Invited by Skeptics, but Denied a Seat at the Table: When Inclusion is Just an Illusion 🤷🏻♀️
Dodging Debate: When Skeptics Avoid Substance to Protect Outdated Theories
Listen to the audio version.
Since my Substack post on August 19 [Diverging Perspectives: A Professional Debate with Jake Donoghue from Our Twitter Conversations], I received a DM from Jake inviting me to a space he was hosting with several guests—nearly all of them anti-crypto and blockchain, and I’d describe them as strong skeptics of the space. I didn’t hesitate to join, as I already followed most of them, and many follow me as well.
Similar to my first encounter with Jake in one of his spaces, where he had previously mentioned there wasn’t time to invite anyone up to speak, today there was time. However, I was once again cut short and removed from the speaker role without a chance to respond to their comments.
While I was the only one given the mic, I barely got to speak for 3 minutes (1:06:00 to ~1:09:00). As everyone knows, unless you’re delivering an elevator pitch to a panel of investors, it’s impossible to present a strong rebuttal to their anti-crypto stance in such a short time—making it easy for them to dismiss it as irrelevant. @AmScream responded by accusing me, or people like me, of spreading false information without even knowing who I am. He introduced himself as an engineer and independent documentary film producer—someone I’d never heard of despite being in the crypto space since 2015. His YouTube channel barely has 1,120 subscribers, yet he essentially accused me and a project I backed of being a Ponzi scheme, and asserted that my information about IBM still using their blockchain technology was false.
Take a listen: @AmScream, someone without credentials making unfounded claims and baseless accusations about others, despite having no knowledge or evidence to back them up. His ARMCHAIR criticism is rooted in insecurities, as he passes judgments without any real expertise.
@AmScream is nothing more than a pseudo-expert.
Here are the facts:
IBM has not completely dropped its blockchain technologies, but they have significantly scaled back their blockchain division. In 2021, IBM restructured its blockchain team to focus on more profitable areas like hybrid cloud and AI, which have become higher priorities for the company. However, they still maintain involvement in blockchain through specific use cases, such as IBM Food Trust and TradeLens (a shipping logistics blockchain platform developed in partnership with Maersk, although this, too, faced scaling challenges). IBM is now pivoting its blockchain efforts towards more practical applications rather than broad, large-scale initiatives.
@AmScream, however, didn’t even bother to address my point about Walmart’s blockchain technologies.
ALLOW ME TO SHED SOME FACTS WITH YOU @AmScream, which it seems you're much lacked. Walmart is still using blockchain today, primarily in its supply chain management. They have implemented blockchain technology through initiatives like the IBM Food Trust platform, which allows Walmart to track the provenance and journey of food products from farm to shelf. This provides more transparency and traceability in food safety and quality, which is especially important in managing recalls, reducing waste, and ensuring that products meet regulatory standards.
If Walmart were to drop blockchain technology, it could harm them in several ways:
Reduced Transparency: Blockchain enables real-time, tamper-proof records that provide transparency across the supply chain. Without it, Walmart could lose this transparency, making it harder to track the origin of products, especially in the event of a recall or contamination.
Inefficiency in Supply Chain: Blockchain allows for faster verification and auditing of goods as they move through the supply chain. Dropping it could result in slower processes, manual checks, and higher costs.
Loss of Competitive Edge: Walmart has been an industry leader in integrating advanced technologies like blockchain to improve efficiency and trust in their supply chain. Moving away from blockchain could diminish their innovative reputation and give competitors an edge.
Consumer Trust: With increasing consumer demand for transparency in product sourcing (especially in the food industry), dropping blockchain could erode consumer trust in the safety and authenticity of Walmart's products.
While it wouldn't be catastrophic, eliminating blockchain could certainly impact their supply chain efficiency and trust, both of which are key to their operational success today.
