Thank you. I KNEW (strongly suspected) that this was an independant action on his part and that Coinabul did not condone this. I actually have a lot of respect for you guys because I am a gold bug (silver bug!) myself. Which is why I was so surprised to see the link. I will also make that a little more clear than it was in the OP.

I do however remain surprised and mystified that he advertises himself as a marketing executive at coinabul on his linkedin page (http://www.linkedin.com/pub/david-hollis/3b/6a3/880)

Perhaps it is merely out of date and the error was on my end? Then again, as he never was an executive and merely an unpaid intern that is still really weird.

For one? okay...

pre·ten·tious/priˈtenCHəs/
Adjective:   
Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.

I had done martial arts, everything from Judo to Shaolin to Aikido to Tai Chi, for over 20 years. I've studied with some well-known people in said circles, I'm published and I have been invited to judge at major international tournaments. Those are facts. There's no question that a song which calls me pretentious, etc. is defamatory. In short, I don't need a court of law to show that someone claiming I have no credentials is defamatory. It is, in fact, defamatory.

It's also ironic, as Mr. Hollis represents himself as a "Financial Services Professional" and a "Marketing Executive at Coinabul". Is he really? For one, he was an unpaid intern at Coinabul more than a year ago and was only there for a few short weeks (see below). So he wasn't any kind of executive, ever. Second point. He took the exam and is a registered Financial Services Professional in Australia? Where's his certificate? So let me get this straight, Mr. Hollis is sitting there calling me pretentious when the truth is it's him who is misrepresenting his experience and credentials? That's a big laugh.

As for the composer, I'm honestly surprised you cherrypicked the song out of the OP. That is surprising given everything else that was said. But as for the composer, the guy said he didn't do martial arts and didn't want to learn, so he has just as much right and credibility calling me pretentious as BitcoinOZ does.

Whaaaaaaaaat? No, the real issue is how you have tried to drag me into your personal shitstorm and how you have been attacking me and others in an attempt to obfuscate your own problems.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=128630.0

Next time don't use company resources to troll and defame.

BTW, here's a hint. If you're going to set up some kind of strawman about how the "real choice" is deciding to side with the law or remain "non legit" it looks like a) an admission you've done something illegal and b) are now asking people to side with you (i.e. conspire). Do you really think everyone is going to stand up and say "Hey let's all agree (i.e. conspire) to break the law with bitcoinoz!!" yeah that sounds like a great argument. Do I need to tell you what side I've chosen? Sheesh.

This post is a public service placeholder to collect any information on BitcoinOZ, as it has now become clear he has misrepresented himself as a Marketing Executive at Coinabul(!!), is lying and worming his way out of his status as a member of the Bitcoin Global board, and has possibly been misrepresenting himself as a Financial Services Professional. I don't think he deserves a scammer tag as I have not suffered any financial loss. However, if you have suffered financial loss as a result of this guy's actions, or if you have any information considering the large number of possible cases he has engaged in, please post that material in this thread. Thank you for your time,

-----

The Case against BitcoinOZ

Contents

1. Who is Bitcoinoz?
2. What did he do?
3. Character Witnessing (opinions/why you should care.) -- please add to this section your opinion. I'm sure lots of people will stand up for him, as he's a well-known member of this community.

-----

1. Who is Bitcoinoz?

David A. Hollis of Victoria, Australia (address withheld) goes by many names. Some of these names include (but are not limited to) noagendamarket and now, bitcoinoz. But you may know him better as the guy who ran BITCOINRS, or as one of the members of the board of Bitcoin Global (GLBSE). As you can tell, he is a member of the community in the strongest sense; he is involved in many businesses and other "schemes" in the community.

As David A. Hollis, he advertises himself as a Marketing Executive for coinabul.com (which has now been shown to be a misrepresentation by Mr. Hollis; see post below by Jay Shore), he runs bitcoin.com.au, a bitcoin blog which he uses to promote coinabul.com and other businesses he is involved in. He also runs the BitcoinMedia Youtube Channel, aliased as "Ozzy Bitcoin". As you can tell, he's a rather involved member of the community. He is not an anonymous troll. He's a well-known community figure and one couldn't be blamed for assuming he had the ear of quite a few people, and a certain modicum of trust among many of us here in the community.

