Re: PSA: cypherdoc is a paid shill, liar and probably epic scammer: HashFast affair
To be fair Cypherdoc made some good calls on the market back a few years.
But to find out that he got 3000 BTC for posting on this forum for a few months/weeks is pretty insane to me.
But then again I am not judge and I don't know the law behind people making stupid contracts where they give away 10% of their company's equity for someone to post on this forum a few hundred (or thousands?) of times.
Only in the Bitcoin world ...
But to find out that he got 3000 BTC for posting on this forum for a few months/weeks is pretty insane to me.
But then again I am not judge and I don't know the law behind people making stupid contracts where they give away 10% of their company's equity for someone to post on this forum a few hundred (or thousands?) of times.
Only in the Bitcoin world ...
Calls on what? On Gold? On bitcoin? Because his HF endorsement has nothing to do with being good at finance or any other domain. He endorsed a high-tech start-up. What is his history with any of those?
There will be always non-technical people with money that want to get rich. Or people who simply like nice words and fail to properly investigate themselves what they are investing into. See BFL's case. There is not technical data in cypherdoc's endorsement. Only nicely put words.
HF said they were teaming with Uniquify to build a 28nm 400gh/s ASIC and that's what they did
The bankruptcy court put HF through the "best effort" test. If they had failed it, the court would have approved the motions to convert from Chapter 11 to 7.
If your plan is to throw random statements and when asked for proof you throw the court thing then you are failing and I don't buy it.
Prove that HF built with Uniquify the chip! I dare you! Prove it that it wasn't pretty marketing or dust in the eye, call it whatever you want!
Yes his calls on the market had nothing to do with the endorsement he was doing for HF. Agreed.
Simply put I do not support the idea of him getting 10% of the company for advertisement/endorsement on his part. But then again is there a law against people being stupid about their company/equity/funds/money?
Not sure about that.
Of course in my view the right thing to do is to return the funds given lots of people (customers) whom were even his subscribers of his newsletter probably bought into the product because of his endorsement through his newsletter and then lost a lot.
I almost lost about $10,000 (or 100 BTC) at the time because of this. Glad I did not buy into what he was pushing for people to buy into.