[ANN] [GDGC] GadgetCoin | IoT | M2M |Smart Contracts on Hardware

[albert_mt]

There's no public or even peer testing that I know of. Regarding scalability and latency, there's no specific information or test that can be performed... nor it is an easy thing to do

where is the peer review for the Paycoin scam you have been supporting mr jobless actor Jose? i can't find anywhere you requested peer testing from the Paycoin team.
where is the scalability and specific information for your Mangocoin? nowhere. you are just trolling.

[barabbas]

ROFL ...ROFL barabbas the supporter of the Paycoin and Iconexpert scams thinks this "BUSINESS MODEL" is not good enough

like viacoin and btcdrak is not good enough for barabbas

LULZ the Paycoin scam was good enough for barabbas, all money should go to the scams barabbas supports!!!!!!!  LULZ

btw, read what he says in the Mangocoinz thread ROFL ...ROFL he is on Mangocoinz ROFL

What barabbas does, being concerned about design and implementation details such as scalability and high availability is a good thing as well as scrutinize the business plan is useful for the developers and project.

I am sure barabbas is equally critical and apply such a high standard to the coins which he support such as to Paycoin or Mangocoinz.  

Based on what I can see in the superb white paper, the working HTML5 wallet and the information about the businesses sites such as jizzmo and streemo, personally I think this project is on the right track.

First of all, and without quoting total idiots, lets set the record straight:

-- I never, ever, "supported" Paycoin. I was fully aware, and posted as such, that the project had tow evident "assets": One of the most idiotic individuals in the world, in Joe Homero Garza AND, by far, the best, most loyal, biggest and more affluent community in crypto. I traded XPY in small amounts (still do).

-- Mangoz is a nice project, in Beta phase at the moment, that is neither crypto nor decentralized and of which I am both supportive (because it has great potential AND it is completely free, therefore there's not even a remote possibility of scam) and very critical given the fact that their three young devs have no idea of how to build a profitable business around their project. Even so, the idea is so different and catchy that I believe some degree of success, probably a minimal fraction of what the potential is, is inevitable.

-- The IconicExpert coin was and is a very good idea, innovative too, that had many unnecessary problems at launch and has had and still has, ways to game the system. But, great idea as it is, the main burden of the coin is IconicExpert himself, a notoriously hated individual -and NOT for legitimate reasons, generally- in  crypto whose ego gets and always will by far the better of him, therefore and on that basis alone, I stopped supporting the project. But it is still a good idea bound to fail for the reason noted.

That out of the way, and to avoid repetition, I'll answer in responding to your post on the mango thread.

[barabbas]

There's no public or even peer testing that I know of. Regarding scalability and latency, there's no specific information or test that can be performed... nor it is an easy thing to do

where is the peer review for the Paycoin scam you have been supporting mr jobless actor Jose? i can't find anywhere you requested peer testing from the Paycoin team.
where is the scalability and specific information for your Mangocoin? nowhere. you are just trolling.

Batman. One last time, I'm Batman.

[albert_mt]

ROFL ...ROFL barabbas the supporter of the Paycoin and Iconexpert scams thinks this "BUSINESS MODEL" is not good enough

like viacoin and btcdrak is not good enough for barabbas

LULZ the Paycoin scam was good enough for barabbas, all money should go to the scams barabbas supports!!!!!!!  LULZ

btw, read what he says in the Mangocoinz thread ROFL ...ROFL he is on Mangocoinz ROFL

What barabbas does, being concerned about design and implementation details such as scalability and high availability is a good thing as well as scrutinize the business plan is useful for the developers and project.

I am sure barabbas is equally critical and apply such a high standard to the coins which he support such as to Paycoin or Mangocoinz.  

Based on what I can see in the superb white paper, the working HTML5 wallet and the information about the businesses sites such as jizzmo and streemo, personally I think this project is on the right track.

