...
Below I will make an attempt to answer all of your questions and explain the proper context of the logs of conversation between Smurf and I. ( I have no feeling of disdain for smurf as he seems to have simply become caught in the middle of this attack. I do not see his posting of those logs as an act of malice.)...
If he was stuck in the middle and not acting out of malice then why would the logs be altered and false as claimed by both you and blocknet?
I take that to mean the logs are true and legitimate.
The question now becomes are you lying about working with and paying dan or is he lying saying that you have never paid him.
3. Has Dan Metcalf performed paid work for me or projects I am invested in. In short yes, but I will explain these projects below so that you can understand the context of "Dan works for me now."
Yes, ...
Key Continue: At this time, desiring to try and recover the market I noticed that the KEY developers were having a great deal of trouble hardening the security of the OS. I contact Dan for the project and he completed it steadfastly with a high degree of quality. This was public knowledge on both the XC twitter, Dans personal twitter, the key twitter and more.
Halcyon: A coin to have a nootropics store. I like this idea and I invested. I funded a few aspects of the tech and when an issue arose, I contacted Dan to provide a quick solution, as well as provide a review that the source was trusted and the anon worked.. and to this day his review remains true. It has a working anonymous solution and a working POS source. The nootropics store design is complete and awaiting an API or a vendor to supply these products.
Dan claims you have never paid him.
And your statements are saying that he reviewed his own code. He provides a solution and reviews said solution.
7. My feelings on the PR response from blocknet. When this controversy came to light, XC community immediately responded without first verifying the authenticity of the logs, while they have many conversational gaps in them, and are being presented in a negative light. I will attempt to explain the conversation and what was intended.
Only conversational gaps now? That is not what you said before.
And this means what is read in those logs is true.
Feel free to post the logs in their entirety versus trying to lecture us on their meaning.
I wish that all who read this understand that this is simply a role in this market that must be filled by those that have obtained enough bitcoin and resources to make projects such as these possible., without us a lot of innovation would not make it to market and developers would not be motivated to produce such brilliant works of code without funding.
These statements are the opposite of one another in the context you use.
Instead of an ipo/ico/ito then fund them yourselves from "those that have obtained enough bitcoin and resources to make projects such as these possible" instead of fleecing the ones out of the insider loop.
? 
