Quote from: Dimsum222 on April 01, 2018, 09:59:24 PM

Quote from: osoese on April 01, 2018, 08:51:36 PM

Hey Dimsum222

I think a few things:

1) I was talking to YOU specifically about the community wallet accusations you were making, and letting every reader (and you) know that we did offer to return the funds to the contributors of that wallet - still waiting on reply... funny thing is I am not a signer on that wallet and I think only one of our dev team is... so unfounded accusations really anyway. Never the less

the other comment was to "etherhacker. We do take any bug report seriously. We were asking if he could please submit a bounty request to help us fix the bug instead of just using it as a means to humiliate us publicly. That first bug was removed when it was reported and we did an entire chain reset to fix it. I think that is taking a report seriously. Our community was strong and supportive of that and it speaks volumes to me as a developer.

I also think the rest of your comments are directed blindly at me as if I am the whole group. I don't have a twitter account or treat anyone with disrespect. The comments about "FUD much" were exactly right on. General respect in the crypto community would be approaching the devs in private not coming over to the ANN and try to disrupt it. I would recommend you reply to tbates76 as he offered to straiten things out in private. Just so you know every one of the guys that did have signatures to that wallet you are mad about said they fully support giving it back to the people who put the money in the wallet. They cant just hand it over to someone else and I am sure you understand that. You see, crypto means a few things for sure:

1) they have the private key they own the funds and can do what they want with them, however, in this case they know the intention of those funds was not for the signers but to enable a community to work together on something. Also in this case it was to work together with a core dev that split that something up when he wouldn't vote on a consensus but left the discord - we know who that is

so....

2) if the transaction fails on smart contract the funds go back to the sender. In this case the contract for that community fund failed so a refund is inevitable and a multi sign wallet is a smart contract on consensys.

I hope you understand and can let this go and move on. EGEM is working over here with the supportive community we have and that is our focus. The code we worked on was reviewed by thousands of peoples eyes before us (its open source) and we did our best and made some mistakes. We opened up the code for all to see on a testnet plenty of time before the soft launch. I would have expected someone to point out an error then. We fix errors when we find them and when they arise, now, and in the future. There is always a way to fix and move on. We don't have ill will toward the other community you speak of, we had a non consensus and unfortunately can't rectify it.

Please contact one of us in private to settle any issues from here on out. This ANN is for EGEM and that community. Thanks.

I'm not addressing you specifically, but the egems team. The level of obfuscation and denial here is amazing. Anyone can go back to read the comments from tbates and riddle in response to etherhacker's notice about the bug in your code, and the response from Riddles was:"GL to you sir." and tbates:"FUD MUCH?". Literally, that's all they said. Is that taking it seriously? No, that's downright dismissive and you got what you deserved. The fact that you are arguing it was otherwise, while the evidence is plainly there for anyone to see is exactly the sort of arrogance and cognitive dissonance the egems team is afflicted with. You are lucky he told you about the bug sooner rather than later, and really should thank him for saving your asses from much bigger trouble later on.

Your other points are wrong as well, esp the twitter account not being in the egems possession. Also, someone with the username osoese posted plenty on various twitter discussions, are you going to delete them and claim you don't have a twitter account? I don't want to spend any more time educating you, or proving why you are wrong, the evidence is right here in this thread and anyone can read it and make up their own minds.

This team not only lacks basic competence in coding, but also deficient in logic and reason in the face of overwhelming evidence.

One last bit of advice, people that have the respect of others don't ask for it, they work for it and EARN IT. Only when they are not capable, do someone asks for respect, and true respect never given just because someone asks for it.

the intentions of etherhacker was clear to me on his first post. I mean he insulted the team calling them script kiddies. How am i not to take that as fud?