Topic: Piece of Shit Bitcoiners et al. Hall of Fame - page 10. (Read 15813 times)

But that is not the same as ripping off people's money. That is just a shitcoin, which is not the criteria here.

We don't know if those who claim to be Evan supporters are sockpuppets and/or those insiders who profited on the scheme.

The real victims are those who have sold for less than they paid at the expense of the insiders who sell to pocket Bitcoin and then get the DRK tokens back again for free via their control over masternodes. It is an endless supply of new fools who might actually be HODLing for the Evolutoin P&D, and their funds are being given to the insiders. They all hope there are some greater fools to sell the Evolution pump to. In short, there can't be a non-manipulated market in this current scam structure.

Evan Duffield is perhaps among the worst on the list, precisely because his victims don't even realize they're such. Because of this, he always has a groupie/follower show up to defend him and his cult anytime somebody has anything negative to say.

Dash was listed on coinmarketcap as "pre-mined" for maybe a day or two before enough Evan followers complained and had the label removed.

And to preemptively respond to AlexGR, his victims are every person who has ever used Dash thinking their transactions would be private or untraceable. He's a snake oil salesman.

Correct this is not about the technology of Dish, rather it is about the actions of the issuers of Dish (DRK) and whether those actions are a scam that defrauded investors.


As purveyor of an unregistered investment securities offer to the public-at-large (and not restricted to accredited investors), his actions are subject to public scrutiny. The SEC has certain requirements on disclosure which he has not adhered to. He is attempting to claim that the tokens were decentrally mined and thus that he is not an issuer, and that the bug that allowed the instamine was a fluke. Yet this is entirely impossible, because no developer who launches a crypto-currency doesn't notice for nearly 24 hours that the coin is being mined at a horrendously faster rate than publicly stated would be the case. Take me to court and I can blow a hole in that statement immediately that any fair judge or jury will clearly see that Evan is lying.


Incorrect.


Your incorrect comprehension of the situation has now been explained to you.

Falsifiability will come from the proper disclosures that the SEC requires for issuing investment securities.

Evan assassinated his own character with his actions which are now being brought into a spotlight.

Semantic obfuscation is one of the traits of a criminal mindset. They even convince themselves they are justified. That is how a criminal mind works.

To recap, Evan admitted that in less than 24 hours, the insiders instamined 33% of the coins contrary to the statements he had made in public which established evidence of a pattern of lying and deceit. We can presume they also managed to mine a significant portion of the remainder of the coins mined, because they were obviously taking this very seriously (which is confirmed by Evan trying to now influence our opinion of the history and pretend he was not serious in the beginning). He then created a masternode scam which concentrates the tokens to those who have most tokens. He even lied in the InstantX white paper exaggerating the security from insecure to very secure with a high school level probability math error and then when I found that error a year later, he tried to again be deceitful in his response (which is in my "vaporcoin" thread in the Altcoin Discussion forum). Thus we can conclude the insiders control most of the tokens and thus control the float and anyone who knows a damn thing about market manipulation knows he who controls the float can manipulate the price, volume, and market cap. Thus the insiders created a P&D rise in the price, volume, and market cap to sucker in fools who handed their money over to the insiders. And then the price collapsed and those fools lost their money. And the P&D has been repeated 3 times because the masternode scam provides a way to recycle the coins back to insiders continuously.

I wrote the following to my angel investor today:

There is no libel in calling someone a "piece of shit", or in some other statement of opinion and the OP seems to be an opinion. Now the two shitcoiners discussing Mr. Duffield's escapades are digging much deeper into libel territory as they seem to be trying to claim certain "facts". But I'm not a lawyer, all I'm saying is that it would make sense to continue that discussion somewhere else. If it yields any conclusion or result then let's petition Gleb to adjust Mr. Duffield's status to "a little speck of shit" or "a mound of shit" or whatever is appropriate.

It is actually not about a "shitcoin" and its merits, but about libelous accusations against an individual. As AlexGR eloquently explained, it is not about Dish, but about Evan Duffield the more or less public individual. The question raised is, whether Evan Duffield is a "piece of shit" or not.
The purpose of this thread is to establish a pillory, which can be problematic in itself, but the OP seems to be open and fair and allow discussions, which I applaud, because otherwise it would turn into a mudslinging contest. In german we call that "Rufmord", which Google translates as "character assassination", which is a criminal offense where I come from. TBTP is intelligent and his accusations have a superficial plausability, though no falsifiability, hence they remain claims. It`s malevolent "in dubio contra reo". Those allegations have to be countered out of sheer sense of fairness, which is what AlexGR is doing with remarkable patience and grace.