2. What did he do?
Apparently, quite a lot. While outlining each and every bad thing he has done is probably a waste of time, I'd like to point out a small handful of facts which probably warrant action. Maybe not action in the form of a scammer tag, but maybe something like getting fired from coinabul.com or having his reputation knocked down a notch or two.

One. David A. Hollis misappropriates the resources of coinabul.com to troll and defame users on bitcointalk.org.

As mentioned, he runs http://www.youtube.com/user/BitcoinMedia -- on this channel he has published a defamatory video regarding me (and possibly other users). Normally this would not be a problem except that he is a well-known public figure, and for the fact that the contact information on this channel is listed as "coinabul.com" and the coinabul twitter page (which I therefore assume he runs).

This is a blatant mis-appropriation of company resources. I have been led to believe that coinabul.com supports his defamatory message against me. I assure you that I do not appreciate this in the strongest possible sense, and that I cannot say anything further regarding that video and it's apparent promotion by coinabul.com because I do not believe this is the correct venue for fully expressing that complaint.

NOTE: Coinabul has nothing to do with David Hollis -- Mr. Hollis only worked for Coinabul for a few short weeks over a year ago, as an unpaid intern. Secondly all links now appear to have been removed. So I have struck the above paragraphs.

Two. David A. Hollis has said untrue and damaging lies against me:

Although I am not a court of law or a lawyer, I will present evidence now that I believe shows:
a) David A. Hollis set out to intentionally deceive people;
b) for the sole purpose of financial gain
c) and to damage an individual

1. My evidence that David A. Hollis set out to intentionally deceive people for the purpose of financial gain.

One of the first questions when dealing with libel or slander is what kind it is, and what the damages are. In many cases the advice is to ignore it if damages cannot be shown. However, in cases of malicious criminal libel, which is a special type of fraud in U.S. law, damages are assumed. But in a case where damages can be shown they should be. In this case, Mr. Hollis has set out to escape his obligation as an operator of BITCOINRS to recognize shares owned by NYAN:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1359710#msg1359710
"Im sure the other shareholders will be more than happy with your donation of 2000 shares since you just offered to not accept them. "

The intentional deception here was that I had not, in fact, offered to donate them, and I still require them to be returned to CPA in the future (once I get the list of shareholders for NYAN).

2. My evidence that David A. Hollis set out to intentionally deceive people for the sole purpose of damaging another individual

Although I cannot speculate precisely why he has enganed in a smear campaign against me, it is easy to show that his comments were damaging because I believe the type of comments he issued fall under the category of malicious criminal libel, which (again) is a special type of law in US law where damages are assumed. Malicious criminal libel is what it is called when you accuse someone of committing a crime which they did not commit for the purpose of issuing libel or slander.

The following quotes are material evidence that BitcoinOZ has accused me of committing a crime for the sole purpose of damaging me:

a) from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1361438#msg1361438
-- "I believe the company has obligations exceeding its assets and therefore should appoint a liquidator."
(establishment of the requirement that he is acting on belief and without evidence)

-- "People say...CPA is no different...both made up companies...not a damn thing I could do about either company. You are no (censored) different..." (establishment of the fact he knew the charges against me were false, and was basing what he said on public opinion)

-- "Theres no way in hell Im going to become an accessory to your crime here..."
(establishment that he has accused me of committing a crime)

-- "Anything else is knowingly committing a criminal act."
(repetition confirming intent)


b) I refuted his statements in a response to that post in the same thread.
Therefore Mr. Hollis was made aware of his error, or was given a chance to provide proof of his claims. Instead of doing so, he continued on in full knowledge that I contested his claims and that he did not actually have any proof...

c) ...as shown in the several following instances where he has accused me of committing a crime in that and in other threads which I will not show (ex. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113708.msg1362875#msg1362875).

