I have a well argued secret Gist (on Github) already at the level of comparing all the preexisting consensus algorithms for blockchains to my new invention. There is a public link to that document already as an Easter egg for you to find in my Steemit posts.

As for detailed argument about IOTA’s consensus algorithm, the short answer is they don’t have one. They put some technobabble BS in their whitepaper about how if every payer and payee autonomously decide to employ a Monte Carlo strategy, then consensus forms.

But game theory analysis doesn’t work like that. Instead users would employ various strategies due to concepts such as the Arrow theorem and Condorcet’s paradox. And they damn well know it. That is why they run a Coordinator on centralized servers to force all payer and payees to a single tangle ordering. But that accomplishes nothing. It is just Visa all over again.

IOTA is a scam. Period.

After my project is launched and I have sufficient funds to hire some PhDs, we’ll go about writing research papers which formally prove these statements and other statements I’ve made about proof-of-work, proof-of-stake, SPECTRE, Byteball, and other DAG systems. It’s not the wisest and most efficient use of my core expertise to spend all my time formalizing mathematical proofs of the unsoundness of the other consensus protocols (or in IOTA the complete lack of any consensus protocol). I best focus on conceptualization, marketing, and implementation, which are my core strengths.