While I admire the thought and effort you put in to crafting what you believed to be a well-reason post, it is grossly fallacious pretty much from start to finish.
As a skeptic you would know this.
but this campaign against LIR is just obvious.
Except, of course, it isn't. You've just invented it and presented subjective speculation which you believe supports your assumption. According to your argument the issue here is not the dishonesty of the devs but is, instead, the motivation of those who expose their dishonesty. Your argument is representative of the US government's approach to whistleblowers. Asking why I am not also targeting 'Scam X' and 'Scam Y' is not a sufficient argument to dismiss the reasoning and evidence which exposes this scam.
Looking at your post history did nothing but confirm your bias.
But it simply doesn't, you're just ignoring the real content of my post history. What about astro-turfed DeOS 'crowdsale' which is just an ICO by another name, or the Recyclix global ponzi scam? Or the COINCE 'cloud mining' fraud with the fake statutory documents? I have put time and energy into alerting people to those criminally fraudulent operations, too. Let alone the hundreds of IBG ponzi 'doubler' threads I routinely post warnings in.
So your claim that I am only fixated on the LIR fraud is demonstrably false. In any event it is irrelevant, the facts in this thread relate to the facts of this fraud.
Funny it took you until August to notice it and speak up.
But it isn't 'funny' at all. I read a KnC thread which Searing, a personal friend of Eric Hansen, the original owner of the Phoenix1969 account, regularly posts to and the issue was raised recently there. That's all. There's no conspiracy here other than the conspiracy to defraud by the 'devs' of this ICO. I know nothing about Lisk, it isn't a project I have any interest in so your speculative claims about that are as baseless as your claims that the evidence against the 'devs' bought and stolen accounts is insufficient. There is more than enough solid evidence, including bitcoin transactions, and, one small matter you are overlooking, Phoenix1969 current user first denied using an account which wasn't his when challenged at the outset of the ICO and has since been forced to admit that it isn't his account.
Yes. They could have thousands of BTC and just walk away, one day, but by that time the residual income would be more profitable than walking away. So, I don't agree that they would do that.
Utterly and wildly speculative and, if you are genuinely a skeptic, you would have to accept that by having proven themselves dishonest from the outset it is actually far more likely that they will continue to be dishonest. To assert they would not abscond with thousands of BTC at a later date is staggeringly and wilfully naive.
If it's a scam it's a scam. It makes no difference now. By continuing this rhetoric you're hurting the investors more than the devs, but since this has already been pointed out to you. I can only assume you want to see us lose money.
No, I want to see you organise yourselves into a working group to rectify this fraud and take action to recover control of the money which is in the hands of people who lied to you from the outset. By *not* tackling this problem now and all bitching about your loss of investment value you are essentially stating that you want other people, further down the line, to have to be the ones who get ripped off as long as you get to turn this investment into a profit now. You want to bury the facts of the fraud for your own gain. That makes you complicit in the fraud.
It's not like the devs are going to refund us now. You're not going to bully them into doing what you want.
No I am not and I have no intention to. You and the rest of the investor community for this project are the ones who should be doing that. They have your money which they got through false pretences and are offering you a cheap web-script with a new skin. You should all be outraged at this fact and more than sufficiently motivated to demand they hand the funds over to an independent third-party so that you all can manage the development yourself through outsourcing the work and paying for it with the money you originally gave, let's not forget, to fraudsters.
. Why don't they use those 470 BTC to support the market? Buyback? They can buyback all coins at 80% discount. So I don't know what kind of job they are doing but it is certainly not a good job. I lost 2 BTC on fake promising. All those big ICO coins failed, the smaller ones are a lot better because they receive 470 BTC, why should they work for the coin? Next month we have LIR2, then LIR3. in fact the coin should be named Liar. 
