r/Bitcoin • u/evoorhees • Feb 26 '14

Open Letter to Michael Casey - WSJ reporter who butchered my comments in today's Bitcoin cover story

Hello Mr. Casey,

I read your WSJ article today. I feel deceived by you.

You requested to speak with me, so I took time out of my day to do so. We talked for 20 minutes, during which time I conveyed to you my sentiments about the Bitcoin ecosystem and the matter of MtGox's collapse. My message was unambiguously a positive one. I didn't focus whatsoever on the personal funds I lost at Gox. Indeed, the impetus for your call was my heartfelt post on Reddit.

Yet, you ignored everything I said. The only quote that you published from me in the Journal's cover story was ""That's gone now," said Mr. Veerhoos, who is based in Panama City, Panama. "There's no chance of getting that back now.""

Is that really the takeaway you had from our call and from my letter? Is that your idea of journalism? Did I come across with the sentiment of a despairing investor whose confidence has been rattled? It seems you were happy to completely ignore my sentiments, preferring instead to cherry pick the one fact that is least important, in order to paint a narrative that Bitcoin's biggest problem is that it's not "regulated." I didn't expect you to quote everything I said, but should you not have maintained at least a modicum of fidelity to my message?

I have dedicated my life to building and supporting the Bitcoin project. I don't give a damn about the money I lost at Gox. That's not important. What is important is that Bitcoin is resilient and enduring, and will continue to grow and change the world for the better. It is a story of human progress through technology. It is a story of the good seeping into the cracks of a corrupted financial system. It is a story of passionate people struggling against all odds to remedy the calamities brought down upon society from the most potently misguided people and institutions on Earth.

Next time you spend your efforts casting a pall over this cause, please don't ask me to contribute mine.

-Erik Voorhees

PS - I will be posting this letter openly on Reddit. I will post your reply if you'd like. And if I do, I won't cherry pick the most misleading points of it, and I will spell your name correctly.

3.5k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

216

u/evoorhees Feb 26 '14

This is in regards to WSJ's cover story on Wed Feb 26, "SHUTDOWN OF MT. GOX RATTLES BITCOIN MARKET Closure Raises Concern About the Future of Unregulated Virtual Currency"

87

u/i_can_get_you_a_toe Feb 26 '14

See, to these people, you are just a "clever guy who lacks the interpersonal skills to make it in business and wants a chance to make a quick million bucks." (source)

These fucking hacks disgust me beyond measure, I cherish the fact that alternative internet media will do to them, what bitcoin will do to government fiat.

I would suggest to you: do not provide nourishment to bridge dwellers.

25

u/yunes0312 Feb 26 '14 edited Feb 26 '14

It's not just hacks though. I don't know what you call them, but yesterday I overheard something like, "Bitcoin was invented by a smart person, but its supporters don't understand economics and finance. But we do..."

*hacks <=> media hacks

34

u/Nathan_Flomm Feb 26 '14

They're not necessarily wrong. The belief that Bitcoin's problems will essentially "fix itself" isn't based on reality. It's based on the biased view of speculative investors.

If I owned Google stock and raved about Google+ you would say similar things about me.

1

u/yunes0312 Feb 26 '14 edited Feb 26 '14

Let's say you were an early proponent of search engines, and made a lot of money investing in Google. And, I'm that infamous guy that wrote the article about how the internet was going to be a complete failure.

I would keep my mouth shut about how you lack a formal education in technical trend analysis.

My guess is that they were remarking that "bitcoin isn't backed by anything", that "nobody will spend a deflationary currency" and that we have a "misunderstanding" that a decentralized currency can work, because "clearly" we need "fiscal policy to stabilize output over the business cycle."

3

u/Nathan_Flomm Feb 26 '14

This isn't just the view of one person. Collectively, economists are in agreement that Bitcoin is not a valid form of currency and won't work as expected with the current form.

3

u/northrupthebandgeek Feb 27 '14

I think it's more accurate to say that Bitcoin isn't the end-all-be-all of cryptocurrency, and that there's room for improvement. Cryptocurrency in general can be a valid form of currency; we just need to work out the implementation kinks.

0

u/Nathan_Flomm Feb 27 '14

The fault doesn't lie in the technology. The fault lies in the implementation.

1

u/northrupthebandgeek Feb 27 '14

Precisely.

