Coindesk Libels Dan LarimersteemCreated with Sketch.

in #eos5 years ago (edited)
EOS CTO and Steemit Co-Founder, Dan Larimer

Earlier this week Coindesk published its first story covering EOS, written by Aaron Stanley. Considering that EOS was one of the sponsors of Consensus 2017, it was surprising to see that the coverage of EOS was more negative than I would have expected.

By this I don't mean it was merely a balanced story that included the good and the bad. The Coindesk story actually went so far as to print libel against Dan Larimer, the founder of EOS (and Steemit). The article quotes sources accusing Larimer of counterfeiting Steem and BitShares tokens and of running EOS as a Ponzi Scheme.

Let me break that claim down for you.

Stanley's article was written in the standard journalistic style. First the claims and potential benefits of the new startup were explored, followed by interviews with various industry experts discussing strengths and weaknesses of the new blockchain contender, followed by a higher level summary by another expert. So far so good.

One of the signs of maturity of a new industry is when independent industry media begin to report the bad as well as the good, instead of acting as cheerleaders.

While balanced journalism is important and valuable in the cryptocurrency space, in a highly competitive industry full of strongly opinionated people, there is also the risk of giving too much credit to "experts" with conflicts of interest.

It appears to me that Stanley fell into that ditch and printed libel against Dan Larimer. The article failed to conduct cursory analysis of the platform and people involved, and yet printed provable falsehoods.

Ian Grigg

In the discussion of EOS, Stanley left obvious stones unturned. He writes, "Perhaps the most notable aspect of EOS is who’s involved," and then goes on to talk about CTO Dan Larimer and CEO Brandon Blumer, but completely ignores the significance of the fact that EOS has teamed up Ian Grigg with Dan Larimer. Grigg has spent his career working on the problems of trust and law and dispute resolution in financial cryptography, which is detailed on his blog,

Coindesk ignored the articles on the tech that have been published by Larimer and Grigg, such as The Message is the Medium which explains in great detail the fundamental change in architecture that will enable EOS to scale in a way that Bitcoin and Ethereum so far have not. Also ignored was Larimer's article from last October where he analyzed the problems with Ethereum and discussed how to solve them, A better approach to Turing Complete Smart Contracts.

Grigg invented the Ricardian Contract and Triple Entry Accounting, which apparently was a major influence on the design of Bitcoin. Between them, these guys have created three fully working cryptographic transaction systems. Grigg and Larimer both bring fresh thinking to the design of distributed transaction systems. They obviously have the technical ability to produce it.

The EOS white paper explains that the token sale design (which I am not promoting in any way) is intended to prevent a pump and dump by whales. The idea is that by selling tokens in week-long blocks and averaging the price of all the bids, and stretching it over a year, it will make the tokens available to everyone instead of whales jumping ahead of the line and then hawking them with 100% markup on the secondary markets. It appears they were trying to prevent "fear of missing out" (FOMO) causing a price spike followed by a crash.

It may not be the best solution, but it definitely shows an intent to avoid the "pump and dump" syndrome that is common to scams in the altcoin market. Later in the article, Stanley gives a soapbox to "experts" who accuse Larimer of running a Ponzi scheme, while completely ignoring the plain evidence of Larimer's intent to avoid pyramiding in the token whitepaper itself.

Coindesk also failed to mention that the EOS token offering is closed to citizens and residents of the USA, and that only 10% of the EOS tokens will be reserved for the founders. At the Consensus 2017 presentation about the software (not the tokens), CEO, Brendan Blumer, had stated that there would be no founder tokens at all. But, all questions regarding the tokens and their distribution were postponed until had final legal opinions in the relevant jurisdictions. According to Larimer, the founder stake was changed after talking with the community.

The final terms of the EOS sale reserved 10% to to keep interests aligned with community as a result of community feedback that selling 100% would be undesirable.

The shallow coverage of the people and tech behind EOS was just the windup for the hackjob to follow after. The next section begins by quoting Tone Vays and ends by quoting Chris DeRose, neither of whom are disinterested parties.

According to Tone Vays, a blockchain consultant, in both Larimer’s former projects, the cryptocurrencies at work were controlled predominantly by a small inner circle looking to hype the platform. “Dan Larimer has started several proof-of-stake based projects and they have all been shady in nature,” Vays said. “Both Bitshares and Steemit allowed insiders to create lots of tokens for themselves, and after that, the proof-of-stake nature of the project allowed those insiders to print tokens of value for themselves in perpetuity.”

ScamCoin Host, Tone Vays

That claim by Vays, in my opinion, constitutes libel. Bitshares and Steemit both run on blockchains. If the insiders were printing tokens for themselves outside of the distribution plan stated in the whitepaper and other documentation, that would clearly be fraud. That is what Vays is intoning.

Alternatively, Vays could mean that the token distribution plan as written in the Steem white paper favors the insiders or early adopters in getting new tokens. If that is what he meant, then he does not understand it correctly. Steem steadily dilutes the holders of the tokens, by generating new tokens to pay for content. Therefore even insiders or early adopters who accumulated large numbers of tokens are being steadily diluted, not gaining a leveraged ability to collect new tokens, as Vays claims.

