign.
You can download my avatar here if you want it for your own profile:
I wish you the best of luck going forward!
and again as Nutildah, acting excited to invest while pretending not to be part of the project. Facetious wording aside, that seems like textbook plant or shill behavior
WOW! I'm sure Bruno must be happy to have such a ringing endorsement. I personally am selling my grandparent's house to raise capital for my YTC investment.
Now let’s see. If you read through the above and the full thread here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4420143.0https://archive.is/kwgbfyou will find a number of interesting things.
- You will find what look suspiciously like promises of future profits, which is a serious no-no from a legal standpoint and I believe is a violation of US securities laws.
- You find at LEAST two accounts presenting themselves as two separate people which are both run by you. Are there any other accounts run by you posting in the same duplicitous way in your ICO thread? Hard to say, but wouldn't surprise me.
I believe the act of presenting yourself as an uninvolved party when you’re a member of the group of people selling something is also illegal in some jurisdictions. Especially if it may constitute a securities offering.
But if course this is just me expressing my belief as a layperson since I am not a lawyer or legal expert. - You find people who have posted that they were ripped off and that it was a scam.
- There is no way to trade the token that I can see.
- The website no longer works.
- There was a business set up to give the semblance of legitimacy to the ICO, but it has been dissolved by the government because you apparently never paid your taxes
So by your own expressed standards the YuTu ICO which you were part of is unambiguously a scam.
It may also constitute legal fraud. Again, the above is just my belief and not a legal opinion, but
there is no doubt at all to any clear eyed observer that you are a hypocrite and a fraud by your own stated standards.If you have the
slightest integrity, you will immediately publicly withdraw your lies and remove the negative comments from my profile, Bryce's, and anyone else you libeled.
Be a better person. Start today.
Your move, buddy.
