So if John said his code was 99% from scratch and 1% was used from btc/ppc code to maintain backwards compatibility, would that make you happy?
It would be yet another inaccurate deflection. Some of the already-identified copied portions have nothing to do with backward compatibility.
You're really desparate to come up with
something, any available excuse, to explain it away, huh? Maybe it would be easier to just go with the simpler explanation that he's a scammer who launched an obfuscated Bitcoin fork as a falsely-hyped entirely-written-from-scratch coin and now continues to scam by making false statements about other coins. Ya, know, Occam's Razor and all.
Why is that
so hard to believe? It is obvious you are unwilling or unable to dig into the code to actually answer for yourself (or look at the twitter timestamps running in reverse order). Is that laziness, inability, or are you just a paid shill with zero willingness to engage in honest inquiry on the matter?
This isn't about the morality of copying music, it is about taking credit for others' work (work that was given to you freely to use if you just acknowledge it) and holding your product out as something it is not. Many people may have 10000 download songs in their iPad, but few claim to have written and performed all those songs, and fewer still would believe them if they did.
If he came out and was someone you respected, I bet you would be buying up Vcash. That is all
How did that work out for Brian Williams?