My hope was that Darin would offer up his name so that others may take the time to Google it and see for themselves if they would be comfortable dealing with SimpleCoin. That was my intent, anyway, hoping to distance myself if I was off-base but, at the same time, hoping others, here, would do their own due diligence. What happened is that all my questions were answered with the exception of a name, which was sidetracked, not once, but twice. Everyone here could see/read exactly what I'm in reference to.
I have been very civil and courteous to you. I answered all of your initial requests. I realized after a couple of replies to your queries that there was nothing I could provide to you that would 'make things right,' so I began to ignore them. You've continued to levy accusations at SimpleCoin veiled as implications, and now you have begun doing it to me directly. And all for what? A hunch you had...
Have you even once considered the consequences that your posts would have if your hunch was incorrect? How it would effect me, my company, and my employee? I have my capital and time at risk for a project I really believe in. What have you risked in levying your accusations at SimpleCoin or me? Simply that you might be wrong?
Your quid pro quo response has left me in somewhat of a quagmire. Do I reply, or shelf the issue with the hope another comes along and pick up the mantle. I flipped a coin. Heads, I post a reply. Tails, I don't.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the last time I've read a similar post, it didn't bode too well for the hot-under-the-collar poster. I purposely used h-u-t-c for the simple fact that you're assuming a rather defensive stance, a stance, I may add, would better serve you if saved for court if, or when, actual accusations, of which I've yet to tip, are volleyed your way.
This 'concern' is all just for your own entertainment.
The above quote was
not offered by you, but I felt a need to quote it, for I'm about to address each sentence of your post, in no particular order--for my own entertainment. I'll try do to so by not coming across as a pompous ass,
Darin Stanchfield.
A hunch you had...
Not a hunch, but red flags. I didn't start looking into SimpleCoin because I had a hunch something didn't smell right. In fact, starting my own investigation was not based on any of the other posters who've asked questions. It started after reading the OP and post #2. That is all! And is the truth! If nobody else would have posted, I would still have gone forward with my research. But...here's the kicker...I wouldn't even have given SimpleCoin a second thought if there wasn't
that post #2.
So, to me fair, I'm not accusing the second poster of being
one of your sock puppets. It could simply be a coincidence. But that coincidence fired up my tinfoil hat, now experiencing difficulty in turning it off.
(I see, now, that this is going to be a fun post to pen and, hopefully, read)I have been very civil and courteous to you.
You sure have! And to everybody else on this thread. But exactly what changed? You're not acting like the same person prior to posting this post. For a person who's none nothing wrong, with nothing to hide, a defensive stance should be furthest from your mind. You would simply address each question and concern with the utmost truthfulness and courtesy you can muster, with mustering anything not even entering into the equation, for replies would come naturally and easy. See the rub you're now causing for yourself?
How it would effect me, my company, and my employee?
In all your excitement, you left out family--and pets. I am surprised to read that 'employee' is singular.
Simply that you might be wrong?
Perhaps, I shouldn't have opt to skip around addressing your post, but address each point in order. But why be methodic?
I've read that sentence several times, trying to put it in context, each time failing, therefore still not sure of your intent with that question(?). The best I can do is that you meant, "Simply put, you might be wrong." and if that's the case, that's the case. We all move forward, with the utmost apology from me and a 1 BTC donation to
Bitcoin100 in your name. Please, make me pay!
I answered all of your initial requests.
I like this one! As I've previously stated with an elaborate outline, you sure have, with always carefully avoiding the 'name' question. This, clearly, everyone can read how that all transpired. My tinfoil hat almost caught fire when all that was transpiring.
I realized after a couple of replies to your queries that there was nothing I could provide to you that would 'make things right,' so I began to ignore them.
And you did a good job, I may add. Too good of a job, for you even avoided answering other questions, not related, at the time, by other posters, although you were clearly longed in here and had ample time to do such. Perhaps, you were in a quagmire yourself at the time, for if you replied to the other questions, but ignored mine, that would have possibly raised red flags for other readers of this thread. My guess is that you were biding time to see how all this unfolds and, at the same time, jockeying for position on how to handle this issue. To date, from my view, it's not going so hot, but time will tell.
And all for what?
A badge! Since you've done a lot of reading of this forum, you'll probably got the joke. But then again, if you would have done a lot of reading of this forum, you wouldn't be making the same mistakes others have made in the past. You would be making new ones. Ones of which would be much harder to detect.
Have you even once considered the consequences that your posts would have if your hunch was incorrect?
Yes! My main concern was how this would effect
Bitcoin100 if I proceeded with my postings here on this thread. Therefore I spent hours, yes, hours, Googling my ass off, making sure that the route I chose had a solid foundation. Granted, there's still a slight chance that I'm mistaken and, if that's the case, I'll go into damage control and fix everything, and we all move forward.
I have my capital and time at risk for a project I really believe in.
And believing in a project is an admirable virtue, one I can relate to with Bitcoin in general and, now,
Bitcoin100 in particular. The capital you have invested into your project is definitely more than I'll invested in mine which, by the way, is nil, to date, with the exception of donations, which don't count, although I'm planning on investing, or donating as the case may be, capital to put in place a web presence. You may also have me beaten in time, albeit I've put in many a man hours. BTW, many other people have put in capital and time into projects they've believed in, to still have them not bear fruit. But a project based on a strong foundation, has a hell of a better chance to succeed than one based on shaky ground.
You've continued to levy accusations at SimpleCoin veiled as implications, and now you have begun doing it to me directly.
Actually, I've avoided directing anything toward you as long as possible. You may consider this post as my first attempt in directing any implications your way.
What have you risked in levying your accusations at SimpleCoin or me?
I believe this is the last sentence. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. Next time I'll address everything in order, because this proved to be not as much fun as I thought it would be doing it this way. It even pains me in having to pen this post. Not really!
As I've mentioned before, I've risked the reputation of
Bitcoin100 by moving forward with. But, moreover, I risk the credibility of Bitcoin if I'd opt not to pursue this matter. And cred is really what this is all about, I believe.
That now concludes me addressing your post. I now see that bwagner has penned a well thought-out post, one, if I may suggest, heading his advice.
Thank you kindly,
Darin Stanchfield, for your post, allowing me to address it in kind.
~Bruno~
PS: It was heads!