However, since Bitshares and Steem both run on blockchains, Vays' claim should be trivial to prove or disprove. Where is the evidence? Which transactions in the Steem blockchain were the fraudulent ones, Mr. Vays? By even making this accusation, Vays calls into question his own understanding of Bitcoin and blockchain technology. The fact that Coindesk did not ask the basic questions to vet this claim yet printed it anyway, appears to be libel.

  1. n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion.

That is the great thing about blockchain and triple entry accounting. Vays' statement can be undeniably proved false by a third party audit of the blockchain. I'm calling out to Steemians to crowdsource a third party audit of the Steem blockchain to see if Vays claims are true or false, and publish it here. Well, we already have Witnesses in the system. But some kind of statistical report on the Steem blockchain would be quite interesting to see.

If Vays claims can be proved to be false, I would suggest that the reputation of Steem and the Steemit community have been libeled in a way that damages the asset value of all members of the community (who hold Steem), and that legal action should be pursued by the community even if Larimer himself does not pursue it.

Moving on, Stanley then cites Wayne Vaughn as saying, " Vaughan noted there’s an element of hysteria and irrationality driving the surge in interest."

But Vaughn's actual words were:

“The people who are excited about it, I don’t think they understand what they’re excited about because there’s no mention of end user applications yet and there are no technical specifics.”

How did Stanley turn a statement that people who are excited about it don't yet have the details into a claim of "hysteria" and "irrationality"? This is not how to write from an objective point of view.

The critical segment of the article wraps up with Chris DeRose.

Chris DeRose, an industry pundit and software developer, argues Larimer’s past claims and value propositions have been “completely divorced from reality” and his current project should not be taken seriously, either. “He’s very audacious. He offers this as an act of generosity, but in reality it’s just a Ponzi scheme,” DeRose said.

Ponzi schemes are fraudulent. To accuse Larimer of running a Ponzi Scheme is to accuse him of a crime. Where is the evidence that Larimer is running or has ever run a Ponzi scheme? For the second time in the same article, Coindesk published a blatantly libelous statement without vetting the details.

Journalists know better than to print blatantly defamatory statements like "in reality (EOS) is just a Ponzi scheme." The following passage is from The News Manual - A Professional Resources for Journalists and the Media.

To defame someone, journalists do not have to make up false things themselves. You can defame a person by repeating words spoken by someone else, for example an interviewee. It is no defence to claim that you were only quoting someone else. If you write something defamatory, you could be taken to court, along with your editor, your publisher and printer or your broadcasting authority, the person who said the words in the first place ... even the newspaper seller.

Let's look at whether these "experts" have any conflicts of interest.

Chris DeRose

This is the same Chris DeRose who said that, "Ethereum can’t work, it’s 100% hype and no substance." DeRose is the industry's "it will never work unless it is my Counterparty project" guy. He has a major case of "wasn't invented here" syndrome. As team member for Counterparty, which has its own token called "XCP", DeRose has a conflict of interest to be commenting on competing projects like EOS and Ethereum. Coindesk neglected to mention that.

Vays hosts a Youtube show called CryptoScam, on which DeRose has appeared a guest, where they analyze various token schemes that they claim to be scams. While some of the projects they've discussed may be scams, Vays has also accused successful projects like Ethereum and Litecoin of being scams on the show.

While this kind of analysis can be a valuable service to the community, it is also one that generates revenue through Youtube ads. Vays advertises prices for his consulting services in the description of all his shows. Vays is making a living by accusing others of being scammers, so he is not a neutral or disinterested party. This is not to say that many of Vays' criticisms are not valid. But his accusations against Larimer were backed up by no evidence, whatsoever.

I have been anti-Ethereum from before the pre-mine of Ethereum because the way I saw what they were doing.

Having failed to gain traction in the market with their own projects, DeRose and Vays are using the Christopher Hitchens method of gaining notoriety by attacking bigger names than themselves. I do not believe Vays or DeRose have taken the time and effort to understand what Larimer has built. They cast stones at that which they do not understand, which is not unlike many critics of Bitcoin in mainstream finance.

The last section of the Coindesk article backs off a bit in an attempt to appear to be objective.

At the end of the day, this is a team of people who have come forward, and they’re trying to build something that they think is innovative and that they want people to build new applications on top of,” Vaughan said, “I think everybody should support people who are doing innovative things. That’s what we need in the world.”

Whether there is a real business use case for EOS is the most significant question concerning the long-term value of EOS tokens. That is probably what this article should have focused on if the goal was actually reporting. Additionally, the unknown quantity in EOS is not CTO Dan Larimer. Larimer has delivered working tech, repeatedly.

The unknown quantity is and its CEO Brendan Blumer. That is where I would be asking questions. Who is this guy, where did he make his money, how has he performed in the past? But, for Coindesk it's easy enough to just quote the boy crying "Ponzi!" and avoid the real work of in-depth reporting.

