This is quite an interesting post. Thank you for pointing it out. Darkcoin/dash advocates often claim that there was a vote on whether to airdrop the instamined coins, and the community voted against it. Therefore, they say, the instamine was "approved" by the community and is okay. However, look
carefully at what was being proposed, and what the community rejected:
The first 24 hours of the coins existence keep causing us problems, an "airdrop" could be a solution to this. We could airdrop all holders (uniquely verified) with a equal portion of coin. This coin would come from a block in the future that paid 2 million+ coins to a specific address that I hold.
He was not proposing to airdrop the instamined coins at all, not even his share of them. He was offering to leave the instamined coins alone, create
another 2 million coins out of thin air, and airdrop
those. As if creating more coins out of thin air was going to fix the original instamine scam?!
Furthermore he was proposing to give these coins not to outsiders, but only to existing holders or people who bought coins (which they would need to do from existing holders!), which means much of this so-called airdrop "fix" would have gone straight into the instaminers pockets!
Who would think to try to fix a scam with another scam? I have to say I may be coming around to the point of view that Evan is in fact brilliant.
I'll be adding this to my thread as evidence that the dash community is
still misleading people about the history of the instamine.