It's not necessary to display each and every instance, just the above will suffice (for now). Again this isn't really a court, although I don't need a flood of evidence for that either given what I have already shown.


3. Character Witnessing
Why should you care?

1.
You should care because David A. Hollis is abusing his position and his status as a community member to lie and obfuscate the truth; he expects people to believe him because he is a well-known community member and not because he has provided any evidence. I believe it is dangerous to do so.

Although he is well-known as a member of the board of directors of Bitcoin Global, and was directly responsible for voting involving financial matters of the company, he has publicly denied being anything other than a shareholder (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=128065.msg1361722#msg1361722). In that linked thread he has misrepresented himself as being merely a shareholder. It seems obvious this was done to try and limit his legal liability (which is probably unlimited).

This isn't a single instance; he has repeated this many times. ex. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=128065.msg1361923#msg1361923 where he stated, "I owned bitcoinglobal shares on glbse and went to shareholder meetings. I also own telstra shares in Australia and go to the annual general shareholder meeting. Exactly what different level of liability does that imply Im not aware of ?".

However, the truth is a little different; as stated, he was a member of Bitcoin Global, a title which carried several obligations and duties. One of which was voting on the direction of the company from major moves like GLBSE going legit (which was an announced motion at a meeting he was present at), to both major and minor financial decisions of the company.
So it appears as if David Hollis is dishonest and is willing to lie to avoid possible jail time. In many developed countries including Australia, this is in and of itself a crime.

2.
David A. Hollis breaks his word on business contracts, and obfuscates and lies to get out of his obligations.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=128065.msg1362184#msg1362184
In this message I outline how BitcoinOZ made an agreement with me to transfer ownership of shares, and then backed out of it. Although he didn't break any laws in that message really I suspect that his smear campaign is an attempt to both get out of keeping his word to me in PM, and also to shift some of the blame to my own companies (and others). For example in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=128065.msg1361960#msg1361960 he says "
If GLBSE is a partnership so is cognitive,nasty mining,CPA and every other stock on glbse". He repeatedly mentions my name and company in his own defense, as if I had anything to do with his possible legal problems with GLBSE. It's kind of weird but that's the only reason I can think why he is doing this.

For example he has said "Usagi was on Nefario's secret panel to approve glbse assets. They had more access to him than the shareholders did.....". This is a blatant lie, and he knows it! IIRC it was even mentioned at a shareholder meeting! I offered to set up a public panel of community members to take the control away from Nefario on issues like banning Kludge and Goat, the Diablo-D3/DMC case and others. However Nefario never listened to any of my advice and did not give me control or ownership of anything. The panel was then immediately disbanded. Nobody would have ever thought it was secret either, as I made several posts about it and talked to a lot of asset issuers -- anyone I could find. Probably including our Mr. Hollis. I probably have the logs somewhere.

3.
You should care because David. A. Hollis is a hypocrite. He has repeatedly stated (for example) that CPA is insolvent. He has been asked to stop. He has justified these ridiculous statements by saying "If CPA is solvent you shouldnt need to sell personal property to cover its loans.". This is disingenuous and irreverent on many levels; First, the loans in question were backed by a personal guarantee. Thus it is wrong of me to wait until we have the CPA shareholder lists before the loans are paid; I should pay the loans myself as I advertised personal responsibility on the loans, and then get the money back from CPA myself when all is said and done, fairly.

He has also claimed that if I am unable to show proper financial records I am insolvent and/or fraudulent. This is an odd claim, but it is also hypocritital. As a member of the board of Bitcoin Global, noagendamarket is on record giving Nefario carte blanche to buy any laptop he wants and then to have GLBSE pay for 50% of it's cost. Now, that isn't a crime and is certainly legal. But what I find odd and hypocritical is that this does not appear to ever be mentioned again anywhere in the Bitcoin Global financial records -- there is no reciept, there is no follow up in a shareholder meeting -- nothing. How then can Mr. Hollis accuse me of being insolvent/fraudulent "because I do not keep proper accounting records", when he does not keep proper accounting records himself? And no, this is not an "admission" I did not keep "proper accounting records". I've offered to show the CSV files and explain any transactions in them several times in the past. My own companies have nothing to do with it, obviously!

