How am I misrepresenting the situation?
By talking about proof and claiming that I "won't" explain as if it's a permanent state.
There's a claim that anonymous staking is possible. yes/no
Yes.
There's no math or white paper outlining how that is possible? yes/no
Not yet, but it will be released just before launch, when we can safely do it without losing the advantage to better-funded coins.
You don't get a delay when your shills are advertising the feature as if it's a 100% certainty. Either remove it or continue to get asked about how it works--there's no middleground here.
Sure, no problem. I have no problem with being asked how it works, and calmly explaining the (pretty understandable IMO) reason why we're not discussing that yet.
What I do have a problem with is accusations, claims that you have some "proof" that the coin we're working hard on is a "scam", and being held responsible for the actions of idiot shills that don't even understand the coin they're shilling about. These people care about nothing but price, whereas us two developers don't even hold much XSPEC, are funded by donations, and gain very little if the price goes up. Our interests (developing good technology) are not aligned with the shills at all, and we wish they would STFU, but there's not much we can do.