Gavin's reputation is on the line because he is a security researcher, and he was duped by a not-very-convincing crypto scam. It's not a big deal to me; I wouldn't hold it against him much in, say, hiring. But whatever damage done to Gavin was done by his own choices. I'm not going to rush to feel sorry for him, either.

No, that's a horrible thought. If he truly is suicidal we should be doing what we can to make sure he is cared for.

@bwilliams, yep, and that's why I said "I understand this". We should help him. But we should also help, if not more, Gavin and the others who's reputation is on the line without much fault of their own.

Why not handle the the thing that seems to be pretty pressing right now instead? Reputation can wait until someone can confirm one thing or another. It's just kind of calloused otherwise and I'm sure someone whose reputation on the line would agree.

Andresen (and Matonis) themselves should be considered responsible for the harm to their own reputations no?

If someone gets scammed by a con-artist, would you blame the victim there too?

In this case yes, because they are influencers of the community and were not being responsible in ensuring the proof was rigorous enough

Gavin 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.