Orange, and because orange coin go up. The others are not the same..... Jeezz..grow tf up. You're as bad as the gold bugs. Lookup the phrase "natural monopoly". The only scenario that fits that definition is when crypto is used as a universal unit of account. As a monetary commodity/asset it's no more a natural monopoly than sand is. Also, the "economy" has a slightly wider scope than this particular thread and it might be wise to spend less time in here if you've ended up with such drastically distorted ideas about how markets develop. Without alts there'd be no bitcoin and vica-versa and pretending they're some kind of "contaminant" is just short-sighted lunacy. It's like your head denying it's got a body. Sorry to apparently challenge your zealotry on that but it's simple observational fact and I'd be careful about what you wish for if you think otherwise :-) You're under the assumption that alts have to go up because "its time." What happened in late 2017 / early 2018 was similar to the dotcom bubble. There was an unrealistic amount of enthusiasm in alts (and BTC) whereby AnyCoin could skyrocket 1000%. People poured their money in without doing due diligence into basic aspects like potential for real world adoption. 2 years later, investors aren't going to be making the same mistake again. Just like with the dotcom bubble, the strong will survive, but unlike last altseason, there will be no reason for the weak to flourish. At the end of the day a coin's chance of success is driven by user adoption. Without this there is no reason to expect any coin to go up, bitcoin included. https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/titcoin/ |
|
|
|
Stop being such a weasel and answer the question. Why would Mike Pompeo say he received a subpoena if it didn't exist?  Stop being such a muskrat and admit the subpoenas don't exist. Why would I do that when Pompeo acknowledged receipt of said subpoena? If the subpoena doesn't exist, why would Pompeo acknowledge receiving it? |
|
|
|
That would be the logical thing to do seeing as how Pompeo said he received the subpoena: Of course concluding these subpoenas never existed is an irrational response to the inability to produce these subpoenas right? Of course!
Given that Pompeo acknowledged receiving the subpoena, yes, saying it doesn't exist is an irrational response. Stop ferreting your way around my questions.
I have always answered all your questions. Now simply answer mine: why would Mike Pompeo say he received a subpoena if it didn't exist? So Mike Pompeo is the official guy who decides of subpoenas are real now huh? Interesting. I thought that was what courts of public record did, but this is news to me. If Mike Pompeo acknowledged Bigfoot, would saying Bigfoot doesn't exist be an irrational response? You don't answer my questions, you answer the questions you wish I had asked. Stop being such a weasel and answer the question. Why would Mike Pompeo say he received a subpoena if it didn't exist? |
|
|
|
I already answered your question. The answer is I don't know. It may never be on the internet. I say the subpoena exists because Mike Pompeo said he received it: And you squirreled your way out of answering my question yet again. How honest and brave. So you don't have the burden of proof to support your premise because "it may never be on the internet". So of course we must assume they exist for this indefinite amount of time right? That would be the logical thing to do seeing as how Pompeo said he received the subpoena: Of course concluding these subpoenas never existed is an irrational response to the inability to produce these subpoenas right? Of course!
Given that Pompeo acknowledged receiving the subpoena, yes, saying it doesn't exist is an irrational response. Stop ferreting your way around my questions.
I have always answered all your questions. Now simply answer mine: why would Mike Pompeo say he received a subpoena if it didn't exist? |
|
|
|
Looks like I'm the only one going for the Browns here, I think they get the job done later today and I'm also confident that they cover the -2.5 spread so I took that in a single bet. For my parlay I got the Browns ML, Ravens ML, Bucs ML, Saints ML and Giants ML. Two games are a risk in the Browns and Giants but I think they can both win and add some value to my parlay. Good luck with your bets!
Well, we were all wrong after all, except for you! Was a close one. Congrats on this win, even if you didn't get your parlay. I just won the under part of the bet, which was a little less than 50% of the bet... Going with SF tomorrow and playing it safe with -3.5. |
|
|
|
Dishonest AND a coward. I should be ashamed of myself! Obviously if I don't explain why Mike Pompeo said something, clearly the subpoenas existed, right Nutilduhh?
