|
Title: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on January 27, 2018, 08:37:30 PM Ponzi Scheme
a form of fraud in which belief in the success of a non-existent enterprise is fostered by the payment of quick returns to the first investors from money invested by later investors. "a classic Ponzi scheme built on treachery and lies" https://i.imgur.com/wbSkmWO.png so OG admits that if "Members" are not happy with returns they need to bring "new" money in.... then he goes all Madoff... https://i.imgur.com/zRRroKD.png yes - asking for more time.. finally from the horses mouth - what do you people think? Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TheNewAnon135246 on January 27, 2018, 09:10:57 PM Seems like he gets very defensive while Anduck justs asks OG about his concerns. Not the kind of behaviour to expect from someone running a "charity".
Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: minifrij on January 27, 2018, 09:17:49 PM Seems like he gets very defensive while Anduck justs asks OG about his concerns. Not a surprise, and also not the first time this has happened.The trick to getting around admitting that NastyFans will never get an ROI is to say that he cannot see the future, even though the past (http://minifrij.com/nasty/) has shown it has done nothing but depreciate significantly. Either that or try to measure it in USD, which is irrelevant as investments are made using Bitcoin. When NastyFans only accepts Paypal, that statistic will make sense. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on January 27, 2018, 09:27:31 PM Its because OG doesnt value BTC.. if he did he would of paid his BTC debts back in full...
https://i.imgur.com/HwF2Cvx.png some people might not know about OG and his "restructured" debts back when Nasty mining was still a business... before he turned it into a fanclub with seats it was a business with an IPO and shares... So much slime comes off this snake oil salesman one more - how he likes to abuse people who question him.. https://i.imgur.com/LIGlPt4.png Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: BTCforJoe on January 27, 2018, 09:49:14 PM Just the fact that he states that more seats are needed in order to make anything from the club... and the fact that the term “ROI” was used screams ponzi in itself. IMO, it sounds clear as day, but to OG, it’s as if he’s already drank the koolaid.
This reminds me of MLM and networking companies, but what is the service offered here? Is it pool mining? Is there an actual sustainable product? Because without one, then yes, this is clearly a ponzi. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on January 27, 2018, 09:53:43 PM Just the fact that he states that more seats are needed in order to make anything from the club... and the fact that the term “ROI” was used screams ponzi in itself. IMO, it sounds clear as day, but to OG, it’s as if he’s already drank the koolaid. This reminds me of MLM and networking companies, but what is the service offered here? Is it pool mining? Is there an actual sustainable product? Because without one, then yes, this is clearly a ponzi. you get a couple of merits for seeing the light.. all evidence is in this thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=86854.0 IPO and shares, to failed investments, then converting to a fanclub, then the dodgy backroom deals - not paying loans in full - going green!! (he sold 30BTC of seats to get his solar panels) all the shenanigans are all there in the thread - although any time I speak out I am called a troll and attacked with negatives as he uses his DT-1 position against me. https://i.imgur.com/hhICkWg.png Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: owlcatz on January 27, 2018, 09:55:11 PM I have to agree, (and not because the scammer gave me a neg rating and he's DT1), this is a ponzi. I even felt scammed when as a newbie I bought 5 minted seats. I think in a year or two of having the coin, it maybe had 5 bucks of btc on it. I sold it once I realized this was all just a large (and quite old apparently) scam - This guy doesn't even believe in BTC, he counts everything in USD to make it seem all prettier.
Hey OG - what exactly do you need more time for? Newbies to fall for your scam and buy more seats so you can increase payouts? Oh wait, sounds like a ponzi ??? Also, you always mention that people should be doing more for the club. What exactly, other than running a miner or something? Anything???? ::) Finally, people are starting to see the truth here... FFS, it's about time! :P Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on January 27, 2018, 10:01:55 PM great to see you here fighting back against mr Aladeen..
take a look at this - in the "restructured" loan agreement there is a $ amount from the BFL refund.. https://i.imgur.com/yR6WDKC.png so when the refund didnt come through - mr Forum treasurer.. he just says no refund from BFL.. ah well I only promised the refund - not my problem if it didnt come through - yet he specified the $ amount above. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: owlcatz on January 27, 2018, 10:23:20 PM Jesus christ... I can't really follow but how much BTC and/or USD was lost to investors in total?
edit - and why does .25 go to "Nastymining"? is that a donation from a loan payment? Man, this guys books must be cooked as shit.... if he even has any legal paperwork at all!? :P Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on January 27, 2018, 10:31:33 PM Jesus christ... I can't really follow but how much BTC and/or USD was lost to investors in total? edit - and why does .25 go to "Nastymining"? is that a donation from a loan payment? Man, this guys books must be cooked as shit.... if he even has any legal paperwork at all!? :P the loans were just under 300BTC and he ended up paying less than 10BTC back - they also used some "OG" magic to make up 5K more seats... I bet the lenders other than OG are still pissed on that one.. this one makes me giggle as well.. IPO - for those who dont know means initial public offering.. OG sold shares in his mining op.. https://i.imgur.com/KlR44nR.png then a few years later, after he could not fulfill his loans, decides to quote everything in USD - Turns all Madoff.. well he has now started calling it a charity. https://i.imgur.com/XsabVA7.png It's pretty clear he has no clear idea what NF is. I'd like to see the docs that prove transition from IPO to charity and how that was all accounted for legally as you can't just write a note and call it "done" but that is the act of the forum treasurer.. this bloke is trusted with 500BTC of forum funds and has been paid 6BTC a year to do it... you would think more members would be screaming out for money back. yet he still has his auction site up for seats, he still pedals his wares in the Collectibles sub.. another great piece of info is that every minted seat comes with an OG owned seat.. thats right he is offloading his own seats through physical sales.. can anyone else see what is going on here? notice how it is "his" mining operation now - yet above he sold shares in it?? EDIT... Seems like he gets very defensive while Anduck justs asks OG about his concerns. Not a surprise, and also not the first time this has happened.The trick to getting around admitting that NastyFans will never get an ROI is to say that he cannot see the future, even though the past (http://minifrij.com/nasty/) has shown it has done nothing but depreciate significantly. Either that or try to measure it in USD, which is irrelevant as investments are made using Bitcoin. When NastyFans only accepts Paypal, that statistic will make sense. wow - just noticed that Mini.. what a great site you have there, so even more proof that he is either running a failed business or he is outright scamming. falling prices over time and proof that he raised funds to start a business and not a charity... Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: owlcatz on January 27, 2018, 10:52:58 PM Holy fuck... It's really a shame more forum members are either afraid to speak up about this due to his DT1 trust abuse, or just don't care. Anyhow, if we can save some newbies from falling for his phony seats, alls well. :D
Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: OgNasty on January 27, 2018, 11:30:36 PM You guys really need to get a life. I get so tired of stating the below.
1) I don't run NastyFans. 2) I buy seats and am a regular member like everyone else (I just bought 25 more yesterday). TMAN, you literally provided a screenshot showing that pricing was always in USD from literally day 1. Those GLBSE shares were priced at $1.54. I have since returned more than $5 per seat while they carry a current value of more than $20. I have not taken a dime for any of my time/electricity/space/internet and continue to make efforts to bring in donations to NastyFans. When GLBSE burned, there were hundreds of similar organizations that turned to ashes. The fact that you attack the one Phoenix that found a way to rise out of that instead of appreciating it says more about your character than anything else. The bottom line is that I run a mining organization that I donate 100% of the electricity to, provide with free internet, free cooling, free space, and operate for free just to give away all the mined BTC to the NastyFans organization that anyone in the world can be a part of. https://talkimg.com/images/2024/01/11/3UJeJ.png https://talkimg.com/images/2024/01/11/3UjGC.png Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TwitchySeal on January 28, 2018, 01:16:17 AM I would love to have a skype/phone/whatever conversation to explain exactly what a scumbag OGNasty really is.
I can prove he's a liar. I can prove he abuses the trust system. Let's talk about it, if anyone cares. He's also proud of the way he put a significant amount of effort into convincing other people into investing their money into Butterfly Labs and the Pirateat Ponzi (easily two of the biggest ponzis of all time) Side note, can anyone confirm if he is really still being paid BTC0.5 per month for holding BTC500 for Theymos as a forum 'treasurer', every month for the past few years? I have to assume that deal has expired some how, and if not it definitely should be. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: owlcatz on January 28, 2018, 01:44:22 AM You guys really need to get a life. I get so tired of stating the below. <snip bunch of bullshit crap as always> Liar. What's new. Who's paying for your swimming pool maintenance, or your electricity at your home? Who paid for your solar panels? (I know, why can't you explain it??) You literally don't address anything - You just spew your "alternative facts"... Are you Donald Fucking Trump, or KellyAnn Conjob? ??? Anyhow, start addressing the questions above and maybe you'll tread your way out of the mess you have dug yourself into. :P I can prove he abuses the trust system. What's to prove? Look at the rating he left me a month ago... :D Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TwitchySeal on January 28, 2018, 01:53:11 AM You guys really need to get a life. I get so tired of stating the below. <snip bunch of bullshit crap as always> Liar. What's new. Who's paying for your swimming pool maintenance, or your electricity at your home? Who paid for your solar panels? (I know, why can't you explain it??) You literally don't address anything - You just spew your "alternative facts"... Are you Donald Fucking Trump, or KellyAnn Conjob? ??? Anyhow, start addressing the questions above and maybe you'll tread your way out of the mess you have dug yourself into. :P I can prove he abuses the trust system. What's to prove? Look at the rating he left me a month ago... :D It's actually much worst than any damage he has done to a single user. OgNasty joined this forum: June 04, 2011, 08:23:23 PM As of July 2016, he had literally ZERO negative trusts sent or received - trusted or untrusted. From 2011 until Summer 2016, he bullied anyone and everyone who dared leave him negative trust into removing it. He didn't even leave negative trust for the people who ran ponzi schemes that he convinced other people to invest in. Then he got some neg trust that he couldn't bully away - since then he seems to have gone from "let me use my status to preserve my 'perfect record' " to "it's open season on these bitches" I'd love to share more details, can dig up tons of links and screenshots if anyones interested. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: OgNasty on January 28, 2018, 01:59:59 AM Who's paying for your swimming pool maintenance, or your electricity at your home? Who paid for your solar panels? I maintain my pool myself. I pay for the electricity in my home. I paid for my solar panels. :D Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: BTCforJoe on January 28, 2018, 02:03:40 AM You guys really need to get a life. I get so tired of stating the below. <snip bunch of bullshit crap as always> Liar. What's new. Who's paying for your swimming pool maintenance, or your electricity at your home? Who paid for your solar panels? (I know, why can't you explain it??) You literally don't address anything - You just spew your "alternative facts"... Are you Donald Fucking Trump, or KellyAnn Conjob? ??? Anyhow, start addressing the questions above and maybe you'll tread your way out of the mess you have dug yourself into. :P I can prove he abuses the trust system. What's to prove? Look at the rating he left me a month ago... :D It's actually much worst than any damage he has done to a single user. OgNasty joined this forum: June 04, 2011, 08:23:23 PM As of July 2016, he had literally ZERO negative trusts sent or received - trusted or untrusted. From 2011 until Summer 2016, he bullied anyone and everyone who dared leave him negative trust into removing it. He didn't even leave negative trust for the people who ran ponzi schemes that he convinced other people to invest in. Then he got some neg trust that he couldn't bully away - since then he seems to have gone from "let me use my status to preserve my 'perfect record' " to "it's open season on these bitches" I'd love to share more details, can dig up tons of links and screenshots if anyones interested. Considering that this is a Scam Accusation thread against OgNasty, I'm actually interested. I've seen him post around the forums, but have never run into the whole NastyPool offering that this topic was started about, but I have to say that I've been exploring his post history and trust history and their references, and holy hell. I feel like I'm in high school all over again :D I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this, but as an outsider with a 3rd party point of view, I'm more inclined to believe that anything related to NastyFans is a sham without any real services or products that benefit a user from joining. EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi, which is okay as long as the person entering the pool/club/charity understand that what they're "donating" to is, in fact, a ponzi that relies on the promotions and dedicated work of its members (bringing in more members) to be able to realize a "return" on their "donation". I don't know when this became so convoluted, but I had to take a break on page 51 of the NastyFans thread. I'll get back to finishing it later so I could provide some more of my input, but my oh my... what an interesting read so far. You guys really need to get a life. I get so tired of stating the below. 1) I don't run NastyFans. 2) I buy seats and am a regular member like everyone else (I just bought 25 more yesterday). -snip- This is just my opinion, but that's exactly like my position in an offshore corporation that I am a part of. I don't own the corporation; I'm just a board member of the corporation, but I do get this nifty little plastic card that allows me to make purchases and I'm also allowed to send emails and make phone calls with people regarding the best interest of said corporation. But I don't own it, nor do I run it. I'm just a regular ol' member of the corporation. Just sayin'. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: OgNasty on January 28, 2018, 02:31:45 AM I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TwitchySeal on January 28, 2018, 02:33:23 AM You guys really need to get a life. I get so tired of stating the below. <snip bunch of bullshit crap as always> Liar. What's new. Who's paying for your swimming pool maintenance, or your electricity at your home? Who paid for your solar panels? (I know, why can't you explain it??) You literally don't address anything - You just spew your "alternative facts"... Are you Donald Fucking Trump, or KellyAnn Conjob? ??? Anyhow, start addressing the questions above and maybe you'll tread your way out of the mess you have dug yourself into. :P I can prove he abuses the trust system. What's to prove? Look at the rating he left me a month ago... :D It's actually much worst than any damage he has done to a single user. OgNasty joined this forum: June 04, 2011, 08:23:23 PM As of July 2016, he had literally ZERO negative trusts sent or received - trusted or untrusted. From 2011 until Summer 2016, he bullied anyone and everyone who dared leave him negative trust into removing it. He didn't even leave negative trust for the people who ran ponzi schemes that he convinced other people to invest in. Then he got some neg trust that he couldn't bully away - since then he seems to have gone from "let me use my status to preserve my 'perfect record' " to "it's open season on these bitches" I'd love to share more details, can dig up tons of links and screenshots if anyones interested. Considering that this is a Scam Accusation thread against OgNasty, I'm actually interested. I've seen him post around the forums, but have never run into the whole NastyPool offering that this topic was started about, but I have to say that I've been exploring his post history and trust history and their references, and holy hell. I feel like I'm in high school all over again :D I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this, but as an outsider with a 3rd party point of view, I'm more inclined to believe that anything related to NastyFans is a sham without any real services or products that benefit a user from joining. EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi, which is okay as long as the person entering the pool/club/charity understand that what they're "donating" to is, in fact, a ponzi that relies on the promotions and dedicated work of its members (bringing in more members) to be able to realize a "return" on their "donation". I don't know when this became so convoluted, but I had to take a break on page 51 of the NastyFans thread. I'll get back to finishing it later so I could provide some more of my input, but my oh my... what an interesting read so far. You guys really need to get a life. I get so tired of stating the below. 1) I don't run NastyFans. 2) I buy seats and am a regular member like everyone else (I just bought 25 more yesterday). -snip- This is just my opinion, but that's exactly like my position in an offshore corporation that I am a part of. I don't own the corporation; I'm just a board member of the corporation, but I do get this nifty little plastic card that allows me to make purchases and I'm also allowed to send emails and make phone calls with people regarding the best interest of said corporation. But I don't own it, nor do I run it. I'm just a regular ol' member of the corporation. Just sayin'. Might take me 24 hours, but will go through my history with OgNasty and try my best to explain exactly what happened as accurately as possible. In the mean time check out the trust I left Og and also the trust Luptin left him in the mean time, including references. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: owlcatz on January 28, 2018, 02:37:46 AM I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. If you continue to spread libel statements with no evidence and do not correct your prior ones, I will red tag you for spreading lies about provably honest community projects. More trust abuse for calling you out on facts huh? Really outstanding work as a DT1 Member. I'm sure that's going to work great for you down the road.... :P Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: OgNasty on January 28, 2018, 02:44:18 AM I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. More trust abuse for calling you out on facts huh? Really outstanding work as a DT1 Member. I'm sure that's going to work great for you down the road.... :P I have little respect or patience for liars. NastyFans is not a Ponzi and this is provable. If someone says it is a Ponzi, they are a liar and shouldn’t be trusted. Not sure what about that concept you don’t grasp. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: owlcatz on January 28, 2018, 02:48:39 AM I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. If you continue to spread libel statements with no evidence and do not correct your prior ones, I will red tag you for spreading lies about provably honest community projects. More trust abuse for calling you out on facts huh? Really outstanding work as a DT1 Member. I'm sure that's going to work great for you down the road.... :P I have little respect or patience for liars. NastyFans is not a Ponzi and this is provable. If someone says it is a Ponzi, they are a liar and shouldn’t be trusted. Not sure what about that concept you don’t grasp. So... then show us all real proof its "non-ponzi provability". Just because it's yours and you have DT1 status doesn't mean you can just go around and neg people who disagree with your alternative facts. Prove it, green guy.... Shouldn't be that hard? Right.. You can't, because it's not yours, blah-lies, blah-blah... :D Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TwitchySeal on January 28, 2018, 02:59:19 AM I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. If you continue to spread libel statements with no evidence and do not correct your prior ones, I will red tag you for spreading lies about provably honest community projects. More trust abuse for calling you out on facts huh? Really outstanding work as a DT1 Member. I'm sure that's going to work great for you down the road.... :P I have little respect or patience for liars. NastyFans is not a Ponzi and this is provable. If someone says it is a Ponzi, they are a liar and shouldn’t be trusted. Not sure what about that concept you don’t grasp. How many people did you collect money from to invest in Pirateat's massive ponzi scheme? No neg rep for Pirateat though... Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: BTCforJoe on January 28, 2018, 03:02:02 AM I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. If you continue to spread libel statements with no evidence and do not correct your prior ones, I will red tag you for spreading lies about provably honest community projects. I’m basing my opinion on what I have been presented with here. In the first statement of the screenshot provided in the top post, you advise members to bring in more donations to the club to make more earnings. In any other situation, that is a sure indicator of a ponzi. It’s not lateral growth that you’re promoting. From your own words, you are asking members to become more involved and contribute more to the club. This in itself seems fine. But when you ask for them to bring in more donations, that’s the part where I’ve become skeptical about the organization. I won’t edit anything I’ve posted before. I stated my observations simply as that. Observations and opinions based on the material that was put before me. If you want me to change my view, then I implore you to provide me with evidence that supports that the club in itself is not a ponzi. I’ll be more than willing to put my foot in my own mouth if you can do so, but as I just stated, my opinions are based on comparisons to other projects that are modeled around the facts that were provided in supporting that NastyFans is a ponzi. I’m inviting you to prove my opinions to be incorrect and am open to hear anything you have to say. Cheers. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: minifrij on January 28, 2018, 03:02:58 AM I have little respect or patience for liars. NastyFans is not a Ponzi and this is provable. If someone says it is a Ponzi, they are a liar and shouldn’t be trusted. Not sure what about that concept you don’t grasp. You heard the man. He is right and you are wrong, provably™! You dare question the mighty OgNasty or anything he is associated with and you will be negative rated for being such a small minded buffoon. Don't you understand? It's all just a load of fun! (providing you don't ask any questions or use logical judgement)Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: OgNasty on January 28, 2018, 03:10:11 AM If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: minifrij on January 28, 2018, 03:17:01 AM Provide evidence. The blockchain is my proof. Do your own DD. I’m wasting no more time on your trolling. Here's the original post Og made before turning on the sass.Provide evidence. Each of BTCforJoe's comments are completely valid points from an outsider who hasn't had to deal with you before. Without even trying to refute any of these, you simply state 'Provide evidence'. What a sound and justifiable response to legitimate concerns.The blockchain is my proof. The blockchain can only prove so much. Sending payments doesn't suddenly make the claims in this thread irrelevant. I could show you hundreds of transaction IDs from ponzis and HYIP schemes.I’m wasting no more time on your trolling. So anyone criticizing your scheme is either nefarious and trolling? No wonder someone so naive lost hundreds of other people's BTC in things like BFL and Pirateat40's obvious ponzi.Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Lauda on January 28, 2018, 05:46:07 AM 1) I don't run NastyFans. So you're saying that in the hypothetical case of someone getting tagged and/or legal action being taken, regardless from who, that it should be directed towards nonnakip? No neg rep for Pirateat though... No neg rep for Quickseller, a known investor in this *charity*. ::)Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on January 28, 2018, 07:48:00 AM OG ran an ipo for his mining op. Now he says he owns his mining op... I'm confused
Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: OgNasty on January 28, 2018, 08:48:04 AM 1) I don't run NastyFans. So you're saying that in the hypothetical case of someone getting tagged and/or legal action being taken, regardless from who, that it should be directed towards nonnakip? I don’t know how much more clear I can be. I don’t run NastyFans. You are as much in control of what NastyFans does as I am. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TheNewAnon135246 on January 28, 2018, 08:59:03 AM 1) I don't run NastyFans. So you're saying that in the hypothetical case of someone getting tagged and/or legal action being taken, regardless from who, that it should be directed towards nonnakip? I don’t know how much more clear I can be. I don’t run NastyFans. You are as much in control of what NastyFans does as I am. Are you sure about that? Just wanted to point out that nowhere in the nastyfans policy was there any specification / written understanding or documentation (nor any post on this forum) to authorize OgNasty to suddenly have control over treasury seats, complete with voting rights: The fanclub does not have treasury seats. All seats are the same. Just like you OgNasty received the number of seats on the GLBSE list. I think you agree that it is very generous that OgNasty does not accept donations for those seats. Maybe you want OgNasty to abstain from voting also? Sometimes OgNasty abstains. Somtimes not. Maybe OgNasty has insights to some issues that we do not know. Example of BTCFPGA: without OgNasty votes the results of the BTCFPGA order poll is not cancel. But this is obvious scam now. I trust OgNasty and I think most fans do. If OgNasty forces a poll result then maybe there are good reasons. But as president I choose polls carefully because I know OgNasty can push a majority. Maybe in the future OgNasty does not have so many seats. We have several members with many seats and are growing. So really, we have a mockery of a voting system: We have a member with many many seats. We can ask OgNasty to abstain from voting. But there are some members like stan.distortion that prefer OgNasty handles the important decisions. They maybe have no disagreement with OgNasty voting. As president I would appreciate knowing before if OgNasty will vote on a poll. Because then there is no need for that poll. 1) abstention is instead automatically treated like a veto / converted to a vote of "take no action which can be used to fix or amend broken policy" 2) the mining operations manager (or whatever OgNasty's title is) basically has full veto power for everything treasury seats are no longer treated separately like they're supposed to be. 3) there is no "3" ... though I guess I'll add that technically, the 75% majority vote requirement isn't all that abnormal, but in light of point number 2, it's easily abused. With voting we can change nastyfans policy. With dialogue we can work with OgNasty to start polls where we know OgNasty abstains. I have much respect for OgNasty and the NASTY MINING work. I trust OgNasty. As president of nastyfans I also see the problem with seat distribution. I believe this problem will fix itself as NASTY MINING and nastyfans matures. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on January 28, 2018, 09:16:07 AM OG ran an ipo for his mining op. Now he says he owns his mining op... I'm confused Why are you ignoring this?? You raised funds in an IPO now you are stating nasty mining is all yours.. how did this transition happen? EDIT - Partial answer in true OG style here. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=86854.msg29084811#msg29084811 he still refuses to give a straight answer, he seems more and more like trump every day Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Thule on January 28, 2018, 04:28:48 PM 1) I don't run NastyFans. So you're saying that in the hypothetical case of someone getting tagged and/or legal action being taken, regardless from who, that it should be directed towards nonnakip? No neg rep for Pirateat though... No neg rep for Quickseller, a known investor in this *charity*. ::)No neg rep for Lauda and TMAN for their extortial Lauda lost staff position because of that. Lauda abusing now massivly with his group competition Lauda and TMAN in a group trying to destroy OG and QS for exposing them QS opened a thread exposing Lauda which got kicked out from staff and as revange to discredit QS they added him -500 trust points. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Thule on January 28, 2018, 05:01:35 PM Anyone taking Lauda for his ITO must be insane.He is so hated by the community because of his massiv abuse that he has to defend himself with his group everywhere.
He has already been in the past exposed for a big scam and lost his position as moderator. Anyone taking him needs to know it will light a very bad light on your ITO. TMAN was part of that scam thats why he keeps defending Lauda as he is part of the group. You can read it here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.msg17624090#msg17624090 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1786074.msg17811352#msg17811352 another scam of TMAN https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2214957.msg22327483#msg22327483 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1775044.msg17703267#msg17703267 Have a look who exposed them and have a look at their profil how they are trying hard to destroy his rep Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: minifrij on January 28, 2018, 05:06:13 PM Have a look who exposed them and have a look at their profil how they are trying hard to destroy his rep Quickseller ruined his reputation on the forum long before he ever talked about Lauda, TMAN or I. You have little to no idea what you're talking about.Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Thule on January 28, 2018, 05:24:20 PM i know exectly when he got the massiv abuse of trust given and for what thread.
Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: minifrij on January 28, 2018, 05:31:36 PM i know exectly when he got the massiv abuse of trust given and for what thread. If you think that Quickseller's negative trust is unjust then you're even dimmer than I thought.Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on January 28, 2018, 08:24:45 PM OG ran an ipo for his mining op. Now he says he owns his mining op... I'm confused Why are you ignoring this?? You raised funds in an IPO now you are stating nasty mining is all yours.. how did this transition happen? -snip- Back on track... still do not understand why OG is ignoring this post... if people bought into his IPO where are the shares? blaming an exchange going pop isnt the answer.... anyway - people try to speak out against OG and his decisions... even though he does not run the place.. https://i.imgur.com/SR82P2X.png then we all get the news of BFL going tits... what does OG do? he rejoices as he has squirmed his way out of 250BTC+ of debt.. https://i.imgur.com/sPQYnBl.png notice how he then puts it on the lenders... they shouldn't be too discouraged.. https://i.imgur.com/Y2zLI0S.png so - no ownership of fucking up... no oh shit, lets try to work another way of making this right.. just.. tough titties.. you agreed so I wash my hands of this shit... then he goes on to another historic investment.. one of the best in crypto.. Even though he had slagged off the mining gear they produce. (full disclaimer I actually got done for over 100BTC by ASICMINER - but in OG Terms I did ok as I did get a decent return in Fiat based on the Dividends - my investment was over a year earlier) https://i.imgur.com/Ns7OdRj.png anyway - pointing out his downfalls here as he seems to not want to answer the pertinent question about changing from IPO to Fanclub and now Charity... Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TwitchySeal on February 24, 2018, 04:44:19 AM Long read, TLDR at bottom of post.
I've been doing some digging on OgNastys 2012 involvement in the massive ponzi scheme known as 'Bitcoin Savings and Trust' run by Trendon Shavers aka Pirateat40. I hope OgNasty will let me know if I'm wrong about any of this (with evidence) and share any missing relevant details. - On April 7, 2012 OgNasty created this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0) encouraging people to invest directly invest in pirateat40s ponzi scheme if possible. Yesterday OgNasty edited the the first post in the thread. I took a screen shot of the first half of the post but am unable to find a cached version with the full FAQ's that were originally posted. Screenshot pre-edit (https://i.gyazo.com/e306d4ed3b3f6ef417db8f44d99e06b7.png). (notice it says "Reserve Funds: Paid Out" - I'll be getting back to that) He also locked the thread yesterday, some I'm unable to post any direct quotes from the thread and will be posting links to the posts instead and copy pasting the actual quotes into this thread. About 14 hours ago I archived all posts in the thread in case OgNasty decides to edit any more posts. I hope he doesn't. - At the time, the ponzi scheme had waitlists and required a personal invite. - Pirateat40 promised a return of 1% per day initially. I know that this was eventually reduced, but I'm not sure when or by how much. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trendon_Shavers - OgNasty created this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0) for people who were unable to get a personal invite. - He was offering those who invested with him 8% or more monthly payments based on how much in total was invested. (This is much less than the 1% daily - but both interest rates, 1% daily or 8% monthly, are obviously not sustainable and should scream ponzi scheme to anyone with a basic understanding of finance. I believe OgNasty was collecting far more than he was paying people back while the ponzi scheme was still paying out. Keep in mind, the longer a ponzi scheme is able to appear solvent,) - In a April 11, 2012 post that was edited on April 26, 2012 OgNasty posted the terms of his "reserve funds": Quote RESERVE FUND: A Reserve Fund has been established to provide depositors with insurance against loss of deposits. In the event of a Bitcoin Savings & Trust failure, the Reserve Fund will be paid out to depositors, proportionately to their deposits held as listed on this thread. - April 16, 2012, OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg854449#msg854449) confirming he has received over BTC250. Apparantly this was a threshhold that allowed him to increase monthly payments by 1 or 2 %. - April 23, 2012, OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg865607#msg865607): Quote BASE RATE INCREASE: In order to encourage new deposits and reward all depositors for the growth of this program, I would like to announce a potential increase to the base rate on deposits. Once there are 2000+ Total BTC Held in Deposits listed on this thread, the base rate will be increased from 8% to 10% for all depositors. Note: Having 2000+ Total BTC Held in Deposits will also enable the Reserve Fund to grow much faster, which will benefit all depositors. The base rate may be lowered back to 8% if Total BTC Held in Deposits fall below 2000 BTC for a prolonged length of time. - April 30, 2012 - OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg876553#msg876553) after sending out a BTC.01 test payment. Quote I've sent out 0.01 BTC test payments to all depositors. If you did not receive a 0.01 BTC test payment, you have about 20 hours to let me know before interest payments are sent. If you did receive the test payment, all is well and you will receive your interest payment tomorrow. - May 1, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg878008#msg878008): Quote Interest payments have been sent. Thank you to all my depositors. - May 5, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg884213#msg884213) confirming he has received over BTC2,000 in deposits. Quote Congratulations to all depositors, as we have surpassed BTC2,000 in deposits and the base rate has been increased to 10%! We also got a shiny new logo courtesy of Timbo925. - May 11, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg895455#msg895455) explaining that he would be taking 1% of all deposits to fund the reserve account. At this point there are over BTC2,000 and the reserve account has BTC30. Quote Deposits have been rising and I place the full deposit in my BS&T account, so it is not like I take 1% from each deposit and put it in the reserve fund. After 1 month, from the very first deposit, I've built a 30 BTC reserve. That amount will continue to rise and is not pegged to a %. Now that we have a 2000+ BTC balance, that will enable the reserve fund to grow more quickly. I will admit I have been focusing more on providing a higher base rate and interest rate loyalty rewards than building the reserve fund. - May 23, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg917045#msg917045) informing people that the reserve account is up to BTC50. (Still over BTC2000 invested) Quote UPDATE: Reserve Account has been increased to 50 BTC. Deposits are now allowed at any time during the month. Reinvesting interest is now allowed, PM me to signup. - June 1, 2012 OgNasty makes second round of interest payments and shares details in this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg936171#msg936171) According to the info he posts, he has now collected BTC2970 and paid out each investor between 3% and 11% on their investment (some investors bought in mid month so they receive a smaller cut based on when they invested. The bigger investors received a 1% 2% or 3% bonus based on the size of their deposit. Details of users and their addresses: Code: Depositor Rate Reward Amount Payment Address - June 24, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg987574#msg987574) offering a bump up to 12% monthly return as long as the total investment was greater than BTC2,000 - July 1, 2012 OgNasty makes his third monthly interest payment in this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1002169#msg1002169) At this point he has BTC2638.25 invested. Quote MONTHLY PAYMENTS SENT: Interest payments have been sent to depositors for the month of June. Code: Account Opened Depositor Rate Reward Amount Payment Address - July 2, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1004105#msg1004105). Apparently pirateat40 has lowered interest rates. The end is near. Quote There will be some adjustments to adapt to the new lower rates at Bitcoin Savings & Trust. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=90327.msg1004085#msg1004085 We have also dipped below the 2000 BTC requirement and the interest rate has now dropped back down to 8% monthly. Embarrassed - July 21, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1045555#msg1045555) Updating the current reserve to BTC65. Important: This is the last mention I can find on the total value of the reserve account that OgNasty is using to insure investors. Quote UPDATE: Reserve Account has been increased to 65 BTC. Base rate will remain at 8% after the BS&T rate reduction. Rewards will be limited to 2% after the BS&T rate reduction. - August 1, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1072336#msg1072336) Quote I'm awaiting a withdrawal from BS&T. All payments/withdrawals will be made as soon as this transfer is completed. - August 2, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1073454#msg1073454). Note: unlike previous months no details on total invested or paid out are shared. Quote All payments and withdrawals have been processed for July. Thank you. - August 17, 2012 OgNasty makes this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1109202#msg1109202) confirming that it was a scam all along. It's also worth noting that OgNasty he was considering working to continue running his 'program' but would more likely focus on his NastyMining project. So, he thought about continuing to run a ponzi scheme, but would be most likely he would look into creating his own project, Nasty Mining. Let that sink in for a minute. Quote Due to the news of BTCST closing, I have requested all funds from the account and will be returning them to depositors as soon as received. So the reserve funds were worth BTC65 (maybe a bit more) and the actual investments worth worth way more than BTC1,000, quite possibly well over BTC2,000. Nobody confirmed getting their investment back. The only direct claim he made was that the "reserve fund has been paid out". Again, reserve fund = ~BTC65, investments = ~BTC2,000.I will be looking into options to keep the program running in one form or another, but most likely I will close this program down to focus on NastyMining. Thank you to all my depositors. UPDATE: Bitcoin Savings & Trust is officially in default and the reserve fund has been paid out to depositors. Note, I have only taken a cursory look at the deposit addresses and none of them seem to line up with any sort of full refund of their investment. If OgNasty chooses to dispute the results of my investigation, I will surely do so. Hopefully someone will help out as this is quite a pain in the ass. TLDR- - Beginning in April (April 7, 2012) OgNasty collected funds from investors and offered between 8% and 12% monthly return on investment. - OgNasty invested the funds he collected in Pirateat40's massive ponzi scheme that offered 1% daily to start and later lowered it. (He likely made quite a bit considering 12% monthly is far less than 1% daily) - OgNasty claimed to have BTC2970 invested on June 1, 2012 and BTC2638.25 on July 1. - OgNasty claimed to be taking 1% of all investments to set aside as a "reserve account" in case pireateat40 scammed. - On July 21, 2012 , OgNasty confirmed that the reserve fund was worth BTC65 . I can't find anywhere confirming it was any higher than that. - On August 17, 2012, OgNasty confirmed that pirateat40 had defaulted "Bitcoin Savings & Trust is officially in default and the reserve fund has been paid out to depositors." - Around BTC2,000 invested - Around BTC65 returned. OgNasty was returning 8%-12% monthly for about three months while investing in a ponzi scheme that was paying out as much as 1% daily. Yet OgNasty still claims to have been doing the community a favor. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TwitchySeal on February 24, 2018, 04:51:28 AM I orignially posted the above post in the reputation forum in this thread - should Og Be Removed from DT1 [POLL] (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2214058.msg30930083#msg30930083)
There have been a couple responses from OG: The pirate situation was ~6 years ago. If any users of my service had a complaint, I’d be happy to address it with them, even after all this time has passed. Since there is no complaint and I paid out the insured deposits as I had agreed with the users, there is nothing to discuss here. The pirateat40 situation involved law enforcement and the authorities have prosecuted the guilty parties for the situation already. My involvement has been cleared by the folks who are paid to investigate these situations. As for the NastyMining tie in, you’re damn right I was angry about pirate stealing everyone’s funds and was sick of all the scams in the community. I vowed to help create a project capable of returning BTC to users that wouldn’t fail so that there would be at least one non-scam option on this forum going forward. I’m happy to say that while NastyMining is still just a baby, I’m quite happy with the hundreds of BTC donated by it to NastyFans and distributed to BTC users so far and look forward to that number increasing for decades into the future. Could you please just give me rough estimate? When it was discovered that Pirateat40 was running a massive ponzi scheme, how much did your group of investors have invested? How much did you return to investors after the fact? It really seems like you returned well under BTC100 (give or take BTC30) to investors after you collected around BTC2,000 (give or take a couple hundred). the response. Could you please clarify what you mean by "distributed" ? Does this include interest payments? What I'm really interested in (and I think other members of the community should be as well) is how much was invested through your service in August 2012 when pirateat40 defaulted. After he defaulted how much did you return to the people you collected from? Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on February 24, 2018, 09:36:11 AM Even though OG indicated he made everyone whole all he did was pay out 60odd btc??
Slime mc slime.. mr Oh I am the only one who paid out.. Why is this idiot still on DT? The fool has the worst business brain on the forum. Anything he touches is bound to fail Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TwitchySeal on March 01, 2018, 09:17:48 PM Ok, I've gathered enough evidence to prove that from April 2012 - August 2012 OgNasty:
-Made a shitload of Bitcoin during his "Bitcoin Pass Through" program with virtually no risk for himself -Since then has lied about what actually happened and gone out of his way to cover up facts by editing and deleting posts/locking thread. The Facts - April 11th, 2012 OgNasty created the "Bitcoin Pass Through (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0)" Program. - He collected funds from investors and made monthly payouts ranging from 8-12% monthly. - He invested the funds with pirateat40's Bitcoin Savings and Trust, which paid out investors 7% weekly - He created a reserve (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg846783#msg846783): Quote A Reserve Fund has been established to provide depositors with insurance against loss of deposits. In the event of a Bitcoin Savings & Trust failure, the Reserve Fund will be paid out to depositors, proportionately to their deposits held as listed on this thread. Quote The target for the reserve account is 100%. The question is, how long will it take to get there? I am hesitant to commit to an exact % of profits that will go to the reserve account, but I plan to increase it on a regular basis as interest payments are paid out. - May 1, 2012 he made his first interest payment (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg878008#msg878008) (unfortunately there are no records in the thread of reserve size, total invested or total interest payment for this payout) - May 5, 2012 he confirmed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg884213#msg884213) that the total investments had surpassed BTC2,000 - May 11, 2012 He confirmed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg895455#msg895455) that the total reserve was BTC30. On May 23, 2012 he confirmed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg917045#msg917045) that the total reserve was BTC50 - June 1, 2012 - second monthly interest payments are made (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg936171#msg936171). (We have the data for these payments.) -- BTC2,970 invested total -- BTC2455 full month deposits -- BTC515 mid month deposits (reduced interest) -- BTC281.75 are paid to investors -- Assuming OgNasty was receiving the standard 1% daily return* he received BTC761.05 off the full month deposits and BTC77.25 from the mid month investors for a total of BTC838.3 BTC 838.3 interest received from pirateat40 BTC281.75 interest payment to OgNastys investors BTC50 Total OgNasty has contributed to "insure deposits" BTC506.55 Total OgNasty profited personally (without risk) for ONE MONTH (May 2012) *I'm not sure whether he was receiving compound interest or not, so I'm going to calculate it as if he wasn't since it's the lower amount I'll continue to do the Jul1 Payouts soon (we have all data for that month as well). Keep in mind though, this whole thing came crashing down in August. There were only 4 payout periods (not including the final lol Reserve payout made on Sept 1) Anyone who had money invested with OgNasty in August had their entire deposit stolen. Does this seem plausible? https://i.gyazo.com/04ff773ed63fe77fbbd79b72a23e2d47.png https://i.gyazo.com/7c50686ce2d276aa706ca3b285e40a6c.png https://i.gyazo.com/02977e61da167ad91e87b9a4805dea72.png If anyone wants to check my math: Code: Depositor Rate Reward Amount Payment Address Edit: I had the year listed as 2011, it was actually 2012. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TwitchySeal on March 02, 2018, 08:58:49 PM - July 1, 2012 - third monthly interest payments are made (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1002169#msg1002169). (We have the data for these payments.)
-- BTC2,638.25 invested total -- BTC276.28 full month deposits -- BTC11.09 mid month deposits (reduced interest) -- BTC287.37 total is paid to investors -- Assuming OgNasty was receiving the standard 1% daily return* he received BTC715.425 off the full month deposits and BTC38.02 from the mid month investors for a total of BTC753.445 BTC 753.445 From pirateat40 ==> OgNasty BTC287.37 From OgNasty ==> OgN Investors BTC15 From OgNasty ==> Reserve Fund BTC451.075 From OgNasty ==> OgNastys Pocket BTC451.075 Total OgNasty profited personally (without risk) for ONE MONTH (June 2012) *I'm not sure whether he was receiving compound interest or not, so I'm going to calculate it as if he wasn't since it's the lower amount If you want to check my math: Code: Account Opened Depositor Rate Reward Amount Payment Address Edit: I had the year listed as 2011, it was actually 2012. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: ShiftKeyBroken on March 03, 2018, 07:31:56 AM - July 1, 2011 - third monthly interest payments are made (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1002169#msg1002169). (We have the data for these payments.) -- BTC2,638.25 invested total -- BTC276.28 full month deposits -- BTC11.09 mid month deposits (reduced interest) -- BTC287.37 total is paid to investors -- Assuming OgNasty was receiving the standard 1% daily return* he received BTC715.425 off the full month deposits and BTC38.02 from the mid month investors for a total of BTC753.445 BTC 753.445 From pirateat40 ==> OgNasty BTC287.37 From OgNasty ==> OgN Investors BTC15 From OgNasty ==> Reserve Fund BTC451.075 From OgNasty ==> OgNastys Pocket BTC451.075 Total OgNasty profited personally (without risk) for ONE MONTH (June 2011) *I'm not sure whether he was receiving compound interest or not, so I'm going to calculate it as if he wasn't since it's the lower amount If you want to check my math: Code: Account Opened Depositor Rate Reward Amount Payment Address must say, fantastic work on gathering the evidence. i am new to this forum but reading this was very interesting, i think it is safe to say that the accused individual is likely running either a ponzi scheme or something where he gets to keep large chunks of money for doing nothing. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: BTCforJoe on March 03, 2018, 08:12:44 AM -snip- I asked for you to do some research and dig up some proof. And you sure did. I haven't really researched NastyFans, as I really don't care about it, but the documentation that you've provided is pretty damning in itself. What I'm really curious about, however, is what the members of NastyFans have/had to say about the way this whole thing went down. Is NF still active? Does it still have members? Were the Slack screenshots from the original post recent? Oh, and after re-reading this thread, it's weird to see that some posts were edited... I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. This used to read as: I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. If you continue to spread libel statements with no evidence and do not correct your prior ones, I will red tag you for spreading lies about provably honest community projects. As can be seen by my unedited post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg29073251#msg29073251), as well as by owlcatz's unedited post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg29072668#msg29072668). I gather that this is because it's easy to see the way in which DT1 abuse was threatened towards me. I saw nothing wrong with what I posted, nor did I find any of it to be untrustworthy. But based on the documentation in this thread, along with the actions I've observed, I really am concerned that this user is a DT1 member. Either way, getting back on track, if anyone could answer my questions above, I'd appreciate it. At the end of the day, it is insignificant to me, as I have no intention of joining anything related to OgNasty. It's just to appease my curiosity, so I'm absolutely fine with not getting any answers if you guys feel like this is beating a dead horse :P Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Lauda on March 03, 2018, 08:17:55 AM Oh, and after re-reading this thread, it's weird to see that some posts were edited... It is not weird; the post was being set up to justify a negative rating in order to silence you. If you keep poking for information there, you are likely to get one. ::)I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. This used to read as: I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. If you continue to spread libel statements with no evidence and do not correct your prior ones, I will red tag you for spreading lies about provably honest community projects. As can be seen by my unedited post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg29073251#msg29073251), as well as by owlcatz's unedited post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg29072668#msg29072668). I gather that this is because it's easy to see the way in which DT1 abuse was threatened towards me. I saw nothing wrong with what I posted, nor did I find any of it to be untrustworthy. But based on the documentation in this thread, along with the actions I've observed, I really am concerned that this user is a DT1 member. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: OgNasty on March 03, 2018, 08:27:22 AM This thread is a joke. The "evidence" is not evidence of any wrongdoing of any kind. There isn't even a victim mentioned in this "ponzi" allegation. It's quite obvious to anyone who has paid attention over the years that this is nothing more than a delusional attempt by Lauda/TMAN/TwitchySeal to enact some sort of revenge against me for their reputations being ruined as a result of their own shady actions.
Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: |Admiral| on March 03, 2018, 08:58:10 AM This thread doesnot conclude any relevant facts.
But why @Ognasty you edited your post after twitchyseal's comment?? Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Quickseller on March 03, 2018, 08:58:16 AM Geeze, if this thread isn't a whole bunch of idiots circle jerking, then I don't know what is...
Also, most of those saying OgNasty is a scammer are either directly part of an extortion (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.0) ring, or are very closely associated with those who are. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on March 03, 2018, 09:42:53 AM This thread is a joke. The "evidence" is not evidence of any wrongdoing of any kind. There isn't even a victim mentioned in this "ponzi" allegation. It's quite obvious to anyone who has paid attention over the years that this is nothing more than a delusional attempt by Lauda/TMAN/TwitchySeal to enact some sort of revenge against me for their reputations being ruined as a result of their own shady actions. Ponzi x 2.. nastyfans i.e.- if you aren't happy with returns bring more money in. Piraet.. biggest ponzi in history where the most profit from your "passthrough" was made by you. This isn't about anyone other than you OG. You love the spotlight and here you have it.. Oh and your post changing and DT abuse.. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Rakeshdobar1 on March 03, 2018, 09:47:08 AM Can a donor be a scammer?? I just wonder how OG can be scammer when he himself donated 10 or 50 btc to this forum ??
Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on March 03, 2018, 09:48:47 AM Can a donor be a scammer?? I just wonder how OG can be scammer when he himself donated 10 or 50 btc to this forum ?? He used the scam money to pay the doner amount?? =profit/DT then abuse Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Lauda on March 03, 2018, 09:49:20 AM Can a donor be a scammer?? I just wonder how OG can be scammer when he himself donated 10 or 50 btc to this forum ?? Numerous forum donors are scammers, e.g. this guy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=35827) or this guy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=67058).Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: ShiftKeyBroken on March 03, 2018, 09:55:25 AM -snip- I asked for you to do some research and dig up some proof. And you sure did. I haven't really researched NastyFans, as I really don't care about it, but the documentation that you've provided is pretty damning in itself. What I'm really curious about, however, is what the members of NastyFans have/had to say about the way this whole thing went down. Is NF still active? Does it still have members? Were the Slack screenshots from the original post recent? Oh, and after re-reading this thread, it's weird to see that some posts were edited... I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. This used to read as: I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. If you continue to spread libel statements with no evidence and do not correct your prior ones, I will red tag you for spreading lies about provably honest community projects. As can be seen by my unedited post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg29073251#msg29073251), as well as by owlcatz's unedited post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg29072668#msg29072668). I gather that this is because it's easy to see the way in which DT1 abuse was threatened towards me. I saw nothing wrong with what I posted, nor did I find any of it to be untrustworthy. But based on the documentation in this thread, along with the actions I've observed, I really am concerned that this user is a DT1 member. Either way, getting back on track, if anyone could answer my questions above, I'd appreciate it. At the end of the day, it is insignificant to me, as I have no intention of joining anything related to OgNasty. It's just to appease my curiosity, so I'm absolutely fine with not getting any answers if you guys feel like this is beating a dead horse :P that edit though... it is a little scary. he is literally blackmailing people with his dt powers. i am a little scared now. anything you say against him results in a red tag? really? Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Lauda on March 03, 2018, 10:32:57 AM that edit though... it is a little scary. he is literally blackmailing people with his dt powers. i am a little scared now. anything you say against him results in a red tag? really? There are cases in which tagging someone for speaking out is warranted, i.e. when someone makes a shill account to make a horrible accusation without any evidence (e.g. that one is a pedophile). However, there are also cases in which it is not (e.g. just honestly questioning certain *businesses*; cough). I wouldn't recommend questioning unless you are ready to face the consequences which others have suffered already.Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on March 03, 2018, 11:34:59 AM that edit though... it is a little scary. he is literally blackmailing people with his dt powers. i am a little scared now. anything you say against him results in a red tag? really? There are cases in which tagging someone for speaking out is warranted, i.e. when someone makes a shill account to make a horrible accusation without any evidence (e.g. that one is a pedophile). However, there are also cases in which it is not (e.g. just honestly questioning certain *businesses*; cough). I wouldn't recommend questioning unless you are ready to face the consequences which others have suffered already.You mean like me?? The tag by OG means nothing. I have been sent over 20BTC for trades without escrow since I have been tagged. OG's word means nothing to many people. Since his blatant abuse of trust against anyone who speaks out against him is so obvious.. oh and the respect comment, telling people to respect him as he says so is pathetic Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: ShiftKeyBroken on March 03, 2018, 12:37:27 PM @ognasty i apologize for questioning your "business". please don't tag me, i'm sorry. also, i'm curious, can someone tl;dr for me what nastyfans is?
Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on March 03, 2018, 12:47:04 PM @ognasty i apologize for questioning your "business". please don't tag me, i'm sorry. also, i'm curious, can someone tl;dr for me what nastyfans is? It's a semi ponzi where he encourages people to invest.. then once in tells you it's only for fun and no guarantees of profits are made. It's also a semi ponzi as once in if you moan about the profits you are told to bring people in to get more donations. All in all it is a load of shit, anyone with half a brain would not "invest" BTC Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: owlcatz on March 03, 2018, 04:50:49 PM that edit though... it is a little scary. he is literally blackmailing people with his dt powers. i am a little scared now. anything you say against him results in a red tag? really? Exactly. He's as thin-skinned as Donald J. Trump, and has the same exact symptoms - ie, Malignant Narcissm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignant_narcissism). Check my trust ratings (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=313016), and you will see clear evidence of the trust system being diddled by Quickspazzer and OGnasty, in conjunction with one or the other using a pretty inactive DT1 account, Tomatoface (http://). If you check Tomatoface's trust list, you can see he has excluded both Zepher and I - It was a clear copy and paste from OG's trustlist over to Tomatofaces (Whom I don't even know or have never dealt with BTW). Proof: OgNasty's Trust List - (Note: ~ = Exclusions from DT2) Code: OgNasty Tomatoface's Trust List - (Note: ~ = Exclusions from DT2) Code: Tomatocage Is it just me, or are these two just a LITTLE bit alike? Zepher is a highly trusted user who was booted from DT by these actions above, just for speaking out against Quickscammer (Og has always hated him for some reason as well). I find it HIGHLY ironic that OGnasty has EXCLUDED well know scam-busting users, like Cryptodevil and Suchmoon. More trust diddling. Same with TimeLord, the guy who exposed Tomatoface's owner, Quickscammer, as well as the Pharmacist, whom both despise for some reason... The trust system is a joke, and there is the proof kids. This guy has no business on DT1 in light of the allegations in this thread alone, let alone all the others, like the time he scammed Isoneguy by returning his coin to a shit coinbase address just to be a prick.... ::) Oh and telling me who I should respect around here, OG? Fuck you and the stolen car you rode in on, scammer. ;D Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on March 03, 2018, 04:54:22 PM that edit though... it is a little scary. he is literally blackmailing people with his dt powers. i am a little scared now. anything you say against him results in a red tag? really? Exactly. He's as thin-skinned as Donald J. Trump, and has the same exact symptoms - ie, Malignant Narcissm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignant_narcissism). Check my trust ratings (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=313016), and you will see clear evidence of the trust system being diddled by Quickspazzer and OGnasty, in conjunction with one or the other using a pretty inactive DT1 account, Tomatoface (http://). If you check Tomatoface's trust list, you can see he has excluded both Zepher and I - It was a clear copy and paste from OG's trustlist over to Tomatofaces (Whom I don't even know or have never dealt with BTW). Proof: OgNasty's Trust List - (Note: ~ = Exclusions from DT2) Code: OgNasty Tomatoface's Trust List - (Note: ~ = Exclusions from DT2) Code: Tomatocage Is it just me, or are these two just a LITTLE bit alike? Zepher is a highly trusted user who was booted from DT by these actions above, just for speaking out against Quickscammer (Og has always hated him for some reason as well). I find it HIGHLY ironic that OGnasty has EXCLUDED well know scam-busting users, like Cryptodevil and Suchmoon. More trust diddling. Same with TimeLord, the guy who exposed Tomatoface's owner, Quickscammer, as well as the Pharmacist, whom both despise for some reason... The trust system is a joke, and there is the proof kids. This guy has no business on DT1 in light of the allegations in this thread alone, let alone all the others, like the time he scammed Isoneguy by returning his coin to a shit coinbase address just to be a prick.... ::) Oh and telling me who I should respect around here, OG? Fuck you and the stolen car you rode in on, scammer. ;D I don't know what I am more impressed with. The posts by you and twitchy outright proving his scammy behaviour or that sweet as fuck signature. I think I love you owl Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: owlcatz on March 04, 2018, 03:46:59 AM This thread is a joke. The "evidence" is not evidence of any wrongdoing of any kind. There isn't even a victim mentioned in this "ponzi" allegation. It's quite obvious to anyone who has paid attention over the years that this is nothing more than a delusional attempt by Lauda/TMAN/TwitchySeal to enact some sort of revenge against me for their reputations being ruined as a result of their own shady actions. And... As always... You have no real rebuttal for your scamming or the numbers above. Do you see those numbers twitchy posted? You now have to refute them with some REAL evidence, don't ya think man? ::) You claim you are 100% legit. You claim you file all taxes 100% legit. Prove it...... But, ofc, you will not I'm guessing. It sure looks like you made off (pun intended) with QUITE a few BTC there, doesn't it? Unless you can refute the evidence, I'm just going to tell everyone I ever meet in BTC-Real-World what a scammer you are, because apparently you are just too chickenshit to ever literally show your Islam style bearded ass up at any real BTC convention, ever. ;D Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: OgNasty on March 04, 2018, 03:51:02 AM There has been no evidence of wrongdoing posted for me to respond to. Only dim witted personal insults and incorrect assumptions.
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on March 04, 2018, 04:14:45 AM There has been no evidence of wrongdoing posted for me to respond to. Only dim witted personal insults and incorrect assumptions. Thanks for clearing that up. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: owlcatz on March 04, 2018, 04:24:17 AM There has been no evidence of wrongdoing posted for me to respond to. Only dim witted personal insults and incorrect assumptions. Thanks for clearing that up. Note: TL:DR - Ognasty ignores the entire thread's evidence and assumes we are all just scammers. Hey OG- Ponzi scammer - Prove it with maths, or... are you in 5th grade still? .. ;D Tomorrows post: Inspecting OGnasty's trust list because it's basically full of scammers! :D Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: ShiftKeyBroken on March 04, 2018, 05:39:34 AM the way i see it, ognasty is siphoning "investor" money to himself and continues to do so. am i correct?
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: owlcatz on March 04, 2018, 05:43:13 AM the way i see it, ognasty is siphoning "investor" money to himself and continues to do so. am i correct? I take it that way in the past at least, now that I see the long view. You? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Quickseller on March 04, 2018, 06:15:23 AM the way i see it, ognasty is siphoning "investor" money to himself and continues to do so. am i correct? Which one of the circle jerkers that have made a hobby of extorting people and smearing OgNasty are you? (This doesn’t mention the other shady and scammy behavior you are are involved in). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on March 04, 2018, 07:37:45 AM There has been no evidence of wrongdoing posted for me to respond to. Only dim witted personal insults and incorrect assumptions. The passthrough numbers that twitchy posted show that you that you made a profit and your clients lost out. It's clear in the numbers twitchy posted. That's what you need to refute Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: ShiftKeyBroken on March 04, 2018, 08:30:52 AM the way i see it, ognasty is siphoning "investor" money to himself and continues to do so. am i correct? Which one of the circle jerkers that have made a hobby of extorting people and smearing OgNasty are you? (This doesn’t mention the other shady and scammy behavior you are are involved in). wow... i am a new member and you are automatically making dumb assumptions. very sad. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Quickseller on March 04, 2018, 04:59:48 PM i am a new member When people make a point to say this, more often then not, they are not. There is often a specific reason why they want everyone else to think they are new ::)Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on March 04, 2018, 05:05:51 PM There has been no evidence of wrongdoing posted for me to respond to. Only dim witted personal insults and incorrect assumptions. The passthrough numbers that twitchy posted show that you that you made a profit and your clients lost out. It's clear in the numbers twitchy posted. That's what you need to refute Please answer for once Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: OgNasty on March 04, 2018, 05:22:16 PM I saw no losses being alleged. Only a list of people I made payouts to before they withdrew their entire balance. If you are trying to say all those users on the list didn’t get their entire deposit back, quit beating around the bush and say it so I can give you another negative for spreading lies.
Without some actual accusation of me not paying someone what I should have comes forward, this thread is nonsense and should be locked. Make an allegation of a scam with a victim that received losses, or lock the thread. Pretty simple. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on March 04, 2018, 05:25:12 PM I saw no losses being alleged. Only a list of people I made payouts to before they withdrew their entire balance. If you are trying to say all those users on the list didn’t get their entire deposit back, quit beating around the bush and say it so I can give you another negative for spreading lies. Giving me another neg is right up your alley.. keep up with the trust abuse as it doesn't help your case. Are you saying that every person who took part in your passthrough received back their deposits in full? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on March 04, 2018, 07:28:46 PM I saw no losses being alleged. Only a list of people I made payouts to before they withdrew their entire balance. If you are trying to say all those users on the list didn’t get their entire deposit back, quit beating around the bush and say it so I can give you another negative for spreading lies. Without some actual accusation of me not paying someone what I should have comes forward, this thread is nonsense and should be locked. Make an allegation of a scam with a victim that received losses, or lock the thread. Pretty simple. I haven't accused you of scamming the people that invested in your "BTC Pass-Through" program. I'm accusing you of lying and making deceptive comments about what really happened after pirateat40 left your investors holding the bag in order to protect/build your rep. I think that if you had been honest about the whole thing, there's a good chance people wouldn't have trusted you enough to loan you all that Bitcoin for you to send to Butterfly Labs (another massive ponzi scheme) and then offered to create hundreds of seats to your fan club rather than repaying your debt in BTC. It just doesn't make sense why you would delete all the evidence of exactly how much BTC you had invested with pirateat40, or how many BTC were in the "reserve" fund if "almost everyone" had divested before the scam was confirmed. It doesn't make sense why you are refusing to share the numbers. I believe you are lying. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: owlcatz on March 04, 2018, 07:35:52 PM I saw no losses being alleged. Only a list of people I made payouts to before they withdrew their entire balance. If you are trying to say all those users on the list didn’t get their entire deposit back, quit beating around the bush and say it so I can give you another negative for spreading lies. Without some actual accusation of me not paying someone what I should have comes forward, this thread is nonsense and should be locked. Make an allegation of a scam with a victim that received losses, or lock the thread. Pretty simple. I haven't accused you of scamming the people that invested in your "BTC Pass-Through" program. I'm accusing you of lying and making deceptive comments about what really happened after pirateat40 left your investors holding the bag in order to protect/build your rep. I think that if you had been honest about the whole thing, there's a good chance people wouldn't have trusted you enough to loan you all that Bitcoin for you to send to Butterfly Labs (another massive ponzi scheme) and then offered to create hundreds of seats to your fan club rather than repaying your debt in BTC. It just doesn't make sense why you would delete all the evidence of exactly how much BTC you had invested with pirateat40, or how many BTC were in the "reserve" fund if "almost everyone" had divested before the scam was confirmed. It doesn't make sense why you are refusing to share the numbers. I believe you are lying. That's what narcissists do. They live in their own little world and anything they don't like to hear or believe is "Fake News"... Let's see here: Bullying Lying Abusing Position for personal gain (The threat of a neg by OgNasty scares most if not all users to speak out publicly. Can't tell you how many PM's I got thanking me in privnote lol). Conspiring with Quickscammer to diddle the trust network using Tomatoface's account to try and remove people he doesn't like from DT2 (Zepher). Next I'm going to go through everyone on his trust list and examine why everyone is there and why people are negged exactly. Refusal to ever admit wrongdoing Etc, etc.... ;D C'mon Og, gimme a neg, i'll take another for the team of HONEST users here for them thinking you are a scammer but afraid to speak out because you ruin accounts with trust abuse. ::) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on March 04, 2018, 08:15:40 PM I saw no losses being alleged. Only a list of people I made payouts to before they withdrew their entire balance. If you are trying to say all those users on the list didn’t get their entire deposit back, quit beating around the bush and say it so I can give you another negative for spreading lies. Without some actual accusation of me not paying someone what I should have comes forward, this thread is nonsense and should be locked. Make an allegation of a scam with a victim that received losses, or lock the thread. Pretty simple. Changing posts again?? So slippery so so slippery. Why on earth would you delete messages then alter others after posting if you had nothing to hide? I guess as you refuse to answer and refuse to discuss your arest record then we will have to go to the next stage which will be an investigations thread. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: ShiftKeyBroken on March 04, 2018, 11:25:36 PM I saw no losses being alleged. Only a list of people I made payouts to before they withdrew their entire balance. If you are trying to say all those users on the list didn’t get their entire deposit back, quit beating around the bush and say it so I can give you another negative for spreading lies. Without some actual accusation of me not paying someone what I should have comes forward, this thread is nonsense and should be locked. Make an allegation of a scam with a victim that received losses, or lock the thread. Pretty simple. actually, that's a good point. @tman and gang, is there any witness who has lost money and has a complaint or scam report? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on March 04, 2018, 11:48:22 PM Most of my accusations have claimed that the whole "BTC Passthrough" program that OgNasty ran took place in 2012 (April 2012 - August 2012) This was an honest mistake, they actually all took place in 2012 (April 2012 - August 2012)
I saw no losses being alleged. Only a list of people I made payouts to before they withdrew their entire balance. If you are trying to say all those users on the list didn’t get their entire deposit back, quit beating around the bush and say it so I can give you another negative for spreading lies. Without some actual accusation of me not paying someone what I should have comes forward, this thread is nonsense and should be locked. Make an allegation of a scam with a victim that received losses, or lock the thread. Pretty simple. actually, that's a good point. @tman and gang, is there any witness who has lost money and has a complaint or scam report? See my response above (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg31580963#msg31580963). We do have a witness, OgNasty himself. But he's resorted to deflection and insults rather than giving any direct answers to very reasonable questions - 1) How many BTC did pirateat40 steal from OgNastys investors? 2) How many BTC were in the reserve fund that OgNasty had established (and paid out) Why would OgNasty refuse to answer these questions? Even if he's right about me being a dimwit extortionist liar that's insignificant to the Bitcoin community...so what? Edit: I had the year listed as 2011, it was actually 2012. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on March 05, 2018, 06:30:58 AM Why would OgNasty refuse to answer these questions? Even if he's right about me being a dimwit extortionist liar that's insignificant to the Bitcoin community...so what? The bold is the interesting part - why does he continue to deflect ? another interesting thread regarding OG promoting a very bad business https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1582065.0 for those who havent read it all I would take the time to look @ OG's stance on this - also can anyone else see his persecution complex coming into play? Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: suchmoon on March 05, 2018, 05:19:28 PM I find it HIGHLY ironic that OGnasty has EXCLUDED well know scam-busting users, like Cryptodevil and Suchmoon. It's your fault Owlz... ;D (/ssssss) The only place where I ever crossed paths with the mighty Og in a less-than-cordial way was when I posted a positive trust for you. That guy is like three-degrees-of-separation-angry. Not sure what cryptodevil did to him. Maybe just the "devil" in the name is enough to set Og off. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: owlcatz on March 05, 2018, 05:26:23 PM I find it HIGHLY ironic that OGnasty has EXCLUDED well know scam-busting users, like Cryptodevil and Suchmoon. It's your fault Owlz... ;D (/ssssss) The only place where I ever crossed paths with the mighty Og in a less-than-cordial way was when I posted a positive trust for you. That guy is like three-degrees-of-separation-angry. Not sure what cryptodevil did to him. Maybe just the "devil" in the name is enough to set Og off. LOL... So more trust-diddling evidence then... Shocker!!! ::) Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Panthers52 on March 06, 2018, 03:12:59 AM I find it HIGHLY ironic that OGnasty has EXCLUDED well know scam-busting users, like Cryptodevil and Suchmoon. It's your fault Owlz... ;D (/ssssss) The only place where I ever crossed paths with the mighty Og in a less-than-cordial way was when I posted a positive trust for you. That guy is like three-degrees-of-separation-angry. Not sure what cryptodevil did to him. Maybe just the "devil" in the name is enough to set Og off. Kind Regards Panthers52 Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on March 06, 2018, 04:14:47 AM There has been no evidence of wrongdoing posted for me to respond to. Only dim witted personal insults and incorrect assumptions. The passthrough numbers that twitchy posted show that you that you made a profit and your clients lost out. It's clear in the numbers twitchy posted. That's what you need to refute OG still slipping by the pertinent questions.. keep sending in QS and his alts, but the question still remains Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: suchmoon on March 06, 2018, 04:27:17 AM I find it HIGHLY ironic that OGnasty has EXCLUDED well know scam-busting users, like Cryptodevil and Suchmoon. It's your fault Owlz... ;D (/ssssss) The only place where I ever crossed paths with the mighty Og in a less-than-cordial way was when I posted a positive trust for you. That guy is like three-degrees-of-separation-angry. Not sure what cryptodevil did to him. Maybe just the "devil" in the name is enough to set Og off. Kind Regards Panthers52 Such a coincidence though. Really crazy. Quicksy's alts can read Og's mind. Also crazy. I prefer Occam though. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on March 06, 2018, 04:54:10 AM I find it HIGHLY ironic that OGnasty has EXCLUDED well know scam-busting users, like Cryptodevil and Suchmoon. It's your fault Owlz... ;D (/ssssss) The only place where I ever crossed paths with the mighty Og in a less-than-cordial way was when I posted a positive trust for you. That guy is like three-degrees-of-separation-angry. Not sure what cryptodevil did to him. Maybe just the "devil" in the name is enough to set Og off. Kind Regards Panthers52 Such a coincidence though. Really crazy. Quicksy's alts can read Og's mind. Also crazy. I prefer Occam though. I am developing a man crush on you.. the negative trust on your account is just legend worthy bud Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Panthers52 on March 07, 2018, 08:28:10 AM I find it HIGHLY ironic that OGnasty has EXCLUDED well know scam-busting users, like Cryptodevil and Suchmoon. It's your fault Owlz... ;D (/ssssss) The only place where I ever crossed paths with the mighty Og in a less-than-cordial way was when I posted a positive trust for you. That guy is like three-degrees-of-separation-angry. Not sure what cryptodevil did to him. Maybe just the "devil" in the name is enough to set Og off. Kind Regards Panthers52 Such a coincidence though. Really crazy. Quicksy's alts can read Og's mind. Also crazy. I prefer Occam though. Kind Regards Panthers52 Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: TMAN on March 07, 2018, 09:38:26 AM I don't see why you think you can act the way you do (same for the others), and that anyone would want to give credence to what your opinion is. Maybe because you think some people agree with you sometimes? Kind Regards Panthers52 Hey Quickspazzer you alright? Listen plenty of people agree to us - the issue is that your mate OG is on DT! that scares plenty of people.. I have had messages both on and off forum commending me for trying to take down the Snake oil salesman. People are afraid to speak out as they will be given a nice red neg, me I dont give a shit about that, neither does owl or twitchy by the look of things. in time I will reveal more information about OG - his arrest record alone is horrible reading for someone who is trusted so much online. Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: suchmoon on March 07, 2018, 01:36:36 PM I don't see why you think you can act the way you do (same for the others), and that anyone would want to give credence to what your opinion is. Maybe because you think some people agree with you sometimes? Kind Regards Panthers52 I'm gonna cry now, Quicksy sad bad things about my opinion and did it with a puppet so it's like doubleplusungood :'( Yeah, right. You're confused, probably has to do with your alt-puppeting. Your desire to bend this forum to some twisted fantasy of yours doesn't mean that everyone behaves that way. Stop projecting. I couldn't give any less shit about someone agreeing or disagreeing with me on teh intertubes. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on March 12, 2018, 08:05:05 AM so still no straight answer from OG about "paying out" to his clients.. .was it only the 65BTC or was it the full deposit? slippery man slips the question again! ???? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: cunicula on March 12, 2018, 10:29:57 AM Quickseller is a scammer and anyone affiliated with him is either his fucking alt or a blowjob cabin.
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on March 12, 2018, 11:32:50 AM Quickseller is a scammer and anyone affiliated with him is either his fucking alt or a blowjob cabin. I like your style.. so does the above apply to OG? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: cunicula on March 12, 2018, 03:26:02 PM Quickseller is a scammer and anyone affiliated with him is either his fucking alt or a blowjob cabin. I like your style.. so does the above apply to OG? I am sure that when my account was hacked then it was traded by Quickseller only ,because escrow scams are something he is best at. I am also sure that this Quickscummy tard is having many multiple accounts here and keeps posting with his alt to divert the topic, when account farming is in your blood then you have no ethics. I simply cross product both of them as QuickNasty and OGseller, both loves cheap sauces and fucking bean nuts. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: cunicula on March 12, 2018, 04:18:40 PM Watch this video and love seeing Quicky blowing OG dynasty.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vao5rn7OHPo Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: game-protect on March 19, 2018, 03:12:57 PM Fraud by false representation (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/pdfs/ukpga_20060035_en.pdf)
(1) A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and (b) intends, by making the representation— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss. (2) A representation is false if— (a) it is untrue or misleading, and (b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading. (3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of— (a) the person making the representation, or (b) any other person. (4) A representation may be express or implied. (5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TMAN on March 21, 2018, 02:12:01 AM so still no straight answer from OG about "paying out" to his clients.. .was it only the 65BTC or was it the full deposit? slippery man slips the question again! ???? so from the silence we can only gather that OG paid out 65BTC and did not make users whole as he eluded to.. take that as you will people Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 06, 2019, 08:40:19 PM Update:
I'm not sure how I missed this back then, but pirateat claimed to the SEC that he returned the full balance of a handful of investors, including OGNasty. The following transcript is from page 35 of this document (https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/pirateat40/secvs.pirateat401.pdf). Q = Question = SEC Investigator. A = Answer = pirateat40/Trendon Shavers. https://i.gyazo.com/e2394edf039d81fb5e7acb026086a76d.png Quote Q So what activities did you undertake for Bitcoin Savings & Trust between August 2012 when you stopped taking deposits from investors and March or April of 2013? A l immediately closed out the new accounts that had just recently started, retuned all their coins. Then kind of strategically based on how many coins | still had tied up, I worked to move some of the coins out. But, you know, with losing the large sum of coins, it made it very difficult to do that. So I kept some of the coins to be able to trade so | could make coins to pay them back. And it took a long time. Q And did you return any bitcoin to investors during this time period from August 2012 through March or April of 2013? A Yes Q So you retuned the deposits of newer account holders is that correct? A That was. almost immediately afterward when I shut it down. Q And did you return bitcoins to others during that time period? A Yes. Q Who? A Actually hold on. MR. MOUSTAKIS: For the record, the witness is referring to Exhibit 3. A Jepham. Q Can you spell that? A J-c-p-h-a-m; Keefe, K-e-e-fLe; Seanbeaupre, Q Can you spell that for us? A S-e-a-n-b-e-a-u-p-r-e; Teek, T-e-8-k. Q What is it that tells you in Exhibit 3 that you returned bitcoin to these investors? A I'm just pulling them from memory. Q Oh. So Exhibit 3 is simply refreshing your recollection far these purposes? A Yes. Ognasty, O-g-n-a-s-ty; A-r-a-s-h-d, Brendio, B-r-e-n-d-i-o, BtcAdomains. Q Can you spell that? A B-t-c-4-d-o-m-a-i-n-s, Coin_toss, C-o-i-n-t-o-s-s, Fred0, F-r-e-d-o, Gave some. | haven't returned all of his. Same thing with Imsaguy, I-m-s-a-g-a-y. Q You returned some but not all of his deposits? A Correct. And then there's a bunch that aren't listed on there because the accounts were closed. Q And all the other individuals you named you returned their entire principal amount? A Their entire balance. Q Entire balance. A Yeah. Q At the time of the shut down in August 2012? A Yes. Q Whatever that balance may have been. A Correct. Q And for Gigavps and Imsaguy you returned some but not all of their balance? A Right. Q How did you make the determination as to which investors to return bitcoin to and which not? A Accounts that | physically knew there was pay VC -- a couple of the other guys that had these Pirate pass-thrus where their people were coming to me asking for coins and | had no way of knowing if they had coins with me or not. And so like I said, the brand new accounts, | shut those out and closed them out. paid them back initially. And then | went through and worked out the people that | had long relationships with and knew that they were good. | paid them a percentage based on how many coins they had with me. Q So you gave priority to your long time investors in returning funds when you shut down Bitcoin Savings & Trust? OgNasty made this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1109202#msg1109202) (archive (https://archive.is/UOkiL)) on August 17, 2012: Quote Due to the news of BTCST closing, I have requested all funds from the account and will be returning them to depositors as soon as received. I will be looking into options to keep the program running in one form or another, but most likely I will close this program down to focus on NastyMining. Thank you to all my depositors. Then on September 1, 2012 he edited in this update: Quote UPDATE: Bitcoin Savings & Trust is officially in default and the reserve fund has been paid out to depositors. According to my calculations (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg31441207#msg31441207), as of August OGNastys pass-through had BTC2,638.25 invested total, and the reserve was at BTC65. All the evidence, including the fact he went back and edited/deleted a ton of posts as soon as he knew I was looking into this), points to OGNasty receiving a full payout of BTC2,638.25 that belonged to the OGNasty Pass-Through investors from pirateat in August 2012 while everyone, including his investors, was learning that the whole thing was a scam. Knowing that his investors would assume that Pirateat40 had their investments, he only paid out the BTC65 reserve to them and kept the rest. (Also, I had a bunch of years in this this thread as 2011, but they should have been 2012. I archived them all and then edited in the right year just now.) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: owlcatz on December 06, 2019, 10:53:26 PM Goddamn... Really makes me wonder why anyone would trust that guy with BTC.
Great work there, fascinating really. But not unexpected. ::) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: The Sceptical Chymist on December 06, 2019, 11:07:49 PM But, but he said this:
Quote The reserve fund was paid out and all users were satisfied. End of story. Now I don't know the whole story behind all of this, so I'm going to refrain from passing any judgement without knowing all the details, but am I to understand that 65BTC was paid out instead of the 2,638.25BTC that should have been because OgNasty assumed that everyone would have thought BST was insolvent and therefore didn't make restitution to its investors at all, i.e., didn't pay anyone anything? And is TwitchySeal also suggesting that OgNasty's investors/customers would never find out about the 2638.25BTC? I'm genuinely curious about this, as it all happened well before I got into bitcoin. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: suchmoon on December 06, 2019, 11:31:51 PM ~ That seems to be Twitchy's hypothesis, yes, and it's a fairly solid one as far as I can see. One thing to keep in mind (because it came up in another unrelated thread) is that the eye-watering amount of 2000+ BTC was not quite as huge back then. Divide it by 1000 or so if you want to gauge the scale in fiat terms. Worth noting before someone jumps in to accuse Og of scamming $20 million. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 07, 2019, 12:09:22 AM But, but he said this: Quote The reserve fund was paid out and all users were satisfied. End of story. Now I don't know the whole story behind all of this, so I'm going to refrain from passing any judgement without knowing all the details, but am I to understand that 65BTC was paid out instead of the 2,638.25BTC that should have been because OgNasty assumed that everyone would have thought BST was insolvent and therefore didn't make restitution to its investors at all, i.e., didn't pay anyone anything? And is TwitchySeal also suggesting that OgNasty's investors/customers would never find out about the 2638.25BTC? I'm genuinely curious about this, as it all happened well before I got into bitcoin. I’ve had to make some assumptions because og edited/deleted a lot of posts after he found out I was looking into it and before I was able to archive them and has just deflected/attacked me when asked about it. I know what was invested through July of 2012 (up till August 1), but not was invested in August, the month the ponzi collapsed. Og announced he was paying out the reserves bc pirateat defaulted on sept 1. If he has evidence that would clear himself he should post it. I have no problem admitting I’m wrong. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: OgNasty on December 07, 2019, 06:03:24 AM When pirate opened his plan up to the public, users moved to dealing with him directly. There's a reason you can't find any victims. I'm flattered at the amount of effort you all put into trolling me, but it really is shameful what you will swear to. I think you need to take a long hard look into your own lives and see what it is that makes you want to attack someone who has honestly been so successful here. You should be happy for me, not spouting incessant lies like a band of rabid jealous failures.
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 07, 2019, 06:24:49 AM OG is calling everyone in this thread a liar, despite the fact he was audited, and is now awaiting his fate. :/
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53280278#msg53280278 There will be no justice here. Thankfully, OG could not lie to the auditor. :) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 07, 2019, 06:45:51 AM OG is calling everyone in this thread a liar, despite the fact he was audited, and is now awaiting his fate. :/ https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53280278#msg53280278 There will be no justice here. Thankfully, OG could not lie to the auditor. :) The link that you provided, Vod, does not show evidence or any description of an actual audit. Are you referring to a different part of that thread in your above link? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 07, 2019, 06:51:25 AM I saw no losses being alleged. Only a list of people I made payouts to before they withdrew their entire balance. If you are trying to say all those users on the list didn’t get their entire deposit back, quit beating around the bush and say it so I can give you another negative for spreading lies. I think the main reason I don't have more evidence is because on Feb 22, 2018 at 3:44 pm, I was dumb enough to make this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg30855823#msg30855823) in your Pirate-Passthrough thread. 6 minutes later, at 3:52pm, while I was still reading through it... poof...a bunch of posts just vanished, and the OP was edited down to basically nothing. 2 minutes later, at 3:54 pm you posted in the thread saying it was a witch hunt and then locked it. You've been cagey ever since, refusing to give any information or address any details about what really happened. I do have a lot of evidence though. Before I thought you were just being scummy. But that transcript sure makes it seem like Pirate returned your full balance: Quote A Yes. Ognasty, O-g-n-a-s-ty Quote Q And all the other individuals you named you returned their entire principal amount? A Their entire balance. Q Entire balance. A Yeah. Q At the time of the shut down in August 2012? A Yes. Q Whatever that balance may have been. A Correct. You on Sept 1: Quote UPDATE: Bitcoin Savings & Trust is officially in default and the reserve fund has been paid out to depositors. And then you led your investors to believe that Pirate kept your full balance for himself. Which would explain the 'no victims' defense. The victims don't know they were scammed. And I'm going to go ahead and guess many of them sent you money to invest in Butterfly Labs shortly after that. And then when BFL crumbled you just rolled them all into NastyFan seats.... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TheNewAnon135246 on December 07, 2019, 08:29:13 AM You can still see 2 cached versions (HERE (https://web.archive.org/web/20140429234623/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0) and HERE (https://web.archive.org/web/20160212042638/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0)).
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 07, 2019, 09:51:07 AM OG is calling everyone in this thread a liar, despite the fact he was audited, and is now awaiting his fate. :/ https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53280278#msg53280278 There will be no justice here. Thankfully, OG could not lie to the auditor. :) The link that you provided, Vod, does not show evidence or any description of an actual audit. Are you referring to a different part of that thread in your above link? The link was referring to the part I bolded above. Sorry, I posted personal info once on that scammer, and his lackies left me negative trust. Luckily I think the time he has to keep everything a secret is running out. I just hope he doesn't take this forum down with him. We should be safe provided Theymos can restore the hundreds of posts OG has deleted to cover his ponzi/scams. He is a danger to bitcoin. :/ You can still see 2 cached versions (HERE (https://web.archive.org/web/20140429234623/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0) and HERE (https://web.archive.org/web/20160212042638/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0)). "HOW CAN YOU PAY MONTHLY INTEREST ON DEPOSITS? I am running a pass-through operation for pirateat40's Bitcoin Savings & Trust for lenders looking to receive interest on their BTC. I receive a higher interest rate from BS&T and I pass a portion of that to lenders as a monthly interest payment." So pirate paid OG to help him scam? Finally. I think OG might be going to jail. ;D Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 07, 2019, 04:33:06 PM OG is calling everyone in this thread a liar, despite the fact he was audited, and is now awaiting his fate. :/ https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53280278#msg53280278 There will be no justice here. Thankfully, OG could not lie to the auditor. :) The link that you provided, Vod, does not show evidence or any description of an actual audit. Are you referring to a different part of that thread in your above link? The link was referring to the part I bolded above. So what about the auditing part? Is there any actual audit, or are you just referring to the efforts of TwitchySeal and some other members attempts to draw attention to some of OG's history.. which I suppose is a fair use of the word "audit", even if I misread it to be more detailed in terms of review actual OG records, whether financial or otherwise. Sorry, I posted personal info once on that scammer, and his lackies left me negative trust. Luckily I think the time he has to keep everything a secret is running out. I just hope he doesn't take this forum down with him. Probably makes it more difficult to take down the forum if he is holding less forum value. I have hardly any ideas about total value that the forum has, or how much it goes beyond the 500BTC that were returned or other financial assets or encumbrances that the forum might have. I suppose that you are not really referring to taking down the forum in terms of finances but instead if there were some other fraud that might end up implicating or even discouraging someone like theymos from continuing to run the forum? which I suppose you never know if there could end up being evidence that implicates further down the line (or up the line), and of course, I am just engaging in logical speculation rather than any actual evidence that goes beyond inferences.... which sometimes people end up getting prosecuted for mere inferences rather than direct evidence. We should be safe provided Theymos can restore the hundreds of posts OG has deleted to cover his ponzi/scams. He is a danger to bitcoin. :/ Bitcoin should give less than two fucks about any scammers within, unless they happen to be undermining bitcoin from within and placing secret code or something like that. If we are talking about more scams getting revealed to the public, surely bitcoin should be able to survive those kinds of matters without any kind of blemish, because there are already scams upon scams upon scams, and scams likely come with the territory of any kind of asset (including new ones in the crypto space) that end up having actual financial value. Regarding your point about administrative access to posts that were deleted, yep you would think that they could be made available, but again getting way beyond my factual knowledge that is for sure. You can still see 2 cached versions (HERE (https://web.archive.org/web/20140429234623/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0) and HERE (https://web.archive.org/web/20160212042638/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0)). "HOW CAN YOU PAY MONTHLY INTEREST ON DEPOSITS? I am running a pass-through operation for pirateat40's Bitcoin Savings & Trust for lenders looking to receive interest on their BTC. I receive a higher interest rate from BS&T and I pass a portion of that to lenders as a monthly interest payment." So pirate paid OG to help him scam? Finally. I think OG might be going to jail. ;D There would need to be investigations by prosecutors and charges, and surely some charges can sometimes be secret until all of a sudden peeps end up getting arrested, but gosh, way too soon to be suggesting that OG might be going to jail - even though sometimes testimonial evidence could end up resulting in subpoenas, and frequently we are not going to hear about subpoenas in the public, but we might end up hearing about a door that gets broken down in the middle of the night in which arrests end up being made -as far as such a matter goes public... and hey, if an arrest gets made, peeps end up in jail real fast, even if they may be able to post bond and get out quickly, presuming that they are considered not to be a flight risk, which could go either way depending on how much value is actually at stake in any hypothetical charges that would be brought, whether against OG or any other person that ends up being accused of being involved in actual crimes within the bitcoin/crypto space. By the way, many of us likely realize that there are many crimes in the crypto space that are not even prosecuted, yet. I am not sure if I should name any names, but let me just say in the phone porting sims hi-jacking context, sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars of value or even more are taken, but law enforcement does not seem to even investigate a lot of those relatively BIG value cases.... but I suppose, on the other hand, if they are pointed to an actual identifiable person and enough information to at least to make a prosecutable case, then in those cases they are going to be more compelled to take further investigatory actions that may end up resulting in an arrest (or arrests) - one of the risks of dealing with other peoples money and even exercising fiduciary duties (but end up abusing the following of those fiduciary duties). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 07, 2019, 05:41:47 PM One thing to keep in mind (because it came up in another unrelated thread) is that the eye-watering amount of 2000+ BTC was not quite as huge back then. Divide it by 1000 or so if you want to gauge the scale in fiat terms. Worth noting before someone jumps in to accuse Og of scamming $20 million. While this is obviously true, I have my doubts if this should matter, today. Many, many users are here because they believe in the long term success of Bitcoin, and they expect its value to increase. In turn, anybody doing shady / fraudulent stuff (not judging, yet, just generally saying) with Bitcoin should expect his actions to become a huge matter at some point.I'm not taking sides, here, but I'm inclined to believe what I read. @OgNasty, I think it's time to address the concerns in an appropriate manner. A simple answer to the question, "Did you receive the full amount (2.000something BTC) back from Pirateat40?" would be very, very helpful in this matter. As suchmoon said, it was no huge deal back in the days, but it could become one, now. So, this question should definitely get addressed rather sooner than later. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: suchmoon on December 07, 2019, 06:15:08 PM One thing to keep in mind (because it came up in another unrelated thread) is that the eye-watering amount of 2000+ BTC was not quite as huge back then. Divide it by 1000 or so if you want to gauge the scale in fiat terms. Worth noting before someone jumps in to accuse Og of scamming $20 million. While this is obviously true, I have my doubts if this should matter, today. Many, many users are here because they believe in the long term success of Bitcoin, and they expect its value to increase. In turn, anybody doing shady / fraudulent stuff (not judging, yet, just generally saying) with Bitcoin should expect his actions to become a huge matter at some point.It goes both ways. Not everyone was a staunch hodler back then just like not everyone is today. Just saying that whatever OgNasty's role was in the scam it shouldn't be amplified (or diminished) by "what if Bitcoin went up to $20k 5 years later". People were giving him 50-100 BTC because it was worth ~$10. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 07, 2019, 06:38:20 PM Right. But either way, things could get complicated if someone now demanded back his BTC, provided the "new" information that OgNasty got back all the Bitcoins is true. While I do realize it would not be fair to have someone pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for - generally speaking - being an egg thief half a decade ago, the claim for the BTC in itself would be very valid.
That's why I think it's important to get some clarity in this matter. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 07, 2019, 06:55:04 PM Right. But either way, things could get complicated if someone now demanded back his BTC, provided the "new" information that OgNasty got back all the Bitcoins is true. While I do realize it would not be fair to have someone pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for - generally speaking - being an egg thief half a decade ago, the claim for the BTC in itself would be very valid. That's why I think it's important to get some clarity in this matter. I doubt that it would be fair, in terms of equity, for any court to actually rule the return of the actual asset when the asset might be up anywhere between 50x and 1,000x depending upon a ruling that would establish when the violation had occurred (whether breach of fiduciary duties or some kind of fraud or conversion), if there were such a finding that put a date on the valuation and could conclude the amount of BTC at issue at the point of such violation(s). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: owlcatz on December 07, 2019, 08:08:15 PM I doubt that it would be fair, in terms of equity, for any court to actually rule the return of the actual asset when the asset might be up anywhere between 50x and 1,000x depending upon a ruling that would establish when the violation had occurred (whether breach of fiduciary duties or some kind of fraud or conversion), if there were such a finding that put a date on the valuation and could conclude the amount of BTC at issue at the point of such violation(s). Coins are coins. Look at the craig wright ruling. I haven't read the shavers thing completely or recently, but to me 1 BTC = 1 BTC. Not dollars. ;) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 07, 2019, 08:15:51 PM I doubt that it would be fair, in terms of equity, for any court to actually rule the return of the actual asset when the asset might be up anywhere between 50x and 1,000x depending upon a ruling that would establish when the violation had occurred (whether breach of fiduciary duties or some kind of fraud or conversion), if there were such a finding that put a date on the valuation and could conclude the amount of BTC at issue at the point of such violation(s). Coins are coins. Look at the craig wright ruling. I haven't read the shavers thing completely or recently, but to me 1 BTC = 1 BTC. Not dollars. ;) Of course, if you were a victim you could make those kinds of return of the asset arguments, especially if you have any meaningful evidence that the coins are still in the custody of the person claiming NOT to have them. I just have my doubts about those kinds of arguments would fly necessarily if the possession of the coins are questioned. Of course, there may be burden of proof for the holder of the coins to show that he no longer has them and certain facts around such matter that might be taken with a grain of salt, too depending on the whole set of facts regarding what happened and if there is any kind of showing that the holder of the coins had been acting in good / reasonable faith. The Craig Wright ruling might be different, at least in the sense that he had continuously claimed to still have the coins (just not the ability to access to them, currently)... so the court was likely using his own statements of possession against him. If he is claiming to have the coins, then it is easier to express such ruling in terms of both the asset and the dollar value and the change in value of the asset in terms of dollars seems to be almost a non-issue under those Craig Wright kinds of factual findings. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 07, 2019, 08:59:43 PM I doubt that it would be fair, in terms of equity, for any court to actually rule the return of the actual asset when the asset might be up anywhere between 50x and 1,000x depending upon a ruling that would establish when the violation had occurred (whether breach of fiduciary duties or some kind of fraud or conversion), if there were such a finding that put a date on the valuation and could conclude the amount of BTC at issue at the point of such violation(s). Coins are coins. Look at the craig wright ruling. I haven't read the shavers thing completely or recently, but to me 1 BTC = 1 BTC. Not dollars. ;) But I do see the issue, here – as I said, this literally compares to egg thief vs. millions of Dollars. I have no idea how to handle such a (hypothetical) thing in a fair manner. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: The Sceptical Chymist on December 07, 2019, 09:10:34 PM Coins are coins. Look at the craig wright ruling. I haven't read the shavers thing completely or recently, but to me 1 BTC = 1 BTC. Not dollars. ;) I don't think law enforcement or anyone in the government would see it that way, however. I think they'd probably look at the dollar value of the amount that was involved at the time it was stolen/embezzled/misappropriated/whatever and what the dollar value was at the time the coins were disposed of, if at all.I read most of this thread, but it still isn't clear to me what a "pass-through" is. From what I gather, OgNasty was obtaining a higher interest rate from Trendon Shavers and he passed the difference along to his own investors, which I got from Vod's previous post. And honestly I don't even know what OgNasty's business is, so that's why I've always refrained from getting involved in the scam accusations against him. But I do see what the potential problem is here with the claim that Shavers never refunded him anything more than the 65BTC, while he apparently got much more than that. If I'm way off base, someone please correct me. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 07, 2019, 09:46:28 PM I don't think law enforcement or anyone in the government would see it that way, however. As far as I remember, there were already cases other than the Craig Wright one where courts ruled that people have a right to get back what was taken from them (being Bitcoin). That's just from memory, though, and this case might be a bit different.I read most of this thread, but it still isn't clear to me what a "pass-through" is. From what I gather, OgNasty was obtaining a higher interest rate from Trendon Shavers and he passed the difference along to his own investors, which I got from Vod's previous post. OgNasty was "investing" in the Pirateat40 scam, and he offered people to "invest" with him for a lower percentage (8, later 10+% a month instead of 1% a day, initially, as with Trendon Shavers / Pirateat40). And he'd "invest" those BTC with Pirateat40. Kind of an indirect, "insured" "investing" in the BTCS&T, hence the additional BTC for the insurance fund. And honestly I don't even know what OgNasty's business is, so that's why I've always refrained from getting involved in the scam accusations against him. But I do see what the potential problem is here with the claim that Shavers never refunded him anything more than the 65BTC, while he apparently got much more than that. If I'm way off base, someone please correct me. The 65 BTC came from the insurance fund which OgNasty set up on his own, likely from the profits he made from Pirateat40. To have at least some BTC in case Pirateat40 defaults, which eventually happened. And OgNasty paid out "investors" from his insurance fund.Now the current accussation is that he was made whole by Pirateat40, receiving all 2.000+ BTC, but not telling it his "investors" and instead, only paying them the lousy remains from the insurance fund. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 08, 2019, 01:49:37 AM When pirate opened his plan up to the public, users moved to dealing with him directly. I just have to point out how irrelevant this is. You started your pass-through in April, 5 months after pirate was publicly looking for lenders and 4 months before it crashed. And you catered to people who couldn't afford the minimum investment required to deal with him directly. The 65 BTC came from the insurance fund which OgNasty set up on his own, likely from the profits he made from Pirateat40. To have at least some BTC in case Pirateat40 defaults, which eventually happened. And OgNasty paid out "investors" from his insurance fund. Now the current accussation is that he was made whole by Pirateat40, receiving all 2.000+ BTC, but not telling it his "investors" and instead, only paying them the lousy remains from the insurance fund. Until yesterday, I wasn't really making a scam accusation. I was just pointing out that the whole 'I had a reserve fund that protected my investors' argument was disingenuous since the reserves were only worth a fraction of the actual investments. Imagine putting $1,000 into a high risk investment and being told not to worry about the risk because if your $1,000 was stolen you'd still get $40 back. I think I figured out what happened to about 40% of the BTC2600 known invested bitcoin by digging through the block chain. and pretty confident that the following is true. Hopefully someone will double check my claims and tell me what you think. We have data from Og Pass-Through funds from the beginning of May, June and July. Since we're trying to figure out what happened in August, we really only need to pay attention to July since it's the most recent. - On July 1 there were 11 individual investors with deposits ranging from BTC10 to BTC700 for a total of BTC2,638.25 - Of those 11 individuals, we have 7 bitcoin addresses:
We don't know what happened to the BTC1488 that belonged to the other 4 investors, but I think we can get a more accurate number of how much money wasn't paid based on what we know about the reserve fund, and how much the 2 players that never divested were paid from it. The reserve was at BTC65 on July 1 after building it up a little each month for the past 3 months. It's likely he added a little more in August also, so lets say the reserve was at BTC80. If BTC300 lost received BTC27.54 from the BTC80 reserve, that means that BTC300 was just over 34% of the total that was stolen from the investors, and the total stolen would be about BTC882. One more variable that could make the number higher is if anyone invested in August.
- The columns with dates are interest payments - Everything happened in 2012 Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Quickseller on December 08, 2019, 03:42:54 PM Instead of slinging mud at OgNasty endlessly, could you possibly explain what contract OgNasty violated?
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 08, 2019, 05:06:38 PM Instead of slinging mud at OgNasty endlessly, could you possibly explain what contract OgNasty violated? Wth man. If you think I'm wrong just say so and explain why instead of vaguely implying everything I say is bullshit. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: suchmoon on December 08, 2019, 05:20:17 PM Instead of slinging mud at OgNasty endlessly, could you possibly explain what contract OgNasty violated? Wth man. If you think I'm wrong just say so and explain why instead of vaguely implying everything I say is bullshit. Take it as a compliment. Quicksy has no explanation, not even a contrived pseudo-legal one, if he's resorting to a straw man argument. If he comes up with something he'll probably use his "more trusted" sockpuppet account to post it. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Quickseller on December 08, 2019, 05:50:44 PM Instead of slinging mud at OgNasty endlessly, could you possibly explain what contract OgNasty violated? Wth man. If you think I'm wrong just say so and explain why instead of vaguely implying everything I say is bullshit. You might argue it was unethical for OgN to participate in the pirate ponzi in the first place, but there were many other people also participating. You might also argue that OgN violated a bunch of SEC paperwork rules, but so do most things around here. The amount that OgN may have profited was a few thousand dollars, but it might be zero if he invested his own money in pirates ponzi. I previously thought that your beef with OgN was that he was running a signature campaign for what turned out to be a shady casino as this is when your scrutiny of him started. But it doesn’t look like you have extended those same concerns to yahoo who is running a campaign for an even more shady business that was known to be shady before the campaign started and that has been running for months. You also haven’t extended those standards to any of the people who have positive trust ratings who are participating in the campaign. I would suggest that you find a contract, implied or explicit that OgN did not keep. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 08, 2019, 06:08:13 PM Instead of slinging mud at OgNasty endlessly, could you possibly explain what contract OgNasty violated? Wth man. If you think I'm wrong just say so and explain why instead of vaguely implying everything I say is bullshit. You might argue it was unethical for OgN to participate in the pirate ponzi in the first place, but there were many other people also participating. You might also argue that OgN violated a bunch of SEC paperwork rules, but so do most things around here. The amount that OgN may have profited was a few thousand dollars, but it might be zero if he invested his own money in pirates ponzi. I previously thought that your beef with OgN was that he was running a signature campaign for what turned out to be a shady casino as this is when your scrutiny of him started. But it doesn’t look like you have extended those same concerns to yahoo who is running a campaign for an even more shady business that was known to be shady before the campaign started and that has been running for months. You also haven’t extended those standards to any of the people who have positive trust ratings who are participating in the campaign. I would suggest that you find a contract, implied or explicit that OgN did not keep. Please read what I wrote if you want to discuss it. It's clear you either haven't or you're intentionally making this thread more complicated than it needs to be. Start here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53277993#msg53277993). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 08, 2019, 07:22:12 PM I would suggest that you find a contract, implied or explicit that OgN did not keep. I would suggest you sell your mom for a bit more than a satoshi.... https://web.archive.org/web/20140429234623/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0 Quote "WHAT IF BITCOIN SAVINGS & TRUST STOPS PAYING INTEREST? In the event that BS&T stops paying interest, I will request a withdrawal. Once received, your funds will be returned to you." OG received the withdrawal, but did not return the funds. BS&T did not collapse as far as the relationship between them and OG. He was made whole, and he scammed his investors. Quote WHAT ARE THE RISKS INVOLVED? There are always risks. The major risks are that pirateat40 or myself will disappear with your funds. A secondary risk is that BS&T stops paying interest. - pirateat40 and you did not disappear with any funds - BS&T stop paying but you had all the investor deposits. What happened? Quote What I would do to protect my reputation, is pay out the reserve fund to depositors proportionately to their current deposit as listed on this thread. It is important that depositors read the information provided in the original post and not make assumptions. All his future comments point only towards the reserve fund. He knew the collapse was coming and that is why he offered bonuses if you kept a minimum number of coins with him (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg854449#msg854449). But the original post always contained the original phrase: "In the event that BS&T stops paying interest, I will request a withdrawal. Once received, your funds will be returned to you" Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 08, 2019, 07:44:50 PM So the accusation is that OG was fully refunded by BS&T, but told the "investors" that he was not, only paid the reserve to the investors, and pocketed the refund WD from BS&T?