First of all, and without quoting total idiots, lets set the record straight:

-- I never, ever, "supported" Paycoin. I was fully aware, and posted as such, that the project had tow evident "assets": One of the most idiotic individuals in the world, in Joe Homero Garza AND, by far, the best, most loyal, biggest and more affluent community in crypto. I traded XPY in small amounts (still do).

-- Mangoz is a nice project, in Beta phase at the moment, that is neither crypto nor decentralized and of which I am both supportive (because it has great potential AND it is completely free, therefore there's not even a remote possibility of scam) and very critical given the fact that their three young devs have no idea of how to build a profitable business around their project. Even so, the idea is so different and catchy that I believe some degree of success, probably a minimal fraction of what the potential is, is inevitable.

-- The IconicExpert coin was and is a very good idea, innovative too, that had many unnecessary problems at launch and has had and still has, ways to game the system. But, great idea as it is, the main burden of the coin is IconicExpert himself, a notoriously hated individual -and NOT for legitimate reasons, generally- in  crypto whose ego gets and always will by far the better of him, therefore and on that basis alone, I stopped supporting the project. But it is still a good idea bound to fail for the reason noted.

That out of the way, and to avoid repetition, I'll answer in responding to your post on the mango thread.

lol what a liar troll you are 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=900970

anyone can read there how you fully supported the Paycoin scam in January and february. When everyone could see it was a scam and people were loosing money in big time, you were still shilling for Garza.

You go from thread to thread and attack all coins to build the righteous and objective image to support scams like paycoin is.

what a despicable liar troll.

[albert_mt]

There's no public or even peer testing that I know of. Regarding scalability and latency, there's no specific information or test that can be performed... nor it is an easy thing to do

where is the peer review for the Paycoin scam you have been supporting mr jobless actor Jose? i can't find anywhere you requested peer testing from the Paycoin team.
where is the scalability and specific information for your Mangocoin? nowhere. you are just trolling.

Batman. One last time, I'm Batman.

what a surprise that there is no peer review for your Paycoin scam. after all peer test is only important for other coins not for your scam.

[altcoinUK]

Lets forget about barabbas. He felt he must share his disapproval regarding to this project. There are 1000 other coins but he needed to express his view regarding to this one. He knows why it was important for him, but lets move on and discuss GadgetCoin.

I think the collaboration with ZoVolt is a great news and that should bring a lot to the table. As I can read ZoVolt has relation with Cisco, NHS, large investment groups, etc. If they can bring one of the big players like Cisco to the party then we don't even need the jizzmo site and this coin will be all right.

[mtomcdev]

A few community members contacted us in PM and asked in this thread about the availability of coins and VICR contracts. Also, a few investors working with our partner ZoVolt Ltd want to be involved with the GadgetNet business ideas, help us to cover the development and infrastructure costs, and try out crypto investments by purchasing our VICR contracts.
From tomorrow the contracts will be available again for a 48 hours period until Saturday morning when we will terminate permanently the contract distribution process.

Please let us know if you have any issues with the BTC transactions or anything else during the purchase process and we will sort the problems out.

[albert_mt]

A few community members contacted us in PM and asked in this thread about the availability of coins and VICR contracts. Also, a few investors working with our partner ZoVolt Ltd want to be involved with the GadgetNet business ideas, help us to cover the development and infrastructure costs, and try out crypto investments by purchasing our VICR contracts.
From tomorrow the contracts will be available again for a 48 hours period until Saturday morning when we will terminate permanently the contract distribution process.

Please let us know if you have any issues with the BTC transactions or anything else during the purchase process and we will sort the problems out.

thanks dev, it's great you extended a bit.

[Netzer]

A few community members contacted us in PM and asked in this thread about the availability of coins and VICR contracts. Also, a few investors working with our partner ZoVolt Ltd want to be involved with the GadgetNet business ideas, help us to cover the development and infrastructure costs, and try out crypto investments by purchasing our VICR contracts.
From tomorrow the contracts will be available again for a 48 hours period until Saturday morning when we will terminate permanently the contract distribution process.

