Quote from: shangerlaa on October 07, 2017, 04:46:25 PM

When people in the crypto space don't invest in it ( a lot of the investors have a tech back ground that understand how software development works) it shows they don't believe in Reggie tech skills. If outside investor were going heavy into it Tim Draper would be the first to jump in. I don't see any article on him investing in it or articles on outside investors. Show me an article of rich billionaires investing in veritaseum. Until then no proof. But this is an article explaining why people are dumping it or not interested in it. Lots of red flags. https://medium.com/@EthereumRussian/veritaseum-is-a-scam-c6e05fb1e4eb

So to your question on why its tanking. That article pretty much sums it up.I saw the website it was huge red flag for me. Thats what I always pay attention to is the first thing the website and the people behind it. Does the person running it have skills in software development and do they have a passion for that industry. If not its not something I am interested in. A good example is ethereum. It has huge community huge team and Vitalik tech saavy eat, breaths, sleeps ethereum. Reggie I don't think is tech saavy type and Crypto space is who different demon then the stock market.

I would say that if the Veritaseum team has any managerial competency, then they should take some effort (no matter the trouble) to debunk all the points mentioned in that article.
Sure the community can answer that for Reggie, but isn't that supposed to be Reggie's responsibility?

I believe it was not Youtube blogger CryptO that made Veritaseum famous, but Clif High and jsnip4.
I can see there are several wrong information/statement in that article that is biased towards Veritaseum but let's leave the work to Veritaseum team to debunk them, even if it means having to repeat the same answers all over again.

Like I said before, Veritaseum should have a comprehensive FAQ in place to answer/debunk such misinformation.
It doesn't really pay the team well by having to repeat the same work over and over again instead of having a comprehensive FAQ in place to conveniently do the same job.
But good that the team took my advice (or complain) for a FAQ, but still not complete/comprehensive enough.
That Medium article should provide further points to be added into the FAQ.
Despite my nickname, Veritaseum team would be far better off if it swallows its pride and take my advice.
Yes, a comprehensive FAQ can make a huge difference that even Reggie can fail to see.

Edit:
An ICO can have nice website with great team (ref: SALT Lending), but even then many are now shouting scam despite such niceties.

Update:
Having said all that, I believe I have a part to play too. I would like to refer the Medium article writer to http://veritas.veritaseum.com/index.php/26-veritaseum-faq-frequently-asked-questions for clarification.
Personally I am far less worried about scam factor than the adoption of the Veritaseum platform by institutions.

Update #2:
I personally think the Gnosis report numbers were not plucked out of thin air, but derived from very specific questions asked, much like the ones asked in its report on Ripple.