Topic: Why I chose not to invest in SpectreCoin (XSPEC) now - page 2. (Read 2248 times)

Don't be worried, I will

But if you don't want to trust me, find a experienced developer friend and ask him to asses the XSPEC github repository. This way you don't need to trust me.

Anyway, I am doing an in depth research of all the donation address transactions. The results I have seen so far are pretty worrying. Will share as soon as I have everything well written.

I'd hope that you'd continue to be vigilant for everyone's sake.  As I said before I think checks and balances of this nature are necessary and a lot of us cannot decipher code and need to be informed of concerns like this.  BUT because I cannot decipher code I also have to be careful when considering the points that you're making which is why I questioned intent with the change of tone.  There is benefit to spreading false information on both sides of the code base and when I'm reading accusations I want as little emotion as possible and as much tangible fact as possible to make the most informed decisions.

More psychological spin! My replies aren't emotional, just pointing out what you're doing.
Why keep bringing it back to 1.4? why not focus on jbgs lies and lack of work to date?

The guy is 29 years old, even 15 years is bs, playing with code in your teens is not commercial experience, and yes this matters, working 40+ hours a week with deadlines for an entire year alone has far more value than playing with code for fun after school, he first claimed 20+ years and told one member 25 years, was he coding at the age of 4?

He also owned and worked in a bar, not something you would do along side full time software development. He has clearly lied here, it's not a minor exaggeration, it's a full on lie.

And you do have an agenda here, it shows by your approach, you keep diverting from the main issue and focusing on 1.4, the smallest point raised here and the one thing no one can prove as of yet, other than the fact he's given false deadlines etc.

As for your comments about Mandica being the only one who's met him, read the bold part in your above quote, due to this we don't need to meet the guy to conclude what I've said above.

Calling you what you are is not an attack, just an observation + the lack of care to be a nice guy towards shills.

Mandica has replied to the other thread, but not this one. And she was mainly trying to discredit preshpr1nce, not much responding to questions. But again we would need to trust Mandica's claims, a person who probably has a lot of coins (as jbg stated too) and so interests on one side of the truth.


I am waiting to see the 1.4 code to decide, I don't care much about the release, although is worrying that is late.
I would like to see the amount of work done in 1.4, to prove 7 months of development which is missing from github (Jun-Dec, Feb-Mar), and so to prove jbg claim that he's working full time.

If that happens, I am very happy to shut the fuck up and, maybe, also buy some XSPECs.

Again, I'm not sure why you are attacking me.  I'm not arguing.  I'm questioning.  Sorry I didn't like you're post if that's what you are being aggressive about. 
I'm not saying I don't have some money in xspec. I do.  Money and time.  I like the community. But I don't have any emotion involved in it as a coin.  It's just data.  I don't have a feeling one way or the other and I didn't invest what I couldn't afford to lose. 
I like what Gunner is doing.  I think it's important to hold people accountable. 
The burden of proof is on the person making the assertion
I'm not making assertions here and you're not contributing anything to my inquiries.   
If it can't be proven it shouldn't be asserted.  I think Gunner understands that.
Maybe you've had to many people attack you directly because of your post.  I'd apologize for the zealots, but that's their job.  I don't encourage that.  As a result I think that you think my posts are something they aren't and if I wanted to deal with people like you I'd just hop over to 4chan where at least they are witty.  So as a courtesy, I'm informing you that I'm going to just communicate with Gunner from this point forth.  I hope your day gets better.


@Gunner... yes that's true 15 years is a claim.  Mandica is the only person who has met jbg.  I wonder how they feel about these claims and jbg's abilities since it was the project lead that brought them on according to them.

If the 1.4 code hadn't had the delay.  Would this issue be resolved or would it be resolved with the release of 1.4?  Because it's still late.  Would that amount of delay still render this situations a "scam?"

I have no way of knowing if he would have fessed up as I've never met the individual.  I suppose he could have denied that the jbg you presented to him was him.  I'm surprised he didn't honestly. 

So you think that 1.4 is NOT going to come out?  That's what you're saying?

Remember that also 15 years is a claim. I have done some more research and I am really doubtful he has 15 years of commercial development experience. You can find my research in my previous posts.


Totally agree, and that's why today, 9th of March, with 1.4 code still hidden, after claimed it would have been made public at the end of January, there is a very big red alert for me.


He fessed up because I brought strong proofs, do you think he would have done it otherwise?


It should just be public, so you can actually check that work has been done. You can commit whenever you like to commit, there are guidances, but you can do whatever you want. As long as we can check the commits, and the work done in the commits. We can't check the commits for 1.4, jbg said they would have been made public end of January, now we are in March and he comes up with an excuse to still keep them private. It smells so dodgy man.

Still no good argument here, all I see is some guy who thinks he is good at putting a psychological spin on everything, you're pretty poor at it too, but A+ for confidence.
You have XSPEC in your signature, you're telling me you don't have an investment in this coin?

Also you like throwing around the word discredit, there's nothing to discredit here, you provide no good argument.
Also as for Brycel, if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

Trying to say prove it to something which the counter itself hasn't been proven is pointless.
Shall we discuss if unicorns exist while we're at it? I would like for you to prove to me that they don't

He did admit that he lied, yes.  And I don't know the difference between someone has coded for 15 years and someone who has coded for 20.  20 certainly sounds better but in terms of what a 20 year would be capable of in comparison I'm not sure. 
I think all of those statements that you posted would be lovely to know.  Even with help from jbg though I don't know that it will prove anything.  once a liar in the eyes of people, always a liar right?  The only way any of this could possibly come to a head is that he show work on 1.4 and then 2.0 after that.    The other stuff would require him to expose himself or would be questionable as he can say it... but not really prove it.
I agree.  This does require an enormous amount of trust.  And I think it's fine to challenge what he says.  Do that.  By all means challenge what he says but understand that there really isn't an answer that he can give that can be trusted, by you, or that wouldn't compromise him. 
He's slow as shit.
It's frustrating that he is operating as every available position within spectrecoin because he's the only "recognized" individual associated with it.  From what I can tell... he just wants to code. 
I think it's wise to challenge what he says... but not by generalizing his character on a solitary action.  Not with baseless FUD.   Like I said before... I Troll.  I'm not ONLY a Troll.   He's lied... but that doesn't necessarily make him ONLY a liar.  At least he fesses up.  Habitual liars usually stack lies upon lies and he came clean off the bat. 
Also, would making smaller commits over a period of time be better?  I'm not sure how that works.  Is it just to show work or so code can be reviewed as its completed?

I would probably do what you say for someone who is not a proven liar. jbg has been proved to lie about his experience, my question is now how many other things has he lied on?

So I checked all the claims he made which are in my opinion doubtful.

The claims are:
- he worked as software developer
- not only that, but he's also an experienced software developer
- he's working full time on XSPEC
- he's working with another +20 years experience developer
- the other developer has been working for 6 months
- he does not owns much coins
- he's working on 1.4
- he's releasing 1.4 with all the features he said he's going to include
- he's releasing 1.4 at the time he said
- he's uploading the code publicly on github
- the work he has done is enough to justify 9 months of development
- he's not rewarded by XSPEC

I probably forgot some, anyway some of these are difficult to prove if jbg does not help, and he decided not to help for long, now he comes to answers what he wants and then disappears again. You can read my previous posts to find clues of why I think most of these are false, and some of them are already proven to be false.

That's why an investment in XSPEC is all based on jbg trust, and you are perfectly aware of this. And that's also why I am challenging what he says.

If I only have to base my opinion on facts, which do not comprehend jbg claims, this is a 100% scam because:
- he is a proven liar
- no one is working on the codebase. Out of 9 months, there are only 2 months of activity of 1 developer.

This is a much simpler discussion, but since there are still many people listening to him, it's far more interesting to check what a proven liar is claiming and then people around him believing without a single question.

You are sadly mistaken if you think I'm attempting to "save" a coin or am emotionally invested in a dataset.  This is not an issue of "care."  This is an issue that deserves visability so I'm in full promotion of bumping this to the top.  My inquieries are not something to "beat."  I see that you think that this is some sort of gladiatorial battle that you are "winning" which is why you attempted to turn my words against me in some desperate attempt to discredit me when I am just posing questions and concerns to gunner.  Questions are not really something to discredit.  You either answer them or don't.  I'm not making any claims.  As I stated before I found your post particularly biased and non-objective highlighting incomplete "research" to skew information.  jbg has said that "lines of code" are not a good benchmark to determine the amount of time dedicated to producing a product. 

I can't fault Gunner for badgering or harassing.  That's his prerogative an if he can't suffer a potential scammer lightly and thinks this will be an effective method of drawing them out... then that's cool by me.  I'd personally prefer that he kept his argument succinct and within the bounds of provable fact.  Having said that I do think that he's being or trying to be genuine.
 
BUT statements like "Brycel is made up by jbg"  Yes, I CAN fault gunner for those.  He is making an assertion by saying that.  This is a belief.  Not a fact.  Until he can prove this belief it's a fact... This is unreasonable FUD.
It's not a matter of whether or not I believe him.  This is a matter of proof and evidence is necessary.  Is it a possibility that Brycel is a fabricated entitiy?  Sure.  But saying that he is without proof is not only speculative, but negligent.
Also continuing to equate lines of code with actual invested time SEEMS to be ignoring the other responsibilities that jbg has that he stated have been time consuming for him. 
@ gunner You aren't seeing enough commits for your liking so you think this is a scam.  That's a fair statement.  And this is clearly of interest to you as you apparently made a new account to address this situation.  I'd encourage you to continue with your assessment but refrain from overstepping into statements like the above that you haven't or can't back up.
I wouldn't still be questioning your intentions if you hadn't made your assertions  personal  and made backless statements presented as truth.

Can't fault what gunner is saying here.
The word promise may be strong, but let's look at it like this,

As a project that holds investors, if you say something is coming on a date, it is an expectation, asking the question is not a demand, saying he's failed to meet his own words is not a demand, outside of crypto if you were invested in a project and the developer told you something is coming on a date, you would expect this to be true, if he fails you'll want to see proof or reason as to why he has failed.

So in this scenario, he has made claims about the the release of 1.4, he's failed to meet these claims so now gunner is asking him to put up the work done to prove work is actually being done.

To give an example, if I invested in a developer who was building a block of units, he said the foundation would be set by a given date and this failed to happen due to say an issue with a builder, the investor would ask for evidence of this, and also ask for evidence of what's being done to resolve.

Without any evidence the investor would typically pull out of threaten to do so first.

How is this any different? people are investing in to this coin and he's not doing his part as the developer.

The proof is there in the screenshot, and we can see how people react to false deadlines just by looking at the price of XSPEC.

Aside from his communications with gunner, he's also told the entire community that it would be here in Feb.

Can I just give you some advice also, you care about this coin, you dislike people seeing this thread, if you're going to keep bumping it up you have to do better than this, all you're doing is giving it more visibility while being constantly beat in your comments, you are hurting the 1 thing you're trying to save

Good work gunner, keep it up mate

Yes, because, as I already explained to you, now after more than a month my doubts are becoming certainty, and I will not go easy with a potential scammer. Again I cannot force anyone to answer me, but I am free to keep doing the questions as much as I like. Again, if you think I am not genuine and don't agree with my methods: I don't care. I am trying to debunk a potential scammer and it's not an easy task and I'll do it the way I think is right. I think you don't understand how difficult this thing is. jbg is reading all my moves online, I am open and public. And he's hiding everything and answers when he wants, can just say random words and everyone in the community believes them. I need to back up every single thing with facts.

An example:
- mid Feb says he's going to finish 1.4 in time
- he disappears for 10 days
- comes back early March and says he need 24h/48h to assess
- after more than 48h, he says release it's not imminent
- yesterday he makes an announcement and at the end says there will be an announcement for 1.4. An announcement of an announcement.

No one questioned him.

Would you believe me if I didn't keep the screenshots, which luckily I took a month ago? Of course you wouldn't.


You can see it as he's a bad project manager, or that he's lying to people, so a potential scammer. I am more in favor of the latter.
The fact he has released the entire package when he has finished is just not true. It's something you heard around. The github history shows he worked incrementally the only time he worked, that is December / January. In all other months (Jun-Dec, Feb-Mar, 7 months!) there is not tangible work, a part of a week or so in September.


My point is that jbg made Bryce(l) up. There is no Bryce(l) which I can contact. The only proof for this is to see his 6 months worth of software development, anything else is pointless discussion. Anyone genuine would try to shed some light, jbg is not.


A scammer would have many coins, would keep saying BS to people, and then would dump their coins. Big addresses are moving now and there are whales dumping already. Make your self some questions.


Of course. He has done so already during December/January. Just look at the commits in github. This will prove also again that he's not working full time as he says. Ask your self why he hasn't done an action which takes 2 seconds after a month and a half after promising it.

I understand the reasons that you're asking for 1.4.  I'm not saying there is anything wrong with asking.  They are good reasons to ask IMO.
But you're mistaking "promises" for "projected times of completion" and then you're not really "asking"  you're "demanding" because there is an expectation that you will receive an answer to your requests.  I cannot stress enough that these things aren't owed to you.  You made good points simply by posing the questions.  But you're evading the fact that this has become personal.   Because you've moved away from simple inquisition to personally challenging jbg's character I question that validity of your research.  You've stepped beyond "informing the community" into a realm that self prescribes importance beyond that of a concerned member of the crypto community.

jbg has shown repeatedly that he is not capable of setting realistic deadlines.  In this case an unexpected life event resulted in the delay.  Since he is the only coder... if he stops working the entire project is delayed.  Doubling or tripling his completion time (which is the common tactic used for projects) would have alleviated this problem all together and hopefully he'll learn from that mistake this time.  Piecing together a time-line of why he is late involves delving into his personal life which I think we both agree SHOULDN'T be on display.     But also jbg hasn't released commits from the beginning.  He's always released the entire package when he was finished with it

I don't understand what Brycel has to do with jbg.  If you have a problem with Brycel's work (which is the cryptographic portion of the code I believe) that is something you should take up with Brycel who was hired personally by Mandica and is not active in the community.  It's okay to be upset about that, or question that, but I don't think that is okay to hold over jbg.

I also don't understand what the problem is with an exchange holding that many coins nor do I see how an exchange address being tied to a wallet with 1M coins is relevant.  It seems normal to me that these things would be connected but this is a highly speculative correlation you are trying to make here IMO.

So if we remove the things that are speculative (addresses to exchanges being linked to wallets) and the things not expressly related to jbg (Brycels work) and the things that we aren't due since  it was Manidca that brought him on AND it delves into his personal life (proof of experience) THen we are left with one thing.

You want to see 1.4 right now even though he says it's not finished?

The reasons why I am asking him to put 1.4 code public are simple:
- it's a very simple action (2 seconds) who would prove what he says he's doing
- he promised it

Again, as his own set up and missed deadlines, he continuously promises things and then does not fulfill them.

Here's the screenshot

This message is from end of January. We are the 9th of March, and it still hasn't happened. And now there is a new excuse why this hasn't happened, he says he has mixed up the code, after more than a month of his promise to put it publicly online the week after.

The truth is simple in my opinion: at that point in time he has done 0 work for 1.4, but he could say anything he wanted because his community just believes him without asking for proofs. And it took advantage for this continuously:
- his experience (proved)
- him working full time (obvious if you are a software developer and check the commit history)
- Bryce and his work (where is Bryce? where are his 6 months worth of development?)
- him saying he does not hold many coins

After a month and a half now, he hasn't done a simple thing that would have cleared up all of this.

And now I found out that he has an address connected with the donation address which has 233k coins received and it's connected with an address with 1M coins received, when he always said that he does not own much coins.

