Quote from: holyprofit on August 01, 2014, 10:30:53 AM

Quote from: hoertest on August 01, 2014, 09:50:54 AM

Dan here is a little look into the glass bowl of "forum psychology" befor considering that review.

Since you offered to do it and havent been approached this are the two possible outcomes:

1: Your review is positive like the keycoin one, Cloak PR knows how to capitalise on this and cloak will outperform XC short term (long term is the summ from alot of short terms) Cloak will officilly be no P&D anymore cause of Dan Metcalf approval stamp.Ratio between positive effect on XC and Cloak: 1 to 10 ( like keycoin)

2: your review is negative. since you asked to do it and not been asked you look like an ass that just wants to sabotage the competition leading up to our REV3 release. i know thats not your intentions but this is how its gonna be made to look , and as of now our community while having quality members doesn't have the manpower to equal out the perception.

No matter what this review will not turn out positiv for your project I'm 100% shure, and I'm good at anticipating people/crowd reactions.
I know you mean good but not now . please , please, please

Did I miss something? Where did he say he was going to review cloak? If such a thing where to happen I agree it's risky either way. To be honest I think with key everyone was a bit
surprised at how influential his opinion would be.

Let's clear a few things up:

- Someone stole a private IRC conversation, allegedly in which Dan participated, and put it into pastebin.

- This does not amount to Dan (or anyone from XC) publicly saying anything against Cloak.

- So XC does not need to "make amends" or do anything of the sort.

- Dan further expressed interest in reviewing Cloak. I'm also interested, since I have a number of questions about how their approach could be feasible. But I agree that a review from Dan would be politically complex. And I doubt the Cloak devs will want one.