4. You should care because David A. Hollis intentionally covered up a crime involving a ponzi scheme on GLBSE and on the forums. Out of respect for the possible legal proceedings against the individual in question I cannot name any names, so don't ask. Let's just understand two things: David A. Hollis, in full knowledge that two separate crimes were taking place (a theft and a ponzi scheme) and with knowledge of the individuals involved:
a) allowed this ponzi scheme to operate on the lending forum of bitcointalk.org
b) covered up the theft and ponzi scheme for his own personal financial gain and to avoid trouble with the law.
AGAIN and I cannot make this clear enough, out of respect for possible legal proceedings which may be an issue, I cannot reveal anything further about this. If you would like me to do so, all you have to do is call me to testify in said legal proceedings. But I will say this, it's bloody unlikely to happen as I have no special information that 20 other people closer to this issue have, so yeah, don't bother asking.

5. You should care because David A. Hollis could do the same thing to you if he decides he doesn't like you. Some of the other cases where he has lied about me in order to defame me, are when he accused me of scamming or creating preferential shares because I sold a single to pay off the CPA loans.

The problem with this is that he was informed that I had a legal claim on the single. Further to this point, those of you who remember the BMF motion to allow BMF to buy hardware will remember that I had offered to donate the mining from my own personal single to BMF, to help the company. This single was, in fact, the one I sold. It was never BMF property. It was sold because I had a full and legal right to do so to cover my personal obligation on CPA loans.

When informed of the fact of my legal claim, he merely repeated that I had committed a scam/fraud. This is in line with everything else mentioned in this report.

He has also posted defamatory videos of me on the internet, which he knows to be false and misrepresentation of me and my character. For example, the video describes me as doing certain styles of martial arts which I do not do, or engaging in things I do not do; these are clear misrepresentations.

But beyond that, I believe that David A. Hollis is a disgrace to this community, and maybe -- just maybe -- should be preemptively labled with a scammer tag in recognition of the extreme misappropriation of his position he has engaged in on many fronts, not limited to a libelous and defamatory campaign against me for financial gain, or to escape possible criminal liablity with gas-lighting, outrageous lies, and mis-characterizations of himself and others.

In short, you should care because, as he is a prominent member of this community, I cannot idly stand by and watch him lie and manipulate people and abuse his position to gaslight and to obfuscate the truth. it's people like David A. Hollis who are destroying this community, and I say **** that. And I say **** David A. "BitcoinOZ" Hollis. I've really had enough of his sh** personally. I can't keep up with the massive smear campaign he is a party to. I just want to be left alone, so I thought I would show how little credibility this jerk really has. I wouldn't want someone thinking he was someone who could be trusted.

I mean, I trusted him myself. As the operator of NYAN I trusted him because he was a member of the community and I bought 2,000 shares of his company BITCOINRS because I believed he was an honest person and a good businessman because of his reputation. I screwed up. If I could go back I wouldnt' have bought those shares. I had no idea he would turn on me like this, try to screw me over like this. You have been warned.

A final thought. A lot of people have said I am a scammer just because I use different names on different forums, or that I have used different names here. Well I've never tried to hide that or hide myself and basically stuck to the same two names, Serena and Usagi. BTW, Serena is an English name and Usagi is a Japanese name. I just wanted English people to feel more comfortable in dealings with me. Lots of Chinese and Japanese use an English first name. So I am sorry if you feel this is scummy but it was not my intention to decieve. However, I would like to point out that after GLBSE shut down and rumors of the board members being scam artists started to fly around, BitcoinOZ used his status as a donator to have his name changed on the forums. That's right. he changed his name on the forums so people would not associate him with his former identity. That is something way way worse that I did -- he actually is using a different name now to hide who he was and what he did in the past. So yeah.

