pull down to refresh

101 sats \ 6 replies \ @Kruw 13 Sep \ parent \ on: Disagreement or Silencing? meta

"Scamming" is the most generous interpretation of his actions, remember? #1566778

If he's causing people to lose their coins and profiting from it, that's bad.

If he's causing people to lose their coins and NOT profiting from it, that's even WORSE (since he can't refund their losses with his profits).

The more appropriate term for destroying user funds without profiting from it would be "terrorist", so calling him a "scammer" is me being nice to him.

write
compose
1 sat \ 5 replies \ @Scoresby 13 Sep

I don't agree at all. You have not presented anywhere close to sufficient evidence to support either claim.

reply
1 sat \ 4 replies \ @Kruw 13 Sep

Why don't Justin's own words count as sufficient evidence?

reply
1 sat \ 3 replies \ @Scoresby 13 Sep

Because when I read those words I do not get that he is draining someone's wallet.

Whati read is you and him arguing about Ark and then Justin making a statement about Lightning as a part of that argument.

It reads to me like an argument, not theft. The burden is on the accuser (you) to prove the claim that he is actually trying to drain people's wallets. And you certainly haven't convinced me.

reply
1 sat \ 2 replies \ @Kruw 13 Sep
And you certainly haven't convinced me.

Wrong, I already convinced you that funds can be drained from sleeping lightning wallets: #1569234

I am happy to explicitly acknowledge that keeping your lightning wallet online is important to prevent it from getting drained.
reply
1 sat \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby 13 Sep

"funds can be drained" does not equal "Justin is trying to drain wallets"

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Kruw 14 Sep

We already tested Justin's honesty and proved he is intentionally causing the draining, remember? He refused to delete his Tweet with the malicious instructions: #1570012

reply