Shit, some interesting info there gunner, are you saying 200 thousand or 2 hundred xspec? you've put a dot rather than a comma?

The key problem is not only the jbg. The present problem is the dev team has the incompatible contradiction. Thus they decided to fork. That really sucks.

You put a lot of energy into this.
You made your point, but now it starts to get annoying.

What are your intentions?

Do you really think that spectrecoin is a scam?
Because I don't think so.

I'd hope that you'd continue to be vigilant for everyone's sake.  As I said before I think checks and balances of this nature are necessary and a lot of us cannot decipher code and need to be informed of concerns like this.  BUT because I cannot decipher code I also have to be careful when considering the points that you're making which is why I questioned intent with the change of tone.  There is benefit to spreading false information on both sides of the code base and when I'm reading accusations I want as little emotion as possible and as much tangible fact as possible to make the most informed decisions.

ok, good finds of gunner833 and preshpr1nce and quite interesting for investors (especially for very cautious, hesitant, and risk-averse investors).
jpg seems to be caught and embarrised by you because he obviously hasn't delivered enough results within that quite big time frame.

but does this really make the whole project a scam or would it even be "proof" for a scam?

i would bet you would find similar things in many coin projects if you would just dig deep enough into them.
some of them might indeed be scam projects.
but in this one i'm not sure about that.
there seems to be still a good team behind it and the technical structure of the "shadowcoin" is pretty nice and solid.

as it seems the team is trying to solve the issues and make up for the done mistakes.

i think jpg should admit his mistakes and give away a big part of the work into other hands what he obviously already does (at least partly).

although jpg might have delivered too less of programming work he could have still done some more work around it than it seems to us.
maybe he spent alot of time with researching the code and whatever else.
not all of someones work can 100% be controlled through physical results.
we cannot really tell.

and also the coin is already working well so maybe it wasn't too urgent to improve things on the technical side.

but i still agree with you guys that it was just not enough of what jpg has delivered until now.

i will hold my coins and hope that other programmers will take over the work now and in the future.
and maybe jpg will still deliver something on what he has promised.

@Gunner... yes that's true 15 years is a claim.  Mandica is the only person who has met jbg.  I wonder how they feel about these claims and jbg's abilities since it was the project lead that brought them on according to them.

If the 1.4 code hadn't had the delay.  Would this issue be resolved or would it be resolved with the release of 1.4?  Because it's still late.  Would that amount of delay still render this situations a "scam?"

I have no way of knowing if he would have fessed up as I've never met the individual.  I suppose he could have denied that the jbg you presented to him was him.  I'm surprised he didn't honestly.  

So you think that 1.4 is NOT going to come out?  That's what you're saying?

He did admit that he lied, yes.  And I don't know the difference between someone has coded for 15 years and someone who has coded for 20.  20 certainly sounds better but in terms of what a 20 year would be capable of in comparison I'm not sure.

I think all of those statements that you posted would be lovely to know.  Even with help from jbg though I don't know that it will prove anything.  once a liar in the eyes of people, always a liar right?  The only way any of this could possibly come to a head is that he show work on 1.4 and then 2.0 after that.    The other stuff would require him to expose himself or would be questionable as he can say it... but not really prove it.

I agree.  This does require an enormous amount of trust.  And I think it's fine to challenge what he says.  Do that.  By all means challenge what he says but understand that there really isn't an answer that he can give that can be trusted, by you, or that wouldn't compromise him.  
He's slow as shit.
It's frustrating that he is operating as every available position within spectrecoin because he's the only "recognized" individual associated with it.  From what I can tell... he just wants to code.  
I think it's wise to challenge what he says... but not by generalizing his character on a solitary action.  Not with baseless FUD.   Like I said before... I Troll.  I'm not ONLY a Troll.   He's lied... but that doesn't necessarily make him ONLY a liar.  At least he fesses up.  Habitual liars usually stack lies upon lies and he came clean off the bat.

Also, would making smaller commits over a period of time be better?  I'm not sure how that works.  Is it just to show work or so code can be reviewed as its completed?

You are sadly mistaken if you think I'm attempting to "save" a coin or am emotionally invested in a dataset.  This is not an issue of "care."  This is an issue that deserves visability so I'm in full promotion of bumping this to the top.  My inquieries are not something to "beat."  I see that you think that this is some sort of gladiatorial battle that you are "winning" which is why you attempted to turn my words against me in some desperate attempt to discredit me when I am just posing questions and concerns to gunner.  Questions are not really something to discredit.  You either answer them or don't.  I'm not making any claims.  As I stated before I found your post particularly biased and non-objective highlighting incomplete "research" to skew information.  jbg has said that "lines of code" are not a good benchmark to determine the amount of time dedicated to producing a product. 