Please let us know if you have any issues with the BTC transactions or anything else during the purchase process and we will sort the problems out.

could you extend the contracts until next week? I know someone who is very interested to buy coins but he will get his money only end of next week.

[mtomcdev]

A few community members contacted us in PM and asked in this thread about the availability of coins and VICR contracts. Also, a few investors working with our partner ZoVolt Ltd want to be involved with the GadgetNet business ideas, help us to cover the development and infrastructure costs, and try out crypto investments by purchasing our VICR contracts.
From tomorrow the contracts will be available again for a 48 hours period until Saturday morning when we will terminate permanently the contract distribution process.

Please let us know if you have any issues with the BTC transactions or anything else during the purchase process and we will sort the problems out.

could you extend the contracts until next week? I know someone who is very interested to buy coins but he will get his money only end of next week.

The contracts will be available until the 18th of July, Saturday morning.
We must start working on the roll out of jizmmo and streemo and we would need to understand how much money we have to start those applications. Also the community requested to take the coin to the exchanges and we would need to understand what is the final number of available coins and start working on the exchange integration.

There will be plenty of opportunities later to buy GadgetCoin if someone is interested.

[mtomcdev]

Update

We really appreciate the complimentary comments regarding our white paper. Whether the comments come from the community or commercial players such as IBM and Samsung, it's a nice feeling when someone says something positive about our white paper. And today our white paper received even more flattering recognition. The W3C organization has invited us to work on the Web of Things initiative and contribute to the work of standardization and IoT device integration with the world wide web. It is really exciting and very much an honour that we will have the opportunity to work with professionals who shaped the world via their researches and contributions in the W3C organization over the last 3 decades.

We will take the concept of blockchain, authentication and access control based on the public private key infrastructure to W3C knowing that the Internet of Things revolution would benefit greatly from the innovation this digital currency community has been working on for years.

We will keep you updated regarding standards and open source releases.  

[meandme]

Update

We really appreciate the complimentary comments regarding our white paper. Whether the comments come from the community or commercial players such as IBM and Samsung, it's a nice feeling when someone says something positive about our white paper. And today our white paper received even more flattering recognition. The W3C organization has invited us to work on the Web of Things initiative and contribute to the work of standardization and IoT device integration with the world wide web. It is really exciting and very much an honour that we will have the opportunity to work with professionals who shaped the world via their researches and contributions in the W3C organization over the last 3 decades.

We will take the concept of blockchain, authentication and access control based on the public private key infrastructure to W3C knowing that the Internet of Things revolution would benefit greatly from the innovation this digital currency community has been working on for years.

We will keep you updated regarding standards and open source releases.  

nice,thank for the update

[altcoinUK]

Bloody hell guys, that's a marvellous news. I always told here that the white paper is a superb material!

What is most important from GadgetNet viewpoint, the relation with W3C could open many doors because those W3C guys work with the CTOs of the word biggest companies.

And the armchair commentators who knows absolutely nothing about software development but doubt your software engineering and business skills can say whatever they want, your white paper which you put in the public domain, the working blockchain, smart contracts in the GDC wallet and the recognition from W3C speak for itself.

[barabbas]

Bloody hell guys, that's a marvellous news. I always told here that the white paper is a superb material!

What is most important from GadgetNet viewpoint, the relation with W3C could open many doors because those W3C guys work with the CTOs of the word biggest companies.

And the armchair commentators who knows absolutely nothing about software development but doubt your software engineering and business skills can say whatever they want, your white paper which you put in the public domain, the working blockchain, smart contracts in the GDC wallet and the recognition from W3C speak for itself.

This "armchair commentator" who knows little about software development, has only stated the absolute lack of viable business plan in this project. And, before celebrating and "mooning" wants to have proof the basic software actually works. There are over 1,000 working blockchains in crypto. And almost as many white papers of various degrees of "quality" in them. 95% of both are attached to failures and the other 5% have slim to none actual viability. So I keep saying, great if this works and progress is made IF and only IF the p2p works in a significant scale comparable to the commercial competition already established. When and only IF then it works properly, it would be time to list it as an asset; until then, it is just an idea, probably a very good one, but just an idea.

