[holydarkness said: the explanation, in summary, was that the OP, -CryptoViking- has deleted all of the chat]

As a professional, from where I stood, you should have understand and well-adept on the rule to archive everything for future reference, this practices even also applied in real world business. But let's not dwell on that. Earlier today I've contacted OP via telegram and reinvited him to this thread to perhaps add further info. And unlike you, I archive it, alongside with a prior notice to the counterparty that I am doing so. Let's just wait for OP to come here.

[I saw that OP has replied here in between me composing this wall of text and confirmed the deletion. OP, do you mind sharing those archived conversations?]

Meanwhile, let's talk about this interesting part of paid service you offered, shown below. From the perspective of a professional, as you claimed to be, from 1 to 10, how low do you think these practices I mark in red squares in term of ethical business, personal invasion, and/or honest review site?



Do those private investors know and you have their consent on their email being shared to a third party paying you? How about the 5 stars comment and 50 supportive comments? These were made with honesty too?


Can I kindly, very kindly, ask you to please don't self-overpraise yourself? If you can? I believe you're not the last force standing on this dirty market and helping people, especially given that you involve yourself on that dirty market by offering positive reviews on several sites. Lovesmayfamilis can probably single handedly --or even single fingerly-- topped your self-proclaimed last force against dirty market and helping people, and he's just one of dozens of the prominent scam-busters on this forum who actively hunting not only projects but also individuals who threaten the poor and vulnerable citizen of crypto, I was just too lazy to dig their profile link. If you have been around the scam busting field for so long, I am more than sure you can mention several names yourself. And they do that completely for free. So yeah, I doubt the "last force" statement is quite correct.


No admins involved on this case by standing in front of you to defend "their friend". So far, only the DTs, and they're not even 20, just... 5, hmmm... you must be bad at math. And they --or dare I say "we" as I am there too-- are not friends with cryptoviking or backstage. For a professional in scam busting and crypto reviewing who doesn't take screenshots for what I assume would be privacy reason, you seems a bit trigger happy on baseless statements, don't you agree?

But enough roasting. Now let's move back to the topic. I'd like to address the concern of your depth of capability to conduct research as... the last force. Let's focus on this project and the article you published [archived here].

You believe Ms. Valge's involvement on the project is, at the very least, questionable because you can't confirm her involvement. No mention of this project on her LinkedIn. Thus you marked it with fake on your page. If only you dive deeper, far deeper than an amateur like me did, you'll find a fact that she retweeted the announcement of those 56 partners.



I doubt she'll be retweeting it if she did not involved at any degree and backstage only borrowed her name without consent.

Thought?