Quote from: ibminer on April 23, 2015, 10:25:34 AM

Quote from: dogie on April 23, 2015, 12:49:21 AM

Quote from: ibminer on April 21, 2015, 09:27:34 PM

Quote from: dogie on April 18, 2015, 02:56:39 AM

Quote from: ibminer on April 18, 2015, 02:20:42 AM

Quote from: dogie on April 17, 2015, 10:56:43 PM

[All the questions seem to be directed to Guy, if I've missed any then please requote.]

If you have answers to any of the questions, and can answer them honestly, I am sure I am not the only one that would be interested in your input.... but it sounds like you are not allowed to speak on certain subjects and I'd rather not be given half answers or PR statements that I need to decipher

Nothing is NDA'ed but it gets a bit messy. tldr its not Guy's story(ies) to tell. Unless his sources want to go public, there isn't anything anyone can do with the information. ... If that makes sense?

I guess I understand where your coming from but I'm not sure I agree with it... I feel like once the information made it to you, you should reveal it. It sounds like the stories come from Guy, through his sources, but now its been given to you (or you had the knowledge prior) and I would expect you to let the community know about it. Regardless, I really don't know all of the information so its pointless speculating what I might do in your shoes, I guess we'll have to leave it at that. Undecided

Only time will tell!

I'll explain as best I can.

Guy posts on the forum: "I know a secret, and I think you know it too."
Guy doesn't want to reveal the secret in public, so tells me privately.
I didn't 'know' the secret, nor is it public knowledge.
Guy can't yet reveal to anyone what the secret is because the sources aren't public.
Outing his sources would likely damage those sources.
While I could reveal the secret, it would damage both Guy and his sources.
The actual secret is relatively unimportant for everyone and unless someone sues someone else, isn't even an ethical violation.
There isn't any reason for me to force the issue of revealing it.

The end result of what Guy said is that it makes it out as if there is some big conspiracy when its a very minor thing we don't actually care about. But now no one can confirm, deny or explain. It wasn't a good idea.

It seems like a slight contradiction to say revealing this information could damage multiple people, at least one of which is a prominent figure in the bitcoin mining community, but that its somehow relatively unimportant information for everyone??

I don't get a good feeling about any of this but I'll try one more question, if you are willing to answer (and be honest

)...
Would the actual secret cause you to change the ethical rating, or any rating, of any manufacturer on your trustworthiness guide?

Sorry, I missed this question.

No, no rating would have changed.