No I didn't. I think their technology is very interesting.
All I see is you attacking them over the future size of IoT projections. You made your point in the first post, yet you repeat the same point over and over so that their marketing guy can't get the last word. Readers can read your first point. Instead it comes across as you trying to control everyone's marketing. They are just getting started and hopefully they will get some professional help on the marketing.
I didn't see you make any posts in the thread about the actual technology. (perhaps I missed them?)
You're confusing push back against absurd hype like "wealth gains never seen in the history of mankind" (paraphasing) with missing the point of their technology.
Smooth you will not be able to stop dumb users from being dumb as goat shit. I had a Dash user tell me to go to hell in a private message yesterday when I explained the fact that if the ROI for masternodes is exceeding the growth of the money supply and the instanamine was 50% of the money supply at the time masternodes were introduced, then mathematically the instaminers own more than 50% of the coin, much more and growing as a percentage. You can't teach dolts basic math.
As for that IoT hype, I ignored it as other astute observers do, so we don't need to read upteen posts from you fighting with their marketer in their thread. The first post was sufficient. You belabor the point and for what benefit? It only ends up making people dislike you. Obstructionists are not as loved as helpers and builders.
Not the same thing at all, in fact not even related. Go back and look at what I actually replied to instead of imagining it to be something it wasn't.
I was reading it and after a few posts I just had to stop.
Overall CfB seems very reasonable and intelligent on that thread, and whoever is running that iotatoken nick comes off like a hype-spewing retard.
Agree CfB seems very level-headed. Why are you fighting with "retards" (he just seems overzealous to me and not retarded). That should be below your pay grade. I am trying to learn that too.
Any way, if he doesn't criticize me, I won't criticize him.
What the hell is the point of that? Tit for tat? Criticize me any time you like (especially if deserved).
As you know I often jot down quickly the general gist and then proof-read my posts and edit. You will find my edited post. You are very quick to ponce on my post. I didn't know you would reply within 3 minutes.
My point is simply that I'd rather not write about your personality defects, but if you are attacking mine then I am forced to clarify that we are all just human and why can't we all just respect each other.
You and I have a philosophical challenge ongoing as to whether any direct funding can be obtained from a serious open source crypto project. Fine. So let's let the free market tell us the final answer. Attacking me will just end up reducing the objectivity of the free market test because then I can argue that you manipulated the result. How about let the free market decide.
Clickz, BTW, is an okay name. It is tied to web browsing and such, which might be fine, though perhaps a bit of a misnomer if the market expands broader and/or the desktop web itself becomes more of a niche.
We still click on the smart phone. Aliasing it as 'pressing' won't distinguish it from 'clicking' for another generation or so. A decade is more than enough time.
Rather I think clicking is tied to everything we typical users do with computers (not just web browsing) except for other rarer forms of I/O such a speech. Also "click" has another meaning which means to "get along well", e.g. you and I don't always click. That is a very social meaning, but it also applies to having programmable block chain applications (or just preset opcodes and chain assets) clicking (syncing and getting along well) with each other. Clicking implies working well together.
My argument is that most users of the internet don't comprehend that they have need for money on the internet other than the forms they already have (credit cards, paypal). So to position an altcoin as money is useless from their perspective. I argue that instead you need to position the goods involved to some goods they value already, which I assert is navigating cyberspace (including apps not just web) and social networking ("getting along well"). So clicking (the action) and clicking (the getting along well synergy) reinforce each other, because you do one to get the other and vice versa.
When later these clickz are monetized and the users start obtaining new features (such a new types of sites that weren't before economic and new ways to earn an income, etc) with clickz, then they will see clickz as the money and not dollars and pesos, i.e clickz will be their unit-of-account, not fiat, because their use case is clicking.
Altcoin developers appear to have nearly 0 marketing experience/skills unless it is just selling hype to dumb investors (must be a low-hanging fruit optimization phenomenon).
..