[READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Byte Mason Product Suite

Can you share some evidence for the account being fake? They were critical of your proposal ([READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Saddle Finance - #37 by FantomFunhouse) but so were a variety of other people. Accusations were also made in the thread suggesting that you were acting in bad faith ([READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] Saddle Finance - #41 by jackanorak) so I would hope that you see the necessity for some objective reasoning as to why you think @FantomFunhouse is a bad faith account?

— EDIT —

Snap


In the original post of this thread they made the claim that the discussion is “heavily astroturfed”, which is clearly accurate. In the first 25 comments, more than half are by users who’ve never posted before (kiwikish, mate_phi, Miso, veJoe, Andros, Ikpeamarom, 0xFreshPots, CryptoDandy, b1rdmania, naly, jonsteps, GuiLamas, IlijasDev).

As for the key issue at play here, I think @exosphere makes a very good point about those of us who lack first hand knowledge. I unfortunately have zero experience with the Fantom ecosystem and so it is very difficult to assess the veracity of both sides claims. My friend is not a developer and so although he has an opinion, from the lack of specifics that he can remember (or at least that he’s shared) I’m trying hard not to take it as equivalent to insider knowledge of the situation.

On the other hand, I’m not sure that abstaining is the correct course of action. If the option is to give out tokens or not then personally I think voting to not give them as the default until the matter in question is resolved.

Of the claims here to be addressed, perhaps this one is specific enough that it can be established true or false:

Can anyone prove whether this specific point is accurate or not?