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 08, 2019, 07:52:01 PM So the accusation is that OG was fully refunded by BS&T, but told the "investors" that he was not, only paid the reserve to the investors, and pocketed the refund WD from BS&T? That's according to the SEC document where Trendon Shavers mentions his name and spells it out. I am sure OG is on record somewhere saying he did receive the coins and he would have to claim he made all his players whole. I think he just hoped no one would ever find out. Now you know what pays for his pool, and his panels, and new Telsa trucks... coins from our fellow community members. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 08, 2019, 07:55:08 PM That's according to the SEC document where Trendon Shavers mentions his name and spells it out. So I should trust what Trendon Shavers has to say about who he paid? I'm not sure about that.. I am sure OG is on record somewhere saying he did receive the coins. Cool, post links..BTW did you actually call the IRS on OG, putting his life in danger, the 500BTC of forum funds in danger, and possibly the forum itself in legal danger, or did you lie about contacting the IRS? JJG want's to know too.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Quickseller on December 08, 2019, 08:02:23 PM Instead of slinging mud at OgNasty endlessly, could you possibly explain what contract OgNasty violated? Wth man. If you think I'm wrong just say so and explain why instead of vaguely implying everything I say is bullshit. You might argue it was unethical for OgN to participate in the pirate ponzi in the first place, but there were many other people also participating. You might also argue that OgN violated a bunch of SEC paperwork rules, but so do most things around here. The amount that OgN may have profited was a few thousand dollars, but it might be zero if he invested his own money in pirates ponzi. I previously thought that your beef with OgN was that he was running a signature campaign for what turned out to be a shady casino as this is when your scrutiny of him started. But it doesn’t look like you have extended those same concerns to yahoo who is running a campaign for an even more shady business that was known to be shady before the campaign started and that has been running for months. You also haven’t extended those standards to any of the people who have positive trust ratings who are participating in the campaign. I would suggest that you find a contract, implied or explicit that OgN did not keep. Please read what I wrote if you want to discuss it. It's clear you either haven't or you're intentionally making this thread more complicated than it needs to be. Start here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53277993#msg53277993). Elsewhere in the deposition, transaction histories of all the account holders accounts are mentioned, but are not attached to the document. If you can find an account history of OgN's BS&T account, the last withdrawal(s) can be cross referenced to the blockchain (if the txid is not listed), and I will consider the probability if OgN actually received the withdrawal or not. It was suggested by pirate40's lawyer that some pass-through 'lenders' were scammed by pass-through operators, although the article I read did not mention him offering evidence to support this. The document you provided was a deposition of pirate40, who for obvious reasons is not the most reliable person. He also contradicted himself on the following page in where he testified to compared to what he told an SEC investigator via telephone previously. He testified that he first gave priority to new account holders, and then prioritized his long standing accounts, but he previously only said that he prioritized his long standing accounts. I also reviewed posts of some others that pirate40 claimed to have paid in full, however, some never made any mention of pirate40, btc4domains posted (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=92827.msg1024679#msg1024679) that he lost money in the pirate ponzi, brendio (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=82772.msg1158806#msg1158806) posted multiple times that he had not received anything from pirate40, coin_toss tried to sell (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=108685.0) his BS&T account after he would have received payment. Imsaguy seems to imply that he was expecting a payout for his pass through (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91417.0;all), but it is unclear if he ever received a withdrawal, he did say in late August 2012 that he had not received anything. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 08, 2019, 08:07:30 PM BTW did you actually call the IRS on OG, putting his life in danger, the 500BTC of forum funds in danger, and possibly the forum itself in legal danger, or did you lie about contacting the IRS? JJG want's to know too.. I have already posted I sent a postal letter to the IRS. Did OG post a link containing my name and location, and claim I called myself a pedophile? What did your morals do there? I am sure OG is on record somewhere saying he did receive the coins. Cool, post links..Let's chat more when you are less biased, ok? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 08, 2019, 08:17:12 PM I have already posted I sent a postal letter to the IRS. Did this postal letter contain the formal accusation of fraud documents (whatever they are called) against OG that you originally threatened?Did OG post a link containing my name and location, and claim I called myself a pedophile? What did your morals do there? I think that was pretty low, but.. This is far from the first time I have seen this link, I believe you referenced it first, it did not originate from OG did it? It is basically old news, hence not having to be contained to the investigations board.. Anyway, this is off topic.. I want to know if OG middleman scammed his pirate pass through investors or not.. I am sure OG is on record somewhere saying he did receive the coins. Cool, post links..Burden of proof is on the accuser.. If their is proof I want to see it, but it's not my job to go find it.. First you need to prove that OG got whatever refund, then you need to prove that he did not pay whatever refund.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 08, 2019, 09:08:24 PM [edited out] BTW did you actually call the IRS on OG, putting his life in danger, the 500BTC of forum funds in danger, and possibly the forum itself in legal danger, or did you lie about contacting the IRS? JJG want's to know too.. You are anticipating something that I would like to know, eddie13? I may have heard something about VOD calling the IRS about OGNasty, but I really cannot remember if I did or not, so I should not be spreading rumors in terms of my own faulty memory regarding that. Rather than getting derailed into what VOD may have done (Edit: looks like Vod largely responded to this point above to the extent that it might be minimally relevant to anything that we are attempting to discuss here), and I am not sure if it is completely relevant (but sure, it could be relevant, I suppose). I am a bit more interested in the extent to which posts might have been deleted in terms of OGNasty's own back and forth communications, which seems to be what Twitchy asserted to have happened within a short period of Twitchy's attempted investigation into some of the possible factual matters. In that regard, I had thought that there should be way back machines or something like that that would establish if Twitch's assertion about OGNasty engaging in shredding would be true.. and then furthermore, a way to see the contents of the shredding attempts without having to rely upon any forum administrator's possible abilities to access such contents. Am I naive to believe that there are way back machines that would capture the contents of forum post shredding attempts. There are guys (and perhaps a gal or two) who are way the hell better at using those kinds of interwebs tools than me... to the extent such tools might exist. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Quickseller on December 08, 2019, 09:35:49 PM am a bit more interested in the extent to which posts might have been deleted in terms of OGNasty's own back and forth communications, which seems to be what Twitchy asserted to have happened within a short period of Twitchy's attempted investigation into some of the possible factual matters. In that regard, I had thought that there should be way back machines or something like that that would establish if Twitch's assertion about OGNasty engaging in shredding would be true.. and then furthermore, a way to see the contents of the shredding attempts without having to rely upon any forum administrator's possible abilities to access such contents. This (https://web.archive.org/web/20140429234638/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0;all) is probably a pretty good representation of the thread in question. It is from May 2014, and there were the same number of posts in the thread as of Feb 2016. There are other versions of this thread here (https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.*), but I expect them to contain the same information, or less information because some of them contain only one page. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 08, 2019, 09:50:25 PM You are anticipating something that I would like to know, eddie13? I may have heard something about VOD calling the IRS about OGNasty So what about the auditing part? I think you could get caught up by reading my posts in this thread starting here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53106959#msg53106959) for a couple pages or so.. I am a bit more interested in the extent to which posts might have been deleted in terms of OGNasty's own back and forth communications, which seems to be what Twitchy asserted to have happened within a short period of Twitchy's attempted investigation into some of the possible factual matters. In that regard, I had thought that there should be way back machines or something like that that would establish if Twitch's assertion about OGNasty engaging in shredding would be true.. and then furthermore, a way to see the contents of the shredding attempts without having to rely upon any forum administrator's possible abilities to access such contents. Am I naive to believe that there are way back machines that would capture the contents of forum post shredding attempts. There are guys (and perhaps a gal or two) who are way the hell better at using those kinds of interwebs tools than me... to the extent such tools might exist. Same here.. I am soooo ready to see some damning evidence against OG after all of this half baked, circumstantial, and speculative attacking of him basically across the entire forum.. Some of the best of the best are here constantly trying to dig at whatever they can find and keep coming up with nothing much, while still insisting he is such a horrible scammer and causing ridiculous amounts of drama.. At this point I really just want to finally be convinced that he is indeed a piece of shit so I can quit caring about all of this, but nothing good yet.. Maybe they got em this time, and if they do, I want to see it.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 08, 2019, 10:53:20 PM You are anticipating something that I would like to know, eddie13? I may have heard something about VOD calling the IRS about OGNasty So what about the auditing part? I think you could get caught up by reading my posts in this thread starting here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53106959#msg53106959) for a couple pages or so.. I am a bit more interested in the extent to which posts might have been deleted in terms of OGNasty's own back and forth communications, which seems to be what Twitchy asserted to have happened within a short period of Twitchy's attempted investigation into some of the possible factual matters. In that regard, I had thought that there should be way back machines or something like that that would establish if Twitch's assertion about OGNasty engaging in shredding would be true.. and then furthermore, a way to see the contents of the shredding attempts without having to rely upon any forum administrator's possible abilities to access such contents. Am I naive to believe that there are way back machines that would capture the contents of forum post shredding attempts. There are guys (and perhaps a gal or two) who are way the hell better at using those kinds of interwebs tools than me... to the extent such tools might exist. Same here.. I am soooo ready to see some damning evidence against OG after all of this half baked, circumstantial, and speculative attacking of him basically across the entire forum.. Some of the best of the best are here constantly trying to dig at whatever they can find and keep coming up with nothing much, while still insisting he is such a horrible scammer and causing ridiculous amounts of drama.. At this point I really just want to finally be convinced that he is indeed a piece of shit so I can quit caring about all of this, but nothing good yet.. Maybe they got em this time, and if they do, I want to see it.. I did not really want to get into the VOD drama unless there is some significant reason that I need to do so. I am not going to rule out that I may want to look further into the matter, but there is only so much time in the day, and I was just curious about the possible significance of purported deleted posts that Twitchy had brought up regarding OGNasty, and if there is not really much if any significance, then maybe this whole assertion that OGNasty is going to jail is overblown. So, yeah, I have seen some of the arguments against OGNasty, and surely the trent shavers testimony would only be one aspect, but there would need to be some kind of corroboration, whether evidence of bitcoin addresses or even members complaining that they were not paid while OGNasty seemed to imply that there were no complaints. There should always be some complaints, but then a question might be whether any of the complaints add up to clear and convincing evidence against OGNasty in terms of whether he engaged in fraudulent behavior or breach of fiduciary behavior or some other means of running off with the funds, and that is what seems to be asserted here. By the way, I personally doubt that there has to be either direct evidence or even evidence of legal wrong doing in order to drag a person's reputation through the mud regarding conduct that might end up being morally repugnant rather than illegal, so in that sense, the evidence still seems to be a bit ambiguous from my perspective about OGNasty - but I am NOT even saying that I have seen all of the evidence. Sure, there were some problematic aspects of how he seemed to have handled the forum airdrops, which was kind of what drew me into this seemingly related discussion in the first place, and even with that, I see topics (talking about forum funds and the other pass through entity allegations of this thread) overlapping, and I only have so much time to think about these kinds of OGNasty is a bad guy matters, and sometimes factual matters from different cases could show a pattern of behavior, even if each one of the situations might not stand completely on its own as a violation (like fraud, or breach of fiduciary duty or conversion or whatever), too. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: marlboroza on December 08, 2019, 11:22:13 PM I want to know if OG middleman scammed his pirate pass through investors or not.. This is pretty much very simple yes-know question.@OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 08, 2019, 11:43:03 PM My apologies, I had not seen that document. Although my criticism does stand with regards to your lack of calling out anyone involved in the yobit campaign.. Thanks for reading it. I have no recollection of you criticizing me about anything involving yobit...I think you might be confusing me with someone else, or I just don't remember. I don't even really know what happened with yobit other than they used to shit post like crazy.Elsewhere in the deposition, transaction histories of all the account holders accounts are mentioned, but are not attached to the document. If you can find an account history of OgN's BS&T account, the last withdrawal(s) can be cross referenced to the blockchain (if the txid is not listed), and I will consider the probability if OgN actually received the withdrawal or not. About half the interest payments and divestment transactions were made from OGs main address (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/168WXhArv7Fasqvi2xm5MQMfLhG18jifMe?page=424). He didn't receive any large amounts after August 2. If the feds seized any of Pirates BTC we could probably track them the say way we did with Silk Road Coins and work backwards. It was suggested by pirate40's lawyer that some pass-through 'lenders' were scammed by pass-through operators, although the article I read did not mention him offering evidence to support this. If Pirate made a few big refunds to pass-through operators in the middle of the collapse, it would provide an ideal situation to scam a bunch of money for each operator. The document you provided was a deposition of pirate40, who for obvious reasons is not the most reliable person. He also contradicted himself on the following page in where he testified to compared to what he told an SEC investigator via telephone previously. He testified that he first gave priority to new account holders, and then prioritized his long standing accounts, but he previously only said that he prioritized his long standing accounts. At this point, Pirate lying about returning the funds is by far the most likely scenario that ends in Og being not being a thief. And it's easy to just say 'oh he wasn't trustworthy, OG is, so pirate must be the one lying'. But the transcript (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53277993#msg53277993)is pretty convincing, Og won't address it, and I don't see what motivation Pirate would have to lie about returning what looks to be ~BTC800 to OgNasty and only a few others. You could argue he was trying to look nice or just get the number he scammed down I guess. Probably the biggest red flag is how cagey Og has been about the whole thing. It doesn't make sense if he's innocent. When he's tried to defend himself it's always a vague, weak or not relevant argument. Refuses to answer any direct question. While we have solid, easily accessible proof that from May through July all his investors were making good money and being payed promptly. Why aren't there any details of how the whole thing ended? He's obviously capable of keeping records and being transparent. It's possible there's a valid reason...why not just tell us? If he's guilty, he's probably wary about saying anything that could be disproven at some point in the future, and the truth doesn't make him look good. The vague deflection and insults would make a lot of sense . Not saying any of this stuff proves he's 100% guilty, btw. Just pointing out what I consider pretty big red flags. I also reviewed posts of some others that pirate40 claimed to have paid in full, however, some never made any mention of pirate40, btc4domains posted (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=92827.msg1024679#msg1024679) that he lost money in the pirate ponzi, brendio (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=82772.msg1158806#msg1158806) posted multiple times that he had not received anything from pirate40, coin_toss tried to sell (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=108685.0) his BS&T account after he would have received payment. Imsaguy seems to imply that he was expecting a payout for his pass through (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91417.0;all), but it is unclear if he ever received a withdrawal, he did say in late August 2012 that he had not received anything. I'll look into these too. I've already sent a few pms out to investors who may have answers. I am a bit more interested in the extent to which posts might have been deleted in terms of OGNasty's own back and forth communications, which seems to be what Twitchy asserted to have happened within a short period of Twitchy's attempted investigation into some of the possible factual matters. In that regard, I had thought that there should be way back machines or something like that that would establish if Twitch's assertion about OGNasty engaging in shredding would be true.. and then furthermore, a way to see the contents of the shredding attempts without having to rely upon any forum administrator's possible abilities to access such contents. Am I naive to believe that there are way back machines that would capture the contents of forum post shredding attempts. There are guys (and perhaps a gal or two) who are way the hell better at using those kinds of interwebs tools than me... to the extent such tools might exist. It looks like I was wrong about him deleting posts from that thread. It's possible I saw the long OP get deleted and for some reason though it was actually deleted posts, or it could have been in another thread. It looks like all he did was delete the entire OP and lock the thread. So, yeah, I was wrong about that and apologize to OG for making that claim. I'm seriously not out on a Witch Hunt here and If I find anything that exonerates him or something I that makes him look 'less bad' I would post it for sure. For anyone that is behind, please read this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53277993#msg53277993), and then this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53287301#msg53287301) if you want to catch up. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 09, 2019, 12:08:28 AM I am a bit more interested in the extent to which posts might have been deleted in terms of OGNasty's own back and forth communications, which seems to be what Twitchy asserted to have happened within a short period of Twitchy's attempted investigation into some of the possible factual matters. In that regard, I had thought that there should be way back machines or something like that that would establish if Twitch's assertion about OGNasty engaging in shredding would be true.. and then furthermore, a way to see the contents of the shredding attempts without having to rely upon any forum administrator's possible abilities to access such contents. Am I naive to believe that there are way back machines that would capture the contents of forum post shredding attempts. There are guys (and perhaps a gal or two) who are way the hell better at using those kinds of interwebs tools than me... to the extent such tools might exist. It looks like I was wrong about him deleting posts from that thread. It's possible I saw the long OP get deleted and for some reason though it was actually deleted posts, or it could have been in another thread. It looks like all he did was delete the entire OP and lock the thread. So, yeah, I was wrong about that and apologize to OG for making that claim. I'm seriously not out on a Witch Hunt here and If I find anything that exonerates him or something I that makes him look 'less bad' I would post it for sure. For anyone that is behind, please read this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53277993#msg53277993), and then this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53287301#msg53287301) if you want to catch up. Thanks for that clarification, Twitchy. I am glad that wayback machine was able to clarify that deleting of posts was not as BIG or widespread as previously recalled, and surely we know that sometimes OPs are rewritten as matters evolve, so sometimes the rewriting of the OP could cause some inadvertent appearances of a cover up that ends up NOT panning out upon further investigation. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 09, 2019, 12:08:53 AM OGNasty seemed to imply that there were no complaints. There should always be some complaints I'm seriously not out on a Witch Hunt here Where are the compaints?If their are no complaints, then why are you even digging for dirt, unless it is a witch hunt? This shit is ancient and you are just trying to find ancient dirt.. I don't see the intentions of this to make any possible victims whole.. Just to take down OGNasty.. It looks like I was wrong about him deleting posts I do respect admitting when you are wrong though.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 09, 2019, 12:26:57 AM OGNasty seemed to imply that there were no complaints. There should always be some complaints I'm seriously not out on a Witch Hunt here Where are the compaints?If their are no complaints, then why are you even digging for dirt, unless it is a witch hunt? Oh gawd... you are going to accuse me of engaging in a witch hunt, too? Seems to me that I just raised a legitimate connected concept. I recall OGNasty asserting that there were no complaints, and if there were no complaints, then so be it. I have life experiences that have shown me that when dealing with people there are frequently if not always some complaints.. and surely, some complaints are materially relevant and others are not. Let's say, for example, that one of the investors was owed 10BTC, and OGNasty said that he was going to send the 10BTC within 72 hours; however, it took him a week to send the 10BTC. There might be a complaint about receiving the BTC late, but in the end, many might conclude that the late sending of the BTC was not necessarily a material breach, even though OGNasty had represented that he would send the BTC within 72 hours. Now if he did not send the 10 BTC or he only sent 2 BTC that might be another story. Another example would be if OGNasty said that he was only going to send 2 BTC because he was only paying 20% of the amount owed which was apportionate to the whole amount of the funds that were available, but if OGNasty later got reimbursed the additional 8 BTC with the presumption that OGNasty was receiving that additional reimbursement to pay off any additional claims, there might not have been any complaints if the intended recipient did not realize that OGNasty had received the additional 8BTC but had not used those funds for reimbursement.... So, in any case, the absence of complaints might not prove the point that is at issue, and if some investors later find out that they were provided with false or misleading facts, then they might choose to later complain even though they had not complained earlier. I am just saying that complaints might or might not be relevant, even at a later stage of looking into the matter. This shit is ancient and you are just trying to find ancient dirt.. Perhaps everything is ancient. I have no fucking clue. If new evidence comes out, and affected people just find out about the new information, then the situation might no longer be "ancient" because there is the revelation of new information. I haven't seen any mention of the intentions of this to make any possible victims whole.. Just to take down OGNasty.. I don't know. I already revealed how my attention was drawn to this, which was initially the various posts about the airdropped coins that led into this information, and if there is just digging up old information then I may have missed that, and I have no intention to rehash old information, to the extent that might be happening. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: philipma1957 on December 09, 2019, 12:50:58 AM I want to know if OG middleman scammed his pirate pass through investors or not.. This is pretty much very simple yes-know question.@OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? so did pirate lie. or did og lie. the worth of the coins was as low as six dollars in 2012 and as high as 40 so the value when and if received was 6 x 2500= 15,000 to 40 x 2500= 100000 if he received them you would need to prove it. all we have is the word of a liar pirate that he got them. but at least i finally understand some of the vod vs og feud and why many people don't like og. my dealings with og have been a few sales to him and he did some escrows for me. good luck to og proving he did not get the 2500coins good luck to anyone proving og did get the 2500 coins which ever one is true is hopefully found out and proven. as for how to evaluate what the coins are worth. if og did get them. as i stated they are worth 15,000 to 100,000 you then would trace them and see how and when they were disposed of. ie if hodl on some those are worth more. if sold,quickly those are worth less. but your bottom line is a thief that was convicted is the only evidence that og,received payment of 2500 coins. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 09, 2019, 12:59:39 AM OGNasty seemed to imply that there were no complaints. There should always be some complaints I'm seriously not out on a Witch Hunt here Where are the compaints?If their are no complaints, then why are you even digging for dirt, unless it is a witch hunt? Yeah, that's been Ogs defense also. I'm alleging that the guys that lost their deposits think Pirateat stole their money, but Og is the one that stole it. That's why. If his investors found out that he pocketed their deposits 8 years ago though, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince a bunch of people to loan him money to send to Butterfly labs a year later. And then when BFL turned out to be a big ponzi, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince the people he couldn't pay back to accept 5,000 'seats' into the OgNasty fan club. Witch Hunt implies that the truth is irrelevant. All that matters is we get to set a witch on fire. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: philipma1957 on December 09, 2019, 01:06:20 AM OGNasty seemed to imply that there were no complaints. There should always be some complaints I'm seriously not out on a Witch Hunt here Where are the compaints?If their are no complaints, then why are you even digging for dirt, unless it is a witch hunt? Yeah, that's been Ogs defense also. I'm alleging that the guys that lost their deposits think Pirateat stole their money, but Og is the one that stole it. That's why. If his investors found out that he pocketed their deposits 8 years ago though, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince a bunch of people to loan him money to send to Butterfly labs a year later. And then when BFL turned out to be a big ponzi, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince the people he couldn't pay back to accept 5,000 'seats' into the OgNasty fan club. Witch Hunt implies that the truth is irrelevant. All that matters is we get to set a witch on fire. all we have is the word of a convicted liar : pirate 🏴☠️ if og did get the BTC from pirate maybe pirate 🏴☠️ could prove it. your next step is find the pirate 🏴☠️ and see what evidence he has. do,you know how to contact the pirate 🏴☠️? I will say this find the pirate and you may find the treasure. I would,love to know if og is innocent or not. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 09, 2019, 01:13:39 AM Oh gawd... you are going to accuse me of engaging in a witch hunt, too? No...That was meant to address twitchy.. Finished your post and yeah, I was not trying to include you in the witch hunting party.. I see you as a pretty neutral truth seeker.. I'm alleging that the guys that lost their deposits think Pirateat stole their money, but Og is the one that stole it. Right..If his investors found out that he pocketed their deposits 8 years ago though, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince a bunch of people to loan him money to send to Butterfly labs a year later. So you think you see a series of ponzi associations here.. And then when BFL turned out to be a big ponzi, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince the people he couldn't pay back to accept 5,000 'seats' into the OgNasty fan club. Do you think it would have been reasonable for him to assume that BFL was a ponzi? Or was he just doing a community project? I'm not real up on BFL but I know they scammed a LOT of very smart people.. Witch Hunt implies that the truth is irrelevant. All that matters is we get to set a witch on fire. If you got me on the exact definition I'll concede, but you know what I mean.. What is your goal of an outcome here? And others posting or who have posted here? Is the goal to take down OG or something else? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 09, 2019, 01:40:26 AM Oh gawd... you are going to accuse me of engaging in a witch hunt, too? No...That was meant to address twitchy.. Finished your post and yeah, I was not trying to include you in the witch hunting party.. I see you as a pretty neutral truth seeker.. Ok. Thanks for the clarification. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: philipma1957 on December 09, 2019, 02:17:01 AM Oh gawd... you are going to accuse me of engaging in a witch hunt, too? No...That was meant to address twitchy.. Finished your post and yeah, I was not trying to include you in the witch hunting party.. I see you as a pretty neutral truth seeker.. I'm alleging that the guys that lost their deposits think Pirateat stole their money, but Og is the one that stole it. Right..If his investors found out that he pocketed their deposits 8 years ago though, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince a bunch of people to loan him money to send to Butterfly labs a year later. So you think you see a series of ponzi associations here.. And then when BFL turned out to be a big ponzi, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince the people he couldn't pay back to accept 5,000 'seats' into the OgNasty fan club. Do you think it would have been reasonable for him to assume that BFL was a ponzi? Or was he just doing a community project? I'm not real up on BFL but I know they scammed a LOT of very smart people.. Witch Hunt implies that the truth is irrelevant. All that matters is we get to set a witch on fire. If you got me on the exact definition I'll concede, but you know what I mean.. What is your goal of an outcome here? And others posting or who have posted here? Is the goal to take down OG or something else? I would love to know if pirate is the liar or if og is. It is why I posted here. I see 1 piece of interesting info a statement from pirate claiming he paid more then 2500 coins to og. I see nothing else. The key is find out if pirate told the truth. once you do that if you can then next step is figure out what og did with them. If you can not prove the statement true or not true post that since that is all you can do. If you can prove pirate is lying cool he is the villain. I wish op good luck in figuring out if pirate told the truth or lied. It is a big deal if pirate paid og back. If the investors are not og If all the investors are og and he was the only person that put the 2500 coins in it is not a big deal. I simply don't know. Whats true. but it would be nice to get some truth as to what happended. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 09, 2019, 03:05:11 AM I might fly there, knock on his door, and attempt to interview him, if you guys want to pay to make it happen..
Send me on an adventure.. Someone said he is out of jail? Where's he at? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 09, 2019, 03:36:04 AM I might fly there, knock on his door, and attempt to interview him, if you guys want to pay to make it happen.. Send me on an adventure.. Someone said he is out of jail? Where's he at? I believe that I heard him interviewed by Tone Vays or Chris Darose or someone on a podcast a couple of years ago and it was after he had already been sentenced and before he had served any time, I believe. He did not seem like any kind of outright liar, but surely sometimes it can be difficult to know if their is a reason to lie about one aspect or another aspect of his past conduct. I doubt that he would accept any kind of interview, unless he is really comfortable with the situation, and possibly he would not even want to do it in person... ... so we would just have to pay for your skype connection rather than your plane and hotel... hahahahahaha Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 09, 2019, 03:40:13 AM your skype connection I don't have a skype, lol Hire someone else.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 09, 2019, 03:42:58 AM your skype connection I don't have a skype, lol Hire someone else.. You run a tough bargain. :o I was playing good cop. Now we are going to have bad cop come in and let you know what will happen if you don't cooperate. Good luck. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: OgNasty on December 09, 2019, 03:58:10 AM When Bitcoin Savings & Loan disappeared, I lost my funds along with everyone else. I had no special relationship with pirate. I was trying to protect users from losing everything if he disappeared, which I did successfully and everyone I interacted with was satisfied. I believe my PMs were even subpoenaed at one point (can't remember if it was just for MtGox or pirate@40 or both) further proving my innocence of any wrongdoing. Some window licking forum users with Og Derangement Syndrome and no access to any private information surely aren't going to find some smoking gun the SEC missed.
It is funny reading over this nonsense, as it comes back with more spectacular claims (lies) each time. I only hope you are getting some sort of joy or entertainment from all this time you're wasting making yourselves look like idiots and spreading misinformation. Otherwise I would be disappointed to keep feeding you my attention you so dearly crave. EDIT: Let me be perfectly clear about lies still being told. I have not been audited. I lost my BTC in Bitcoin Savings & Loan along with everyone else. I did not keep any "refund" for myself. I met every one of my obligations honestly. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 09, 2019, 04:48:02 AM When Bitcoin Savings & Loan disappeared, I lost my funds along with everyone else. I had no special relationship with pirate. I was trying to protect users from losing everything if he disappeared, which I did successfully and everyone I interacted with was satisfied. I'm glad you're willing to address this.How many BTC did your investors lose when they disappeared? Any theories on why you were one of the eight people Pirate told the feds he paid out in full at the time of the shut down in August 2012? Do you remember if this (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/8656eb07b3c11d105bccdc0a1000777fa5f56219fd41ed75d2b4aa8ccb4b5e6e) is the last transaction you ever received from Pirateat? (August 2, 2012) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 09, 2019, 06:33:59 AM Hey OG, on top of being a scammer a liar and a physical abuser, are you now going to be that guy who thinks children are being abused but is too scared to get involved? You know everything about me - police number 780-423-4567
You are pathetic. A nice boyfriend in prison should teach you some reality. When Bitcoin Savings & Loan disappeared, I lost my funds along with everyone else. I had no special relationship with pirate. You lost your funds, then you took the refund that was meant for EVERYONE and kept it for yourself. Quote from: OgNasty I am running a pass-through operation for pirateat40's Bitcoin Savings & Trust for lenders looking to receive interest on their BTC. I receive a higher interest rate from BS&T and I pass a portion of that to lenders as a monthly interest payment. https://web.archive.org/web/20140429234623/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 09, 2019, 07:41:30 AM [Deflection] C'mon... how hard can it be...? [...]This is pretty much very simple yes-know question. @OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 09, 2019, 07:51:19 AM I have never been audited. I believe my PMs were even subpoenaed at one point (can't remember if it was just for MtGox or pirate@40 or both) further proving my innocence of any wrongdoing. So the statement "I have never been audited" is a lie. You have now been audited twice. [...] @OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? The sooner you come clean, the less of a sentence you will receive... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 09, 2019, 11:22:47 AM When Bitcoin Savings & Loan disappeared, I lost my funds along with everyone else. It would appear that pirateat40 was mistaken in his testimony to the SEC (https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/pirateat40/secvs.pirateat401.pdf) then? https://i.imgur.com/wSYp21n.png He submitted your name on a spreadsheet as evidence with a reimbursed amount and claimed it was the entire principle. Perhaps it was just your personal investment and not those participating in the "passthrough" -- either way, sounds like you didn't lose your funds. Unless he entered mistaken evidence. Did he? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TheNewAnon135246 on December 09, 2019, 06:32:16 PM When Bitcoin Savings & Loan disappeared, I lost my funds along with everyone else. I had no special relationship with pirate. I was trying to protect users from losing everything if he disappeared, which I did successfully and everyone I interacted with was satisfied. I'm glad you're willing to address this.How many BTC did your investors lose when they disappeared? Any theories on why you were one of the eight people Pirate told the feds he paid out in full at the time of the shut down in August 2012? Do you remember if this (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/8656eb07b3c11d105bccdc0a1000777fa5f56219fd41ed75d2b4aa8ccb4b5e6e) is the last transaction you ever received from Pirateat? (August 2, 2012) Is there any evidence of OG owning the receiving address? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: suchmoon on December 09, 2019, 07:02:00 PM Is there any evidence of OG owning the receiving address? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18321 Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: marlboroza on December 09, 2019, 07:15:43 PM I lost my BTC in Bitcoin Savings & Loan along with everyone else. Elaborate "I lost my BTC" https://i.imgur.com/e7fAK6E.png Explanation looks like someone ran their own ponzi on top of another ponzi, regardless who posted this. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TheNewAnon135246 on December 09, 2019, 07:49:42 PM Is there any evidence of OG owning the receiving address? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18321 Thanks, missed that ;D. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: philipma1957 on December 10, 2019, 05:02:02 AM so i see og’s address in his profile take in 1000 btc and send it away in about 19 minutes.
at the time the coin was worth 9400 usd. how does anyone here know where the 1000 went 750 to one address 250 to another. it looks like he may have simply passed the coins to two other investors. So this only show coins went in and then went out. in about 19 minutes. so first problem is it is 1000 coins not 2500 coins. second problem is it moved out. to op do you know the two btc address it went to? can you attach them to og? or is it possible og simply paid investors promptly. after reading and checking. i have concluded there is no evidence ognasty was paid 2500 coins back by pirate. there is evidence he was paid back 1000 coins. which he paid investers. so until the missing 1500 is shown to have been paid by pirate to nasty the thread does not has much in terms of the pirate - nasty issue. maybe pirate misspoke maybe he was stressed out when he gave testimony. i dont know much about bfl or nasty fans issues. i myself,had 1000 usd held for 18 months by bfl i was then refunded it. i can see why people are concerned. as 1500 coins are in question. at the time it was about 14000 dollars. maybe og used some of his funds to pay. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 10, 2019, 07:37:04 AM He received BTC1000 on August 2. (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/8656eb07b3c11d105bccdc0a1000777fa5f56219fd41ed75d2b4aa8ccb4b5e6e), BTC68.8 on August 6 (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/f591acd2d7d5233b3089d4b577ef2414eee104c38a6ff4c7776591de47f71e4f), and BTC38 on August 16 (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/c265f7ec360c2f01afe7a75368160e8792bd0d5cf75305a521d29edb1b07ffb4) from pirateat.
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: AlexSimion on December 10, 2019, 01:18:02 PM How is this guy not in jail yet ?
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 10, 2019, 02:24:57 PM How is this guy not in jail yet ? Tbh it's not that simple. We don't even know 100% for certain what really happened (even though we have strong indications); all we have from his side, so far, is a reply that he lost his BTC with BS&T, like anyone else, too. But no information about what happened to users' BTC. So, if there's that little public information out there, I don't see how anyone would go to jail for that.Also, it's not like prosecuting authorities get to know about such cases and just throw people right into jail. Such events usually precede a conduction of criminal investigation and then, they will decide 1) if the material is enough to prove if someone's even guilty and 2) what kind of punishment is chosen. It's not like every egg thief (or even worse) goes right into jail, even though this seems to be a pretty common expectation among users in Cryptoland. :) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: tmfp on December 10, 2019, 03:10:14 PM Let me be perfectly clear about lies still being told. I have not been audited. I lost my BTC in Bitcoin Savings & Loan along with everyone else. I did not keep any "refund" for myself. I met every one of my obligations honestly. That reads like a list of lies being told. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 10, 2019, 03:12:43 PM How is this guy not in jail yet ? Tbh it's not that simple. We don't even know 100% for certain what really happened (even though we have strong indications); all we have from his side, so far, is a reply that he lost his BTC with BS&T, like anyone else, too. But no information about what happened to users' BTC. So, if there's that little public information out there, I don't see how anyone would go to jail for that.Also, it's not like prosecuting authorities get to know about such cases and just throw people right into jail. Such events usually precede a conduction of criminal investigation and then, they will decide 1) if the material is enough to prove if someone's even guilty and 2) what kind of punishment is chosen. It's not like every egg thief (or even worse) goes right into jail, even though this seems to be a pretty common expectation among users in Cryptoland. :) Also: - It really wasn't enough money to warrant the feds getting involved (I'm guessing OG made $8k-$15k, I think Pirateat got 18 months for $1.5 million) - Anyone who sent OG their money had it stolen assume the guy who stole it went to prison for it. Did a little more blockchain digging. Between April 10 and August 17 Og sent BTC12351.01614 to Pireateat. BTC5673.310835 were received. I need to go through and look at all the transactions during the time period to and from Ogs wallet though. These are just Og <==> Pirateat transactions. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: philipma1957 on December 10, 2019, 03:14:38 PM He received BTC1000 on August 2. (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/8656eb07b3c11d105bccdc0a1000777fa5f56219fd41ed75d2b4aa8ccb4b5e6e), BTC68.8 on August 6 (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/f591acd2d7d5233b3089d4b577ef2414eee104c38a6ff4c7776591de47f71e4f), and BTC38 on August 16 (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/c265f7ec360c2f01afe7a75368160e8792bd0d5cf75305a521d29edb1b07ffb4) from pirateat. the 1000 traces to being paid to investors . I did not check the 68.8 or the 38 still it seems that og did not get the other 1400. he may not be guilty of anything in the pirate case. A) no one has come to the plate and said they were not refunded. B) no one has shown he got 2500 coins paid back. C) pirate may have misstated he fully paid Ognasty during statements quoted in the thread. still a lot has been shown on Ognasty that looks gray including he may have earned alt coins on the forums 500 Btc that he held. there is a thread floating around that shows this happened. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 10, 2019, 03:58:32 PM He received BTC1000 on August 2. (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/8656eb07b3c11d105bccdc0a1000777fa5f56219fd41ed75d2b4aa8ccb4b5e6e), BTC68.8 on August 6 (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/f591acd2d7d5233b3089d4b577ef2414eee104c38a6ff4c7776591de47f71e4f), and BTC38 on August 16 (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/c265f7ec360c2f01afe7a75368160e8792bd0d5cf75305a521d29edb1b07ffb4) from pirateat. the 1000 traces to being paid to investors . I did not check the 68.8 or the 38 It looks like he kept over BTC300 of it. https://i.gyazo.com/f4657310b04ccb84cbf5166267d34fd5.png Shouldn't the 99f address be part of his wallet? I'm not quite sure what happened at 16:11:44. C) pirate may have misstated he fully paid Ognasty during statements quoted in the thread. Yeah, this would have to be true for Og to be innocent.Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 10, 2019, 07:13:51 PM OGNasty seemed to imply that there were no complaints. There should always be some complaints I'm seriously not out on a Witch Hunt here Where are the compaints?If their are no complaints, then why are you even digging for dirt, unless it is a witch hunt? Yeah, that's been Ogs defense also. I'm alleging that the guys that lost their deposits think Pirateat stole their money, but Og is the one that stole it. That's why. If his investors found out that he pocketed their deposits 8 years ago though, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince a bunch of people to loan him money to send to Butterfly labs a year later. And then when BFL turned out to be a big ponzi, he probably wouldn't have been able to convince the people he couldn't pay back to accept 5,000 'seats' into the OgNasty fan club. Witch Hunt implies that the truth is irrelevant. All that matters is we get to set a witch on fire. There are no victims seeking redress here, but that doesn't stop the local Bitstasi from making themselves feel authoritative by picking the peanuts out of turds of their favorite targets looking for clues. None of your conclusions are supported by the evidence and are 100% speculation. Like I said before, you weren't there and you have ZERO FUCKING CLUE what you are talking about. Things were different back then, and if you want to condemn everyone involved with shady dealings in any way, maybe you want to start picking thru Theymo's turds too since he ran BFL ads on the forum. You are a noob with little dick energy looking to prove yourself and take down opponents by any means necessary, no matter how much bullshit you need to manufacture or how many stray peants you need to collect. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 10, 2019, 08:21:27 PM Things were different back then, and if you want to condemn everyone involved with shady dealings in any way, maybe you want to start picking thru Theymo's turds too since he ran BFL ads on the forum. If Pirateat paid OG his balance in August, and then OG just kept the money and told investors Pirate scammed him, you think that would be ok because things were different back then? I don't. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 10, 2019, 11:26:02 PM Things were different back then, and if you want to condemn everyone involved with shady dealings in any way, maybe you want to start picking thru Theymo's turds too since he ran BFL ads on the forum. If Pirateat paid OG his balance in August, and then OG just kept the money and told investors Pirate scammed him, you think that would be ok because things were different back then? I don't. If you just string together a bunch of allegations, suspicions, and speculation carefully crafted to insinuate guilt while providing no actual evidence to give yourself an out to claim you were just "scambusting" and not targeting a user for personal reasons, do you think that would be ok? I don't. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 10, 2019, 11:30:13 PM Things were different back then, and if you want to condemn everyone involved with shady dealings in any way, maybe you want to start picking thru Theymo's turds too since he ran BFL ads on the forum. If Pirateat paid OG his balance in August, and then OG just kept the money and told investors Pirate scammed him, you think that would be ok because things were different back then? I don't. If you just string together a bunch of allegations, suspicions, and speculation carefully crafted to insinuate guilt while providing no actual evidence to give yourself an out to claim you were just "scambusting" and not targeting a user for personal reasons, do you think that would be ok? I don't. No, I definitely don't think that would be ok. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 10, 2019, 11:39:01 PM If you just string together a bunch of allegations, suspicions, and speculation carefully crafted to insinuate guilt while providing no actual evidence to give yourself an out to claim you were just "scambusting" and not targeting a user for personal reasons, do you think that would be ok? I don't. No, I definitely don't think that would be ok. https://i.imgur.com/CoWZ05t.gif Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: andulolika on December 10, 2019, 11:53:52 PM I'm not reading more than the first page, I liked the seats and I thought the profits will be invested towards mining till it simply stops doing it for any reason, besides that being all my insight I claim lauda tman and the group are themselves a bully group that abuse the trust rating system and their influence so would have no say in that context against ognasty.
Ofcourse If their claims deemed true, but I still don't see it as a sustainable mining operation at long term and everyone should be aware that it would cease in a moment and should be happy with what they get, the mining competency is too damn huge. The seats are a fun investment but obviously not serious and not something to do big deal about since one knows what one is getting in. Edit: I'm not sure what I am reading on this last page of the thread but, 2012? what was btc worth by then? Wasn't he supposedly buying the miners for the operation or it didn't happen yet? I should shut up here but i enjoy writting and disagreeing with the subjects mentioned up. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 11, 2019, 12:03:11 AM I'm not reading more than the first page, I liked the seats and I thought the profits will be invested towards mining till it simply stops doing it for any reason, besides that being all my insight I claim lauda tman and the group are themselves a bully group that abuse the trust rating system and their influence so would have no say in that context against ognasty. Ofcourse If their claims deemed true, but I still don't see it as a sustainable mining operation at long term and everyone should be aware that it would cease in a moment and should be happy with what they get, the mining competency is too damn huge. The seats are a fun investment but obviously not serious and not something to do big deal about since one knows what one is getting in. Edit: I'm not sure what I am reading on this last page of the thread but, 2012? what was btc worth by then? Wasn't he supposedly buying the miners for the operation or it didn't happen yet? I should shut up here but i enjoy writting and disagreeing with the subjects mentioned up. This post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53277993#msg53277993) and this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53287301#msg53287301) will catch you up. Not directly related to Nasty Fans though. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: tmfp on December 11, 2019, 12:11:11 AM Things were different back then What does that mean? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 11, 2019, 12:13:26 AM Things were different back then What does that mean? It means this community was young and still developing without established norms and copious amount of FUD, and for people to point back with perfect hindsight and pretend everything was crystal clear is absolute horse shit. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: mikeywith on December 11, 2019, 12:26:19 AM Such a very interesting thread, here are my observations.
