[snip]
Is there something wrong with the wallet?
No?
Then it's a non-issue.
It doesn't matter whether it's a fork of another coin or not because it works and therefore meets the criteria of the ITO. Its only purpose is to allow holders of BLOCK to store their tokens while the technology is developed to exchange them for NHZ assets which is the ultimate intention of the tokens.
It's not a non-issue because it shows lack of serious effort from development team, not to put single feature they are advertising in that wallet, rather they decided to release the simple clone. You have a responsibility to the community, that's what I was trying to explain. It's not the issue if you will walk away with 1M US$ of other people money and achieve nothing, problem is your failure will make every other attempt of funding the development this way much, much harder. You are not alone on this world, and your potential failure will have serious consequences. Show me on thing that was done about this project that required some effort, pretty graphics doesn't count. That's why the cloning wallet is an issue, even if it is working as it should.
I get your perspective.
On the other hand, I do not think we'd significantly lower the risk of failure by putting out a whitepaper.
Why? Because describing how you'd do something isn't the same as actually doing it. Projects can fail for multiple reasons, including unexpected oversights in the whitepaper. In fact, it may turn out that whitepapers can lead to overconfidence in a technical proposal. So, to summarise, I don't think we'd lower the risk with a whitepaper. Better to do what we've done and go with a track record (the Xnode protocol).
In any case, what's done is done. People seem to think the Blocknet is a great idea, and there's no changing the plan now.