Topic: Coindesk and its drama (Read 227 times)
They can't even be counted as a news creating site as their news being produce comes from other "unreliable" sites. They always have that feel on it, they will put unrelated images on their topics just to have a thumbnail being shown when shared on a social media. I mean look at their news about ICOs in Canada, they just posted a picture of a Canadian flag (which potentially been grabbed on the internet. Just my opinion but going to these news curators wouldn't be even my last source of news if want to know what is real and true as they almost all the time mislead the readers.
Seems to me like another sign of coindesk not doing their due diligence.
And they shouldn't take things like this too lightly.
And they shouldn't take things like this too lightly.
They certainly need to fix their procedures, especially since they are going to be held at a high standard.
Coindesk is a popular news site, that just recently posted an article on Omisego and had a scam airdrop link. Lots of people are upset over this as they should be, including Vitalik and Omisego who are boycotting this year coindesk consensus meeting. Another issue is that in response to this, Peter Rizzo who is the Editor in Cheif has been quite unprofessional about this.
What are your thoughts?
What are your thoughts?
That is just a proper move for Vitalik and Omisego afterall there are several fake news that are posted in the coindesk website. I was also surprised that they even another huge fake news against omisego. Vitalik had posted all of those evidence he have on twitter and thus he said that he will boycott such coindesk conference.
Seems to me like another sign of coindesk not doing their due diligence.
And they shouldn't take things like this too lightly.
And they shouldn't take things like this too lightly.
Coindesk have proven its worth at providing information on people, however for providing a false information that lead to people having scam with, I surely doubt by now whomever they working with this time does not give the people a good hindsight to its own shaded activity.
They need to really reflect on what happened and take full responsibility. Looking the procedures and policies for sure.
Coindesk have proven its worth at providing information on people, however for providing a false information that lead to people having scam with, I surely doubt by now whomever they working with this time does not give the people a good hindsight to its own shaded activity.
Despite the unprofessionalism in the article written by coindesk the fact still remains that coindesk is one of the most professional and accurate such when it come to crypto news and update
Would you describe what unprofessional and professional means? You are saying things that are contradicting to your statement.What can we expect with media? They can choose the sides that they want too or they will choose your side if you pay them good amount of $$.
Coindesk is a popular news site, that just recently posted an article on Omisego and had a scam airdrop link. Lots of people are upset over this as they should be, including Vitalik and Omisego who are boycotting this year coindesk consensus meeting. Another issue is that in response to this, Peter Rizzo who is the Editor in Cheif has been quite unprofessional about this.
What are your thoughts?
Despite whatever the current situation may be, Coindesk is the go to premier site when it comes to regulatory news regarding the crypto space. Now is the time to pay attention to the law and policy makers, because it is they who will decide the fate of crypto.What are your thoughts?
Crypto and fiat must make a seamless transition forming a unity or crypto may fail. Not all regulation is bad, some is good because it protects investors.
I know other sites that are better imo. Coindesk has done a lot of things wrong. People/companies make mistakes, but this is out of hand.
Naturally when they are angry, because it should not be done because it can damage the reputation, and this can be very detrimental.
Coindesk is a popular news site, that just recently posted an article on Omisego and had a scam airdrop link. Lots of people are upset over this as they should be, including Vitalik and Omisego who are boycotting this year coindesk consensus meeting. Another issue is that in response to this, Peter Rizzo who is the Editor in Cheif has been quite unprofessional about this.
What are your thoughts?
Despite whatever the current situation may be, Coindesk is the go to premier site when it comes to regulatory news regarding the crypto space. Now is the time to pay attention to the law and policy makers, because it is they who will decide the fate of crypto.What are your thoughts?
Crypto and fiat must make a seamless transition forming a unity or crypto may fail. Not all regulation is bad, some is good because it protects investors.
I wouldn't put all the blame on coindesk though. I mean, These guys are just trying meet their target and set goals. The part where I'm not so good with them is their inability to take even a few minutes to go through submissions. Coindesk has influence in the crypto space and any little slide would make thousands of noobs lose money. They'd just have to be careful next time.
Well its just like any other media. They are an avenue for some unconfirmed news that without a thought publish it for their own gains without even confirming with the responsoble party if it is indeed a fact or just a fabricated story to put omisego down probably. Coindesk has many readers, i myself get crypto news from it. They do have a reputation to protect but it seems the unrofessionalism of an editor does not necessarily project the totality of coinbase itself. We can never be too quick to judge.
We have received information that suggests you or your company will be making news and are reaching out for more information. These are often called “rumors” but today’s rumors are tomorrow’s news. We want to confirm what we might write is true.
CoinDesk journalists work in a fast-moving environment. This means that in some scenarios we may deem it operationally necessary to proceed without response from our subjects.
Add these 2 together and what you get is: We often write our articles based on rumors that we try to confirm, but if we don't get a response fast enough, we'll write an article anyway. Just note that we are trying!
[/quote]
Exactly, so they dont really care about the accuracy of their reporting. They are basically just a marketing outlet for the parent company.