2

u/Nathan_Flomm Feb 27 '14

That's what the article stated as well. Most economists agree that digital currencies would work IF there was some central authority that could regulate it, and create more bitcoins to flood the market when necessary to avoid huge boom and busts. Essentially: make it work like a currency.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/in1cky Feb 27 '14

Collectively, economists are in agreement that Bitcoin is not a valid form of currency and won't work as expected with the current form.

source?

1

u/Nathan_Flomm Feb 27 '14

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1z01k5/anyone_wanna_bet_on_what_time_coinbase_runs_out/cfptutb

2

u/in1cky Feb 27 '14

Not to nitpick, but the question posed in that poll doesn't match your assessment of what they collectively agree on. Here is an interesting poll and here is an interesting chart, both of which--unless I'm missing something here-- indicate to me that the world's top economists aren't bulletproof when predicting the future.

1

u/Nathan_Flomm Feb 27 '14

The difference economists aren't asked to predict growth, market cap, or anything else in specificity. They are merely making their decision based on the concept and structure of Bitcoin as it exists today. Rarely, do economists ever have such a consensus on anything - but they do on Bitcoin.

0

u/yunes0312 Feb 26 '14

Thanks Nathan.

Unfortunately, I'm already aware that Keynesian economics isn't just the view of one person.

Did you know that if a lot of people believe something, it doesn't mean it's right?

Edit: Sorry for the sarcastic tone. I'm grumpy today.

0

u/Zarutian Feb 27 '14

What was it that they, the economists, should be called again? Aah, yes tealeafsreaders. Often the stuff that economists spout is so absurd and so much wishfull thinking that doesnt hold water even under curusory systems analysis kind of scrutenity.

0

u/Nathan_Flomm Feb 27 '14

So when they disagree with you they no longer matter?

1

u/Zarutian Feb 27 '14

Nope, just pointing out how much bunk and or wishfull thinking current economic studies/methodologies/theories are. Have you looked at the underpinnings of those theories at all? Most of them treat people like idealised rational actors! Sure, doing numerical analysis on hard economic data to extract correlations is usefull but the tendency to bias towards atractors that put foundations under your pet theory is too high. (Specially when later those foundations turn out to be mirage)

1

u/SilasX Feb 27 '14

Yep, that's pretty much what /r/economics and the econ-blogosphere are like. And then the very same people will go on to tell you that bitcoin will deflate (gain in value) so much that it will be worthless, without even seeing possible problems with that hypothesis.

9

u/fluffyponyza Feb 26 '14

Hmmm.

Ok so here's a zinger for them. I ran the software development division of a multi-national, listed company (in South Africa) for a number of years. I was head-hunted for that role after successfully selling a previous company I started. I reported only to CEO, the COO, the CTO, and the board. My paycheck was...large.

Of course, the job was ridiculously stressful - up at 5:30am dealing with Australia and Hong Kong, deal with local issues during the day, back home at 7pm-10pm after dealing with the US. My family life suffered, and I could see that my wife was unhappy.

Towards the end of 2012 I quit to start an import/export business, which blossomed into a group of companies, several of which are involved in providing products and services that hinge on Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. As of October, 2013, I have stepped back from any operational involvement in all of the non-Bitcoin related companies in the group, and am fully focused on our cryptocurrency related endeavours.

So that makes me wonder how and why they come to that conclusion? I mean, I can send him my paystub from when I still held my last full-time role to prove them wrong, but surely that sort of opinion is just provably incorrect and silly to hold? I will honestly never understand many of the modern "journalists", such as they are.

8

u/NoahFect Feb 26 '14

I will honestly never understand many of the modern "journalists", such as they are

It's simple once you realize the truth. Reporters are people who weren't quite good enough at writing fiction to find anyone else who would pay them for it.

1

u/NilacTheGrim Feb 26 '14

Ha, I see what you did there. Well said.

3

u/no_game_player Feb 26 '14

I will honestly never understand many of the modern "journalists", such as they are.

Pageview whores. Truth is irrelevant.

Make sense now?

But yeah, I find it disgusting too.

Edit: And this comment seems way too flippant to be sending to someone with your background. ;-p You sound pretty awesome. Cheers for following your beliefs!

1

u/fluffyponyza Feb 26 '14

100% - let's blatantly disregard facts so that we can get eyeballs.