-----

ADDENDUM: David Hollis advertises himself as a "... Financial Services Professional" on linkedin, and advertises himself as a Marketing Executive of Coinabul. These claims have now been proven false in a post by Jay Shore below.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/david-hollis/3b/6a3/880

I do not know if he really is a financial services professional however given his misrepresentation that he is or ever was an Executive at Coiniabul I doubt it. Please note that it is a crime to misrepresent yourself as a financial services professional in the USA and Canada and likely Australia. It is illegal to call yourself a financial services professional or offer any kind of investment advice whatsoever unless you are accredited. The defining acts being to do with "advice" and "investment" and "financial services" and nothing to do with how such things are denominated, i.e. baseball cards and bitcoins are both under that umbrella. I would propose Mr. Hollis to show us his accreditation as a financial services professional. If he is lying about his job experience as an Executive on a resume that might not in and of itself be a crime, but if he is lying about having professional accreditation from a sanctioned governing body, that is in fact a crime.

------

Edit: The links to coinabul.com have now been removed.

So in other words, you lied when you said you had evidence, or that you had posted it previously. Thank you.

What do you mean by "again"? There was no first time. If there was, feel free to link the post you made with any evidence you have.

Actually I think a couple people already tried that.

No, you need to get your facts straight. You wrote:


What you fail to have mentioned is that the marked passage (marked with a star) is a quote from the actual spreadsheet. Your complaint amounts to that I made a mistake in responding to a scam accusation -- regarding actually falsifying NAVs -- and not that I DID falsify NAVs or misrepresent how I valued issues on the spreadsheet! You and others have clearly announced that this has become a witch-hunt to find something to label me with a scammer tag, and that you have no actual evidence that I deserve one. Deprived has said 'I believe you deserve one anyways...' recently in this thread. Puppet and guruvan have flat out admitted they do not have evidence (I can provide a link). Deeplink repeatedly ignores questions to provide supporting evidence. Cunicula and Ian Bakewell are self-admitted trolls or just cheering trolls. Greyhawk is a troll who has had posts deleted from this forum specifically for trolling me. And so on. Do yourself a favor. Make an OP, clearly outlining what it is you feel I did to deserve a scammer tag, and in that same post provide the evidence you have. If you cannot do this, stop. Now, as you have made an exhibit in post #2 and I cannot remember if I responded to it, I'll respond to it now.

My response is that you seem to have recognized there is no validity in "Usagi: falsifying NAVs, ..." and have instead decided to blow a simple mistake in wording way out of proportion. At no time was there ever an intent to deceive because the actual formula was shown in immediately readable form on the spreadsheet. So no, I am not guilty of fraud. It is obvious that the mistake I made does not constitute fraud; there is and was simply too many other statements by myself on the matter, and further, this is the scam accusation forum, I was not trying to advertise my business or advertise to any investor, I was merely responding to a scam accusation. So you will have absolutely no luck accusing me of fraud here.

Do you realize your mistake now? I did not falsify NAVs. Please stop your obvious smear campaign. If I actually falsified NAVs then state that i did so and show where I did so -- Quoting the spreadsheet where I show and explain the actual formula on the spreadsheet used to value NAVs is not proof I misled anyone. It's actually proof I was doing my best to disclose how I valued issues to investors. You are actually showing the exact opposite of what you are claiming by quoting that formula.

You also seem to be ignoring the very great amount of evidence that the intent was to provide added value through analysis. And I am not talking about the NUMEROUS times I stated that, I'm just talking about what I actually did -- which you should become familiar with first before making serious allegations against me or my companies. I conducted interviews with GigaVPS (GIGAMINING), Garr255 (COGNITIVE) friedcat (ASICMINER, MOORE), Juan (BTC-MINING) and more. My mandate was clear and that you are trying to ignore all of that makes me think you are being deceitful in accusing me of misrepresenting NAV because of a mistake in wording I made when responding to a scammer accusation.

You also seem to ignore the fact that there were two clearly labled valuation columns. One containing the values using the formula described above, and one containing an analysis value -- which is the actual complaint. I was going WAY over what was required to disclose price to investors.