1-The alleged stolen amount is way too large that should result in "victims" going after OgNasty back in 2012 , let alone now given bitcoin price is a little over $7000, tracking the transactions and proving that OgNasty has received coins back from Pirateat and kept them would have been fairly easy back then ( unless Pirateat and OgNasty were scam partners and Pirateat made sure those coins can't be linked to OgNasty) which does not seem to be case since Pirate "admitted" that he fully refunded OgNasty. if Pirateat is lying about the refund, then , OgNasty is innocent. if Pirateat is honest , where are the victims ? 2- Why would OgNasty in the first place get involved in an obvious Ponzi which was deemed to fail ?? some might think it's not your mistake, but after all you are involved in this , your depositors joined this obvious Ponzi because they trusted you, so IMO you should put a little bit more effort in proving you have paid every single coin you received from Pirateat to your investors instead of just denying the accusations. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: tmfp on December 11, 2019, 12:33:36 AM Why would OgNasty in the first place get involved in an obvious Ponzi Things were different back then Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: mikeywith on December 11, 2019, 12:51:11 AM I am sure OgNasty should have a better explanation, maybe in 2012 Ponzi schemes weren't so obvious? or profit was so tempting ? I don't know, but I tend to trust OgNasty based on my little interactions with him, as well as recent past (since I was not there back in 2012). I also came to realize that many accusations in this forum are self-interest based , therefore, I usually tend to not take accusations very seriously if no solid proof is presented, this accusation and regardless of the lack of what I think of as "solid evidence" still is somehow "serious" and I would really love to read more clarification from OgNasty, not that my opinion matters or anything ::). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Recaptcha007 on December 11, 2019, 02:33:32 AM Why would OgNasty in the first place get involved in an obvious Ponzi Things were different back then Well, common sense has to play a role as well. Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. Pirate came out and said not to trust him several times as well as hinting that he was engaging in illegal activity. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 11, 2019, 02:59:24 AM Things were different back then What does that mean? It means this community was young and still developing without established norms and copious amount of FUD, and for people to point back with perfect hindsight and pretend everything was crystal clear is absolute horse shit. TECSHARE either isn't aware of what's actually going on in this thread, or he's actively trying to protect OgN by making it seem like he's "only" being accused of getting involved with a big ponzi scheme. Analogy: John goes to a party with some friends. Lots of drugs at party. Party gets robbed. John stands between robber and his friends to protect them! Robber makes off with ~$1.5 million in cash. John and his friends go home broke and sad, but they are glad John protected him. 7 years later evidence is found that shows John stealing $15k from his friends while they think John is protecting them from the robber. TECSHARE is Johns friend now though, so he defends him. TECSHARE: "We didn't know those drugs were bad and illegal! Things were different back then! Leave John alone! WITCH HUNT!!!!" Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 11, 2019, 03:08:25 AM Well, common sense has to play a role as well. Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. Pirate came out and said not to trust him several times as well as hinting that he was engaging in illegal activity. Well, if OG had common sense and didn't trust pirate, why did he encourage people to deposit as much as possible and leave it there for the extra bonus? https://web.archive.org/web/20140429234623/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0 post 16 Six days later he increased the profit for people who left larger deposits there. When he and pirate agreed to close down and split profits, all OG had to do was pay out a small fund he set up just to scam. Now the shills he paid are doing their job. :/ Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: philipma1957 on December 11, 2019, 04:15:18 AM Things were different back then, and if you want to condemn everyone involved with shady dealings in any way, maybe you want to start picking thru Theymo's turds too since he ran BFL ads on the forum. If Pirateat paid OG his balance in August, and then OG just kept the money and told investors Pirate scammed him, you think that would be ok because things were different back then? I don't. i looked and looked and look and i dont see this. i see a partial payment which ognasty paid in under an hour to investors . if you can show me more then the three payments you showed which add to under 1200 btc meaning ognasty was shorted around 1300 btc. if you find the payments for that 1300,which i cant. you would have something. frankly things were nuts 🥜 in 2012 to 2013 time period. i joined in july or august 2012. coins did not cost much maybe eight or nine bucks. shit happened every other month. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 11, 2019, 04:32:43 AM Things were different back then What does that mean? It means this community was young and still developing without established norms and copious amount of FUD, and for people to point back with perfect hindsight and pretend everything was crystal clear is absolute horse shit. TECSHARE either isn't aware of what's actually going on in this thread, or he's actively trying to protect OgN by making it seem like he's "only" being accused of getting involved with a big ponzi scheme. Analogy: John goes to a party with some friends. Lots of drugs at party. Party gets robbed. John stands between robber and his friends to protect them! Robber makes off with ~$1.5 million in cash. John and his friends go home broke and sad, but they are glad John protected him. 7 years later evidence is found that shows John stealing $15k from his friends while they think John is protecting them from the robber. TECSHARE is Johns friend now though, so he defends him. TECSHARE: "We didn't know those drugs were bad and illegal! Things were different back then! Leave John alone! WITCH HUNT!!!!" Don't ever speak for me little girl. No, it couldn't possibly be that YOU don't know what was going on. You are involved in the ponzi scheme by way of investigating it. I was involved by coincidentally helping to expose its collapse. Theymos was involved by way of hosting the forum. Hundreds of users were involved tangentially. This is not tantamount to wrongdoing no matter how much you struggle to manufacture that appearance. You aren't looking for justice for any harmed party. You are a mini digital Stazi agent looking to use the state to fight your interpersonal battles. You don't have any evidence of wrongdoing, you are just picking through OGNasty's turds looking for peanuts because your target is OGNasty, not because you are seeking justice for any harmed party. This is to serve yourself and your friends, and this is painfully transparent. This community needs to collectively stand up to budding little goosesteppers like this, or else this is going to be the future of crypto. Is that really what you want? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 11, 2019, 04:44:35 AM This community needs to collectively stand up to budding little goosesteppers like this, or else this is going to be the future of crypto. Is that really what you want? Yes, I'm sure most of use would like to see crypto be legitimate. That is what we are trying to do by exposing a habitual scammer like OG. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 11, 2019, 04:54:57 AM This community needs to collectively stand up to budding little goosesteppers like this, or else this is going to be the future of crypto. Is that really what you want? Yes, I'm sure most of use would like to see crypto be legitimate. That is what we are trying to do by exposing a habitual scammer like OG. You should move to China if that is the kind of "legitimate" you are looking for. You would fit right in with the CCP. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 11, 2019, 04:56:42 AM You are involved in the ponzi scheme by way of investigating it. I was involved by coincidentally helping to expose its collapse. Theymos was involved by way of hosting the forum. Hundreds of users were involved tangentially. This is not tantamount to wrongdoing no matter how much you struggle to manufacture that appearance. None of this is nearly the same as collecting funds to be deposited into what apparently everybody knew was a Ponzi scheme, Og included. Could it be that nobody complained afterward because everybody knew what they were getting themselves into at the beginning? We really don't know the specifics because we don't know what was contained in Exhibit 3, other than the name "OgNasty" next to an amount of BTC on a spreadsheet. The number may have been 1,000, it may have been 2,600+ -- we don't know for sure. We also don't know if it reflected Og's personal investment or all the BTC collected from investors, or both. Its true that all this is well in the past and doesn't really matter anymore from a legal standpoint, but it still demonstrates behavior that is pretty far from trustworthy. The fact that Og won't comment on what Shavers was talking about in his testimony only makes things worse. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 11, 2019, 05:24:16 AM You are involved in the ponzi scheme by way of investigating it. I was involved by coincidentally helping to expose its collapse. Theymos was involved by way of hosting the forum. Hundreds of users were involved tangentially. This is not tantamount to wrongdoing no matter how much you struggle to manufacture that appearance. None of this is nearly the same as collecting funds to be deposited into what apparently everybody knew was a Ponzi scheme, Og included. Could it be that nobody complained afterward because everybody knew what they were getting themselves into at the beginning? We really don't know the specifics because we don't know what was contained in Exhibit 3, other than the name "OgNasty" next to an amount of BTC on a spreadsheet. The number may have been 1,000, it may have been 2,600+ -- we don't know for sure. We also don't know if it reflected Og's personal investment or all the BTC collected from investors, or both. Its true that all this is well in the past and doesn't really matter anymore from a legal standpoint, but it still demonstrates behavior that is pretty far from trustworthy. The fact that Og won't comment on what Shavers was talking about in his testimony only makes things worse. I took the liberty of putting the perfect hindsight and speculation in underline and bold. In, other words, even if all of this baseless speculation is true, the so called "victims" don't consider themselves to be an aggrieved party, and this is all being perused for ulterior motives. Exactly, we don't know the specifics. OGNasty was named. OOoooO. Very impressive, that is for anyone who just casually skims and doesn't bother spending way too much time digging through these records looking for any ACTUAL evidence of wrongdoing. Of course that is the point isn't it? The convince as many people as possible assuming most will just make their own assumptions based on these baseless accusations and speculation while simultaneously not actually providing any definitive evidence of any wrongdoing. If I was OGNasty I would tell you all to go fuck yourselves too and suggest you find yourself some other steaming heap to pick peanuts out of. This atmosphere of picking through everyone's activities and demanding public explanation for everything just because some one has a figment in their imagination is not just repugnant but dangerous the the freedoms of the community in general and needs to be broken. This is like the 1984 version of crypto with a boot stamping on its face for eternity. war is peace freedom is slavery fascism is legitimacy Sooner or later you will all be just like OGNasty and each have your turn at the unaccountable mob picking through every intimate detail of your life looking for things to report to the government simply because they can and it makes them feel less like the weak little men they are because they wield power over another. History shows that is really the only motive required for this to develop. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 11, 2019, 05:25:56 AM Here are all the transactions between OgNastys known addresses wallet (https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/000c9e9219e1faec/addresses) and Pirateats starting on 4/10/12.
It's a filtered list. Only when Og sends or receives from a known Pirateat address from April 2012 and later. (There were a few small ones from earlier in the year for less than BTC2 each, but pass-through didn't start till April, so they don't matter.)
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 11, 2019, 05:32:21 AM None of this is nearly the same as collecting funds to be deposited into what apparently everybody knew was a Ponzi scheme, Og included. ... I took the liberty of putting the perfect hindsight and speculation in underline and bold. This statement doesn't reflect hindsight, it reflects having a feeling about something as it was happening: Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. Sooner or later you will all be just like OGNasty and each have your turn at the unaccountable mob picking through every intimate detail of your life looking for things to report to the government simply because they can and it makes them feel less like the weak little men they are because they wield power over another. Seeing as how most of us never promoted a Ponzi scheme on the forum, I highly doubt it. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 11, 2019, 05:43:49 AM [Posts the same TX details over again to topic slide because it looks convincingly official and is a good way to avoid an actual substantive reply.] None of this is nearly the same as collecting funds to be deposited into what apparently everybody knew was a Ponzi scheme, Og included. ... I took the liberty of putting the perfect hindsight and speculation in underline and bold. This statement doesn't reflect hindsight, it reflects I fixed that for you. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 11, 2019, 05:45:37 AM the 1000 traces to being paid to investors. The BTC1000 tx is the third to last up there ^^^ and is on this paginate: https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/000c9e9219e1faec?page=55 Of the BTC1000 only ~BTC650 left the wallet...I think. That tx looks weird though if someone could take a closer look. After that he received 2 more from Pirate (and a bunch of small stuff that doesn't matter) with the last one being for BTC38 on the same day, August 17, that pirate announced it was closing down, and OG posted in his thread that he had request all deposit be returned (and then updated later that pirate defaulted and reserves were paid). 2 days later he sent BTC380 to an address that shortly was moved to silk road. I don't think this was a payout to an investor due to timing and tx size. Then on September 1, the day he said reserves were paid out, he sent 4 transactions of BTC22.95, BTC27.54, BTC4.59, BTC9.92, which is pretty close to my original guess on the value of total reserves. This is not conclusive proof, it looks like he had control of more of the deposits than he should've in early August. I'll go through the individual investors deposit/interest-payment/reserve payout history later and it will be more clear. Might have messed up a number or two somewhere, let me know. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 11, 2019, 06:00:41 AM the 1000 traces to being paid to investors. The BTC1000 tx is the third to last up there ^^^ and is on this paginate: https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/000c9e9219e1faec?page=55 Of the BTC1000 only ~BTC650 left the wallet...I think. That tx looks weird though if someone could take a closer look. After that he received 2 more from Pirate (and a bunch of small stuff that doesn't matter) with the last one being for BTC38 on the same day, August 17, that pirate announced it was closing down, and OG posted in his thread that he had request all deposit be returned (and then updated later that pirate defaulted and reserves were paid). 2 days later he sent BTC380 to an address that shortly was moved to silk road. I don't think this was a payout to an investor due to timing and tx size. Then on September 1, the day he said reserves were paid out, he sent 4 transactions of BTC22.95, BTC27.54, BTC4.59, BTC9.92, which is pretty close to my original guess on the value of total reserves. This is not conclusive proof, it looks like he had control of more of the deposits than he should've in early August. I'll go through the individual investors deposit/interest-payment/reserve payout history later and it will be more clear. Might have messed up a number or two somewhere, let me know. I took the liberty of placing more baseless speculation in bold. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 11, 2019, 06:15:30 AM None of this is nearly the same as collecting funds to be deposited into what apparently everybody knew was a Ponzi scheme, Og included. ... I took the liberty of putting the perfect hindsight and speculation in underline and bold. This statement doesn't reflect hindsight, it reflects I fixed that for you. Anybody who can understand English knows what he meant. Let's look at it again: Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. He uses the word "thought", as in "thought at the time." Don't know how you could possibly confuse this, but I'm sure you'll find a way. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 11, 2019, 07:48:02 AM TECSHARE either isn't aware of what's actually going on in this thread, or he's actively trying to protect OgN by making it seem like he's "only" being accused of getting involved with a big ponzi scheme. It's obvious TECHY is protecting OG - that's why he suggested I move to China, where you can easily pay off government officials. No thanks Techy, the best place to legitimize crypto is HERE where the laws are enforced. (Not this forum obviously, but our democracy) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 11, 2019, 08:21:02 AM Anybody who can understand English knows what he meant. Let's look at it again: Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. He uses the word "thought", as in "thought at the time." Don't know how you could possibly confuse this, but I'm sure you'll find a way. What part of any of this changes the fact that there are no victims seeking redress and this is purely driven by clear long term motives to target OGNasty rather than to seek any kind of restorative justice? TECSHARE either isn't aware of what's actually going on in this thread, or he's actively trying to protect OgN by making it seem like he's "only" being accused of getting involved with a big ponzi scheme. It's obvious TECHY is protecting OG - that's why he suggested I move to China, where you can easily pay off government officials. No thanks Techy, the best place to legitimize crypto is HERE where the laws are enforced. (Not this forum obviously, but our democracy) Protecting OG from what? Mobs of midget dicks like you with serious inferiority complexes along with other comorbid compulsive psychological conditions? That tale you have spun about why I suggested you would like China is quite entertaining. Not the suggestion so much as you probably believe that those mental gymnastics make sense to anyone other than you. I am not sure why if I was corrupt and wanted to pay people off I would suggest you would want to live there, but your refractory projections usually don't make any logical sense now do they? After all the point is to just topic slide with horse shit until people get frustrated tired of trying to decipher the truth now isn't it? That is a game of volume not quality or logic. You aren't interested in preserving the law or any kind of justice, all you are concerned with is the perception of control that attempting to use the state to fight your petty interpersonal battles gives you. You really honestly are a pathetic excuse for a human being and it is far past time you are shunned from this community for your endless power tripping psychotic abusive behavior. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 11, 2019, 08:31:48 AM Anybody who can understand English knows what he meant. Let's look at it again: Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. He uses the word "thought", as in "thought at the time." Don't know how you could possibly confuse this, but I'm sure you'll find a way. What part of any of this changes the fact that there are no victims seeking redress No part. Literally nobody is alleging that victims are coming forward. Just alleging that he lied to past investors and stole their money knowing they would assume someone else stole it. and this is purely driven by clear long term motives to target OGNasty rather than to seek any kind of restorative justice? It's driven by facts. Court records, block chain transactions and forum archives. I understand you don't consider these things 'proof' but if you change your mind I encourage you to check them out by going back a few pages and reading up. It's all there. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 11, 2019, 08:45:56 AM [...] all you are concerned with is the perception of control that attempting to use the state to fight your petty interpersonal battles gives you. You really honestly are a pathetic excuse for a human being and it is far past time you are shunned from this community for your endless power tripping psychotic abusive behavior.[...] Do you tell OgNasty - regarding this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.0) - that too? Basically a case of "what goes around, comes around" isn't it...? And time to stop (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53314362#msg53314362) has long passed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53117950#msg53117950) (in both threads). Even theymos asked nicely: Quote from: theymos [...] All three of TMAN, Vod, and OgNasty are forum veterans with good trade histories, and I would tend to trust all three of them (to varying degrees). This drama is highly counterproductive. Nobody has a real trade complaint AFAICT, so the underlying facts hardly matter. [...] I challenge all of you to just knock it off. If you can't work together, then ignore each other, even if you're being prodded. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5178813.msg52274888#msg52274888) But by now I - personally - (and I suspect a lot of other users too) cannot take either "side" too seriously any more... too bad. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 11, 2019, 09:50:52 AM Anybody who can understand English knows what he meant. Let's look at it again: Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. He uses the word "thought", as in "thought at the time." Don't know how you could possibly confuse this, but I'm sure you'll find a way. What part of any of this changes the fact that there are no victims seeking redress and this is purely driven by clear long term motives to target OGNasty rather than to seek any kind of restorative justice? Nobody is talking about the "victims," aka willing Ponzi participants, because nobody cares about that aspect. Its just interesting information that was recently brought to light. Don't know why you're getting all bent out of shape over it. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 11, 2019, 10:08:16 AM Nobody is talking about the "victims," aka willing Ponzi participants, because nobody cares about that aspect. Definitely not a witch hunt.. Case closed.. /thread Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: suchmoon on December 11, 2019, 03:37:29 PM We really don't know the specifics because we don't know what was contained in Exhibit 3, other than the name "OgNasty" next to an amount of BTC on a spreadsheet. I don't think "Exhibit 3" has even that, at least I wasn't able to find it: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4386354/securities-and-exchange-commission-v-shavers/ Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 11, 2019, 04:02:29 PM Anybody who can understand English knows what he meant. Let's look at it again: Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. He uses the word "thought", as in "thought at the time." Don't know how you could possibly confuse this, but I'm sure you'll find a way. What part of any of this changes the fact that there are no victims seeking redress and this is purely driven by clear long term motives to target OGNasty rather than to seek any kind of restorative justice? Nobody is talking about the "victims," aka willing Ponzi participants, because nobody cares about that aspect. Its just interesting information that was recently brought to light. Don't know why you're getting all bent out of shape over it. I am not really opposed to bringing some of these matters to light based on possible new evidence, even though I hardly know shit about a lot of the underlying case. Nonetheless, if there is new evidence, we cannot keep considering the looking into the matter would merely be a personal vendetta or fishing expedition. Sure, having victims would seem to be some kind of necessity in terms of considering impact or even if there would be a damage related remedy, but, they might not even know enough details of the underlying situation to realize that they were damaged, and I keep coming back to the idea that the extent of damage would have some reflection of the dollar value of the asset at the time of the damage, even if the asset had subsequently appreciated in price (which we know to be the case with bitcoin). I see most of the time in 2012, BTC prices were around $4 but towards the end of the time period in question, BTC price went up to $16 before coming back down again to $10-$12 for the rest of the year. There seems to be some evidence that OGNasty may have paid off the bigger of the investors, so the ONLY remaining ones would have had smaller investments. Of course, in retrospect, we can see that it was a ponzi shceme and too good to be true, but when people are caught up in ponzi schemes they sometimes will still participate based on their considerations that they are not going to be the last person out, so they kind of already know the risk, or could be presumed to be sufficiently taking on their own risks. So some of the victims might have been reluctant to make any claims, even if they did not get paid back any of their investment, because there could be some feelings of guilt about making any kinds of claims in such an obvious too good to be true situation, but even if everyone kind of knew it was a ponzi scheme that would not remove fiduciary responsibility from anyone serving as a middleman, including if there was fraud, misrepresentation or conversion that is just discovered. There might be plenty of investors who don't give too many shits about chances that they took on a few hundred dollars, so they don't really want to rock the boat if they got paid back some of their amount, given that they knew the whole thing was bullshit, but if they later found out that there were breaches of fiduciary responsibility, fraud, misrepresentation or conversion, then that could raise their concerns (or change their perspectives). I still don't believe that any reasonable remedy would purely measure damages in BTC... but we cannot really know circumstances, if we cannot pindown any actual cases of actual victims, can we? On the other hand, there still could be conclusions of wrongdoing, based on the new evidence, even if the exact victim circumstances are not clarified? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: ibminer on December 11, 2019, 07:11:22 PM I don't think "Exhibit 3" has even that, at least I wasn't able to find it: After a subpoena, exhibit 3 is apparently an export that was done by pirateat40 which contains raw data of "account histories" beginning in 2012, according to the document posted by TwitchySeal. I believe exhibit 3 is here: https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/pirateat40/gov.uscourts.txed.146063.4.8.pdf The "balance" is odd on OgNasty's page towards the end..but if you calculate the totals listed for deposits/withdrawals/payments: deposits: 3,890.26 withdrawals: -3,948.00 payments: 2,540.63 I'm not sure what to take away from this... this appears to be actual evidence put into the case, but whether pirateat40 had any reason to screw with the data before sending it, I don't know. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 11, 2019, 08:02:19 PM I don't think "Exhibit 3" has even that, at least I wasn't able to find it: After a subpoena, exhibit 3 is apparently an export that was done by pirateat40 which contains raw data of "account histories" beginning in 2012, according to the document posted by TwitchySeal. I believe exhibit 3 is here: https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/pirateat40/gov.uscourts.txed.146063.4.8.pdf The "balance" is odd on OgNasty's page towards the end..but if you calculate the totals listed for deposits/withdrawals/payments: deposits: 3,890.26 withdrawals: -3,948.00 payments: 2,540.63 I'm not sure what to take away from this... this appears to be actual evidence put into the case, but whether pirateat40 had any reason to screw with the data before sending it, I don't know. Great find! OG received 2 interest payments and a withdraw in mid August (total of BTC144) Yet no interest payments or withdraws were paid to pass-through investors. Just the reserve payout on September 1. This much is clear and provable. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 11, 2019, 10:00:02 PM ~ TL;DR [I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. Victims might not have known they were robbed. Who needs victims anyway? We can still use this as an opportunity to allow certain people here to pursue personal vendettas. After all what is important is that we pass judgement on people even if there is no harmed party seeking redress.] Anybody who can understand English knows what he meant. Let's look at it again: Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. He uses the word "thought", as in "thought at the time." Don't know how you could possibly confuse this, but I'm sure you'll find a way. What part of any of this changes the fact that there are no victims seeking redress No part. Literally nobody is alleging that victims are coming forward. Just alleging that he lied to past investors and stole their money knowing they would assume someone else stole it. and this is purely driven by clear long term motives to target OGNasty rather than to seek any kind of restorative justice? It's driven by facts. Court records, block chain transactions and forum archives. I understand you don't consider these things 'proof' but if you change your mind I encourage you to check them out by going back a few pages and reading up. It's all there. Literally no one is alleging you are alleging victims are coming forward. That is a cute little semantic trick though to make it superficially seem like I was accusing you of making that claim rather than accusing you of pursuing a personal vendetta for your own self serving purposes. All of your claims rely heavily on speculation, assumptions, and perfect hindsight. There are no victims seeking redress, meaning you are here to target OGNasty, not to serve any sort of justice. [...] all you are concerned with is the perception of control that attempting to use the state to fight your petty interpersonal battles gives you. You really honestly are a pathetic excuse for a human being and it is far past time you are shunned from this community for your endless power tripping psychotic abusive behavior.[...] Do you tell OgNasty - regarding this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.0) - that too? Basically a case of "what goes around, comes around" isn't it...? And time to stop (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53314362#msg53314362) has long passed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53117950#msg53117950) (in both threads). Even theymos asked nicely: Quote from: theymos [...] All three of TMAN, Vod, and OgNasty are forum veterans with good trade histories, and I would tend to trust all three of them (to varying degrees). This drama is highly counterproductive. Nobody has a real trade complaint AFAICT, so the underlying facts hardly matter. [...] I challenge all of you to just knock it off. If you can't work together, then ignore each other, even if you're being prodded. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5178813.msg52274888#msg52274888) But by now I - personally - (and I suspect a lot of other users too) cannot take either "side" too seriously any more... too bad. I did not. Feel free to quote if you think I am wrong. I don't support your false equivalence. Vod has a long history of perusing his personal vendettas using every forum rule, community, and even the state to attack people who dare speak critically of him. OGNasty does not. They are no where near the same, so your "what goes around, comes around." colloquialism is meaningless in this context. Nobody is talking about the "victims," aka willing Ponzi participants, because nobody cares about that aspect. Its just interesting information that was recently brought to light. Don't know why you're getting all bent out of shape over it. I see you are borrowing TwitchySeal's semantic deceits as well. None of this information is new. This isn't about seeking redress for any harmed party. This is about targeting a specific user because it serves you and your friends personally. I am "getting all bent out of shape over it" because I am not a fan of little men trying to make themselves feel big by rallying mobs and using the state as a tool to punish people who are critical of them. That's all this is. You can postulate about the law like Vod all you like, everyone sees what this is even if they aren't as vocal about it as me. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 11, 2019, 10:43:07 PM ~ TL;DR [I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. Victims might not have known they were robbed. Who needs victims anyway? We can still use this as an opportunity to allow certain people here to pursue personal vendettas. After all what is important is that we pass judgement on people even if there is no harmed party seeking redress.] Gosh, Tecshare. What a great summary!!!!! No wonder you are so well liked in these parts. Your ability to boil a bunch of words down to their bare essence. ;) NOZT ::) ::) ::) By the way, Tecshare, I recall a few posts back, you were going on a little temper tantrum when Twitchy had attempted to summarize what you were saying, so you decided to attempt such paring down on your own? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 12, 2019, 12:37:17 AM Gosh, Tecshare. What a great summary!!!!! No wonder you are so well liked in these parts. Your ability to boil a bunch of words down to their bare essence. ;) NOZT ::) ::) ::) By the way, Tecshare, I recall a few posts back, you were going on a little temper tantrum when Twitchy had attempted to summarize what you were saying, so you decided to attempt such paring down on your own? I am not really sure what ways I can make it more clear that the need to be liked is extremely low on my hierarchy of needs, but it always seems people like to remind me of this when I am critical of them as if it is an effective motivating force. It's not. Also, much like TwitchySeal it seems you also like to project emotional states upon me rather than respond to the substance of what I posted. You can all collectively wag your fingers at me and tell stories if you like, this Stalinist "show me the man I will find you the crime" bullshit must be stopped at all costs. If I need to be the whipping boy for a while until everyone else realizes they need to collectively stand up to this as well then so be it. All it takes is enough people saying no. The people doing this can't target all of us, their bullshit only spreads so thin. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 12, 2019, 12:58:35 AM Gosh, Tecshare. What a great summary!!!!! No wonder you are so well liked in these parts. Your ability to boil a bunch of words down to their bare essence. ;) NOZT ::) ::) ::) By the way, Tecshare, I recall a few posts back, you were going on a little temper tantrum when Twitchy had attempted to summarize what you were saying, so you decided to attempt such paring down on your own? I am not really sure what ways I can make it more clear that the need to be liked is extremely low on my hierarchy of needs, but it always seems people like to remind me of this when I am critical of them as if it is an effective motivating force. It's not. I am not trying to be prescriptive. I was merely describing. So motivate yourself however, you would like. Also, much like TwitchySeal it seems you also like to project emotional states upon me rather than respond to the substance of what I posted. O.k. Just seemed like a temper tantrum to me, but if it was an objective and emotionless variation of a rant, then that is fine, too. You can all collectively wag your fingers at me and tell stories if you like, this Stalinist "show me the man I will find you the crime" bullshit must be stopped at all costs. You are on a mission to stop injustices. I see. Great. If I need to be the whipping boy for a while until everyone else realizes they need to collectively stand up to this as well then so be it. I am glad that you are taking one for the team. That's good of you. All it takes is enough people saying no. The people doing this can't target all of us, their bullshit only spreads so thin. I doubt that you are being targeted. Anyhow, that seemed to be a bit off topic. ::) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: suchmoon on December 12, 2019, 01:08:14 AM his Stalinist "show me the man I will find you the crime" bullshit must be stopped at all costs You can stop posting any time you want. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 12, 2019, 01:11:33 AM I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. I thought that was the case.I think it's kind of lame and that you say stuff like this without even looking into it: None of your conclusions are supported by the evidence and are 100% speculation. I appreciate you admitting that you didn't bother looking into it though. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: hacker1001101001 on December 12, 2019, 04:13:53 AM I doubt that you are being targeted. his Stalinist "show me the man I will find you the crime" bullshit must be stopped at all costs You can stop posting any time you want.I think it's kind of lame and that you say stuff like this without even looking into it: None of your conclusions are supported by the evidence and are 100% speculation. I appreciate you admitting that you didn't bother looking into it though. If one goes Sherlock on the traces of this attacks on specific people, you would know who's being targeted for what. But most don't bother, afterall it's all just a forum for many but much more than it for some. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 12, 2019, 06:46:53 AM I doubt that you are being targeted. his Stalinist "show me the man I will find you the crime" bullshit must be stopped at all costs You can stop posting any time you want.I think it's kind of lame and that you say stuff like this without even looking into it: None of your conclusions are supported by the evidence and are 100% speculation. I appreciate you admitting that you didn't bother looking into it though. If one goes Sherlock on the traces of this attacks on specific people, you would know who's being targeted for what. But most don't bother, afterall it's all just a forum for many but much more than it for some. Differences of opinion is not a bad thing, and even clusters of alliances are not necessarily bad, either. The forum seems to allow for that, and surely seems to be dangerous if newbies get too caught up in such battles, which makes it seem that they are accounts created or paid for by other members, even if they are overly enthusiastic to take sides. None of us that you quoted, herein are newbies. Anyhow, I try NOT to participate too much in those kinds of alliances, but the use of trust and various aspects/ tools of the forum does seem to encourage some of that kind of involvement. Came for the bitcoin, stayed for the interludes of drama. ;) ;) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 12, 2019, 07:20:24 AM I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. I thought that was the case.I think it's kind of lame and that you say stuff like this without even looking into it: None of your conclusions are supported by the evidence and are 100% speculation. I appreciate you admitting that you didn't bother looking into it though. Do you always edit people's quotes and take them out of context to manufacture deceptive conclusions or just when you have no argument to support your personal vendettas? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 12, 2019, 08:18:51 AM I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. I thought that was the case.I think it's kind of lame and that you say stuff like this without even looking into it: None of your conclusions are supported by the evidence and are 100% speculation. I appreciate you admitting that you didn't bother looking into it though. Do you always edit people's quotes and take them out of context to manufacture deceptive conclusions or just when you have no argument to support your personal vendettas? I did not do that. It's pretty ironic how you've been defending Og and claiming all of my assumptions are baseless and none of my conclusions are supported by fact (plus all the personal attacks), despite the fact you haven't bothered to look into it. Textbook psychological projection. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 12, 2019, 08:43:33 AM [...] [...] all you are concerned with is the perception of control that attempting to use the state to fight your petty interpersonal battles gives you. You really honestly are a pathetic excuse for a human being and it is far past time you are shunned from this community for your endless power tripping psychotic abusive behavior.[...] Do you tell OgNasty - regarding this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.0) - that too? Basically a case of "what goes around, comes around" isn't it...?And time to stop (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53314362#msg53314362) has long passed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53117950#msg53117950) (in both threads). Even theymos asked nicely: Quote from: theymos [...] All three of TMAN, Vod, and OgNasty are forum veterans with good trade histories, and I would tend to trust all three of them (to varying degrees). But by now I - personally - (and I suspect a lot of other users too) cannot take either "side" too seriously any more... too bad.This drama is highly counterproductive. Nobody has a real trade complaint AFAICT, so the underlying facts hardly matter. [...] I challenge all of you to just knock it off. If you can't work together, then ignore each other, even if you're being prodded. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5178813.msg52274888#msg52274888) You're comparing apple's and oranges, I only referred to the two threads who are basically the same petty $%^*(&&... The one has done a lot of "policing" on this forum (stepping on a lot of toes while doing so) and the other one has mainly used this forum for his own financial gain (making a lot of people look green with envy). Not supporting either one, nor condemning either one (although; yes, the one might have been a bit more tactfull and the other might have used a bit better judgment in appraising opportunities). But you must admit that both threads turned out to be nothing more than "petty interpersonal battles" (as you say), by both... :-X PS and doing more harm to this forum and community than contributing... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 12, 2019, 12:04:40 PM I did not do that. It's pretty ironic how you've been defending Og and claiming all of my assumptions are baseless and none of my conclusions are supported by fact (plus all the personal attacks), despite the fact you haven't bothered to look into it. Textbook psychological projection. But you did in fact do that. I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. I thought that was the case.I think it's kind of lame and that you say stuff like this without even looking into it: None of your conclusions are supported by the evidence and are 100% speculation. I appreciate you admitting that you didn't bother looking into it though.I put the quote you selectively edited in bold and underlined the parts where you took what I said out of context and pretended as if it were a direct statement from me as a matter of fact. What I actually said: ~ TL;DR [I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. Victims might not have known they were robbed. Who needs victims anyway? We can still use this as an opportunity to allow certain people here to pursue personal vendettas. After all what is important is that we pass judgement on people even if there is no harmed party seeking redress.] You will notice you removed the context of not only the "TL;DR" indicating it was a summary of another user's post, but you also took the time to remove the brackets which are another indication of such so that you could reply to the comments as if it fit the narrative you are trying to manufacture. You did in fact edit my quote and take it out of context. You can repeat that I have not looked into it ad nauseam, but that doesn't make it a fact. You know what is textbook psychological projection? Exactly what you just did editing my quotes and purposely manufacturing new context to push your preferred narrative. Just because you have some facts doesn't mean they support your every conclusion. You have established a relationship. You haven't established intent, harmed parties, or even missing funds. Your conclusions rely on speculation, assumption, and suspicion, not facts. You have come to a conclusion first then are attempting to arrange the facts around that conclusion. That is called confirmation bias, and it is a logical fallacy. You're comparing apple's and oranges, I only referred to the two threads who are basically the same petty $%^*(&&... The one has done a lot of "policing" on this forum (stepping on a lot of toes while doing so) and the other one has mainly used this forum for his own financial gain (making a lot of people look green with envy). Not supporting either one, nor condemning either one (although; yes, the one might have been a bit more tactfull and the other might have used a bit better judgment in appraising opportunities). But you must admit that both threads turned out to be nothing more than "petty interpersonal battles" (as you say), by both... :-X PS and doing more harm to this forum and community than contributing... You are the one comparing apples and oranges. I didn't make a comparison, I pointed out your comparison is a false equivalence because their behavior is no where near comparable. Petty bickering is one thing, perpetual organized attacks on targeted users abusing the forums trust systems and using the force of the state as a weapon is not comparable. One is distinctly more dangerous to this community than the other. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 12, 2019, 12:29:31 PM Just because you have some facts doesn't mean they support your every conclusion. You have established a relationship. You haven't established intent, harmed parties, or even missing funds. Your conclusions rely on speculation, assumption, and suspicion, not facts. You have come to a conclusion first then are attempting to arrange the facts around that conclusion. That is called confirmation bias, and it is a logical fallacy. I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday. If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong. Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it. (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).) We have pirates ledger for every transaction. We have ogs thread archived. We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer. We have the block chain. Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors. The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012. On August 6 Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8 On August 13 Og received an interested payment of BTC39.2 On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38 On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors. BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54 We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2. You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 12, 2019, 03:14:29 PM Just because you have some facts doesn't mean they support your every conclusion. You have established a relationship. You haven't established intent, harmed parties, or even missing funds. Your conclusions rely on speculation, assumption, and suspicion, not facts. You have come to a conclusion first then are attempting to arrange the facts around that conclusion. That is called confirmation bias, and it is a logical fallacy. I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday. If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong. Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it. (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).) We have pirates ledger for every transaction. We have ogs thread archived. We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer. We have the block chain. Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors. The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012. On August 6 Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8 On August 13 Og received an interested payment of BTC39.2 On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38 On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors. BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54 We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2. You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it. This is exactly what I am talking about. A discrepancy in the numbers does not equal theft. Again, you are making conclusions then arranging the facts around it to support that conclusion, not looking at the facts and making a conclusion based on the facts. This is textbook confirmation bias. You are so thirsty for this to serve your personal vendettas. You aren't interested in facts or an honest assessment of what happened here. You are only interested in crafting a narrative that is maximally destructive to OGNasty's reputation because your target is the man, not any damages caused. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 12, 2019, 03:33:01 PM [...] You're comparing apple's and oranges, I only referred to the two threads who are basically the same petty $%^*(&&... The one has done a lot of "policing" on this forum (stepping on a lot of toes while doing so) and the other one has mainly used this forum for his own financial gain (making a lot of people look green with envy). Not supporting either one, nor condemning either one (although; yes, the one might have been a bit more tactfull and the other might have used a bit better judgment in appraising opportunities). But you must admit that both threads turned out to be nothing more than "petty interpersonal battles" (as you say), by both... :-X PS and doing more harm to this forum and community than contributing... You are the one comparing apples and oranges. I didn't make a comparison, I pointed out your comparison is a false equivalence because their behavior is no where near comparable. Petty bickering is one thing, perpetual organized attacks on targeted users abusing the forums trust systems and using the force of the state as a weapon is not comparable. One is distinctly more dangerous to this community than the other. It's obvious you are on OgNasty's side. That's your prerogative. I'm just pointing out they are both prolonging "petty interpersonal battles" that are harmful to this community either way. Now we can discuss the extent to which one is more harmful than the other, but I (and - again - I suspect more people around here) am (are) not up for that. As I already said: [...] by now I - personally - (and I suspect a lot of other users too) cannot take either "side" too seriously any more... too bad. Just leaving this out here - again: Quote from: theymos [...] All three of TMAN, Vod, and OgNasty are forum veterans with good trade histories, and I would tend to trust all three of them (to varying degrees). This drama is highly counterproductive. Nobody has a real trade complaint AFAICT, so the underlying facts hardly matter. [...] I challenge all of you to just knock it off. If you can't work together, then ignore each other, even if you're being prodded. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5178813.msg52274888#msg52274888) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 12, 2019, 03:54:15 PM This is exactly what I am talking about. A discrepancy in the numbers does not equal theft. If you can actually disprove something specific I said, please do. Your 'A discrepancy in the numbers does not equal theft' defense is a true statement, but it doesn't directly address anything. Sometimes a discrepancy absolutely does prove theft. And sometimes, like in this case, it's just one piece of the big picture. I'm going to keep editing out and ignoring all the bullshit assumptions and personal attacks from now on, btw. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 12, 2019, 04:06:53 PM It's obvious you are on OgNasty's side. That's your prerogative. I'm just pointing out they are both prolonging "petty interpersonal battles" that are harmful to this community either way. Now we can discuss the extent to which one is more harmful than the other, but I (and - again - I suspect more people around here) am (are) not up for that. As I already said: [...] by now I - personally - (and I suspect a lot of other users too) cannot take either "side" too seriously any more... too bad. Just leaving this out here - again: Quote from: theymos [...] All three of TMAN, Vod, and OgNasty are forum veterans with good trade histories, and I would tend to trust all three of them (to varying degrees). This drama is highly counterproductive. Nobody has a real trade complaint AFAICT, so the underlying facts hardly matter. [...] I challenge all of you to just knock it off. If you can't work together, then ignore each other, even if you're being prodded. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5178813.msg52274888#msg52274888) Again, this is a totally false equivalence as I already explained. You can keep trying real hard to make it sound like they share equal fault here, but that is absolute horse shit. This is Vods MO 100%. Target people abusing whatever systems of power he can, the slide the topic with so much bullshit and bickering people don't want to even look at it any more, then they throw their hands up and call it a draw. He does this EVERY TIME he is challenged on his abusive behavior. Its easy to poo poo and say just ignore him when you aren't the one being targeted. After all it costs you nothing to dismiss attacks on others now doesn't it? This is exactly what I am talking about. A discrepancy in the numbers does not equal theft. If you can actually disprove something specific I said, please do. Your 'A discrepancy in the numbers does not equal theft' defense is a true statement, but it doesn't directly address anything. Sometimes a discrepancy absolutely does prove theft. And sometimes, like in this case, it's just one piece of the big picture. I'm going to keep editing out and ignoring all the bullshit assumptions and personal attacks from now on, btw. So I am to prove a negative now? That's not how it works captain confirmation bias. You are making the claim, you have the burden of proof. It is just one piece of the big picture, and the rest of the pieces you drew in with crayon from your imagination and stomp your feet and demand the Easter bunny you drew is real because rabbits exist. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 12, 2019, 07:12:38 PM [edited out] ~ TL;DR [I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. Victims might not have known they were robbed. Who needs victims anyway? We can still use this as an opportunity to allow certain people here to pursue personal vendettas. After all what is important is that we pass judgement on people even if there is no harmed party seeking redress.] You will notice you removed the context of not only the "TL;DR" indicating it was a summary of another user's post, but you also took the time to remove the brackets which are another indication of such so that you could reply to the comments as if it fit the narrative you are trying to manufacture. You did in fact edit my quote and take it out of context. You can repeat that I have not looked into it ad nauseam, but that doesn't make it a fact. You know what is textbook psychological projection? Exactly what you just did editing my quotes and purposely manufacturing new context to push your preferred narrative. That is what you get, Tecshare, for attempting to confuse matters. You get confusion that you, yourself, caused, seemingly on purpose with your lame-ass attempt at creating a dinsingenuous summary that you were inaccurately striving to spin in your favor. If you try to be a bit more genuine in your renditions of the conduct and statements of others, then maybe someone will feel sorry for you. Including me. Perhaps? :D :D :D :D But, here, you dug your own little hole (a victim of your own seeming success) and then you are complaining (largely off topic and irrelevantly and who gives any shits) about someone else pulling up the ladder. Difficult to feel sorry for that when we have other topics of the thread, which is largely the evidentiary relevance of various matters concerning OGNasty and if there is any accounting that needs to be done based on more recent evidentiary revelations or the extent that any of the new evidentiary revelations matter. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 13, 2019, 01:47:03 AM That is what you get, Tecshare, for attempting to confuse matters. You get confusion that you, yourself, caused, seemingly on purpose with your lame-ass attempt at creating a dinsingenuous summary that you were inaccurately striving to spin in your favor. If you try to be a bit more genuine in your renditions of the conduct and statements of others, then maybe someone will feel sorry for you. Including me. Perhaps? :D :D :D :D But, here, you dug your own little hole (a victim of your own seeming success) and then you are complaining (largely off topic and irrelevantly and who gives any shits) about someone else pulling up the ladder. Difficult to feel sorry for that when we have other topics of the thread, which is largely the evidentiary relevance of various matters concerning OGNasty and if there is any accounting that needs to be done based on more recent evidentiary revelations or the extent that any of the new evidentiary revelations matter. Attempting to confuse matters? I am sorry if you were confused, but I can't be responsible for every simpleton that wanders in and has trouble reading my words. What was lame-ass was your original lazy opinion based on not even bothering to review the information fully, by your own admission, but still be willing to have a strong opinion about it. This is exactly what I was criticizing about TwitchySeal. He knows damn well most people aren't going to bother to look that close and he has a good chance of convincing people through repetition of his baseless theories operant conditioning style. Combine this with the long term trend of himself and his buddies repeating this behavior clearly directed at OGNasty, and it becomes quite obvious this is about serving personal vendettas, not about righting any wrongs done. Why would I want you to feel sorry for me? What hole? Why is it you rely on projection so much? Is it perhaps because you don't have any logical retort to what I said? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 13, 2019, 02:24:07 AM That is what you get, Tecshare, for attempting to confuse matters. You get confusion that you, yourself, caused, seemingly on purpose with your lame-ass attempt at creating a dinsingenuous summary that you were inaccurately striving to spin in your favor. If you try to be a bit more genuine in your renditions of the conduct and statements of others, then maybe someone will feel sorry for you. Including me. Perhaps? :D :D :D :D But, here, you dug your own little hole (a victim of your own seeming success) and then you are complaining (largely off topic and irrelevantly and who gives any shits) about someone else pulling up the ladder. Difficult to feel sorry for that when we have other topics of the thread, which is largely the evidentiary relevance of various matters concerning OGNasty and if there is any accounting that needs to be done based on more recent evidentiary revelations or the extent that any of the new evidentiary revelations matter. Attempting to confuse matters? I am sorry if you were confused, I'm referring to your actions, not my state of thinking. but I can't be responsible for every simpleton that wanders in and has trouble reading my words. Yes. You seem to have trouble focusing on the topic, and you seem inclined to attack people who seem to NOT be fully lovey dovey with your goals and objectives to confuse matters in order to protect your lil buddy... and that is not even attempting to say anything negative about OGNasty, it is just referring to your ongoing distraction pitbull-like behaviors.What was lame-ass was your original lazy opinion based on not even bothering to review the information fully, by your own admission, but still be willing to have a strong opinion about it. I doubt my opinion was strong. I just was talking about the process that suggests reviewing evidence and logic to the extent that exists and is presented. This is exactly what I was criticizing about TwitchySeal. He knows damn well most people aren't going to bother to look that close and he has a good chance of convincing people through repetition of his baseless theories operant conditioning style. Oh? I see. Twitchy is a menace to the forum because he presents evidence and logic, and the forum members are too fucking stupid to understand that Twitchy is full of shit, and so therefore, Twitchy should not be presenting such evidence to all of us (forum member) dumb fucks... because we are too damned gullible. And furthermore, Twitchy is tricky as fuck for engaging in such manipulation. Shame on you Twitchy!!!!! When I really consider what you are saying Tecshare, that makes a whole lot of sense. NOT. Combine this with the long term trend of himself and his buddies repeating this behavior clearly directed at OGNasty, and it becomes quite obvious this is about serving personal vendettas, not about righting any wrongs done. You are so NOT very convincing in this regard. Evidence and logic is evidence and logic. Either it is convincing or it is not. Who knows how to resolve it, but members should be able to assess the information for themselves, and if any member has strong proposals or recommendations regarding what should be done or argued for in light of the evidence and arguments, then they should be free to make such assessments and to make whatever proposal, including the one that you are making (which is to drop the matter, but you are just one member, right?). Why would I want you to feel sorry for me? Hopefully, you don't want that. What hole? You got me? I don't know what hole you are referring to. Why is it you rely on projection so much? Did not realize that I was doing that. Is it perhaps because you don't have any logical retort to what I said? I don't know. I already responded to everything that seemed to be necessary to respond to. You, Tecshare, sure do seem to have a tendency to devolve into a lot of irrelevant divergencies, including questioning my own competencies or whatever you had been attempting to do in your post. Probably, I should apologize for responding to all of this seemingly irrelevant nonsense that Tecshare seems to be bringing up... but I tend to not be easily deterred.. regarding baloney talk... .. I might have to get a lesson from Nancy Reagan ("just say no"... ... hhahahahahahaha)... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: suchmoon on December 13, 2019, 02:39:01 AM ~ Don't waste your time trying to understand his pretzel logic. Debating with TECSHARE is like marriage - the only way for it to work is to admit that you're always wrong and he's always right. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 13, 2019, 03:34:41 AM I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday. If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong. Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it. (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).) We have pirates ledger for every transaction. We have ogs thread archived. We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer. We have the block chain. Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors. The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012. On August 6 Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8 On August 13 Og received an interested payment of BTC39.2 On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38 On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors. BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54 We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2. You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it. Bump^^ Reference Material: OgNastys WalletExplorer Transactions from August 2012 (https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/000c9e9219e1faec?page=55) OgNasty transactions with pirate from April 2012 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53315690#msg53315690) Pirates Ledger (https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/pirateat40/gov.uscourts.txed.146063.4.8.pdf) . (ctrl + f 'ognasty') OgNasty Posts June Payments in pass through thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg936171#msg936171) OgNasty Posts July Payments in pass through thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1002169#msg1002169) August (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1073454#msg1073454) If you're taking Ogs character into account, consider what he put in his OP: "You should [use in Bitcoin Savings & Trust]. pirateat40 is a great asset to the community and if you have the BTC to establish an account, a current member willing to refer you, and are willing to wait for your invite, please do" (https://i.gyazo.com/e306d4ed3b3f6ef417db8f44d99e06b7.png) Now go read the first page and a half of this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=555881.msg6056716#msg6056716). And keep in mind the 'insurance' he mentions was BTC65 total. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 13, 2019, 08:52:25 AM [edited out] Now we can discuss the extent to which one is more harmful than the other, but I (and - again - I suspect more people around here) am (are) not up for that. Twitchy is providing evidence and arguments for a theory. Of course, some other members are throwing in their perspective, too and providing links to other evidence and theories in a kind of crowd sourcing way (that sometimes might support existing evidence and arguments and sometimes negate the same), and it is up to members (including yourself) to decide for themselves the extent that they are "up to it" or not and whether they are going to give such evidence and logic any weight at all or completely say that Twitchy and others who support such Twitchy evidence and logic is full of shit or not. If you read back a couple of posts (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53316874#msg53316874) you will notice I am saying nothing about Twitchy's argument(-ation). I simply reacted to Tecshare's statement that a legendary member was engaging in "petty interpersonal battles" with another legendary member. And pointing out that that behaviour was mutual. Now, if you think that that behaviour (by either one of them) is actually doing anything good for this community you'r totally entitled to that opinion. Mine should be clear by now, but let me quote someone who put it much more clearly then me: Quote from: theymos [...] All three of TMAN, Vod, and OgNasty are forum veterans with good trade histories, and I would tend to trust all three of them (to varying degrees). This drama is highly counterproductive. Nobody has a real trade complaint AFAICT, so the underlying facts hardly matter. [...] I challenge all of you to just knock it off. If you can't work together, then ignore each other, even if you're being prodded. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5178813.msg52274888#msg52274888) Which, BTW, brings us back on topic; because it would be really nice (especially for OgNasty's own reputation) if this was to be cleared up crystal clear (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53298576#msg53298576). But I also do not really see any "real trade complaint"... :-X Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: ibminer on December 13, 2019, 11:57:37 AM The quote you keep referencing from theymos was made in relation to OgNasty vs Vod at a time when insults after insults were being hurled at each other and no real facts or evidence were being presented of anyone having "a real trade complaint", it was certainly not productive for the forum to have 2 of its veteran members going at each other like that.
