Jasinlee - one of XC's "Team Members" is a master fraudster

[organizer]

Is the XC braintrust implying that Jasin did not take orders on fictional asics and make statements about these asics (such as delivery, project status & performance claims), did not collect LTC, BTC and CACHE for these orders?

It's a pretty simple question to answer without trying to redirect into another argument.

[1714601016]

1714601016

[1714601016]

1714601016

[synechist]

This is much more than just a project blowing up. This is someone taking money for a project and failing to even produce any tangible proof that the money received was indeed going towards work of the project.

No, this is exactly what happens when a project blows up. Something goes wrong, and then sentiment turns against the project and accusations start flying.

I do PR. I'm very well aware of how quickly people perceive things to be "tangible proof" when in fact they're just misperceived half-truths and emotion.

Case in point: XC's FUDstorm at the hands of a competitor. The FUD was solidly and resoundingly repudiated (before I was part of XC), but not before most people had dumped. And they dumped because they believed they had "tangible proof" that XC was a scam. They were all wrong. The "tangible proof" (like, say items in github, etc.) turned out not to be any kind of proof, and the truth came out.

[csun]

Quote from: organizer on Today at 11:01:53 PM
why on earth would they defend him and keep him around.


Why on earth would you attack him so persistently? You're not even a customer of his.

Or are you so dense to think that these people don't have receipts of their orders and probably don't care to make sensitive information public?

Interesting you mention that.  There were no email orders (according to the dozens of sockpuppets attacking jasin at litecointalk).  And we used to be able to log into fibonacci.io and look at our orders/shares.  Now we can't because it's dedicated to XCurrency.  So unless the sockpuppets took screenshots - probably no proof.  Right?

Well that sucks  . I was around last year when the inital offering came out, but I ran when I found out my money would be going towards salaries. I've been following the discussion of the project for a while and I empathize with the people who have had their money taken. I hope this guy gets what he deserves.

[rdnkjdi]

I'll respond to Teka's questions (within reason as far as time it takes me) unless he pisses me off too.  Also I will respond to anyone from the XC thread unless they're just using wordplay and throwing up straw men by saying there is no evidence - and try to simply deflect and use word play the way synechist has.  

I have no intention of turning this into something too large to back up - I created a summary and then provided the raw evidence to back each piece up very adequately.  Which point would you like me to back up Teka?

Each of my numbered points on my latest post is very easy to verify.  The threads are linked on litecointalk.

I will no longer waste time dealing with synechist's wordplay (I would suggest others do the same)

I will repeat for anyone reading.  I WILL backup ANY ACCUSATION I have made.  But synechist is using a wordplay and trying to redirect in ways I'm not willing to waste my time and effort to deal with..  Ask in the thread - you will get answers.

[synechist]

Is the XC braintrust implying that Jasin did not take orders on fictional asics and make statements about these asics (such as delivery, project status & performance claims), did not collect LTC, BTC and CACHE for these orders?

It's a pretty simple question to answer without trying to redirect into another argument.

No, I am not implying, I am directly stating that "Jasin did not take orders on fictional asics and make statements about these asics (such as delivery, project status & performance claims), did not collect LTC, BTC and CACHE for these orders."

This is because the word "fictional" ought to be replaced with a more correct word, like "planned".

As such, I directly state that:

"Jasin did take orders on planned ASICs and made statements about these ASICs (such as delivery, project status & performance claims), and collected LTC, BTC and CACHE for these orders."


So, umm... I've stated it now. Have you thereby accomplished something?

[Teka]

I'll respond to Teka's questions (within reason as far as time it takes me) unless he pisses me off too.  Also I will respond to anyone from the XC thread unless they're just using wordplay and throwing up straw men by saying there is no evidence - and try to simply deflect and use word play the way synechist has.  

I have no intention of turning this into something too large to back up - I created a summary and then provided the raw evidence to back each piece up very adequately.  Which point would you like me to back up Teka?

Each of my numbered points on my latest post is very easy to verify.  The threads are linked on litecointalk.

I will no longer waste time dealing with synechist's wordplay (I would suggest others do the same)

I would like you to stop attacking other XC team members and XC directly. Also, if you can change the thread title to mention just Jasin names and that's only because current title make it sounds like he's a CORE dev. As I said, I won't comment and its not my job to comment on the work that Jasin does outside of XC. I've only responded when XC has been attacked directly or core team members. The core values of XC have never changed, we are still here to build a platform. Myself and other team members such as Synchesits are working crazy hours to get XC to where it needs to be.