Attacking the project as a "scam" and quoting the community trolls saying it will never work is just partisan journalism, which suggests that either Coindesk or the author, Stanley, may have had an undisclosed conflict of interest in writing this story. Or maybe Aaron Stanley just went for the low hanging fruit because he didn't have time to do real research. Either way, this article reflects poorly on the credibility of Coindesk.

Speaking of interests... This author has never been paid by or EOS, does not own EOS tokens or shares in, and does not promote the EOS tokens as an investment for anybody. Along with several others from the Steem community, I did accept Dan Larimer's offer of a free ticket to Consensus 2017 to learn about EOS and be an "EOS community ambassador" at the launch party. I met the team members and leaders of EOS and, the venture fund behind EOS. I asked a lot of questions and dug deep enough to get my mind around it. Oh, and my Steem net worth is $30, at time of writing.


I hope someone hires @theshadowbrokers to destroy @Coindesk. They are corrupt E Corp of crypt0.

Minor correction, the final terms of the EOS sale reserved 10% to to keep interests aligned with community as a result of community feedback that selling 100% would be undesirable.

Also relevant, we were promoting the EOS.IO software to US developers in NY, all questions regarding the tokens and their distribution were postponed until we had final legal opinions in the relevant jurisdictions.

You know for all of the negativity you receive Dan, I want to personally thank you for changing my life. I know that probably doesn't sound like much but the steemit platform has made me feel like my voice is actually worth something. You have helped me fight against the constraints of abject poverty and instilled a new sense of self-confidence.

EOS has also made me want to start diving into programming. So I'm sure there will be much more to thank you for in the future. (By the way, what would be the languages to learn that would be most beneficial to developing on the EOS blockchain?)

I agree, Steemit works remarkably well and that is all that really matters.

From what i´ve studied you can use any of the hard good old ones, like C/C++ where EOS is being written itself, as you can see for yourself here:

This is from another post:

Scripting Language Independent
The EOS architecture can simultaneously support multiple programming languages. Initially EOS will support Wren and Web Assembly, but it could also support any other suitably high performance sandboxed language.

What would you consider a high performance sandboxed language?

It´s the guy who wrote the text in the link that said that brother, i just ctrl+c / ctrl+v it hehehehehehe!
I really don´t know what it means by this expression. Maybe if you send an e-mail directly to the developers team, they can help you?

Excellent Dan!
You, and your team, are Utopian generous in a Capitalist world...
I'm Canadian! I get it - but the rest of the world might have have been looking for a hidden angle, when, in truth, there was none.
This update makes sense!
Although, if I understand you from your sincere views on your Steemit posts (and from one-on-one conversation with you), you were probably against it based on the principle of equality and fairness...
This update is rational in the world we currently live in.
I love your vision for the future, and I'm so incredibly grateful that your intellect and your morals combined to make you who you are.
I'm excited for your future, and I sense your hand will play a role in crafting
Steem on, my brother!


I really resonate with your words @scan0017. I truly feel like this is the platform that can unite us as humans to create a better world. Ever since I learned about the open source community, I felt in my bones it was the way we could create an abundant future together. Just followed you and look forward to being connected. Onward and upward!

We're on the same page.
You, me, everyone ...
The quickening is at hand,
Most haven't even opened their eyes,
Even if they did, they wouldn't know what they were gazing upon.
Trust your instincts; follow them,
Human beings are the only animals on the planet that don't immediately trust their instincts.
You already know what to do.
How do I know if it's the right thing?
You know.

Love this. The quickening indeed! I was just talking about that last night. Our global consciousness is uniting at an exponential rate it seems! If Bucky Fuller were around, he would totally be a Steemian!

Extremely well said scan0017 - I also have parked my body at this time in the Canadian jurisdiction. Anybody that would have done the effort to research Dan's life and his technological manifestations as a consequence of his ethical and moral aspirations has to be proud of what both Larimer's (Stan & Dan) are trying to achieve and have so far accomplished. They might not be perfect - nobody is by the way in a fractalized universe - but they are in my book 2 of the most courageous and to be appreciated souls to walk this earth.

I encourage everybody to do their own research and do not trust anybody with their "opinion" - or at least pick your influencers wisely - onwards Cryptocommunity - this is just the beginning ;-)

Cheers brother - thank you.
We are closer to Gene Roddenberry's ideal for a perfect society than we have ever been...
Forward thinking people like you, me, everybody with their eyes on tomorrow for motives other than profit, we ARE the leaders, whether we recognize it or appreciate it...
Educate yourselves, orient your compass correctly, and let's make our generation be the one that historians write about as the fulcrum point where history made its right-angle turn which led towards the better tomorrow we all believe in.

I'm game - onwards ;-)

I know you didn't mean anything remotely in support of the system of enslavement which most of us here understand and work tirelessly to expose. But I have it from several sources that Gene Roddenberry was a high level Freemason, and that Star Trek was an extremely clever predictive programming exercise with multiple objectives, not the least of which was prepping humankind to not only accept, but plead for the transhuman singularity, i.e. the beginning of an AI controlled world and the end of the human soul.

