Quote from: adhitthana on November 06, 2014, 11:24:00 AM

Quote from: Marlo Stanfield on November 06, 2014, 11:14:09 AM

Lots of people have been observing XC since it was X11coin. And there general consensus always was that it was shady.

Well what more facts do we need. According to you with absolutely no evidence supplied the consensus is it is "shady". Grin

There is a certain irony in that some alt coin supporters are so keen to punish people without supplying any sort of real evidence. There is no respect for due process or any sort of "fair trial".
It's incredibly ironic though I'm pretty sure the irony is totally lost on those who do this. Grin

Quote from: The Minion on November 06, 2014, 04:10:21 PM

Quote from: adhitthana on November 06, 2014, 03:36:37 AM

Quote from: RichardT on November 06, 2014, 12:17:28 AM

Oh, Dan must of have not known that he was engaging in unethical behavior

There is no evidence that Dan did anything unethical.

There is only people like you saying he did something unethical but not saying exactly what is was.

If he did something unethical then you should be able to state what it was in a sentence or two.

This 100%. These smear tactics are just that.

1) Dan drained the XC premine when there was a promise of transparency. And Synechist lied saying that it was drained by mid-September when in fact there was money being taken out of it up until late October according to the blockchain.

2) Dan has been consistently deceptive. If you honestly think that he doesn't frequently bend the truth and dodge legit questions then you're being willfully ignorant.

3) Dan deceived at best and lied at worst when directly asked if he had involvement in HAL by claiming he had no role in the development despite Promethus saying that Dan helped develop their anon. Even if Dan didn't physically write any code, he was involved in the development. It was confirmed by Prometheus that he was involved with more than just a code review.

His wording has consistently been deceptive. It is unethical period. Please explain how that is not unethical.

Dan doing a code review under the pretense of being an unbiased third party to lure unsuspecting investors in to a Prometheus pump and dump is the epitome of unethical behavior. How is could it not be?

4)Lie:

Quote from: atcsecure

Have you done code reviews for prom directly or him as a contact that lead you to do one? NO

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=841958.msg9396234#msg9396234

Dan's excuse when caught was that he was 'frustrated'...

5) He was confirmed to have loljosh launch the clone coin by both n00bnoxious and Synechist in my deleted post from the blocknet thread. Him saying he "assisted with some QT work" is a lie. Launching the chain is much more than "assisted with some QT work".

I'd seriously love to hear a defense of these actions.

And yes, lots of people knew about the shadiness surrounding XC for a very long time. Dan Metcalf already had one of the worst reputations in the alt scene. But XC supporters would never know that outside their circlejerk of a thread.

And to call it smear tactics is insane. It's mind boggling to see these shell shocked people continue to follow this group. It's wild to see these actions carried out while a group approves of them and applauds. It's like the Twilight Zone.