You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Help Us Launch The First Steemit Marketing Initiative That Pays You To Refer
Now, seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? Mark Lyford is well known scammer and because Michael defends him so fiercely, it's pretty clear he can't be trusted.
You are not going to win anything by defending scammers. You are just ruining your own reputation. You are hurting reputations of Steem and Bitshares very badly with that kind of behavior. It doesn't do any good to be associated with scams.
It's simple really. I know what I'm talking about. I know the massive things Michael and I are working on for the benefit of BitShares and Steemit and I know that this is not a scam.
I understand your guilt by association theory. So I am putting my reputation on the line to counteract that unfair behavior. Now you have two reputations to try to smear.
He already threatens my reputation: "And I say this to you too: By defending a scammer you are ruining your own reputation."
"A demagogue /ˈdɛməɡɒɡ/ (from Greek δημαγωγός, a popular leader, a leader of the mob, from δῆμος, people, populace, the commons + ἀγωγός leading, leader)[1] or rabble-rouser is a leader in a democracy who gains popularity by exploiting prejudice and ignorance among the common people, whipping up the passions of the crowd and shutting down reasoned deliberation.[1][2][3] Demagogues have usually advocated immediate, violent action to address a national crisis while accusing moderate and thoughtful opponents of weakness or disloyalty. Demagogues violate established rules of political conduct. Most demagogues who were elected to high office changed their democracy into some form of dictatorship."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogue
Stan, with all due respect, it's not as much your reputation that we are caring about as much as that of @dan, @ned and Steem/Steemit. I've been following Dan's work since the very beginning of Bitshares. I'm a very senior developer myself, and I have to say that I am humbled by what Dan and his dev team have been achieving in such a short time. And at the same time I am totally underwhelmed and at times sickened by the very poor marketing of his projects. There is no question that Graphene is a software chef-d'oeuvre and Bitshares and Steem mind blowing social and economic experiments. It really makes me sick to see the otherwise stellar reputation these projects could have be tarnished by getting associated with the type of crappy marketing ploy and sketchy individuals we are discussing about here. As Dan's father, I wish you cared more for your genius son's reputation than that of your sketchy friends. Enough said.
You know nothing about mass marketing appeal. Sorry.
Wait and see.
Some of the naysayers lack objectivity in my opinion. I have personal experience of the honesty of the principals. Businesses do fail. Probably less than 1 in 10 startups work out. I was fully reimbursed in my investment project with MichaelX when regulatory hurdles and other factors put the project to an end.
I know investors lost money with Mark Lyford's project, but there were no funds left to reimburse when he was forced to close it down due to lack of operating capital. That is not scamming. I know many very successful businessmen who weren't successful on their first try. I have lost on some investments in the crypto world, and gained on others.
Please be objective in evaluating this proposal.
I upvoted the post and Stan Larimer's comment.
It is scamming when the business and money collection is continued even when it's clear that it will fail. I view Lyford as a long-con man. He doesn't try to do quick money and run, but instead he is milking as much as he can from same people. I've seen his videos so I know he can be very convincing – I was even convinced of him when I first stumbled upon his businesses. Fortunately I was too lazy to make any investments at the time.
Lyford didn't just lose the investment money because of some unforeseeable difficulties. His business plans were doomed to fail from the beginning. He is only a marketing guy who knows to sell, but apparently he has no intention of actually delivering the products. He just takes the money and says "oops, it didn't work out". And after a while he has new business which will go exactly the same way.
I've met people like him before and I don't want to see them here in Steem.
And I say this to you too: By defending a scammer you are ruining your own reputation.
Please tell us how you were scammed. Never mind what someone else says about someone else, innuendo and demagoguery. Please speak from first hand knowledge of how YOU were scammed. I have spoken from first hand knowledge of how I was treated fairly.
@onceuponatime: please tell us how you were attacked personally by @samupaha that justifies your intervention. Never mind what someone else says about someone else, isn't that what you just said?