The conclusion I'm drawing is that you know his acknowledgement of receiving a subpoena means the subpoena exists, that's why you can't bear to answer the question. There's no other possible explanation for you continuing to squirrel your way around answering the question. You can't even answer the simple question, by what date will you be able to provide the subpoenas issued by The House regarding the presidential impeachment investigation before October 31st 2019. 2020? January? March? Whats a good enough amount of time for you to admit you have zero evidence? Why would you say a subpoena exists if you can't prove it?
I already answered your question. The answer is I don't know. It may never be on the internet. I say the subpoena exists because Mike Pompeo said he received it: And you squirreled your way out of answering my question yet again. How honest and brave. |
|
|
|
"Some people" said there were subpoenas, including the man who received such a subpoena, Mike Pompeo. Stop weaseling your way around the question: why would Pompeo lie about receiving a subpoena? Clearly you think the subpoena doesn't exist. Clearly Mike Pompeo stated it does. How do you reconcile this? Why would Mike Pompeo lie about Bigfoot? This is an image of Mike Pompeo with Bigfoot, therefore Bigfoot exists. How can you reconcile this?  Stop mongoosing your way around the question. Clearly you have no evidence they ever existed, because so far your best argument is "Mike Pompeo said so", which is equally substantial as the above included proof of Bigfoot. This is pretty stupid, even for you. I think this is the lowest point you've ever devolved to on the forum, which actually says quite a bit about the depths to which you've now sunk. Obviously your shitty shop job is a shop job: Obviously Pompeo actually said this: Comparing the two things as equally relevant renders you a dishonest coward, especially when you can't even answer the simple question as to why Pompeo would acknowledge receipt of a subpoena if it didn't exist. |
|
|
|
3 Accounts Connected:bitkoyun, sonerbo, sonerbo1Proof:- bitkoyun posts the wallet address 17YazJeU4TXkZr6PqCSQGnDbDyQh7baZV8 here: [1 (signed message)]
- sonerbo posts the wallet address 17YazJeU4TXkZr6PqCSQGnDbDyQh7baZV8 here: [1],
bitkoyun's registration predates that of sonerbo - therefore, sonerbo is the alt. Both are claiming from the same competition as though they are not the same person, therefore they are scammers. Related Addresses:= Miscellaneous: sonerbo1 was used to recover the "main" sonerbo account here: [ Archive]
05 August 2013, 23:49:50 Date Registered: bitkoyun 03 November 2014, 01:31:21 Date Registered: sonerbo February 07, 2018, 03:19:29 PM Date Registered: sonerbo1 2018-05-10 6:22:42 PM password reset via email sonerbo 20 May 2018, 20:51:47 Last actual post sonerbo1 01 March 2019, 08:11:51 Last actual post bitkoyun 15 March 2019, 00:39:24 Last Active: bitkoyun 2019-04-21 9:07:23 PM woke up sonerbo1 2019-10-30 11:13:02 AM woke up sonerbo1 You don't speak Turkish. You clearly have no idea what is going on in the thread you referenced, yet you still "connect" them so you can red tag both of them... for what reason exactly? |
|
|
|
I will not post here again, because I am tired of all B.S. posted by Carsen and his shills.
You should probably remove your scam accusation against me and Denarius. You have no right to be tired, you sit here and can make false scam accusations against someone and an entire community, you deserve everything you have coming to you. Why would he do that? You have a track record of being involved in scam projects. Logic would assume Denarius is also a scam. At best, its a failed shitcoin. C'mon man. There's literally thousands of other coins out there trying to achieve the exact same thing you are and you have failed to differentiate yourself in any way, other than the notoriety of you being involved with scam projects. |
|
|
|
So expecting you to prove your premise that these subpoenas were real makes me a flat Earther? Is that what we are going with now?
