"You can make up duplicity, but that doesn't make it real."

So, you're maintaining that the dlive team wasn't integral with Lino from the outset, and that they never misrepresented to Stinc that relationship? Or that their claims as to why they left Steem are entirely true and not merely vapid excuses for a departure that was intended from the outset?

You can make those claims, but I doubt anyone will believe them, or agree with you.

"If by "their treatment of Steemers" you mean "provided a product that people wanted and liked, but not enough to actually continuously make enough capital to allow the service to continue to run," then it seems to me that Steemers came out ahead."

Clearly, that's not what I mean. Rather I have agreed that there were benefits to Steem, and the Steemer community from dlive doing business here, and I have already - and repeatedly (albeit elsewhere) - stated that. Misrepresenting their purpose and presence on Steem does a disservice to our community, whether you remain in denial regarding that duplicity or not.

Their undercutting of Dtube's costs with the ability the Lino ICO funding availed them was certainly a harm to dtube and @heimindanger (seemingly a typical Chinese SOP, as we can see from the exact same impact of Chinese below cost steel exports on American producers).

You seem to be doubling down on false protestations of innocence, rather than acknowledging at all that their association with Lino was concealed from Steemers, and that they simply used Steem to test their product while intentionally relaying the impression that they had no such relationship with a competing platform.

Then they sought to lure folks they'd exposed to their product off Steem - poaching, in other words. You seem to endorse such skulduggery, rather than agree that such business practices demonstrate that trust in such outfits is ill placed. Profit isn't bad, but greed isn't good.

Good business depends on good ethics, not Bain Capitalesque swindles.

"DLive did many things, but stab their business partners in the back isn't one of them."

You utterly ignore how they dissed the platform in their exit post. That's denial of a scorched Earth policy, and disingenuous.

Who would want to enter into a relationship with folks that would make that post? Not me. I bet few who aren't just as ethically challenged would. Your defense of them says more about you than it does them, TBQH, particularly as you're either denying or ignoring the malicious acts they executed.

"Do you know who it is that says "principle is more important than principal?" People with a lot of one and very little of the other and no expectation of being able to exchange the two."

You demonstrate your lack of ethics more with each supposed burn. The truth in business is there are people you can do business with on a handshake, and there are people you can't do business with. The list of untrustworthy thieves and scammers is long and tragic. Tragic because all their scams have devalued whatever products have been tainted by association with them, and the advances in sound enterprise that might have been are languishing as a result.

Good business is good for communities and the people in them. Scams are bad, and destructive of society. Folks that do the latter are incapable of achieving the former, and smart money stays the hell away from them.

And their apologists.