3 ms·

This and the NYT interview are not puff pieces. They are handing SBF the rope to hang himself with, putting his confession on the record. Not sure what what th

by jmull 4y ago

This and the NYT interview are not puff pieces. They are handing SBF the rope to hang himself with, putting his confession on the record. Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding. If they wanted to protect him they would refuse to interview him and try to convince him not to speak to anyone but counsel about this.

kranke155 4y ago
Maybe you’re right. Actually wrote this before reading the article (typical!) and the article is not friendly to him at all, weirdly he seems to confess his activity. This is super weird because my impression is his father is a lawyer, so is it possible he actually doesn’t think / knows he won’t be convicted of anything?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ninth_ant 4y ago
> Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding They are clouded by anger and frustration, I’d wager, many folks lost money in this fraud. Some maybe caught up in the mob mentality and excitement around taking SBF down. Anything short of absolute demonization is not good enough when you’re mad, I suppose.
- kranke155 4y ago
  I didn't lose anything, maybe I had 10$ in dust on FTX. But yeah I'm pretty mad and I'm even more mad because I believe CZ/Binance are also a super shady time bomb.
FireBeyond 4y ago
> Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding. From the other day, it seems, they're angry that the NYT isn't saying, in exact words, "SBF is a massive criminal who committed massive fraud". And when you respond and say "That's because their lawyers understand the concept of defamation", they say "well, then they just need to talk to people and have them say it so everyone knows he's a criminal and committed fraud".
- HWR_14 4y ago
  Also, because he's staying and talking. If you yell at him that he is a bad criminal, it probably ends your interrview

by jmull 4y ago

kranke155 4y ago

Maybe you’re right. Actually wrote this before reading the article (typical!) and the article is not friendly to him at all, weirdly he seems to confess his activity. This is super weird because my impression is his father is a lawyer, so is it possible he actually doesn’t think / knows he won’t be convicted of anything?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

ninth_ant 4y ago

> Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding They are clouded by anger and frustration, I’d wager, many folks lost money in this fraud. Some maybe caught up in the mob mentality and excitement around taking SBF down. Anything short of absolute demonization is not good enough when you’re mad, I suppose.

kranke155 4y ago
I didn't lose anything, maybe I had 10$ in dust on FTX. But yeah I'm pretty mad and I'm even more mad because I believe CZ/Binance are also a super shady time bomb.

FireBeyond 4y ago

> Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding. From the other day, it seems, they're angry that the NYT isn't saying, in exact words, "SBF is a massive criminal who committed massive fraud". And when you respond and say "That's because their lawyers understand the concept of defamation", they say "well, then they just need to talk to people and have them say it so everyone knows he's a criminal and committed fraud".

HWR_14 4y ago
Also, because he's staying and talking. If you yell at him that he is a bad criminal, it probably ends your interrview