It is also complete and utter toss. The bakery, as a business, is not being subjected to the 'dominance' of its customers!

Your grasp of the legal entity a commercial operation represents appears to be extremely weak, as well as your understanding of law.

Here, let me explain, although I *really* shouldn't have to because it is that fucking obvious:

Anti-monopoly laws are designed to prevent a business which is a monopoly from abusing that position and, here's the important part, the Anti-monolopy law is ONLY APPLICABLE TO BUSINESSES WHICH ARE MONOPOLIES! So quoting an exception to that law, which is what you did, is false because the statute does not apply to businesses which are not monopolies!

Now, you keep insisting in your wilful ignorance that I have to show you the law which prevents discrimination against people because of their sexual orientation. In the bakery's case it was this one: http://www.glapn.org/6007historyLGBTQrights.html#xxxOregonEqualityAct

Do you get it yet? Your rabid insistence that the bakery was being forced to labour is false because they could have simply shut the entire business down when they realised that anti-discrimination laws meant they would not be able to deny service to people they did not approve of. That they wished to operate as a commercial entity means they are unable to discriminate against their customers.

If they wanted to shut down and close the business they were and are perfectly entitled to do so, ergo, no 'forced' labour.

Utter bullshit. I promote nothing. As far as I'm concerned all 'cloud mining' services should be avoided like the plague. All I'm doing is helping newbies to be aware of the obvious ponzi scams and their shills, like yours and you.

But, still, thanks for providing a perfect example of how untrustworthy you are by employing patently dishonest argument in your reply, namely, attempting to deflect from the criminal nature of your shilling for obvious-ponzi-is-obvious cloudmining.website by lazily, and without any basis whatsoever, accusing me of wrongdoing.

GermanGiant, who is probably just an alt of yours anyway, or at least is part of the active shilling for this scam, tried the same dishonest accusation, too. It was promptly exposed as the baseless deflection attempt it was then, as well.

LOL!!

Busted!

Cloud mining is generally all a scam as the legit operations can't actually offer a profit at current prices, but you know this already and are simply shilling hard for your favourite ponzi scam.

Don't think it isn't patently obvious that the only reason you opened this thread in this particular sub-forum is to trap noobs into believing you are legit because here they can't see the red writing under your username that shows you to be untrustworthy.

PSA: Vitamin King is shilling for cloudmining.website in order to get newbies to join the ponzi scheme so he can profit from their deposits before the scam collapses. You have been warned.

Very lulzy.

Oooh, great rebuttal of my criticism concerning your desperate attempt to disassemble your support of discrimination by breaking it down into component parts of physical movement. Projection much?


No, your analogy is false. Not only would I not feel justified in demanding that you move from your bus seat, even if I wanted to sit in that seat because of reasons, I would have no basis by which to demand you to vacate that seat. What point are you even trying to make here, that people are entitled to order other people out of a bus seat?


See, now you're just blatantly being a dick. You know damn well that my references to buses and water fountains are to highlight how your claims towards 'justifying' discrimination are an echo of previously 'accepted' racial discrimination and I am pointing out to you that racial discrimination, being utterly wrong and hateful, is no different to discrimination based on your, or a baker's, disapproval of another persons lifestyle.

Now you're simply agreeing with my point. Are you even paying attention to the crap you're coming out with or is your hatred for 'others' so blinding, you've lost the ability to maintain coherent argument?


Hahahaha, wow, you are desperate, aren't you? Quoting 'U.S. Code Chapter 1 - MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE' as pretext for the right of a business to refuse trade. lol.

Discrimination against whom a business is willing to service is not a fucking 'Monopolies' issue! It is a discrimination issue!

Here, let me point you in the direction of information that is simple enough even you in your blind hatred of 'others' can still understand it.
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/the-right-to-refuse-service-can-a-business-refuse-service-to-someone-because-of-appearance

Which is *exactly* what I already said and to which you attempted to cite a fucking 'Monopolies' trade law to dispute it! Still, it made me laugh, so thanks for that.

That isn't the correct logic to use.

The longer these HYIP Ponzi-based schemes are active, the closer they get to their inevitable collapse.

Wasn't it alleged recently that bottlecaps and hobonickels were the creation of Cryptsy staff members, along with talk of how they hyped the coin and manipulated the market there to dump them on to unsuspecting noobs?

I don't imagine anything has changed in that regards.

I wonder if the referral-link to Cryptsy in that article benefits Coindesk or the author of the piece. Pretty fucking shady 'unbiased journalism' either way.

Draughts.

The fuck? That is the shonkiest, most twisted and warped bit of reasoning I have read in a long time. Seriously, it takes some effort to be so committed to dreaming up a 'justification' for hateful discrimination that you actually start to break it down into physical movement in order to desperately attempt to reach your point.

The bus analogy reflects an 'expression', which was the choice of the racist white people back in the day to socially declare black people as lesser human beings than they. It's got nothing to do with whether somebody is already in the seat and everything to do with expressed rule which clearly showed that white people considered black people to be inferior human beings, to the degree they dictated to black people where they were permitted to sit on the bus, which water fountains they were permitted to use, and so on.

Would you, like most fundie xtian 'conscientious objectors', consider a black person's protest at being told they could not access the same facilities as white people, to be 'intolerant' of the white people's racist rules? Would you claim the black person was trampling on the deeply-held personal beliefs of the white people?


