Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] AIRcoin - University of Chicago, Dark Gravity Wave, Altcoin Alliance
by
hughjays77
on 23/03/2014, 21:46:45 UTC
You are just not a reliable .source of information especially with your constant whining..'Aircoin - Proteus' is a part of the Aircoin team and that has been well established. You think the coding is been done by robot  Roll Eyes

Can you imagine if you were on the main Bitcoin threads in 2011 & 2012.....$0.05 to $6.00 then back to 0.03 then up to $21 then back to $0.90....up 1000's of % then crashes of over 97%. You would have been worse than a teenage girl on her period. Just man up and stay the course or pull the plug and leave   Cool







Grin Last communication was approx 15hrs not 2days ago. Please disregard anything from 'JTB' as anything resembling fact . Why lie, ....I could think of a few good reasons  Cool



I apologize for the lack of clarity.  I intend on incrementing the version number, I just posted to let everyone know that I have tried compiling with incrementation and without.  Some Devs find not incrementing the version number to be a solution in a situation like this.

         -- Proteus, Lead Technical Developer

Yes, well you can "disregard" anything I say -- no stopping you. But, before you listen to hughjays77 as if he is some authority figure, I would point out that I was clearly not talking about a wallet update from someone named Proteus.

I have no reason to doubt that Proteus is who he says he is, but any casual glance at the posts I have been making, will clearly show that I am, was and will be referring to the so-called "big announcement" made about two days ago. (ok, ok, a day and two thirds ago -- Friday night Chicago time).

And speaking of that "big announcement", here is the last line of the whole thing:

Please, if you have any questions, either post them here, and we will try to address them promptly and plainly.
 
Now, I have posed a few questions (and have more) and I know that others have posed questions. If you consider them answered "promptly and plainly", then clearly hughjays77 is right and I am to be "disregarded".

If you feel as I do that "promptly and plainly" is not the description that you would use, then maybe hughjays77 is the one whom you should "disregard".

He asks why I would lie, implying something nefarious with a knowing smiley face to boot.

I ask, why obfuscate with his nonsense post?