Which, in order to achieve some degree of success, will need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan.

It seems to me there's a very long road ahead before celebrations and "moonings" are called for. I will gladly join in the festivities. Then and there.

[meandme]

Bloody hell guys, that's a marvellous news. I always told here that the white paper is a superb material!

What is most important from GadgetNet viewpoint, the relation with W3C could open many doors because those W3C guys work with the CTOs of the word biggest companies.

And the armchair commentators who knows absolutely nothing about software development but doubt your software engineering and business skills can say whatever they want, your white paper which you put in the public domain, the working blockchain, smart contracts in the GDC wallet and the recognition from W3C speak for itself.

This "armchair commentator" who knows little about software development, has only stated the absolute lack of viable business plan in this project. And, before celebrating and "mooning" wants to have proof the basic software actually works. There are over 1,000 working blockchains in crypto. And almost as many white papers of various degrees of "quality" in them. 95% of both are attached to failures and the other 5% have slim to none actual viability. So I keep saying, great if this works and progress is made IF and only IF the p2p works in a significant scale comparable to the commercial competition already established. When and only IF then it works properly, it would be time to list it as an asset; until then, it is just an idea, probably a very good one, but just an idea.

Which, in order to achieve some degree of success, will need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan.

It seems to me there's a very long road ahead before celebrations and "moonings" are called for. I will gladly join in the festivities. Then and there.

 there's a very long road ahead  ，  i agree with you

[chocobo]

Anyone else unable to connect to the wallet?

[altcoinUK]

Bloody hell guys, that's a marvellous news. I always told here that the white paper is a superb material!

What is most important from GadgetNet viewpoint, the relation with W3C could open many doors because those W3C guys work with the CTOs of the word biggest companies.

And the armchair commentators who knows absolutely nothing about software development but doubt your software engineering and business skills can say whatever they want, your white paper which you put in the public domain, the working blockchain, smart contracts in the GDC wallet and the recognition from W3C speak for itself.

This "armchair commentator" who knows little about software development, has only stated the absolute lack of viable business plan in this project. And, before celebrating and "mooning" wants to have proof the basic software actually works. There are over 1,000 working blockchains in crypto. And almost as many white papers of various degrees of "quality" in them. 95% of both are attached to failures and the other 5% have slim to none actual viability. So I keep saying, great if this works and progress is made IF and only IF the p2p works in a significant scale comparable to the commercial competition already established. When and only IF then it works properly, it would be time to list it as an asset; until then, it is just an idea, probably a very good one, but just an idea.

Which, in order to achieve some degree of success, will need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan.

It seems to me there's a very long road ahead before celebrations and "moonings" are called for. I will gladly join in the festivities. Then and there.

Normally I couldn't care less who does what in this forum or which user goes to which thread, everyone is free to say and do whatever in this forum. As far as my concern, the issue is, that I know that you clearly understand that the handful supporters (including me) of this coin has financial interest in the success of this coin as we try to support this little-tiny project and we want to make money with this idea, so you understand this very well but you are keep coming back and banging on with your fixations.

I saw others are unhappy about your Paycoin scam involvement, and then I also read back whether you supported the Paycoin scam or not. Indeed when Garza was scamming his customers with the $20 nonsense then you were not pointing out the "absolute lack of viable business plan" nor you were concerned there about the "need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan", but you were cheerleading the scam exactly as these users said you did. It's a fact that you supported wholeheartedly the Paycoin scam. Just like others, I also read back your posts from January and February and it is very clear you were indeed shilling for the Garza's scam.
It seems when you have financial interest even if it is a scam you are not so worry about the "need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan". You are banging on the "need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan", but (again I read back as others did) indeed you had been supporting IconicExpert's coin. How the fuck such a shady and controversial person like IconicExpert could have a business plan at all? Hmmmm? It's same as if Bernie Madoff would roll out a business plan. Whatever good idea Maddoff would have there can't be a viable business plan based on his any ideas. Period. It seems when you have financial interest or whatever your agenda is then you conveniently ignore the "need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan".

