There is no concrete evidence that Eduardo DeCastro = iCEBREAKER. I've asked before to people to provide evidence, but like I said, I haven't seen anything concrete yet. Until then, it is a mere allegation.
You are the only fair and balanced Monero Dev I am aware of, so what`s your take on the "concrete evidence" regarding the accusations that Evan has scammed anyone? Do you think he should be on that list?
I'll start of by saying that I am neither a dev nor a core-team member. Perhaps my "role" is better described as contributor.
Anyway, like I stated upthread at least one person missed the launch due to Evan Duffield launching earlier than he said he would. That should be considered as someone (in)directly being "ripped off" in my opinion (or scammed). Furthermore, for every poster there might be 10-20 readers who experienced the same thing. He also confirms that he'll try again next week. That probably resulted in some people getting caught off guard regarding the launch. In addition, there were no Windows binaries available, which arguably represents a great part of users. However, he was apparently willing to throw 5k DASH at it. See
I compiled the exe for Windows... no blocks yet, just a bazillion rejects.
Any chance you could upload that windows client exe? I'd be willing to throw 5k XCO at you. Just make sure it's the latest source from github
As you can see from the timestamp, this was only 2 hours after the launch (launch was 18 January 2014, 11 PM EST). That is concrete evidence that he was at least mining during the first 48 hours.
I also dislike the fact that, almost 2 years after, he tried to turn the "feature into a bug" with a lot of hype surrounding it. Analogies like "it's the same as startups" or building a company from the ground are just plain fallacies in my opinion. They might apply if you fairly lay out everything in advance of the launch, like Ethereum did, but you absolute can't make them after such a thing happened.
Until Evan makes FULL DISCLOSURE of the truth, then he is scammer. There is no other valid sentiment.
Even if disclosure were made now, there have been two years of deception, obfuscation, and spin (not only by Evan but by the other useful idiots like AlexGR who, assuming no more explicit involvement, got in early and allowed themselves to be recruited by their own greed as accomplices). That can't be erased from history any more than MtGox would cease to be a scam if Karpeles showed up and told us the missing coins, that he misled people about for possibly years, was all just a big accident.
Anyone who bought Dash on the basis, in whole or part, of misleading statements from Evan or the others and then lost money has been scammed.Thus a correction is needed:
Evan Duffield, along with AlexGR and the rest of the Dash shills who continue to scam investors (DASH)
I also mostly agree with this quote, I'll address the part of misleading statements. Evan Duffield has documented his own version of what happened with the instamine here:
http://dashdot.io/alpha/?page_id=118I'll take some excerpts out of them which I disagree with.
First:
Its also important to note, I was working a very challenging day job while working on Dash in the first couple weeks. So I was putting out fires every night, keeping tabs on Dash during the day (while getting yelled at by my boss when he caught me a couple times). Eventually I quit when I got Dash stable enough to work on full time and decided I really wanted to explore what I could do with it.
This is basically the same as him saying it was a hobby, which I addressed in my other comment upstate. That statement directly contradicts the email he sent out to the Bitcoin dev mailing list.
Second:
3) Evans point in the above video is that, without the instamine Dash would not have captured the interest of its Founders.
Addressed this earlier in the post. The fact that the instamine had to happen to capture interest of the founders is a bit sketchy in my opinion.
Third:
Dash Early Distribution
This shows a graph of transactions from early addresses to other addresses. However, one could have simply sent his "instamined DASH" to another address and made it look like the coins where distributed. You simply can't post that graph and say the the coins were redistrubted. There is not enough evidence for this.
Fourth:
Dash was buggy at the beginning
In my opinion, he should've done some more testing like he said than instead of seemingly rushing to launch like he did.
Whether the instamine was intentional or not, I am leaning towards probable. I do admit though, that there is not enough concrete evidence to be certain of this.
Whether he should be on the list or not. He certainly isn't as worse as most people on that list, but he "ripped off" people to some extent. I'll leave the decision open to Gleb Gamow.
Finally, the instamine will probably always be a dark cloud hanging over DASH, which will hinder its ability to grow. Even Charlie Lee, a completely unbiased person, said this. The mere reason for this is not the instamine per se, but the fact that the instamine represents such a large part of the current supply. It's ~31.5% of the current supply. Like AlexGR pointed out, Litecoin had some kind of instamine as well, but it only represents <1% of the current supply. This issue might have been avoided if he didn't cut the blockreward to 1/4th (if I recall correctly).
@AlexGR, don't try to derail the discussion to anything Monero related. Smooth and I might be Monero proponents, but TPTB_need_war who started this discussion isn't invested in Monero at all. Furthermore, the discussion here doesn't destroy the functionality of the thread, because most of the functionality is in the opening post.