Perhaps this was a real scam initially, then he decided to pretend it wasn't, after-the-fact, to save his skin? It seems to me that leaving a shadow of a doubt as to his trustworthiness was a big, big mistake. Couldn't he have just presented the hypothetical to the community openly if that were his true goal?
I am eagerly awaiting the third act in this saga, where it is revealed that the whole exit scam/"PR stunt" was a misdirection and the real scam is uncovered.
It's possible to be both factually correct ("it would have been really easy to scam you people!") and also an asshole simultaneously. The two are not guaranteed mutually exclusive.
FYI: I've put together a little summary with commentary in the Get Rich Quick "Business Blockchain" Bible (Free Online) - The Secrets of Free Easy Money with a Fast Exit Case Study thanks to Savedroid - <a href="https://github.com/openblockchains/get-rich-quick-bible" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/openblockchains/get-rich-quick-bible</a> Buyer Beware.
Fraud: "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain."<p>I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think you can pretend to commit a crime without consequence. If he does generate publicity, it could be considered financial or personal gain. And the deception does seem wrongful, even if it was for a day. Also, there are laws against this kind of thing to prevent people from attempting a crime and then saying "I was just kidding. I wanted to make it look real so you'd know what it felt like if I actually did it."<p>In the US, suing for emotional distress in this scenario would be a slam dunk I'd imagine.<p>More than that though, who wants to work or do business with someone who thinks this is a good idea.
Was this shitcoin on exchanges aleady? If so, maybe the shitcoin headmaster in this case decided to change his plans from full on exit scam to massive dump and pump.