How about "Honorary Scam Artist"? Sounds classier and I doubt you have had success yet with extracting money from the fabled rich 16 year olds you always go on about.
The LTB Network Forum
Let's Talk about Factom's Repeated Lies and "mistakes" - per cryptonaught's request
Jump to bottomComments
-
Posted on November 16, 2015 at 4:18 PM0 likes
-
Posted on November 16, 2015 at 4:20 PM
As long as it's derogatory, and exclusive, I'm probably ok with that.
0 likes -
Posted on November 16, 2015 at 4:39 PM
yawn, just answer the questions or don't.
@cryptonaut stop feeding the trolls.
Here are the questions again, you're welcome to not answer them as it demonstrates once again that all you want is personal drama and are only trolling here to get people on the internet to like you and thank you.
@paulsnow @Adam, @brighton36, @junseth
Here are 6 simple questions:
1) You cite Factom's talking about developing solutions for Land Titles for countries, and assert we were discussing the Honduras project, even though we do not mention Honduras. What exactly is the ethical problem with discussing use cases that a startup is working to address?
2) Provide one statement about land titles and/or the Honduras project made by Factom that was a lie. An actual quote please.
3) You claim we withheld information about Epigraph's role in the Honduras project in order to mislead investors. Were they not given credit in the very first announcement?
4) We used Koinify to run the token sale, and third parties to assess the development milestones that we must reach to unlock the funds raised by the token sale. Why do you neglect details about the Factom token sale that were designed to avoid the risk of people buying tokens for a protocol that was not delivered?
5) Factom has delivered the protocol, which is now running. There are 10,000+ anchors in the Bitcoin blockchain. Isn't an operational protocol some indication of performance for those supporting Factom?
6) The funds raised by Factom have been fairly modest. But we do have a team of developers, and we do our work in Github. Do you have any reason to believe that the funds raised by Factom are not being used to develop the project as it has been defined by our White Paper, the Consensus Paper, and the Factom Data Structure Details document?
@brighton36 - Please respond to all of Pauls points.
You can choose not to respond and demonstrate that you've got nothing but big talk and an inferiority complex.
1 like -
Posted on November 16, 2015 at 4:41 PM
Hah - You're a little bitch Adam , I knew you wouldn't label me a Liar.
Since you won't, I'll take that content onto my show instead.
0 likes -
Posted on November 16, 2015 at 4:49 PM
It's funny how you've gone from insulting yourself to insulting me because you're not getting your way. If I gave you the status of Liar because you asked me to, it would be arbitrary when it is a very meaningful designation only given to people who prove in public that it is accurate.
You've made big accusations that fall apart under the slightest bit of scrutiny so I guess it makes sense you're only willing to back up your accusations in a format where nobody can challenge you.
If that's how your comfortable, I guess we'll pick up the conversation here after you've released your episode and somebody else has listened to it to figure out what you said. Great strategy to maximize your drama.
3 likes -
Posted on November 16, 2015 at 5:03 PM
Alright. I admit defeat. I know when things have gone far enough. You're right, I have nothing. Go ahead give me the label.
1 like -
Posted on November 16, 2015 at 5:26 PM
Adam, do not give him the label. He will use it for untold evil!
0 likes -
Posted on November 17, 2015 at 5:57 AM
Chiming in to say that I was convinced by the Factom reporting that Honduras was on 100% on board. This 'fact' actually made it all the way into Economist magazine, read by millions and millions of people. The only place where I found out this was misrepresented, was a private 3rd party chatroom for another project with < 250 people where Paul Snow revealed that this was still a tentative 'deal'.
Closer scrutiny about his wording reveals that it may be even less than that. It is completely undeniable that this played a large role in motivating investors to get on board with the project, and to attract media attention. To portray the refusal of posting a retraction as "a reporting mishap" is dishonest to say the least, especially since this "whoopsie" has the potential to raise millions of dollars from thin air.
[8/14/15, 7:24:39 PM] Paul Snow: Lastly, we primed a reporter with information about a pending agreement, and the reporter jumped the gun and mangled the message. We discussed that with the folks in Honduras, and they preferred us to let it lie than to try and fix it. It is tough to change a story that gets blasted out and repeated.
[...] Start by posting a public retraction and contacting the journalists... It's been 6 months... What efforts have you made so far? Do you believe it is morally defensible to "let it lie" as you said?
2) Provide one statement about land titles and/or the Honduras project made by Factom that was a lie. An actual quote please.
Here is just ONE example.
http://blog.factom.org/post/119366700609/honduras-to-build-land-title-registry-using
"Honduras, one of the poorest countries in the Americas, has agreed to use a Texas-based company to build a permanent and secure land title record system using the underlying technology behind bitcoin, a company official said late Thursday."
Still no retraction has been published, and news outlets are still reposting the same story. I was willing to give Factom a chance, but they have not published a formal retraction in 6 months. It made its way into one of the most read articles about Bitcoin since 2009. If you cannot see what is wrong with this, the only advice I have for you is please do not become an investor.
The last time we saw press releases about tentative deals (in this case with Walmart and Target) from a cryptocurrency project, which also refused to publish a retraction, was the great Paycoin disaster...
I'm not here to make your decision for you. All I ask is that you stay vigilant, read all the material and make your own decision.
