You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Edited
Strong points by you. There are a lot of weird aspects and red flags with the EOS sale and project. As with when any ICO or crypto project, people need to do their due diligence and go in with an open mind, rather than an open wallet.
For the record, my opinions are actually coming from in depth research (extreme due diligence) as well as speaking with core devs as well as the creator both in person and in depth online over a very long period of time. Also have done the same over the past couple years regarding the core team's past projects.
On the subject, why does the core team have past projects at all? Why aren't those past projects current projects?
To give some perspective, maybe I should ask you why you currently no longer have your first job? Why you don't have your first girlfriend/boyfriend? Why you no long want to be what you wanted to be when you grew up when you were 5 years old? People move on from things. They grow, they progress; out with the old and in with the new. However, these projects, in my eyes, reach a bit beyond those very real human traits.
The ways these projects were designed, the people who "gave birth," to them aren't needed after a certain point. They're self-sustaining, self-governing "entities," if you will. Stan, Dan's dad likes to call them "unmanned companies," which I think is pretty proper terminology.
If you study how the chains are governed, how they evolve, how it's decided which way development moves, etc. it's like a well-oiled, nicely governed machine.
From my understanding, they develop projects (e.g. BitShares, Steem, and now EOS), get them to the point of reliability and self-sustainability/governance, and turn them loose. If you truly think about it, they're leaving some seriously ingenious projects at the mercy of those who take it upon themselves to ingrain themselves in the project by playing a vital role, be it in the form of witnessing/governance, ongoing development, marketing, etc. It's genius.
They're forward thinking individuals, always noting flaws of past projects as well as other people's projects and then evolving on those flaws, addressing them. I'm glad they move on to new projects. Human beings can only be spread so thin, it's unrealistic to think that they'd remain involved in so many projects.
Follow-through is one of the most important things in life and even more important when assessing management teams of investments you make. But you've made up your mind and you know you're right. I am not interested in trying to change it. Good luck.
If you study the past projects, you'll see that they've always followed through and more. A solid track record like that speaks volumes. Also, speaking personally with Dan, he's quite a revolutionary person in terms of human emancipation, personal freedoms, etc. The guy doesn't claim it outright, he's pretty humble person, but his motives are something truly admirable. He could do nothing for the rest of his life and be perfectly fine, but he keeps pushing. The guy is certainly an inspiration to me and many others. I'm not one to kiss ass or anything like that, but this guy really deserves much more credit than he gets, as does his team. That's one of the reasons why it bothers me to see people dog them and assume they're out to "get us." And once you get to know me, you'll see that I remain unbiased. I give credit where it's due as well as criticism. I'm all about advancing this space, and there's nothing to be gained by being blindly biased or "rooting for the home team." I follow solid tech and that alone.