Regardless from you moral and agenda, it was pointed out here clearly that there is a business plan for GadgetNet. GadgetNet will pay out 95% for broadcaster and I have broken the cost of streaming down to you. The unique selling point is the 95% pay out which is unprecedented in the industry and if you do business you should know that a business plan can be based on such a unique selling point. You also ignore the fact, that if there are viewers then there is advertising revenue which indeed strengthen the business plan. Moreover, you have been banging on the fucking P2P while it was pointed out you numerous time that the jizzmo model is using hybrid RTMP model - that's why you need streaming node servers. Despite it (the hybrid RTMP model) was explained to you several times here, you understand virtually nothing from the technology, but you keep coming here with your fixations about that P2P doesn't work yet.

Moreover and probably most importantly, since Zovolt and W3C is in the picture, the dependence on the jizzmo site and adult theme is less significant and the generic IoT aspect of the business plan is very relevant, and that is a fucking marvellous news. The white paper say nothing about P2P video but it is about a generic IoT framework - precisely what industrial integrators like Zovolt or professioanl bodies such as W3C are looking for.

Finally, your comment about the white paper is just the full ignorance of facts. The fact is that from the 1,000 published white papers that you have mentioned only a very few, maybe 5 contains novel and business worthy concept. One of the few is for example Dr Gavin Wood's Ethereum papers which is a quality material from a fine scientist. Other quality white paper (terms of the tech content) is what these developers published - that's why W3C invited these guys to join to the WoT program.
On the other day, you were making arrogant comments here and implying that the developers are a bunch of idiots who don't even consider addressing the test or scalability requirements. And then W3C thinks the developers are good enough to be invited to join WoT.

The handful supporters of this project happy with the direction and what the developers achieved so far such as the recognition from W3C or the partnership with Zovolt as well as with the business plan.

From your public comments it seems to me you are the supporter of Mangocoinz. Good luck with Mangocoinz to shake the phone, spin it over your head in a sock or whatever the use case and business plan are there and sell the application as a gym application when gym users don't use it at all. I am sure that will be a more successful business, the developers know there who to develop software and you will be making millions with that coin which I am sure has a "viable business plan". Really, good luck to you there. I wish you the best, since you are so experienced and it seems you know everything about technology businesses you will be very successful, but I ask you politely, please don't troll this thread any more which thread and project is important for the handful of users, the supporters of this coin.

[mtomcdev]

Moreover and probably most importantly, since Zovolt and W3C is in the picture, the dependence on the jizzmo site and adult theme is less significant and the generic IoT aspect of the business plan is very relevant, and that is a fucking marvellous news. The white paper say nothing about P2P video but it is about a generic IoT framework - precisely what industrial integrators like Zovolt or professioanl bodies such as W3C are looking for.

Thank you for your enthusiastic support and kind words about the GadgetNet idea.

You have made an important point regarding the generic IoT framework. The jizzmo application is only one use cases from the many that the platform can support. The main goal has been from the beginning to develop a generic, blockchain based Internet of Things platform.

[albert_mt]

Moreover and probably most importantly, since Zovolt and W3C is in the picture, the dependence on the jizzmo site and adult theme is less significant and the generic IoT aspect of the business plan is very relevant, and that is a fucking marvellous news. The white paper say nothing about P2P video but it is about a generic IoT framework - precisely what industrial integrators like Zovolt or professioanl bodies such as W3C are looking for.

Thank you for your enthusiastic support and kind words about the GadgetNet idea.

You have made an important point regarding the generic IoT framework. The jizzmo application is only one use cases from the many that the platform can support. The main goal has been from the beginning to develop a generic, blockchain based Internet of Things platform.

go Gadget, go guys! Internet of Things is the future and if W3C is interested then Gadgetnet is in business 

[barabbas]

Bloody hell guys, that's a marvellous news. I always told here that the white paper is a superb material!