[synechist]

I object to this assertion that I'm using "wordplay".

What I am doing is asserting that:

- you're making serious allegations

- which would need proof if you want to avoid being very unethical

- and proof has not been even remotely provided here.


Since you're mounting a case, the burden of proof is on you.

I've been helpful enough to indicate earlier what would amount to sufficient proof for your case.

Now go get some proof.

[rdnkjdi]

I would like you to stop attacking other XC team members

This thread was meant as a warning.  Not an "attack on XC".  People should invest elsewhere if Jasin is heavily involved in this project which he is.  

My statements about you guys being slimey was when you started telling organizer he had no business attacking jasin if he didn't get scammed.  I'll go back thru and try to pull out everything.

I stand by my wordplay deal with the other guy.  And my slimy statement (this is an opinion and not something that can be backed with fact)  I think he's slimy.  I don't want to deal with it.

If there are others too lazy to reference the threads that prove my points to be fact than I will be happy to answer questions for them.  I'm not wasting my time with wordplay.

if you can change the thread title to mention just Jasin names and that's only because current title make it sounds like he's a CORE dev.

I will mention his name and say a developer.  Also I don't think he's a developer for cache although heavily involved so I'll make it accurate.  Does current title look ok?

[Teka]

I would like you to stop attacking other XC team members

This thread was meant as a warning.  Not an "attack on XC".  People should invest elsewhere if Jasin is heavily involved in this project which he is.  

To me personally, some of your comments such as 'I tend to think you are rather slimey.' came across as a personal attack on team members and this entire thread has come across as an attack on XC.

Also Jasin shares cool ideas with us yes, but the current core devs are Dan and other coders mentioned on the site.

[rdnkjdi]

Is the XC braintrust implying that Jasin did not take orders on fictional asics and make statements about these asics (such as delivery, project status & performance claims), did not collect LTC, BTC and CACHE for these orders?

There's no proof.  We didn't get emails.  We used to be able to login and see our orders.  Now all we see are advertisements for their coin.

You make it sound like the page has a giant xc logo on it. It mentions and old project called cryptophi that was once part of the collab between XC and Cache. It's even at the bottom of the page for crying out loud.

The thing is - Jasin is selling cryptophi as one third of the page he used to have where we logged in for our pre-orders.  It might be old news to you guys.  It's what we see EVERY TIME we go to check on orders that mount into the tens of thousands of dollars.

That it's "old news" is not exactly what we want to hear.  I assume he used it for filler?  The fact remains - it links XC and Fibonacci and Jasin all together extremely tightly.  Which even you've admitted to.  

While you may see it as an attack on XC.  I see it as a warning about the type of developers XC is happy to keep on their team, defend, support and be supported by.  Names are EVERYTHING in crypto.  People WILL lose money on XC if Jasin is involved.  I can almost garuntee it.  

Most people didn't have a clue about him using innerchains on both coins.  Most people don't know anything about cachecoin, or that he owns half of it, or that he plans on putting the features (albiet the technical underlying code may be different) that are in XC into cachecoin.

My warning about him being a scammer is a testament to his character.  If it's not cachecoin it'll be something else.  But where Jasin goes people WILL lose money and they WILL be left holding the bag.

You may view it as an attack.  I view it as a warning.

I tried to remove slimy reference in the dialog (think I got them all - I was accused of having no reading comprehension so negative comments go both ways).  I'll take out any other derogatory references you would like.  

Also Jasin shares cool ideas with us yes, but the current core devs are Dan and other coders mentioned on the site.

Your chat thread is talking about taking him on full time ... or mentioning it.

[synechist]

Organiser persists in systematically hounding Jasin and spreading any negative sentiment he finds about him.

Yet Organiser was never a customer of Jasin's.

Now if it were the case that Organiser has proof that Jasin is a scammer, Organiser's actions would be justified.

But if it were not the case that Organiser has proof that Jasin is a scammer, Organiser's actions would be manifestly awful and brutal.


Since the facts presented here and in the other threads are inconclusive at best, and since Organiser has not had opportunity to engage in a refund process with Jasin, he lacks the crucial evidence needed to assert that Jasin is a scammer.

Therefore Organiser is brutally unethical.



