Just as suspected...mr suspicious 

You just created that account to FUD up because you sold too soon...

I see makes sense...you bummmm

That is accurate, and is an unfortunate consequence of dero having taken the code closed-source, which was just shortsighted and unnecessary. That action irrevocably shifted things from a "trust in the code" situation to a "trust in the team" one. Which itself is fine, so long as a person has a clear understanding that this is what they are doing.

...
You wrote that you had been pushing for source release "for the version of Atlantis which has been out for ~1 month", and I responded by saying it would be a problem if the commit history going back to the last public derosuite commit were not included, and that even if it was, it would still be problematic, given that git is not immutable.
...

I just made a pretty simple point in response to you, and then tried to explain it to b9ron, when he took issue with it.

And I never even came close to saying I only trust code I wrote myself, not sure where you pulled that from.

...
And the only way to change that, is to verify all the code (which as I have also pointed out, does not even suffice entirely, as you are still trusting that the code you see is what was actually running).

That would be about the size of it, though I already wrote as much in my initial reply to you on this topic. It should be a fairly uncontroversial concept (not sure why b9ron felt the need to push back), though not perhaps an obvious one, so I mentioned it in order to help readers better understand exactly where they are putting their trust.

...Because the only functional difference between dero and this hypothetical is that the unknown entity is captain, so it comes down 100% to your trust in him, not in the code, not in the blockchain, not in anything else.

And the only way to change that, is to verify all the code (which as I have also pointed out, does not even suffice entirely, as you are still trusting that the code you see is what was actually running).

That's just a cute way of yet again avoiding the point; can it be long now before your argument becomes accusing me of being mojo and/or serena? If you didn't mean to refute me, you should not have responded. But you did, and through your responses we have so far learned:

a) You have indicated that it is fine for the community to only have the ability to make pull requests, but not have any actual control over the project.
b) You have characterized dero as unfinished alpha stage software, and intimated that people should not use it like a bank, until "some years when everything will be stable with 0 risks and truly Open Source."
c) You demonstrate by point (b) that you do not understand that the blockchain is an immutable record, and that what happens with it now bears on whether people should trust it years from now.
d) You demonstrate by point (c) that you do not understand my initial point, which regarded the importance of being able to verify the code that was running on the network between the time the source was closed, and now.

This is what is meant when I say you have no understanding of blockchain; this, though it obviously escapes you, is what others can see by your words. And that rather than either agree or refute, you should instead point to a repo where I have forked a few projects, as though it says anything, rather than address the points themselves, says volumes.

The irony is that where I have not actually argued here against using or getting involved with dero, you yourself have inadvertently and voluntarily provided a few decent reasons why a person might do well to avoid it.

Your words speak for themselves; your cognitive dissonance is too strong for me to believe I could break through, but others can read what you have written and see.

You are missing the point yet again, while simultaneously demonstrating that you have about zero understanding of blockchain.

The repo should have all the history, going back to the last public derosuite commit; it would be highly suspicious for that not to be the case. But if it does not, then expect the questions and demands for sources to persist. And, skepticism may well persist regardless, and justifiably so, since unlike in blockchain, it is possible to rewrite history in git.

Let this serve as a lesson for other devs, about closing sources, even for awhile; open source in the crypto space is not about free software, it is about trust; you can trust the code, and/or you can trust the dev, but without fully open code, you are reduced to the latter. That is to say, the question is not about open source, but about open development.

@jopari & DeroHodler: all well and good, but everything you've written is conjecture. The software has been closed-source since before atlantis, and you have no way of saying when, or even if, the premine ever left the wallet shown in the screenshot. For all you know, there really is a bit more than 4m dero in there.

@kryptoid: have you ever gone by the name mrpoopybutthole on discord?