3 ms·
Andresen (and Matonis) themselves should be considered responsible for the harm to their own reputations no?
by nsajko 11y ago
Andresen (and Matonis) themselves should be considered responsible for the harm to their own reputations no?
- nacs 11y agoIf someone gets scammed by a con-artist, would you blame the victim there too?
- machinelearning 11y agoIn this case yes, because they are influencers of the community and were not being responsible in ensuring the proof was rigorous enough
- TillE 11y agoGavin said that he expected Wright to immediately post public proof equivalent to what he'd seen in private. When that didn't happen, he started expressing doubts. I don't think he ever intended his post alone to be treated as authoritative proof. Yeah he made a mistake. But smart, even skeptical people get conned into making those kind of mistakes all the time. In the end, it's a lot of drama with no real harm done.