and you can't, no matter what, deny his contribution to the space (however bad or good it may be). Wish I had a bit more of that kind of sass.
How exactly did he contribute to this space? Is scamming people a contribution? If that's a yes in your book, then his contribution as con made a lot of people consider crypto a scam and therefore not touch it again.
What bothers me more is that even the more prominent Bitcoiners seem to be cool with this retard. Probably a sign that these Bitcoiners aren't entirely sober or trustworthy either. Cons like to hang out with other cons after all.
His predictions are meaningless too with how he has denied having made certain ridiculously high price calls in the past. He keeps denying having made specific price calls until he is right one day.
Awareness. At the very least, we got to give him that. And what you said actually... he burnt a lot of people but hopefully they learnt their lessons. IF you want to go so far as to say he even helped bring on the purge of altcoins by shilling them so much they collapsed under the weight of dumping, that's not wrong too.
Make no mistake, I'm not a fan of anything remotely related to him -- not even his alleged support for libertarianism -- but I've always said that it takes all kinds to make the world go round. And certainly, for something like Bitcoin, it takes ALL kinds and then some. I'm just being objective. We can denounce all the McAfees and Silk Roads as much as we want, but they played their role and we're here today where we are as much because of guys I do like (such as Antonoupoulos) as the guys I don't.
We don't have to take such extreme stances on things we dislike do we?