Definitely not my intention; I'm absolutely against enslavement (been married).
I like a Utopian ideal where everyone can contribute their gifts to society and no one ever goes hungry, lacks medical care, or fears land mines.

As for the singularity...
If that ever comes to fruition in my lifetime, no thank you.
I'm curious to see what comes after death (though not in any hurry).

People seek immortality in THIS mortal coil... We're already eternal.

This ride on planet earth is just one roller coaster in a Universal Amusement Park that goes on forever...
And I want to ride the teacups 😉

your my hero Dan, i really respect you bro, your the Nikola Tesla of my time, and the most under-rated man on this planet at the moment, for what its worth, thank you for all your efforts man

"the most under-rated man on this planet at the moment, "o yes i agree.

Dont compare programmers of today with Nikola Tesla ever again!

You are comparing person who explained how mobile phone will work 1909!!! 800 years before the time of the cellphones!

I agree CTO of Steem did awesome work, but he did nothing for free and especially not that great to be in front of time for almost a 9 centuries!

you gotta do a quick review of your dates bro, but think about it this way, someone understands a technology and its implications on the world, so while we're busy chatting away about whatever it is we are doing that day, this guy is dedicated a good portion of his effort to utilizing and refining that technology for the betterment of all mankind, also, not for fame or praise, the guy basically gets the shit end of the stick each time but he soldiers on, respect that man bro he is changing the world you live in, even if its eventually just from fear from the other side, they cant ignore this platform, bitshares or eos,
nikola tesla was a physicist bro, they are in a sense students and programmers of nature, a programmer is very similar, there is more in common than you are giving it credit for in my opinion

I feel blessed to be alive in the same time as Elon Musk and Dan Larimer you will get it one day i think, maybe 9 centuries later xD

I'm not feeling blessed in any way being more stuck into technology, screen and internet. It's personal opinion. Especially when i'm not a DEGeneration of modern technology but someone who is there from a start of computing systems and basic - ZX Spectrum as a first Personal Computer.

Living a life in a blockchain with 20 hours daily, while finances created from Thin Air of your "life" -while it's stuck to a screen, are generating more factories, oil rigs and other destroyers of the AIR which you can't live without, but you are STILL FUCKING STUPID TO UNDERSTAND IMPORTANCE OF AIR, having a blast of rudeness to violate my right on telling you in a polite way TO NOT USE A NAME OF WORLDS GREATEST MINDS comparing to a "Great CTO" who found a way to program a blog that will post to a technology storage such as Torrent HASH (which exists for over a DECADE now) and Crypto took it over renaming it to blockchain.

Nikola Tesla almost died proving his concepts of Electricity, Energy Flow, Signals. Things ENTIRE PLANET couldn't imagine. What this great "CTO" we are talkiing about here did for this planet ? Gave you cash ? Ahahahha

Although your tone is violent, your argument has a point.
Try to be more elegant, and maybe you will get more respect in return.

Remain open and transparent. There is a LOT of Power in Blockchain.
You are a focal point of controversy whether you like it or not.
Truth and Integrity are your only Defense.
Stay vigilant, hang in there and good luck with your work.
~The Management


I love this book! Just followed ya. Excited to connect.

Thanks, Dan. I will make the correction in the article.

We all know you're working hars to make our community strong and making us proud.
You have the ability to grow day by day as result the registration in steemit account.
More than 90k in a month !!
Congratulations and thank you for making steemit. @dantheman

@dantheman -- could you please explain the root of this beef with Tone Vays? I always found it interesting how much of a hard-on he has for anything you do. I remember his tweet storm highlighting the Steem WP and typing his """"objective""" analysis of the concept.

Was there even an interaction that sparked it? Or did he just lock on to you for funzies?

If you follow him you'll see that he shits on anything that isn't Bitcoin. He wasn't around in the Bitcoin early days and definitely came way after Bitcoin Jesus.

What is he to gain with that attitude if he was not around the early days of Bitcoin?

I think some people are hard wired to be argumentative. In some circles this combative temperament gives a person popularity on the Internet. If that happens to give someone a rep that allows them to get invited to conferences and paid to speak, I can see why the environment is reinforcing his behavior.

I used to be a Bitcoin maximalist while I was at bitcoin mag, but I soon realized that it is unlikely that the bitcoin dev are the only good programmers out there. I also realized that taking a maximalist attitude makes any crypto community more likely to be just like the establishment they are rebelling against. If our community + money is the way of the future and reflects our ethos, we should - in word and deed - also reflect our ethos. In my opinion the ethos here is a collaborative environment, good sense of humor, and willingness to learn and try new things.

Well said man. Rolling stone, no moss and all that...

oh I noticed. he and DeRose are peas in a pod. all the combined intellectual integrity of a pair of CNN reporters

What is even funnier is what your comment reveals about CNN. To think we would come to a time in history where mainstream media are recognized to be liars.

brave new world xD

in the NY ISO banned, but for what?