You are overlooking compelling evidence that the subpoena exists in order to continue hammering your one go-to line of "SHOW ME THE SUBPOENA!" This is quite similar to what flat earthers do when they shout "SHOW ME THE EARTH IS ROUND!" while ignoring a large body of evidence suggesting that it is. The non-existence of the subpoena is independent of Mike Pompeo. How many months do you need to find it? Just give me a number.
I will answer your question: I don't know. It may never appear online. Now please answer mine: is Mike Pompeo wrong or lying when he mentions receiving a subpoena in his letter to the house committee? If he is not wrong or lying, then what is he talking about when he uses the word "subpoena"? I am not overlooking any evidence of anything. Some people said there were subpoenas. And? That is not proof it exists or evidence of anything other than some one said it does. "Some people" said there were subpoenas, including the man who received such a subpoena, Mike Pompeo. Stop weaseling your way around the question: why would Pompeo lie about receiving a subpoena? Clearly you think the subpoena doesn't exist. Clearly Mike Pompeo stated it does. How do you reconcile this? |
|
|
|
So expecting you to prove your premise that these subpoenas were real makes me a flat Earther? Is that what we are going with now?
You are overlooking compelling evidence that the subpoena exists in order to continue hammering your one go-to line of "SHOW ME THE SUBPOENA!" This is quite similar to what flat earthers do when they shout "SHOW ME THE EARTH IS ROUND!" while ignoring a large body of evidence suggesting that it is. The non-existence of the subpoena is independent of Mike Pompeo. How many months do you need to find it? Just give me a number.
I will answer your question: I don't know. It may never appear online. Now please answer mine: is Mike Pompeo wrong or lying when he mentions receiving a subpoena in his letter to the house committee? If he is not wrong or lying, then what is he talking about when he uses the word "subpoena"? |
|
|
|
|
haha,
the EVIDENCE presented is UNDENIABLE and BACKED by SEVERAL OBSERVABLE INSTANCES of scum behavior by the-scum-beyond-all. Here we have a litany of solid connections between the-one-below-all and scam behavior that can lead to no other conclusion other than he stole the invisible giraffe, flogged it, starved it, and left it for dead. Only a true felch artist could ascertain ANYTHING OTHER than the OBVIOUS which is that the-ass-above-all was SCAM FACILITATING with the help of his invisible associates who led him to the exact location of the invisible giraffe.
really xlvids, I don't understand how anyone with half a brain could assume anything other than the OBVIOUS which is that the-log-who-floats-in-the-bowl was SCAM FACILIATING as is his UNDENIABLY PROVEN nature as a SCAM ARTIST.
it is HIGH TIME these DIRTY TURDS were flushed from the bowl even though we all know that floating logs are the hardest to flush down and sometimes require 1 or 2 even up to 3 additional flushes before they finally SINK. i will be sure to reference your philosopher's list of 38 strategems on how to troll your opponent AT ANY TIME OR PLACE OF MY choosing. we get goosebumps just thinking of envisioning the-log-above-all CRYING TO THEYMOS over THIS post. it is a masterful collection of OBSERVABLE INSTANCES of outright SCUMBAG behavior and we commend your honesty for compiling them into such a thoughtful manner. we have now offered UNDENIABLE PROOF for all to see about SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS of FRAUDULENT forum BEHAvior. i need to add at least a couple more sentences to this paragraph to get it up to cryptohunter size or oops should i say the-asshole-below-all and i believe this is first and foremost a primary DISPLAY of the best usage of the IVORY TOWER section i have seen in a LONG TIME.
the one above all
but are they really though? no
there's a nice haiku.
