3 ms·

> 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 ma

> 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.
- baobabKoodaa 4y ago
  I'm not the one who called David Gerard a "journalist" in the first place, you are. Not sure why you think the onus is on me to prove that David Gerard is a "bad journalist" when I never claimed he was a journalist to begin with. I claimed he was a crank (as opposed to a scientist). I've provided plenty of examples of him being a crank, but you don't really care about evidence against your beliefs, so you'll just no-true-scottsman any example provided.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    You contrasted him with Molly White, who according to you "is a legit journalist". That looks to me like you claiming that he is not "a legit journalist". If you no longer want to stand behind that claim (or somehow believe you never made it) and your new point is that you don't like some Reddit comments he made, then godspeed to you and your opinions. You not liking something he says does not constitute "evidence against [my] beliefs", as I entirely believe a lot of internet randos don't like Gerard and/or how he writes.
    - baobabKoodaa 4y ago
      > You contrasted him with Molly White, who according to you "is a legit journalist". That looks to me like you claiming that he is not "a legit journalist". Right, David Gerard is not a legit journalist. He's a crank. If you want to claim that he is a journalist of some kind, that's a claim that you are making - not me. I already told you if "journalist" is his preferred pronoun then I'm fine calling him a journalist - he's just not a "legit" one. If you say he's not a journalist at all, that's also fine by me. Again, not a "legit" journalist in that case either.

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.

baobabKoodaa 4y ago
I'm not the one who called David Gerard a "journalist" in the first place, you are. Not sure why you think the onus is on me to prove that David Gerard is a "bad journalist" when I never claimed he was a journalist to begin with. I claimed he was a crank (as opposed to a scientist). I've provided plenty of examples of him being a crank, but you don't really care about evidence against your beliefs, so you'll just no-true-scottsman any example provided.
- wpietri 4y ago
  You contrasted him with Molly White, who according to you "is a legit journalist". That looks to me like you claiming that he is not "a legit journalist". If you no longer want to stand behind that claim (or somehow believe you never made it) and your new point is that you don't like some Reddit comments he made, then godspeed to you and your opinions. You not liking something he says does not constitute "evidence against [my] beliefs", as I entirely believe a lot of internet randos don't like Gerard and/or how he writes.
  - baobabKoodaa 4y ago
    > You contrasted him with Molly White, who according to you "is a legit journalist". That looks to me like you claiming that he is not "a legit journalist". Right, David Gerard is not a legit journalist. He's a crank. If you want to claim that he is a journalist of some kind, that's a claim that you are making - not me. I already told you if "journalist" is his preferred pronoun then I'm fine calling him a journalist - he's just not a "legit" one. If you say he's not a journalist at all, that's also fine by me. Again, not a "legit" journalist in that case either.