Dan, you're a disgrace for the crypto movement. Sad to see so many people falling victims again of your latest scam, hope they will learn some day...

I don't why Dan gets so much hatred. Somehow every his project involve a lot of controversy, but at the same time he delivering more and beyond from technology standpoint.

Anytime I hear someone call EOS a scam, I reply with "Good, don't invest in it". I've done my due diligence and I know where I stand. Cost per EOS decreases if there is less capital flowing into it during the offering.

with EOS currently having over $70 Million 2 days into a 350+ day ICO its going to bring a lot of attention.. its going to be interesting I really hope EOS can deliver the tech.. because the community is there

I have all the faith in the world in EOS, I hope Dan pays no mind to these short-sighted fools.

Dan laughs last. There are no exceptions.

He fails to notice that Bitshare's insiders can still print money to themselves, and anyone is free to join!


Tony Vay also called Steemit a Ponzi scheme.

He debated Jeff Berwick of Dollar Viglillante on the subject.

Vays accusing technology he doesn't understand of being a scam? Imagine my shock.

He pulled this shit during our debate last year. I called him out for questioning my competency of understanding how a blockchain worked.

Vays is an example of everything that is wrong with the 'Bitcoin Maximalist' mindset.


Tone Vays 'forced' me to upvote you on this, counterproductive much?

Amazingly in depth post. Could take me a month to put all of this together! I would have to admit that technically all money is a ponzi.
glad you and @scan0017 weighed in on this. I am glad @scan0017 said he is honoring the rules...finally someone acknowledged that baffling rule. From my perspective as a newb I just keep seeing rabbit holes going deeper. Shotguns knives slander? It might be a more fair economy in crypto but it appears the same old demons of greed and murder that haunted the old system are here as well. cb

Hey brother, cheers to you for the compliment ✊️
My, very plebeian, ignoramus, innocent, opinion on the matter of not allowing a US offering:
The criminalcratic body of congress, being the MOST tax oppressive in a potentially retroactive maneuver, may strike all ICO's with the same req's as IPO's and thus: basically screwing all owners AND issuers.
By not permitting US participation, EOS avoids this potential disaster.
I'm not a lawyer, I'm not a politician, I'm not Yoda.
IF I were an employee/executive with EOS (I'm not), I would have made the same move they did.
In fact, this move makes me believe in their future more than I did before.
Even though I can't buy in...
Son of Canada, citizen and resident of the United States.

Right. Writing is on the wall. Kinda puts a sense of urgency on getting into some icos before its too late. Please let me know if see any attractive offerings!

Good information, I agree with your arguments. Tone Vays called Steem a scam, but I see no signs of Steem being a scam at all and here we are 1 year later, Steem is going strong!

I find it hard to take Tone Vays discourse seriously.

I wish more posts had the depth of this one.

Some points here but for some reason I really didn't like the tone of this post.

Some of the issues raised by Vays and others are legitimate, dispite how others may not be.

Glad you latched on to an early stage project but some criticism is worthy.

It is not libel.

The quoted statement by Tone Vays:

“Dan Larimer has started several proof-of-stake based projects and they have all been shady in nature,” Vays said. “Both Bitshares and Steemit allowed insiders to create lots of tokens for themselves, and after that, the proof-of-stake nature of the project allowed those insiders to print tokens of value for themselves in perpetuity.”

That is Tone Vays negative opinion and he may be wrong but its not libel.

The reality is the rules of the steemit system in earlier days were very easy to criticize and things have changed drastically since then for the better.

Tone Vays appears to be a super conservative bitcoin maximalist and he still thinks most ALTs are a scam. Unfortunately a large number of ALTs really are scams so that keeps him in business as scam watcher.

Vays is a sad bitcoin maximalist.

Saying EOS is a Ponzi Scheme is not libel, kyle?

I don't know. I don't think there is anything wrong with saying 'X might be a Ponzi, this is why...'.

There needs to be criticism.

I agree with you. However, what he said was "X is a Ponzi" with no reasons why. There is a huge difference. One of them is actionable.

Well I don't even have time to read that crap so good for pointing out poor journalism. That is the worst in a community like crypto.

It's open air accusation of criminal behavior aimed at stealing personal assets from participants.

Sounds pretty close to libel to me.

I don't know that there is not any criminal activity.

burden of proof is on..... who?

Though there are many ways to defame someone, there is one very well established way that makes you automatically guilty of libel -- stating that a person has committed a crime, when they have not been found guilty by a court of law. This is why journalists are extremely careful to talk about the man "alleged to have done X" or "charged with X", but never "the man who did X" until after a guilty verdict has been rendered. Chris DeRose's statement was unquestionably libel. Whether Coindesk participated in the libel by printing in that form it would be up for grabs.

Idk I have seen conflict from both sides.

well, regardless of conflict, if one party is publicly making accusations of active fraud/criminality, burden of proof is not on the accused party.

this is made even more amusing considering that total transparency is baked into the code and the platform itself. if criminality does exist, one would think it could/would have been found by now.

