Topic: PROOF that XSPEC is a SCAM - page 2. (Read 2581 times)

Editing posts, really?

Given that the facts mentioned on this thread are true, this is truly alarming. I actually had high hopes for XSPEC but now I see why the value has tanked badly. I guess the nice logo design fooled everyone too.

You don't accept pm from newbies. Could you enable that?

I'm not wrong at all, while I won't post his name I'll say this, go dig around his GitHub profile a bit and you'll find his complete name, first, middle and surname, from here you can look him up, jbg admitted to owning a bar which didn't work out, he has admitted to being in his 20s, if you search his full name you come across an interview video of a New Zealand guy with his full name, they talk about the bar, if you then look further in to this guy you find some of his online profiles which has his date of birth and it's the same guy, he's 29, same guy also owns an eCommerce system which jbg has admitted to, the guy in the interview video looks late 20s also.

There is absolutely no denying this.

If you're calling some one out as being wrong, show some proof, it's what this thread is about after all.

Regardless this thread focuses more on the code and lies, being 29 if he didn't lie about his experience and had produced some work, I wouldn't really care about his age.


This is the lowest reply in the whole thread, can any one back me up here on the fact he's edited his post and now claims I've edited or made up a quote? I don't need to make anything up and I've been honest all along.
Maybe I need to start archiving the thread to prevent this from happening again, just more proof he's got nothing useful to say I guess.

IQ bigger than 80? So people with IQ 145 should consider it?

Wow, you have edited your post because previous was obvious lies (Words you put in my mouth, I didn't say.), so you made another one which is more slimy btw. I am actually glad you did it because it sheds some light on what possibly your intentions/reasons are.
I have made meaningful comparison with other open source project, like Linux distributions and talked about practices which are common for many if not most of Open Source projects.

How you put things out of context, like this for example: "The code on GitHub is not a good measure" is unbelievable.
Adieu everyone.

The quote you've referenced from my anti FUD thread does not apply here, this is not a FUD thread, it's a show me proof thread.
If you read my post in the quote you've stated, I make comments about the threads like "Bitcoin is going to die" etc, these threads hold no value other than some guys speculation, this thread on the other hand shows proof through work, my god you shills are digging real low now.

So why are you very greedy what this coin die? I dont think that we need to be hurry about this.
We need to give the developer team time to change every single of issue then if it can not fix, just let it dies.

I agree that guy is an asshole, but that's not exactly what I have meant with my statement.

TLDR: its a scam, and you might have an IQ >80 if you bought it

1. The difference between Spectrecoin and Shadowcash: Have you forgotten to mention Tor hidden service, that isn't in the ShadowCash or any other coins (DeepOnion, Verge, Bytecoin, Zcash...)? Do you know the big difference between Tor hidden service and Tor (exit nodes are involved)?
2. Well
3. Version 1.4, that is completely rewritten, is being developed for half a year. So far, this is a private code, it is absent from the GitHub, in order to Tokenpay does not steal it. Until it is released, we will assume that you are right.
4. You conducted a very long investigation, but it was enough to read official wiki:

I wasn't going to reply to this nonsense but I laughed so hard at your comment:


Yet you said this in an earlier post:


Please make up your mind 

Jbg promised 1.3.5 to Mac in 48 hours. But did not delivered it. That person asked him about that and said that you promised that 1.3.5 in 48 hours. At that point jbg lost it and started that. So in my opinion "that dude" did not deserve it.

I think that you are wrong here.

I'm not doing a Mandica here, any one can read the above quote and decide for themselves.
Your claims = GitHub isn't a good measure to determine work DONE (we're not talking about upcoming work here)
My claim = All the work done, all the commits for related work are on GitHub for the public to see, call me an asshole, that's ok, but to say I've not answered your question? what more would you like?



Who's being the asshole here? the guy has no agenda, he holds the coins, if he wants to use font to get a point across he's free to do so.
Once again, and let me yell this for you, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AVAILABLE CODE, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A COMPLETE RELEASE OF A VERSION LACKING WORK
Your available code claim comes back to the whole "It's coming" argument, this thread is not about the future or holding a crystal ball, it's about observing the work which has been done on the released versions.

You expect me to put my identity online after exposing your coin so what? you can attempt to make my life hell? get real, I do not need to put anything up to validate my claims, you are the one who needs to validate claims, your post about private vs public is great, you've just admitted this feature exists in SDC but you're claiming it's a development of XSPEC? I guess this is why I seen no commit history relating to this from JBG, Also how about you give us some proof of Brycels existence and JBGs development experience? this should matter far more than a guy on a forum.

I'll admit I've never installed the XSPEC wallet on my computer, why would I as some one who doesn't hold any of the coins? I've also never installed a privacy coin wallet on my machine as I have no use for a privacy coin, I'm invested in not one privacy coin so to come out and say I know nothing about reading commit history due to this is false, I also do not need to sit back and read the entire source code of a coin to see lack of work, the joy of having a complete commit history over a period of time in relation to a project is we can see the EXACT work done on a given area over a period of time, I have better things to do than read your entire source code, but with such a lack of a commit history it didn't take too long to go from curious to amazed, so I went through this area, I've also claimed in this thread that I've focused on JBGs commit history, never once have I claimed to have read the entire source code, I've also stated the developer prior to JBG has done work, my comments are not bias, I've clearly stated these things in this thread, so nice job trying to twist things, I still encourage people to read the whole thread and if you have an understanding, the commit history by JBG

Regardless of the public vs private system being something I lack experience with, it doesn't change the fact the commit history is lacking, you've STILL not addressed why this is the case? You've just taken time to try find an unrelated area to try prove me wrong.

