@markxmayer
Full disclosure: I am a loyal and rabid fan of the LTB network and Adam. I did make a small investment in Swarm. I have exchanged email (promptly and unexpectedly) with Ben and Joel, but I don't know any of the parties personally in any way (other than maybe vicariously).
It is so difficult to know what really happened here because text chats lack context. I completely respect (dare I say love) everything that Adam does. This bothers me because it seems that all participants are wonderful, well intentioned people trying to advance crypto, and they got hung up on semantics and ego.
The chat reads to me like the Swarm guys had been burning the candle at both ends. Assuming the time stamp is Pacific time and they are in the UK it would be late evening (9:30). They appear to be happily showing off their work to some people (friends?, investors?, planned interview? context!) They seem "punchy," joking with each other and generally sounding silly (a non-professional context).
The first I see from Adam is "lol invented cryptoequity." Now, if that is between friends it could be ok, but he basically mocked them publicly with that salvo. It is fine to disagree, but mocking isn't appropriate (unless in good fun between friends, which is how I originally read it because I thought they were friends).
From there Ben seems to gets defensive. Adam takes an aggressive tone, laughs again, and continues to poke. Their response to Adam is certainly not professional, and the whole conversation quickly degrades into, as many have pointed out, childish-sounding garbage. Kicking Adam was in poor taste - and would stick in my craw too.
In my heart I think that Adam felt slighted because I believe (from listening to every show) that he had some early discussions with Joel and helped him with ideas, including concepts of/around cryptoequity. I have no idea if that exact term was used, but I hear that as Adam's true point of disagreement. Unfortunately I think egos got bruised, and human nature took over.
I despise this rift in the community. I wish that the parties could see that we'd all benefit from more harmony and less discord. Of course my read on all of this could be complete crap. I'm hoping I'm close. I have nothing but respect (and love) for all of you.
I commented on this earlier - I did have an ongoing relationship with Joel, they asked me to join the team several times and I even asked for an offer once. The issue is people who don't see anything wrong with intentionally misleading, I don't support projects like that.
I am, without doubt, a troll when people are doing something I feel is obviously wrong. That doesn't make them any less wrong. If you compare my approach vs. their approach it seems pretty clear they don't actually even believe themselves and are just making shit up.
Regardless, my point is that with SWARM just like with LTBc or any other new community oriented token, the leaders and catalysts of such projects are VERY influential on the project. They set the tone of the culture, they define inclusivity, they make the rules and then are responsible for enforcing them as norms. I am very concerned for swarm on those merits, and this was the last straw not the first.
Also, I'm not saying I invented cryptoequity. they certainly did not either, the first practical application was Protoshares which at the time I described as a cryptoequity (december), there are earlier bitcointalk threads etc. The whole argument is nonsense so they can say they invented it which gives them legitimacy that simply is not theirs. They hope to re-invent it, but I really have a problem with people who claim ownership of broad ideas before they've done anything. They are hoping to achieve basic platform functionality (like coinpowers.com has had for the last two months) by the end of august.
please do not feel obligated to listen or agree with me, I just don't want it to be a surprise since I have spoken positives in the past - I asked them to take down my quote from the site yesterday
