He did admit that he lied, yes. And I don't know the difference between someone has coded for 15 years and someone who has coded for 20. 20 certainly sounds better but in terms of what a 20 year would be capable of in comparison I'm not sure.
Remember that also 15 years is a claim. I have done some more research and I am really doubtful he has 15 years of commercial development experience. You can find my research in my previous posts.
I think all of those statements that you posted would be lovely to know. Even with help from jbg though I don't know that it will prove anything. once a liar in the eyes of people, always a liar right? The only way any of this could possibly come to a head is that he show work on 1.4 and then 2.0 after that. The other stuff would require him to expose himself or would be questionable as he can say it... but not really prove it.
Totally agree, and that's why today, 9th of March, with 1.4 code still hidden, after claimed it would have been made public at the end of January, there is a very big red alert for me.
I agree. This does require an enormous amount of trust. And I think it's fine to challenge what he says. Do that. By all means challenge what he says but understand that there really isn't an answer that he can give that can be trusted, by you, or that wouldn't compromise him.
He's slow as shit.
It's frustrating that he is operating as every available position within spectrecoin because he's the only "recognized" individual associated with it. From what I can tell... he just wants to code.
I think it's wise to challenge what he says... but not by generalizing his character on a solitary action. Not with baseless FUD. Like I said before... I Troll. I'm not ONLY a Troll. He's lied... but that doesn't necessarily make him ONLY a liar. At least he fesses up. Habitual liars usually stack lies upon lies and he came clean off the bat.
He fessed up because I brought strong proofs, do you think he would have done it otherwise?
Also, would making smaller commits over a period of time be better? I'm not sure how that works. Is it just to show work or so code can be reviewed as its completed?
It should just be public, so you can actually check that work has been done. You can commit whenever you like to commit, there are guidances, but you can do whatever you want. As long as we can check the commits, and the work done in the commits. We can't check the commits for 1.4, jbg said they would have been made public end of January, now we are in March and he comes up with an excuse to still keep them private. It smells so dodgy man.