I stated 3 different counter-points to your argument against XSPEC and Stealth Staking specifically and yet you replied to NONE of them. Literally, nothing in your response was even about XSPEC other than claiming you had "valid criticisms"! I'll state them out boldly because it seems you're having trouble with reading comprehension:
1. You have no basis for disproving Stealth Staking is possible other than "no one has even thought about implementing it" and "the devs are unknown" as your argument.
2. The developers of XSPEC have followed their roadmap and successfully developed so far, so there isn't a reason to distrust them yet.
3. Saying "its never been done before therefore it is impossible that this could be achieved" is a dishonest argument. You cant prove that its NOT possible and no one can prove that it IS possible, so spreading FUD about stealth staking is senseless.
There is nothing to PROVE that stealth staking isn't possible and it would take a genius. There is nothing to PROVE that the developers don't know how to do it. If you have solid evidence or facts I'd love to see how the XSPEC developers are scammers or that they don't know how to do stealth staking. I mean, as your profile says, facts are more efficient than FUD! So please, provide some solid facts to back up your claims. I'm all ears.
Why would i claim Dash's marketcap will never be higher than Monero? AFAIK, except for a week or two, it has always been higher. Maybe you misread, but I'm willing to recant if you can find the quotation. Also, what's your fixation with dash? I've also talked shit on vanillacoin and a few other lowcap privacy coins that never went anywhere--anyways....
1. Correct, even Bitcoin released a whitepaper before implementation. And anyone following privacy coins seriously is aware of legitimate breakthroughs such as mimble wimble, SPECTRE (not to be confused with spectrecoin), Zstarks, and Zcash's sapling upgrade. These things don't appear out of nowhere and cryptographers, and those who follow the scene seriously, are well aware of new advancements well ahead of the implementation. It would be odd that something as novel as anonymous staking wouldn't have had at least a mention among the cryptography community. I suppose it's possible, but it would be unreasonable to ask people to trust an anonymous developer's word--especially when these systems are supposed to be trustless.
2. But nothing succesfully implemented from the roadmap indicates they are capable of such an innovation. AFAIK there isn't even a testnet up--which begs the question: are they planning on implementing a novel software without any open testing? That in itself would show sloppy technique in software development.
3. This seem a repetition of the prior two, so no need to repeat myself.