In case it wasn't clear, I was suggesting that the XFC representatives may want to compile a list of answers to frequently asked questions (that are indeed absolutely legitimate). To refer people specifically to this list rather than say "this question has already been answered" would be more helpful and save the average person from having to read through over a hundred pages of a discussion thread. I made no assumption as to whether or not you specifically had read all of the posts here. Furthermore, I was suggesting that 'someone on twitter' who has a track record of exposing scam blockchain operations has XFC on his radar. I made no inference as to whether or not he thinks highly of the project - the people who purchase his reports can form their own judgements about that. The inference was that if this project does turn out to be a scam, he may have an interest in bringing this to people's attention.

As a casual observer who has accumulated a few XFC by playing the free-roll games, I have no direct affiliation with XFC team, so I'm not sure why you would expect me to have the answers to all of your questions. My response was intended to offer a suggestion for how XFC might want to address the concerns of the people who have invested in their project. With that in mind, it seems a little hypocritical to question my ability to comprehend English. Nevertheless, despite your further insults, I don't think we're on opposing sides here - it seems that we both want transparent information in an accessible format.