Just because their feud may have spurned up someone like TwitchSeal who has shown newer evidence to suggest OgNasty is much worse than a liar, if what I'm seeing is accurate with the numbers pirateat40 confirmed under oath, and what OgNasty publicly proclaimed to his investors, I think there would be a valid trade complaint here. Trendon Shavers (pirateat40) would have made a very large mistake if he lied to the SEC and I don't think he or his lawyers would have been willing to take that chance. OgNasty is likely in PMs trying to figure out WTF to say while TECSHARE stalls everyone with useless arguments. suchmoon said it best: Debating with TECSHARE is like marriage - the only way for it to work is to admit that you're always wrong and he's always right. From TECSHARE's perspective, he is never wrong, those that disagree will be attacked until they succumb. If you don't succumb, round' and round' you will go on the pretzel train. Chooo chooooo. I guess we just shouldn't look at the new evidence since TECSHARE thinks it came out due to a personal feud... whether or not one may have been triggered by the other, shouldn't they still be treated as separate cases and situations with various elements of evidence and facts in each? If someone came out right now stating Donald Trump was molesting 12 year olds, and presenting evidence for it, is TECHSHARE going to come in and say "this is just a witch hunt because people don't like his foreign policy, nothing to see here, walk away!" ::) Og doesn't want to respond directly to any of this, just like he didn't want to provide me any full-context on his chopped up PMs with Vod... and any response will unfortunately be some sort of PR-like statement that is vague and requires you to just trust him. You're gonna go far, Og. (https://youtu.be/zEZRKgFIkxc) (meaningful lyrics.) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 13, 2019, 12:21:02 PM ~ What actions? You mean my words? Last I checked words required a state of thinking to interpret but maybe you have some special way of reading where you don't use your brain. I am quite focused on the topic, just not the parts of it you wish to emphasize. Calling it evidence and logic doesn't make it evidence an logic. There is transaction data yes, but the part where it is assumed there was wrongdoing, victims, or other malpractice is absolutely assumption, not facts or logic. I am not particularly interested in convincing you. I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated. More operant conditioning presenting no new information The quote you keep referencing from theymos was made in relation to OgNasty vs Vod at a time when insults after insults were being hurled at each other and no real facts or evidence were being presented of anyone having "a real trade complaint", it was certainly not productive for the forum to have 2 of its veteran members going at each other like that. Just because their feud may have spurned up someone like TwitchSeal who has shown newer evidence to suggest OgNasty is much worse than a liar, if what I'm seeing is accurate with the numbers pirateat40 confirmed under oath, and what OgNasty publicly proclaimed to his investors, I think there would be a valid trade complaint here. Trendon Shavers (pirateat40) would have made a very large mistake if he lied to the SEC and I don't think he or his lawyers would have been willing to take that chance. OgNasty is likely in PMs trying to figure out WTF to say while TECSHARE stalls everyone with useless arguments. suchmoon said it best: Debating with TECSHARE is like marriage - the only way for it to work is to admit that you're always wrong and he's always right. From TECSHARE's perspective, he is never wrong, those that disagree will be attacked until they succumb. If you don't succumb, round' and round' you will go on the pretzel train. Chooo chooooo. I guess we just shouldn't look at the new evidence since TECSHARE thinks it came out due to a personal feud... whether or not one may have been triggered by the other, shouldn't they still be treated as separate cases and situations with various elements of evidence and facts in each? If someone came out right now stating Donald Trump was molesting 12 year olds, and presenting evidence for it, is TECHSHARE going to come in and say "this is just a witch hunt because people don't like his foreign policy, nothing to see here, walk away!" ::) Og doesn't want to respond directly to any of this, just like he didn't want to provide me any full-context on his chopped up PMs with Vod... and any response will unfortunately be some sort of PR-like statement that is vague and requires you to just trust him. You're gonna go far, Og. (https://youtu.be/zEZRKgFIkxc) (meaningful lyrics.) Ah look who it is, Mr. "I am a neutral party" who always just coincidentally seems to argue for Vod's position. There is no new evidence. The only thing that is new is injected speculation, theorizing, and assumption. That and the need to manufacture yet another scandal to be used to attack OGNastys character for criticizing the wrong people here. There is nothing factual supporting the conclusion that he stole money, or that anyone was victimized. This is all just suspicion characterized as fact because hey look at his name in this transcript and here are some transactions that I made assumptions about. Why should OG reply to you harpies? There is nothing logical or rational he can say that will stop this ceaseless series of attacks on his character, because it is based on targeting the individual, not on facts or logic. There is no path to redemption with you people, which is why people like me will consistently tell you to go fuck yourselves and get a life of your own rather than harassing people on the internet. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 13, 2019, 12:33:50 PM [...] Just because their feud may have spurned up someone like TwitchSeal who has shown newer evidence to suggest OgNasty is much worse than a liar, if what I'm seeing is accurate with the numbers pirateat40 confirmed under oath, and what OgNasty publicly proclaimed to his investors, I think there would be a valid trade complaint here. [...] We basically agree; what I told Tecshare was about the (prolonged) feud between Vod and OgNasty (and the quote you refer to is in that context). But regarding this issue in this topic I was clear: [...] it would be really nice (especially for OgNasty's own reputation) if this was to be cleared up crystal clear (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53298576#msg53298576). [...] So... [...] Why should OG reply to you harpies? There is nothing logical or rational he can say that will stop this ceaseless series of attacks on his character, because it is based on targeting the individual, not on facts or logic. There is no path to redemption with you people, which is why people like me will consistently tell you to go fuck yourselves and get a life of your own rather than harassing people on the internet. Actually, it would be quite simple: [Deflection] C'mon... how hard can it be...?[...]This is pretty much very simple yes-know question. @OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? and provide the blockchain proof to back his words up... sounds simple enough to me... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 13, 2019, 01:23:05 PM I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated. To everyone else observing it looks like you are barking at anyone who questions why OgNasty said he lost funds in the BST ponzi when Trendon Shavers testified to the SEC that he had refunded him in full. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sirazimuth on December 13, 2019, 02:19:23 PM I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated. To everyone else observing it looks like you are barking at anyone who questions why OgNasty said he lost funds in the BST ponzi when Trendon Shavers testified to the SEC that he had refunded him in full. In coming ...”WOOF WOOF! blah blah angry rant blah blah ...nutilduuuhhh” Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: marlboroza on December 13, 2019, 03:12:44 PM May I suggest everyone to ignore Tec's hare, obviously trying to move thread into different direction. TH said he didn't read anything, so OG could have robbed a bank and he would say that "he didn't read it" and continue spewing his online rants.
Lets make something clear @Ognasty: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53304177#msg53304177 Have you invested YOUR money or money which was generated by other passtrough-depositors? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: The-One-Above-All on December 13, 2019, 03:58:14 PM The reader should read this post and note there will be NO DEBUNKING OF THE CENTRAL POINTS there is no IRREFUTABLE PROOF of what they are claiming took place ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE. It is all speculation the critical evidence is the "word" of a convicted "scammer".
These SAME DT members have previously claimed WHEN IT SUITED THEM. That accusations or EVEN QUESTIONS that are too pointed are to be classed as DEFAMATION AND LIES and those bringing them forward should have RED TRUST. Clear DOUBLE STANDARDS. Our questions (to hhampuz) were accompanied by 100% undeniable independently verifiable observable instances and NONE of the DT members even dared dispute them and they still said it was DEFAMATION AND LIES and we got 8 red trusts for that question and supplying the corroborating evidence that they did not dispute. So how can we trust these same DT members that are now WILLING to 100% believe the words of a convicted "scammer" (as their only strong evidence of full refund) and YEARS LATER THEY SUDDENLY GET ALL INTERESTED when OG gets back on DT and their accounts are glowing with CORRECTLY GIVEN red trust demonstrating many of them are scammers or extortionists. The reader should note that this other JayjuanGEE or whatever his pathetic dreg name is has been CLEARLY demonstrated to be dishonest and in league with the proven scam facilitators and other trust abusing scum. I would not trust the SPIN he attempts to put on anything. This fool falsely presented evidence out of full context and deliberately deleted out "nutildahs" asserting that we just made the mistake of believing. He is often found in cahoots and protecting the SAME SCAMMERS and SCAMMER supporters he is aligning with NOW. See this thread for more Undeniable independently verifiable instances of FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING (no need to rely on the desperate words of a convicted fellon) you can read and investigate this all for yourselves. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170789.0 Then look at the ONLY DT to be flagging these correctly as scammers OGNASTY and then ask yourselves I wonder WHY NOW AFTER ALL OF THESE YEARS are these scammers and scammer supporters who are only now starting to glow red because OG got back on DT. They are trying anything and willing to believe anyone and scrape any dirt up to get OG off DT. Do not trust their slanted speculations This is not to say we claim to KNOW that OG is not guilty of what they claim. BUT they have clear motivation for attacking him NOW and are proven scammers or scammer supporters themselves. So I would await CONCLUSIVE PROOF of guilt before listening to their SLANT on it. Love their willingness to believe 100% what a convicted "scammer" says but Unwilling to accept undeniable conclusive proof when it demonstrates financially motivated wrong doing ON THEIR PART. If we hold to THEIR SELF IMPOSED STANDARDS then OG is NOT GUILTY and it is DEFAMATION and LIES until CONCLUSIVE PROOF (even then it will be defamation and lies if it is regarding themselves LOL) Twitchy scum bag is an obseravble supporter of scammers and scammer supporters. I mean let's look at who is on his trust list.... and where his merits come from. OG is 100x more trustworthy than these foul leaches. He just returned 500BTC to the foum after years. Do you think you would see that 500BTC from lauda, twitchy,tman, JJG, LFC bitcoin, nutildah or any of these undeniable scum bags. DEBUNK ANY OF OUR CENTRAL POINTS SCAMMER AND SCUMBAGS here and now. YOU CAN NOT. here comes the crying "trolling" "lies" "mentally ill" " who is we" "any other excuse not to tackle the central points because we are unable to".... LOL this jayjuangee is the scammers new front man they have rolled out it seems. Another scumbag going on the dirty turds thread soon. He already is protecting other trust abusers/scammer supporters and protecting willing scam facilitators. RUNS AWAY from debating with us because we will pull this scumbag to piece in public. TLDR?? OG IS NOT GUILTY BY DT MEMBERS OWN SELF IMPOSED STANDARDS. Do not let them impose double standards on other members. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 13, 2019, 04:50:26 PM Yes. Last time that I checked, posting constitutes an action. Last I checked words required a state of thinking to interpret but maybe you have some special way of reading where you don't use your brain. I am quite focused on the topic, just not the parts of it you wish to emphasize. Calling it evidence and logic doesn't make it evidence an logic. There is transaction data yes, but the part where it is assumed there was wrongdoing, victims, or other malpractice is absolutely assumption, not facts or logic. You are not really saying anything in need of response so far, but I will read on. ;) I am not particularly interested in convincing you. I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated. I doubt that you are really saving anyone or clarifying matters with your ongoing unsupported conclusions, ie that this is a witch hunt, and your other various convolutions and ad hominems etc. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 13, 2019, 05:35:14 PM The reader should read this post and note there will be NO DEBUNKING OF THE CENTRAL POINTS there is no IRREFUTABLE PROOF of what they are claiming took place ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE. It is all speculation the critical evidence is the "word" of a convicted "scammer". You should really go back and read the thread man.The court document where pirate said he paid Og back isn't crucial evidence. It's entirely possible pirate was lying. The crucial evidence can be found in the forum archives and block chain. Nothing else you said is directly related to whether or not Og scammed pass-through 'investors'. I could be the biggest scammer piece of shit in the world and it wouldn't change the facts. I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday. If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong. Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it. (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).) We have pirates ledger for every transaction. We have ogs thread archived. We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer. We have the block chain. Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors. The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012. On August 6 Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8 On August 13 Og received an interested payment of BTC39.2 On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38 On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors. BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54 We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2. You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it. Bump^^ Reference Material: OgNastys WalletExplorer Transactions from August 2012 (https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/000c9e9219e1faec?page=55) OgNasty transactions with pirate from April 2012 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53315690#msg53315690) Pirates Ledger (https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/pirateat40/gov.uscourts.txed.146063.4.8.pdf) . (ctrl + f 'ognasty') OgNasty Posts June Payments in pass through thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg936171#msg936171) OgNasty Posts July Payments in pass through thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1002169#msg1002169) August (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1073454#msg1073454) If you're taking Ogs character into account, consider what he put in his OP: "You should [use in Bitcoin Savings & Trust]. pirateat40 is a great asset to the community and if you have the BTC to establish an account, a current member willing to refer you, and are willing to wait for your invite, please do" (https://i.gyazo.com/e306d4ed3b3f6ef417db8f44d99e06b7.png) Now go read the first page and a half of this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=555881.msg6056716#msg6056716). And keep in mind the 'insurance' he mentions was BTC65 total. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: The-One-Above-All on December 13, 2019, 06:09:25 PM The reader should read this post and note there will be NO DEBUNKING OF THE CENTRAL POINTS there is no IRREFUTABLE PROOF of what they are claiming took place ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE. It is all speculation the critical evidence is the "word" of a convicted "scammer". You should really go back and read the thread man.The court document where pirate said he paid Og back isn't crucial evidence. It's entirely possible pirate was lying. The crucial evidence can be found in the forum archives and block chain. Nothing else you said is directly related to whether or not Og scammed pass-through 'investors'. I could be the biggest scammer piece of shit in the world and it wouldn't change the facts. I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday. If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong. Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it. (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).) We have pirates ledger for every transaction. We have ogs thread archived. We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer. We have the block chain. Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors. The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012. On August 6 Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8 On August 13 Og received an interested payment of BTC39.2 On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38 On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors. BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54 We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2. You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it. Bump^^ Reference Material: OgNastys WalletExplorer Transactions from August 2012 (https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/000c9e9219e1faec?page=55) OgNasty transactions with pirate from April 2012 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53315690#msg53315690) Pirates Ledger (https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/pirateat40/gov.uscourts.txed.146063.4.8.pdf) . (ctrl + f 'ognasty') OgNasty Posts June Payments in pass through thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg936171#msg936171) OgNasty Posts July Payments in pass through thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1002169#msg1002169) August (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1073454#msg1073454) If you're taking Ogs character into account, consider what he put in his OP: "You should [use in Bitcoin Savings & Trust]. pirateat40 is a great asset to the community and if you have the BTC to establish an account, a current member willing to refer you, and are willing to wait for your invite, please do" (https://i.gyazo.com/e306d4ed3b3f6ef417db8f44d99e06b7.png) Now go read the first page and a half of this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=555881.msg6056716#msg6056716). And keep in mind the 'insurance' he mentions was BTC65 total. Let's make this VERY SIMPLE Striking away pirates claim You are claiming you have CONCLUSIVE PROOF of clear and undeniable financially motivated wrong doing by OG nasty. YES OR NO?? If you say YES and you do NOT have conclusive proof. That is defamation and lies according to DT precedent here. So you accept you should be flagged and tagged?? I mean in our case we had conclusive undeniable proof they did not even dispute that but still gave us red for asking a QUESTION. So be very careful. Then again you do not need to be careful as you currently support them. You are correct though that if you have CONCLUSIVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF your motives do not really matter and can be struck away. Those motives only MATTER if there is NOT CONCLUSIVE PROOF. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 13, 2019, 06:45:30 PM The reader should read this post and note there will be NO DEBUNKING OF THE CENTRAL POINTS there is no IRREFUTABLE PROOF of what they are claiming took place ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE. It is all speculation the critical evidence is the "word" of a convicted "scammer". You should really go back and read the thread man.The court document where pirate said he paid Og back isn't crucial evidence. It's entirely possible pirate was lying. The crucial evidence can be found in the forum archives and block chain. Nothing else you said is directly related to whether or not Og scammed pass-through 'investors'. I could be the biggest scammer piece of shit in the world and it wouldn't change the facts. I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday. If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong. Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it. (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).) We have pirates ledger for every transaction. We have ogs thread archived. We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer. We have the block chain. Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors. The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012. On August 6 Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8 On August 13 Og received an interested payment of BTC39.2 On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38 On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors. BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54 We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2. You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it. Bump^^ Reference Material: OgNastys WalletExplorer Transactions from August 2012 (https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/000c9e9219e1faec?page=55) OgNasty transactions with pirate from April 2012 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53315690#msg53315690) Pirates Ledger (https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/pirateat40/gov.uscourts.txed.146063.4.8.pdf) . (ctrl + f 'ognasty') OgNasty Posts June Payments in pass through thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg936171#msg936171) OgNasty Posts July Payments in pass through thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1002169#msg1002169) August (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg1073454#msg1073454) If you're taking Ogs character into account, consider what he put in his OP: "You should [use in Bitcoin Savings & Trust]. pirateat40 is a great asset to the community and if you have the BTC to establish an account, a current member willing to refer you, and are willing to wait for your invite, please do" (https://i.gyazo.com/e306d4ed3b3f6ef417db8f44d99e06b7.png) Now go read the first page and a half of this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=555881.msg6056716#msg6056716). And keep in mind the 'insurance' he mentions was BTC65 total. Let's make this VERY SIMPLE Striking away pirates claim You are claiming you have CONCLUSIVE PROOF of clear and undeniable financially motivated wrong doing by OG nasty. YES OR NO?? If you say YES and you do NOT have conclusive proof. That is defamation and lies according to DT precedent here. So you accept you should be flagged and tagged?? I mean in our case we had conclusive undeniable proof they did not even dispute that but still gave us red for asking a QUESTION. So be very careful. Then again you do not need to be careful as you currently support them. You are correct though that if you have CONCLUSIVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF your motives do not really matter and can be struck away. Those motives only MATTER if there is NOT CONCLUSIVE PROOF. Just read the post man. I already said it proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he pocketed BTC144 and there's evidence that the the number is higher, it's not as strong, but still worth discussing. As far as the BTC144, it's not impossible that after receiving the last 3 payments from Pirate in August he used a completely different wallet with completely different funds and paid the 4 investors to completely separate wallets from all the other payments they received (even though he said all payments would go to the address the investor provided when they invested) and then on Sept 1 paid out the reserves from and to the original addresses that every other payment had been made in previous months, and didn't mention it in the thread, unlike every other payment. Look at all the evidence and decide for yourself how likely it is that that is what happened, and let me know if you can think of any other scenario where he didn't steal any funds. Also, scrutinize all the evidence yourself - it's possible I made some stupid mistake somewhere. If someone finds one I'm happy to admit it and go back and edit my posts to reflect that. I've already admitted I made a mistake about him deleting posts in the original thread when he found out I was looking into it. It was just content in the OP, not any actual posts. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 13, 2019, 07:13:17 PM [edited out] Let's make this VERY SIMPLE Striking away pirates claim You are claiming you have CONCLUSIVE PROOF of clear and undeniable financially motivated wrong doing by OG nasty. YES OR NO?? If you say YES and you do NOT have conclusive proof. That is defamation and lies according to DT precedent here. So you accept you should be flagged and tagged?? Did someone die and put you in charge of what are the forum/thread rules regarding discussion of topics, whether accusations or otherwise? I doubt it. You seem to have about as much of a clue for proper and relevant forum/thread discussion(s) as a fruit fly. Maybe you are a fruit fly, disguising yourself as a forum member? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: The-One-Above-All on December 14, 2019, 01:55:59 AM [edited out] Let's make this VERY SIMPLE Striking away pirates claim You are claiming you have CONCLUSIVE PROOF of clear and undeniable financially motivated wrong doing by OG nasty. YES OR NO?? If you say YES and you do NOT have conclusive proof. That is defamation and lies according to DT precedent here. So you accept you should be flagged and tagged?? Did someone die and put you in charge of what are the forum/thread rules regarding discussion of topics, whether accusations or otherwise? I doubt it. You seem to have about as much of a clue for proper and relevant forum/thread discussion(s) as a fruit fly. Maybe you are a fruit fly, disguising yourself as a forum member? DT already set a precedent moron. THEIR RULES Shhh fool. Nobody is going to fall for your cheap parlor tricks to derail this thread. Twitchy clearly stated he has NO CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING. IT is merely speculation. However COMPELLING it seems DT members demand CONCLUSIVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING before you can speculate, insinuate or even ask questions or it is DEFAMATION, SPREADING LIES and you will all get red trust from each other LOL What if after all of this he did pay it back from another account or somewhere else there is an explanation? where are these people that were scammed?? GO red trust all the other proven scammers that have undeniable observable instances of scamming, scam facilitating for pay and then we can come back to the ones we SPECULATE or it seems PROBABLE ( to some DT members that do not like OG being on DT) that have scammed after that. I'm not saying OG is not enjoying a lavish lifestyle on others bitcoins he kept. I am saying you have NO CONCLUSIVE PROOF so stick to your own fucking self imposed standards and come back with it or by your own definitions you are DEFAMING him and spreading lies. The timing and the specific members here is what makes it look extremely fishy to me. Not claiming there is no fire with your smoke just you need to find the fucking fire don't you. We supplied the fire and you never denied any of it. You just said bringing it up was defamation and spreading lies LOL. That was a question not even a clear accusation like many are making on this thread. No more double standards here on this forum. You set precedents and hold to them. You must hold to them for all members. /thread come back with conclusive proof of financially motivated wrong doing or fuck off. If you had enough for a type2 or 3 flag you would have pulled it by now. You do NOT. Of course red trust or the lemons flag is just a joke and proves NOTHING. Hmmmm would I trust someone who just handed back 500 btc after years of being in SOLE control of it or a bunch of people that are undeniable scammers, or scammer supporters trying years after the event to drag anything up to get their main enemy removed from DT which they want sole control over??? HMMMM let me think.....hahaha Twitchy if you had NOT been supporting and protecting scammers whilst shouting down whistle blowers and those that have been trust abused then perhaps it would have seemed less contrived and motivated to just pull OG off DT by any and all means. Same for this JJG windbag. It all just seems a little TOO convenient right now he just got back on DT and some of the scammers he tagged are getting some red on their accounts. I hope the campaign managers will be removing them soon or else we will be asking WHY THIS IS. Surely not MORE double standards LOL Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 14, 2019, 03:22:51 AM Twitchy clearly stated he has NO CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING. IT is merely speculation. https://i.gyazo.com/bf916543f861c8077abe0836405d108c.png It's not merely speculation. There's a shitload of evidence. What I stated was that the evidence "proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he pocketed BTC144" If scammers were only labeled such when it was proven that it would be impossible for them not to have scammed....nobody would ever be labeled a scammer. Could you take the default trust list drama to another thread please? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 14, 2019, 04:50:41 AM I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated. To everyone else observing it looks like you are barking at anyone who Fixed that for you. Also what is it like speaking for "everyone"? Sounds like a cool job. I doubt that you are really saving anyone or clarifying matters with your ongoing unsupported conclusions, ie that this is a witch hunt, and your other various convolutions and ad hominems etc. That is all irrelevant. Any conclusions I make are independent of the fact that the conclusions against OGNasty require assumption and speculation and are not conclusive proof of anything. I don't have to prove my conclusions. You have to prove your conclusions, that is how burden of proof works. Look at all the evidence and decide for yourself how likely it is that that is what happened, and let me know if you can think of any other scenario where he didn't steal any funds. Sure thing. As far as the BTC144, it's not impossible that after receiving the last 3 payments from Pirate in August he used a completely different wallet with completely different funds... It's entirely possible pirate was lying. There is a lot more but that is not the point. The point is it is your burden to prove that there is no disconnect, not for everyone to prove your assumptions wrong. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 14, 2019, 05:04:53 AM I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated. To everyone else observing it looks like you are barking at anyone who Fixed that for you. Also what is it like speaking for "everyone" sounds like a cool job. Is this the part where I tell you not to speak for me and call you a little girl? There's an obvious conundrum here that you are downplaying in order to continue your Trump-esque screams of "WITCH HUNT!" Its amazing that you actually believe people still take you seriously. You think? I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. It's crazy how many people have jumped to vigorously defend OgNasty, but don't seem interested in what actually happened. QuickSeller is the only exception. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: trapcoder666 on December 14, 2019, 05:07:39 AM Feels like we're back in Salem, Massachusetts , 1692 ;D
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 14, 2019, 05:07:59 AM I am sure you two are having loads of fun obsessing over me, but back to the part where you prove your accusations against OGNasty...
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 14, 2019, 05:11:06 AM I am sure you two are having loads of fun obsessing over me, but back to the part where you prove your accusations against OGNasty... Keep it simple. Just focus on the BTC144 I explained here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53327533#msg53327533 Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 14, 2019, 05:16:04 AM I am sure you two are having loads of fun obsessing over me, but back to the part where you prove your accusations against OGNasty... I don't recall anybody saying "Hey, let's get TECSHARE's opinion on this." You could have chosen to not say peep, but instead you chose to start attacking literally everybody who pointed out the discrepancy between Og's words and Shavers' testimony (and documentary evidence supported by the blockchain). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 14, 2019, 05:21:30 AM I am sure you two are having loads of fun obsessing over me, but back to the part where you prove your accusations against OGNasty... Keep it simple. Just focus on the BTC144 I explained here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53327533#msg53327533 This is exactly what I am talking about. A discrepancy in the numbers does not equal theft. If you can actually disprove something specific I said, please do. Your 'A discrepancy in the numbers does not equal theft' defense is a true statement, but it doesn't directly address anything. Sometimes a discrepancy absolutely does prove theft. And sometimes, like in this case, it's just one piece of the big picture.Kind of seems like you are admitting that your conclusions rely on speculation. I would love to hear you explain how the fact that your accusation relies on speculation is not addressing the central issue of burden of proof, which by definition relying on speculation you have not met. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 14, 2019, 05:33:32 AM I doubt that you are really saving anyone or clarifying matters with your ongoing unsupported conclusions, ie that this is a witch hunt, and your other various convolutions and ad hominems etc. That is all irrelevant. Any conclusions I make are independent of the fact that the conclusions against OGNasty require assumption and speculation and are not conclusive proof of anything. I don't have to prove my conclusions. You have to prove your conclusions, that is how burden of proof works. You seem to be twisting my part in this whole situation. I have not been presenting any evidence. I have largely been commenting on the process, which seems to go to your witch hunt allegations, which I suppose I agree with you regarding any suggestion that, for example with OGNasty's conduct, there would be an initial presumption of innocence. But seems to me that Twitchy has presented evidence and logic to undermine those presumptions of innocence that could allow members to conclude that OGNasty might be guilty of the alleged conduct. You are largely asserting to stop the investigation because it is a witch hunt. There could be some burden of production and persuasion upon you in that regard, also, but whatever, the evidence is still being presented here and members can decide for themselves whether the evidence is persuasive. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 14, 2019, 06:07:50 AM Way too much personality happening in this thread now..
You you, He He, This user, That user, etc. etc. We are all guilty of it so don't try denying it.. Let's get to the facts of this matter so we can get it over and done with eh? Isn't that what's best for BTC? So we are down to 144 unaccounted for BTC now? Worth what? Like $1,000 at the time? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 14, 2019, 06:09:19 AM Kind of seems like you are admitting that your conclusions rely on speculation. I would love to hear you explain how the fact that your accusation relies on speculation is not addressing the central issue of burden of proof, which by definition relying on speculation you have not met. Speculation happens when no compelling facts are considered, which is not the case here. You've been given the resources to educate yourself on the evidence of what happened but are unwilling, unable, or you did educate yourself but can't refute anything I have claimed, so you just call everything 'speculation'. This is what it actually looks like when someone makes false assumptions just to attack someone: I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. ~snip~ All of your claims rely heavily on speculation, assumptions, and perfect hindsight. If you're capable, just put a little effort into looking into the facts. Maybe you'll find something I missed and then the next time you insult me it will feel even better than normal. If you're not capable, then please stop making statements as you did consider the evidence. Way too much personality happening in this thread now.. You you, He He, This user, That user, etc. etc. We are all guilty of it so don't try denying it.. Let's get to the facts of this matter so we can get it over and done with eh? So we are down to 144 unaccounted for BTC now? Worth what? Like $1,000 at the time? You're killing me man. Just read the thread please, I'm starting to feel like a broken record. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53339211#msg53339211 Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 14, 2019, 06:16:04 AM You're killing me man. Just read the thread please It is getting exceedingly difficult to read all of this thread.. Passing my give a fuck levels.. tl;dr please 144BTC @ <$10? Get to it if you want me to change my mind to "OG is a scammer".. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 14, 2019, 06:29:21 AM You're killing me man. Just read the thread please It is getting getting exceedingly difficult to read all of this thread.. Passing my give a fuck levels.. tl;dr please 144BTC @ <$10? Get to it if you want me to change my mind to "OG is a scammer".. There's evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he stole BTC144. There's evidence that he stole ~BTC1,000 , but not enough to classify as beyond a reasonable doubt. When pirate sent him the funds he stole BTC1 = ~$11.80 If you think one of the most trusted users on the site deserves a pass because the bitcoin he stole was only worth $1,700 at the time , and you want to dismiss the other evidence that is was possibly much more, then you should give him a pass. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 14, 2019, 06:36:29 AM only worth $1,800 at the time So you want me to find him a scammer, because you cannot trace the blockchain evidence of $1,800 at the time worth of BTC past a dead end, but he just returned 500BTC @ $7,500 = $3,750,000 +BCH forks and +++, and he is a scammer? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 14, 2019, 06:57:36 AM only worth $1,800 at the time So you want me to find him a scammer, because you cannot trace the blockchain evidence of $1,800 at the time worth of BTC past a dead end, but he just returned 500BTC @ $7,500 = $3,750,000 +BCH forks and +++ and he is a scammer? Come on man. These loaded questions are part of the reason this thread is going to shit. If you care, just look at the evidence and come to your own conclusion - then try to prove yourself wrong before you try to prove anyone else wrong. If all you've gathered from this thread is that I "cannot trace the blockchain evidence of $1,800 at the time worth of BTC past a dead end" then I don't know what to tell you. If you don't care that he stole it because of the value, or that he didn't steal a lot more from theymos, then don't bother. (btw, I was wrong, it was only worth $1700 - bad math) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 14, 2019, 08:37:59 AM But seems to me that Twitchy has presented evidence and logic to undermine those presumptions of innocence that could allow members to conclude that OGNasty might be guilty of the alleged conduct. You are largely asserting to stop the investigation because it is a witch hunt. There could be some burden of production and persuasion upon you in that regard, also, but whatever, the evidence is still being presented here and members can decide for themselves whether the evidence is persuasive. Undermining presumptions of innocence is not proving guilt. Do you see how you are consistently inverting the burden of proof from the accuser back to me? I have no burden of anything. I don't care if anyone believes me. I do however care if people believe accusations of scamming based on speculation. What I am doing is not stopping anyone from presenting evidence. What I am doing is however making rhetorical and sophist persuasion ineffective. Kind of seems like you are admitting that your conclusions rely on speculation. I would love to hear you explain how the fact that your accusation relies on speculation is not addressing the central issue of burden of proof, which by definition relying on speculation you have not met. Speculation happens when no compelling facts are considered, which is not the case here. You've been given the resources to educate yourself on the evidence of what happened but are unwilling, unable, or you did educate yourself but can't refute anything I have claimed, so you just call everything 'speculation'. This is what it actually looks like when someone makes false assumptions just to attack someone: I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. ~snip~ All of your claims rely heavily on speculation, assumptions, and perfect hindsight. If you're capable, just put a little effort into looking into the facts. Maybe you'll find something I missed and then the next time you insult me it will feel even better than normal. If you're not capable, then please stop making statements as you did consider the evidence. Wrong. Facts can be presented in addition to speculation. They are not exclusive. My point is your facts alone do not follow to prove the conclusion that theft occurred or people were victimized. This is completely an assumption on your part. You can argue about how likely it is or is not all day, the fact is this you can not prove. The fact that I do not support your conclusions doesn't mean I haven't reviewed the information you have presented, and your patronizing tone is noted. I am refuting everything you have claimed because you can not prove your accusation as I have already explained. 1. You do not know the owner of the output address of the "missing" funds. 2. There are no victims seeking redress or making accusations of theft. 3. EVEN IF you are right the amounts are so small as to not really make any sense for a very trusted member to trash his reputation over. Such an account could easily sell for well over the amount allegedly stolen, therefore it makes no sense for some one to do this for monetary gains when they simply could have just sold the account and associated signatures for a much higher return. Are any of these three points incorrect? Please explain in detail if you think so. only worth $1,800 at the time So you want me to find him a scammer, because you cannot trace the blockchain evidence of $1,800 at the time worth of BTC past a dead end, but he just returned 500BTC @ $7,500 = $3,750,000 +BCH forks and +++ and he is a scammer? Come on man. These loaded questions are part of the reason this thread is going to shit. If you care, just look at the evidence and come to your own conclusion - then try to prove yourself wrong before you try to prove anyone else wrong. If all you've gathered from this thread is that I "cannot trace the blockchain evidence of $1,800 at the time worth of BTC past a dead end" then I don't know what to tell you. If you don't care that he stole it because of the value, or that he didn't steal a lot more from theymos, then don't bother. (btw, I was wrong, it was only worth $1700 - bad math) This isn't a "loaded question", he is addressing the heart of the issue. You don't know what the fuck that transaction was or who it was to. That is a crucial piece of information you are SPECULATING about. You can prove a transaction occurred, but not what it was for, who it went to, or why. Notice again the attempt at inversion of the burden of proof back on the people criticizing your lack of evidence. The facts you have are ambiguous at best. No one needs to prove themselves wrong, you need to prove yourself right, and you haven't done that. Theymos can speak for himself if he feels he was harmed. This is just another example of this being about attacking the character of OGNasty by shifting focus to another accusation rather than addressing this accusation at hand. The volume of unsubstantiated accusations does not magically make them more valid. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 14, 2019, 08:56:14 AM But seems to me that Twitchy has presented evidence and logic to undermine those presumptions of innocence that could allow members to conclude that OGNasty might be guilty of the alleged conduct. You are largely asserting to stop the investigation because it is a witch hunt. There could be some burden of production and persuasion upon you in that regard, also, but whatever, the evidence is still being presented here and members can decide for themselves whether the evidence is persuasive. Undermining presumptions of innocence is not proving guilt. Agreed. Do you see how you are consistently inverting the burden of proof from the accuser back to me? No, I don't see that. Seems that you are the one who brought up this idea of burden of proof, and I am just responding to that. I have no burden of anything. I would suggest that if you raise an issue, and say: This is a witch hunt, then you have the burden to show that. Of course, you can express that "this is a witch hunt" as an opinion, but if you are trying to persuade someone, then you have the burden, no? I don't care if anyone believes me. Why would it matter if anyone believes you about anything. You said that you have no burden, so therefore, you would not be trying to convince anyone of anything, right? Or do you want to have your cake and eat it too?I do however care if people believe accusations of scamming based on speculation. Fair enough. What I am doing is not stopping anyone from presenting evidence. What I am doing is however making rhetorical and sophist persuasion ineffective. You are attempting to rebutt any evidence (while proclaiming that there is not any evidence, even though there is). Doesn't that seem a bit ridiculous? :D :D :D :D Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 14, 2019, 10:17:26 AM But seems to me that Twitchy has presented evidence and logic to undermine those presumptions of innocence that could allow members to conclude that OGNasty might be guilty of the alleged conduct. You are largely asserting to stop the investigation because it is a witch hunt. There could be some burden of production and persuasion upon you in that regard, also, but whatever, the evidence is still being presented here and members can decide for themselves whether the evidence is persuasive. Undermining presumptions of innocence is not proving guilt. Agreed. Do you see how you are consistently inverting the burden of proof from the accuser back to me? No, I don't see that. Seems that you are the one who brought up this idea of burden of proof, and I am just responding to that. I have no burden of anything. I would suggest that if you raise an issue, and say: This is a witch hunt, then you have the burden to show that. Of course, you can express that "this is a witch hunt" as an opinion, but if you are trying to persuade someone, then you have the burden, no? I don't care if anyone believes me. Why would it matter if anyone believes you about anything. You said that you have no burden, so therefore, you would not be trying to convince anyone of anything, right? Or do you want to have your cake and eat it too?I do however care if people believe accusations of scamming based on speculation. Fair enough. What I am doing is not stopping anyone from presenting evidence. What I am doing is however making rhetorical and sophist persuasion ineffective. You are attempting to rebutt any evidence (while proclaiming that there is not any evidence, even though there is). Doesn't that seem a bit ridiculous? :D :D :D :D I brought up the burden of proof, therefore I must prove that the accuser is engaged in a "witch hunt"? What? I never characterized this as a "witch hunt", Twitchy Seal did BTW. Yes, you are in fact inverting the burden of proof from the accuser on to me. I don't have to prove shit. End of story. Twitchy has to prove his accusation, he can not. This is not having my cake and eating it to, it is how burden of proof works. The one presenting the premise (theft) has the burden to prove the accusation. I don't have to prove it is a witch hunt, and your lack of belief in this premise is irrelevant to the fact that the burden of proof has not been met on the accusation of theft. The only thing ridiculous is your continual inversion of the burden of proof. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: The-One-Above-All on December 14, 2019, 01:57:03 PM Twitchy clearly stated he has NO CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING. IT is merely speculation. https://i.gyazo.com/bf916543f861c8077abe0836405d108c.png It's not merely speculation. There's a shitload of evidence. What I stated was that the evidence "proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he pocketed BTC144" If scammers were only labeled such when it was proven that it would be impossible for them not to have scammed....nobody would ever be labeled a scammer. Could you take the default trust list drama to another thread please? But you are SPECULATING he did not pay it back via another account right?? There is no casting off prior DT precedents as DRAMA I'm afraid. OG is DT, those accusing him and seeking to punish are the SAME group that set the precedents YOU NEED CONCLUSIVE IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE TO EVEN ASK POINTED QUESTIONS OF A DT MEMBER or else you will get red trust for defamation and spreading lies. Are you saying we should have double standards here. YES. Under the precedents set by DT it is true then it would be pretty IMPOSSIBLE to flag or tag any scammers. That is strange isn't it. Apparently those super high standards are only needed for DT members so you can give NON DT members tags for ANYTHING including whistle blowing or just telling you to fuck off when you are derailing their threads. The end of this matter is you do not know for SURE and have no CONCLUSIVE PROOF of OG committing ANY financially motivated wrong doing. /end thread. You want to be able to FORCE people to defend possibly shady looking actions or punishment then best make sure that is the same for ALL MEMBERS. Or we will be there to point out the double standards. Double standards = scamming. It is deception to claim you believe in one set of standards when really you do not believe in those set of standards at all. You just pretend you do for personal gain. This is demonstrated when you adopt and support another set of standards for other people. Most DT members pushing for OG to be punished, are undeniably scammers or scammer supporters by the observable actions. Let's start with them before the POSSIBLE scammers. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 14, 2019, 05:32:42 PM [edited out] I brought up the burden of proof, therefore I must prove that the accuser is engaged in a "witch hunt"? What? I never characterized this as a "witch hunt", Twitchy Seal did BTW. Yes, you are in fact inverting the burden of proof from the accuser on to me. I don't have to prove shit. End of story. Twitchy has to prove his accusation, he can not. This is not having my cake and eating it to, it is how burden of proof works. The one presenting the premise (theft) has the burden to prove the accusation. I don't have to prove it is a witch hunt, and your lack of belief in this premise is irrelevant to the fact that the burden of proof has not been met on the accusation of theft. The only thing ridiculous is your continual inversion of the burden of proof. You get so worked up over a seemingly small point. I am not asserting that any initial burden has been moved from Twitchy to you. I am merely asserting that you have the burden to prove any assertions that you make, to the extent that you are trying to persuade anyone into siding with you or action or whatever. If you are not trying to persuade anyone, and you are merely rebutting the claims of others, then of course, you would have no burdens; however, let's say that Twitchy had met his burden of production and presentation, then the burden would shift to the other side (which seems to be you in this case?) to show that his evidence and logic is not true or persuasive. I am not asserting that Twitchy never had any initial burden of proof, but if he were to have met the burden of proof (which he claims to have done in part of the evidence that he presented), then if true, the burden would shift to the opposition in regards to either the truth of that evidence or the persuasiveness of the logical claims. I would agree that we don't get to any of this shifting of the burdens, if what you said were to end up being true - that is that Twitchy has not provided sufficient evidence or logic to prove his points.. It is not just you who gets to decide whether Twitchy has met his burdens, but you are entitled to your opinion and your ability to present rebuttal, counter-evidence and counter-logic, of course. I don's see how I am saying anything that is exactly controversial, like you seem to be attempting to make it out to be. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 14, 2019, 06:16:34 PM I would suggest that if you raise an issue, and say: This is a witch hunt, then you have the burden to show that. Of course, you can express that "this is a witch hunt" as an opinion, but if you are trying to persuade someone, then you have the burden, no? I posted some evidence of "Witch Hunt" back on page 7, but it was dropped as off topic and it seems you didn't want to look too far into it.. If evidence of "Witch Hunt" is now of concern for this topic, I'm sure I/we can provide a plethora thereof, all the way back to and including the creation of this thread by the OP in the first place.. Should we really go down that path? Let me know if/when you would like abundance of "Witch Hunt" supporting evidence presented if it is now considered on topic and relevant to this case.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 14, 2019, 06:54:32 PM I would suggest that if you raise an issue, and say: This is a witch hunt, then you have the burden to show that. Of course, you can express that "this is a witch hunt" as an opinion, but if you are trying to persuade someone, then you have the burden, no? I posted some evidence of "Witch Hunt" back on page 7, but it was dropped as off topic and it seems you didn't want to look too far into it.. Just because you raise a topic, and present evidence in support of that topic does not make it relevant, necessarily. Seems to me that the more important point of relevance is whether OGNasty engaged in the alleged conduct rather than the supposed vindictive behaviors of the purported accusers. There are standards like this in all kinds of areas of life. Let's take an employment example. Let's say that an employer can fire someone for any reason at all, so long as it is not based on a discriminatory category (such as race, age, sex). The employer had stated that it would like to get rid of Billy because billy is over 50, so therefore the employer has an unlawful motive; however, the Employer also has a rule that stealing from the company is a fireable offense. Billy is caught on camera stealing a $2k computer from the company, and he is clearly guilty of stealing the computer from the company. The company fires Billy. In this hypothetical, it does not matter that the employer has a bias and an unlawful motive against Billy that is clearly proven by evidence if the evidence shows that Billy had been fired for stealing the computer from the company, and everyone who steals from the company gets fired. So you can argue and provide facts until you are blue in the face that you have brought up a valid point about the companies proven bias about billy, but that evidence is irrelevant - even if you have established your burdens on that irrelevant point. If evidence of "Witch Hunt" is now of concern for this topic, I don't think it is, but I am not denying that there are people making claims that it is relevant and that there is evidence of it. My assertions about burden of proof in regards to that topic does not make it relevant, necessarily. It is just an example of how someone might have a burden who is attempting to make a point about a topic, but does not make the topic relevant, necessarily. I'm sure I/we can provide a plethora thereof, all the way back to and including the creation of this thread by the OP in the first place.. That would be called going on a tangent. Should we really go down that path? Of course, you are free to try, but it seems mostly irrelevant... not completely, but mostly. Of course, opinions can vary about what is relevant and what is not too, and trolls, shills, distractors become very good at attempting to make irrelevance seem to be irrelevant, but does not cause irrelevance to become relevant. Let me know if/when you would like abundance of "Witch Hunt" supporting evidence presented if it is now considered on topic and relevant to this case.. Maybe you could start a thread on such "witch hunt" topic, and if you provide a link to such topic here, that link might not be considered to be irrelevant to this thread, because at least the link on its own does not provide a lot of gobbledy-gook of tangentially possible distracting information.. and allows a bit better focus on the main topic here, which seems to be whether OGNasty did the alleged unethical or even misleading, fraudulent, conversion deed that he is alleged of doing or not and maybe what the remedy should be, if it seems to be true that he did those things? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sirazimuth on December 14, 2019, 08:34:55 PM [edited out] <lots of proof burdens and other lawyer speak> <more burdens and proofs business> we are now entering the burden of proof rabbit hole...... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 14, 2019, 08:37:43 PM Twitchy clearly stated he has NO CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING. IT is merely speculation. https://i.gyazo.com/bf916543f861c8077abe0836405d108c.png It's not merely speculation. There's a shitload of evidence. What I stated was that the evidence "proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he pocketed BTC144" If scammers were only labeled such when it was proven that it would be impossible for them not to have scammed....nobody would ever be labeled a scammer. Could you take the default trust list drama to another thread please? But you are SPECULATING he did not pay it back via another account right?? Speculation implies there is no firm evidence. It's not merely speculation. There's a shitload of evidence. When you take it all into consideration, it proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he pocketed BTC145 If you wake up in the morning and your yard is wet, but you didn't see it rain, would you consider it just speculation that it rained because someone could have come and sprayed your yard with water while you were sleeping? No. The wet yard proves beyond a reasonable doubt that it rained. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: teeGUMES on December 14, 2019, 09:35:18 PM If you wake up in the morning and your yard is wet, but you didn't see it rain, would you consider it just speculation that it rained because someone could have come and sprayed your yard with water while you were sleeping? No. The wet yard proves beyond a reasonable doubt that it rained. I think you're using phrases that you shouldn't be. Here I sit on the jury, my yard was wet this morning from the phenomenon known as "morning dew". It did not rain yet my yard is wet. I now reasonably doubt your whole case. When you're making accusations such as the ones in this thread/topic you better come harder than that. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 14, 2019, 10:05:08 PM If you wake up in the morning and your yard is wet, but you didn't see it rain, would you consider it just speculation that it rained because someone could have come and sprayed your yard with water while you were sleeping? No. The wet yard proves beyond a reasonable doubt that it rained. I think you're using phrases that you shouldn't be. Here I sit on the jury, my yard was wet this morning from the phenomenon known as "morning dew". It did not rain yet my yard is wet. I now reasonably doubt your whole case. When you're making accusations such as the ones in this thread/topic you better come harder than that. You are fighting with the hypothetical teeGUMES, rather than undermining the point that Twitchy made. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: owlcatz on December 14, 2019, 10:10:21 PM This thread is starting to remind me of the current impeachment on TV, but almost better because I can participate. ;D
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 14, 2019, 10:13:43 PM If you wake up in the morning and your yard is wet, but you didn't see it rain, would you consider it just speculation that it rained because someone could have come and sprayed your yard with water while you were sleeping? No. The wet yard proves beyond a reasonable doubt that it rained. I think you're using phrases that you shouldn't be. Here I sit on the jury, my yard was wet this morning from the phenomenon known as "morning dew". It did not rain yet my yard is wet. I now reasonably doubt your whole case. When you're making accusations such as the ones in this thread/topic you better come harder than that. Ok bad analogy lol. Replace with snow. The fact alone that a scenario exists where it did not snow does not make it impossible to come to a reasonable and reliable conclusion that it snowed. The question should be how likely it is that the scenario of it not snowing happened. This logic is used in court rooms every day. Judges sometimes use a similar analogy to explain the concept to jurors. In Ogs case, I suggest taking into consideration all evidence (blockchain, forum archives, pirates court documents, Ogs actions) and then coming to a conclusion of how likely it is you think he stole the BTC144 rather than just dismissing the whole thing because a scenario exists where he didn't steal the money. I believe the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he stole the BTC144. I also think it's worth noting that the evidence shows it is likely he stole much more. The only burden I have is to be honest. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Recaptcha007 on December 15, 2019, 03:15:11 AM When was Mr. Nasty appointed a treasurer on this forum ? before or after this ponzi passthrough?
