Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: ion.cash "developer" a.k.a. Anonymint goes off the deep end
by
TPTB_need_war
on 11/09/2015, 00:10:10 UTC
However, I don't think it is trust abuse, within the context of the cryptocurrency marketplace. Hype of vaporware and conveniently selective disclosure of information is something that has been used by scammers and has a high risk of being employed by someone who is scamming.

Smooth you live in a fantasy world. You know damn well I am not hyping vaporware because you've even seen the Blake2 hash I coded in Scala this past week.

What I've seen is irrelevant as I'm not the one making a scamming allegation, though I have told you a few times now that your hyping without willingness to back it up with evidence will raise that suspicion. Which it does and will.

Again another of your epic logic fails.

My signature line clearly points to a Hero reputation from 2013.

Hero users can and do scam. Often via purchased Hero accounts (or lower Sr, etc. accounts that are mined up to Hero), sometimes not.

Or someone could falsely claim to be a new version of an old Hero account, without proof.

I'm not saying I believe these things, but others might.

And again you argue ad nauseum on a point that doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

He has provided no strong evidence of any of these things. His evidence links to the opening post of this thread, which is a bunch of links to a cat fight[1].

Smooth when I evaluate people for their efficacy, one thing I look it is how well they reason to the effective point of it. Logic ad nauseum isn't logical.

[1] Also the timing of his Trust report is when I told him to his face that he was making Freudian slips with his use of the words "humble" and "immaturity" and that he was employing psychological warfare. I outed him and he didn't like it. So he proceeded to use every weapon in his toolchest to try to discredit me. The circumstances along with the evidence presented clearly show his motivation is revenge. And the reason is clear also. He was embarrassed because he started off initially attacking me over the definition of the 'delegated'. And then I pointed out that only a simpleton, non-skilled programmer assumes that delegation must be married to trust. Rather than eating humble pie, he turned Freudian and blamed me for not being humble and not putting the entire thread in the opening post.

Here he starts the conflation of 'delegated' and 'trusted':

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171109.msg12374689#msg12374689

So then I explained to him not to conflate the two, yet he repeats for the second time that he doesn't understand the definition of 'delegated':

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171109.msg12374976#msg12374976

After r0ach tried to explain it to him, then I explained it to him yet again and asked him kindly to not start a word war:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171109.msg12375049#msg12375049

Then for the third time he repeated his insistance on conflating the words 'delegated' and 'trusted' even after he has been told already 3X and by 2 experts not to do that:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171109.msg12375107#msg12375107

Then after r0ach tries to warn him the 4th time, he then defiantly states he is not trolling:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171109.msg12375170#msg12375170

But then he proceeds over to my thread to repeat the same nonsense some more as follows...

First, I had to explain it to him again for the 5th time and again caution him that I wasn't going to reveal the secrets of how I unconflate the delegation and the trust:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1174653.msg12375146#msg12375146

Yet for the 5th time he repeats his same insistence that delegation must be married to trust:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1174653.msg12375327#msg12375327

Around that point he started blaming me for his inability to read and saying I wasn't humble:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1174653.msg12377982#msg12377982

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1174653.msg12378045#msg12378045

I asked they move that detailed delegation issue discussion to another thread and it looked like maybe he was going to be reasonable, so I allowed his link to the new thread to remain in my thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175585.msg12375430#msg12375430

And I even pointed out to monsterer that it seemed to me like Smoothie was starting to genuinely think about a potential middle ground and I thought he had opened his mind and become more reasonable finally:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175585.msg12375644#msg12375644

But then he backslides and joins in with the VanillaCoin investors who want to attack me:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175585.msg12375676#msg12375676

And he starts attacking me ad hominem:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175585.msg12375708#msg12375708

Again I apologize profusely (2X) and beg one more time for mutual respect and level headedness (am I am not humble  Huh):

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175585.msg12375715#msg12375715

Then smooth jumps on the bandwagon too with them all attacking me:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175585.msg12375982#msg12375982

Then Smoothie starts with his Freudian slips attacks where he is projecting his lack of humbleness and immaturity as accusations on me when in fact he is covering for big ego and butt hurt over being told 5 times not to conflate delegation and trust by both myself and r0ach:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175585.msg12377446#msg12377446