Its not that they dont like him, its more of Editor was big believer until Tesla scammed him out of half a $mil worth of fake roadsters that never materialized.
If that's really the reason, that's the most idiotic reason possible. So he "earned" a couple of Roadsters by spamming his referral code, and it turns out his free cars might be a decade late, and maybe not as awesome as promised?
If your employer said they'd pay you half a million if you worked for them, and then you did and they didn't pay you, I doubt you'd be dismissing it so frivolously
Is it fraud if he paid $0 for non-existent roadsters? Referral credits are legal fictions, much like how Tesla Roadsters are physical fictions. Trading one fiction for another isn’t fraud, it’s cosplay.
>Is it fraud if he paid $0 for non-existent roadsters?
Is it fraud if you worked for a startup that promised you options, and then refused to honor/issue those said options? After all, because those options never existed, you also "paid $0 for non-existent [options]"?
> Leveraging an existing monetised readership for referral credits isn’t “work”.
> Is it fraud if he paid $0 for non-existent roadsters?
How do you think readership gets monetised in the first place? The biggest way is ads, which includes referrals.
Do you dismiss paid ad placement the same way you dismiss referrals? If not, what makes it different?
> Referral credits are legal fictions
A promise for $100 of stuff isn't exactly the same as a promise for $100, but it's close. Debt is a "legal fiction" but that doesn't mean it's not legitimate, or that you can pretend it doesn't exist.
