So when BFL releases some preliminary product renders and folks cry "fraud" you jump on their bandwagon and assert that when the crowd shouts "fraud" the burden of proof is on the manufacturer: "Prove to us you're NOT a fraud!"
Then when BitInstant releases a preliminary product pic and folks cry "fraud" your immediate response is "nono, that's not ok you guys, those making the claims of fraud bear the burden of proof, anything else would be fallacious!"
Inconsistent reasoning is inconsistent.
I would imagine the major difference is that bitinstant isn't run by a convicted fraudster and hasn't collected millions of dollars in pre-orders...
Enmaku: Should BitInstant do an EXTREMELY SHADY MAKEOVER, like say,
move to an unknown address, list a fake office on their webpage,
fire their secretary (and replace her with a cell phone number),
refuse to answer questions from anxious customers (See: Town Hall thread),
hire Inaba to make funny, evasive jokes instead of addressing the worries of customers,
and also take ten million dollars (or something) in pre-orders,
THEN, I should say
"cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war!"In the meantime, as long as their core business stays healthy,
and doesn't also look like it's
intentionally set up to be able to one day disappear completely,
or is also run by convicted felons, then yeah, BitInstant can do pull whatever stunts pleases them.
The differences between the two companies are pretty obvious and pretty stunning.
BFL could do well to learn a thing (or a thousand) from BitInstant.