I see that the peermountain bounty scammers have cancelled their ICO....there's also no mention of them being in partnership with Blockchain Foundry or Syscoin in any of their abandoned ANN threads either.
Strange.
I presume you're someone at BCF trying to defend your under pressure business - who are you?
I know who techo051 claims to be, as he told me via PM. However, after receiving a response to some questions I put to him 5 days ago I feel I should post the conversation here in the interests of transparency - something that seems to be severely lacking at BCF/SYS.
The posts are in sent/recieved order, the first being the initial PM I got from techo05:
Please feel free to reach out directly if you have any questions on interpreting any of BCF's public filings. I'm the CFO of the company and am happy to walk you through any of our reports. I don't know what was deleted but if you have specific concerns I'm happy to pass them on.
My reply:
Hello techo051,
I appreciate you reaching out to me, It's nice to know at least someone at BCF/SYS is prepared to answer some questions from their investors.
As you say you are the CFO of BCF, may I presume I am speaking to Chistopher Marsh?
You can see some of the posts that have been deleted on the 1st page of the Unofficial SYS thread, please give it a read, I personally have many more that I have not posted yet. As you can see on the first page, I have already tried to express my concerns about having my perfectly legitimate questions ignored & deleted from the SYS thread, hence me starting the Unofficial thread, but if you think it would help the situation by "passing them on" to Daniel again - please feel free.
I'd particularly like to hear your thoughts about this peermountain outfit & your reasons for wanting to go into a partnership with them:
Well, after doing some more research on various websites & reading through their threads on bitcointalk:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2626975.140 (ANN)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2642081.3960 (Bounty)
..I now know what to make of this peermountain "partnership". Peermountain shows all the usual & typical signs of being yet another ICO scam for yet another shittoken:
Conflicting info.
Bounty hunters **facepalm**, many unpaid.
Zero transparency.
Many fake accounts shilling.
Many unanswered questions from investors.
No product.
No dates.
Delays & excuses on all fronts.
Abandoned thread.
etc, etc.
As a long term SYS holder/investor/masternode operator I have to admit that I'm clueless as to why SYS would even consider a partnership with this outfit. It has nothing to offer SYS whatsoever. For what purpose? Why? I'm sure other SYS investors would appreciate some info too.
I'd be interested to hear from whoever it was at Syscoin who's idea it was to get involved with this peermountain outfit & what their reasons for doing so were & based on what, exactly - because all I can see is yet another scam ICO outfit by shady individuals pushing nothing but weak promises.
...as well as why Syscoin investors appear not to be allowed to ask questions publicly about this dubious "partnership". Please also click on the links in the quote above, you will see my attempts to converse with someone at peermountain in an effort to extract some information about them, which failed of course.
I do have more questions, but would appreciate your views on the above first before going into more depth.
Regards.
Reply from techo051:
Thanks for sending this. Yes I'm Chris Marsh. Give me a day or two to go through this but I will get back to you over the weekend with some thoughts.
So, techo051 confirms that he is Christopher Marsh CFO of Blockchain Foundry & that he owns & uses the account techo051 on BCT.
After 5 days, this is the response I got from him via PM regarding the basic questions I asked in my PM above:
On Peer Mountain I looked through the thread, I haven’t been closely involved in those discussions but I can tell you that we have an internal process for vetting partnerships like this and we have also meet with their team in person. Their identity project fits well with some of the identity use cases that BCF is exploring using Syscoin. Lots of projects are operating in the identity space and it’s been a focus of ours for over a year now, including with us being part of Microsoft’s decentralized identity foundation. So from that perspective a partnership with Peer Mountain made sense given what both projects are trying to achieve.
On your other questions about deleted posts, etc. I guess all that I can say there is that the team has a difficult job trying to respond to legitimate questions and concerns while making sure that the official thread doesn’t turn into a toxic place like so much of bitcointalk has. All of us on the team have a vested interest in seeing BCF and Syscoin do well and everything we do from a partnership or other business development perspective is intended to move the projects forward. BCF is an early stage company but we are well funded and have a good investor base backing us. The deficit question that keeps coming up is not accurate and if more clarification is needed there I’m happy to provide it. I’m also happy to get on a call if you want to chat about any of these items in more detail.
As can be seen by this response, Christoper Marsh fails to answer a single question, choosing instead to send me the type of marketing dribble one sees on medium every day.
My reply:
I expected at least a few answers after you deliberated for 5 days - not some marketing statement based on evasion/excuses.
It's obvious you have no intention of addressing or answering a single issue or question even via PM, so I will return to posting on the Unofficial Syscoin thread again untill you or someone else at BCF/SYS decides to interact & communicate with your investors.
So, Christopher Marsh CFO of Blockchain Foundry is given the the perfect oportunity to talk to his investors & explain their actions - & this is the best he can come up with after 5 days of deliberation? Let's break down that reply of his a little bit:
On Peer Mountain I looked through the thread....
So, while looking through their thread you failed to notice that they don't even have & never have had an official presence there at all, or that the thread has been abandoned for some time, or that they don't actually have a product, or that they lied about KYC3 being a seperate business, or that they scammed their bounty hunters, or that they keep changing dates, or that they are now trying to push another ICO scam, etc, etc - or that they didn't even bother to post an official announcement about the Syscoin "partnership"? (apart from one spambot post). You must have really read through their thread thoroughly throughout your 5 days of investigations.....
I haven’t been closely involved in those discussions but I can tell you that we have an internal process for vetting partnerships like this and we have also meet with their team in person.
Why haven't you? You're the CFO of BCF - isn't it your job to be involved & make sure that there are no financial misdeeds going on? Sebastian Schepis, CIO of Blockchain Foundry said:
"We’re thrilled to work with the Peer Mountain Team."
...and yet you're trying to tell us that you, as CFO of BCF, "weren't closely involved"? What happened to your "internal process for vetting partnerships like this" - did that also fail to spot all the inconsistencies I pointed out above? Did you also forget to ask them a single question when you "met them in person"?
On your other questions about deleted posts, etc. I guess all that I can say there is that the team has a difficult job trying to respond to legitimate questions and concerns while making sure that the official thread doesn’t turn into a toxic place like so much of bitcointalk has.
Speaking for myself, nothing in my deleted posts was toxic, as you can see from the very first post on this thread. I posted legitimate questions & Daniel chose to ignore & delete them multiple times, even finding the time to PM me asking me to stop asking questions about my investment....it is censorship & treatment of investors like this that turns topics into toxic dumps. As for the rest of your poor excuse of an explanation, it's just marketing dribble.