I'll also say it doesn't require a senior developer to work this out, people with a basic understanding can clearly see the lack of work in the commits from JBG and I suggest others take a look and decide for themselves, I've not lied about my job, I am a senior developer, but I don't have to prove this to any one, simply because it doesn't really matter and your calling for me to prove it is weak, why don't you prove a thing or two? Like I said I have JBGs details, age, city he lives in etc, I won't post this up so why would I dare post my own details? even after you've straight up lied saying you've met him and he's older, I'm still holding back on posting his ID, so why would I post mine?

You've lied and you've ignored being called out on it completely, I've been honest in this thread, here are some areas I've admitted fault:

1. I didn't look past JBG, while I should have, it probably wouldn't have made any difference to this thread, I would of just perhaps said JBG has done no work rather than XSPEC (bare in mind he's been the developer for 9 months and still is the main and only developer)
2. I've admitted that I've never used the XSPEC wallet or read in to the private vs public system code, if some work had been done on this it would of been on my radar, but it appears you're making claims now from an SDC feature.
3. I've admitted to have not read the entire source code, but at the same time I've never claimed to have done so, only the commits have been observed.

I've even tried to speak to you directly in PM to help you sort things out, you have no control now though, it's JBGs project, the guy who doesn't do any work.

To put this all to rest you only have to do 2 things now:
1. Explain a good reason for JBGs lack of work
2. Explain why you lied about JBGs age after it's even been admitted by JBG and is clearly online

I would also say provide info on why 1.4 is late, but in the scheme of things the above 2 points are far more important, I can live with road maps being a bit delayed.

Also there is one key point to be observed from your final comment, if you had truly proved me wrong you would be encouraging every one to keep this thread alive so people can see you are right and I'm wrong, yet you've just called for this thread to be left to die, there's only 1 reason a person would do this, deep down you know who's right and who's wrong here, if you proved me wrong it would do you and your coin good and you would be calling on your shills to make sure it's seen, yet you're calling for them to leave it.

Even JBG appears more honest than you, I'll give him credit for that I guess.

I have answered @preshpr1nce who is clearly not a software developer and I have nothing more to say here. I suggest as before that any supporters of XSPEC will refrain from posting replies to this FUD and let the trolls toil in their own ignorance. If you want discussions about tech that's fine but keep it in the other thread.

Good Bye from this thread. 

Thanks for the good jobs for showing the negative sides of this coin, exposing its weakness and other faults with solid arguments making this coin look more like a scam. I had invested some good money , but  with so much uncertainties, doubts and speculations about it, it better to get out before its price drop to zero.

Was just about to invest in this. much as his business involvement in the past doesn't matter much, the false information given is a killer, proven beyond doubt that this is a fake, we need more guys like you, thanks a lot.

Wow, thank you of course for giving us the truth. We appreciate this and thank you for taking the time to find these facts. It seems to me that calling a scam project is a very difficult decision because there are so many factors for this.

I'm not trying to discredit you, BUT, the dual system of 'normal' Spectrecoin and anonymous 'Spectre tokens' was always there and was part of SDC as well and is how Monero works in essence. The ring signatures are used by the 'spectre tokens' and not by the 'normal' Spectrecoins. If you read the code or even use the wallet you see this:





The private balance is your anonymous 'Spectre tokens' and the public balance is your 'normal' Spectrecoin which are much like Bitcoin or others and transact like Bitcoin and others. You sign the transaction with your private key etc.



Here is what it looks like in the block explorer when you split and combine 'Spectre tokens' and what the anonymous outputs look that can be combined into Spectrecoins again. You will see the blue address. That is a 'normal' UTXO and the anonymous outputs are the ones marked "anonymous". The ring signatures apply only to the anonymous outputs, just like Monero or PIVX or others. You should know this as being a software developer and you should know that ring signatures are not applied to 'normal' UTXOs.

Please study some privacy coins before you start making comments. And, you display you credentials to make people believe your "analysis" so it becomes relevant, don't you think?

I say your analysis and understanding of software development is poor.

So, I sent mandica a PM yesterday, here is how it went:


Her response is to come in here and ask me to prove my background, I'm not the one trying to take money from people, I have absolutely nothing to prove.

jbg has admitted he is in his 20s, I've also come to learn his name, he's a guy in New Zealand, and yes in his late 20s, I won't expose his name out of respect but JBG = his true initials, you are outright lying right there.

We've been over the nitpicking about Shadow Cash, this isn't what the argument is about for the 5th time.

I've made a comment prior about the first developer and his work on xSPEC and Tor, go read it please, I said he's done more than JBG, my findings were focused on JBGs commits which are lacking, he is the current developer and the one driving it's future.

Regardless of your excuses for the ring size downgrade, you've hyped it as a big feature change (Improvements to ring signatures)
It's not an improvement, and now you're claiming it relates to a feature in 1.4 (Spectre Tokens) which is yet to be seen, typically you would change this as required, all you've done is removed anonymity from spectrecoin, you're now saying an anonymous token is around the corner which will take over the public coins?

I don't care what's coming, explain why in 9 months of JBG developing he's done nothing yet you've hyped these minimal useless changes as a big deal?
What a joke, you're a liar also, just explain my simple question, why in 9 months has a days worth of work been done outside of the donation system?
I don't care for anything more than that.

Rather than explaining my findings you're still trying to discredit me, this is not how you should go about things, you've shown the value of XSPEC in the process, it should not be this hard.