What is most important from GadgetNet viewpoint, the relation with W3C could open many doors because those W3C guys work with the CTOs of the word biggest companies.

And the armchair commentators who knows absolutely nothing about software development but doubt your software engineering and business skills can say whatever they want, your white paper which you put in the public domain, the working blockchain, smart contracts in the GDC wallet and the recognition from W3C speak for itself.

This "armchair commentator" who knows little about software development, has only stated the absolute lack of viable business plan in this project. And, before celebrating and "mooning" wants to have proof the basic software actually works. There are over 1,000 working blockchains in crypto. And almost as many white papers of various degrees of "quality" in them. 95% of both are attached to failures and the other 5% have slim to none actual viability. So I keep saying, great if this works and progress is made IF and only IF the p2p works in a significant scale comparable to the commercial competition already established. When and only IF then it works properly, it would be time to list it as an asset; until then, it is just an idea, probably a very good one, but just an idea.

Which, in order to achieve some degree of success, will need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan.

It seems to me there's a very long road ahead before celebrations and "moonings" are called for. I will gladly join in the festivities. Then and there.

Normally I couldn't care less who does what in this forum or which user goes to which thread, everyone is free to say and do whatever in this forum. As far as my concern, the issue is, that I know that you clearly understand that the handful supporters (including me) of this coin has financial interest in the success of this coin as we try to support this little-tiny project and we want to make money with this idea, so you understand this very well but you are keep coming back and banging on with your fixations.

I saw others are unhappy about your Paycoin scam involvement, and then I also read back whether you supported the Paycoin scam or not. Indeed when Garza was scamming his customers with the $20 nonsense then you were not pointing out the "absolute lack of viable business plan" nor you were concerned there about the "need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan", but you were cheerleading the scam exactly as these users said you did. It's a fact that you supported wholeheartedly the Paycoin scam. Just like others, I also read back your posts from January and February and it is very clear you were indeed shilling for the Garza's scam.
It seems when you have financial interest even if it is a scam you are not so worry about the "need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan". You are banging on the "need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan", but (again I read back as others did) indeed you had been supporting IconicExpert's coin. How the fuck such a shady and controversial person like IconicExpert could have a business plan at all? Hmmmm? It's same as if Bernie Madoff would roll out a business plan. Whatever good idea Maddoff would have there can't be a viable business plan based on his any ideas. Period. It seems when you have financial interest or whatever your agenda is then you conveniently ignore the "need of a carefully planned and well executed business plan".

Regardless from you moral and agenda, it was pointed out here clearly that there is a business plan for GadgetNet. GadgetNet will pay out 95% for broadcaster and I have broken the cost of streaming down to you. The unique selling point is the 95% pay out which is unprecedented in the industry and if you do business you should know that a business plan can be based on such a unique selling point. You also ignore the fact, that if there are viewers then there is advertising revenue which indeed strengthen the business plan. Moreover, you have been banging on the fucking P2P while it was pointed out you numerous time that the jizzmo model is using hybrid RTMP model - that's why you need streaming node servers. Despite it (the hybrid RTMP model) was explained to you several times here, you understand virtually nothing from the technology, but you keep coming here with your fixations about that P2P doesn't work yet.

Moreover and probably most importantly, since Zovolt and W3C is in the picture, the dependence on the jizzmo site and adult theme is less significant and the generic IoT aspect of the business plan is very relevant, and that is a fucking marvellous news. The white paper say nothing about P2P video but it is about a generic IoT framework - precisely what industrial integrators like Zovolt or professioanl bodies such as W3C are looking for.

