I think we won't come to any conclusion and are running in circle with the discussion.
That's only because you know that it's not in your interest to publicly come to the only possible conclusion.
Again, I can fully understand your reasonable doubts on our case.
Good, so do you agree with my conclusion? Or do you think there's some error in my reasoning?
Yes this whole thing sounds too good to be true (and in most cases everything that sounds too good to be true, is too good to be true) and me as external person would think, that's just a matter of time until it crashes.
So do you agree that anyone who invests with you is a fool? You agree that it sounds too good to be true. And you agree that no externally available evidence suggests otherwise. Wouldn't you agree that someone would have to be a fool to invest under those circumstances?
We're currently thinking about a solution to prove the work we're doing.
But wouldn't you agree that so long as there is no such proof, investing would be absolutely foolish?
I say thank you JoelKatz for your interesting thoughts, it's hard to stay objectiv when you are in the subject.
I agree that it's impossible for you to be objective. If you were objective, you'd have to admit that every rational investor would conclude you're most likely scamming and wouldn't invest with you.
Whether or not you think I'm being objective, I'm at least documenting the reasons for my conclusions. You have yet to explain where you think I'm in error when I say that only a fool would invest under the terms you are offering. And, unlike you, I personally have nothing to gain or lose either way. In fact, if you were making persuasive arguments, I'd have every incentive to agree with you because claiming you are a scam, should you later be shown not to be a scam, harms my reputation. And my reputation is all that I have at stake. Unlike you, who have a financial stake.