Ooooo first libel lawsuit filed by a DAO, that sounds juicy :D

I wonder if it could be a class action since all users could claim damage for being associated with a 'Ponzi' or 'scam'?

Any legal scholars in here? :D

EOS looks like a bigger gem then ethereum :)

A very interesting point you make, and using phrases like Ponzi scheme instantly puts fear in a person's mind!

Thanks for the informative and unbiased review.

Also, just for perspective, the people shouting SCAM the loudest when STEEM was being mined in the early days... They were mining STEEM as fast as they could!

So, I'm not saying it is the case, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the loudest EOS detractors end up with big positions in EOS.

Thanks for breaking down the claims in that article which I also read when it came out and was initially disheartened (being relatively new to EOS and the principals involved). I did at the time recall quite a bit of shade which was cast on Ethereum while it was still being created - there were definitely a lot of people desperately trying to defend BTC and cast doubts on whether ETH and its Turing complete contracts could ever work (okay, it had and will have some bugs). Thanks for bringing that up too.

If you look at the numbers already over $70M in ETH invested in the ICO and another 2 days to go. And that's for only 20% of the EOS tokens so we're up at $350M-ish, and quite possibly by the end of the first stage $500M cap based on the full 100%. Of course the price could crater once listed on Bitfinex - who knows - and it could run out of people interested in the remaining ICOs. Either way this is a serious amount of money pouring into something that isn't even working yet so I'm really not surprised that there's FUD-a-plenty being invested.

But hey, I also read people saying that it was in everyone's best interest to have as few as possible people participating in the IC to maximize the payout. So maybe those writers pissing on EOS's strawberries are all heavily invested in it and just trying to scare people away???

As you point out, some of their claims should be easily provable or disprovable - I'd love to see someone do that and clear these EOS guy's names once and for all.

Dan is a blimmin' genius and the media likes to shoot down anyone who is clearly being incredibly successful and is changing the face of technology itself.

When Steem takes over Facebook in market cap and EOS climbs above Ethereum, Aaorn Stanley will be bowing down and asking for forgiveness ;-)

Then @dantheman will have a new problem, (see this clip of Life of Brian - followers misinterpretation ;-))

Go DAN - We love you!

the media likes to shoot down anyone who is clearly being incredibly successful and is changing the face of technology itself.

Bitcoin got the exact same treatment in the early days. To date the only scalable cryptocurrencies are graphene-based blockchains. Dan's work speaks for itself.

Excellent post brother, thank you for the information, I would like you to give me your support as I am new to Steemit and my only goal here is to make known to the whole world the situation that is living in my country, Watch my blog as much as you can, God bless you.

I do believe that many entities fear this transcendent movement,I think we all know who they are ;)

This is amazing post.
I like your post. This word motivate me in steemit.

By this I don't mean it was merely a balanced story that included the good and the bad. The Coindesk story actually went so far as to print libel against Dan Larimer, the founder of EOS (and Steemit). The article quotes sources accusing Larimer of counterfeiting Steem and BitShares tokens and of running EOS as a Ponzi Scheme.

Let me break that claim down for you.

Stanley's article was written in the standard journalistic style. First the claims and potential benefits of the new startup were explored, followed by interviews with various industry experts discussing strengths and weaknesses of the new blockchain contender, followed by a higher level summary by another expert. So far so good.

Probably @dan refused to play a ball and pay nice and fat "hurry up and buy some EOS" campaign at Coindesk . He must be punished, obviously :-)

Why free ticket consensus 2017 @belerophon

Great article.

Resteemed, Followed, and 100% upvoted.

I hate that the people whom are most vocally negative about steemit and EOS don't understand how it really works.

Tone Vays says everything is a scam. Well everything he's not invested in. This is my response to that. The original post is here.


If they can resort to low blows, so can we. Just sayin'.

Sadly overrun

there is so much hate in traditional world towards bitcoin and related tech. and there is too much hate between the chains themselves. what a world..
being fanatic about one tech is not a good idea. tech changes. people or community live.

IMHO blockchain is opposed to normal capitalism in the sense that - more the merrier as opposed to power at the hands of few! Sadly some critics want to jump the gun. I am not saying it is incorrect to question, but it is improper to shout to gain attention.

I am not an expert in crypto but I see that Dan has commented on this post - shows this means something to him. Maybe we will hear his views in one of his own posts soon.

This was one well written article. Now following you @belerophon...

I hope that stream will become a no. 1 social networking site in the world.
I mean this is amazing I just join 2 days before ,so much of active users this site have and
Billions of posts on interesting topics and the important thing I forget to say is money money money .I m proud to ba a stemian.

Well, based on what you wrote, everything they wrote seems understandable.

I mean, bitshare/steem is brillant at surviving pump and dump attacks, which hurts everyone invested. But those who really believe tend to benefit in the long run. So those hoping to make ICO type returns or good returns in the medium on large investments, tend to lose out.

For example, Steem saw lots of money invested, but it is structured to depreciate on purpose, giving good writers a kind of edge on rich investment.

