3 ms·

Sure! Here's David Gerard from 2 months ago, speculating what will happen with SBF: > SBF will be able to disappear with total facial reshaping also total arm

Sure! Here's David Gerard from 2 months ago, speculating what will happen with SBF: > SBF will be able to disappear with total facial reshaping also total arm and leg reshaping and total concrete shoe reshaping Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/yubrvg/sucker_voice_im_in_ftx_files_for_bankruptcy_and/iw9wh1k/?context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/yubrvg/sucker_voi... It's been 2 months and SBF still hasn't done total facial reshaping, neither has he done total arm reshaping, nor has he done total leg reshaping. And also he hasn't died ("concrete shoe reshaping"). This dude's a crank.

wpietri 4y ago
If the best you can do is point to a joke Reddit comment that you apparently haven't fully understood as a joke, then I think we're done here.
- baobabKoodaa 4y ago
  Here's what you asked: > find some things where his supposedly egregious anti-crypto bias led him to say things that have been proven false. I showed you an example where his egregious anti-crypto bias led him to say some things that have been proven false. And your response is "it was just a prank bro", and "I think we're done here"? Yeah, doesn't look like you care about evidence that challenges your beliefs. You have that in common with mr Gerard.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    I think you are smart enough to have figured this out, but let me spell it out for you explicitly just in case. You are claiming that he is failing as a journalist because of an anti-crypto bias. I am looking for proof of that. So what I'm talking about is statements made in a journalistic context where he has gotten something important about the crypto world provably wrong because of his supposed bias. Your best evidence is not, say, taking a citation from his book, or even his blog, and then showing with actual facts that he made an error, and then demonstrating how his anti-crypto bias led him to a conclusion that was not only proven wrong, but that he at the time should have clearly known was wrong about something important to the topic. It's taking a random reddit comment that you apparently can't recognize as a joke and say it hasn't happened yet. To me this makes you look entirely unserious. I can't even tell that you know what journalism is from your behavior here. So yeah, talking with you further looks like a waste of my time. As crypto proponents have generally been for me since 2015, honestly. So yeah, if you want to think bad things about me, go wild, plenty of crypto adherents do.
    - baobabKoodaa 4y ago
      > You are claiming that he is failing as a journalist because of an anti-crypto bias. I am looking for proof of that. So what I'm talking about is statements made in a journalistic context where he has gotten something important about the crypto world provably wrong because of his supposed bias. Ok, here's better evidence for you: in 2016 David Gerard was actively defacing crypto-related Wikipedia articles without any kind of understanding or knowledge about the subject matter. He has since learned a great deal about the subject matter, but my point is that he is a crank and a vandal, not a respectable journalist. For example, this is what David Gerard said about Ethereum's codebase, in the context of heavily editing the Ethereum wikipedia page: "I believe Ethereum's codebase is based on the Bitcoin codebase (though I don't have a cite), so it's a fork of that (as most altcoins are)." (source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4b76i4/who_is_david_gerard_and_why_does_he_keep_editing/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4b76i4/who_is_dav...) The claim that Ethereum is a fork of Bitcoin is false and anyone who googles the subject matter for more than 20 seconds would learn that. Somehow, a major editor of the Ethereum Wikipedia article didn't care to do that. Here's one of many instances where David Gerard vandalizes the Ethereum Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ethereum&type=revision&diff=744282242&oldid=744252276 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ethereum&type=rev... Notice how the addition of the phrase "like any other cryptocurrency" serves no other purpose except to talk down / make fun of Ethereum, and the removal of the phrase "smart contracts" serves no purpose other than to vandalize the article (removing descriptions of the distinguishing features of Ethereum). > So yeah, talking with you further looks like a waste of my time. As crypto proponents have generally been for me since 2015, honestly. So yeah, if you want to think bad things about me, go wild, plenty of crypto adherents do. I'm not a crypto proponent. I already told you how much I respect Molly White's work, and despite that you think I must be a crypto proponent? Just because I expressed criticism of another person in the anti-crypto camp? I hope you don't view all of life with such a tribalist attitude.
      - wpietri 4y ago
        Once again, I have asked you for evidence of him being a bad journalist, and once again you have provided me with nothing of the sort. You still don't even demonstrate an understanding of what journalism is. I'm done. Have a good day.