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 15, 2019, 03:30:10 AM When was Mr. Nasty appointed a treasurer on this forum ? before or after this ponzi passthrough? Pretty sure it was about 7 months later. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: trapcoder666 on December 15, 2019, 03:37:57 AM When was Mr. Nasty appointed a treasurer on this forum ? before or after this ponzi passthrough? Pretty sure it was about 7 months later. Any of his investors posted that they weren't settled yet? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 15, 2019, 03:57:11 AM When was Mr. Nasty appointed a treasurer on this forum ? before or after this ponzi passthrough? Pretty sure it was about 7 months later. Any of his investors posted that they weren't settled yet? No. They received their July interest payments at the beginning of August, just like May June and July. News broke that the ponzi was collapsing in the middle of August. Sept 1 OG posted that pirate had defaulted and paid out the insurance fund he had put aside in case is was a scam. (total of BTC65) They likely just assumed that since it was well known that the ponzi had collapsed, Og hadn't received anything from pirate after August 1. He did though. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: trapcoder666 on December 15, 2019, 04:15:22 AM When was Mr. Nasty appointed a treasurer on this forum ? before or after this ponzi passthrough? Pretty sure it was about 7 months later. Any of his investors posted that they weren't settled yet? No. They received their July interest payments at the beginning of August, just like May June and July. News broke that the ponzi was collapsing in the middle of August. Sept 1 OG posted that pirate had defaulted and paid out the insurance fund he had put aside in case is was a scam. (total of BTC65) They likely just assumed that since it was well known that the ponzi had collapsed, Og hadn't received anything from pirate after August 1. He did though. so BTC144 - BTC65 = BTC79 and at that time that's not much though. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 15, 2019, 04:22:49 AM You get so worked up over a seemingly small point. I am not asserting that any initial burden has been moved from Twitchy to you. I am merely asserting that you have the burden to prove any assertions that you make, to the extent that you are trying to persuade anyone into siding with you or action or whatever. If you are not trying to persuade anyone, and you are merely rebutting the claims of others, then of course, you would have no burdens; however, let's say that Twitchy had met his burden of production and presentation, then the burden would shift to the other side (which seems to be you in this case?) to show that his evidence and logic is not true or persuasive. I am not asserting that Twitchy never had any initial burden of proof, but if he were to have met the burden of proof (which he claims to have done in part of the evidence that he presented), then if true, the burden would shift to the opposition in regards to either the truth of that evidence or the persuasiveness of the logical claims. I would agree that we don't get to any of this shifting of the burdens, if what you said were to end up being true - that is that Twitchy has not provided sufficient evidence or logic to prove his points.. It is not just you who gets to decide whether Twitchy has met his burdens, but you are entitled to your opinion and your ability to present rebuttal, counter-evidence and counter-logic, of course. I don's see how I am saying anything that is exactly controversial, like you seem to be attempting to make it out to be. It is not a small point. It is a point upon which this entire accusation rests. Twitchy Seal is speculating where that money went, he has no proof of where it went, to whom, or why. I have highlighted in bold you contradicting yourself from one second to the next. I don't have any burden to prove anything, and this is you, once again, attempting to divert the burden of proof from Twitchy Seal to me. I never said I was not trying to persuade anyone. I said I don't care if anyone believes me. There is a difference even if you don't want to admit the distinction. Claiming to have met the burden of proof and meeting the burden of proof are not equivalent. I don't get to decide he hasn't met the burden of proof, but you do? It is not my opinion, it is a fact. He has no proof where those funds went. Again, you attempt to invert the burden of proof and claim I need to present evidence his "evidence" does not meet the burden of proof. That is not how burden of proof works. Either he has the evidence or he doesn't, and he doesn't, that is a fact. What you are saying is not controversial, it is a logical fallacy. I mean, we're just going in circles at this point. Speculation implies there is no firm evidence. It's not merely speculation. There's a shitload of evidence. When you take it all into consideration, it proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he pocketed BTC145 If you wake up in the morning and your yard is wet, but you didn't see it rain, would you consider it just speculation that it rained because someone could have come and sprayed your yard with water while you were sleeping? No. The wet yard proves beyond a reasonable doubt that it rained. No, you are going in circles. You don't have any proof theft occured, that OGNasty victimized anyone, or even any proof who those funds went to. You are SPECULATING that it was stolen funds. This is not proof. Your own analogy is accidentally perfect. Your lawn being we doesn't mean it rained. It could have been humid that day, it could be dew, it could have snowed, hell maybe your neighbors sprinkler cast a bit too wide of a spray that day. Your ASSUMPTION that is rained is nothing more than that, an assumption. A wet yard does not prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt besides that your yard is wet. I must say, speaking of lawyer speak, your repetition of the term "beyond a reasonable doubt" is nothing more than a rhetorical sophist mechanism to persuade people of your speculative conclusions. You might want to look up the definition (https://legaldictionary.net/beyond-a-reasonable-doubt/) of that phrase by the way, because it doesn't mean what you think it does. 1. You do not know the owner of the output address of the "missing" funds. 2. There are no victims seeking redress or making accusations of theft. 3. EVEN IF you are right the amounts are so small as to not really make any sense for a very trusted member to trash his reputation over. Such an account could easily sell for well over the amount allegedly stolen, therefore it makes no sense for some one to do this for monetary gains when they simply could have just sold the account and associated signatures for a much higher return. Are any of these three points incorrect? Please explain in detail if you think so. You never responded to these points. I wonder why. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 15, 2019, 05:01:55 AM You get so worked up over a seemingly small point. I am not asserting that any initial burden has been moved from Twitchy to you. I am merely asserting that you have the burden to prove any assertions that you make, to the extent that you are trying to persuade anyone into siding with you or action or whatever. If you are not trying to persuade anyone, and you are merely rebutting the claims of others, then of course, you would have no burdens; however, let's say that Twitchy had met his burden of production and presentation, then the burden would shift to the other side (which seems to be you in this case?) to show that his evidence and logic is not true or persuasive. I am not asserting that Twitchy never had any initial burden of proof, but if he were to have met the burden of proof (which he claims to have done in part of the evidence that he presented), then if true, the burden would shift to the opposition in regards to either the truth of that evidence or the persuasiveness of the logical claims. I would agree that we don't get to any of this shifting of the burdens, if what you said were to end up being true - that is that Twitchy has not provided sufficient evidence or logic to prove his points.. It is not just you who gets to decide whether Twitchy has met his burdens, but you are entitled to your opinion and your ability to present rebuttal, counter-evidence and counter-logic, of course. I don's see how I am saying anything that is exactly controversial, like you seem to be attempting to make it out to be. It is not a small point. It is a point upon which this entire accusation rests. Twitchy Seal is speculating where that money went, he has no proof of where it went, to whom, or why. I have highlighted in bold you contradicting yourself from one second to the next. The part that you highlighted in bold is not contradictory. I don't have any burden to prove anything, and this is you, once again, attempting to divert the burden of proof from Twitchy Seal to me. I already said my part like three times and three different ways, so repetition is not going to make any difference. I rest upon what I have already said. I never said I was not trying to persuade anyone. I said I don't care if anyone believes me. I said that if you are trying to persuade, then you have burdens. I did not otherwise characterize your ambitions in that direction, but now, you seem to be admitting that you would like to persuade some people. There is a difference even if you don't want to admit the distinction. I don't see any reason to attempt to educate me on these points. I have stated my perspective and you have stated yours. Largely, we have exhausted the topic, it seems. Claiming to have met the burden of proof and meeting the burden of proof are not equivalent. Sound to be pretty close in the way you are phrasing it. Maybe you would like to provide an example or some examples, and even describe why it matters to get into such distinction attempts?I don't get to decide he hasn't met the burden of proof, but you do? Each of us does. You cannot decide for the rest of us. It is not my opinion, it is a fact. Everyone is going to agree with you then, if the facts are as obvious as you are making them out to be. He has no proof where those funds went. One step at a time. There was some attempts to digest timelines for the various payments and to add them up, so of course, OGNasty could provide evidence, or someone can go through Twitchy's numbers and to show that they are wrong (several times Twitchy has already invited such criticisms of his numbers) Again, you attempt to invert the burden of proof and claim I need to present evidence his "evidence" does not meet the burden of proof. You can do whatever you want. I doubt that repetitious debating with me about the same points over and over is going to be very helpful in this regard.That is not how burden of proof works. Well, I am glad that you have clarified everything. I feel a lot more enlightened now. Either he has the evidence or he doesn't, and he doesn't, that is a fact. Well sometimes if something is being investigated, the evidence is still being established and developed. At some point, all the evidence has been gathered that is available, and these evidentiary parts might constitute direct evidence and/or reasonable inferences. What you are saying is not controversial, it is a logical fallacy. You have not exactly clarified that purported logical fallacy part, but that's ok, because I already said what I had thought was responsive to the topic. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 15, 2019, 05:18:48 AM When was Mr. Nasty appointed a treasurer on this forum ? before or after this ponzi passthrough? Pretty sure it was about 7 months later. Any of his investors posted that they weren't settled yet? No. They received their July interest payments at the beginning of August, just like May June and July. News broke that the ponzi was collapsing in the middle of August. Sept 1 OG posted that pirate had defaulted and paid out the insurance fund he had put aside in case is was a scam. (total of BTC65) They likely just assumed that since it was well known that the ponzi had collapsed, Og hadn't received anything from pirate after August 1. He did though. so BTC144 - BTC65 = BTC79 and at that time that's not much though. The reserve fund was established in April and used to convince more people to invest. It was increased a little every couple weeks until July, when it hit BTC65 Quote RESERVE FUND: A Reserve Fund has been established to provide depositors with insurance against loss of deposits. In the event of a Bitcoin Savings & Trust failure, the Reserve Fund will be paid out to depositors, proportionately to their deposits held as listed on this thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.msg846783#msg846783 Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 15, 2019, 05:36:23 AM 1. You do not know the owner of the output address of the "missing" funds. 2. There are no victims seeking redress or making accusations of theft. 3. EVEN IF you are right the amounts are so small as to not really make any sense for a very trusted member to trash his reputation over. Such an account could easily sell for well over the amount allegedly stolen, therefore it makes no sense for some one to do this for monetary gains when they simply could have just sold the account and associated signatures for a much higher return. Are any of these three points incorrect? Please explain in detail if you think so. You never responded to these points. I wonder why. How long will you continue to avoid addressing these points? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: trapcoder666 on December 15, 2019, 05:46:30 AM When was Mr. Nasty appointed a treasurer on this forum ? before or after this ponzi passthrough? Pretty sure it was about 7 months later. Any of his investors posted that they weren't settled yet? No. They received their July interest payments at the beginning of August, just like May June and July. News broke that the ponzi was collapsing in the middle of August. Sept 1 OG posted that pirate had defaulted and paid out the insurance fund he had put aside in case is was a scam. (total of BTC65) They likely just assumed that since it was well known that the ponzi had collapsed, Og hadn't received anything from pirate after August 1. He did though. so BTC144 - BTC65 = BTC79 and at that time that's not much though. The reserve fund was established in April and used to convince more people to invest. It was increased a little every couple weeks until July, when it hit BTC65 So that's an excess of BTC79 unaccounted for since he paid out reserves (BTC65) to his clients. All in all during that time, it's not a big sum hence why OG's clients didn't make any accusations against him. Reckon everyone was satisfied. Not taking any sides, just stating what i feel from this fiasco. End of the day, money is still money and Theymos won't have trusted him with the forum funds if he isn't trustworthy. My 2 cents. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 15, 2019, 06:43:38 AM When was Mr. Nasty appointed a treasurer on this forum ? before or after this ponzi passthrough? Pretty sure it was about 7 months later. Any of his investors posted that they weren't settled yet? No. They received their July interest payments at the beginning of August, just like May June and July. News broke that the ponzi was collapsing in the middle of August. Sept 1 OG posted that pirate had defaulted and paid out the insurance fund he had put aside in case is was a scam. (total of BTC65) They likely just assumed that since it was well known that the ponzi had collapsed, Og hadn't received anything from pirate after August 1. He did though. so BTC144 - BTC65 = BTC79 and at that time that's not much though. The reserve fund was established in April and used to convince more people to invest. It was increased a little every couple weeks until July, when it hit BTC65 So that's an excess of BTC79 unaccounted for since he paid out reserves (BTC65) to his clients. All in all during that time, it's not a big sum hence why OG's clients didn't make any accusations against him. Reckon everyone was satisfied. Not taking any sides, just stating what i feel from this fiasco. End of the day, money is still money and Theymos won't have trusted him with the forum funds if he isn't trustworthy. My 2 cents. I don't think the reserve funds should be considered out of pocket. They were seperate, funded by interest payments Og received from his investors deposits and announced every couple weeks when he added a bit more to them. They were clearly used to convince people to invest more and for longer. Og was not entitled to them, the investors were. In total the 4 investors received the BTC65 in lieu of their ~BTC950 deposits that were stolen by either Og or Pirate. If you think they should be deducted from the total missing though, it was ~$980. If you don't deduct them from the funds owed it's ~$1700. There's also pretty strong evidence pocketed an additional ~BTC950 (~$11k), but that happened before August 1 interest/withdraw payments so they are more difficult to prove. Also worth considering - had it come out he did anything shady with the pirate passthrough, it's unikely he would've been able to convince people to loan him a bunch of money for Butterfly Labs hardware (another massive scam that had plenty of red flags), and even if they did, they would've been less likely to accept 5,000 'nasty fan seats' (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg29065445#msg29065445) (which sure look just like a ponzi scheme) that were created just to pay off the BFL loans. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 15, 2019, 10:08:53 AM 1. You do not know the owner of the output address of the "missing" funds. 2. There are no victims seeking redress or making accusations of theft. 3. EVEN IF you are right the amounts are so small as to not really make any sense for a very trusted member to trash his reputation over. Such an account could easily sell for well over the amount allegedly stolen, therefore it makes no sense for some one to do this for monetary gains when they simply could have just sold the account and associated signatures for a much higher return. Are any of these three points incorrect? Please explain in detail if you think so. You never responded to these points. I wonder why. How long will you continue to avoid addressing these points? He can't respond to these points because they are all true, and it totally undermines the speculative narrative he is desperately trying to push. As you can see he is already laying the groundwork for shifting to another accusation to push once again clearly demonstrating this is about targeting the man OGNasty, not exposing any wrong doing. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 15, 2019, 10:47:53 AM 1. You do not know the owner of the output address of the "missing" funds. 2. There are no victims seeking redress or making accusations of theft. 3. EVEN IF you are right the amounts are so small as to not really make any sense for a very trusted member to trash his reputation over. Such an account could easily sell for well over the amount allegedly stolen, therefore it makes no sense for some one to do this for monetary gains when they simply could have just sold the account and associated signatures for a much higher return. Are any of these three points incorrect? Please explain in detail if you think so. You never responded to these points. I wonder why. How long will you continue to avoid addressing these points? He can't respond to these points because they are all true, and it totally undermines the speculative narrative he is desperately trying to push. As you can see he is already laying the groundwork for shifting to another accusation to push once again clearly demonstrating this is about targeting the man OGNasty, not exposing any wrong doing. Should I assume from now on that when you ignore my direct questions it's because you know I'm right? 1 true, bitcoin is fungible, you can't actually track individual bitcoin unless the transaction includes the entire balance. There are clues though. He's made ~6,500 transactions over the past ~8.5 years. More than 60% of his darknet(silk road) and gambling(satoshi Dice) related transactions occurred between June and August of 2011. 2 I've explained to you at least 3 times already. 3 If he thought there was a very low chance of getting caught then it does make sense. Even if he could sell the account for $1700, it would basically be giving a green light for someone to use the account to scam. Steal the money and hope you don't get caught so you can convince more people to invest in future ponzis (like BFL). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 15, 2019, 12:05:32 PM 1. You do not know the owner of the output address of the "missing" funds. 2. There are no victims seeking redress or making accusations of theft. 3. EVEN IF you are right the amounts are so small as to not really make any sense for a very trusted member to trash his reputation over. Such an account could easily sell for well over the amount allegedly stolen, therefore it makes no sense for some one to do this for monetary gains when they simply could have just sold the account and associated signatures for a much higher return. Are any of these three points incorrect? Please explain in detail if you think so. Should I assume from now on that when you ignore my direct questions it's because you know I'm right? 1 true, bitcoin is fungible, you can't actually track individual bitcoin unless the transaction includes the entire balance. There are clues though. He's made ~6,500 transactions over the past ~8.5 years. More than 60% of his darknet(silk road) and gambling(satoshi Dice) related transactions occurred between June and August of 2011. 2 I've explained to you at least 3 times already. 3 If he thought there was a very low chance of getting caught then it does make sense. Even if he could sell the account for $1700, it would basically be giving a green light for someone to use the account to scam. Steal the money and hope you don't get caught so you can convince more people to invest in future ponzis (like BFL). Clearly you don't need my approval to make baseless assumptions about anything. Number 1 sounds distinctly different than "beyond a reasonable doubt" and a lot like "I am speculating". Once again, you are speculating that it was his funds used by him directly that went to dice sites (so what?) and the "darknet". You don't know if he made these transactions or if the clients had their payments directed there. You have fun with your raging "clues", the rest of us will stick to facts. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: hacker1001101001 on December 15, 2019, 01:58:45 PM @TwitchySeal, You are just spitting on OGs repo in different threads with spatualtive accusations over and over. No one seems to see your accusations with solid base, even if OG got the funds they were worth pretty much less than what the two figures amounts of BTC look in today's BTC market. There is nothing much in digging up the ancient tricks people used to make profits out of BTC, no one knew it would become so serious afterall.
I think you should get back to P&S hole of yours and practice your attacking there, rather than firing accusations in air here. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 15, 2019, 02:10:12 PM 1. You do not know the owner of the output address of the "missing" funds. 2. There are no victims seeking redress or making accusations of theft. 3. EVEN IF you are right the amounts are so small as to not really make any sense for a very trusted member to trash his reputation over. Such an account could easily sell for well over the amount allegedly stolen, therefore it makes no sense for some one to do this for monetary gains when they simply could have just sold the account and associated signatures for a much higher return. Are any of these three points incorrect? Please explain in detail if you think so. You never responded to these points. I wonder why. How long will you continue to avoid addressing these points? He can't respond to these points because they are all true, and it totally undermines the speculative narrative he is desperately trying to push. As you can see he is already laying the groundwork for shifting to another accusation to push once again clearly demonstrating this is about targeting the man OGNasty, not exposing any wrong doing. It would surely help if OgNasty would bring some clarification into this topic, but regardless of whether or not he's pocketed the funds, I can see why he does not reply, here. I also generally agree with the whole burden of proof thing. This is generally something which is highly annoying in this forum… shifting the burden of proof to the wrong side seems to be pretty common, here. People got judged and punished for much less information than we have here. However, I think the information presented by Twitchy is enough to at least ask questions, don't you think? With everything presented, it's a possible scenario some misconduct has happened. Maybe this whole thing had a better chance to get resolved if the OP was just a tad less clickbaity and more "functional". Now, we have a derailed thread with people repeating the same stuff over and over, with no solution in sight. And the one all this is about isn't even here. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 15, 2019, 02:17:51 PM Recap:
- Twitchy did a good job, presented some previously unconsidered information in a reasonably detailed form. - Og knows its best from a legal standpoint not to respond to any of this, knowing at worst he'll lose a few inclusions in DT, and bowed out - TS and TOAA jumped in with their usual mad dog trollery, impervious to logic surrounding assumptions the rest of us are making What's next? For me personally, given the fact that Og apparently lied about ever being reimbursed by pirate, I have excluded him from my trust network. That's the only course of action I deem fitting. Not much else to be done in this case, and I certainly don't wish him punitive harm from something that happened 6-7 years ago. Not much else to be said at this point. Anybody feel differently? (besides TS and TOAA, thats a given) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 15, 2019, 02:47:54 PM given the fact that Og apparently lied about ever being reimbursed by pirate When? How? Because Pirate said so? You will exclude OG over some possible lie, but won't even remove that mooseprong moron who advises scammers to evade red trust with alt accounts? I tend to look at net totals when considering including/excluding people from my trust list: are they doing more good than harm? https://i.imgur.com/qLfQkwY.png Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 15, 2019, 04:16:46 PM given the fact that Og apparently lied about ever being reimbursed by pirate When? How? Because Pirate said so? You will exclude OG over some possible lie, but won't even remove that mooseprong moron who advises scammers to evade red trust with alt accounts? I tend to look at net totals when considering including/excluding people from my trust list: are they doing more good than harm? https://i.imgur.com/qLfQkwY.png Eddie... Eddie... What the hell are talking about? Its not just "because Pirate said so." You're not really paying attention here. I didn't say it was a possible lie, I said it was a lie. Considering what was at stake, that's a huge difference. And yet you went and made a meme including shit I never said... That's the great thing about the trust system. I don't need for you to get up to speed on the reality of the situation in order for me to change my trust list. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 15, 2019, 07:25:11 PM 1 and 2 are absolutely valid. Nr3 depends on what you value your account at, personally. You can trash it only once, and once it's done, it's done. So, I don't think just because something's worth more, it has to be the preferred choice or sacrifice in order to make some money off of it. It would surely help if OgNasty would bring some clarification into this topic, but regardless of whether or not he's pocketed the funds, I can see why he does not reply, here. I also generally agree with the whole burden of proof thing. This is generally something which is highly annoying in this forum… shifting the burden of proof to the wrong side seems to be pretty common, here. People got judged and punished for much less information than we have here. However, I think the information presented by Twitchy is enough to at least ask questions, don't you think? With everything presented, it's a possible scenario some misconduct has happened. Maybe this whole thing had a better chance to get resolved if the OP was just a tad less clickbaity and more "functional". Now, we have a derailed thread with people repeating the same stuff over and over, with no solution in sight. And the one all this is about isn't even here. Except he isn't just asking questions. He is claiming to be able to "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" OGNasty is responsible for theft and making conclusions. This also should be taken in the larger context of this exact same pattern of behavior related to other accusations where he makes more accusations against OGNasty over and over again without any definite proof, and he isn't the only one. Anyone pretending there isn't a pattern here is lying to themselves. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 15, 2019, 07:52:04 PM 1 and 2 are absolutely valid. Nr3 depends on what you value your account at, personally. You can trash it only once, and once it's done, it's done. So, I don't think just because something's worth more, it has to be the preferred choice or sacrifice in order to make some money off of it. It would surely help if OgNasty would bring some clarification into this topic, but regardless of whether or not he's pocketed the funds, I can see why he does not reply, here. I also generally agree with the whole burden of proof thing. This is generally something which is highly annoying in this forum… shifting the burden of proof to the wrong side seems to be pretty common, here. People got judged and punished for much less information than we have here. However, I think the information presented by Twitchy is enough to at least ask questions, don't you think? With everything presented, it's a possible scenario some misconduct has happened. Maybe this whole thing had a better chance to get resolved if the OP was just a tad less clickbaity and more "functional". Now, we have a derailed thread with people repeating the same stuff over and over, with no solution in sight. And the one all this is about isn't even here. Except he isn't just asking questions. He is claiming to be able to "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" OGNasty is responsible for theft and making conclusions. You have a way of attempting to personalize everything with your lil ongoing spinning efforts, Tecshare. It seems more accurate to say that Twitchy is asserting that he believes that the evidence that has been provided to date proves beyond a reasonable doubt that OGNasty took a certain quantity of BTC, while there is more evidence out there that shows additional reasonable inferences that OGNasty engaged in problematic behavior including possible theft, misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary obligations, fraud and/or conversion in regards to other amounts of BTC. Twitchy ain't no fucking court of law, from what I can determine, but he is someone who has been involved in putting together the evidence and arguing about what conclusions he believes the evidence reasonably supports. This also should be taken in the larger context of this exact same pattern of behavior related to other accusations where he makes more accusations over and over again without any definite proof. Anyone pretending there isn't a pattern here is lying to themselves. Yes, here is where you are mostly off topic, to be focusing on Twitchy's alleged "pattern" of behavior, rather than the evidence that has been presented, and you seem to easily get distracted into tangential nonsense.. .sure there is some connection of relevance to what you are saying concerning possible biasness, but the connection is so far out into space that it is much more of a distraction mechanism regarding the main point(s), rather than any kind of attempt for you to even try to stay on topic. ::) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 15, 2019, 08:26:27 PM 1 and 2 are absolutely valid. Nr3 depends on what you value your account at, personally. You can trash it only once, and once it's done, it's done. So, I don't think just because something's worth more, it has to be the preferred choice or sacrifice in order to make some money off of it. It would surely help if OgNasty would bring some clarification into this topic, but regardless of whether or not he's pocketed the funds, I can see why he does not reply, here. I also generally agree with the whole burden of proof thing. This is generally something which is highly annoying in this forum… shifting the burden of proof to the wrong side seems to be pretty common, here. People got judged and punished for much less information than we have here. However, I think the information presented by Twitchy is enough to at least ask questions, don't you think? With everything presented, it's a possible scenario some misconduct has happened. Maybe this whole thing had a better chance to get resolved if the OP was just a tad less clickbaity and more "functional". Now, we have a derailed thread with people repeating the same stuff over and over, with no solution in sight. And the one all this is about isn't even here. Except he isn't just asking questions. He is claiming to be able to "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" OGNasty is responsible for theft and making conclusions. You have a way of attempting to personalize everything with your lil ongoing spinning efforts, Tecshare. It seems more accurate to say that Twitchy is asserting that he believes that the evidence that has been provided to date proves beyond a reasonable doubt that OGNasty took a certain quantity of BTC, while there is more evidence out there that shows additional reasonable inferences that OGNasty engaged in problematic behavior including possible theft, misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary obligations, fraud and/or conversion in regards to other amounts of BTC. Twitchy ain't no fucking court of law, from what I can determine, but he is someone who has been involved in putting together the evidence and arguing about what conclusions he believes the evidence reasonably supports. This also should be taken in the larger context of this exact same pattern of behavior related to other accusations where he makes more accusations over and over again without any definite proof. Anyone pretending there isn't a pattern here is lying to themselves. Yes, here is where you are mostly off topic, to be focusing on Twitchy's alleged "pattern" of behavior, rather than the evidence that has been presented, and you seem to easily get distracted into tangential nonsense.. .sure there is some connection of relevance to what you are saying concerning possible biasness, but the connection is so far out into space that it is much more of a distraction mechanism regarding the main point(s), rather than any kind of attempt for you to even try to stay on topic. ::) Tell me, if I am addressing the accusations made by Twitchy Seal, how exactly am I supposed to address his accusations without referring to him personally? This is all very much on topic. He has made accusation after accusation against OGNasty, all with serious gaps in his "evidence" which he glosses over with persuasive techniques, repetition, and speculation. Twitchy Seal is not a court of law, but he sure as fuck enjoys pretending to be one, specifically when it concerns OGNasty. Twitchy Seal has already admitted he has no proof who those funds went to, that is a gigantic fucking hole in his "proof", one he fills with speculation. The fact that he has made several accusations against OGNasty relying on speculation absolutely should be taken into account as it demonstrates a clear pattern of attempting to target OGNasty regardless if he has proof or not. You go ahead and call it whatever you like, his motives are transparent. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Reddiss on December 16, 2019, 03:26:41 PM This is pathetic. I have been on and off this forum for a few years now and over the years it has just turned into a big blackhole filled with crypto spammers scammers naysayers and abusers. Fak!!
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 16, 2019, 04:47:21 PM This is pathetic. I have been on and off this forum for a few years now and over the years it has just turned into a big blackhole filled with crypto spammers scammers naysayers and abusers. Fak!! It does say something when not a single person Theymos chose to hold onto forum funds returned them in the same state. :/ Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 16, 2019, 05:33:42 PM It does say something when not a single person Theymos chose to hold onto forum funds returned them in the same state. :/ This might become a bit offtopic, but: care to elaborate, for those who aren't that familiar with the drama, here? Edit: I read something about missing BCH and other fork shitcoins, but I'm not sure if this is part of what you're referring to. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Recaptcha007 on December 16, 2019, 06:05:08 PM Sooooo he potentially withheld ~1144BTC from his investors in a ponzi passthrough, then was asked some time later to hold 500BTC and get paid BTCs for doing it, which in turn puts him into a highly trusted position to continue swindling others with his nasty fan club for long term gains. All along allowing him to beef up his pad and personal mining operation and using the forum as a sole source of income.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=86854.msg965141#msg965141 ^^^ plus his home address and identity are well known by many on this forum and his "shareholders" since before 2012. FIRST !! He'd be a fucking moron to run away with 500BTC of forum funds. He's not stupid so stop sucking his dick because he returned these funds. He would have had to change his entire lifestyle, put his entire family at risk, all in the blink of an eye when thermos asked for it back. Not happenin captain. SECOND !! Just because he is not an exit scammer doesn't mean he isn't a LONG CON artist you fucking imbeciles. THIRD !! OG twists the shit out of things at times too, sometimes Trumping others into corners over their words like a genius, sometimes just embarrassing himself over the whole pedo link bullshit.. EDDIE!!! Trumping others into corners over their words is NOT FUCKING GENIUS ---- it's a way to draw attention away from the point someone is making. Fucking politician. Otherwise, I very much trust OG.. Click.. INSANE because its a boldfaced lie done to make a statement (i.e. prove a point).Insane.. Quote Bold: Bold lies, otherwise known as bold-faced or barefaced lies, are obvious to people who hear the lies. These types of lies are so egregious that they’re seen in children more often than adults. https://online.husson.edu/why-do-people-lie/Deceptive: Deceptive lies are crafted carefully and skillfully, with the intent to mislead the person on the receiving end. These lies are often subtle and hard to detect. Denial: Denial involves refusing to acknowledge something that’s true. Error: Lies can happen by mistake. People may believe what they’re saying is true, even if that isn’t the case. Exaggeration: Exaggerations make the false assertion that something is greater or better. For instance, people may try to paint a more attractive picture of themselves by saying they’re more successful than they are. Another example is people over-promising something to make up for a mistake. Fabrication: Fabrications deliberately make up a story or something that’s not true. These types of lies tend to be overt and can be a mark of desperation. Minimization: Minimizations lessen the extent of something. Often, these types of lies involve rationalization and take place when people can’t completely deny the truth. Minimizations are the opposite of exaggerations. Omission: Lies of omission leave out part of the truth. For many people, omission is easier to engage in than other types of lies because omission is passive and doesn’t involve making up anything. Why care more bout bold faced lies he done to prove a point, than Mr. Nasty's multiple types of lies? Mr. Nasty been deceptively lying (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.0), cleverly omits things -- cherry pickin, exaggerates his lies AND trustiness, Fabricates lies about other legendaries being thieves (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53095619#msg53095619). And, animatedly denies any lie when shown to be lying (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=211858.msg51287501#msg51287501). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Lauda on December 16, 2019, 06:15:22 PM OG twists the shit out of things at times too, sometimes Trumping others into corners over their words like a genius, sometimes just embarrassing himself over the whole pedo link bullshit.. EDDIE!!! Trumping others into corners over their words is NOT FUCKING GENIUS ---- it's a way to draw attention away from the point someone is making. Fucking politician. Otherwise, I very much trust OG.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 16, 2019, 06:25:39 PM Sooooo he potentially withheld ~1144BTC from his investors in a ponzi passthrough, then was asked some time later to hold 500BTC and get paid BTCs for doing it, which in turn puts him into a highly trusted position to continue swindling others with his nasty fan club for long term gains. All along allowing him to beef up his pad and personal mining operation and using the forum as a sole source of income. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=86854.msg965141#msg965141 ^^^ plus his home address and identity are well known by many on this forum and his "shareholders" since before 2012. FIRST !! He'd be a fucking moron to run away with 500BTC of forum funds. He's not stupid so stop sucking his dick because he returned these funds. He would have had to change his entire lifestyle, put his entire family at risk, all in the blink of an eye when thermos asked for it back. Not happenin captain. SECOND !! Just because he is not an exit scammer doesn't mean he isn't a LONG CON artist you fucking imbeciles. THIRD !! OG twists the shit out of things at times too, sometimes Trumping others into corners over their words like a genius, sometimes just embarrassing himself over the whole pedo link bullshit.. EDDIE!!! Trumping others into corners over their words is NOT FUCKING GENIUS ---- it's a way to draw attention away from the point someone is making. Fucking politician. Otherwise, I very much trust OG.. Click.. INSANE because its a boldfaced lie done to make a statement (i.e. prove a point).Insane.. Quote Bold: Bold lies, otherwise known as bold-faced or barefaced lies, are obvious to people who hear the lies. These types of lies are so egregious that they’re seen in children more often than adults. https://online.husson.edu/why-do-people-lie/Deceptive: Deceptive lies are crafted carefully and skillfully, with the intent to mislead the person on the receiving end. These lies are often subtle and hard to detect. Denial: Denial involves refusing to acknowledge something that’s true. Error: Lies can happen by mistake. People may believe what they’re saying is true, even if that isn’t the case. Exaggeration: Exaggerations make the false assertion that something is greater or better. For instance, people may try to paint a more attractive picture of themselves by saying they’re more successful than they are. Another example is people over-promising something to make up for a mistake. Fabrication: Fabrications deliberately make up a story or something that’s not true. These types of lies tend to be overt and can be a mark of desperation. Minimization: Minimizations lessen the extent of something. Often, these types of lies involve rationalization and take place when people can’t completely deny the truth. Minimizations are the opposite of exaggerations. Omission: Lies of omission leave out part of the truth. For many people, omission is easier to engage in than other types of lies because omission is passive and doesn’t involve making up anything. Why care more bout bold faced lies he done to prove a point, than Mr. Nasty's multiple types of lies? Mr. Nasty been deceptively lying (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.0), cleverly omits things -- cherry pickin, exaggerates his lies AND trustiness, Fabricates lies about other legendaries being thieves (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53095619#msg53095619). And, animatedly denies any lie when shown to be lying (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=211858.msg51287501#msg51287501). And now that the alts are starting to burn their reputations pushing too hard with their endless targeted speculation, of course out come the blatant noob grade sock puppets. Grow a spine and post under your primary account dickless. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Recaptcha007 on December 16, 2019, 06:41:13 PM Scooby: RRUT ROH, Shaggy! I rusta said sumfin right rabout Mr. Rasty
Shaggy: TECSHARE is mad and has no way to deflect! Like letsss get outta heeerree Scoooob!!!! Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 06:43:05 PM THIRD !! OG twists the shit out of things at times too, sometimes Trumping others into corners over their words like a genius, sometimes just embarrassing himself over the whole pedo link bullshit.. EDDIE!!! Trumping others into corners over their words is NOT FUCKING GENIUS ---- it's a way to draw attention away from the point someone is making. Fucking politician. Otherwise, I very much trust OG.. It also shows when others are too stubborn to admit they made a small mistake of words and then will argue it out ad infinitum rather than admit even the slightest fault in themselves.. Click.. INSANE because its a boldfaced lie done to make a statement (i.e. prove a point).Insane.. Quote Bold: Bold lies, otherwise known as bold-faced or barefaced lies, are obvious to people who hear the lies. These types of lies are so egregious that they’re seen in children more often than adults. https://online.husson.edu/why-do-people-lie/"a boldfaced lie done to make a statement" A stupid move in a place where your word is your only value.. I don't buy it or accept it personally.. That's some serious desperation if you have to resort to any sort of lie to counter an opponent.. shown to be lying (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=211858.msg51287501#msg51287501). You write a lot like him.. I don't think you'll be able to convince that guy of anything, regardless of what you show or argue. Interesting join via an alt though. Nah, for example, I used to like and look up to Vod a lot before he showed me that he was IRS snitch and a "bold faced" liar.. I have been nearly begging for you all to show me some solid proof of anything terrible against OG for a while now and this sockpost is just another bunch of inconsequential nonsense.. High effort but inconsequential nonsense nonetheless.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: suchmoon on December 16, 2019, 06:45:29 PM Scooby: RRUT ROH, Shaggy! I rusta said sumfin right rabout Mr. Rasty Shaggy: TECSHARE is mad and has no way to deflect! Like letsss get outta heeerree Scoooob!!!! LOL what you you even trying to do here with this ridiculous sockpuppeting? Give more reasons for TECSHARE to derail the thread? Well done. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 16, 2019, 07:00:14 PM Scooby: RRUT ROH, Shaggy! I rusta said sumfin right rabout Mr. Rasty Shaggy: TECSHARE is mad and has no way to deflect! Like letsss get outta heeerree Scoooob!!!! LOL what you you even trying to do here with this ridiculous sockpuppeting? Give more reasons for TECSHARE to derail the thread? Well done. That's a dog shit Scooby Doo impersonation too. I would love for the thread to stay on topic about how Twitchy Seal is speculating about where those funds went, but since the bullshit story is blown now, the perps have the incentive to derail. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 16, 2019, 07:12:34 PM I would love for the thread to stay on topic about how Twitchy Seal is speculating about where those funds went, That is pure comedy gold right there, Tecshare. https://img.allw.mn/movies/thumbs/b2/du/0idy8geb_400x300.jpg :D :D :D :D :D Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 07:41:04 PM Back on topic..
Og apparently lied about ever being reimbursed by pirate Its not just "because Pirate said so." You're not really paying attention here. I didn't say it was a possible lie, I said it was a lie. Considering what was at stake, that's a huge difference. I agree that is a huge difference.. I'm sorry, I must have missed it.. Does the blockchain show that OG's pirate passthrough was fully reimbursed by pirate? I don't think it did, did it? All I can make of this is that pirate told the cops he fully reimbursed OG so it is just pirate's word VS OG's word (and the blockchain).. And seeing how pirate's word isn't very good and all.. Eh.. Anyone? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 16, 2019, 08:16:52 PM Anyone? Yes, please:What reason would someone who's game is already over have to lie to the court, with information which would be easily verifyable? This is the point which makes no sense to me. He has no reason to lie to the court. Nothing to gain from that. On the other hand, it would be kind of easy to tell Pirate to just send the funds to another address, because, you know, "I've somehow lost control over the original address". Not saying that this is what happened, it's not even speculation. But it's for sure a possibility. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 09:12:14 PM I didn't say it was a possible lie, I said it was a lie. possibility. ??? Really? Why do I have to beg for proof of anything? Even a mere lie and no proof? Ya'll are making me frustrated.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 16, 2019, 09:28:09 PM Ya'll are making me frustrated.. Begging for 100% solid proof that he was reimbursed won't magically make proof appear. We've got someone saying he did reimburse – someone who has nothing to gain from making that up (which, btw, should not be confused with considering Pirate "trustworthy"), and someone who's either avoiding the question or has poor writing skills.So, it's not "us" making you frustrated, it's the situation and what we have, so far. And that situation demands asking questions. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Recaptcha007 on December 16, 2019, 10:18:24 PM A stupid move in a place where your word is your only value.. I don't buy it or accept it personally.. "stupid move in a place where your word is your only value" a few of Mr. Nasty valuable words: ____ NASTY is no bond! IMHO thats why it would be best to stick to this security. Amen.BUT WAIT! AN EDIT in 2018 Quote DISCLAIMER: NASTYFANS SEATS ARE NOT SECURITIES ____Scooby: RUT ROH Shaggy: Nowww wait a minute Scooob! what happened to shares in a mining company? ____ archive.org original (https://web.archive.org/web/20130305002232/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=86854.20) Quote More importantly, many members of this forum and shareholders of this company know my identity and home address. edited many moons later Quote More importantly, many members of this forum and seatowners of this organization know my identity and home address. ____Thelma: Shaggy, shares in a mining company have now become seats of a fan club Fred: Now you sit in your seat watch a man get rich and hope he keeps feeding scraps to your club Shaggy: Zoinks! Mr. Nasty: SAVE THE PLANET! GREEN ENERGY! eddie13: Saving planet make me feel good. mmmmm yaaa roflmao Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 16, 2019, 10:41:28 PM Why do I have to beg for proof of anything? Even a mere lie and no proof? Ya'll are making me frustrated.. You don't. I've posted links to every piece of evidence I've found, including evidence that has proven my own previous theories wrong. Just look at it and come to your own conclusion based on the evidence instead of begging for people to explain it to you or walk you through how to find it. It's all in this thread and you don't need to take my word, or reputation, or anyone elses into consideration. I will save you a bit of trouble though, If you're looking for proof that the chances that Og didn't steal any money is 0.00001% or greater, or if evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he only stole BTC165 doesn't matter because it was only worth ~$1700, or if you don't think evidence that shows it was likely that he stole much more but there is some doubt, or if you don't think Ogs history of profiting off giant scams without risk by collecting other people money is relevant ,then don't bother - you definitely won't find it. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 11:15:59 PM Search "crypto security law 2018" and you will remember that their was a lot of legal drama about crypto stuff and "securities" back then.. Could he have changed the wording due to evolving legalities?
Twitchy I have read the transcripts and looked through your blockchain links.. Sure you have holes and dead ends in ancient blockchain research for speculation of what could have happened, but I don't see any real proof of anything, just theories.. I'm done looking for proof here where their is none, so I will leave you to your echochamber VS TS.. I feel like I'm just being trolled on this topic.. Maybe PM me if someone finds something important and serious with proof because that's the only thing I am going to believe.. Or if the following ever changes I'll be real interested to know why.. https://i.imgur.com/wv85NwR.png Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 16, 2019, 11:23:53 PM Twitchy I have read the transcripts and looked through your blockchain links.. Fair enough. That's all I ask that anyone interested in the situation does. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 17, 2019, 12:30:05 AM We've got someone saying he did reimburse – someone who has nothing to gain from making that up (which, btw, should not be confused with considering Pirate "trustworthy"), and someone who's either avoiding the question or has poor writing skills. Well, the discovered testimony of Pirate did trigger some of the additional investigation into the matter, I don't believe it is fair to assert that Pirate would not have anything to gain from lying, in the event that he was lying. Seems to me that Twitchy is asserting that there is strong evidence that stands largely on its own to corroborate aspects of Pirate's testimony, and if there is some kind of mistake or different explanation regarding that evidence then likely only OGNasty would be able to clarify that matter. Surely beyond a reasonable doubt standards apply to criminal proceedings and clear and convincing evidence would apply to civil proceedings. Neither of those standards need to apply in the event that members were to decide to either remove OGNasty from their trust, or even to list him as untrustworthy, like nutildah has already mentioned in regards to his thinking on the matter. Each member would need to decide for themselves if they have gotten enough evidence to feel comfortable with their decision. Maybe just having a reasonable basis in light of the totality of the various alleged conduct and circumstances would be enough for some members to make such a decision? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: The-One-Above-All on December 17, 2019, 01:42:57 AM We've got someone saying he did reimburse – someone who has nothing to gain from making that up (which, btw, should not be confused with considering Pirate "trustworthy"), and someone who's either avoiding the question or has poor writing skills. Well, the discovered testimony of Pirate did trigger some of the additional investigation into the matter, I don't believe it is fair to assert that Pirate would not have anything to gain from lying, in the event that he was lying. Seems to me that Twitchy is asserting that there is strong evidence that stands largely on its own to corroborate aspects of Pirate's testimony, and if there is some kind of mistake or different explanation regarding that evidence then likely only OGNasty would be able to clarify that matter. Surely beyond a reasonable doubt standards apply to criminal proceedings and clear and convincing evidence would apply to civil proceedings. Neither of those standards need to apply in the event that members were to decide to either remove OGNasty from their trust, or even to list him as untrustworthy, like nutildah has already mentioned in regards to his thinking on the matter. Each member would need to decide for themselves if they have gotten enough evidence to feel comfortable with their decision. Maybe just having a reasonable basis in light of the totality of the various alleged conduct and circumstances would be enough for some members to make such a decision? JJG - likes to try and sound smart but actually reveals himself as pretty much a moron. Slobbering on and on but making zero headway. Yeah, since we now reach the obvious conclusion from the start THE IS NO PROOF OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING FROM OG and it is all just SPECULATION right at the specific point of time years later he regains his DT position and lots of the FRIENDS of the scum bags posting here trying to push speculation as PROOF of wrong doing to the degree that he IS REMOVED FROM DT AGAIN. haha Yeah I think we should all follow nutildahs https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5190369.0 way of thinking on this matter. I mean nutildahs "thinking" is the way to go. The self confessed EVIL scam facilitator and ANTI MIDAS. I think that is the best route , think like nutildah if you want to have to sell your soul for 300bucks after being handed 300BTC for free. haha JJG please just STFU and get back to the WO thread with your other bum chums. You can try and sound clever and interesting there. Sadly here it is painfully obvious that you are some noob trash dreg that wants to appear smart and popular to the unsavory retards that have self installed themselves into positions from which the broken systems of control allow them to dole out their double standards. Your windbag blathering on is laughable. What are you some failed law 3rd rate college student? SO WE HAVE... No proof Years later ( just as he gets on DT it all gets dragged up) Same scammers and scammer supporters that don't want him on DT doing the dragging. Pretty much sums it up. You can employ the nutildah/notildah https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5190369.msg52663441#msg52663441 train of thinking and exculde OG ( OG who kept 500btc for the forum safe for years and is PERHAPS THE ONLY DT with any balls to flag up the scammer gang here PUT THAT ON YOUR SCALES EDDIE) or Simply see this for what it is. Visit this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170789.msg52014561#msg52014561 and exclude, red trust and flag any person there you feel has clearly engaged in financially motivated wrong doing. Suchmoron now chastising her alts in public is pretty cool. The desperation is strong with this one now ScumBuster. haha Thread started by TMAN, (check his trust wall out and wonder why he may want OG removed) joined later by lauda, owl catz https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.0 Now suchmoon, jjg, twitchy, all the DT fav gang members and supporters here??. Why does nobody else seem to give a shit about this you wonder??? where are all the OG victims?? The reader should consider these things I think before taking any of the suggested actions of JJG to do a nutildah on OG's exclusions. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 17, 2019, 01:59:53 AM JJG - likes to try and sound smart but actually reveals himself as pretty much a moron. Slobbering on and on but making zero headway. Good thing that you are here to clarify the situation - especially with the obvious high levels of your smartiness (to the extent comprehensible). JJG please just STFU and get back to the WO thread with your other bum chumbs. You can try and sound clever and interesting there. Sadly here it is painfully obvious that you are some noob trash dreg that wants to appear smart and popular to the unsavory retards that have self installed themselves into positions from which the broken systems of control allow them to dole out their double standards. I am glad that someone died and put you in charge of my locations to be.. You sure grew into your forum magnanimousness quickly around these parts. Your windbag blathering on is laughable. You seem to be better skilled at windbagging than me. I might have to take some lessons from you. ;) What are you some failed law student? Could be worse, right? You have so much figured out, so I am feeling a lot less confident than I had felt.https://c8.alamy.com/comp/CTHFFT/scared-subordinate-wolf-running-off-in-the-snow-showing-submissive-CTHFFT.jpg Since TOAA is such a smartipants, above and beyond what anyone would have expected from such a dweeb-like character, I take back almost all of everything that I said in my earlier posts (in my whole forum history), but I am going to leave my posts, just in case I change my mind. :P Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: The-One-Above-All on December 17, 2019, 02:22:13 AM @JJG silly little pics and avoiding the core points. Good move. You are learning your place.