I can't fault Gunner for badgering or harassing.  That's his prerogative an if he can't suffer a potential scammer lightly and thinks this will be an effective method of drawing them out... then that's cool by me.  I'd personally prefer that he kept his argument succinct and within the bounds of provable fact.  Having said that I do think that he's being or trying to be genuine.
 
BUT statements like "Brycel is made up by jbg"  Yes, I CAN fault gunner for those.  He is making an assertion by saying that.  This is a belief.  Not a fact.  Until he can prove this belief it's a fact... This is unreasonable FUD.
It's not a matter of whether or not I believe him.  This is a matter of proof and evidence is necessary.  Is it a possibility that Brycel is a fabricated entitiy?  Sure.  But saying that he is without proof is not only speculative, but negligent.
Also continuing to equate lines of code with actual invested time SEEMS to be ignoring the other responsibilities that jbg has that he stated have been time consuming for him. 
@ gunner You aren't seeing enough commits for your liking so you think this is a scam.  That's a fair statement.  And this is clearly of interest to you as you apparently made a new account to address this situation.  I'd encourage you to continue with your assessment but refrain from overstepping into statements like the above that you haven't or can't back up.
I wouldn't still be questioning your intentions if you hadn't made your assertions  personal  and made backless statements presented as truth.

I understand the reasons that you're asking for 1.4.  I'm not saying there is anything wrong with asking.  They are good reasons to ask IMO.
But you're mistaking "promises" for "projected times of completion" and then you're not really "asking"  you're "demanding" because there is an expectation that you will receive an answer to your requests.  I cannot stress enough that these things aren't owed to you.  You made good points simply by posing the questions.  But you're evading the fact that this has become personal.   Because you've moved away from simple inquisition to personally challenging jbg's character I question that validity of your research.  You've stepped beyond "informing the community" into a realm that self prescribes importance beyond that of a concerned member of the crypto community.

jbg has shown repeatedly that he is not capable of setting realistic deadlines.  In this case an unexpected life event resulted in the delay.  Since he is the only coder... if he stops working the entire project is delayed.  Doubling or tripling his completion time (which is the common tactic used for projects) would have alleviated this problem all together and hopefully he'll learn from that mistake this time.  Piecing together a time-line of why he is late involves delving into his personal life which I think we both agree SHOULDN'T be on display.     But also jbg hasn't released commits from the beginning.  He's always released the entire package when he was finished with it

I don't understand what Brycel has to do with jbg.  If you have a problem with Brycel's work (which is the cryptographic portion of the code I believe) that is something you should take up with Brycel who was hired personally by Mandica and is not active in the community.  It's okay to be upset about that, or question that, but I don't think that is okay to hold over jbg.

I also don't understand what the problem is with an exchange holding that many coins nor do I see how an exchange address being tied to a wallet with 1M coins is relevant.  It seems normal to me that these things would be connected but this is a highly speculative correlation you are trying to make here IMO.

You want to see 1.4 right now even though he says it's not finished?

Again, how jbg handles this and the blame you're placing on jbg presumes the fact that you somehow feel that you are entitled to have jbg answer you.  I think that you think an awful lot of your "research" to think that this is somehow sinking a boat, but it's your research and you can place that amount of value on it if you like.  I'm not so sure it's that valuable at this point, where initially I was convinced there was some merit.
  
You also asked jbg to make 1.4 public and he has not been present due to the loss of an individual that was "close" to him according to a recent announcement in discord.  He only just came back to a few days ago and he's responded to your concern today.
  
I do not know of any promises that he made to you.  I have not see them.  Can you please show me screen shots of those as well?  But if he did not promise this then this presumes that he "owes" this to you as a response as well.  I'm not sure who you are, but as this conversation goes on I'm seeing more and more entitlement.  You're "asking for simple facts" but jbg doesn't owe you anything.  IF he was aware of your existence and DID promise this to you, which I will need to see then you are completely justified and do deserve a response to that.

Okay, I understand your source not wanting to use a name that may make them vulnerable and I respect you for not doing that.  Unless that person can provide evidence then that's not really something that should be pursued as it's an unjust smear.  Initially I commended your work in trying to expose a potential scammer.  It's an honorable and reward-less task, but like I said it's moving past that at this point and is getting a bit facetious and personal.  There's really no reason to NOT continue being objective and succinct without the unnecessary jabs.  They aren't lending any credit to you.

The 'senior dev' who likes to help people.  

TLDR: its a scam, and you might have an IQ >80 if you bought it