Does it honestly scan with you that dan is a money grabbing scammer? It saddens me that some have this perspective and I wish it wasn't so for their sake more than anything. What I saw during Bitshares lifetime so far was a person doing his best to navigate the rapidly shifting sands of this new frontier with integrity. Bear in mind that from the outset, there were attacks from trolls and those attempting to manipulate the situation for their benefit. They were sometimes successful in exploiting any weakness or mistake that the team behind Bitshares made. The simple truth is that you will never be able to unpick the genuine gerievance from the faux grievance, you will never be able to unpick the truth of Dan's motivations from the troll slander. Investors who felt they didn't make what they thought they would in the time-scale they wanted feel agrieved and that is their right. However, those experiences do not make Dan responsible or a scammer. It is a waste of time to dig around in the past when subjective positioning is unlikely to change whatever. There will simply be a raking over of old wounds and a loss of precious time. The smart thing to do is move on and concern ourselves with the present (there's enough going on that needs analysis right now) for the sake of the future. Lessons have been learned, Dan has said so himself. Investment is ideally done objectively and dispassionately. Dan's tech speaks for itself. I suggest an investor that is not interested in that, at this embryonic stage, is not making an objective decision.
Finally, I believe Dan has been audited and he was most certainly not revealed to be a money grabbing scammer. Though plenty of those do exist and are continually preying upon people in this space....many of them on Steemit.
This isn't about me (I've already made my investing decisions by backing STEEM, BitShares, and EOS). It's about those who are still trying to make up their minds. I agree, the trolls will never be convinced otherwise. This isn't about them either. This about the genuine investors who want all the data available to make good decisions. Just relying on the capabilities of the technology alone without also recognizing potential systemic weaknesses either from leadership or from previous failures of the team involved which haven't been accounted for is short-sighted (IMO).
You mentioned Dan being audited. Do you have a link with more information on that? I'm not sure it's super relevant to me personally as Dan can make as much money as the free markets will pay him, as long as it's true to his principles via voluntary trade, but it may be relevant for some. I run the weekly exchange transfer report, as an example, and every week Dan is at the top of the withdrawal list for a lot of money. Some people don't understand that and are bothered by it, thinking he set this up just to take the lion's share of investors money for himself. Is that true? Only Dan can say. Only Dan can clarify what his actual intentions are and leave it to others to believe him or not.
If lessons were learned, I'd love for them to outlined in detail. As a developer myself, doing post-mortems on failed projects or deploys is important to avoid making the same mistakes again. With that public, there'd be no secret history or unknown concern that often keeps investors from getting involved.
Either way, as you said, it's up to Dan as to whether or not this is worth his time. I'm just giving my opinion and there's no malice in it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I appreciate there is no malice. I would absolutely not have a discussion like this with someone I thought was not being sincere. On the contrary, it's because I respect you that I'm giving my view. I agree with those who have suggested that all the information is there and available for you or anyone else to explore and form solid conclusions upon. Dan has already said what needs to be said for anyone prepared to hear it. That simply leaves those that are demanding to be convinced, those that can't or won't do their own research, those that want acrimony, gossip or to further manipulate and finally those that desperately want Dan to fail, integrity or not. Each of those motives or positions is a total waste of anyone's time, let alone Dan's. Also, the assumption that more detail and additional subjective statements and analysis of an issue that has clearly already polarised opinion will lead to improved investment decisions for those already unable to make one is flawed. How many more early investors does the crypto space need? Surely we need the users who will become investors and they will judge the dapps, not the conflicting subjective views of a piece of technical history.
As you have said though, none of this is down to us to decide, but I hope, despite your genuine arguments around clarity, that Dan leaves it alone and continues to refer to that which is already documented. At least until such a time that the world and everyone in it is free!! Feel free to respond but just wanted to say thank you for your time and the courteous debate.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If, in your perspective, this information is readily available, can you send me the top links you would recommend to an investor who has concerns?
I've been involved in cryptocurrency for more than 5 years now, and the lack of clarity on what was going on kept me away from the early protoshares/BitShares stuff. From my perspective, as someone who really does want to know more about what happened, what was learned, and what mistakes won't be repeated, this stuff isn't clear and digging deeply into forum threads isn't the most effective way to clarify things (IMO). The valuations of these products are far more than just their technical capacity. The world views, opinions, and historical actions of those involved play a huge role. It's not drama for drama's sake but critically important data points used for current and future valuations.
Thank you also. I've enjoyed discussing this with you.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm sorry Luke, I don't have a silver bullet link. For me, the information has been gathered over time directly from the Bitshares forum where for a period, I think I read virtually everything which gave me context for my conclusions. I appreciate how hard it would be to trawl through all that. I wish I could help you more.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This is exactly why I'd like all that information to be organized and presented in a single place so investors who did not read through it all as it happened could be better informed. I know other people who also read through it all in real time as it happened and came away with the opposite perspective you did and no longer support things Dan works on. That's why I think having things organized from the perspectives of the people involved would be helpful.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well, it's all there if you have the inclination to make the attempt to discover a deeper truth should one exist. I maintain that people will see what they want to see. Best of luck should you make the attempt.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Should I be sad reading all this or should I accept that everyone makes up their own mind and whatever truth they perceive as their truth? Maybe I want to make people happy. There's always a sollution.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Truth is the truth no matter what people choose to think. I don't think you should be sad. All this is human nature playing out. It's kind of why we need robust blockchains. Try to focus on the positives and on the fundamentals.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit