> That said, Derek calling it a scam doesn't mean it's not a scam.

Agreed, but neither does it make it a scam. Any input he has on the subject is compromised and basically meaningless as evidence one way or the other. So we really should avoid citing him.

How is that? Everyone who isn't invested in the project is calling it a scam. Heck, even Forbes had a lengthy article about that a few months ago.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2019/05/01/exclusive-...

So you're saying because it's still in dev and still raising money, so it's not a scam?

> So you're saying because it's still in dev and still raising money, so it's not a scam?

At no point have I weighed in on if it is a scam or not. All I am saying is that citing Derek Smart as an authority on the matter is not really a good idea either way. He is hugely biased and is basically praying it fails.

Citing other, probably less biased sources? Great, go ahead.

The problem these guys seem to have is that it was him who first blew the whistle. So they their dislike of him as an excuse.