You also seem to be ignoring the shareholder motions I made to see what shareholders wanted in terms of valuation on the spreadsheets. All of this material evidence you have ignored undermines your credibility in this case as it's become clear you have no idea what you are talking about, and are an incredibly biased individual who is incapable of presenting a clear and concise accusation nor any supporting evidence that cannot immediately be shot down by posting facts about what I actually said and did about my company. Please just stop being a jerk.

But I was never on any sort of secret panel. I offered to help nefario organize what was supposed to become a public, community panel, independant from the GLBSE. I did this because he was doing a lot of stupid things like with DMC and kludge and goat and with alberto's ID/info. But he didn't listen to anything I said and the panel was never actually set up. Nefario refused to give control to anyone. So twisting this and claiming it was secret and that I had access to Nefario "more than shareholders" is an extremely dishonest thing. You do get this, don't you? That you (deeplink and bitcoinoz) are the bad buys here?

ir·rev·er·ent/iˈrev(ə)rənt/
Adjective: Showing a lack of respect for people or things that are generally taken seriously.

rev·er·ent/ˈrev(ə)rənt/
Adjective: Feeling or showing deep and solemn respect: "a reverent silence".

rev·er·ence/ˈrev(ə)rəns/
Verb:   Regard or treat with deep respect.
Synonyms:   verb.  revere - venerate


Does this have anything to do with "Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices..." ?

Please make a clear post outlining exactly what you feel I did to deserve a scammer tag, and provide clear evidence of your claim. I'd be happy to respond to a claim that is made with evidence besides "I heard someone else say it so it must be true". Make it simple. Make it cut and dry. If you cannot do this, you should probably stop making an ass of yourself on these forums.

Summary appears to be, you claim I am writing a revisionist history (without evidence to show this) therefore Usagi is untrustworthy". Nice try. Does this have anything to do with "Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices..." ?

Please make a clear post outlining exactly what you feel I did to deserve a scammer tag, and provide clear evidence of your claim. I'd be happy to respond to a claim that is made with evidence besides "I heard someone else say it so it must be true". Make it simple. Make it cut and dry. If you cannot do this, you should probably stop making an ass of yourself on these forums.

Lol? Where were you when Ian Bakewell defrauded CPA and broke his contract with us, then defamed me by claiming I was trying to clawback the money? Where were you when people were accusing me of misrepresenting the NAV of BMF when I had announced many times and even done interviews with mining companies that BMF provided added value by doing analysis?

Oh right, you were trolling the scam accusations against me because you didn't like how I did things. Nice job.

Just state your case with your "dry powder" like you said you were going to do, hopefully in a new thread, make it clear, make it cut and dry, and we'll deal with it. If you cannot do this, you should probably stop.

Deprived et al. is positive that if he keeps churning enough accusations out eventually people will start believing him.

The difference here is that I am basically one guy defending myself and it's 4-5 people who are posting on me. So it looks like I am posting voluminous while all I am doing is responding to the accusations that are being lobbied against me. Why are you complaining about my posts? Looked at another way you're just pointing out the number of accusations people are making. Where's the evidence? You cannot just say "Oh look, BMF paid CPA 30 bitcoins therefore fraud". That is illogical and irreverent. That's just what it is. You need to show evidence. You cannot just say 'usagi is swindling people via fraudulent business schemes' when you don't have any evidence. You cannot even plausibly claim you believe it, if you do not have evidence. And if the evidence you present is shown to be false you cannot continue with your claim. It's illegal. Do you understand that?

All I'm asking is for deprived or whomever to make an OP which describes any particular instance of what they are claiming, and show the evidence that I have done it. Make it clear. Make it cut and dry. Seriously, if this cannot be done, apologize and GO AWAY.

Just state your case and show your evidence or stop. If you cannot do this, then why do you make an ass of yourself on the forums?

Just state the case and show the evidence or stop. This endless parade of accusations that morphs from one argument to the next from week to week as each allegation is shown to be false is pathetic.