THIS is what I implied earlier when I questioned Organiser's motives. I did NOT imply that I don't care about fighting scammers.

[Teka]

Is the XC braintrust implying that Jasin did not take orders on fictional asics and make statements about these asics (such as delivery, project status & performance claims), did not collect LTC, BTC and CACHE for these orders?

There's no proof.  We didn't get emails.  We used to be able to login and see our orders.  Now all we see are advertisements for their coin.

You make it sound like the page has a giant xc logo on it. It mentions and old project called cryptophi that was once part of the collab between XC and Cache. It's even at the bottom of the page for crying out loud.

The thing is - Jasin is selling cryptophi as one third of the page he used to have where we logged in for our pre-orders.  It might be old news to you guys.  It's what we see EVERY TIME we go to check on orders that mount into the tens of thousands of dollars.

That it's "old news" is not exactly what we want to hear.  I assume he used it for filler?  The fact remains - it links XC and Fibonacci and Jasin all together extremely tightly.  Which even you've admitted to.  

While you may see it as an attack on XC.  I see it as a warning about the type of developers XC is happy to keep on their team, defend, support and be supported by.  Names are EVERYTHING in crypto.  People WILL lose money on XC if Jasin is involved.  I can almost garuntee it.  

Most people didn't have a clue about him using innerchains on both coins.  Most people don't know anything about cachecoin, or that he owns half of it, or that he plans on putting the features (albiet the technical underlying code may be different) that are in XC into cachecoin.

My warning about him being a scammer is a testament to his character.  If it's not cachecoin it'll be something else.  But where Jasin goes people WILL lose money and they WILL be left holding the bag.

You may view it as an attack.  I view it as a warning.

I would just like to get a few things straight first:

- You can not guarantee that people will loose many because Jasin is involved
         - Our core community is aware of this situation and has expressed their opinon, none of them have dumped or a dumping because of Jasin.

- Jasin's involvement with cachecoin was public

- Blockchain 2.0 and POBOC ('Interchains') was public and we released that we will be working with Cache on this

- Anon features were a part of Cache, we addressed the fact that the implementation was different. We never tried to hide the fact that Cache had Anon features. In fact we even discussed it with members.

- This means that most people knew about nearly every detail of cache and the collab with XC

- You cannot prove that Jasin is stealing any code which I really don't think he is. As you said this your gut feeling.

[csun]

This is much more than just a project blowing up. This is someone taking money for a project and failing to even produce any tangible proof that the money received was indeed going towards work of the project.

No, this is exactly what happens when a project blows up. Something goes wrong, and then sentiment turns against the project and accusations start flying.

I do PR. I'm very well aware of how quickly people perceive things to be "tangible proof" when in fact they're just misperceived half-truths and emotion.

Case in point: XC's FUDstorm at the hands of a competitor. The FUD was solidly and resoundingly repudiated (before I was part of XC), but not before most people had dumped. And they dumped because they believed they had "tangible proof" that XC was a scam. They were all wrong. The "tangible proof" (like, say items in github, etc.) turned out not to be any kind of proof, and the truth came out.

Oh please stop with the mis-direction.

First:
When a project blows up, sentiments and accusations start flying in addition to valid complaints.

You're just sweeping everything said here as false accusations when in fact:

1. Money was taken for a product.
2. Said product was not delivered.
3. Requests for explanations are met with nebulous / non-verifiable excuses.
3. An entire website filled with data on customer orders was taken down and has not been put back up well after the promised date.
4. No explanations are offered for the delay.
5. Jasin has not answered any further questions and has been MIA for the past week and a half.

Second
You're trying to confound the meaning of tangible proof and the use case. Your example is the use of fabricated proof to attempt to back an accusation. In this case tangible proof constitutes verifiable proof to prove a point; that work was done. Again, the refusal to allow someone to contact a foundry to verify dealings with Fibonaci is a red flag.

[crimealone]

why on earth would they defend him and keep him around.

Why on earth would you attack him so persistently? You're not even a customer of his.

What the hell?  This is essentially XC's PR guy saying "Who gives a shit if he's a scammer - he didn't take YOUR money.  What's your problem"

"You have no reason to inform people that a developer is a massive fraudster if he didn't take YOUR MONEY"

Does nobody give a flying f%%% when people are ripped off thousands and just continue on their way?  The XC "team" obviously doesn't.  Not in practice - not in speech.  And this statement parades it around on massive display.

