Care to elaborate? While I don't hestitate to put mental reservation into use for good reason (such as keeping others' secrets) and sometimes leave out technical details that are irrelevant and I cannot easily explain to the audience, and sometimes I may even be mistaken, nothing I say is known by me to be false at the time.

---

Really? What evidence was that? When did you ever show any interest in FPGAs before you got upset over the ASIC announcement, for that matter?

No, you intentionally-blindly accepted Kano's revert of all the improvements and bugfixes I had made to the Icarus driver on Kano's whim.
Furthermore, the Windows compatibility Kano pointed out was broken, was not ignored, but easily fixed without reverting any of the improvements or bugfixes.
Do you junk your new car just because someone finds one of the fuses is popped, or do you just fix the problem and move forward?

No, git handles attribution just fine - when used correctly. While you and Kano regularly misattribute your commits based on code from others, I make good use of the --author option to give credit to the person who wrote the code.
Considering you've claimed you never look at BFGMiner code, it's ironic you claim it's mostly code pulled from cgminer. I encourage anyone who knows his way around git (even github's web interface isn't too bad) and has any doubts about this, to look at the code themselves and see plainly where BFGMiner code came from or didn't.

That's called the not-invented-here syndrome. Also, libblkmaker is and always has been standard C.

No, that's how I handle trolls and claims with no basis in the truth (usually repeated from a troll). These are pretty standard recommended ways of dealing with trolls.
That I let any posts like this one of yours trick me into wasting time responding, I guess is my own fault.

While I don't generally abandon functionality I need (or else I wouldn't have taken the time to write it in the frist place!), I regularly act to make them more compatible with others' objections. It's not unheard of for others to convince me that I'm wrong either, though that takes actual logic, not mere trolling like you and Kano enjoy doing. Even while BIP 16 is the P2SH solution adopted by Bitcoin, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that BIP 17 was the superior solution - but that's all ancient history now.

cgminer is pretty much deprecated - as a GPU miner, in a world that has moved on from GPUs. cgminer's FPGA code, which came from and was maintained mostly by myself until you cut it off from its main development branch, is horribly outdated and mostly only grown worse as Kano incompetently tried to "improve" it - so your choice of "substandard" here is pretty accurate!