Both Steem and Bitshares have great continuous features, bringing their value up, but this took 6 months or more after the initial hype, in which time people assumed they'd been had. Somehow hard work, lots of money, and the social media nature of Steem has enabled both to come out on top. No doubt, alot of people accustomed to other cryptos, have lost money not knowing the real depth of graphine,etc.

You are absolutely right. Steem and EOS are designed to build real value over time. They discourage speculators.

Maybe he is trying to create FUD so he can clear some cheap EOS from the ico :)

Excellent write up. Thank you.

Love the positivity brother 😊😉

Great great read! Well written. Thanks.

I agree in the libel by Tone Vays. But this isnt out of the norm for his work. If you ever listen to his shows you would see this is barely a slight for him. He makes a lot of outlandish claims and his conspiracy theories are just that. The real issue is why this article sourced and interviewed the subjects it did. These are by no means legit experts in the field and like you are making the point of above their is definitely just one side of the story.

Dan Larimer is either going to be the next Elon Musk or the iceberg that sunk the Titanic. It's not a coin flip though he has a lot working in his favor.

Is Musk actually the real deal? Sure, he appears to be an intelligent person, but Is he not just another propped up illuminati actor like so many others who gain fame and fortune promoting the beast system? Just asking.

It's a complicated question to answer. If you are the type that believes it's impossible to create a company like PayPal surviving on Raman noodle and living in a house that you share with ten other people including your pregnant girlfriend, without being a part of the Illuminati, then I guess. PayPal has its detractors but it has many qualities similar to that of the crypto space. Credit based on an alogyrithm and not dictated by FICO, for access to business loans, purchases etc... PayPal also offer the ability to make reasonable income that can't be taxed and the ability to buy bitcoin more conveniently than nearly every other method I know. I know Elon Musk sold PayPal but he then took that money and invested it all in Tesla and Space X, to the point of having to actually crash on couches and borrow money for rent. I know the story seems exaggerated, and perhaps too good to be true, but don't doubt it dude is a legit informed and intelligent person pushing all in betting on himself.

Very interesting article. It sounds like I need to start going to a different news provider to get my crypto news!

These are awesome news , very good that he will attend Consensus :)

The media should be balanced and balanced and not be a judge and part when publishing information on this subject; Since it is very volatile and can lead to a negative consequence

So why bag EOS? Why cut it down?

Really simple - the US is banned from playing. If the US can't play then it will take its bat and ball and go home, so no-one can play.

I've had discussions on Steemit with Dan in the comments of articles he has written. We have a very different viewpoint on several things. And I strongly disagree with some of his ideals.

But in all of that, what comes across, to me at least, is that Dan is a man of passion and integrity. I think he would be the last guy to run a Ponzi scheme.

The attack on him and EOS is actually a good thing. And he should be pleased about it. This means that someone with something to loose sees him and EOS as a threat, and is frightened enough to try and do something about it.

So my advice to @dan is this - take a leaf out of the All Blacks playbook (they are the world's best rugby team for a reason) - focus on your game, not what the other players are doing. get the basics right, don't panic if you are loosing at half time, stick to the plan and grind out a victory.

It may end up being a hard won victory, it may be ugly, but victory is victory and obtaining victory on your own terms is even sweeter.

Good luck to all the EOS team, and remember that if they are talking about you, you must be doing something noteworthy, so keep doing it.

The real question is why is the U.S. banned from this offering ? This is very strange after they advertised this in Time Square.

There are many possible reasons - (and here I am totally speculating)

  • There is something dodgy in this and they don't want o get prosecuted by the US.

  • They are not in it to make a quick buck. So they want the rest of the world to get involved first, before allowing the big money in the US to suck up all the tokens

  • someone in the US has really annoyed them, so they are doing this out of spite

  • this is a very clever marketing strategy. If people in the US are not allowed to by into EOS, what do you think they will do about it? They will find another way to buy in, and be happy to pay a higher price to do so.

The cynic in me says it is the last option. How do you make your ICO stand out from all the rest in this crazy market? Ban the biggest buyers from the table and watch the coverage of what you are doing skyrocket.

Job done.

I read the article on Coindesk earlier this week and I didn't think it was overly negative or libel. I feel the journalist just grabbed together as much info as he could, and summarized it rather well.

Every ICO is risky. The journalist probably wanted to convey that so he put in some negative sounds. Maybe he shouldn't have done that. But by doing so, the article didn't feel like: "OMG this is so awesome! Go buy EOS tokens right now!".

Instead, it gave me a short overview of some facts, and send me on my way to do my own research.

On the topic of this article:

Thanks for the tip on 50/50 payout, @beordo!

I have zero respect for Coindesk since they ordered Omar Bahm to take his videos down from Youtube after Consensus, or they would sue him. This just strengthens my opinion. Good article, and yes i will invest in EOS, just not yet ;)

Coindesk is just an exchange and not a particularly good one as far as I have seen. They are also (allegedly) backed by the big banks and are merely a front for big bank intervention into the cryptocurrency market. Sounds a bit nuts and paranoid but that doesn't mean it's not true. Unfortunately talking about them this way, they get a lot of free publicity. Interesting article.