Wrong again, and still a spectacularly warped bit of reasoning.

If a black person walks into a white-person-owned coffee-shop and places an order, it is legal for the proprietor to assert that they are no longer serving customers and turn the customer away. Nobody is forcing the business-owner to have to labour. If, however, the proprietor only declines to provide service when the customer is black, then it is apparent he is not, in fact, denying service to all customers but is picking and choosing who to serve, based on his own personal discriminatory rules. That is not his choice to make. The rules of public trade are that if you are providing goods and services your business must service all customers, not that it must labour, but that if it is labouring to provide goods and service then it cannot refuse to service a customer on the basis of 'conscientiously objecting' to the fact that customer does not conform to the proprietor's definition of an 'acceptable' person.

Equality is not 'special treatment'.

Conscientiously objecting to something is one thing, projecting that objection on to other people by discriminating against them is something else entirely. You are free to believe whatever religious-based morality you have been conditioned to replace secular reality with, you are not free, however, to force it on to other people through your discrimination.

The seats may be just as comfy at the back of the bus, but if somebody is told they may not sit on the seats at the front, because people consider that person to be 'not as equal' a human being as those 'kind' who get to sit on the seats at the front of the bus, does telling that person they can choose any seat they wish at the back mean you can dismiss their protestations at being discriminated against as leftist/liberal 'intolerance'?


ORLY? A business is a legal trading entity and, as such, does not have the right to pick and choose who it serves based on the personal discrimination issues of its staff.

You want to sell cakes to white people only? You can't form a company and refuse to serve black people.

You want to give cakes to white people only? Knock yourself out, you racist asshole, you are perfectly entitled to personally hand out cakes just to white people and tell any black person who asks for one that you refuse to because it goes against your fundamentalist xtian 'morality'. That is your right.

Do it for money, though, and your racist self doesn't get to dictate company law because the business, as a legal entity, is performing the trade.

I'd express surprise at the sheer number of people who don't seem to understand that basic fact, but seeing as they are the type who like to call homophobic discrimination 'conscientious objection', and cite those who protest against discrimination as being 'intolerant'. It's almost like they are so wilfully ignorant they don't even understand the irony (as well as absurd stupidity) of using that word to describe people who are against other people's intolerance of those 'who are not like them'.

The only reason he might not be afraid of prison is because he never believed he would be sent there. We are talking about a guy who, with his *extremely* close relationship with Stuart Fraser, had spent the preceding years dreaming himself to be a Gates/Musk/Jobs/Satoshi future-tech visionary and had conned Fraser into throwing money at his shitty business schemes.

He is a narcissistic nobody who was fortunate enough to gain a personal connection to a very wealthy man who believed the crap he was spouting about how clever his ideas were.

Once the expensive cars and private jets started coming into the mix he probably started to believe his own bullshit. Sure, when the alphabet agencies have him against the wall, he'll just give 'em that dumb-fuck squinty-eyed grin and say sorry for making some bad business decisions and losing the muggles a great deal of money. They'll shrug their shoulders and be all, "Awww, hey, that's ok Joshie, this is the land of the free, home of the brave, you just be living the 'Mercan Dream, son!" and then send him on his way, right? Right? RIGHT? I mean, he's a good religious boy who loves himself some Jesus and fears himself some God, the 'right' god, of course, so nobody is going to be sending him to prison just for being an honest entrepreneur.

Cocaine's a hell of a drug.

Give the evidence that this scheme is legit, as you have already claimed has been proven, or find yourself heading towards marked scammer territory.

Your continued shilling for this scam and readiness to throw around empty claims about how it has been proven legit, is highly suspicious.

That a scam pays is not evidence it is not a scam. That's ponzi bullshit 101.

Evidence or retract.

This discussion thread even had a newbie-account shill turn up and try claiming he was a customer and that they are a legit operation, because that's not suspicious AT ALL. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1128611.0

That is one shitty-looking website. Good find.

Awesome domain, just rolls off the tongue.


Great rebuttal, you *really* capture the essence of a good argument against those who are asserting that you are a no-mark brand-new-account shill for the scam known as Recyclix. It is *totally* reasonable to say the equivalent of, "Yeah, well you stink, too" as a way of proving how legit you are.

Nothing says legit like a company paying you with PayPal from their hotmail account, right?
http://www.moneymakergroup.com/Recyclix-Recyclixcom-t493509.html&view=findpost&p=1109292008#entry1109292008

Uhuh, course you are. Just a really really keen customer wanting to give us lots of information about how reputable they are

There's money to be made in throwing together a good front. Just go ask the Urocoin scammers... as well as cloudthink.io... and every other Mlm,Hyip,ponzi op that has passed through here.

If it walks like a duck..

Uhuh, of course you did, brand new account.

Sponsoring an industry event doesn't make any company less of a ponzi-scam.

Still doesn't make it any less of a ponzi-based criminal scam.

I contacted their North West office and you just need the judgement and to fill out their 'transfer up' form, along with paying a flat GBP60.00 payment.

Indeed, it's all part of the same 'family' of Ukrainian scammers I believe.

Eobot, Rdpmain and cloudmining.website are likely the same scumbags, along with their 'Cloudmining Monitoring' website, cmmonitor, which supposedly shows which ponzi scam, I mean cloud-mining service, is still operational.