You seem smart enough to avoid tackling anything that demonstrates there is no proof of any financially motivated wrong doing by OG and lots of strong observable evidence to support this is nothing more than an attempt by a bunch of scammers to get OG removed from DT now he just got back on. Well done fool. You are learning. Wordy wordy wordy wordy garbage. Not one inch did you manage to push the OG is guilty or OG is worthy of DT exclusion or even cast any extra double over his name. Words words words and more words all paper think fragile garbage that amounted to ZERO. Like you achievements here on this forum since joining. Simply a waste of board resources. Net negative. All you are demonstrating clearly is you will support willing scam facilitators and trust abusers actions. You should be excluded. Once the core gang of scammers (who are trying to pull OG off DT) are ousted I hope the new wave of DT remember you and ensure you can do no further damage here. Actually don't worry we shall constantly remind them of your prior allegiances. You seem intent on hooking onto/up with the obviously most dirty members here. That is your own choice. Leave your post history as is. It is good to demonstrate that trying to sound smart is not the same as being smart and that making lots of posts is not the same as having some kind of influence or making some kind of difference. Also leave your begging for btc sig on to demonstrate that 2014 was too late for many to make it out of the gutter. Perhaps been taking too many of those nutildah trading tips hey?? haha Anyway the thread is simply going around in circles. The main points we have just provided above. /THREAD on to busting those that undeniably engage in financially motivated wrong doing here that are occupying positions of TRUST. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 17, 2019, 03:40:00 AM @JJG silly little pics and avoiding the core points. Good move. You are learning your place. You seem smart enough to avoid tackling anything that demonstrates there is no proof of any financially motivated wrong doing by OG and lots of strong observable evidence to support this is nothing more than an attempt by a bunch of scammers to get OG removed from DT now he just got back on. Well done fool. You are learning. Wordy wordy wordy wordy garbage. Not one inch did you manage to push the OG is guilty or OG is worthy of DT exclusion or even cast any extra double over his name. Words words words and more words all paper think fragile garbage that amounted to ZERO. Like you achievements here on this forum since joining. Simply a waste of board resources. Net negative. All you are demonstrating clearly is you will support willing scam facilitators and trust abusers actions. You should be excluded. Once the core gang of scammers (who are trying to pull OG off DT) are ousted I hope the new wave of DT remember you and ensure you can do no further damage here. Actually don't worry we shall constantly remind them of your prior allegiances. You seem intent on hooking onto/up with the obviously most dirty members here. That is your own choice. Leave your post history as is. It is good to demonstrate that trying to sound smart is not the same as being smart and that making lots of posts is not the same as having some kind of influence or making some kind of difference. Also leave your begging for btc sig on to demonstrate that 2014 was too late for many to make it out of the gutter. Perhaps been taking too many of those nutildah trading tips hey?? haha Anyway the thread is simply going around in circles. The main points we have just provided above. /THREAD on to busting those that undeniably engage in financially motivated wrong doing here that are occupying positions of TRUST. I am feeling better again. I am going to take your advice and leave my post history alone. Accordingly, cancel the terms and conditions previously asserted within my above post (the one with the disheartened wolf-doggie in it). I reinstate all of my previous forum posts to their previous "as is" status. My confidences are back; thanks for the pep speech, TOAA. You are the greatest!!!!!! ;) Regarding all your other above-cited nonsensical points, snap out of it!!!! For your level of demonstrated disjointed delirium, you are deserving of one of these: (been waiting all day for an appropriate candidate, which you have achieved. Congratulations.): https://www.mememaker.net/api/bucket?path=static/img/memes/full/2014/Aug/9/17/snap-out-of-it-beeotch.jpg :D :D :D :D :D Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 17, 2019, 06:25:41 AM Ya'll are making me frustrated.. Begging for 100% solid proof that he was reimbursed won't magically make proof appear. We've got someone saying he did reimburse – someone who has nothing to gain from making that up (which, btw, should not be confused with considering Pirate "trustworthy"), and someone who's either avoiding the question or has poor writing skills.So, it's not "us" making you frustrated, it's the situation and what we have, so far. And that situation demands asking questions. You don't see any issue with people being forced to prove their innocence on demand? You don't see how this would be abused? There is a very good reason the criminal justice system uses the standard of "innocent until proven guilty" because the process itself can easily become a tool of retribution. Are you absolutely sure he has nothing to gain? With the series of accusations against him made by Twitchy Seal it in fact does seem like he has something to gain, in the form of targeting OGNasty. Why do I have to beg for proof of anything? Even a mere lie and no proof? Ya'll are making me frustrated.. You don't. I've posted links to every piece of evidence I've found, including evidence that has proven my own previous theories wrong. Just look at it and come to your own conclusion based on the evidence instead of begging for people to explain it to you or walk you through how to find it. It's all in this thread and you don't need to take my word, or reputation, or anyone elses into consideration. I will save you a bit of trouble though, If you're looking for proof that the chances that Og didn't steal any money is 0.00001% or greater, or if evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he only stole BTC165 doesn't matter because it was only worth ~$1700, or if you don't think evidence that shows it was likely that he stole much more but there is some doubt, or if you don't think Ogs history of profiting off giant scams without risk by collecting other people money is relevant ,then don't bother - you definitely won't find it. Tell me, specifically what part of your cavernous anus did you pull that statistic from? You are telling me that you know beyond a reasonable doubt those funds went to an address owned and controlled by OGNasty? If not, that is a lot more than a 0.00001% chance, but maybe if you make up some more stats and say "beyond a reasonable doubt" a few more times people will just believe you eh? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on December 17, 2019, 06:37:48 AM You are telling me that you know beyond a reasonable doubt those funds went to an address owned and controlled by OGNasty? NO! Just saying they didn't go to the addresses all the interest/withdraw funds went during the time period. Every other payment has been documented - from mid April - August 1. Pirate ponzi goes under mid August, Og collects a couple payments from Pirate mid August. He tells his investors he got robbed instead of paying paying them the funds pirate payed him. Not sure how much simpler I can make this. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: The-One-Above-All on December 17, 2019, 07:06:25 AM @JJG silly little pics and avoiding the core points. Good move. You are learning your place. You seem smart enough to avoid tackling anything that demonstrates there is no proof of any financially motivated wrong doing by OG and lots of strong observable evidence to support this is nothing more than an attempt by a bunch of scammers to get OG removed from DT now he just got back on. Well done fool. You are learning. Wordy wordy wordy wordy garbage. Not one inch did you manage to push the OG is guilty or OG is worthy of DT exclusion or even cast any extra double over his name. Words words words and more words all paper think fragile garbage that amounted to ZERO. Like you achievements here on this forum since joining. Simply a waste of board resources. Net negative. All you are demonstrating clearly is you will support willing scam facilitators and trust abusers actions. You should be excluded. Once the core gang of scammers (who are trying to pull OG off DT) are ousted I hope the new wave of DT remember you and ensure you can do no further damage here. Actually don't worry we shall constantly remind them of your prior allegiances. You seem intent on hooking onto/up with the obviously most dirty members here. That is your own choice. Leave your post history as is. It is good to demonstrate that trying to sound smart is not the same as being smart and that making lots of posts is not the same as having some kind of influence or making some kind of difference. Also leave your begging for btc sig on to demonstrate that 2014 was too late for many to make it out of the gutter. Perhaps been taking too many of those nutildah trading tips hey?? haha Anyway the thread is simply going around in circles. The main points we have just provided above. /THREAD on to busting those that undeniably engage in financially motivated wrong doing here that are occupying positions of TRUST. I am feeling better again. I am going to take your advice and leave my post history alone. Accordingly, cancel the terms and conditions previously asserted within my above post (the one with the disheartened wolf-doggie in it). I reinstate all of my previous forum posts to their previous "as is" status. My confidences are back; thanks for the pep speech, TOAA. You are the greatest!!!!!! ;) Regarding all your other above-cited nonsensical points, snap out of it!!!! For your level of demonstrated disjointed delirium, you are deserving of one of these: (been waiting all day for an appropriate candidate, which you have achieved. Congratulations.): https://www.mememaker.net/api/bucket?path=static/img/memes/full/2014/Aug/9/17/snap-out-of-it-beeotch.jpg :D :D :D :D :D ^^^ bunches of words with no weight or value ^^^ "nonsensical points" that he can not demonstrate are incorrect because they are observable and undeniably true lol Just cries out with ad hominem attacks with no substance at all mixed in. Only a retard like heuristic bum chum of yours would give you a merit. The WO reach around bum chum gang lol Fun to see the thread chasing it's tail not realizing it is finished without further conclusive proof. Simply providing a clear example of the double standards of DT fools crying defamation when you ask them questions corroborated with clear observable instances and conclusive proof, then they come at people with only armed with " if a scammer told the truth + didn't OG pay from another address LOL" 2 BIG jumps from conclusive proof they can already start requesting/suggesting excludes and making STATEMENTS about OG's guilt. What a sham. Collusion by scammers and their pals who OG has flagged to attempt to get OG out so " THEIR OWN WARRANTED RED TRUST" that only OG dares to leave them. Whilst other DT members sit there calling them out subtly but doing nothing really like flagging them or giving them red trust they deserve... vanishes and they appear trusted members LOL OG is still not as strong as he should be in the face of undeniable scammers but is still 100x stronger than anyone else in DT1 and must remain there under all circumstances. JJG the nothing burger of achievements and word salad specialist seeking to clearly support the corrupt scumbags whilst "appearing" to be neutral. What point is there with this thread now since there is no further evidence at this time? It is clear you are 2 huge jumps from conclusive proof that is laughable to come at OG with when other DT members require no such LEAPS. All the evidence you need for financially motivated wrong doing is HERE in black and white. The reader should not be swayed by the zero content garbage JJG sharts out everywhere. He never seems to isolate any points he would like to debunk or even contest he just makes claims like "they are nonsense" with no reasoning presented at all. WHY because he knows they those points we made can NOT be contested. So to present them once again Let's not keep going around in circles. NO conclusive proof of OG's financially motivated wrong doing. ONLY speculation with 2 HUGE obvious gaps Clear and undeniable motivation for the timing of this attack by those scammers and their pals OG has flagged up and those flags have just started being relevant since he recently got into DT. Clear double standards by DT members now DEFAMING OG by their own PRIOR standards. Not worth discussing further UNTIL those 2 HUGE gaps are filled or OG comes out and makes a statement. You have lost clearly. Just give it up and keep sniffing around for more "reasons" to try to attack anyone who gets on DT that will not collude with you. Those "nonsensical points" that are not going to be debunked at this time sums up the thread so far. The investigative work is perhaps commendable but when I notice it is conducted by someone that clearly ignores simple and undeniable observable instances of his pals being scammers or willing scam facilitators and shows " no interest" then I do not commend, I say take care of the proven scammers that are easy targets first and remove them from DT. Then spend spare time going after what you believe are" possible " scammers. twitchy don't imagine playing up to the most corrupt is a long term good play here. Eventually they will be booted out and those with ZERO observable instances of financially motivated wrong doing will take charge of default trust. There is no room for the dirty and corrupt there long term. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 17, 2019, 07:43:42 AM You are telling me that you know beyond a reasonable doubt those funds went to an address owned and controlled by OGNasty? NO! Just saying they didn't go to the addresses all the interest/withdraw funds went during the time period. Every other payment has been documented - from mid April - August 1. Pirate ponzi goes under mid August, Og collects a couple payments from Pirate mid August. He tells his investors he got robbed instead of paying paying them the funds pirate payed him. Not sure how much simpler I can make this. No, you are not "just saying" they didn't go to the same address, you are saying your evidence "proves beyond a reasonable doubt OGNasty stole", which is of course an absolute fucking lie, proven by your own admission. You are claiming to have absolute proof, then walking it back when I call you out on it, pretending you are just making a suggestion. You are full of shit. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 17, 2019, 09:16:02 AM Ya'll are making me frustrated.. Begging for 100% solid proof that he was reimbursed won't magically make proof appear. We've got someone saying he did reimburse – someone who has nothing to gain from making that up (which, btw, should not be confused with considering Pirate "trustworthy"), and someone who's either avoiding the question or has poor writing skills.So, it's not "us" making you frustrated, it's the situation and what we have, so far. And that situation demands asking questions. You don't see any issue with people being forced to prove their innocence on demand? You don't see how this would be abused? There is a very good reason the criminal justice system uses the standard of "innocent until proven guilty" because the process itself can easily become a tool of retribution. Are you absolutely sure he has nothing to gain? With the series of accusations against him made by Twitchy Seal it in fact does seem like he has something to gain, in the form of targeting OGNasty. Generally, I totally agree that "guilty until proven innocent" is not an option, hence I'm careful forming an opinion, here. I don't know much about what else is going on between Twitchy and OgNasty. All I've seen is the information provided in this thread, and I absolutely think it's enough to ask questions. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: ibminer on December 17, 2019, 11:34:29 AM shown to be lying (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=211858.msg51287501#msg51287501). You write a lot like him.. Look, I don’t care that the guy makes money or is “getting rich”, he does do work and he has put effort into what he does with coin making and escrowing. With the pass-through stuff, I wasn’t a part of it, but I would still care if he has made money by lying to investors and pocketing funds. I’m still doing my own research into all of that of which I have had little time to devote… December is a busy month for me. (And no, I'm not Santa. :P) But as others have stated, I don't see why it shouldn't be looked into, and responded to. Regarding NastyFans, at this point, I’ve said what I had to say. You’ll see no more wittiness from me in this situation, the last time I was witty with Og in the room, he implied I stole a miner and not much longer after that casually brought up my dox, which he has apparently held onto since 2015. :) So I'm good.. carry on. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 17, 2019, 12:20:19 PM I think this didn't come out the way I meant it to. Maybe language barrier. I was referring to Pirate: he's got nothing to gain from lying to the court, especially with information which is easily verifyable. Generally, I totally agree that "guilty until proven innocent" is not an option, hence I'm careful forming an opinion, here. I don't know much about what else is going on between Twitchy and OgNasty. All I've seen is the information provided in this thread, and I absolutely think it's enough to ask questions. Now you are just repeating yourself. He isn't just "asking questions" is he? He is making conclusions, and claiming to have "proof beyond a reasonable doubt OGNasty stole" that Bitcoin. That is a lie and you know it no matter how many times you try to equivocate. The history of flimsy accusations against OGNasty is quite important to this matter, but being ignorant of the history of this situation doesn't stop you from equivocating over and over playing the role of "the moderate" as you perpetuate his lies now does it? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 17, 2019, 12:22:31 PM I didn't say it was a possible lie, I said it was a lie. ??? Really? Why do I have to beg for proof of anything? Even a mere lie and no proof? Ya'll are making me frustrated.. You don't have to do anything. You could stop posting right now. Nobody owes you anything. From Og: I lost my BTC in Bitcoin Savings & Loan along with everyone else. I did not keep any "refund" for myself. From Shavers' SEC testimony: Quote Q And did you return bitcoins to others during that time period? A Yes. Q Who? ... A Yes. Ognasty, O-g-n-a-s-ty; ... Q And all the other individuals you named you returned their entire principal amount? A Their entire balance. Then you have Exhibit 3 which shows transactions being made to Og, backed by entries on the blockchain. This is plenty of proof. Now please, stop asking the same questions if you don't like the answers. I don’t appreciate the insinuation. Although, I agree whomever it is does seem to echo some of the things I (and a few others) have said, in some sort of trolling way, but I don’t agree with most of it. It’s a little odd for me because… I occassionally joke around with people IRL using a Scooby Doo voice in a joking way, and I’m pretty certain I’ve never stated this anywhere.. :-\ Maybe it is you, as you are finding a way around your limit of 14 posts every 2 weeks! (completely jesting) I remember when your posts, activity and merit were all in parity for a brief while. Nobody needs to give you merits for 150 days now, it would appear. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 17, 2019, 12:45:52 PM [...] From Og: I lost my BTC in Bitcoin Savings & Loan along with everyone else. I did not keep any "refund" for myself. From Shavers' SEC testimony: Quote Q And did you return bitcoins to others during that time period? A Yes. Q Who? ... A Yes. Ognasty, O-g-n-a-s-ty; ... Q And all the other individuals you named you returned their entire principal amount? A Their entire balance. Then you have Exhibit 3 which shows transactions being made to Og, backed by entries on the blockchain. This is plenty of proof. [...] So, still the same question for OgNasty: [...] it would be quite simple: [Deflection] C'mon... how hard can it be...?[...]This is pretty much very simple yes-know question. @OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? and provide the blockchain proof to back his words up... sounds simple enough to me... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 17, 2019, 01:11:10 PM I think this didn't come out the way I meant it to. Maybe language barrier. I was referring to Pirate: he's got nothing to gain from lying to the court, especially with information which is easily verifyable. Generally, I totally agree that "guilty until proven innocent" is not an option, hence I'm careful forming an opinion, here. I don't know much about what else is going on between Twitchy and OgNasty. All I've seen is the information provided in this thread, and I absolutely think it's enough to ask questions. Now you are just repeating yourself. He isn't just "asking questions" is he? He is making conclusions, and claiming to have "proof beyond a reasonable doubt OGNasty stole" that Bitcoin. That is a lie and you know it no matter how many times you try to equivocate. The history of flimsy accusations against OGNasty is quite important to this matter, but being ignorant of the history of this situation doesn't stop you from equivocating over and over playing the role of "the moderate" as you perpetuate his lies now does it? So, one more time, I'm not here to argue with you about Twitchy, I'm here to ask questions I consider important and helpful in getting this mess resolved. Did that arrive? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 17, 2019, 02:42:10 PM Now why are you always bringing Twitchy in? For the sake of getting this resolved, I really don't care much about whether he is asking questions or drawing conclusions. I am asking questions and others are, too. In order to get some clarity about this situation, it would be really helpful if we can put this obsession aside and focus on the actual questions being asked. But that doesn't seem to be your intention, otherwise you probably wouldn't misunderstand what I'm writing on purpose, all the time. So, one more time, I'm not here to argue with you about Twitchy, I'm here to ask questions I consider important and helpful in getting this mess resolved. Did that arrive? Maybe because he is the one claiming he has "proof beyond a reasonable doubt OGNasty stole" those Bitcoins? Exactly how am I supposed to address the accusations without addressing the accuser? By Twitchy Seal's own admission he has no proof who those coins went to, therefore by definition he is lying about having "proof beyond a reasonable doubt OGNasty" stole. I don't really care if you think it is important that the one making the accusations is flat out fabricating conclusions, it is in fact important. We have been over the questions, over, and over, and over, and over again. Exactly what is being accomplished other than trying to convince people of his guilt by repetition? It has been established with Twitchy Seal's own admission he doesn't have any idea where those funds went. I consider the fact that you are ignoring this fact quite relevant. I understand perfectly. You only want to look at one side of this issue and ignore the complete fabrications being claimed by the accusers while you pretend to play the role of undecided moderate. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 17, 2019, 03:54:00 PM I understand perfectly. You only want to look at one side of this issue and ignore the complete fabrications being claimed by the accusers while you pretend to play the role of undecided moderate. If this is what you "understand" from what I write, then I suggest we better stop wasting each other's time. You are in fact creating a strawman you can fight against, and nothing I say will convince you of what I'm actually saying.Over and out. :) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 17, 2019, 06:56:21 PM I think this didn't come out the way I meant it to. Maybe language barrier. I was referring to Pirate: he's got nothing to gain from lying to the court, especially with information which is easily verifyable. Generally, I totally agree that "guilty until proven innocent" is not an option, hence I'm careful forming an opinion, here. I don't know much about what else is going on between Twitchy and OgNasty. All I've seen is the information provided in this thread, and I absolutely think it's enough to ask questions. Now you are just repeating yourself. He isn't just "asking questions" is he? He is making conclusions, and claiming to have "proof beyond a reasonable doubt OGNasty stole" that Bitcoin. That is a lie and you know it no matter how many times you try to equivocate. The history of flimsy accusations against OGNasty is quite important to this matter, but being ignorant of the history of this situation doesn't stop you from equivocating over and over playing the role of "the moderate" as you perpetuate his lies now does it? Anyone who compiles information (evidence) should be making some kind of conclusions or recommendation (which seems to be what Twitchy had been attempting to do), but if the evidence is compiled well, any reader of the information that has been compiled would not have to agree with the conclusions or recommendations of the information compiler. In this case, it should be easy enough for any forum member to be able to separate Twitchy's compilation efforts from his conclusions/recommendations, no? For example, if all of the evidence shows that OGNasty was paid back 84 BTC more than he paid out to pass through investors, then a reasonable inference could be reached that he pocketed such 84BTC that he was paid. If there is no other evidence regarding what happened to that 84BTC, then what are we supposed to conclude happened to that 84BTC? We cannot conclude that he paid that 84BTC to pass through investors unless we get further evidence of such additional payment(s), which seems to be absent in this case, so wouldn't the most reasonable inference be that OGNasty somehow took those BTC? Sometimes accountings are needed from members who put themselves into positions of trust and holding the BTC of other members, especially if they are continuing in that line of business, and if they choose not to give a reasonable and perhaps credible accounting, then the most fair conclusion might be to go with the negative inferences that seems to establish a negative conclusion. There are common practice legal principles that deal with non-cooperating parties in these kinds of circumstances, and if all reasonable efforts have been taken to attempt to get persons with evidence to cooperate and they choose not to, then sometimes the most reasonable next step would be to draw a negative inference from their ongoing non-cooperation in providing evidence. Several posters here have already asserted that OGNasty has not sufficiently cooperated or provided a reasonable and credible explanation regarding the current evidence. Others have argued that OGNasty does not need to cooperate, which does seem to be the weaker position, especially for someone who had been serving as a fiduciary holder of BTC (and still regularly engages in such fiduciary holding of BTC practices through the forum, from my understanding). Maybe it is true that 99% of the time, OGNasty pays back all of the funds that he holds on behalf of other members, but is that an acceptable practice if it were shown to be true? Anyone who does not get paid back in a particular case does not care if OGNasty pays back 99% of the time, s/he only would care that s/he did not get paid back in this particular instance, if that ends up being the most reasonably inferred facts of this particular case. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 17, 2019, 09:21:13 PM Anyone who compiles information (evidence) should be making some kind of conclusions or recommendation (which seems to be what Twitchy had been attempting to do), but if the evidence is compiled well, any reader of the information that has been compiled would not have to agree with the conclusions or recommendations of the information compiler. In this case, it should be easy enough for any forum member to be able to separate Twitchy's compilation efforts from his conclusions/recommendations, no? For example, if all of the evidence shows that OGNasty was paid back 84 BTC more than he paid out to pass through investors, then a reasonable inference could be reached that he pocketed such 84BTC that he was paid. If there is no other evidence regarding what happened to that 84BTC, then what are we supposed to conclude happened to that 84BTC? We cannot conclude that he paid that 84BTC to pass through investors unless we get further evidence of such additional payment(s), which seems to be absent in this case, so wouldn't the most reasonable inference be that OGNasty somehow took those BTC? Sometimes accountings are needed from members who put themselves into positions of trust and holding the BTC of other members, especially if they are continuing in that line of business, and if they choose not to give a reasonable and perhaps credible accounting, then the most fair conclusion might be to go with the negative inferences that seems to establish a negative conclusion. There are common practice legal principles that deal with non-cooperating parties in these kinds of circumstances, and if all reasonable efforts have been taken to attempt to get persons with evidence to cooperate and they choose not to, then sometimes the most reasonable next step would be to draw a negative inference from their ongoing non-cooperation in providing evidence. Several posters here have already asserted that OGNasty has not sufficiently cooperated or provided a reasonable and credible explanation regarding the current evidence. Others have argued that OGNasty does not need to cooperate, which does seem to be the weaker position, especially for someone who had been serving as a fiduciary holder of BTC (and still regularly engages in such fiduciary holding of BTC practices through the forum, from my understanding). Maybe it is true that 99% of the time, OGNasty pays back all of the funds that he holds on behalf of other members, but is that an acceptable practice if it were shown to be true? Anyone who does not get paid back in a particular case does not care if OGNasty pays back 99% of the time, s/he only would care that s/he did not get paid back in this particular instance, if that ends up being the most reasonably inferred facts of this particular case. All the evidence does not show that. All the evidence shows is transfers were made, not to who, for what, or why. That is absolutely speculation. I took the liberty of putting the part where you yet again try to reverse the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused. Interesting how we can't conclude he is innocent until proven otherwise, but for you to speculate and make conclusions based on speculation about what happened to those funds, well that is perfectly acceptable to conclude isn't it? You keep crying up and down that you aren't twisting around the burden of proof, but it you do it over and over in every reply. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: marlboroza on December 17, 2019, 09:46:16 PM ~ So, still the same question for OgNasty: [...] it would be quite simple: [Deflection] C'mon... how hard can it be...?[...]This is pretty much very simple yes-know question. @OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? and provide the blockchain proof to back his words up... sounds simple enough to me... Transparency. It's not for everyone I guess. :-\ Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 17, 2019, 10:01:48 PM Anyone who compiles information (evidence) should be making some kind of conclusions or recommendation (which seems to be what Twitchy had been attempting to do), but if the evidence is compiled well, any reader of the information that has been compiled would not have to agree with the conclusions or recommendations of the information compiler. In this case, it should be easy enough for any forum member to be able to separate Twitchy's compilation efforts from his conclusions/recommendations, no? For example, if all of the evidence shows that OGNasty was paid back 84 BTC more than he paid out to pass through investors, then a reasonable inference could be reached that he pocketed such 84BTC that he was paid. If there is no other evidence regarding what happened to that 84BTC, then what are we supposed to conclude happened to that 84BTC? We cannot conclude that he paid that 84BTC to pass through investors unless we get further evidence of such additional payment(s), which seems to be absent in this case, so wouldn't the most reasonable inference be that OGNasty somehow took those BTC? Sometimes accountings are needed from members who put themselves into positions of trust and holding the BTC of other members, especially if they are continuing in that line of business, and if they choose not to give a reasonable and perhaps credible accounting, then the most fair conclusion might be to go with the negative inferences that seems to establish a negative conclusion. There are common practice legal principles that deal with non-cooperating parties in these kinds of circumstances, and if all reasonable efforts have been taken to attempt to get persons with evidence to cooperate and they choose not to, then sometimes the most reasonable next step would be to draw a negative inference from their ongoing non-cooperation in providing evidence. Several posters here have already asserted that OGNasty has not sufficiently cooperated or provided a reasonable and credible explanation regarding the current evidence. Others have argued that OGNasty does not need to cooperate, which does seem to be the weaker position, especially for someone who had been serving as a fiduciary holder of BTC (and still regularly engages in such fiduciary holding of BTC practices through the forum, from my understanding). Maybe it is true that 99% of the time, OGNasty pays back all of the funds that he holds on behalf of other members, but is that an acceptable practice if it were shown to be true? Anyone who does not get paid back in a particular case does not care if OGNasty pays back 99% of the time, s/he only would care that s/he did not get paid back in this particular instance, if that ends up being the most reasonably inferred facts of this particular case. All the evidence does not show that. All the evidence shows is transfers were made, not to who, for what, or why. That is absolutely speculation. I took the liberty of putting the part where you yet again try to reverse the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused. Well, perhaps I am saying that the burden of proof shifts, and perhaps that is a fair way of saying that if we conclude that the evidence establishes that OGNasty received BTC that should have been the property of others, and it appears that he did not distribute those to the others, then he has some kind of burden to describe or show what happened to those BTC. Of course, you are saying that we do not know the who, what, or why, and that seems to be a bit of an overstatement regarding what the reasonable inferences seem to establish. Yeah, you can argue that they are not established enough, but maybe you are being unreasonable? Levels of reasonableness frequently vary, and that can be why jurors differ in their opinions, even after instructions regarding how to consider the evidence and which parties have which burdens to show what. We are not exactly a jury here, but similar principles apply, even if we might be having some disagreement about what are the standards or even the thresholds for the burdens. Interesting how we can't conclude he is innocent until proven otherwise, Yes. We seem to agree on that. but for you to speculate and make conclusions based on speculation about what happened to those funds, It is not called speculation, it is called reasonable inferences. Sure, we can disagree what reasonable inferences establish in this case or any other case. well that is perfectly acceptable to conclude isn't it? Sometimes you conclude based on what you got. Sometimes you have direct evidence and other times you have indirect evidence. With indirect evidence, you can still determine if you believe that it is enough to establish reasonable inferences of x or y, even if it might not be as solid of an evidentiary ground as direct evidence. Don't try to act as if the only kind of relevant evidence is direct evidence. That is ridiculous. We have thousands of years of history in which indirect evidence and reasonable inferences is used (even justly so) when direct evidence cannot be obtained. People do not admit, frequently, when they did something wrong, but they still end up getting convicted (either criminally or civilly) on a regular basis, and justly so based on various kinds of indirect evidence and reasonable inferences. There are a variety of evidentiary standards including beyond a reasonable doubt (as Twitchy keeps mentioning), but this is not necessarily a criminal matter. There is also preponderance of the evidence and clear and convincing, and depending on the kind of case will determine the evidentiary standards (sometimes established by common law and other times by statute). I think frequently fiduciaries are going to be held to higher standards than regular people because they have a duty to those that they are entrusted with the funds. So frequently we hear about a reasonable person standard, but in the case of a fiduciary, the standard might be tailored to what would a reasonable fiduciary do. OGNasty likely knows enough about what he is doing in order to be held to the standards of reasonable fiduciary practices. You keep crying up and down that you aren't twisting around the burden of proof, but it you do it over and over in every reply. I am just providing an opinion on these various facts and arguments as they are presented. I doubt that I am twisting anything because I don't have any beef against OGNasty or any alliance with Twitchy or any of the other supposed Nasty haters. Like I mentioned several times already, this Nasty-hater theme, just seems to be quite a bit of a distraction rather than really attempting to figure out what the newly established facts are/mean and/or inferences that can reasonably drawn from them. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 17, 2019, 11:35:17 PM Anyone who compiles information (evidence) should be making some kind of conclusions or recommendation (which seems to be what Twitchy had been attempting to do), but if the evidence is compiled well, any reader of the information that has been compiled would not have to agree with the conclusions or recommendations of the information compiler. In this case, it should be easy enough for any forum member to be able to separate Twitchy's compilation efforts from his conclusions/recommendations, no? For example, if all of the evidence shows that OGNasty was paid back 84 BTC more than he paid out to pass through investors, then a reasonable inference could be reached that he pocketed such 84BTC that he was paid. If there is no other evidence regarding what happened to that 84BTC, then what are we supposed to conclude happened to that 84BTC? We cannot conclude that he paid that 84BTC to pass through investors unless we get further evidence of such additional payment(s), which seems to be absent in this case, so wouldn't the most reasonable inference be that OGNasty somehow took those BTC? Sometimes accountings are needed from members who put themselves into positions of trust and holding the BTC of other members, especially if they are continuing in that line of business, and if they choose not to give a reasonable and perhaps credible accounting, then the most fair conclusion might be to go with the negative inferences that seems to establish a negative conclusion. There are common practice legal principles that deal with non-cooperating parties in these kinds of circumstances, and if all reasonable efforts have been taken to attempt to get persons with evidence to cooperate and they choose not to, then sometimes the most reasonable next step would be to draw a negative inference from their ongoing non-cooperation in providing evidence. Several posters here have already asserted that OGNasty has not sufficiently cooperated or provided a reasonable and credible explanation regarding the current evidence. Others have argued that OGNasty does not need to cooperate, which does seem to be the weaker position, especially for someone who had been serving as a fiduciary holder of BTC (and still regularly engages in such fiduciary holding of BTC practices through the forum, from my understanding). Maybe it is true that 99% of the time, OGNasty pays back all of the funds that he holds on behalf of other members, but is that an acceptable practice if it were shown to be true? Anyone who does not get paid back in a particular case does not care if OGNasty pays back 99% of the time, s/he only would care that s/he did not get paid back in this particular instance, if that ends up being the most reasonably inferred facts of this particular case. All the evidence does not show that. All the evidence shows is transfers were made, not to who, for what, or why. That is absolutely speculation. I took the liberty of putting the part where you yet again try to reverse the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused. Well, perhaps I am saying that the burden of proof shifts, and perhaps that is a fair way of saying that if we conclude that the evidence establishes that OGNasty received BTC that should have been the property of others, and it appears that he did not distribute those to the others, then he has some kind of burden to describe or show what happened to those BTC. Of course, you are saying that we do not know the who, what, or why, and that seems to be a bit of an overstatement regarding what the reasonable inferences seem to establish. Yeah, you can argue that they are not established enough, but maybe you are being unreasonable? Levels of reasonableness frequently vary, and that can be why jurors differ in their opinions, even after instructions regarding how to consider the evidence and which parties have which burdens to show what. We are not exactly a jury here, but similar principles apply, even if we might be having some disagreement about what are the standards or even the thresholds for the burdens. Interesting how we can't conclude he is innocent until proven otherwise, Yes. We seem to agree on that. but for you to speculate and make conclusions based on speculation about what happened to those funds, It is not called speculation, it is called reasonable inferences. Sure, we can disagree what reasonable inferences establish in this case or any other case. well that is perfectly acceptable to conclude isn't it? Sometimes you conclude based on what you got. Sometimes you have direct evidence and other times you have indirect evidence. With indirect evidence, you can still determine if you believe that it is enough to establish reasonable inferences of x or y, even if it might not be as solid of an evidentiary ground as direct evidence. Don't try to act as if the only kind of relevant evidence is direct evidence. That is ridiculous. We have thousands of years of history in which indirect evidence and reasonable inferences is used (even justly so) when direct evidence cannot be obtained. People do not admit, frequently, when they did something wrong, but they still end up getting convicted (either criminally or civilly) on a regular basis, and justly so based on various kinds of indirect evidence and reasonable inferences. There are a variety of evidentiary standards including beyond a reasonable doubt (as Twitchy keeps mentioning), but this is not necessarily a criminal matter. There is also preponderance of the evidence and clear and convincing, and depending on the kind of case will determine the evidentiary standards (sometimes established by common law and other times by statute). I think frequently fiduciaries are going to be held to higher standards than regular people because they have a duty to those that they are entrusted with the funds. So frequently we hear about a reasonable person standard, but in the case of a fiduciary, the standard might be tailored to what would a reasonable fiduciary do. OGNasty likely knows enough about what he is doing in order to be held to the standards of reasonable fiduciary practices. You keep crying up and down that you aren't twisting around the burden of proof, but it you do it over and over in every reply. I am just providing an opinion on these various facts and arguments as they are presented. I doubt that I am twisting anything because I don't have any beef against OGNasty or any alliance with Twitchy or any of the other supposed Nasty haters. Like I mentioned several times already, this Nasty-hater theme, just seems to be quite a bit of a distraction rather than really attempting to figure out what the newly established facts are/mean and/or inferences that can reasonably drawn from them. Yet again you simply flip the burden of proof on its head and just pretend you haven't, but if you have its ok because "burden of proof shifts" according to you. It is not an overstatement at all. You nor anyone else have as any fucking clue whatsoever where those funds went. This is 100% a fact. Your speculation about what happened to it is not evidence, it is speculation. You are right, I am being totally unreasonable expecting you to be able to prove your accusations of theft without relying completely upon speculation and using that to demand the burden of proof now be upon OGNasty. You have fun with your twisted semantic gymnastics, just be careful you don't sprain your brain bending over backwards to try to make all your rambling gibberish seem like it makes logical sense. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 18, 2019, 12:15:34 AM [ edited out] Yet again you simply flip the burden of proof on its head and just pretend you haven't, but if you have its ok because "burden of proof shifts" according to you. Seems that you are purposefully attempting to skew the kinds of accepted practices in this burden of proof kind of area. It does not matter at all what I think. I am merely attempting to describe what I understand to be the standards and practices, and if I don't understand or if I am not explaining well, then I have no problem being corrected. Your level of wanting to misunderstand or to divert into nonsense about what I think leads us into gobble-dee-gook landia, which seems to be your preferred stomping grounds. hahahahaha Anyhow, it seems that I already stated what I mean by shifting burdens, and there is really no need for me to attempt to reiterate what I have already said. It is not an overstatement at all. You nor anyone else have as any fucking clue whatsoever where those funds went. This is 100% a fact. Your speculation about what happened to it is not evidence, it is speculation. There has been some compiling of facts that lend reasonable inferences regarding that the funds likely went into the pockets of OGNasty. Is that the only explanation? no. Is it 100%? no. But it seems to be the most probable based on the evidence so far presented. Is it enough evidence to convict in a criminal proceeding? Perhaps.... Is it enough evidence to get a prosecutor interested? Perhaps. Is there a statute of limitation problem or an amount in controversy (like de minimus issue)? Could be. Does there need to be enough evidence in order to have a criminal conviction? no way José. Just like nutildah said, members can decide to remove trust from OGNasty or to refuse to trust him or to distrust him based on evidence already presented. Or they could decide that the evidence does not rise to a level that inspires them to take any actions in regards to whether or not to trust OGNasty. You are right, I am being totally unreasonable expecting you to be able to prove your accusations of theft without relying completely upon speculation and using that to demand the burden of proof now be upon OGNasty. You are being unreasonable by trying to personify every statement that is made. Who gives any shits what I say in terms of proving anything? I am not trying to prove anything. I am just describing various aspects of applicable standards to consider, and you seem to want to argue about basic foundational ideas. You have fun with your twisted semantic gymnastics, just be careful you don't sprain your brain bending over backwards to try to make all your rambling gibberish seem like it makes logical sense. Sure, sometimes there are better ways that I might be able to say the thing that I am trying to say. I am just a mere mortal with my communication limitations. On the other hand, it does not seem that you are doing much if any better than me in terms of exuding logical clarity, especially since you seem to get so easily distracted into irrelevancies regarding conspiracy theories or even trying to confuse what the facts and logic establish.... directly or indirectly, including lacking or refusing to consider various standards of proof and how burdens might shift under certain circumstances. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 18, 2019, 12:35:36 AM JayJuanGee, you have done an excellent job of mathematically proving OGNasty is a thief and subsequently a liar. There is no way he could be innocent.
However, all I see in this thread is posts from Techy (contents ignored) trying his best to deflect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587) and muddy the waters. No future reader can gain anything useful from this thread. If you could make up a concise, condensed, easy to understand post with the proof OG stole hundreds of thousands of dollars (in today's value) I will put it in the impeachment thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5202604.0) where people don't have to wade through all this BS. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 18, 2019, 01:14:02 AM JayJuanGee, you have done an excellent job of mathematically proving OGNasty is a thief and subsequently a liar. There is no way he could be innocent. However, all I see in this thread is posts from Techy (contents ignored) trying his best to deflect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587) and muddy the waters. No future reader can gain anything useful from this thread. If you could make up a concise, condensed, easy to understand post with the proof OG stole hundreds of thousands of dollars (in today's value) I will put it in the impeachment thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5202604.0) where people don't have to wade through all this BS. I think that Twitchy and some others have largely compiled the transactional information and timeline matters that might be useful in terms of boiling matters down to OGNasty getting paid by Pirate after he had made all of the pass through payments to investors, which suggests that he did not pay any pass through investors (or at least not the full amounts) after getting paid from Pirate. Twitchy summarized the matter with references in this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53333137#msg53333137). There might be supplementary and supportive information that Twitchy could point out. I have not done anything to really help in the compiling or analyzing of any of the evidence except getting caught up in arguing with TecShare and TOAA regarding their various distraction points. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 18, 2019, 03:28:18 AM I have not done anything to really help in the compiling or analyzing of any of the evidence except getting caught up in arguing with TecShare and TOAA regarding their various distraction points. Only idiots argue against proof. There are no reputable members defending OG here. Also, it seems I stopped lying once OG was caught stealing. Funny how OG's deflection (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587)/distraction worked... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Lauda on December 18, 2019, 05:35:18 AM However, all I see in this thread is posts from Techy (contents ignored) trying his best to deflect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587) and muddy the waters. Exactly. Guilty or not, there is a lot of distracting stuff in this thread. It would be best to ignore him and a couple of others and try sorting this out.Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: philipma1957 on December 18, 2019, 06:22:13 AM You're killing me man. Just read the thread please It is getting getting exceedingly difficult to read all of this thread.. Passing my give a fuck levels.. tl;dr please 144BTC @ <$10? Get to it if you want me to change my mind to "OG is a scammer".. There's evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he stole BTC144. There's evidence that he stole ~BTC1,000 , but not enough to classify as beyond a reasonable doubt. When pirate sent him the funds he stole BTC1 = ~$11.80 If you think one of the most trusted users on the site deserves a pass because the bitcoin he stole was only worth $1,700 at the time , and you want to dismiss the other evidence that is was possibly much more, then you should give him a pass. so 144 coins. did not he repeatedly state he invested coins . he did. lots of posts show he said he put coins into this pirate club. so now you need to prove those 144 coins belonged to whomever. i rounded a bit aug 6. 1 btc was. 10.75. x 66.8. = 725 aug 13. 1 btc was 11.86. x 39.2. = 453 aug 17. 1 btc was 13.31. x 38.0. = 505 I get 1683 in usd. so did he simply keep that as it was what he invested? we don’t know was some of that paid to a third party investor we don’t know did it belong to multiple third parties and og kept it wrongly we dont know. when og had 3 million plus in funds did he keep them safely we do know answer is yes. my biggest concern about og was he may have made some coin with digibyte in a gray manner. not this. to op when you can answer the questions we dont know let us know. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 18, 2019, 09:39:02 AM so 144 coins. did not he repeatedly state he invested coins . he did. lots of posts show he said he put coins into this pirate club. so now you need to prove those 144 coins belonged to whomever. i rounded a bit aug 6. 1 btc was. 10.75. x 66.8. = 725 aug 13. 1 btc was 11.86. x 39.2. = 453 aug 17. 1 btc was 13.31. x 38.0. = 505 I get 1683 in usd. so did he simply keep that as it was what he invested? we don’t know was some of that paid to a third party investor we don’t know did it belong to multiple third parties and og kept it wrongly we dont know. when og had 3 million plus in funds did he keep them safely we do know answer is yes. my biggest concern about og was he may have made some coin with digibyte in a gray manner. not this. to op when you can answer the questions we dont know let us know. Exactly. All the same mob members who have been attacking OGNasty forever now are here repeating over and over again how they have proof, but hey have nothing of the sort. The only 100% absolute fact here is no one knows where those funds went, to who, or why. This point is not even being debated, just being glossed over in favor of repeating "there is proof" ad nauseam without ever presenting it. This is 100% about targeting OGNasty. None of these people here accusing him give a flying fuck about anyone that was supposedly victimized or this community in general. This community is simply a tool for them to punish their adversaries as they have demonstrated repeatedly in the past. EDIT: And of course this same mob of people is making sure I pay a price for speaking up here in the form of more trust system abuse. The referenced event happened some time ago, but the trust rating was only left now. I wonder why that is! Apparently putting people on my trust list Lauda doesn't approve of makes me dishonest. Lauda 2019-12-18 Reference (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5182530.msg52385837#msg52385837) "Dishonest. Wouldn't trust." Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 18, 2019, 10:43:35 AM Exactly. All the same mob members who have been attacking OGNasty forever now are here Wrong. Didn't give a shit about OgNasty until this thread was revived. repeating over and over again how they have proof, but hey have nothing of the sort. Wrong. Your failure to digest proof submitted here many times over is no fault but your own. The only 100% absolute fact here is no one knows where those funds went, to who, or why. Wrong. We know funds went from pirate to Og even though Og said he was never reimbursed by pirate. This point is not even being debated, just being glossed over in favor of repeating "there is proof" ad nauseam without ever presenting it. Wrong. Its been an ongoing debate for over a week now. This is 100% about targeting OGNasty. None of these people here accusing him give a flying fuck about anyone that was supposedly victimized or this community in general. We've gone over this already, several times. I for one don't feel sorry for victims who knowingly invest in Ponzi schemes. Regardless, it was 7 years ago, so good luck finding someone willing to claim they were a victim now. This issue has never been about this point despite your repeated attempts to make it so. This community is simply a tool for them to punish their adversaries as they have demonstrated repeatedly in the past. Nobody is making you stay here. And of course this same mob of people is making sure I pay a price for speaking up here in the form of more trust system abuse. The referenced event happened some time ago, but the trust rating was only left now. I wonder why that is! Because you are currently attempting to introduce confusion into a relatively clear matter. Og said he lost funds to pirate. Pirate submitted testimony to the SEC saying he was refunded in whole. Documents submitted by pirate correspond to blockchain evidence which prove beyond a reasonable doubt at least some funds were sent to Og. In this instance, given the circumstances, it makes absolute sense to trust pirate's word over Og's, given that pirate was submitting testimony to government officials and Og is not. I don't always agree with Lauda's ratings but in this case I absolutely do. You don't have to be here. If you hate this community so much, then leave. You show up with a bad attitude every single day. Nobody has ever asked for your advice on anything. Nobody needs you. Just leave if you hate it so much. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 18, 2019, 10:56:54 AM Exactly. All the same mob members who have been attacking OGNasty forever now are here Wrong. Didn't give a shit about OgNasty until this thread was revived. repeating over and over again how they have proof, but hey have nothing of the sort. Wrong. Your failure to digest proof submitted here many times over is no fault but your own. The only 100% absolute fact here is no one knows where those funds went, to who, or why. Wrong. We know funds went from pirate to Og even though Og said he was never reimbursed by pirate. This point is not even being debated, just being glossed over in favor of repeating "there is proof" ad nauseam without ever presenting it. Wrong. Its been an ongoing debate for over a week now. This is 100% about targeting OGNasty. None of these people here accusing him give a flying fuck about anyone that was supposedly victimized or this community in general. We've gone over this already, several times. I for one don't feel sorry for victims who knowingly invest in Ponzi schemes. Regardless, it was 7 years ago, so good luck finding someone willing to claim they were a victim now. This issue has never been about this point despite your repeated attempts to make it so. This community is simply a tool for them to punish their adversaries as they have demonstrated repeatedly in the past. Nobody is making you stay here. And of course this same mob of people is making sure I pay a price for speaking up here in the form of more trust system abuse. The referenced event happened some time ago, but the trust rating was only left now. I wonder why that is! Because you are currently attempting to introduce confusion into a relatively clear matter. Og said he lost funds to pirate. Pirate submitted testimony to the SEC saying he was refunded in whole. Documents submitted by pirate correspond to blockchain evidence which prove beyond a reasonable doubt at least some funds were sent to Og. In this instance, given the circumstances, it makes absolute sense to trust pirate's word over Og's, given that pirate was submitting testimony to government officials and Og is not. I don't always agree with Lauda's ratings but in this case I absolutely do. You don't have to be here. If you hate this community so much, then leave. You show up with a bad attitude every single day. Nobody has ever asked for your advice on anything. Nobody needs you. Just leave if you hate it so much. You have no proof where the funds went after OG received them, this is a fact. For all you know it could have been a refund, and you have no evidence to demonstrate otherwise, only speculation of where it went. This is not proof, this is speculation. Lauda's rating, according to what was left, has nothing to do with this, but of course based on the timing of the rating, it is obviously retribution for posting here and dismantling their efforts trying to target OGnasty with accusation after accusation based on speculation. This is just more proof these systems are merely tools you and your mob buddies use to punish people with ideas you don't like, and protecting people from fraud is merely an afterthought if it is considered at all. I don't think I will go anywhere. I think I will keep doing what I am doing and continually draw attention to the malignant behavior of you and your pals. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Lauda on December 18, 2019, 11:01:40 AM You have no proof where the funds went after OG received them, this is a fact. For all you know it could have been a refund, and you have no evidence to demonstrate otherwise, only speculation of where it went. This is not proof, this is speculation. Lauda's rating, according to what was left, has nothing to do with this, but of course based on the timing of the rating, it is obviously retribution for posting here and dismantling their efforts trying to target OGnasty with accusation after accusation based on speculation. This is just more proof these systems are merely tools you and your mob buddies use to punish people with ideas you don't like, and protecting people from fraud is merely an afterthought if it is considered at all. I don't think I will go anywhere. I think I will keep doing what I am doing and continually draw attention to the malignant behavior of you and your pals. I have no idea who is right or wrong here, neither do I care. Reading up made it evident that you are dishonest, a hypocrite and are intentionally trying to distract away from the users that are actually willing to objectively look into this (and apparently attack those as well). I couldn't reference this thread as it might be misinterpreted as you being involved in the original ponzi-case, which you are not. This was one of the clearest ratings[1] that I have ever handed out to anyone here. With that, I also will not address whatever you reply/distract to this, or to your attacks against the "accusers" or whatever it is that you're doing. I don't always agree with Lauda's ratings but in this case I absolutely do. Thanks. Sometimes I wonder whether some people are doing stuff like this purely to test where the limits are of different individuals here.[1] Even the write-up is concise, and clean. Totally unlike me! https://i.imgur.com/e0vHz2x.gif Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 18, 2019, 11:41:12 AM You have no proof where the funds went after OG received them, this is a fact. It really doesn't matter as it doesn't change the fact that Og lied about not being reimbursed by pirate. For all you know it could have been a refund, and you have no evidence to demonstrate otherwise, only speculation of where it went. Doesn't matter; see above. Lauda's rating, according to what was left, has nothing to do with this You're the one who brought it up. This is just more proof these systems are merely tools you and your mob buddies use to punish people with ideas you don't like, and protecting people from fraud is merely an afterthought if it is considered at all. K, so leave. I don't think I will go anywhere. I think I will keep doing what I am doing and continually draw attention to the malignant behavior of you and your pals. This is straight out of the TOAA playbook: trolling and lying in the name of helping others while actually helping nobody. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 18, 2019, 12:21:52 PM You have no proof where the funds went after OG received them, this is a fact. It really doesn't matter as it doesn't change the fact that Og lied about not being reimbursed by pirate. For all you know it could have been a refund, and you have no evidence to demonstrate otherwise, only speculation of where it went. Doesn't matter; see above. Lauda's rating, according to what was left, has nothing to do with this You're the one who brought it up. This is just more proof these systems are merely tools you and your mob buddies use to punish people with ideas you don't like, and protecting people from fraud is merely an afterthought if it is considered at all. K, so leave. I don't think I will go anywhere. I think I will keep doing what I am doing and continually draw attention to the malignant behavior of you and your pals. This is straight out of the TOAA playbook: trolling and lying in the name of helping others while actually helping nobody. Yet is does matter, because a supposed lie is not equivalent to theft. The "lie" itself isn't even proven and based on the word of a convicted felon. You don't have any idea where that money went, and any conclusions toward that end are purely speculation. Yes, I did bring it up because the timing of the rating makes it clear it was left in retribution for pointing out the continual speculative accusations and attacks on OGNasty. Why would I leave when clearly that is the goal of these attempts to punish me and intimidate me into silence? No, I think I will get louder. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 18, 2019, 12:29:44 PM Yet is does matter, because a supposed lie is not equivalent to theft. The "lie" itself isn't even proven and based on the word of a convicted felon. You don't have any idea where that money went, and any conclusions toward that end are purely speculation. The lie has been proven. Again, your failure to digest the proof is nobody's fault but your own. From all available evidence it would appear that Og only paid investors from his reserve fund. However, this isn't a court room and nobody is attempting to convict anybody of anything, so its doesn't matter. Yes, I did bring it up because the timing of the rating makes it clear it was left in retribution for pointing out the continual speculative accusations and attacks on OGNasty. Why would I leave when clearly that is the goal of these attempts to punish me and intimidate me into silence? Wrong. You're being "punished" (its not all about you btw) because of your habitually deceptive behavior. No, I think I will get louder. Yeah because that tactic has paid dividends for you in the past. ::) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 18, 2019, 01:17:48 PM Yet is does matter, because a supposed lie is not equivalent to theft. The "lie" itself isn't even proven and based on the word of a convicted felon. You don't have any idea where that money went, and any conclusions toward that end are purely speculation. The lie has been proven. Again, your failure to digest the proof is nobody's fault but your own. From all available evidence it would appear that Og only paid investors from his reserve fund. However, this isn't a court room and nobody is attempting to convict anybody of anything, so its doesn't matter. Yes, I did bring it up because the timing of the rating makes it clear it was left in retribution for pointing out the continual speculative accusations and attacks on OGNasty. Why would I leave when clearly that is the goal of these attempts to punish me and intimidate me into silence? Wrong. You're being "punished" (its not all about you btw) because of your habitually deceptive behavior. No, I think I will get louder. Yeah because that tactic has paid dividends for you in the past. ::) People keep throwing words around like "proof". Repeating the word proof over and over again doesn't make it proof. What you have is some ambiguous statements and some transactions to addresses owned by recipients you can not identify. No, this isn't a court room, because if it was this discussion would have been over with once it was established no one can identify the owners of the final unexplained transaction. That's all it is, is an unexplained transaction, but you and the rest of The Hardly Boys created this speculative novel around the events like you always do any time you can use circumstances to cast aspersions upon anyone who resists your attempts at targeting and intimidation. Yes, I am sure the trust rating from Lauda regarding a months old event was just left today totally coincidentally, and not because I am making it harder for their buddies to continue their long term attempt at the character assassination of OGnasty and anyone else who doesn't bow to their abuse of systems designed to prevent fraud. Actually it has paid dividends. If my efforts weren't effective you and The Hardly Boys wouldn't need to target me. Good luck following your raging clues. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 18, 2019, 02:24:31 PM This is 100% about targeting OGNasty. None of these people here accusing him give a flying fuck about anyone that was supposedly victimized or this community in general. OG stole BCH - fact. OG lied about being reimbursed by pirate - fact. Who do you want us to target? Lauda? ::) I'm prob the only person here that cares about the community. Techy does not. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 18, 2019, 02:33:51 PM People keep throwing words around like "proof". Repeating the word proof over and over again doesn't make it proof. What you have is some ambiguous statements and some transactions to addresses owned by recipients you can not identify. 1. We can identify pirate's addresses. 2. We can identify Og's addresses. 3. There is no 3. There doesn't need to be. No, this isn't a court room, because if it was this discussion would have been over with once it was established no one can identify the owners of the final unexplained transaction. No, its not a court room because its an internet forum. That's all it is, is an unexplained transaction, Its a repayment. Its from pirate's address used to pay Og, as it was a dozen times previous. Yes, I am sure the trust rating from Lauda regarding a months old event was just left today totally coincidentally, In the past two weeks you've further solidified your pattern of being habitually deceptive so I don't fault Lauda at all. and not because I am making it harder for their buddies to continue their long term attempt at the character assassination of OGnasty and anyone else who doesn't bow to their abuse of systems designed to prevent fraud. You're really not doing jack shit. You haven't stopped anything. Actually it has paid dividends. If my efforts weren't effective you and The Hardly Boys wouldn't need to target me. Good luck following your raging clues. 1. I'm not targeting you. As far as the history of this thread is concerned, you're the one who has been doing the targeting. 2. You being "targeted" is not dependent on your "efforts" being effective. You were targeted for being dishonest. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 18, 2019, 03:12:33 PM A reply by OgNasty would be appreciated:
[...] From Og: I lost my BTC in Bitcoin Savings & Loan along with everyone else. I did not keep any "refund" for myself. From Shavers' SEC testimony: Quote Q And did you return bitcoins to others during that time period? A Yes. Q Who? ... A Yes. Ognasty, O-g-n-a-s-ty; ... Q And all the other individuals you named you returned their entire principal amount? A Their entire balance. Then you have Exhibit 3 which shows transactions being made to Og, backed by entries on the blockchain. This is plenty of proof. [...] So, still the same question for OgNasty: [...] it would be quite simple: [Deflection] C'mon... how hard can it be...?[...]This is pretty much very simple yes-know question. @OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? and provide the blockchain proof to back his words up... sounds simple enough to me... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 18, 2019, 05:30:45 PM People keep throwing words around like "proof". Yeah of course "words" are not proof, but words have meanings in the event that you happen to attempt to read, organize to understand beyond the mere "words on a page". Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 18, 2019, 09:30:47 PM attempt to read, organize to understand I have.. I have been following this topic of conversation from it's origination, since before it was even moved to this particular thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5202391.msg53227599#msg53227599), and many previous semi-related topics.. I believe you will find that this topic originated there in the link (OG stealing from passthrough)..But you know, I would not claim myself to be a foremost expert on blockchain investigation, so it is possible my understanding is faulty, no matter my personal efforts, though my efforts have been great, including the effort to make this post.. However.. philipma1957 is more trustworthy than me or any other user commenting here, according to me personally, and I also trust him to have among the highest level of blockchain expertise to decipher this evidence.. I also don't see anyone here daring to accuse him of anything character or motive related, therefore I find it quite reasonable for me to accept his findings as highly accurate, logical, and neutral.. still it seems that og did not get the other 1400. A) no one has come to the plate and said they were not refunded. B) no one has shown he got 2500 coins paid back. C) pirate may have misstated he fully paid Ognasty during statements quoted in the thread. i looked and looked and look and i dont see this. i see a partial payment which ognasty paid in under an hour to investors . if you can show me more then the three payments you showed which add to under 1200 btc meaning ognasty was shorted around 1300 btc. if you find the payments for that 1300,which i cant. you would have something. What evidence we have here seems to show, with quite great magnitude of certainty IMO, that OG's pirate passthrough was not fully paid out by pirate.. This shows me that their is very little reason to believe that OG lied about being fully "reimbursed", or I would rather say "paid out" by Pirate.. so 144 coins. did not he repeatedly state he invested coins . he did. lots of posts show he said he put coins into this pirate club. so now you need to prove those 144 coins belonged to whomever. ....... so did he simply keep that as it was what he invested? 1. Their is no proof.. Only a dead end.. But many here seem to believe that proof is not required, contrary to my and philipma1957's opinion, which is what creates this great divide in the community, between those who require proof to come to a solid conclusion, and those who do not.. Our only choice is to either agree to disagree on the necessity of proof, or argue on forever.. I think I am in the "agree to disagree" camp, seeing as this will most likely just be left unsolved.. I don't see how this could be any more respectable on my part than that.. 2. These coins being OG's share of the partial reimbursement and him rightfully keeping them is just as logical of a hypothesis as him "stealing" them, and IMO more likely due to OG's most excelent track record of handling great amounts of funds over many many years, if he even kept them at all.. OGNasty's word > pirate's word 100% IMO, and the fact that statements were made to the police or any government agents only makes them less credible, also IMO.. OG stole BCH - fact. What basis do you have for this claim? Link please?The thread I linked at the top of this post clearly proves that he did not steal BHC, unless you are thinking of some other unrelated incident I am yet unaware of.. But I welcome any evidence you may be able to share.. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 18, 2019, 11:15:41 PM 1. Their is no proof.. Only a dead end.. But many here seem to believe that proof is not required, contrary to my and philipma1957's opinion, which is what creates this great divide in the community, between those who require proof to come to a solid conclusion, and those who do not.. This is at the core of the issue, as those who do not, realize their ability to freely impugn the reputation of anyone who crosses them is threatened by such a standard. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: philipma1957 on December 18, 2019, 11:38:45 PM 1. Their is no proof.. Only a dead end.. But many here seem to believe that proof is not required, contrary to my and philipma1957's opinion, which is what creates this great divide in the community, between those who require proof to come to a solid conclusion, and those who do not.. This is at the core of the issue, as those who do not, realize their ability to freely impugn the reputation of anyone who crosses them is threatened by such a standard. other possibilities og paid the 144 in coins with cash. to someone that was owed the btc. and that person does not want to be revealed. this would mean og is taking a beating in this thread simply because he is preserving some one’s identity. I want to point out. at first to this thread began with 2500 missing coins which became 1000 missing coins which now really looks to be 144 coins worth just under 1700 usd. i do sales i do passthroughs i do trades. you could never understand my business by looking at the blockchain. and my biggest account shows 350 coins passing through. og has an address with 17500 coins coming in and out in the last 8 years. i doubt very much that is the only way he does business. look if you can show me someone that says og robbed the 144 coins directly from me i would be surprised. ie john smith say og should have given me the 144 coins and did not. as for obvious ponzi in 2012 there was no such thing since pirate could have had 100000 or more cheap coins from 09 and 10. so by creating the bank to boost price of his stack of coins it was possible it was not a ponzi. these days this could happen with a coin like doge. i have two trezor accounts one with 230000 doge and one with 140000 doge. if doge went up to three dollars i would be a millionare. maybe i would do a doge pirate club like the first pirate did. the difference would be i would pay out in the hopes it would drive the price higher. back in 2012 many may have thought pirate was running his club to publicize bitcoin and drive the price up. there were very little coins to mine or use in 2012. so to say it was an obvious ponzi is pretty much wrong. to say it may have been a ponzi is more accurate. do i think og gets a pass on this yes until some one shows me he was not paid the 144 in coins and was due the 144 in coins og gets a pass. i did read a thread saying og pledged the forums 500 in btc and got the equivalent of 7 btc worth of digabyte for doing this. that seems more interesting than this thread. so at the op why not see what you can find out about that? i will look for that thread. I was referring to this. First: I've been wondering about this for a while now, and although I don't want to point fingers, I do like transparency so here it goes: What happened to the "dividend" from airdrops based on Bitcoin holdings? http://transition.obyte.org/ shows that treasurer address 1Eog8UqRFLufC71rBLt2nYgfUDskgxAyVF joined the Byteball airdrop with 500.00051 BTC (0.0771% share): Code: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- https://explorer.obyte.org/#OOUIJTHWY5PANA7P2YUJX67VVN2QZYIX shows the GBYTE (now called OBYTE) received on address OOUIJTHWY5PANA7P2YUJX67VVN2QZYIX: on 09.07.2017 13:58:44, approximately 36.174 GBYTE was received. Out of this, 0.0625 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.msg20026523#msg20026523)*500 = 31.25 GBYTE was thanks to forum funds. At the time, this was worth approximately (https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/obyte/) 7 BTC. There were later airdrops too, and Stellar Lumens (https://www.stellar.org/blog/bitcoin-claim-lumens-2/) could have produced a similar amount based on Bitcoin holdings, but I don't think that data is publicly available. quoted for reference. So og was allowed to earn 7btc as a bonus using forums funds. but not risking them. and theymos said : "I don't see it as a violation of the treasury agreement " Maybe he felt it was to pay og for the doxxing vod did to og. Maybe theymos felt og deserved some $$ for vod's doxxing. Which is why these threads need to come to an end. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 19, 2019, 10:48:51 AM 1000+ BTC?? How much are we talking about here. This actually can get on the news if it is true ??? At this point your socks just confirm what everyone is already thinking, this accusation is horse shit. As Phillipma1957 already explained, we have no idea what happened to the funds or why. This is why we need to end this atmosphere of guilty until proven innocent and digging into everyone's business just because some bored assholes have fantasies, suspicions, or vendettas or else privacy will be a thing of the past here. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 20, 2019, 10:08:09 AM You mean the rating I left you for doxing and reporting OGNasty to the IRS that even Theymos agreed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5142064.msg51007199#msg51007199) deserved a red tag? Theymos also said this: Quote Red-trusting Vod over this is an appropriate usage of red-trust, since his actions here are highly trust-relevant. But I tend to think that since he edited his post and seems to genuinely regret at least the public doxxing part, it'd be best to forgive. So, you are looking to theymos for approval here, but not doing what he considers the best course of action. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 20, 2019, 11:09:33 AM I am curious how long the moderators will continue ignoring these off topic posts.
Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Recaptcha007 on December 20, 2019, 06:18:22 PM as for obvious ponzi in 2012 there was no such thing since WHAA? Dat only possible if you have no common sense!!pirate could have had 100000 or more cheap coins from 09 and 10. so by creating the bank to boost price of his stack of coins it was possible it was not a ponzi. back in 2012 many may have thought pirate was running his club to publicize bitcoin and drive the price up. there were very little coins to mine or use in 2012. so to say it was an obvious ponzi is pretty much wrong. to say it may have been a ponzi is more accurate. do i think og gets a pass on this yes How many passes you give? Well, common sense has to play a role as well. Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. Pirate came out and said not to trust him several times as well as hinting that he was engaging in illegal activity. Common sense must play a role! that seems more interesting than this thread. Yeah, and:I was referring to this. Shaggy: Like WoW!First: I've been wondering about this for a while now, and although I don't want to point fingers, I do like transparency so here it goes: What happened to the "dividend" from airdrops based on Bitcoin holdings? http://transition.obyte.org/ shows that treasurer address 1Eog8UqRFLufC71rBLt2nYgfUDskgxAyVF joined the Byteball airdrop with 500.00051 BTC (0.0771% share): Scooby: RUT ROH, RAGGY! How many passes Mr. Nasty allowed 5? 10? I make coin and be good escrow,, now I get freedom to swindle? Nice place here Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Lauda on December 20, 2019, 07:04:09 PM Nice place here Rules for thee, but not for me. Glad that forum rules are equally applied by the leftist moderators. Oh wait. ::) Rules aside, it's like that for many things here apparently.Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 20, 2019, 08:04:36 PM This is why we need to end this atmosphere of guilty until proven innocent and digging into everyone's business just because some bored assholes have fantasies, suspicions, or vendettas or else privacy will be a thing of the past here. Show us how it's done and remove your trust abuse. Then you won't be a hypocrite and people may listen to you. (BIG may) You mean the rating I left you for doxing and reporting OGNasty to the IRS that even Theymos agreed deserved a red tag? Unlike the accusations against OGNasty, the fact that you acted in this unacceptable way is not under debate. Remind me again what this has to do with the topic? Oh right nothing, not that you or the mods give a shit about that. No, I don't mean that. Stop deflecting (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587) pervert. Practice what you preach, end your attitude of OG being guilty of nothing with no proof, just because you are bored, he's your pal, and you have a vendetta against me. Take the first step, remove some of your abusive feedback trust, and start a wave. :) It make even convince OG to take the first step in turning honest. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 20, 2019, 10:44:30 PM This is why we need to end this atmosphere of guilty until proven innocent and digging into everyone's business just because some bored assholes have fantasies, suspicions, or vendettas or else privacy will be a thing of the past here. Show us how it's done and remove your trust abuse. Then you won't be a hypocrite and people may listen to you. (BIG may) You mean the rating I left you for doxing and reporting OGNasty to the IRS that even Theymos agreed deserved a red tag? Unlike the accusations against OGNasty, the fact that you acted in this unacceptable way is not under debate. Remind me again what this has to do with the topic? Oh right nothing, not that you or the mods give a shit about that. No, I don't mean that. Stop deflecting (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587) pervert. Practice what you preach, end your attitude of OG being guilty of nothing with no proof, just because you are bored, he's your pal, and you have a vendetta against me. Take the first step, remove some of your abusive feedback trust, and start a wave. :) It make even convince OG to take the first step in turning honest. What do you mean then? I have left about an average of 2 negative ratings a year since I have been on this forum, can you even count how many you have left? So I am a pervert now too? That is a new one. I don't even particularly like OGNasty and have had minimal contact with him over the years. I have a vendetta against YOU? That would be funny if it weren't totally batshit insane considering your years of stalking and abusing the trust system against me. I put the part where you inverted the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused in bold. I don't have to prove anything. I am by far not the only one who thinks the evidence in this case is ambiguous at best. Now if you are done being an unstable wingbat and projecting everything you do upon me, perhaps you can actually post on topic. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 20, 2019, 10:58:47 PM So I am a pervert now too? That is a new one. I don't even particularly like OGNasty and have had minimal contact with him over the years. Yes you are, but that's YOUR issue with OG. He is the one that pointed out deflection is a common tactic of pediophiles. You'd be very smart to stop deflecting like that self described sick fuck. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 21, 2019, 12:44:34 AM So I am a pervert now too? That is a new one. I don't even particularly like OGNasty and have had minimal contact with him over the years. Yes you are, but that's YOUR issue with OG. He is the one that pointed out deflection is a common tactic of pediophiles. You'd be very smart to stop deflecting like that self described sick fuck. I could try to make sense of this insane rambling, but then I would probably require heavy medication like you. Any chance you are going to be on topic any time soon? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 21, 2019, 12:49:17 AM I could try to make sense of this insane rambling, but then I would probably require heavy medication like you. All you can do is deflect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587), you sick fuck. :/ Maybe shut up for a bit and let OG explain why he didn't return funds that were returned to him. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 21, 2019, 01:30:21 AM I could try to make sense of this insane rambling, but then I would probably require heavy medication like you. All you can do is deflect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587), you sick fuck. :/ Maybe shut up for a bit and let OG explain why he didn't return funds that were returned to him. That's not how burden of proof works. The accusers have produced completely ambiguous evidence that is proof of nothing. The burden of proof is on the accusers to prove their claims, not OGNasty to detail his private activities to satiate your obsessive vendetta (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5142064.msg51007199#msg51007199). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 21, 2019, 02:46:27 AM I could try to make sense of this insane rambling, but then I would probably require heavy medication like you. All you can do is deflect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587), you sick fuck. :/ Maybe shut up for a bit and let OG explain why he didn't return funds that were returned to him. That's not how burden of proof works. The accusers have produced completely ambiguous evidence that is proof of nothing. The burden of proof is on the accusers to prove their claims, not OGNasty to detail his private activities to satiate your obsessive vendetta (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5142064.msg51007189#msg51007199). My agenda? Why are you so obsessed with deflecting (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587) everything, pervert? Now shut up for a bit and let's get back on topic. Let OG explain why he didn't return funds that were returned to him. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 21, 2019, 09:22:56 AM I could try to make sense of this insane rambling, but then I would probably require heavy medication like you. All you can do is deflect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587), you sick fuck. :/ Maybe shut up for a bit and let OG explain why he didn't return funds that were returned to him. That's not how burden of proof works. The accusers have produced completely ambiguous evidence that is proof of nothing. The burden of proof is on the accusers to prove their claims, not OGNasty to detail his private activities to satiate your obsessive vendetta (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5142064.msg51007189#msg51007199). My agenda? Why are you so obsessed with deflecting (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587) everything, pervert? Now shut up for a bit and let's get back on topic. Let OG explain why he didn't return funds that were returned to him. Are you hearing voices now too Vod? I never said anything about your "agenda", but thanks for the demonstration of your abilities of projection. How about instead of declaring people guilty until proven innocent, you prove your accusation. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 21, 2019, 01:23:25 PM Aaaaand... back on topic:
A reply by OgNasty would be appreciated: [...] From Og: I lost my BTC in Bitcoin Savings & Loan along with everyone else. I did not keep any "refund" for myself. From Shavers' SEC testimony: Quote Q And did you return bitcoins to others during that time period? A Yes. Q Who? ... A Yes. Ognasty, O-g-n-a-s-ty; ... Q And all the other individuals you named you returned their entire principal amount? A Their entire balance. Then you have Exhibit 3 which shows transactions being made to Og, backed by entries on the blockchain. This is plenty of proof. [...] So, still the same question for OgNasty: [...] it would be quite simple: [Deflection] C'mon... how hard can it be...?[...]This is pretty much very simple yes-know question. @OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? and provide the blockchain proof to back his words up... sounds simple enough to me... Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 21, 2019, 01:27:54 PM Aaaaand... back on topic: A reply by OgNasty would be appreciated: [...] From Og: I lost my BTC in Bitcoin Savings & Loan along with everyone else. I did not keep any "refund" for myself. From Shavers' SEC testimony: Quote Q And did you return bitcoins to others during that time period? A Yes. Q Who? ... A Yes. Ognasty, O-g-n-a-s-ty; ... Q And all the other individuals you named you returned their entire principal amount? A Their entire balance. Then you have Exhibit 3 which shows transactions being made to Og, backed by entries on the blockchain. This is plenty of proof. [...] So, still the same question for OgNasty: [...] it would be quite simple: [Deflection] C'mon... how hard can it be...?[...]This is pretty much very simple yes-know question. @OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did? and provide the blockchain proof to back his words up... sounds simple enough to me... I am seeing a repeating theme of the inversion of the burden of proof and people demanding OGNasty prove his innocence rather than people proving his guilt. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 21, 2019, 01:31:58 PM I am seeing a repeating theme of the inversion of the burden of proof and people demanding OGNasty prove his innocence rather than people proving his guilt. Nobody is demanding anything. We just want to know what happened. Pirate said he repaid Og in full. Og said he didn't. Og is the only person who can answer if pirate's sworn testimony to the SEC is true or not. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: allyouracid on December 21, 2019, 01:34:49 PM You'd be very smart to stop deflecting like that self described sick fuck. I could try to make sense of this insane rambling, but then I would probably require heavy medication like you. All you can do is deflect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587), you sick fuck. :/ Why are you so obsessed with deflecting (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg53297587#msg53297587) everything, pervert? So, this is your discussion culture? This is how you solve problems? How old are you? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: sbogovac on December 21, 2019, 01:38:18 PM [...] I am seeing a repeating theme of the inversion of the burden of proof and people demanding OGNasty prove his innocence rather than people proving his guilt. dude: 1. I dind't ask you anything; but, 2. there is proof (both sworn testimony as well as blockchain proof), so now it's only the polite thing to ask for a reply... (from OgNasty). Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 21, 2019, 03:05:50 PM I am seeing a repeating theme of the inversion of the burden of proof and people demanding OGNasty prove his innocence rather than people proving his guilt. Nobody is demanding anything. We just want to know what happened. Pirate said he repaid Og in full. Og said he didn't. Og is the only person who can answer if pirate's sworn testimony to the SEC is true or not. Yeah you're right, people are just making a string of accusations attempting to impugn his character over and over again until he is forced to prove his innocence rather than accusers proving his guilt = no one demanding anything. [...] I am seeing a repeating theme of the inversion of the burden of proof and people demanding OGNasty prove his innocence rather than people proving his guilt. dude: 1. I dind't ask you anything; but, 2. there is proof (both sworn testimony as well as blockchain proof), so now it's only the polite thing to ask for a reply... (from OgNasty). No, there isn't as Philipma1957 and others already pointed out: He received BTC1000 on August 2. (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/8656eb07b3c11d105bccdc0a1000777fa5f56219fd41ed75d2b4aa8ccb4b5e6e), BTC68.8 on August 6 (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/f591acd2d7d5233b3089d4b577ef2414eee104c38a6ff4c7776591de47f71e4f), and BTC38 on August 16 (https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/c265f7ec360c2f01afe7a75368160e8792bd0d5cf75305a521d29edb1b07ffb4) from pirateat. the 1000 traces to being paid to investors . I did not check the 68.8 or the 38 still it seems that og did not get the other 1400. he may not be guilty of anything in the pirate case. A) no one has come to the plate and said they were not refunded. B) no one has shown he got 2500 coins paid back. C) pirate may have misstated he fully paid Ognasty during statements quoted in the thread. 1. Their is no proof.. Only a dead end.. But many here seem to believe that proof is not required, contrary to my and philipma1957's opinion, which is what creates this great divide in the community, between those who require proof to come to a solid conclusion, and those who do not.. This is at the core of the issue, as those who do not, realize their ability to freely impugn the reputation of anyone who crosses them is threatened by such a standard. other possibilities og paid the 144 in coins with cash. to someone that was owed the btc. and that person does not want to be revealed. this would mean og is taking a beating in this thread simply because he is preserving some one’s identity. I want to point out. at first to this thread began with 2500 missing coins which became 1000 missing coins which now really looks to be 144 coins worth just under 1700 usd. i do sales i do passthroughs i do trades. you could never understand my business by looking at the blockchain. and my biggest account shows 350 coins passing through. og has an address with 17500 coins coming in and out in the last 8 years. i doubt very much that is the only way he does business. look if you can show me someone that says og robbed the 144 coins directly from me i would be surprised. ie john smith say og should have given me the 144 coins and did not. as for obvious ponzi in 2012 there was no such thing since pirate could have had 100000 or more cheap coins from 09 and 10. so by creating the bank to boost price of his stack of coins it was possible it was not a ponzi. these days this could happen with a coin like doge. i have two trezor accounts one with 230000 doge and one with 140000 doge. if doge went up to three dollars i would be a millionare. maybe i would do a doge pirate club like the first pirate did. the difference would be i would pay out in the hopes it would drive the price higher. back in 2012 many may have thought pirate was running his club to publicize bitcoin and drive the price up. there were very little coins to mine or use in 2012. so to say it was an obvious ponzi is pretty much wrong. to say it may have been a ponzi is more accurate. do i think og gets a pass on this yes until some one shows me he was not paid the 144 in coins and was due the 144 in coins og gets a pass. As you can see what is being called "proof" is nothing of the sort, and a string of people intent on harassing OGNasty are in fact demeaning he prove his innocence rather than the accusers prove his guilt. All the accusers have is speculation, and the ambiguous statement of a convicted felon. There are no limits to how much people can speculate on and impugn the character of others, therefore it is totally irrational to expect people to have to defend themselves as if they are guilty until they prove themselves innocent as you are in fact demanding. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 21, 2019, 03:15:12 PM I am seeing a repeating theme of the inversion of the burden of proof and people demanding OGNasty prove his innocence rather than people proving his guilt. Nobody is demanding anything. We just want to know what happened. Pirate said he repaid Og in full. Og said he didn't. Og is the only person who can answer if pirate's sworn testimony to the SEC is true or not. Yeah you're right, people are just making a string of accusations attempting to impugn his character over and over again until he is forced to prove his innocence rather than accusers proving his guilt = no one demanding anything. You are continuing to twist this into things its not about. TwitchySeal hasn't posted in days. How is asking a question the same thing as "making a string of accusations"? This is why some people consider you to be untrustworthy and/or a troll. I know you don't care what they think, but I'm just letting you know: this behavior is why they think what they do. Quote All the accusers have is speculation, and the ambiguous statement of a convicted felon. There was nothing ambiguous about pirate saying he had repaid Og in full. He even spelled out O-G-N-A-S-T-Y for the record. Again, you are just lying. For what reason, I have no idea. If you didn't keep churning out bullshit I wouldn't feel the need to keep correcting you, BTW. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 21, 2019, 03:22:04 PM I am seeing a repeating theme of the inversion of the burden of proof and people demanding OGNasty prove his innocence rather than people proving his guilt. Nobody is demanding anything except. We Pirate said he repaid Og in full. Og said he didn't. Preponderance of evidence (if not beyond a reasonable doubt) blockchain evidence has been compiled and explained that supports Pirate's version of events rather than OG's. Og is the only person who might be able to provide evidence of explanation that can answer if pirate's sworn testimony to the SEC and the supporting blockchain evidence FTFY :D :D :D or maybe I totally butchered the simplified version of it?. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 21, 2019, 03:31:46 PM I am seeing a repeating theme of the inversion of the burden of proof and people demanding OGNasty prove his innocence rather than people proving his guilt. Nobody is demanding anything. We just want to know what happened. Pirate said he repaid Og in full. Og said he didn't. Og is the only person who can answer if pirate's sworn testimony to the SEC is true or not. Yeah you're right, people are just making a string of accusations attempting to impugn his character over and over again until he is forced to prove his innocence rather than accusers proving his guilt = no one demanding anything. You are continuing to twist this into things its not about. TwitchySeal hasn't posted in days. How is asking a question the same thing as "making a string of accusations"? This is why some people consider you to be untrustworthy and/or a troll. I know you don't care what they think, but I'm just letting you know: this behavior is why they think what they do. Quote All the accusers have is speculation, and the ambiguous statement of a convicted felon. There was nothing ambiguous about pirate saying he had repaid Og in full. He even spelled out O-G-N-A-S-T-Y for the record. Again, you are just lying. For what reason, I have no idea. If you didn't keep churning out bullshit I wouldn't feel the need to keep correcting you, BTW. Is that what this thread is? People just asking questions? To me it looks like yet one more attempt in a long string of attempts to attack OGNasty by casting aspersions upon him and demanding he prove his innocence, and dance like a puppet for his accusers, but sure you call it "just asking questions" if you like. There was plenty ambiguous about Pirate's statement, even if there wasn't, he is still a convicted felon. I don't know about you, but convicted felons don't rank too high in my trustworthiness or reliability ranking. Also there is the little detail that no one has any proof where refunded funds went, and for all you know all of them were returned, but lets ignore that crucial gap in the evidence. Tell me, where in my quote there did I say anything about Twitchy Seal? I know it is hard to not let your projections bleed into your statements, but please do try. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 21, 2019, 03:46:52 PM Is that what this thread is? People just asking questions? Stop lumping us all into one group. Its dishonest, and stupid. That's why I brought up Twitchy: he was the one who said he could "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" that Og stole from his investors. While I tend to agree with him, I'm not willing to invest the time trying to "prove it beyond a reasonable doubt." I never said that I could. What I did say about Og was this: I certainly don't wish him punitive harm from something that happened 6-7 years ago. So just stop with your bullshit Stazi Gang narrative for one second. What I want to know is why pirate would say he reimbursed Og in full while Og said he didn't. And you can't answer that question, so why you keep responding is beyond me. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TECSHARE on December 21, 2019, 03:50:34 PM Is that what this thread is? People just asking questions? Stop lumping us all into one group. Its dishonest, and stupid. That's why I brought up Twitchy: he was the one who said he could "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" that Og stole from his investors. While I tend to agree with him, I'm not willing to invest the time trying to "prove it beyond a reasonable doubt." I never said that I could. What I did say about Og was this: I certainly don't wish him punitive harm from something that happened 6-7 years ago. So just stop with your bullshit Stazi Gang narrative for one second. What I want to know is why pirate would say he reimbursed Og in full while Og said he didn't. And you can't answer that question, so why you keep responding is beyond me. Thanks for another demonstration of the inversion of the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 21, 2019, 04:02:49 PM Thanks for another demonstration of the inversion of the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused. I accused Og of lying based on sworn testimony that is on public record and blockchain evidence that confirms/proves funds were returned to Og from pirate. I added him to my distrust list -- whoopty f'n doo. He's not being tried or convicted of anything because, as I've already explained to you yet you still don't seem to grasp, this isn't a court room. He could perhaps present another side to the story that I hadn't considered, but he doesn't feel its worth doing so, and frankly I don't blame him. Am I missing anything? You feel the need to do some more barking still? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 21, 2019, 05:36:39 PM blockchain evidence that confirms/proves funds were returned to Og from pirate. But it doesn't? i looked and looked and look and i dont see this. i see a partial payment which ognasty paid in under an hour to investors . if you can show me more then the three payments you showed which add to under 1200 btc meaning ognasty was shorted around 1300 btc. if you find the payments for that 1300,which i cant. you would have something. If anything, the blockchain evidence shows that he was not fully paid out by pirate.. How do you figure, nutildah, that the blockchain evidence even remotely shows OG's passthrough was fully paid out? The blockchain evidence corroborates that the passthrough was shorted in the end.. Does it not? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: suchmoon on December 21, 2019, 05:51:18 PM The blockchain evidence corroborates that the passthrough was shorted in the end.. Does it not? I think the allegation is that some of what he got back from pirate (even if it was not the full amount) he didn't "pass through" to the investors. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: eddie13 on December 21, 2019, 06:10:31 PM The blockchain evidence corroborates that the passthrough was shorted in the end.. Does it not? I think the allegation is that some of what he got back from pirate (even if it was not the full amount) he didn't "pass through" to the investors. That is a separate allegation.. I was responding to this allegation.. I accused Og of lying based on sworn testimony that is on public record and blockchain evidence that confirms/proves funds were returned to Og from pirate. Pirate said he repaid Og in full. Og said he didn't. Og is the only person who can answer if pirate's sworn testimony to the SEC is true or not. What I want to know is why pirate would say he reimbursed Og in full while Og said he didn't. blockchain evidence that confirms/proves funds were returned to Og from pirate. If anything, the blockchain evidence shows that he was not fully paid out by pirate.. The only "evidence" the passthrough was paid in full, is pirate's testimony to the police, in the transcript.. ognasty was shorted around 1300 btc. if you find the payments for that 1300,which i cant. you would have something. As for the mysterious 144BTC dead end.. Separate allegation... (144BTC is all that's left unaccounted for after it was shown that the passthough was stiffed around 1300BTC, not fully repaid by pirate) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: nutildah on December 22, 2019, 02:17:31 AM The blockchain evidence corroborates that the passthrough was shorted in the end.. Does it not? I think the allegation is that some of what he got back from pirate (even if it was not the full amount) he didn't "pass through" to the investors. That is a separate allegation.. I was responding to this allegation.. I accused Og of lying based on sworn testimony that is on public record and blockchain evidence that confirms/proves funds were returned to Og from pirate. Pirate said he repaid Og in full. Og said he didn't. Og is the only person who can answer if pirate's sworn testimony to the SEC is true or not. What I want to know is why pirate would say he reimbursed Og in full while Og said he didn't. blockchain evidence that confirms/proves funds were returned to Og from pirate. If anything, the blockchain evidence shows that he was not fully paid out by pirate.. The only "evidence" the passthrough was paid in full, is pirate's testimony to the police, in the transcript.. ognasty was shorted around 1300 btc. if you find the payments for that 1300,which i cant. you would have something. As for the mysterious 144BTC dead end.. Separate allegation... (144BTC is all that's left unaccounted for after it was shown that the passthough was stiffed around 1300BTC, not fully repaid by pirate) You're making things more complicated than they need to be. 1. The testimony was delivered under sworn oath to the SEC, not the police. 2. I can't prove that all funds were returned to Og by pirate by looking at the blockchain -- I never said that I could. But certainly some of them were, which contradicts Og's statement. I just want to know what would compel pirate to lie under oath about returning all of the funds to Og, if he indeed lied. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: JayJuanGee on December 22, 2019, 04:35:59 AM I just want to know what would compel pirate to lie under oath about returning all of the funds to Og, if he indeed lied. To be fair, Pirate could be motivated to lie or at least to exaggerate in various ways that might be a bit unclear to us, rather than "compelled." No one has cross examined him on those points regarding OGNasty, because it seems that OGNasty was not part of that particular investigation, as far as I had seen. Certainly, I am not asserting that Pirate did in fact lie, but to be somewhat fair to OGNasty, he was not a target of the investigation (at least as far as we know), but I suppose if there were enough facts that demonstrated OGNasty or someone else to be possibly culpable for a crime or even a civil infraction, then the SEC or some other body, like the Department of Justice, might have been motivated to bring charges against him and/or some other persons that were connected to the matter.. but sometimes they just are attempting to get the BIGGER fish (perhaps Pirate in this case) rather than the messy circumstances of the possible smaller fish. Surely, government agents have discretion in these kinds of matters, so their not bringing charges does not mean that OGNasty might not have been guilty of some kind of infraction (civil or criminal) if they were to chose to pursue an investigation in that direction. So, yeah, there would remain a certain amount of due process issue if anyone were to attempt to ascribe too much truth to evidence that is presented in a proceeding in which someone else (seemingly pirate in that case) was the subject of the investigation rather than OGNasty or anyone else that Pirate had named as additional Pass through agents, so in that regard, OGNasty might not have been requested to give evidence. It is also possible that OGNasty was requested to give evidence, and sometimes evidence is not immediately available publicly - or OGNasty might have not voluntarily cooperated with any request to give evidence, and the Agency would then be faced with a decision regarding whether to subpoena him.. also a discretionary matter regarding whether to subpoena a witness and/or documents, and he would not have to be a subject of the investigation in order to receive a subpoena or even a voluntary request for evidence, if they thought that testimony from him would be helpful in any aspect of their investigation that they had been conducting. I am NOT changing my mind in any regard here because I do think that what has already been shown so far in regards to the corroboration of the testimony of Pirate does seem to demonstrate that OGNasty may have pocketed a certain amount of funds that were returned to him after the date that he had refunded all of the pass through investors, and surely, the amount that OGNasty pocketed could be much higher than what Twitchy has argued to be the minimum amount that he can show to rise to the level of beyond a reasonable doubt (including considering OGNasty's ongoing choice not to answer or explain), and for that reason and maybe for other reasons, OGNasty has concluded that it would be better for him to remain silent rather than speak - since maybe his feels that he is NOT really be able to unambiguously clarify the matter, and if he speaks, then more questions might be raised rather than answered, perhaps? Of course this is not a court of law or even any kind of administrative proceeding, either, but we still can be guided by those kinds of standards in attempting to decide how to look at the evidence and what has been presented as arguments, too, including the burden of proof matters, and including assertions from Tecshare (in his opinion) that whatever evidence and arguments that have been presented so far do not rise to a level of sufficiently proving OGNasty of engaging in the alleged wrongdoing. I personally, think Tecshare is being a bit selective in his own conclusions, but anyhow, if this were a criminal court or even a civil court, OGNasty could chose to exercise his 5th amendment right not to testify.. but sometimes adverse inferences can also be drawn from that choice not to testify based on gaps in the evidence that tends to show. Of course, if there is no criminal matter pending, then exercising 5th amendment rights seems more suspect, but anyhow, anyone can assert that the burden of proof is not with them but instead with the party(ies) bringing the allegations. If OGNasty continues NOT to cooperate, then we would have to conclude reasonable inferences based on the evidence that we have - which seems to lean in favor of OGNasty NOT sending the funds to the investors of the pass through after he received them. Of course, the burdens are different if we are talking criminal which would be 1) beyond a reasonable doubt (which seems a bit of a high and unnecessary standard in a situation like this) or in civil matters either 2) preponderance of the evidence or 3) clear and convincing evidence, and seems that there is enough evidence to meet either of the last two thresholds regarding more than just the part of the evidence (the smaller amount of the funds) that Twitchy asserts to have reached the higher standard (at least with the evidence so far including considering that OGNasty is largely refusing to materially cooperate (which maybe he does not have to), but we can still decide where the evidence points, too, even if he chooses to NOT cooperate. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: OgNasty on December 22, 2019, 09:56:13 AM If OGNasty continues NOT to cooperate, then we would have to conclude reasonable inferences based on the evidence that we have - which seems to lean in favor of OGNasty NOT sending the funds to the investors of the pass through after he received them. WTF are you talking about? Everyone received exactly what they should have and everyone involved was happy. Really fucking weak form of harassment to demand I continue to engage lying trolls. The people involved and the SEC investigators know more about what happened then forum trolls who learned about Bitcoin half a decade later. Quit pretending this is anything other than the same group of window lickers attacking me again with half baked accusations. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 22, 2019, 11:27:50 AM WTF are you talking about? Everyone received exactly what they should have and everyone involved was happy. Really fucking weak form of harassment to demand I continue to engage lying trolls. Quoting for his trial. More deflection. True, they did receive your amended promise, but you kept the bitcoin that pirate returned to you. OG: I stole $100. Here, have $20 Victim: I'm happy. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: hacker1001101001 on December 22, 2019, 01:04:16 PM The people involved and the SEC investigators know more about what happened then forum trolls who learned about Bitcoin half a decade later. Quit pretending this is anything other than the same group of window lickers attacking me again with half baked accusations. It would be better if you just ignore all of this as you were doing already, some of the users are here like witches to get your quotes out of context and start rambling on it. It's an long con accusation about an event which occurred in the ancient times of the forum when most of us here were not even involved in crypto. Many users around don't even think you need to answer on this half bakes. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 29, 2019, 12:31:12 AM There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. If you continue to spread libel statements with no evidence and do not correct your prior ones, I will red tag you for spreading lies about provably honest community projects. Any DT member that remembers this original text (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg29072668#msg29072668) - if you believe OG spread libel statements with no evidence about my "provably honest community project", please "red tag" this liar and follow his example. If you have been sitting on the fence worried the bull might charge you, now is the time for everyone to jump in at once. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on April 07, 2020, 04:29:21 AM I decided to bump this so we don't keep going off topic in the other thread.
At this point, OG is sticking to his "insurance" facts. He paid out 65 BTC while holding as many as 2,600 BTC. More digging through the blockchain is needed. He has tried to extort me again in the liar thread - I have ignored him - so expect to see yet another thread full of deflection. Hopefully someone will help out as this is quite a pain in the ass. OgNasty was returning 8%-12% monthly for about three months while investing in a ponzi scheme that was paying out as much as 1% daily. Yet OgNasty still claims to have been doing the community a favor. (emphasis vod) I will help you TS. 1% daily is as much as 136% monthly! I would say he pocketed the difference between the 136% and 12%, but he actually pocketed the entire thing when pirate defaulted. :/ I would love to have a skype/phone/whatever conversation to explain exactly what a scumbag OGNasty really is. I can prove he's a liar. I can prove he abuses the trust system. Let's talk about it, if anyone cares. Is this offer still open? OGNasty is changing his story. :/ (defense / deflection) I didn’t know he was going to default. I knew what everyone else knew and you are a piece of shit to pretend otherwise. You make up numbers with no knowledge of what occurred and spread it like a disease on this community. Unfortunately, unlike your friends and family, this community can’t just abandon you to your own miserable life. We have to put up with your bullshit and lies until you grace us with your departure. He asked if anyone else knew - now he is assuming everyone else thinks as he does. Well, common sense has to play a role as well. Is there anyone who thought Patrick Harnett & Pirate were doing honest dealings? I certainly hope not. I have suspended my investigation into his scam for now due time constraints volunteering security at the hospitals. (Believe it or not, there is a major guard shortage right now everywhere.) But I'm always interested when the prime suspect changes his primary defense. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: OgNasty on April 07, 2020, 07:26:37 AM I had no insider knowledge obviously. I lost my funds with pirate alongside everyone else. Vod’s numbers are also so far off it is ridiculous. There are no victims and I engaged in no wrongdoing whatsoever. Vod is a drunk who is mad that he’s been outed as a self described pedophile.
Vod, can you answer some questions about your credibility? Questions Vod keeps desperately ducking... What are the most jobs you’ve ever had in a 4 year period? Why so many? Who do you blame for constantly being fired from one job after another? After spending your entire life paying absurd taxes to pay for things like universal healthcare, why would you now try and flee that country when your health issues require so much attention? Do you think someone with a history of lying and not being able to hold a job, currently suffering with serious health issues, who has admitted alcohol problems and is currently attempting to flee their country should be raising money from this community for a project with the stated purpose of funding their retirement? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on April 07, 2020, 09:19:56 PM Quote from: Bitcoin Forum A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. Quote The insurance fund only grew until it was paid out. ^ Cut through the deflection and we have this one statement. What does that have to do with what I posted? When you knew he was going to default, you decided to create an insurance fund and forced everyone to accept that instead of coin you got back from pirate. That is where you scammed everyone, by pretending you never received any coin. Quote from: signature link - good read! Unlike previous months no details on total invested or paid out are shared. Reserve fund = ~BTC65, investments = ~BTC2,000. Moving discussion since this is a scandal summary thread. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg54171999#msg54171999) Edit: Reposted since it is on topic here. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: OgNasty on April 08, 2020, 09:22:30 PM Vod claiming dozens of victims now. LOL. What a joke. Still not one person that was involved has ever voiced any sort of complaint to me. Want to know why? It’s because I was completely honest and fulfilled my obligations to them absolutely perfectly.
In other words, there was not a single victim and Vod is a liar. More info on Vod’s constant lies, trust abuse, and merit abuse here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.0 Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on April 08, 2020, 09:26:26 PM Og,
How much was the 'reserve fund' for your pirateat pass through? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: OgNasty on April 08, 2020, 10:05:13 PM Og, How much was the 'reserve fund' for your pirateat pass through? It was the amount I promised the depositors and only grew until it was paid out. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on April 10, 2020, 06:09:17 AM Og, How much was the 'reserve fund' for your pirateat pass through? It was the amount I promised the depositors and only grew until it was paid out. Twitchy - he had the fund he received from pirate - over 2,000 BTC AND the fund he sent to the investors - 65 BTC. Notice the deflection? (This is important) No sense arguing about this - we just need to present the blockchain proof in an easy way people can understand. When I have more time, or if someone else wants to help. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on December 10, 2020, 08:12:59 PM I had no insider knowledge obviously. I lost my funds with pirate alongside everyone else. I know this thread is old, but just wanted to point out everything OG has said is a lie. I’ve never lost anyone’s money. Not a single satoshi. “If you tell the truth, then you don't have to have a good memory” ― Judge Judy Sheindlin Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on January 13, 2021, 07:09:37 PM Bump. Interesting reading for those of you care about honesty and consequences. Look at the difference between the original thread and as it stands today. A lot of deletions and edits for some reason.
You can see in the original thread OG brags of his personal relationship and benefits with pirate, and encourages people to invest. Today he claims he had no special relationship. :/ https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0 https://web.archive.org/web/20160212042638/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0 Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: owlcatz on January 14, 2021, 02:24:14 AM Bump. Interesting reading for those of you care about honesty and consequences. Look at the difference between the original thread and as it stands today. A lot of deletions and edits for some reason. You can see in the original thread OG brags of his personal relationship and benefits with pirate, and encourages people to invest. Today he claims he had no special relationship. :/ https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0 https://web.archive.org/web/20160212042638/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0 Holy shit, this page is priceless - https://web.archive.org/web/20160212040236/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.40 ;D Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on January 14, 2021, 10:22:14 PM I was told yesterday by the pirate SEC lawyer that given the age of the conduct, I should collect as much information as possible to have the agency run with it, and he also directed me to the FBI field office (https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/phoenix) after OG sent the ripoffreport link to three dozen of my facebook friends and topped it up with penis pics (to me alone) I guess he found attractive. That story will the details will be posted soon.
(Og continues this so I must defend myself (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg56098090#msg56098090)) https://nastyscam.com/index.php/2021/01/14/contradictions-of-a-scammer-part-1-ponzi/ (Please note, I refer to the scammer with the random name of "Matt", as I don't want to promote the nasty brand.) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136576.msg56098090#msg56098090 Title: Re: Finally proof that OG is running a ponzi.... Post by: Vod on January 29, 2021, 12:29:08 AM I hope OG doesn't red tag me for posting this...EVERYTHING about it screams ponzi There is nothing Ponzi about NastyFans. If you continue to spread libel statements with no evidence and do not correct your prior ones, I will red tag you for spreading lies about provably honest community projects. More trust abuse for calling you out on facts huh? Really outstanding work as a DT1 Member. I'm sure that's going to work great for you down the road.... :P https://www.urbanthreads.com/productImages/regularSize/UT1821.jpg Three years later and he is finally off DT. He was beaten by a government supported drunk mentally deficient failed night time dishonest security guard who had a stroke. It will be much easier now to out other scammers that OG has been protecting. owlcatz, start a prediction service and I'll pay real btc! :) Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Quickseller on January 29, 2021, 01:19:06 AM I was told yesterday by the pirate SEC lawyer that given the age of the conduct, I should collect as much information as possible to have the agency run with it, Considering the 5 year statute of limitations on most federal crimes (the crimes with no/longer limitations have nothing to do with anything you are alleging OgN did), I would say this is almost certain to be complete BS, and blowing smoke. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on January 29, 2021, 01:44:07 AM I was told yesterday by the pirate SEC lawyer that given the age of the conduct, I should collect as much information as possible to have the agency run with it, Considering the 5 year statute of limitations on most federal crimes (the crimes with no/longer limitations have nothing to do with anything you are alleging OgN did), I would say this is almost certain to be complete BS, and blowing smoke. It's seven years from the discovery of harm. Are you a pretend lawyer now, in addition to a pretend scambuster? Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: TwitchySeal on January 29, 2021, 01:45:32 AM I was told yesterday by the pirate SEC lawyer that given the age of the conduct, I should collect as much information as possible to have the agency run with it, Considering the 5 year statute of limitations on most federal crimes (the crimes with no/longer limitations have nothing to do with anything you are alleging OgN did), I would say this is almost certain to be complete BS, and blowing smoke. I don't think it makes sense to use the existence of a statute of limitations as evidence to suggest whether allegations are credible or not. I'm sure we could each come up with tons of examples of people that were clearly guilty of a crime but not charged due to a statue of limitations. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on January 29, 2021, 07:05:06 PM I don't think it makes sense to use the existence of a statute of limitations as evidence to suggest whether allegations are credible or not. I'm sure we could each come up with tons of examples of people that were clearly guilty of a crime but not charged due to a statue of limitations. I think it makes more sense that PrimeNumber7 is financially motivated to dilute the attention towards the crimes OG admitted to. Everyone knows he scammed 20btc, so a partnership between them seems natural. Title: Re: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes Post by: Vod on February 19, 2021, 07:50:22 PM Questions Vod keeps desperately ducking... What are the most jobs you’ve ever had in a 4 year period? Why so many? Who do you blame for constantly being fired from one job after another? After spending your entire life paying absurd taxes to pay for things like universal healthcare, why would you now try and flee that country when your health issues require so much attention? Do you think someone with a history of lying and not being able to hold a job, currently suffering with serious health issues, who has admitted alcohol problems and is currently attempting to flee their country should be raising money from this community for a project with the stated purpose of funding their retirement? Questions OgNasty keeps desperately ducking... 1) Were you as honest about not being audited as you were about everything else you said about me? 2) Were you as honest about knowing I was a pedophile as you were returning all the coins you owed your investors? 3) Were you trying to expose me by not calling the police, or were you trying to decriminalize sex with children? These are questions I will explore in my research. I will post the crowdfunding link here. Maybe if Og is still being honest, he'll invest some of his donated wealth to help a great cause! :) |
