|
There was a WSJ opt-ed published a few days before he was nominated, and the WSJ editorial board has published multiple editorials (citations available upon request) supporting him since he was nominated.
From what I can gather, Kavanaugh is a constitutionalist who will uphold the constitution as written. I am not aware of any appellate court opinions or speeches in which he advocated for rights enumerated in the constitution to not be upheld -- if someone has an example please post one here.
I fully expect Kavanaugh to be fully smeared by democrats during confirmation hearings, similar to what they did to Boark and every nominee since.
|
|
|
|
I don't know how this dufde hasn't managed to get their profile red tagged yet but I'm pretty sure I have known them for a terrible loan repayment history. I can't find the related threads now but if anybody wants to consider a rational advice, stay away from this dude. Lending him money is as good as donating them to a charity.
This is the thread you are looking for. It looks like it took about 9 months to repay a 1 months loan. Being that the OP is offering his account as collateral, it is probably safe to say any lender will have sold the OP's account (for a large loss) long before the OP is ready to repay. |
|
|
|
|
I don't think that domain is making an active effort to trick people into giving any kind of personal information. If you have evidence this site is trying to obtain some personal information via deception, you should post said evidence.
Bitcointalk.to appears to be a mirror of some sort, similar to the many other mirrors that are out there. Mirrors are useful in that they give people behind things like the GFW additional ways to access the forum, and its free flow of information.
|
|
|
|
|
Generally speaking, someone should add some kind of response to a quote after they quote it. If someone copies what someone else says, responds, and the only thing missing is the [ quote] BB code, this should be at worst treated as a minor infraction (only because it can make reading their post confusing), as it is not plagiarism in a sense that they are finding content, copying it and solely using said content for their own post. This means that someone should be adding a thought in response to a quote. If someone adds a word or a sentence in the middle of the quote, this is trying to pass off the quote as their own and is unacceptable.
I would be especially forgiving when someone is trying to remove a portion of a "quote pyramid" as this is easy to mess up, provided they respond in some way to the quote they incorrectly quoted.
|
|
|
|
|
It is too bad funds were not paid out according to the milestones considering one of the founders declined a portion of his share.
Further a review of the Blockchain reveals how much was paid out and money is in fact missing.
|
|
|
|
Another term that was very cleary broken was that Lauda, Blazed and Minerjones would keep the bitcoin at a specific address, however the bitcoin was moved out of the escrow address very early on. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hello.
I am one of the escrows for the NVO-ICO. The 2-of-3 multi-signature address for this project will be:
3AiGej11G8jUXvEBPvQKPLiHXC7ruUCp1Z
Lauda,
17/05/2017
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJZHJdIAAoJEPTjrTxS+ZrbuQcH/ia4aFdQQe9+p6EnuuYed7gY
eubk16Pkzx21l8JcljJYadIDYW51TI76IukSFwYmoLfG3HoRTexwD02ZYa0bA4oO
cm4kaikbf3U9CU32uJ6jklthpc8HbrLs2H+BJMrcA/1dofQKhXntDHUqPQFuTqlR
JitQ3uzLlJ1OFyiRXOpO5kvSD1lGLUS2rXugULZrXZExT0xcA39j+du9QfdC/26N
lFl9y/HA+XSRgf618dSPmxpv6JtORtERvS4kklZvVFIjIxuNy/+kwE2t1qO1Xz1Q
x2UBkbGATrw3MYPbck5TLdcbLNOdX3321r2K8YY7K2CKNCe4zbP0td+gKTPQLEc=
=n++w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Agreed. Any movement of funds should have been publicly explained and new messages signed. It is very clear there was wrongdoing here. They never even acknowledged where the bitcoin was being held. Also, based upon the speee at which transactions were broadcast out of escrow, I think there is a good chance that one person was in effect control of the coins when the three signed messages clearly implied each escrow agent would control one of three keys to the address that requires two signatures. Multiple people involved in the deal were demanding transparency however the escrow agents were promptly ignoring such demands. Just look at the responses from monerjones and Blazed. All of the responses by lauda were essentially non-answers. |
|
|
|
|
We need to make bitcointalk great again!
The topics themselves are not that boring, there is a lot of nonsense posted in response to many interesting topics, making discussion difficult.
|
|
|
|
I don't see where it doesn't say that all funds go directly to me in case of dispute either. You play on a lot of slides too when you were young suchmoon?
Why would it go to you? In case of a dispute the escrow decides if the product has been delivered and the funds go to the seller, or not and the funds go to the buyer (the latter is what happened here). Is that another one of those Merriam-Webster things that you don't want to accept? I can do ad hominems with the best of them so perhaps let's take it easy with the playground insults. What funds? The amount that some anonymous 'aliased' escrow promises you is the number? "Just trust me guys". I'm done here anyways. With your voice actually meaning something here I figured you'd act a little different. Transparency is one of the biggest things in order to establish trust.. especially with the ol "not your keys not your bitcoin". In this case the investors don't even get to see the public key side which is what bitcoin and public decentralized ledgers are used for. My questions raised have never been whether or not I believe there is theft or fraud happening here, it's been solely about transparency and answers for the less fortunate. The few that have this power have remained silent or continue to talk circles. If this does not raise red flags for you then I'm sorry and I hope the best for you in life. Unfortunately, Suchmoon is known to take the side of those who is in a greater position of power. It is her way to gain power herself. Obviously it is ridiculous to say that transparency is not required because it was not expressly agreed to ahead of time. Another term that was very cleary broken was that Lauda, Blazed and Minerjones would keep the bitcoin at a specific address, however the bitcoin was moved out of the escrow address very early on. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hello.