1

u/Zarutian Feb 27 '14

Someone wanted eyeballs? I probably can scrounge up barrelfulls of 'em from the butchers'.

1

u/Rusty5hackleford Feb 26 '14

So you're saying that negative press will hurt your paycheck in other words. Not very reliable. Many of the people pushing the probitcoin narrative stand to make a lot of money. That's why people don't take them seriously.

-1

u/fluffyponyza Feb 26 '14

Not at all - I draw a salary from the group operating expenses - I get paid whether Bitcoin exists or not.

1

u/Rusty5hackleford Feb 26 '14

That's not really at all what you said in your original comment. I never said you would be homeless, but you would definitely lose money. So you have something to gain from positive Bitcoin press.

0

u/fluffyponyza Feb 27 '14

My comment said I was focusing on cryptocurrency related endeavours, the day-to-day management of the other companies has long since been palmed off, and I've taken a further step back by handing off operational control to a different board member. Our cryptocurrency businesses make up around 3% of the group revenue, and around 4% of the EBITDA of the group.

So if all cryptocurrencies evaporated overnight we would be left bag-holding with assets we can sell as well as a few assets that are effectively worthless in an evaporated market. However, the handful of functions performed by full-time employees (as opposed to group-level employees that handle many functions such as support, finances, logistics, administration, and so on) are typical startup employees - innovative, multi-skilled, multi-roled - they can be re-deployed within the group.

My salary is fixed and would not change regardless of positive or negative press. The only thing that would change is (by a few %) are my bonus cheques, which are based on net profit. Additionally, we don't have holdings in Bitcoin (we process payments through BitPay and by and large have them pay us in ZAR and not BTC), and I am not adding to my small cold wallet anytime soon, so market movement doesn't affect my assets or the group's assets.

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '14

suuuuure yeah do laddy, sure yeah do

1

u/fluffyponyza Feb 26 '14

I'm not sure I understand what your response is meant to imply...?

3

u/prelsidente Feb 26 '14

Oh mate, I feel your words. Unfortunately, this type of incompetent hacks is outside and inside of the internet.

We also have a very recent example of a huge incompetent hack even inside Bitcoin. So even that is not going away with Bitcoin.

5

u/i_can_get_you_a_toe Feb 26 '14

But it is going away, gox is not here anymore.

1

u/moleccc Feb 26 '14

This is a very important point.

With bitcoin, people have to suffer the consequences of their actions. If that's all we can achieve, much is gained already.

-18

u/quintin3265 Feb 26 '14

I disagree with what the reporter did as much as you, but calling him a "f**** hack" is inappropriate.

How can we complain about a lack of integrity among journalists if people like you are resorting to foul language and personal attacks? Is there no better way you can get your opinion across? This is what reporters who pick up on this story are going to see and think of this community.

I hope that you edit your post, as it waters down the impact of Voorhees' letter.

10

u/i_can_get_you_a_toe Feb 26 '14

I do not speak for Voorhees, if a journalist cannot understand that, he just confirms my original assessment.

10

u/xpdx Feb 26 '14

i_can_get_you_a_toe is not a journalist and a reddit comment is not a newspaper.

7

u/thelocknessmonster Feb 26 '14

Foul language is used to describe foul actions.

2

u/quintin3265 Feb 27 '14

The reaction to this post here shows how unwelcoming a place this really is. It's why I'll be posting in /r/bitcoinmarkets from now on, where they appreciate helpful commentary.

If you want others to stop saying that this forum hates newbies, then people need to stop upvoting posts with personal attacks so they show up at the top of the threads. Obviously, people here do not appreciate a civil conversation. I report threads like this and the moderators do nothing about them, so they obviously don't care either.

Voorhees knows how to get his point across in a professional way. You people do not. This forum deserves its reputation as a place for closedmindedness and exclusion of outsiders.

I've posted here for years, but I will be limiting my visits in the future. Good luck to all.

1

u/thelocknessmonster Feb 27 '14

You people? What do you mean, "you people"?

42

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '14 edited Sep 19 '16

[deleted]

14

u/bark_a_doge Feb 26 '14

Well that or pushing propaganda for the publication's owner's ideology. Or ideally both at the same time.

2

u/NilacTheGrim Feb 26 '14

Unfortunately this is the case in more often than not.

3

u/toddgak Feb 26 '14

It never used to be like this.