@AmScream: As for your continuous unfounded claims and criticisms based purely on speculation that I backed the first women-led memecoin project, which you doubt, well…
I'm sure if the sun rose in the east, you'd still find a way to question it. 🤣🤦🏻♀️
I bet he doesn’t even know that "memecoin" is just a nickname for a type of cryptocurrency. Even BITCOIN was considered a memecoin when it first started 15 years ago. It has nothing to do with the underlying technology, whether it's Solana or any other blockchain. These coins can still have advanced utilities built on top of them, like smart contracts, decentralized applications, or AI-driven tools. In fact, platforms like Solana, with its high performance and low fees, are perfect for developing complex ecosystems, regardless of the memecoin label.
These SELF-PROCLAIMED PSEUDO-EXPERTS like @AmScream are a total joke!
Below are some of my tweets after I was removed as a speaker, questioning all of their so-called "expertise" points.
As for his comment on my analogy of Pro Trump vs Pro Kamala being 180 degrees in the wrong direction, it only highlights how arrogant and misguided he's trying to be while attempting to paint himself as the "smart" one in the room.
There's an old saying, "Think before you speak" or "Read before you speak."
A quick scroll through my timeline would have clearly shown that I’m PRO KAMALA. His assumption is way off—being PRO CRYPTO doesn’t mean I’m PRO TRUMP. I also made it clear that my analogy was just that—an analogy—since I have no knowledge of their political stance.
@AmScream, I need to SCHOOL YOU on a few wise sayings from truly intellectual people: 'Wisdom is not in speaking, but in listening,' and 'An intelligent person listens more than they speak.'
Take a listen to my analogy, which @AmScream didn’t even bother to hear.
IN SUMMARY: As I tweeted when their spaces ended:
“To the convinced mind, no explanation is needed. To the skeptical mind, no explanation will suffice.”
These hardcore skeptics need a history lesson, which I shared: Take Thomas Edison and Henry Ford, for example—both were initially skeptical of airplanes. And then there's Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman, who in 1998 predicted that the internet would have no more impact on the economy than the fax machine. He dismissed it as a passing fad, yet the internet became one of the most transformative innovations in history, reshaping industries worldwide.
These super skeptics will never admit what they already know: #CRYPTO IS HERE TO STAY. With crypto ETFs now part of traditional portfolios, 401(k)s, and IRAs, they still refuse to acknowledge that THEY ARE WRONG and will go down in history like Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, and Paul Krugman—doubting groundbreaking innovations until proven otherwise.
While John Reed Stark claims he’s not selling anything to make money, he certainly enjoys the privilege of being invited as an "expert" against crypto and blockchain—publicity is wealth too. Meanwhile, Jake, @AmScream, and David profit from selling books or receiving donations through their websites. As for Dave Troy and Mark Hays, I don’t know enough to speculate.
IN CLOSING, super skeptics, especially the HOST like JAKE DONOHUE and SELF-PROCLAIMED PSEUDO-EXPERT like @AmScream, will always focus on blown-up crypto cases like FTX, BlockFi, or CZ Binance in prison, trying to paint the entire crypto space with the same brush—as if one bad painting means all paintings are bad.
It’s like saying all cars are dangerous because of a few reckless drivers!! 🤣🤦🏻♀️
Maybe they're all just taking the bus around?! 🤷🏻♀️
They’ve been attacked by CRYPTO IDIOTS (and yes, many are, I admit), with weak insults like calling them boomers, out of touch, or poor.
But they would never dare debate anyone with real substance and credentials because that would only expose how outdated and disconnected their theories truly are.
Supplement: Crypto Futures: Kamala's Vision vs Trump's Disaster
Here’s my FORECAST, since they all had their chance to make predictions about a KAMALA PRESIDENCY vs a TRUMP PRESIDENCY. When Kamala wins in November, she WILL embrace cryptocurrencies, but she will seek out TRUE EXPERTS—like myself—who are technologically advanced, builders in the space, ANTI-BAD ACTORS, and possess STRONG KNOWLEDGE in both traditional finance (TraFi) and crypto SEC regulations. This will help her administration adopt crypto in a more REGULATED way, pushing the technology and ecosystem forward.