Last Edited: November 17, 2015 at 6:08 AM0 likes -
Posted on November 17, 2015 at 7:24 AM
@foodtaster Chiming in to say
You're late to the show! ;-)
that I was convinced by the Factom reporting that Honduras was on 100% on board. This 'fact' actually made it all the way into Economist magazine, read by millions and millions of people. The only place where I found out this was misrepresented, was a private 3rd party chatroom for another project with < 250 people where Paul Snow revealed that this was still a tentative 'deal'.
You say, you was convinced. That's fair, because it's just a statement about yourself. But you also say "misrepresented". And that's wrong. You should ask yourself, because of what was you convinced that there is a signed contract?
And regarding the Economist... it's also not misrepresented. Your problem is misinterpretation!
Economist:
- "That is why politicians seeking to clean up the Property Institute in Honduras have asked Factom, an American startup, to provide a prototype of a blockchain-based land registry. Interest in the idea has also been expressed in Greece, which has no proper land registry and where only 7% of the territory is adequately mapped." http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21677228-technology-behind-bitcoin-lets-people-who-do-not-know-or-trust-each-other-build-dependable
Please focus on: "to provide a prototype of a blockchain-based land registry"
Is that misrepresented?
Closer scrutiny about his wording reveals that it may be even less than that. It is completely undeniable that this played a large role in motivating investors to get on board with the project, and to attract media attention. To portray the refusal of posting a retraction as "a reporting mishap" is dishonest to say the least, especially since this "whoopsie" has the potential to raise millions of dollars from thin air.
[8/14/15, 7:24:39 PM] Paul Snow: Lastly, we primed a reporter with information about a pending agreement, and the reporter jumped the gun and mangled the message. We discussed that with the folks in Honduras, and they preferred us to let it lie than to try and fix it. It is tough to change a story that gets blasted out and repeated.
[...] Start by posting a public retraction and contacting the journalists... It's been 6 months... What efforts have you made so far? Do you believe it is morally defensible to "let it lie" as you said?
Why shouldn't it get some attention? I mean, it's nothing that Factom provides a prototype of a blockchain-based land registry? And that the article came out... besides the fact, that there is nothing wrong with the article - it's not that unusual that information come out before it's wanted, right?
You can forget that it came out earlier than wanted.. Factom could have announced that, and it wouldn't be wrong because what's in the article is true. It's that simple. What has happened is, that @PaulSnow was open and honest about what was going on behind the curtain. And you would like to turn honesty into something shady, and misinterpretation into misrepresantation? That's kind of paradox, right?
2) Provide one statement about land titles and/or the Honduras project made by Factom that was a lie. An actual quote please.
Here is just ONE example.
http://blog.factom.org/post/119366700609/honduras-to-build-land-title-registry-using
"Honduras, one of the poorest countries in the Americas, has agreed to use a Texas-based company to build a permanent and secure land title record system using the underlying technology behind bitcoin, a company official said late Thursday."
You focus on the "has agreed". But what agreed? Please focus on:
- "has agreed to use a Texas-based company to build (...) a system"
Do you see the difference? Do you understand that there is a difference between misrepresantation and misinterpretation?
And that was just ONE example? That wasn't an example. Please show all the others examples, you're claiming to have.
Still no retraction has been published, and news outlets are still reposting the same story.
What should Factom retract? Should they have written comments like:
- "Ongoing negotiations is not the same like a signed contract, please keep that in mind!"
- "agreed to build a prototype doesn't mean a signed a contract, please keep that in mind!"
- "eventually doesn't mean for sure"
- " pilot project should be completed by the end of the year does not mean a signed contract and ready to start, please keep that in mind!"
- (....)
That way?
I can see the headline:
FACTOM TEACHES SEMANTICS!
I was willing to give Factom a chance, but they have not published a formal retraction in 6 months. It made its way into one of the most read articles about Bitcoin since 2009. If you cannot see what is wrong with this, the only advice I have for you is please do not become an investor.
The last time we saw press releases about tentative deals (in this case with Walmart and Target) from a cryptocurrency project, which also refused to publish a retraction, was the great Paycoin disaster...
Paycoin...? Really? Little manipulative moves like this I called "manipulation-for-dummies" earlier in this thread.
I'm not here to make your decision for you. All I ask is that you stay vigilant, read all the material and make your own decision.
Nice from you. I am somebody who did that and does it. And I would say: Everybody who is not able to read things right should stay away from his bankaccount.
And something about this thread, because you are so new: This thread is not really about Factom. Factom is more a subject here that is used for some kinds of psychological therapy. If you are all right with that... go on! It can be illuminating. ;-)
Last Edited: November 17, 2015 at 7:37 AM0 likes -
Posted on November 17, 2015 at 7:39 AM
Yes, that would have been a good start.
Dear truth innovators, I'm a patient man. I'm also willing to bet $1,000,000 that your strained justifications regarding the points outlined in this thread will eventually become rather embarrassing. I have arranged this money in a tenative deal with a Nigerian prince. Rest assured, we have a press release. It is now up to you to misinterpret it.
How desperate.
Last Edited: November 17, 2015 at 7:40 AM0 likes
Post Reply
Please Login to post a reply to this thread.