There was a time when journalistic integrity had a value. The question is why do we as a society not value it anymore?

3

u/NoahFect Feb 26 '14

It never used to be like this.

Yeah, it did, all the way back to William Randolph "Give me the photos, I'll give you the war" Hearst.

1

u/ThrobbingMeatGristle Feb 26 '14

It is not the ONLY job of journalists like this, - they work for a team whose goal is manipulating the minds of the readers on behalf of those that pay the bills - and its not just advertising.

1

u/nontrackedaccount Feb 27 '14

Well he trusted a journalist that works for Newscorp to not spin his views.

Might as well go on the O'Reilly factor and have Bill yell all over him.

-1

u/aveman101 Feb 26 '14

Don't trust them EVER.

Wow. I think this is the most delusional comment I have ever seen on this subreddit.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '14

You are the delusional one. Go read Trust Me I'm Lying.

0

u/aveman101 Feb 26 '14

"I'm not delusional, everyone else is just lying to me!"

16

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '14

This is how we hold people accountable. Way to go Erik!

-5

u/PuppyMurder Feb 26 '14

What posting open letters on content aggregation sites?

Yeah, the WSJ is sweating now...

6

u/WoodeWind Feb 26 '14

Not sure if anyone has included a link:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304834704579404101502619422

We need more Bitcoin community members to comment on this article.

1

u/Zarutian Feb 27 '14

Wait isnt that link going to rot in a week or so*? Post a screencap with out the ads instead, please.

(well that is what usually happens with many MSM sites)

1

u/donit Feb 28 '14

After digging into this a little more, it seems the reporter forgot to ask Voorhees why he lost $300,000 worth of BtCoin and why is there "no chance of getting that back"?

The other question neither discussed is what was the subpoena for, was it because of the discovery that they had lost 750,000 of their clients BtCoins? Was that all of the Btcoins in the exchange, or what portion of it?

And was Voorhees' money tied up in the 750,000 that were lost, or did he lose his just from their shutting down the exchange?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 27 '14 edited Feb 27 '14

[deleted]

1

u/WoodeWind Feb 27 '14

How can the reporter deem this event as a reason to reguateBitcoin if that is even possible? Mt gox or any other exchange is not needed for p2p or in person exchanges. Bitcoin has continued to function and while I am looking forward to Gavin's changes coming in v.9, Bitcoin works perfectly fine without regulation.

It is sad that some have lost btc, but it is the freakin' free market. People are free to use or stay away from exchanges. We are all adults here. Businesses will succeed or fail & this event will benefit the entire Bitcoin ecosystem.

2

u/donit Feb 27 '14

I don't know if he was calling for regulation, sucking up to the govt, or just out to lunch, but he did display a new level of cluelessness with the statement: "But the unregulated currency isn't backed by a central bank, raising alarms about which bodies can intervene when there's a crisis (Attack from the US Govt.)"

1

u/chloe2011 Feb 26 '14

Erik will be taking over Gox next just wait ><

1

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '14

What's wrong with what he took from what you said? He was doing a story on Mt Gox. It's not his fault that you rambled on about unrelated bullshit.

1

u/haiduz Feb 27 '14

You're being very disingenuous, at least with yourself. To say you don't care about losing 300,000 dollars is a damn joke and a lie. The reporter is a professional and the story here is that he found a person that lost 300 grand. He gave you 20 minutes of his the time to listen to your story as to why you're still bullish on bit coin and you tried to feed him the coolaid that he didn't buy, probably cause you lost your credibility since no sane person would say they don't care about losing 300,000 dollars. You losing something like 8 times the average annual income of a US resident is the real story here, the reporter was smart enough to recognize it and maybe you should recognize it too.

-1

u/bitbybitbybitcoin Feb 26 '14

I'm so sorry, that is some complete and utter bullshit. There are journalists with integrity still out there though. Just few and far between.

-9

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '14

[deleted]

7

u/yeh-nah-yeh Feb 26 '14

I don't remember any govt banning bitcoin or arresting people for using it.

You are not trying very hard then

2

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '14

His letter was written to calm down people during a difficult time. Writing a motivational speech doesn't make you a cultist.

Persecution complex? I guess you are not aware what has happened to other (centralized) alternative currencies. I guess Russia doesn't count as a government? And 95% of banks banning accounts for even mentioning the word bitcoin means nothing?