Despite the unprofessionalism in the article written by coindesk the fact still remains that coindesk is one of the most professional and accurate such when it come to crypto news and update so just because of the unprofessional act of any of they editor coindesk still remains the best.
I'm sorry but I have to disagree. I don't know if you have been here for too long to say that they are accurately writing crypto articles and calling this the best is bullshit. They should at least review any news submitted before releasing it to the public as it may affect the sentiments of the people (or maybe this is their real intention?)
My thoughts are that we should never be too quick to judge. Coindesk has a very good reputation.
A very good reputation? Is this your personal opinion or are you quoting sources here? AFAIK Coindesk used to write articles based on tips from random sources, so they used to be a scam megaphone. I'm not following their articles now, but in 2014/15 they had a bunch of fake articles that turned out to be nothing but lies.
I also saw them pumping altcoins and writing articles about coins they were holding. That's why if you check their columnist's profiles, many of them state that they don't have any cryptocurrencies, so that they can't be accused of being overly positive for their own financial benefit. Now, do I believe that people who write articles about cryptocurrencies for a living don't have any coins? Of course not, do you?
Exactly, as far as I can remember, they even promoted Bitcoin Cash in their websites after the hardfork which stir controversy as well. That's why when I read news coming from desk, It just gives me a good chuckle everyday.
. Specially around March of 2017 onwards, almost all of the articles everyday are garbage. 
I've actually didn't saw that article, although I use their site quite a lot. They usually have a disclaimer on the bottom of their articles saying that they are not responsible for what is written on the article. Not on all of them of course, but on those independent ones. Don't know if this was the case or not, but of course they should check what they are publishing, and shouldn't allow for scam links to show up on their articles, even when they are not written by them.
Despite the unprofessionalism in the article written by coindesk the fact still remains that coindesk is one of the most professional and accurate such when it come to crypto news and update so just because of the unprofessional act of any of they editor coindesk still remains the best.
we all do not yet know the truth ,, and if this is true9 or false false accusations, if considering coindesk is one of the most proesional places and already have a good reputation .. update should always I lakuka to monitor what is really happening Despite the unprofessionalism in the article written by coindesk the fact still remains that coindesk is one of the most professional and accurate such when it come to crypto news and update so just because of the unprofessional act of any of they editor coindesk still remains the best.
As if it really matters that you're that one pig in the pen that's slightly less covered in shit
Coindesk is also a subsidiary of DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/ for the record. The policies are pretty shitty as well https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-5R_GEMYqiDXDhiX0ta43lATYYmsNv2MFw_-8gqd9K8/edit
You can get that right from there site.
You can get that right from there site.
We have received information that suggests you or your company will be making news and are reaching out for more information. These are often called “rumors” but today’s rumors are tomorrow’s news. We want to confirm what we might write is true.
CoinDesk journalists work in a fast-moving environment. This means that in some scenarios we may deem it operationally necessary to proceed without response from our subjects.
Add these 2 together and what you get is: We often write our articles based on rumors that we try to confirm, but if we don't get a response fast enough, we'll write an article anyway. Just note that we are trying!
Despite the unprofessionalism in the article written by coindesk the fact still remains that coindesk is one of the most professional and accurate such when it come to crypto news and update so just because of the unprofessional act of any of they editor coindesk still remains the best.
I do agree that we shouldn't just jump on them for 1 mistake. However, they have made multiple and they are not fixing it. They have really bad procedures with listings, which is going to cause a lot of bad publishing. They just are not running in a professional way, its okay to make mistakes when you own up to them.
The way I see it is that they're just another media outlet, only their focus is on crypto. There are a number of them, so if Coindesk buries itself under its own tarnished reputation, there will be another one popping up to take its place and hopefully won't make the same mistakes. You've all seen how many bitcoin businesses that have failed since 2009. Coindesk is just another business, and if they fail they fail. The community will get over it and find some other news outlet. I've always questioned the qualifications of most journalists and I have had an abiding distrust of many of them. As a whole, they make so many factual errors that it's hard to trust them as reliable sources of information. If you add all the rumors and half-truths that fuel the goings-on of the world of bitcoin, well. No one should be surprised at this allegation here.
My thoughts are that we should never be too quick to judge. Coindesk has a very good reputation.
A very good reputation? Is this your personal opinion or are you quoting sources here? AFAIK Coindesk used to write articles based on tips from random sources, so they used to be a scam megaphone. I'm not following their articles now, but in 2014/15 they had a bunch of fake articles that turned out to be nothing but lies.
I also saw them pumping altcoins and writing articles about coins they were holding. That's why if you check their columnist's profiles, many of them state that they don't have any cryptocurrencies, so that they can't be accused of being overly positive for their own financial benefit. Now, do I believe that people who write articles about cryptocurrencies for a living don't have any coins? Of course not, do you?
Coindesk is also a subsidiary of DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/ for the record. The policies are pretty shitty as well https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-5R_GEMYqiDXDhiX0ta43lATYYmsNv2MFw_-8gqd9K8/edit
You can get that right from there site.
Jump to: