Topic: Why I chose not to invest in SpectreCoin (XSPEC) now - page 3. (Read 2248 times)

Again, how jbg handles this and the blame you're placing on jbg presumes the fact that you somehow feel that you are entitled to have jbg answer you.  I think that you think an awful lot of your "research" to think that this is somehow sinking a boat, but it's your research and you can place that amount of value on it if you like.  I'm not so sure it's that valuable at this point, where initially I was convinced there was some merit.
  
You also asked jbg to make 1.4 public and he has not been present due to the loss of an individual that was "close" to him according to a recent announcement in discord.  He only just came back to a few days ago and he's responded to your concern today.
  
I do not know of any promises that he made to you.  I have not see them.  Can you please show me screen shots of those as well?  But if he did not promise this then this presumes that he "owes" this to you as a response as well.  I'm not sure who you are, but as this conversation goes on I'm seeing more and more entitlement.  You're "asking for simple facts" but jbg doesn't owe you anything.  IF he was aware of your existence and DID promise this to you, which I will need to see then you are completely justified and do deserve a response to that.

Okay, I understand your source not wanting to use a name that may make them vulnerable and I respect you for not doing that.  Unless that person can provide evidence then that's not really something that should be pursued as it's an unjust smear.  Initially I commended your work in trying to expose a potential scammer.  It's an honorable and reward-less task, but like I said it's moving past that at this point and is getting a bit facetious and personal.  There's really no reason to NOT continue being objective and succinct without the unnecessary jabs.  They aren't lending any credit to you.

The shill who can't contribute anything useful

What was the point in that post? can't add anything of intelligence as per usual, nice one!

the shiller guy who speaks out of turn

Rowan, I made a response about this personal information. A lot of news can be interpreted as negative based on title more than facts, reason, and moreover conclusion. I remember your name and its literally sad to see people leave.

I see what you are saying, but again it is my perception that you are attempting to dictate the terms and conditions of what is "acceptable" as far as a response goes and though I may misremembering your earlier post  it feels as if the goals posts are being moved with each response.  On top of that I don't understand why you feel as if it's the responsibility of jbg to respond to you.    You feel under appreciated for the work that you did to investigate this issue so you begin implementing snark to "get a response."  I understand that you may not find the intrinsic motivation of having done something positive for the crypto community enough to sate you for the work that you did, but posts like the previous one question whether this was for the good of the crypto community or not.  If you are not invested and have a genuine interest in fleshing out the concerns with jbg... then why the violent communication technique?

When I go back and look at your earlier post where you suggested times by which a project should be completed and see that the authority with which you presented your information may be flawed, incomplete, or both I find myself questioning what you used as a benchmark and whether or not any of the code based arguments were of any merit.  Because the things you are claiming should take a very short time (If I'm understanding correctly) can be quite a hefty task.

Also that "Should I post jbg's real name and location" statement makes me think you wish to use that as some sort of leverage.  As if you're hanging this over the community's head or something.  I don't understand the intention there either.

I thank you for posting the pics instead of using them in a threatening fashion.  If we are here to call people out then there's no reason for the "I got a gun in my pocket" talk... just shoot.  It showed me that you weren't being ENTIRELY genuine about the information you were claiming to present.  But I still think you're generally being genuine.  Sometimes people stretch the validity of things to prove a point and you came clean, so I'm cool with that.  But  I am still not sure why you are choosing to hide the screen name of the individual that claimed jbg said he had 25 years of experience coding.  That's a pretty damning claim.  I'd like to see evidence of this and if someone is willing to say that shouldn't they weigh in here with some evidence.  Turn something that is just hearsay into something a bit more tangible?   

I am not invested in this project anymore and have been asked to share my story multiple times. I don't think it matters much, since it was a personal decision, but here goes:

I found out who jbg is, which did not match the profile he publicly portrays to his investors.
An article popped up about his history, which made me lose trust in his ability to run a business.
The reason he says its important for him to remain anonymous, is because it could compromise the project otherwise.

I do not know if this project is a scam, but these three points made me too uncomfortable to stay. So I left.

Like I said, its personal. Community is nice, I hope the project succeeds.

I understand your comment and you are right, I have changed my tone. But for a reason.

If more than a month ago I was doubtful, after a month of looking of what's going on in XSPEC, my doubts are becoming more and more certainty. I have written why endless times. Also the change of tone was intended to make jbg reply.

Think about it from my perspective:
you lose a lot of time to share your research to the community for 0 return and you mostly get quick shill answers which you have to spend more time answering to. Then the guy doesn't even answer to you. After a month, the market says I am right, and then he of course answers. Not because he wants to, because the market says so.

Also I then ask him for very simple things to clear everything up, and after more than a month they are still not done!

How do you want me to approach a, what now I believe is, potential scammer? Do you want me to go gentle with him?

Like: hey, so sorry you missed your own set up deadline to release 1.4, and you still don't know when you are going to release it. You also haven't made 1.4 code public after a month, how many more months do you want? 2 or 3? Let's do 4!

Do you think this would work better?

I don't approve much preshprince tone, he's way harsher than me and has spent less time researching XSPEC in general than me, but hey, his choice.

You asked for screenshots, I gave them to you. I am not lying as you can see. You can think I am not genuine, but to be honest I don't care anymore. I only care about jbg responses and his ability of release 9 months worth of development work with 1.4. This hasn't happened yet, and it's the only thing everyone should care about. Plus maybe his donation address transactions, which is worrying too.

I don't give a shit.  
If you are comfortable blowing someone's spot based on the traces they've left on the web, that's up to you.  It's up to the individual to operate in a manner that allows for them to be private.  If he's left footprints and if you feel comfortable releasing his real name... I don't care.   But I don't see how that is of benefit as we can at least confront jbg by his screen-name and we are not afforded that same benefit of confrontation with your... I dunno... informant.
But I thought your original post was unbiased and informative.  It had a feel of genuinely pointing out concerns.  This most recent post has some passive aggression and presumptions about what makes a "genuine person" in the form of an ultimatum and a lot of very speculative input.  The tone has changed.  

I love to troll, it's a simple pleasure in my life and a horrible indictment of my character.  Your first post was a REALLY good example of how I would present something if I wanted to look distanced and like I was genuinely trying to help (but I was actually baiting someone)... but this most recent post is starting to reek of something more personal.  Like the bait wasn't substantial so you're "upping" your game .  Throwing subtle jabs here trying to goad someone into an emotional reaction... which we both know would result in you "winning" from a troll perspective.  

The other guy (Preshprince)'s post started in that manner.  Making claims without proof and such.  I peeped that game from the get go.  But now you're starting to head in that direction.  
So why do all this?  You said your piece initially, which informed the people.  They can make their decisions from that first post and decide whether JBG is genuine or not yeah?  You're attempting to set the precedent for what is and isn't acceptable now.  You aren't just providing your "findings" you're challenging character.  You're questioning semantics.  You're  hiding sources.  These are also questionable actions.

Edit:  Didn't nail preshprince's screen name.  Edited

I haven't invested into SpectreCoin project but I have participate into telegram bounty and what I have read there everyday makes me think that somehow you misunderstood all the situations somehow. In my opinion , they are a legit project with a solid team but this is just my opinion.

I have asked them. Following your same thinking, do you want me to disclose also jbg real name and surname then?

So three things on slack.  Which he's admitted to and regrets.
One instance of hearsay that is, as of yet, unverified... (so lets hope they can get a screenshot as well).
And then a nitpick at semantics.
Just post the name man.  They made a claim.  Let them back it.  Call them out too.  This is the web.  There is not privacy in a chatbox.

Cool, I am going to ask both users and let you know.

In the meanwhile, let's continue and say I have got 3 screenshots, and jbg mentioned an "ad-hoc conversation" when he clearly wrote it multiple times.

Why do you think he was trying to minimise again?

"Authorization?" 
You going to get a fine or something?  Ya'll buddies? 
Or you just don't want him to come into question.
I think that individual needs a much scrutiny for making that claim as jbg does.

one, two, three and four.

Happier?

Names removed on the forth one as it was a private conversation and I haven't asked for authorisation to publish, I can ask and disclose if that makes you feel even happier.

Post the screen shots please.

Nothing man, I am still not sure he's genuine, and you need go to in depth when you try to debunk a scammer. If he's genuine, he'll be able to answer the questions without any problem, but he avoided for more than a month. Ask yourself why?

Now that he started, let him continue please, it will be better for you too.

What started as valid argument seems to be degrading into "doubt," speculation, subtle ad-hominem jabs at character, unbacked claims bordering on threat, and challenges that jbg has no obligation to respond to.  At this point I just question the motivation of these posts.  It seems a lot of effort on behalf of those making the "scam" claims and what initially seemed as a tight weave is starting to show some thread wear.
Post the screen-shots, Gunner.  What are you hiding from?