OneCoin whitepaper author regrets getting involved, admits mistake
If some of you do not know, Marcelo Garcia Casil is a founder of the blockchain start-up company DXmarkets.com.
He came in contact with Onecoin in February 2017. He was paid to audit Onecoin's tech system, software and make an assessment of how to improve it to be more transparent since we all know that Onecoin blockchain does not provide public explorer where users can search and find their own transactions. Instead, in blockchain viewer in the back office, users can only see certain (probably bulk) transactions, but not the one that they execute, as critiques would call them "real life transactions".
After his external tech audit, he was supposed to make a white paper of that would he suggest to make for Onecoin and he did make it.
After it was announced in the Macau event in May 2017, Onecoin critiques started attacking Marcelo over Linkedin and Twiter.
One of the loudest was, of course, a proven liar, Bjorn Bjerke and our dear friend CryptoXpose:
He was probably frustrated to see his startup company name being dragged through the mud in the blockchain community.
On the closed leader meeting in Macau, Kari and Pierre showed the first page of this white paper and they said:
"here is the statement, we have a blockchain". That was wrong. Cause it was misleading to the leaders.
That white paper was no proof of current blockchain but it was supposed to be a future project for when Onecoin goes public and when it needs to be transparent with a blockchain. In fact, the company never even published this document in the back office. It was distributed by some top leaders to the network but the company stated everyone who publishes that white paper will get their account frozen.
This was actually just now understandable cause that white paper does not relate to the actual tech and if this solution was to be implemented, only then would the company publish white paper.
It is sad to acknowledge, that Onecoin does not really provide us any proof of blockchain. We can only believe them.
In fact, seems like no top leader from Onelife network also has a proof of the blockchain. The whole user base trusts dr Ruja.
Of course, critiques use this as an argument that Onecoin does not have a blockchain. That is also incorrect. The fact that only a few people know the truth behind blockchain technology does not mean it does not exist. Maybe they really do have some revolutionary tech that they do not want to disclose or anyone could join mining and undermine whole Onelife concept. We can not be sure, no one of us.
So it is left for people who believe in Onecoin to join, and people who do not believe and want public explorer and to see source code not to join.
As it seems that Onecoin does not want to go transparent with its blockchain after all. At least not yet, Marcelo became angry on him self for accepting this job since he already know about Onecoins negative reputation in the blockchain community and he knew the risks he was taking when he decided to link his regret article on reddit.
Of course, as usual, whenever Onecoin pops up some credible name to work for or with them, those people became slandered and attacked by the blockchain and blogger communities, they are being quickly discredited like they worth nothing, and they are being labeled as scammers
The same happened with Marcelo. But when ever such person stops working with Onecoin they become so important all of the sudden to Onecoin critiques
The same is with Marcelo, his regret article became solid new argument that Onecoin critiques parrot around. And as usual, as he is totally a good guy and inexperienced to manipulation, he was tricked into writing something controversial that they now use as a bible for their cause.
Let's analyze what he wrote:
So he was approached from Onecoin to make a tech audit for them and although he knew about Onecoins bad reputation within the blockchain community, he decided to accept it cause he was excited to help Onecoin users with more transparency with the blockchain. Since that did not happen, his white paper was not even published by the company, he was only left with his company name in the mud, so now he regrets.Marcelo Garcia wrote:TL;DR; - I was approached to do a blockchain tech audit for a company, later discovered that it was for onecoin, influenced by a trusted friend I decided that my audit could benefit the onecoin users and accepted the work and then produced a paper with recommendations. I was acting with the right intentions but I now regret my involvement. Please read the full details below.
So did not know it was Onecoin at first, but he learned about it later and he still accepted cause he believed his role there will be to provide a transparent solution for Onecoin blockchain. He was so disappointed when he realized that he was only hired as an external auditor of their current system, not as a future transparency solution provider. As every auditor does, he signed NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) so he can not speak about certain staff what he did.Marcelo Garcia wrote:New management had joined that other company and they wanted to have an independent perspective on their internal systems. I tentatively accepted, and only later on learned that this other company was OneCoin. I went ahead with the assignment in the belief that auditing a system and providing input on blockchain technology would ultimately help the wider community. I believed it would help the people who might end up using it and do what Blockchain can do best – bring transparency.