What about bounty?

Perhaps I'm mistaken but I believe you said Brycel "does not exist."  Perhaps I'm recalling a different post but I thought that was you.
 
And yes I'm sure devs do arrive on projects much larger in size, but more likely with more developers than one.  It's not like he was folded in.  He was thrust in after the other devs left if my understanding is correct.
I wouldn't call my views "biased" I'm just trying to be objective when reading the posts here and the further they move away from simple fact and start to deviate towards ad-hominem attacks the less credible they become in my eyes.  I'm not even defending the project or jbg.  I'm just seeing red flags in these posts that lead me to question their reason.  And "because I'm a white knight" sounds awesome as a primary objective in these posts I have to remind myself that this is the net and these are chat boxes.  We can say anything about ourselves yeah?  It doesn't really do much in the way of making a point.

As for this

I did say I derive pleasure from trolling.  This is not a solitary defining characteristic of my being nor is it the only thing I derive pleasure from.  I do enjoy helping people as well... but again, we can say whatever we want and take it all with a grain of salt.  It seems to me that you are relying on what one may consider an "easy out" in terms of trying to make me not seem valid in questioning the intent of these posts.  But I was very open about being trollish and how it was applicable to the situation and why these posts give me reserve.  I feel like I'm being very neutral and non-incendiary when I point out these discrepancies that have lent ME some doubt as to pure motivations in these posts.  That's all.

I would stay far away from this coin, too many shills for this coin. Smells scammy and looks like a pump and dump.

This is your view, you say I've provided no evidence but I've gone through the commits and shown examples where "big improvements" are nothing more than a few lines of code, in some cases less than that, others have reviewed and agreed with me, what more proof do you want? I've given examples rather than pure speculation.

You don't appear to get the point that jbg has been on board for 9 months, in the real world people jump on to projects much larger than this in size and have far far less time to understand the code base enough to bring value, imagine hiring some one who claims 15-20 years of experience and they can't bring value for 9+ months, where do we see value from jbg's work?

This isn't a personal attack on jbg, I don't know the guy and I don't care for XSPEC, the shilling on the forum and the talks about deadlines being missed on top of gunners findings made me go look at a coin I otherwise wouldn't of cared for.. simple as that.

You're obviously the one with bias views here, you're trying to defend it without adding much more than an attack on ones approach.

As for mentioning you're a troll to discredit you, you called yourself a troll, every one will have their own view on this and yes, I'll say it discredits you in my eyes, people with half a brain have better things to do than troll, try being helpful rather than an asshole.

Do you have bounty program?

I would.  It was biased and goading and assumes a relatively sterile environment that presumes little or no familiarization as far as the code is concerned.  jbg came in on the middle of a project and was tasked with reviewing all of the code that preceeded his entry into the project.

Now it's true there are some zealots among the community that take any disparaging comment about the coin personally.  I don't understand that but... you know... whatever... People gunna do, I guess.  I don't care how you respond to them.  You being diplomatic is the least of my concerns on a fucking message board like BCT. 
 
I also have little concern for peoples' emotions and am not particularly sensitive myself... irl and online but especially online where verbal context isn't present.  But this is more about statements that you presented as fact but didn't have much anything to back those facts up except what you believe... but you presented those beliefs as "truth."

I do derive pleasure from trolling, but it has little to do with any of this and if it was an attempt to discredit me... I DID say it's a horrible indictment of my character, BUT it does put me in a unique position to spot possible troll tactics like trying to goad people into an online altercations in subtle fashion after appearing to be credible and diplomatic.  I'm not questioning nature.  I don't care about anyones' "nature" online.  I do care about intent.  And I do question intent when someone goes from someone seeming to have authority over a topic to someone taking caddy digs at another person.  Gunner's original post was well laid out and objective.  I'm simply saying that this most recent one takes multiple jabs at jbg personally and it caused me to rethink some of his original post that I commended initially.  I'm not saying there is ulterior motive... but I didn't question whether there WAS ulterior motives before and now I do.