I think "investing" is about much more than profit. I would not feel good investing in military companies and profiting via war/killing.
Likewise, but on a much lesser level, I would not want to profit from an instamined coin who has potentially serious security issues. Another moral issue that I stay away from.
That is an investment in a future failure and it brings the whole ship down with it and does wonders for destroying the image of Crypto.

So, one should not equate brain dead people with exposing fraud, security issues, etc.
I'm not gonna name call but what do you call those who associate themselves with that?

You should know that for something to be fraud, there must be deception. As I've stated before, the DRK instamine is well known. DRK has FAQs that address it. It's 100% out in the open. You can call it unethical, but ethics are subjective. There are those who would say that gambling is unethical. As far as security goes, nothing is 100% secure until we're all using open source hardware. Haven't seen any commentary on that far more important issue.

Monero has way more to gain by building itself up than by tearing others down. If DRK is built on a flawed foundation, as you seem to think, then it would follow that it will eventually crumble.

You should know that for something to be fraud, there must be deception. As I've stated before, the DRK instamine is well known. DRK has FAQs that address it. It's 100% out in the open. You can call it unethical, but ethics are subjective. There are those who would say that gambling is unethical. As far as security goes, nothing is 100% secure until we're all using open source hardware. Haven't seen any commentary on that far more important issue. (Suggestion: incorporate the development of an open source hardware storage device into the Monero objectives/mission statement as Skycoin has done. https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/380441.msg10594612#msg10594612)

Monero has way more to gain by building itself up than by tearing others down. If DRK is built on a flawed foundation, as you seem to think, then it would follow that it will eventually crumble.

That's not something that you, or anyone in fact, can stop. People will do what they want, and face the consequences accordingly.

I'm invested in both Monero and DRK. I don't care who wins. In terms of potential profit, I actually stand to gain more from Monero, just because the DRK-XMR rate was so favorable when I diversified. That being said, why are Monero lead devs trolling Darkcoin? Are you guys fucking brain dead? Do you not realize how terrible that looks? If you guys spent half as much time working as trolling, Monero might actually be usable by now. This criticism applies to Smooth in particular. Get your head out of your ass bud.

If the horse refuses to drink, what good is it? The strong prosper and the weak perish, regardless of your futile interventions. Such is life.

You should know that for something to be fraud, there must be deception. As I've stated before, the DRK instamine is well known. DRK has FAQs that address it. It's 100% out in the open.

Hey smooth! Do you feel like you are being dragged through the mud?  I sure dont.

First of all, being buried in a huge FAQ is not "out in the open". Is it stated on the OP along with the coin parameters? Is it included in specifications page on the web site? Those are places where normally relevant facts and parameters about the distribution of a coin are stated. Answers: No and no.

Second, if this is all "out in the open" why do DRK supporters get so upset about it being discussed, attack the person discussing it (including claimed doxing, though I doubt that was accurate), go onto other coin threads complain about it being discussed, etc.?

Third, the DRK FAQ itself is little more than a vehicle for further deception:

1. It claims the instamine took place over 48 hours. In fact the main part of the instamine (approx 1.5 million coins) happened in just 8 hours

2. It claims definitively the coins were sold/distributed (and makes other unsupported statements) when in fact this is entirely unproven and in fact unprovable.

3. It offers no disclosure about some relevant events surrounding the instamine that cast a negative light:

a) Evan promising not to launch for a few days and then doing an ambush launch shortly thereafter with 2 hours notice.

b) That there was a "serious error" in the code during the first two hours of the launch, during which time >500K coins were mined by someone somehow.

c) Any statement about the goals or planned features for the coin was withheld until after the instamine was over. In order to have any reason to mine this coin during that time you would have to literally mine every single generic featureless coin launch, or simply be extremely lucky, which is implausible for any outsiders. In this way the instamine was effectively a premine.

d) Several cuts to the mining reward that were made later (including redirecting them to masternodes i.e. existing coin owners), increasing the relative size of the premine.

Ask yourself: why is it that every single thing that has ever happened before during and after the launch, as well as the subsequent supply of the coin, had the effect of decreasing outside participation and increasing share that benefits insiders? If these were a "mistake" or "accident" you would expect half to fall one way and half the other. Sorry, I don't buy this "coincidence"

Have fun with your instamined/premined scam coin, and go right on running it up as high as it'll go, just don't expect others to remain silent about it.

Concern trolling much?

No one is actively "disparaging competitors" and we certainly aren't going to hire people to do it. We are criticizing an instamine/premine scam with mediocre technology. It doesn't even matter whether it is a competitor or not (a reasonable argument has been made that it isn't). Bytecoin wasn't a competitor of anything when I criticized their ninjamine/premine scam, for example. I don't play favorites.