Then I will sue you for incitement of the crowd @belerophon You can then sue me for calling you a douchebag :D
I am against law, only love

I read the article as well, but briefly, and also did not understand the sudden negative twitch. I did what I usually once a story goes south. That little 'x' and moving on to something more interesting. Kudos for setting this straigth for the record.

great. keep doing these kind of informative posts.

Meh, there is no libel. You've misread Vays' quote. What he wrote is essentially true. Insiders amassed fortunes and are now engrained in the system. They can receive coins for witnessing and curration not by making fake coins.

seems fair enough that people who invested their time or money early in the project were taking a greater risk and so get rewarded for that... having put in the work and/or money, why shouldn't they get paid? no-one complains about Satoshi sitting on a million bitcoins...

It was a ninja launch. Its not quite what you describe.

this steemit lark seems to be working fine to me... i don't feel like i've been scammed... but i know nothing...

The rules of the system are drastically different now.

When you think about it Tone is accusing them of two things. They are "scammers" if they cash out by selling their tokens. They are also "shady" if they keep their tokens in the system, which gives them Steem Power to upvote, etc. Well, that is the general dilemma with capitalism. If you spend your money today, you don't have it tomorrow. If you save and invest your money today, it gets easier and easier to make money in the future. You cannot have your marshmellow and eat it too.

I dont agree with Tone for the most part. I just think he is staying within the bounds of libel.

I see your point, CJ. I guess would have to ask Tone Vays to clarify which he meant. But if it was the first, as you think, then what is shady about that? It is true of all capitalist systems that those who hold the capital have an advantage in earning more capital.

It was the purposeful secrecy that was the main issue. Plenty of people would have been willing to mine and witness but just didnt kniw about. Its done now though. Eos seems to be doing a much fairer launch imo.

Also, with the dilution rate of Steem, prior the community vote to change it, those who held STEEM Power were being diluted at 9% per annum. Those who held regular Steem were diluted at 100% per annum. That has changed with the community vote. So now Steem Power holders are diluted at 1% per year. Simply holding tokens in Steem doesn't make anybody rich. You have to interact with content to generate additional Steem. If you just sit on the tokens you accumulated, they will gradually dwindle away.

I think your numbers are a little off. 9% is now it was way bigger back then like 800% in tge first year. It was hyper inflation

Nice article! Upvoted and followed. An ICO that lasts almost a year? That's unreal, wow. Guess I need to look into it! :)

Very insightful sir. Hope you keep on posting this important updates to the cryptoverse. Cheers! I will be reading your future posts :)

There is always the easy way to handle nay sayers.

It's not a money bag isn't it?

In some countries like mine in Singapore cryptocurrencies, bitcoins, etc are not recognised as something of value. They are also not considered under the "Securities and Futures Act".
I do believe every or any form of investments that we commit has some risk either high or low.
Should they cease to be accepted or stop operating. We will not be able to obtain any refund.
Well I'm still new to this market and trying to understand and learn as fast as I could. There are also many others who succeed in this arena.
Anyway decided to hang on STEEM and enjoy all the valueable information and comments from you guys. Thank you..

Thanks for all the great info, followed!

excelente trabajo para q su equipo de trabajo sigan adelante.......

Followed and upvoted. Thank you for this great article!

I'm inclined to give "benefit of the doubt" to any project associated with Ian Grigg, based on his high intellect and years of service to the financial cryptography community.

How you can write as long para. my god I can't write that much long paragraph.

Knowing how to win is all about knowing how to generate controlled opposition.

Wow! Thanks for writing this..its sad but needs to be defended. I think you guys are super smart for what you did here with Being able to create digital assets from a 'blogchain' lol gives me hope for the future. If they want to get into semantics then we they need to get caught up to speed. @oh-kay this is a good comeback to those who throw shade!

Sincerely @saysay

I think EOS is paid and the result is the growth in steemit.
Thank You for sharing

Postnya very useful and hope you are lucky for future in this steemit :)
But do not forget the upvote on my blog too :D

Business of today is really tough as like this article makes very clear the old adage; "If you can't soar with the Eagles, sling poo to make them look as dirty as you are." stands true yet again. I can appreciate the success @EOS as well as their support and skill in Steemit. And since I am a @steemit member, I take attacks against our CEOs very personal.

It is a sad sad state of affairs when someone like Chris DeRose can get away with spewing his conflict of interest as in the example given of (FOMO) causing a price spike followed by a crash. These slanderous accusations are a direct slam on all of us as well as our bottom line. Yes it is all just business, but good business should always prevail above slander and ridicule.

My hat is off to those Behind Steemit and EOS excellent work ethic gentlemen, keep it coming...

Congratulations @belerophon! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the number of comments
Award for the number of comments received

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honnor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

By upvoting this notification, you can help all Steemit users. Learn how here!

Excellent detective work, thank you.