Could you two perhaps take your shitcoin shit slinging contest somewhere else perhaps? Just a suggestion.

"The list is reserved for those who were instrumental in substantially ripping off folks in the cryptocurrency space."

Nobody got ripped off. There are no "victims" of Evan, nobody can say they ...got ripped off by Evan. Get over it.

To use your favorite words... you are conflating morality, ethics, etc with lists like the one in this thread. Your points are orthogonal relevant to the context of this thread.

The irrationality presented here is a reverse halo effect, where one gets attributed more negatives than he deserves, due to bias-induced dislike.

If you were acting rationally, you'd understand there are things you can do and things you can't do in situations like these, and that those things have the appropriate place to be conducted.

What you can do:

- Make a list of "immoral devs" who are running "sketchy" or "shady" or "illegal" coins, and put Evan in there. It's your take on the issue and your personal right to do so. Some will agree, some will disagree, but it's all subjective - except the actual facts.
- Proclaim a moral high ground and look down upon those who do not adhere to it. Again it's your take on the issue and it's kind of subjective, so...
- Accuse Evan for things he actually did.

What you can't do:

- Put Evan in a child molester or wife-beater list
- Put Evan in a terrorist list
- Put Evan in a list of people who ripped other people off (<= we are here)

...and do all that just because you have various DΑSH-related issues or dislike, or bias vs Evan.

And why you can't do all these things? Because none of them are true and they reflect negatively on you as a person for trying to pass them as facts when they are not.

How would you feel if you were accused of something that you didn't do? Do you understand the principle of don't do unto others what you don't want to be done to you?

You can say Evan instamined an amount of DRK and that this could be sketchy, shady, immoral, or something that you can't support and that you dislike everyone who supports a coin like that. That's your moral preference and it is respected.

Now, from that point you make a giant leap. Can you say he ripped people off? Where? When? How? This is your irrationality. You want to object to something that you feel is immoral or wrong but your method is immoral/wrong in itself, by trying to accuse someone of things that aren't true.

You have been brought up to speed regarding facts which you thought were different (community, and not unilateral, decisions on things like coin supply, community veto on fixing the instamine distribution, price of the coin and market trend regarding the "P&D" accusation, etc etc) - not that these matter, as they have nothing to do with ripping people off.

You have been shown your irrationality in trying to use a false narrative/accusation because you perceive you are doing the moral thing by opposing what you feel is immoral.

If you want to insist, you can. But then you have no moral high ground. You are, at that point, automatically immoral because you continue to falsely accuse someone else, of stealing people's money - when you know that such a thing hasn't happened, and you also know the reasons of your confusion and what you *really* object to, which isn't relevant to the topic at hand. It is however relevant to the parallel thread you are pasting this content.

Bill Clinton a.k.a. Slick Willy argues that everyone who invested in D​arkcoin a.k.a. D​a​s​h made a profit. I guess he flunked basic math.

For the slowminded, the relevance is that someone took the profit and someone else didn't. Now go review the facts that I presented upthread as to the dominance the insiders had due to the instamine and the ongoing concentration of tokens via the masternode scam. This slime ball argues that if we can't go round up those fools who lost their money and left cryptoland in disgust or who are too embarrassed to admit they invested in the scam, then that means they don't exist. Yet basic math tells us they must exist.

You have zero victims to present to me and zero case of ripping people off. You throw blanket statements like "P&D", when P&Ds happen in every single market, whether it is commodities, stocks, metals, crypto etc. I guess satoshi is a scammer because uᴉoɔʇᴉq was P&Ded from 0$ to 1200$ back to 100$ and now to 400$. Like he has anything to do with the market P&Ds.

But even in DRK's case you are ill-informed, because you are not even following the DΑSH market, but assume it lost value. Well, after 2014 it got an even better pump in 2015. So what you are claiming is a mathematical impossibility, as someone could have sold for equal or higher than he bought, even if he bought at the all-time-high point of the 2014 pump. Marketcap is again approaching ATH levels. If there is anyone "locked" he can sell right now. And I'm not even factoring profits made from 2 years of holding masternodes.




If we debate c coding I'll lose because I know very little.