I am one of the escrows for the NVO-ICO. The 2-of-3 multi-signature address for this project will be:
3AiGej11G8jUXvEBPvQKPLiHXC7ruUCp1Z
Lauda,
17/05/2017
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJZHJdIAAoJEPTjrTxS+ZrbuQcH/ia4aFdQQe9+p6EnuuYed7gY
eubk16Pkzx21l8JcljJYadIDYW51TI76IukSFwYmoLfG3HoRTexwD02ZYa0bA4oO
cm4kaikbf3U9CU32uJ6jklthpc8HbrLs2H+BJMrcA/1dofQKhXntDHUqPQFuTqlR
JitQ3uzLlJ1OFyiRXOpO5kvSD1lGLUS2rXugULZrXZExT0xcA39j+du9QfdC/26N
lFl9y/HA+XSRgf618dSPmxpv6JtORtERvS4kklZvVFIjIxuNy/+kwE2t1qO1Xz1Q
x2UBkbGATrw3MYPbck5TLdcbLNOdX3321r2K8YY7K2CKNCe4zbP0td+gKTPQLEc=
=n++w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
|
|
What is the accusation?
Transparency? The accusation is that a portion of the money being held in escrow was stolen or otherwise misappropriated |
|
|
|
How long is it reasonable to wait? Another month? Another two months?
The refund has already been finished.  Oh shit lol! Any thread or Telegram documentation on that? Yeah. This was the first post explaining the timeline; this was the second post containing all the batches. Missing from that information is an accounting of funds released to various parties and the conversation from the car alts to bitcoin. |
|
|
|
I have read through all 11 pages of this thread. There aren't many questions that haven't been asked and answered,
What question has been answered? Can you point to the posts in which actual information was given in an answered question? |
|
|
|
Generating the SHA-256 checksum can be done by hand but that would be a bad idea. It takes a long time and it is prone to error.
This is okay. If you make a mistake, your seed will be invaded and won’t result in lost funds. In general however, I believe what the OP is proposing is excessive for real world use. It would be more ideal to come up with a way to generate a seed on a computer that you are confident is not using flawed RNG. Perhaps to buy individual computer parts at various stores over time, keeping the parts in a safe until you are ready to use them. Alternatively, you should develop a way to test the RNG to ensure it is in fact random after several million (or maybe billion) generations. |
|
|
|
It appears as if the escrow agents are going to refund about 1400 btc to investors. The problem with this is that there is a lower band of 600 BTC missing from this amount. All of the escrow agents have refused to address any concerns that anyone has brought up, even after acknowledging being aware of said concerns. Further none of the escrow agents are providing even a basic accounting of the funds. Based on the above, it appears the escrow agents are engaging in a similar scam that TF likely pulled in regards to inputs.io, meaning refunding a majority of funds held, while keeping substantial amounts for themselves to which they are not entitled to. I am curious to know if theymos is okay with someone with such a large amount of money in dispute being not only directly on his trust list, but on DT1. I would encourage everyone reading this thread to make the following changes to their trust list: I would encourage everyone who cares about the situation to engage in the above quoted thread. |
|
|
|
It appears as if the escrow agents are going to refund about 1400 btc to investors. The problem with this is that there is a lower band of 600 BTC missing from this amount. All of the escrow agents have refused to address any concerns that anyone has brought up, even after acknowledging being aware of said concerns. Further none of the escrow agents are providing even a basic accounting of the funds. Based on the above, it appears the escrow agents are engaging in a similar scam that TF likely pulled in regards to inputs.io, meaning refunding a majority of funds held, while keeping substantial amounts for themselves to which they are not entitled to. I am curious to know if theymos is okay with someone with such a large amount of money in dispute being not only directly on his trust list, but on DT1. I would encourage everyone reading this thread to make the following changes to their trust list: |
|
|
|
|
Lol, theymos solved a problem by posting a bunch of selfies.
If I didn’t know any better, I would say he is a teenage girl.
|
|
|
|
I recently came across diagaran2, and was somewhat surprised. Does he have any relation to diagaran? Edit: my bad. There is an additional letter within the name. If anyone has additional information they want to add, pm me and I’ll unlock the thread. |
|
|
|
|
Based on the amount of bitcoin missing/unaccounted for, the escrow “fee” is in the millions of dollars and nears 1,000 btc, and exceeds 60% of what is being disbursed.
|
|
|
|
|
Still no response beyond “I didn’t see the scam accusation thread because I don’t frequent that section”? Nothing about the underlying concerns?
|
|
|
|
|
The English sections should only contain English. If a post is posted in Russian in one of the English sections it would be off topic and should be reported
|
|
|
|
In other news: https://news.bitcoin.com/iran-expected-lift-cryptocurrency-ban-september/Iran Is Testing National Cryptocurrency
Iran Expected to Lift Cryptocurrency Ban in SeptemberMr. Hakimi also discussed the possibility of Iran’s current position regarding the development of a state-issued cryptocurrency, stating: “National virtual currencies haven’t proved successful experiences in the world, but some economic officials have emphasized on this, so the Informatics Services Corporation has readied a test edition and some other entities are also cooperating in this.”
Saeed Mahdiyoun, an official representing Iran’s Supreme Cyberspace Council, also recently indicated that the country’s cyberspace authority was actively exploring the idea of introducing a national cryptocurrency. This is a hint that they will pull a Venezuela Petro stunt, having their own coins which is backed by oil, to manuever itself against trade embargo led by US. I understand the Venezuela coin was largely a failure. Most exchanges prohibited its use on its platform as well as by their employees. I don’t think they were really able to raise much money this way. I would anticipate Iran’s coin similarly fail. In both cases, if their government is overthrown the new government would likely not honor these obligations. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