wpietri 4y ago

If the best you can do is point to a joke Reddit comment that you apparently haven't fully understood as a joke, then I think we're done here.

baobabKoodaa 4y ago
Here's what you asked: > find some things where his supposedly egregious anti-crypto bias led him to say things that have been proven false. I showed you an example where his egregious anti-crypto bias led him to say some things that have been proven false. And your response is "it was just a prank bro", and "I think we're done here"? Yeah, doesn't look like you care about evidence that challenges your beliefs. You have that in common with mr Gerard.
- wpietri 4y ago
  I think you are smart enough to have figured this out, but let me spell it out for you explicitly just in case. You are claiming that he is failing as a journalist because of an anti-crypto bias. I am looking for proof of that. So what I'm talking about is statements made in a journalistic context where he has gotten something important about the crypto world provably wrong because of his supposed bias. Your best evidence is not, say, taking a citation from his book, or even his blog, and then showing with actual facts that he made an error, and then demonstrating how his anti-crypto bias led him to a conclusion that was not only proven wrong, but that he at the time should have clearly known was wrong about something important to the topic. It's taking a random reddit comment that you apparently can't recognize as a joke and say it hasn't happened yet. To me this makes you look entirely unserious. I can't even tell that you know what journalism is from your behavior here. So yeah, talking with you further looks like a waste of my time. As crypto proponents have generally been for me since 2015, honestly. So yeah, if you want to think bad things about me, go wild, plenty of crypto adherents do.
  - baobabKoodaa 4y ago
    > You are claiming that he is failing as a journalist because of an anti-crypto bias. I am looking for proof of that. So what I'm talking about is statements made in a journalistic context where he has gotten something important about the crypto world provably wrong because of his supposed bias. Ok, here's better evidence for you: in 2016 David Gerard was actively defacing crypto-related Wikipedia articles without any kind of understanding or knowledge about the subject matter. He has since learned a great deal about the subject matter, but my point is that he is a crank and a vandal, not a respectable journalist. For example, this is what David Gerard said about Ethereum's codebase, in the context of heavily editing the Ethereum wikipedia page: "I believe Ethereum's codebase is based on the Bitcoin codebase (though I don't have a cite), so it's a fork of that (as most altcoins are)." (source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4b76i4/who_is_david_gerard_and_why_does_he_keep_editing/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4b76i4/who_is_dav...) The claim that Ethereum is a fork of Bitcoin is false and anyone who googles the subject matter for more than 20 seconds would learn that. Somehow, a major editor of the Ethereum Wikipedia article didn't care to do that. Here's one of many instances where David Gerard vandalizes the Ethereum Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ethereum&type=revision&diff=744282242&oldid=744252276 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ethereum&type=rev... Notice how the addition of the phrase "like any other cryptocurrency" serves no other purpose except to talk down / make fun of Ethereum, and the removal of the phrase "smart contracts" serves no purpose other than to vandalize the article (removing descriptions of the distinguishing features of Ethereum). > So yeah, talking with you further looks like a waste of my time. As crypto proponents have generally been for me since 2015, honestly. So yeah, if you want to think bad things about me, go wild, plenty of crypto adherents do. I'm not a crypto proponent. I already told you how much I respect Molly White's work, and despite that you think I must be a crypto proponent? Just because I expressed criticism of another person in the anti-crypto camp? I hope you don't view all of life with such a tribalist attitude.
    - wpietri 4y ago
      Once again, I have asked you for evidence of him being a bad journalist, and once again you have provided me with nothing of the sort. You still don't even demonstrate an understanding of what journalism is. I'm done. Have a good day.