You do NOT want to be associated with these guys.

"If he didn't steal from you - you shouldn't give a sh** that other people are gonna get ripped off"

What a tool.

If I'm not mistaken, Jasin refunded you and then you claimed to have bought more shares - but didn't prove it.

You stopped replying to Jasin's PMs.

Why don't you simply reply with proof of the money you're owed and then get refunded?

Given this, why do you continue to spread FUD instead of just doing the responsible thing?

What are your intentions here?

Why people like you always call everything "FUD"??

[synechist]

This is much more than just a project blowing up. This is someone taking money for a project and failing to even produce any tangible proof that the money received was indeed going towards work of the project.

No, this is exactly what happens when a project blows up. Something goes wrong, and then sentiment turns against the project and accusations start flying.

I do PR. I'm very well aware of how quickly people perceive things to be "tangible proof" when in fact they're just misperceived half-truths and emotion.

Case in point: XC's FUDstorm at the hands of a competitor. The FUD was solidly and resoundingly repudiated (before I was part of XC), but not before most people had dumped. And they dumped because they believed they had "tangible proof" that XC was a scam. They were all wrong. The "tangible proof" (like, say items in github, etc.) turned out not to be any kind of proof, and the truth came out.

Oh please stop with the mis-direction.

First:
When a project blows up, sentiments and accusations start flying in addition to valid complaints.

You're just sweeping everything said here as false accusations when in fact:

1. Money was taken for a product.
2. Said product was not delivered.
3. Requests for explanations are met with nebulous / non-verifiable excuses.
3. An entire website filled with data on customer orders was taken down and has not been put back up well after the promised date.
4. No explanations are offered for the delay.
5. Jasin has not answered any further questions and has been MIA for the past week and a half.

Second
You're trying to confound the meaning of tangible proof and the use case. Your example is the use of fabricated proof to attempt to back an accusation. In this case tangible proof constitutes verifiable proof to prove a point; that work was done. Again, the refusal to allow someone to contact a foundry to verify dealings with Fibonaci is a red flag.

I would agree that you have red flags.

I disagree that you have any kind of proof that Jasin is a scammer.


Since allegations of scamming are very serious and highly damaging, they should not be made lightly or without proof.

Therefore, do not accuse Jasin of being a scammer. It's profoundly unethical.

[synechist]

Why people like you always call everything "FUD"??

Here's why:

"FUD" stands for "fear, uncertainty, and doubt".

What's been propagated in this thread is wilfully unsubstantiated claims of a very serious nature about Jasin.

Their effect is to produce fear, uncertainty, and doubt about Jasin, XC, Cache, etc.

Since they're unsubstantiated and therefore cannot be properly called facts, they're simply "FUD."




(Now what does this tell you about the kind of person I am?)

[rdnkjdi]

I disagree that you have any kind of proof that Jasin is a scammer.

You are not welcome to respond to this.  Even though clowns of your caliber can't keep from it.

A - Person says "Cachecoin is worth .01 bitcoin if you order my ASIC"

B - Person sells their cachecoin they mined months before to you to buy their ASIC using their wife's account.

C - Person has no evidence they ever had an ASIC because the foundry would "cancel the order if they knew it was going to be used for cryptocurrency"

D - Person disabled their website and used it promoted XC

E - Person offers you discount (in cachecoin) that is now worth 0.2% of what it was.

F - Person "runs out of refund money" for people who paid in bitcoin and litecoin.

This is the calliber "red flag" we are talking about for those thinking about investing in XC.

[csun]

This is much more than just a project blowing up. This is someone taking money for a project and failing to even produce any tangible proof that the money received was indeed going towards work of the project.

No, this is exactly what happens when a project blows up. Something goes wrong, and then sentiment turns against the project and accusations start flying.

I do PR. I'm very well aware of how quickly people perceive things to be "tangible proof" when in fact they're just misperceived half-truths and emotion.

Case in point: XC's FUDstorm at the hands of a competitor. The FUD was solidly and resoundingly repudiated (before I was part of XC), but not before most people had dumped. And they dumped because they believed they had "tangible proof" that XC was a scam. They were all wrong. The "tangible proof" (like, say items in github, etc.) turned out not to be any kind of proof, and the truth came out.

Oh please stop with the mis-direction.

