Quote from: HR on May 18, 2017, 03:38:14 PM

Quote from: RB25 on May 18, 2017, 03:31:52 PM

Quote from: HR on May 18, 2017, 02:47:36 PM

Quote from: RB25 on May 18, 2017, 12:01:53 PM

As for a white paper, I don't mind there is no DGB specific white paper. BTC had the start, go read its white paper.

You know, thats your decision and I respect it, even though its opposite my views.

Whats more, and again, in spite of it being the antithesis of what I support, I respect you much more than the coward who simply tries to evade the topic or sweep it under the rug.

Like the people involved in DASH who say they dont care about the instamine, you have the right to say you dont care about the lack of documentation.

As long as everyone is informed, then everyones entitled to their own decision.

However, just as I respect you, I think its only fair you respect my point of view too, dont you?

If theres no problem with you saying you dont care, what problem is there with me saying I do?

In fact, society values those who express their concerns.

I care about the lack of documentation and have been actively taking advantage of every opportunity over the last couple of years to say so and try to instigate a change for the positive. Whats the problem with that?

Thats one thing that should have stayed at that.

The problem is when you are intimidated, attacked and slandered for your legitimate views (and good documentation is legitimate, of course, its a best practice), and when its the Dev himself, then all the warning lights should go off. (And when it's personal character assassination, one should be duly indignant.)

Is this so hard to see?

I had him pull the read the code yourself on me last year with questions about how the individual algos reset their individual difficulty to mine settings and whether they were linked or not. I chalked it up to his own emotional limitations and not being able to handle the directness of our questions. Whats doubly concerning today is that a year has gone by and the same response was given to someone else at their first asking. Theres no emotion involved in being concerned about a pattern of behavior that continues to this day and flies in the face of all conventional wisdom regarding what it takes for a tech project to succeed.

First there was astonishment on my part, then indignation, and Ive explained this enough already. Let it be a word to the wise, and to those who just dont get it, we can all turn the page and go on.

(And no, even though these things would have been indirectly included in the offer I made to DigiByte, none of this was a material aspect.)

P.S. To those of you with your hallucinogenic theories about why this happened, or what my motivations are, etc., give it a rest. Its not that complicated. It is what it is. You can accept it or not, but not accepting it won't change what it is. And the best thing, of course, is to accept reality as it is and not try to impose what you think it should be. Did I say a word to the wise already?

Never though that your opinion was to be kept to yourself or that it deserved no respect. Just offered another perspective from a long-time holder's point of view.

No. And I didn't want to insinuate that was your intention. Simply wanted to use your comment as the basis for a general description of the situation to everyone here. It was not specifically directed at you, and I apologize if it came off that way. Not at all. Just a good opportunity to illustrate a healthy dichotomy for everyone to contemplate.

It appears Jared and the DigiByte community know who you are, and your concerns for a "White Paper".
The fact that you keep harping about it, only unveils the fact of your evil intention (weak male ego) to keep ramming it down peoples throats.

Last time I checked, Jared is doing everything he dreams of doing with Digibyte.
Last time I checked, the arbitrary authorities do not require a White Paper.

Has some ethical code or law been broken? No.
Give it a rest.