If we debate darkcoin/dαsh history, you'll lose because you haven't followed it as I have. So don't try to tell me "facts" that aren't even there.

The unethical slights-of-hand legalese criminal minds make.

Bill Clinton said, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.".

Of course Evan and his accomplices such as yourself have succeeded in defrauding those who bought the P&D when the price rose to nosebleed levels and then crashed. The P&D that was enabled by insiders controlling the float through this shell game, thus able to buy DRK from themselves pushing the price, market cap, and volume up to nosebleed levels which fooled the naive.

Come on, don't think you can get away with that shit with me. Slime-ball AlexGR you are out-of-league trying to debate me. You will lose.

You may resent DΑSH. You may not approve of Evan's skills, methods, ways he conduct or expresses himself. You may believe that DΑSH masternodes are ...illegal by US's law, and by extension Evan is ...unlawful. You may believe that supporting DΑSH is immoral. You may believe that people supporting immoral schemes are immoral themselves.

You may be wrong or right in every one of these. But the bottomline here (in the context of this thread) is:

Has Evan "substantially ripped off" anyone in order to be in a list where actual scammers that stole people's money are in? People who promised ASIC hardware, took the money and never delivered. People who did ICOs to scam investors and then quickly disappeared. Others who run exchanges and stole tens of millions or hundreds of millions of people's money. What does Evan has to do with all this shit? Can you even point someone to some of ...Evan's "victims"? No, because there are none.

Here is my next rebuttal to AlexGR's scamming in this thread:

Please consider adding Marcelo Karlsson. He has scammed $150,000+ from potential Bitcoin investors by lying about Rimbit versus Bitcoin+other CCs, lying about his intentions+plans for Rimbit, and selling illegal and prohibited Perks on Indiegogo.

I'm not sure what you're saying here... "knowing full well they could hide their capture of Bitcoin blaming it on the "enemy""? How did/do they "capture" Bitcoin? In what way do they benefit from creating Bitcoin and allowing China to attempt to control it?

If nobody has been scammed, there is no scam. Crimes need victims. There are no victims here - but there are plenty of people who have actually multiplied their bitcoins.

Dash is unlike the huge majority of coins during the altcoin-boom. There are extremely few coins that managed to stay at the top and preserve or increase the value of their stakeholders. There are HUNDREDS of actual scamcoins and P&Ds out there where people lost everything. People lost serious value even in very high-marketcap coins like litecoin, nxt, peercoin, dogecoin, etc - where hundreds of millions in marketcaps simply evaporated.

As for "sockpuppets", you are in denial, or ignorance (probably the second) of how things actually went down.

As for me: Darkcoin has been my favorite 2014 alt for trying something different than just being the next meme-coin like doge, or next country-coin like aurora. I reasoned, and predicted, that if only 1% of the cryptocurrency users wanted anonymity or privacy, it would mean a minimum marketcap of around 80-100mn for anonymous coins. With marketcaps of the two existing coins back then (anoncoin and darkcoin) being a mere 2-3mn, being in darkcoin was definitely going to pay off. It did - despite the "instamine-instamine-instamine" trolling. Price jumped from 0.001 to 0.025 back in late April-May 2014. It's not trading that far off right now at around 0.017.

I've mined it from around the end of January 2014 in my cpu, then my GPUs... I also traded it, and continue to do so. I've followed it throughout all of its history, so I definitely know which accusations are bogus. I know its thread is >5000 pages long, but, being there in real-time, I've read it all. So some historic "facts" are quite different compared to how they are presented. I just have the experience to correct the inaccuracies, typically propagated by ...competitor coins in the anonymity sector.

Anyway, trusting or not trusting Evan, his responses, his interviews, his facial expressions etc etc is one thing. Saying that he ripped people off, well that never happened.

=>

...

The poor fools who lost their lunch money on the P&D, are probably gone from our community, never to return again.


Yeah let's invent some sockpuppet accounts to pretend there are "users" begging to not keep the supply as what was promised, when in all mathematical likelihood these "users" are the very few insiders who mined the fuck out of the instamine and of course they don't want to be diluted by what was originally promised. This BS is just part of the scam.


Evan has a lie for every occasion and a spin on every lie he told to try to repaint historical facts as totally opposite of what they were. He is Slick Willy.


Sockpuppets.


Sockpuppets.

So now I know you AlexGR are inside on the scam, because you are too smart to not know the above.