And by the same token of non-intervention in larger community issues that doesn't affect one personally, we shouldn't care about anything that doesn't affect us personally: child abuse, rape, murders, theft etc. Let it be, it's none of our business. Is that what you are saying?
People make mistakes. He was too ambitious. He and others failed. All of whom knew the risk.
Banx has been paying "dividends" until Q4 2015 out of "profits" (which means that Banx was supposedly operating at a profit) all the while trying to sell more shares using MLM. A few months later it was bust. Now how do you explain that a business that was so profitable that it could afford to pay dividends can burn all of its retained profits and capital in a couple of months and go bust because they didn't manage to sell more shares, all without a single good reason to explain that surprising blow up? Well the only explanation that makes sense is that banx wasn't making that much profits and had been paying dividends off share capital to keep new investors coming. That's called a ponzi scheme, and ponzi schemes are almost always scams unless they clearly advertize themselves as such. In the extremely unlikely event that Banx was victim of an unfortunate blackswan event, Lyford would be able to prove it easily by opening his accounting books and showing how all the income flows got squeezed and how all the capital went away. In the meantime, you can't blame people for applying Occam's razor and assuming that Banx was a ponzi scam.
Thank you for vouching for the business relations you have had in the past with us and your experience. I appreciate objective comments.
Someone who worked on the LottoShares project - you know, the one that didn't work out but everyone was refunded (not typical in this industry). I am sure you will find a way to call that a scam too.
I could have answered @michaelx
You beat me to it.
Who are you?
The voice of reason. you are right and that is exactly why I defended Mark. Not his failure, but him, as a person.
This is a real proposal and a good one too. It's been built and we are more than happy to have wide community involvement int he shaping of the education and overall product that is put out.
Instead of calling names why don't we try to be productive here and discuss how we can make this initiative work?
How is THIS a scam? It's already been paid for out of our pockets.
We aren't asking YOU or anyone else for money, other than votes and initiative support...oh and maybe contribution of effort to help the community.
I defended Mark because of several reasons, not that I have to answer to you. I didn't like the way that people were treating him, regardless of past mistakes nobody has a right to treat people like they are trash. Sorry.
If it were you being attacked I would defend you as well. Even with you hating me and downvoting me out of spite now.
As for whether or not I can be trusted, I will leave that for the folks like Stan and Dan to decide. They know the time, money, effort, work, and myriad of other things I have contributed, and I am very comfortable in what I have given.
You don't know me at all, so your making statements about the veracity of my integrity or anything else holds no water.
You downvoted this post and caused considerable harm, which is sad because this has some major potential to bring 100x more people to Steemit.
Maybe you can put your pitchfork and torch down?
I am sorry you hate me so much, hopefully over time you will see that I have been a major contributor to Bitshares, and now to Steemit.
@michaelx: how about you do whatever you will do on your own instead of trying to coerce this community in approving something that it should already be clear by now we don't approve at all? Granted, if you are not the one who attempts the get-rich-quick scheme MLM marketing, someone else will, so feel free to do it if you want with whoever you want, we won't stop you, but do that under your own name and reputation without dragging in Bitshares, Steem or Cryptonomex. And please spare us the entitlement: this community doesn't have to agree with your ideas just because you have good connections in the Bitshares world.
If I wanted to get rich I wouldn't give away all of the money on the front to people to encourage growth. Also, you have no idea what an MLM is. This doesn't qualify in the least.
I will discuss whatever I want, when I want - especially WHEN RELEVANT.
Entitlement - the only entitlement I see around here is people like you and your friends bullying everyone.
I will address whom I want, when I want, how I want.
I came here to help - if you don't want it fine.
PS - @recursive I sent steemit 1k new members TODAY before BREAKFAST- what did you do to grow the community?
I am mentoring over 1k people on steemit now. What have you done today?
Spare ME.