Terrible response by the Puffchat guy: https://twitter.com/MikeSuppo (Google Play's dev listing goes to the Puffchat blogspot site, which links to this Twitter account.)
"This is a friendly message to advise that you remove all web based content about Puffchat"
"Please remove within 1 hour."
"Puffchat will be fixed in due course. Every piece of content with the original author's name attached to it after GMT scheduled will only provide evidence that can be used against him."
Edit: Actually, this could just be a publicity stunt. Do something boneheaded like this, get some exposure. Take flak from users that don't necessarily matter, and hope to score a lot more users. If you're not getting the growth you hoped for, what do you have to lose?
No such thing as bad publicity. It gets the brand known "oh, yeah, puffchat, I've heard of that, can't remember why", and if they tell users that it's secure often enough, no amount of evidence that it isn't will make any difference - humans respond more strongly to an authoritative voice than to objective reality.
@iH8sn0w @NinjaLikesCheez All content, including articles, scripts, reddit posts, tweets, everything. By 11.40pm today (3/3/2014).
Hahaha, that is a pretty hilarious bit of fail, there. I don't think it could really be intentional... it might make him kinda famous (in a probably unwanted way) but it won't net him new users.
Comments
Terrible response by the Puffchat guy: https://twitter.com/MikeSuppo (Google Play's dev listing goes to the Puffchat blogspot site, which links to this Twitter account.)
Edit: Actually, this could just be a publicity stunt. Do something boneheaded like this, get some exposure. Take flak from users that don't necessarily matter, and hope to score a lot more users. If you're not getting the growth you hoped for, what do you have to lose?Maybe. But a publicity stunt that highlights findings that run counter to what you're trying to sell the platform on seems dubious.
No such thing as bad publicity. It gets the brand known "oh, yeah, puffchat, I've heard of that, can't remember why", and if they tell users that it's secure often enough, no amount of evidence that it isn't will make any difference - humans respond more strongly to an authoritative voice than to objective reality.
Hahaha, that is a pretty hilarious bit of fail, there. I don't think it could really be intentional... it might make him kinda famous (in a probably unwanted way) but it won't net him new users.