- Aug 14, 2018
Frankly, this is a PR disaster.
Don't get me wrong @amirm, your objective reality is my objective reality. I am typically unable to hear the differences @GoldenOne hears/claims to hear. I also do understand the near impossibility to check a remote test for cheating. Not implying that @GoldenOne would cheat, just that even if he doesn't, a remote uncontrolled/weakly controlled test will not convince anyone anyway. However, that was clear from the start, and going all-in with a $1000 bet was probably unwise, if spectacular.
Some of the back-tracking/conditions make sense and were actually graciously accepted by "our blogger". And that's when the PR tide starts to turn. Whenever he calmly and confidently accepts something, you add new requirements, change the nature and the scope of the test. The net PR result is very negative: while "our blogger" builds his "nice accomodating and confident guy" image, you now appear to wiggle frantically in damage control mode, mostly because you trapped yourself in proposing a flawed challenge in the first place...