Oh lookee now Deprived is preparing to launch yet another accusation against me, whoop de doo. One that he himself admits he has been sitting on for weeks and weeks. Wait, what about the last 5 accusations he made? What happened to those?

As I've said before, you should make a new post with a clear explanation of what your precise claim is, and containing whatever evidence it is you have. Until then, the onus is not on me to defend or show anything. The onus is on you to explain yourself otherwise it appears as if you are just crying wolf.

I don't think you deserve to be a moderator because you have an observed tendency to let your own personal opinion interfere with the duties you perform as a moderator. Not your duties as a moderator, but the duties that you are observed to have performed. For example, when called upon to issue a statement in a thread with clear evidence such as this one or the one I linked you, you mischaracterize the situation by claiming an opposite of what happened; You accused me of dismissing posts with one liners when it is actually you who are dismissing the well-thought out posts (with lots of supporting evidence) in the link provided. That's not your job. Neither was your un-called-for comment in the kongzi.ca thread that I am a scummy fuck. You want to accuse me of being a scummy fuck in a thread I start about an unrelated business where I offer, out of the goodness of my heart, to donate all profits until all of my company's obligations are resolved? Wat?

Another one of your mischaracterizations is that I have call people stupid fucks, etc. (insinuating therefore my arguments are not valid). This makes you look like someone who is unfamiliar with this situation. This has been going on for over 4 months. Do you realize how tired and annoyed I am about these threads? About the lack of moderation, especially from you in particular? To have a mod come here and start swearing at me for apparently no reason as you did in the kongzi.ca thread, makes it look like you are operating from a position of prejudice and ignorance over what is going on here. If that's the case you really have no business making any sort of comment whatsoever. You need to take a step back and appreciate this situation before you stick your nose in it. People like deeplink have been repeating over and over that I have committed fraud, or that I am under investigation, etc. It's clear neither you nor Theymos really appreciate how serious those allegations really are.

In any real forum or business setting you would be immediately fired for what you've said because as a representative of these forums you're making them look bad. In some cases you may have even opened the forum up to unlimited legal liability. This case in particular, is not a simple open and shut case of theft where someone steals some bitcoins, or where someone doesn't pay for something they bought, or doesn't pay back a loan they took out on the forums. People have begun accusing others of committing some very, very serious crimes. In cases of malicious criminal libel, damage is assumed. You better believe it. This is not a joke. You simply do not sit on a moderator/staff/official/whatever account and show malice, preference, and prejudice in the face of overwhelming evidence as you have been presented with, because it opens up the organization you represent to legal liability. People get fired for that all the time. I'm sorry if you feel that I am being excessively rude or minimizing by using the word stupid in describing your actions but there really is no other word for it. Theymos clearly does not appreciate this nor the damage you are doing to these forums. It came as quite a shock to him when GLBSE wanted to go legal too and he wanted out of that. The same thing is going to happen with these forums and the complacency you and others show one day. It's just a matter of time. It's happened before.. take GLBSE for instance. One of the #1 problems was that they held and released people's information. So one of the big things that will happen when the shit finally hits the fan is this scam accusation forum will be removed. Because what you are doing really is stupid and you need to wake up and realize what a poor moderator you are. You're acting like your responsibility is a joke, and that you don't respect the position you hold or what people expect of you in that position.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=127096.0

You are a joke and you should be removed as a moderator of these forums.

I'm happy you enjoyed it. Yeah one of the phases we went through was everyone started writing songs about each other. I wrote a few songs about romeo rose for example. The guy who wrote that song, BTW, is in hiding because it's his schtick to write libelous songs against people and organizations. Not in hiding from me mind you, but from a lot of others. TO his credit, scientology. But others too, or so I hear. So this guy drops in for like 3 months, is a total jerk to everyone, writes a few songs about people, and leaves. Apparently he didn't even do martial arts. He was probably paid.

So yeah does this mean you don't have any evidence re "Usagi: falsifying NAVs, manipulating share prices and  misleading investors."?