Quote from: URSAY on December 21, 2016, 06:21:54 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on December 21, 2016, 05:43:58 PM

Quote

That's why this scam hides in places where people can't ask important questions, nor express dissenting, ie non-cheerleading, opinions.

Polo should have never listed the XC and Blocknet scams to begin with. Doing so brings the exchange additional technical risk from bad code and legal risk from facilitating the scam(s).

I love how we have functional software products for both XC and Blocknet and yet you cry scam, while all along we have been answering questions in slack and doing real user testing.

The only scam here is you coming here and making this statement when actual users have used the software. Why don't you go crawl back into your hole and piss off

Another classy post from Dan Metcalf, your lead dev. I was an actual user of your software so I had an insight into your business. This is one of the reasons I started this thread.

Yes, Dan is using the classy 'attack the attacker' scam defense strategy he learned from the DashHoles (before they signed their mutual non-aggression/co-scamming peace treaty).

As if questioning my credentials (funny coming from a scamcoin dev who has only been here since 2013) is an effective way to deflect criticism of XC/BN.

Given how much money Dan made from pumping and dumping XC, ostensibly to fund Blocknet development, it's entirely appropriate to ask what the hell he's been doing for the last 3 years.

Like MAID, he's blown through million$ in "dev funding" but has nothing to show for it.

But at least MAID raised their funding semi-honestly through an ICO, instead of betraying and throwing under the bus XC users, as did Dan.

Of course the Kool-Aid chugging True Believers will defend their Dear Leader, just as the DashHoles heap praise on Duffield for abandoning Darkcoin for Dash and then pivoting from Dash to Evolution.

LOL "SECURE OS?" Scope creep much? Cheesy