Maybe the communities you are in and the ones I am in don't intersect much :)
If you didn't see me then maybe because your attitude smells strong enough for me to already regret engaging you...
That you don't see my contributions is no surprise to me. The only contribution I noticed of you is your toxic negativity. It seems contributions are only seen when someone posts about them...
That is a bullshit response reggae to legitimate questions.
Maybe if someone else asks these questions I am willing to put time in to answer them. But I don't think they were sincere this time so I rather disengage. Conspiracy people tire me. I know that I need to post more so that people actually see what I am doing for Steem and I want to post more. Doesn't mean I always do as I want do have some threshold of quality on my blog. If I post it should be important.
Wait, so you acknowledge the questions are legitimate, but you won't answer them anyway because @sircork asked them? What the hell? If these are legitimate questions, why not answer them?
I did not say they are legitimate. He asked them to discredit me and I did not feel like going down that route. He has a history of personally attacking people who even slightly disagree with him. Very simple ad hominem. I am not willing to engage in any discussion with him, as is my right. If other people think these questions are valid, they are free to ask them themselves.
Related: https://steempeak.com/steem/@techslut/re-sircork-re-reggaemuffin-re-sircork-re-reggaemuffin-re-sircork-re-steemitblog-hf20-update-operations-stable-20181002t123215706z
None of my business what you are discussing here guys. Only one remark - as far as I can judge that @reggaemuffin has done a lot for the community and was one of the always reachable witnesses during HF20 for the normal users and answered questions.
Usually I hate wars between people but this guy @sirfork (edit: @sircork) indeed seems to have an attacking gene he likes to use - have discovered this quite often in the last weeks where he played the card of the experienced dad, the well-known Steem Witness and all others that disagree are called "sons" without any idea and should go f... themselves or similar wording.
just realised - apart from the usual typos of a non-native English speaker - I even misspelled the name of the known witness - apologies - corrected
I'm sorry, you spelled "defending" gene wrong too. And since you have no idea of the prior relationships here or the history of these people and I, your input is allowed, but not incredibly accurate or relevant to the context.
Also, I don't know where you reached him, but it wasn't in more than 16 discords reaching thousands of users that I and several other witnesses were in.
You were correct though, in your first sentence.
If you said you'd answer them if someone else asked them, then you're acknowledging that the questions are legitimate. Not really sure why you're trying to spin this, as that's a pretty straightforward logical deduction.
So can you answer them and pretend that I'm the one asking them and not Cork?
Here we go:
I could improve in actually shilling my witness more, talking about the things I do for steem. And probably I could post more and ignore the drama queens like all the smarter witnesses ;)
See, that wasn't so hard was it? The questions matter, not the person asking them :D
You showed up with the intent to discredit.
More double talk from "top" witnesses. LOL
Not well played. People see you talking in circles, you understand that right?
I just called you out on the "no one talked about fork requirements at all". Before you ask why, ask if. Then you took about a quest to discredit me. You fail to see that it is not about me in particular. I just want the witnesses to each state what they want before they complain about not getting it.
So you've actually just said you've been absent for the last two years then, lol, what the hell do you think witnesses outside the inner circle jerk have been DOING for two years?
We've been pretty clear about what we want.
Yeah, that's the usual response I get when I lay out transparent truths. See ya, I guess?
Funny how when I lay out solid foundations of integrity and credibility, the opposition always decides im too "negative" to further oppose.
That's what defendants do in court rooms too. Attempt a plea of "prove it! I'm innocent!" then start pleading the 5th when the proof is delivered. Or try to discredit and gaslight the accuser or thin skinned-ly resort to flags in the more childish response repertoire.
Accused? Proof? Innocence? Evidence? Is this a discussion or trial?
Depends on who needs to spin it and how.
Suffice it to say, both sides of whatever you want to call it, still have unseen cards to play...
Sometimes those things are called for depending on the participants of the 'discussion' and how they behave.