I had the right intentions. People who have known me for years, know I aim to be a consistently positive contributor to the blockchain ecosystem and would never intentionally do it any harm. But I realized later I was naive in this case because I had misjudged how my involvement would be misconstrued. I acted as an external and fully-independent party and, as is often the case with auditing, I had to sign an NDA. I still have to comply with that obligation even though it means I can’t provide details that would correct misinterpretations.
As I said, he was attacked by the blockchain and mainly anti Onecoin community (several persons) so he was stressed out. Since it turns out he will not provide any solution for Onecoin, he now wants a pardon from the same community cause this haunts his company.Marcelo Garcia wrote:I believed I was doing something positive that would benefit everyone in the ecosystem. However, some people reacted very negatively to the news and started attacking me. I made the mistake of responding to the trolls and very quickly my words were twisted and false stories were created and published. I then decided to stop commenting on the subject completely
I asked him that on the comments:
And he answered:
Basically, yes, he also does not think centralized cryptocurency should be so in transparent with a blockchain cause it is no different from the banks.
That is indeed highly trusted phase now so only limited mentality of people will join. Cause dr Ruja said Onecoin will be fully transparent once it hits public trading. What critiques are mistaking when Onelife and dr Ruja promote Onecoin as the most transparent cryptocurrency is that they are saying that for their public use, a full potential, not the present closed state. It is natural that decentralized enthusiasts will not believe in any of this.
I also asked him:
"Also, you were my inspiration when you wrote that white paper where you clearly showed Disadvantages of public blockchain networks and acknowledged Private Blockchain Networks also explaining A matter of trust in private networks. So I came to understanding you kinda accepted that cryptocyrrency can also be centralized. Seems like you changed your mind there since you were being slandered by decentralized opposition cause indeed Onecoins centralized closed model attracts pretty much whole decentralized blockchain community against it."
And he responded:
It is clear that he agrees that cryptocurrency can be centralized but he also thinks the company running this private centralized cryptocurrency should open its books (blockchain) to the users and Onecoin is not doing that. YET.
Ok so I got enough info from him so what I wrote on this topic is clear to make a conclusion.
Marcelo Garcia, founder of DXmarkets was hired and paid to make external tech and software audit and he did it. He knew about Onecoins bad reputation in the blockchain community and he accepted this cause he thought he will do the right way helping Onecoin being transparent with its blockchain. Turned out he was only hired for external audit and to make a report as white paper to propose the improvements. Since no work will be done from his side, he was only left with his company name being in the mud in the blockchain community, he decided to regret and he would like to warn any other developers not to mess with Onecoin. He also agrees to some of bad propaganda but it addresses mostly the company not being transparent with the blockchain.
Well, this article attrackted Onecoin critiques who tried to pull out words from Marcelo:
In the comments, Bjorn Bjerke (aka MrBitcoinNorway) started tricking him to slip and succeeded:
And of Marcelo responded:
He here said that there was nothing illegal to report. Yet he agrees with a donation to the victim's fund. A bit controversial there.
Critiques will say that he only did tech audit so he could not see any illegal activities but that is the point, he could see if there is or there is not a blockchain since he audited hardware and software.
Our friend CryptoXpose is gonna make a video that we will for sure analyze here in this topic and it is sad to see Marcelo responds with so much humiliation hoping for Bjorn a proved liar to removes comments where Marcelo is mentioned as a liar:
And yet he was annoyed by Bjorn's pushing:
At the end, here is a proof where he thinks governments should protect people from scams:
And of course critique acts like a child thinking we are there to make Marcelo pick a side where he is not really important for the company Onecoin at all, he is just trying to say sorry to the decentralized community for working with a centralized company that does not want to go transparent with blockchain:
Of course, I wrote him that as an answer that I do seek sides, I just asked Marcelo to clarify some of his statements cause Onecoin critiques tend to twist his words to look as he is talking about the Onecoin company and here is a proof of twisting:
His statements that he agrees with supporting victims of scam is twisted as he agrees Onecoin is a scam until I asked him to clarify that:
So he actually proved what I am trying to do on this forum:
1) I do acknowledge that the Onecoin company is not fully transparent with the blockchain but that does not mean it does not exist. Although skeptics are free to pass it. There are a ton of open sourced ICOs out there.
2) Onecoin concept was certainly used to scam people by luring them to buy education by making promises to them and not making them aware of the risks (the risks that any ICO carries). But the fact that onecoin or bitcoin were used for scams by certain people does not make onecoin and bitcoin them selves a scam.
I wish all the best to Marcelo and his company and I hope he succeeds in major businesses to be self-evident enough so he does not need to bow down to the blockchain community.