:facepalm:


So, yeah, apparently this scam would have been totally profitable for everybody if we had just stfu about it and stopped posting all that factual information about how it was a blatant scam.

Damn us, we iz so bad for ruining their party.

That last part in bold is the only factual part of your spittle-flecked rant.


Ooh this should be good, do go on . . .


*drumroll*
So why the need for referral bonuses?
*cymbal crash*

I'm already aware that, were they actually a genuine mining operation which had already sold off all the available hashrate then there really wouldn't be any benefit to them attracting new customers to trade the KHS because, as you are aware yourself, there is no money to be made from people trading 'KHS' to each other on their site

There is only one reason why these 'cloud mining' operations are all referral-based, and that is because they *need* new investors to continually bring new money into the bottom of the pyramid so that they can cover the withdrawals that they need to make sure happen as, once people think they can't get money out, the whole thing unravels extremely rapidly as everybody seeks to withdraw their money. This is usually the point where they cite 'wallet problems' or 'we haz been haxored' exit strategies for the scam operators.


Of course it will be, because nobody who ever makes that sort of dummy-spitting announcement ever feels compelled to show themselves to be the fools they are by having to respond, yet again, when the content of their post is shredded for the nonsense it is.

Proof or you are just a deluded fantasist.

Which is one of the reasons we can safely rely on objective measurements from non-biological instruments, namely, technology.

We have built plenty of technology solely for the purpose of being able to measure and observe both that which our senses cannot be considered reliable instruments for, such as the tendency to 'see' patterns such as the 'weird shapes' in the dark, as well as that which our sense simply are not capable of detecting due to their limited capacity.

So, no, when theists like to cite 'woo' and how we humans simply don't 'know enough' they are ignoring the inconvenient fact that, actually, we know quite a lot and none of their claims towards the existence of 'woo' withstand any sort of critical analysis, through reason or technological observation and measurement.

Wow. Much warped twisting of reality.

Let me humour your infantile assertion for a minute.

Even if you want to insist that the initial cell-division and replication that takes place at fertilization, be considered as 'life', where is the evidence that we exist as a 'self' before that point?

Yeah, lol, kinda like when Homero Joshua Garza used to spout his bullshit about GAW Miners *only* mission was to bring profit back to mining.

Trouble is, his customers thought he meant them.

What has this:

Got to do with this:

That our body is formed prior to our brain doesn't serve as a rebuttal to the point I made.

We are not our arms and legs, we exist in the firings of our neurons, so how does your point serve, well, your point?

LOL! Where did I make it 'personal'? Hah! I simply replied to your question with a reasoned answer and reminded you that anything outside of that answer would require valid evidence.

How is that making it 'personal'?

Here's how you make it personal, while still being factual:


Let's see now, you big ol' dishonest fundamentalist theist, you, I have asserted something based on the facts we do have, namely, there is no data, nor is there any reasonable explanation of mechanism, which supports our existing prior to the biological development of our brain, so my assertion is reasonable and, what's more, for you to suggest otherwise requires *you* to present evidence that our 'self' exists prior to the biological development of our brain.

Do you see how simple this is? No need for complex hypothesis with quantum-entanglement-magic, simply the undeniable fact that there is no evidence to support the notion that we exist outside of our brain's existence.

But this won't matter to you, what with fundie's apparently suffering from such immense intellectual dishonesty that they stop being able to consider the fact that, while they make herculean efforts to compartmentalise the inconvenience of facts, those outside of their bubble-of-dishonesty *do* in fact see them wriggling and writhing in desperate contortions and outright lies to keep their self-scam going.

Oooh, snappy comeback, you sure showed me there.

I'm just having a little difficulty in finding the part in your reply where you rebut the points I made. Be a dear and highlight where in your reply you actually do that, you know, other than the part where you simply have your little tantrum and throw your toys from the pram.


Ummmm . . .no.

We didn't exist before our brain existed, therefore there is no justifiable reason to believe we exist after our brain ceases functioning.

If you want to suggest otherwise then it is your responsibility to present sufficient evidence to support your claim.

You.Are.A.Scam

No proof of mining equals proof of no mining.

Ah, seems you have the wrong conclusion then. Badbitcoin.org has been proven to be directly involved in supporting an existing fraudulent operation with GAW/XPY and, so, if they are also promoting scrypt.cc all the while the same reasoning which has them asserting other 'cloud mining' operations to be fraudulent also applies to scrypt.cc, then the only possible conclusion is that badbitcoin is also colluding with scrypt.cc.

BTW, @SpanishSoldier, the whole point of how a Ponzi scheme ensures they keep the scam rolling so long is by letting people withdraw when they want to 'test' whether they can, because then they generally will send it straight back in to 'compound' their 'profit'. That's how it works, because everybody is satisfied that, if they wanted to, they could withdraw their funds but in the meantime they will keep 're-investing' their 'profit'.

Ponzi schemes only ever have to pay out a small fraction of the total amount that is sent to them as 'investments', as long as new suckers are brought into the scheme through . . .you guessed it, referrals.

Eventually it can't possibly keep up the needed flow of new 'investors' and the outflow threatens to increase to a larger percentage relative to the new money coming in, which ultimately results in . . . lights out.

Sure they are.

Sounds legit.

/snark

Ooh, are you suggesting that badbitcoin.org and Homero Joshua Garza might actually be behind scrypt.cc itself?

I'd fucking wet myself laughing if it turned out to be true. Given the epic saga that has been the GAW/XPY ponzi/matrix scam it would be simply delicious to connect the dots from them to scrypt.cc

For the same reason badbitcoin.org refuse to tell the truth about GAW Miners 'Hashlets' and the whole XPY scam, because they are involved in promoting all of them.

My flabber has never been more gasted.

So much the fanfare, so short the ride!

Says the guy who is clearly using a sold account and, what's even funnier than the difference in English content of the post history is that it clearly used to belong to someone who ditched it because he had scammed people back in 2013. I love the part where he talks about how his religion prevents him from not paying everybody back.

Theists are so fucking dishonest.


Oh, so a Ponzi scheme would start up and not pay anybody at all? LOL. Because that's how Ponzi schemes like scrypt.cc have run for so long, right, by not paying out at all? Idiot.

Proof or it didn't happen, fundie.

LOL, sure, why not, let's compare her to other monsters created by the Catholic Church, that way she will actually appear to be less of the monster she actually was.

Check-and-mate-evil-atheists!!!11!!!elebenty!!1!!!!


Yeah, see that's the problem. When people declare they don't want to know the actual truth of a situation then lies thrive and a truly evil bitch becomes lionised as a 'Saint'.

No, Scrypt.CC is for arseholes who want to make a profit off the back off naive newbies who think it is a legitimate Cloud Mining operation, which is what it is fraudulently painting itself to be.