My forecast is that KAMALA WILL BE PRO-CRYPTO, with added regulations to protect consumers from scams and fraud.
On the other hand, if we end up with a TRUMP presidency—well, America would need more help than just in the crypto space. TRUMP wouldn’t care about crypto, but the big crypto BAD ACTORS like COINBASE, Gemini, and a16z could easily bribe him to keep pretending to support crypto for the next four years. This would lead to more disasters like the FTX case, with more billionaires and millionaires being made at the cost of more scams and fraud.
UPDATE (9/13/24): Tweets posted after the publication of this article.
These boomers will forever be outdated, not just because they don’t understand the technologies, but because they're stuck in outdated theories about finance and crypto. You’d think it would be smart for them to start adjusting their stance now that both Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs have been approved and major Wall Street firms are recommending crypto as part of traditional retirement portfolios, like 401Ks and IRAs.
But no, these boomers cling to their old ways, and what matters most to them is the satisfaction they’ll get if the entire crypto and blockchain space were to collapse. They’ll claim victory, saying they were right all along—that crypto is nothing more than a scam, a tool for money laundering, malware, and a threat to society. It's the same tired narrative we've been hearing for years, even as billions are pouring into crypto ETFs.
And to say they don't benefit from crypto? That's laughable—many are profiting from book sales, donations, and people like John Reed Stark are [possibly] getting paid to speak at events, relishing the spotlight, which is a form of wealth. If they don’t see the irony in that, they’re all hypocrites and completely irrelevant!
UPDATE (9/17/24): Debunking Lies and Missing Flights: Shutting Down @AmScream’s Blatant Nonsense
It’s been about 5 days since that Twitter Space and my Substack post, and @AmScream finally spoke up—with a blatant lie about his documentary. I wouldn’t waste a second watching it, especially since we debated back and forth through tweets. My first tweet was at 11:49AM PST (converted, as I’m not in California), and my last one—where I completely shut down his nonsense—was at 5:16PM PST.
I literally missed my flight, but it was worth it to expose an incompetent, ignorant, self-proclaimed “expert” with zero substance, zero knowledge about blockchain, and no credentials. He bases everything on outdated blogs, probably written before Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs became mainstream and part of retirement plans. He’s out of touch, arrogant, unable to accept facts, and insists his opinions are truth—stuck in a bubble of lies. Let’s start by sharing his first lie, which I clearly debunked.
Here Is His FIRST Lie Tweet—If He Can Lie About This, He Can Lie About Anything
This was my response:
@AmScream thought he could fool people by claiming his "award-winning" documentary would somehow validate his nonsense and irrelevance. He tried to mislead people into thinking these lame-ass awards endorsed the accuracy of his content, when in reality, they neither approve nor disapprove of the specific content. They only judge production value, which he probably hired film people to handle for him, not the truth behind what he’s selling. He was simply trying to pass off his deception as something legitimate.
Here he was, trying to play the nice guy after acting like a complete asshole on Twitter Spaces, where his pals muted everyone’s mic so he could have the last word. The tables turned quickly when he didn’t have anyone to mute me. I debunked all of his nonsense through tweets, exposing how out of touch, irrelevant, uninformed, and clueless he is about blockchain—and so much more.
I won’t delve into all the details, but I’ve taken a video screenshot of all the tweets, posted below. Reviewing them makes it clear—his incompetence, lack of depth and knowledge, and arrogant ignorance are on full display, proving to everyone exactly who he is.
This was my final tweet when he finally shut up, having nothing left to say after being thoroughly debunked. Who knows how many years he’s been spreading lies, shielded by his friends who also cling to outdated theories, like crypto being a ponzi scheme. I’m sure he’ll try to come back, as he hinted with his "in time" comment, claiming he’ll bring more facts. LOL. I hope he uses that time wisely to get SCHOOLED and learn some updated, relevant facts so he can realize just how outdated his theories truly are.
Excellent comeback! Nice Jenny!
His X profile says he's a Reddit moderator. That alone speaks volumes about his "expertise" and the fact that these guys actually rely on him.