CoinDesk

https://ihb.io/2014-11-09/news/official-coindesk-longer-voice-digital-currency-2-13449

Bravo!

May I begin by noting that for someone who doesn't stoop to badmouthing their competitors (your words), you've done a lot of badmouthing. CoinDesk allegedly ignores comments, is implied to be in cahoots with crooked cloud miners, censors/deletes comments for articles, profits from advertising, has faulty price index algorithms, creates Nermins aka journalists which are fictional... I could go on and on. Not a single compliment that isn't followed by a "but...". And this from CoinDesk, who you say you "respect"?

The alleged disservice CoinDesk does to Bitcoin is lost and will soon be the MySpace to your Facebook it seems. Although you have no income you vaguely talk of "monetization with bitcoin enabled technology (being easier to implement than (they) would think" and chastise cookies, email address databases, Google Analytics and the despicable practice of a media publication selling ads! But that's not your style! Your investors will reap the rewards of the dis-serviced CoinDesk readers; fantastic for a company two paragraphs earlier claimed it was working for no income.

But thankfully your moral compass allows you to service the richest people with the best mobile devices (you got that data from where? Google Analytics? Say it ain't so Mahatma!). Because the third world with their poor cities, 3G non-smart phones - the unbankable - why on Earth would Bitcoin's potential apply to the country of Africa? But I digress, you have no proof of any accusations, but surely your background is in the scope of arguing this. It's not like astronauts who are actors; you've got to have some credentials, so let's hear your wisdom's genesis and nurturer; what are your credentials?

"I am not a journalist and my company wasn’t even founded to be media outlet" - agh, ok, go on: "but it happened to be an easy thing to do and it supports our more important R&D efforts."

Phew! Thank god it's not for the integrity, but for your "more important R&D costs"!
"We made a decision to do it with integrity and I hope we can hold ourselves to this standard always. We have also made mistakes..."

Oh, mistakes! I'm glad you recognize these things happen. Sometimes sources get misquoted, or the source is a liar (CNN are just as guilty for reporting OJ Simpson was innocent), and sometimes, people have no info if sources or proof, which is where we can agree. Tell me about these pieces of evidence you have disproving the alleged fake CoinDesk journalist's report... "how he got them (the photos/quotes), I don’t know and if they are real I don’t know."
Anything else?
"I have suspicions about your practices and social media followers, but I don’t have the data to say anything."
Cmon, give me something here!
"I have noticed and documented issues with his reporting over the past year and a half, but in business you should never speak bad about a competitor, so I bit my tongue."

That seems at odds with your "theses" though....
"but we are tiny compared to you and do not have access to your resources. Big bad Goliath! Go David!

Let's report on your open-letter calling for community boycott of your competitor shall we?

Oh and you believe cloud mining is a scam? Based on what? Proof? Or is it proof that may turn out less black and more gray as details emerge? Because journalists acting on information usually can't give a post-mordem dissection. They have sources, they report the news, and then you come by and point out how clear your 20/20 Hindsight vision is. But you're not a journalist. You're a nobody dragging the rest down because "it's not fair".

Your yearnings for new world order are not welcomed by me. Nor Nermin, I assume. But I'm just glad you've got so much integrity to remain anonymous while you call the plays from your quarterback armchair.

Oh and you believe cloud mining is a scam? Based on what? Proof? Or is it proof that may turn out less black and more gray as details emerge? Because journalists acting on information usually can't give a post-mordem dissection. They have sources, they report the news, and then you come by and point out how clear your 20/20 Hindsight vision is? But you're not a journalist. You're a cancer to Bitcoin growth.

If you love Bitcoin then do something for it; realize your chance of winning an all out war on fiat and banking systems and privacy may be slightly less favorable than introducing technology without the diatribe.

You want cloud hashing miners punished? And it's CoinDesk's job? So now the 400 articles brings you the cache you want! After all, journalists pushing regulatory practices and risking law suits isn't what you volunteered! Oh no! That's CoinDesk's job! If the "community" backs you you're right, if not you say you'll apologise for being wrong. Why would sharing this solely with CoinDesk alone serve the purpose otherwise? The community disagrees and you're wrong? What? Your opinion is neither right or wrong. Though MY opinion is you're very, very wrong. Mass agreement and parroting don't give any credence to your rant.

I think you need a reality check. Pull your head out of the chat rooms and see the responses average Joes have to your anarchistic machinations. I assure you, Joe doesn't want a new world order, no more than I want a Bitcoin fundamentalist zealot assuring me salvation lies in the hearts of the good people of the "Bitcoin community" and that he's keeping the conglomerate Goliath honest.

What is your company, if I may ask? I'd like to steer all newcomers far, far away from your "help".