First:
When a project blows up, sentiments and accusations start flying in addition to valid complaints.

You're just sweeping everything said here as false accusations when in fact:

1. Money was taken for a product.
2. Said product was not delivered.
3. Requests for explanations are met with nebulous / non-verifiable excuses.
3. An entire website filled with data on customer orders was taken down and has not been put back up well after the promised date.
4. No explanations are offered for the delay.
5. Jasin has not answered any further questions and has been MIA for the past week and a half.

Second
You're trying to confound the meaning of tangible proof and the use case. Your example is the use of fabricated proof to attempt to back an accusation. In this case tangible proof constitutes verifiable proof to prove a point; that work was done. Again, the refusal to allow someone to contact a foundry to verify dealings with Fibonaci is a red flag.

I would agree that you have red flags.

I disagree that you have any kind of proof that Jasin is a scammer.


Since allegations of scamming are very serious and highly damaging, they should not be made lightly or without proof.

Therefore, do not accuse Jasin of being a scammer. It's profoundly unethical.

In all courts: taking people's money, failing to deliver a product, failing to prove that you've taken steps to try to fulfill contractual obligations, and destruction or concealment of financial records would very much scream scam.

Again, perhaps you would like to address the hundreds of pages in the threads on failure to do any of what was mentioned above as pure hearsay? That everyone is just out to get Jasin?

[Teka]

This is much more than just a project blowing up. This is someone taking money for a project and failing to even produce any tangible proof that the money received was indeed going towards work of the project.

No, this is exactly what happens when a project blows up. Something goes wrong, and then sentiment turns against the project and accusations start flying.

I do PR. I'm very well aware of how quickly people perceive things to be "tangible proof" when in fact they're just misperceived half-truths and emotion.

Case in point: XC's FUDstorm at the hands of a competitor. The FUD was solidly and resoundingly repudiated (before I was part of XC), but not before most people had dumped. And they dumped because they believed they had "tangible proof" that XC was a scam. They were all wrong. The "tangible proof" (like, say items in github, etc.) turned out not to be any kind of proof, and the truth came out.

Oh please stop with the mis-direction.

First:
When a project blows up, sentiments and accusations start flying in addition to valid complaints.

You're just sweeping everything said here as false accusations when in fact:

1. Money was taken for a product.
2. Said product was not delivered.
3. Requests for explanations are met with nebulous / non-verifiable excuses.
3. An entire website filled with data on customer orders was taken down and has not been put back up well after the promised date.
4. No explanations are offered for the delay.
5. Jasin has not answered any further questions and has been MIA for the past week and a half.

Second
You're trying to confound the meaning of tangible proof and the use case. Your example is the use of fabricated proof to attempt to back an accusation. In this case tangible proof constitutes verifiable proof to prove a point; that work was done. Again, the refusal to allow someone to contact a foundry to verify dealings with Fibonaci is a red flag.

I would agree that you have red flags.

I disagree that you have any kind of proof that Jasin is a scammer.


Since allegations of scamming are very serious and highly damaging, they should not be made lightly or without proof.

Therefore, do not accuse Jasin of being a scammer. It's profoundly unethical.

In all courts: taking people's money, failing to deliver a product, failing to prove that you've taken steps to try to fulfill contractual obligations, and destruction or concealment of financial records would very much scream scam.

Again, perhaps you would like to address the hundreds of pages in the threads on failure to do any of what was mentioned above as pure hearsay? That everyone is just out to get Jasin?

In that case, stop attacking xc members and xc itself and battle Jasin in court.

[csun]

Why people like you always call everything "FUD"??

Here's why:

"FUD" stands for "fear, uncertainty, and doubt".

What's been propagated in this thread is wilfully unsubstantiated claims of a very serious nature about Jasin.

Their effect is to produce fear, uncertainty, and doubt about Jasin, XC, Cache, etc.

Since they're unsubstantiated and therefore cannot be properly called facts, they're simply "FUD."

(Now what does this tell you about the kind of person I am?)

Facts:

-Hundreds of pages of complaints of posts from forum members who have not received what was promised for their payment.
-Members who are voicing their complaints have wide range of registration dates, posting patterns and times.
-Jasin has not posted a response in the thread in a week and a half since his last post.
-Site that had all of users orders is no longer available.

FUD:
You are either very naive, stupid, or being paid very well. Take your pick.