Finally, your comment about the white paper is just the full ignorance of facts. The fact is that from the 1,000 published white papers that you have mentioned only a very few, maybe 5 contains novel and business worthy concept. One of the few is for example Dr Gavin Wood's Ethereum papers which is a quality material from a fine scientist. Other quality white paper (terms of the tech content) is what these developers published - that's why W3C invited these guys to join to the WoT program.
On the other day, you were making arrogant comments here and implying that the developers are a bunch of idiots who don't even consider addressing the test or scalability requirements. And then W3C thinks the developers are good enough to be invited to join WoT.

The handful supporters of this project happy with the direction and what the developers achieved so far such as the recognition from W3C or the partnership with Zovolt as well as with the business plan.

From your public comments it seems to me you are the supporter of Mangocoinz. Good luck with Mangocoinz to shake the phone, spin it over your head in a sock or whatever the use case and business plan are there and sell the application as a gym application when gym users don't use it at all. I am sure that will be a more successful business, the developers know there who to develop software and you will be making millions with that coin which I am sure has a "viable business plan". Really, good luck to you there. I wish you the best, since you are so experienced and it seems you know everything about technology businesses you will be very successful, but I ask you politely, please don't troll this thread any more which thread and project is important for the handful of users, the supporters of this coin.

This is getting to a point of stupid nonsense that simply has to stop, ok?

First of all, EVERY coin has a handful or a multitude of people with financial interest in them. Every single one. That hasn't stopped you -nor it should- from being critical of several of them. Because, in honest projects, we want to be as critical as possible, to avoid excessive absurd expectations and, above all, white or no so white papers whose content is not or cannot be delivered, right? This is no exception.

Second of all, you may choose to believe or interpret whatever way suits you, my postings about PayCoin. Once again, I was never a supporter, much less a shill like you characterized me, nor I have ever been of ANY and ALL projects, including Mango -of which I am also a very critical supporter AND investor-, of PayCoin and much less of Garza whom I have always characterized as egotistical maniac and simply stupid, all of which has not only been confirmed but applies fully to this day. In any case, whether you choose to characterize those postings one thing or the other, it hardly applies or even belongs in here and, frankly, it only is a way for you to antagonize me to serve your own agenda which, in this case, is to be a head cheerleader of this project... which is fine and dandy, although 100% wrong for you are possibly the less indicated individual in all of crypto to be a blind cheerleader, for it shines a very dim and negative light on YOU, not on me.

I am not going to stoop, for now, to your maniacal levels but I'll address the issues. And the issue is blind and quite stupid faith in a project with unknown developers whom you happen to know, precisely for their lack of experience, which makes your recommendations even more suspect and dangerous, just like your totally unjustified enthusiasm. You are welcome to it, of course, but most discerning individuals would take it, as they should, with quite a few grains of salt, alright? And that includes me. Who may or may not be interested in this PUBLIC project. Certainly NOT at the moment but, if everything is in the up and up, why not? Or are you just interested in hiping an idea without any basis in proven facts whatsoever to financially benefit at the expense of others? I didn't think you swung that way but, apparently, I was mistaken.

I wish these guys, whoever they are, from wherever they are, can come through with their ideas and project and make it a blockbuster. I also wish that you make a fortune along the way, as you should, for your support and financial investment. I'd be in line to celebrate and, perhaps, also as an investing participant. But, along the way, I will be following it, scrutinizing it, and posting about it. The good, the bad and the ugly, just like I do with other projects in which for one reason or another, I am interested. Whether you like it or not. Whether you choose to keep antagonizing me or not.

And I will continue being critical of blind, stupid cheerleading, whether with financial interest or not.

You claim to have some technical expertise, I don't know or have any proof of it; I do have proof of your exceptionally unfortunate track record as far as investing in crypto goes, so it stands to reason that even if you are enthusiastic about the claimed technical potential objectives, you would tamper, quite a bit in fact, your rhetoric both about me and about the profit potential of this project for, quite frankly, it is counter productive.  

But, if you are so desperate for avoiding critical views, you can always try and convince the devs to close the thread, start a new, censored, one and get them to delete my posts. Just a suggestion, before you get a heart attack or something.