|
|
|
|
Its not weird because it likely isn't on the internet. We don't know how long it will be before it will be available on the internet, if ever. There's not a single repository for every single piece of information that is "publicly available" and released by congress. However, what is weird is your refusal to accept that Mike Pompeo did say as part of public record that he received said subpoena. Your beef really is with him. After all, he's the one that said this, not me: Still waiting for your proof of Pompeo saying Bigfoot is real... No it is definitely weird, because if it existed I am sure the three of you would not be able to resist posting it here. You are the one holding the premise that the subpoenas exist. Mike Pompeo is irrelevant. If it existed on the internet, then yes, we would have. Just because something doesn't exist on the internet doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You really have completely fallen into a flat earther type argument where if somebody can't prove something to your liking then the earth must be flat. Mike Pompeo can't be irrelevant because he is the one who received said subpoena, as acknowledged in his letter to the house committee: What is he talking about if he didn't receive a subpoena? Is he lying or is he wrong. Just answer the question instead of trying to conflate it with Nancy Pelosi, the White House, or Bigfoot. "Mehhh... I don't have to answer any questions!" If you weren't a such an empty flapping sack of dishonesty then you would just answer them. That looks like a "repository for every single piece of information that is "publicly available" and released" by the house. Interesting.
Surprise: its not. |
|
|
|
What a weasel. If I didn't know any better, I'd think he was just trolling us. Unfortunately he is still dead serious in maintaining this ridiculous masquerade of not being able to grasp simple concepts in logic. Every congressional subpoena in recent years is not on the internet.
Here, this meme is for you.  Guess TECSHARE wins you guys. The subpoena isn't on the internet, therefore it doesn't exist. Oh wait a minute, I forgot about this: http://prod-upp-image-read.ft.com/74bfe2b8-e465-11e9-9743-db5a370481bcWhy would Mike Pompeo say he received a subpoena that doesn't exist? Still waiting for your quote from Pompeo saying Bigfoot is real... You don't think it is at all weird none of you 3 stooges can produce a single copy of a single House issued subpoena related to impeachment issued before October 31st? Seriously, how much time do you need to track it down? A month? Three months? You give me a time frame and we can revisit it then. Just tell me what you think is a reasonable amount of time to be able to access a public court record related to a presidential impeachment over the internet. Its not weird because it likely isn't on the internet. We don't know how long it will be before it will be available on the internet, if ever. There's not a single repository for every single piece of information that is "publicly available" and released by congress. However, what is weird is your refusal to accept that Mike Pompeo did say as part of public record that he received said subpoena. Your beef really is with him. After all, he's the one that said this, not me: Still waiting for your proof of Pompeo saying Bigfoot is real... |
|
|
|
What a weasel. If I didn't know any better, I'd think he was just trolling us. Unfortunately he is still dead serious in maintaining this ridiculous masquerade of not being able to grasp simple concepts in logic. Every congressional subpoena in recent years is not on the internet.
Here, this meme is for you. Guess TECSHARE wins you guys. The subpoena isn't on the internet, therefore it doesn't exist. Oh wait a minute, I forgot about this: http://prod-upp-image-read.ft.com/74bfe2b8-e465-11e9-9743-db5a370481bcWhy would Mike Pompeo say he received a subpoena that doesn't exist? Still waiting for your quote from Pompeo saying Bigfoot is real... |
|
|
|
Exactly, both are fictional! I am glad you are finally with me! Even if I had video of Mike Pompeo saying Bigfoot is real and he's "seent it", that is equally as much proof of Bigfoot existing as when Mike Pompeo says there was a subpoena, that a subpoena existed. That amount of proof being zero of course. What you have here is called a non-sequiter. You can't and won't ever prove the subpoenas ever existed. Admit it.
That's not what I said. I said one was fictional, in reference to your claim about Mike Pompeo saying Bigfoot is real. This on the other hand is not fictional: It is Mike Pompeo going on record saying he received a subpoena. That's why your false equivalence is doubly false. This is some pretty sad slinking you are resorting to in an attempt to worm your way out of admitting you were wrong about the subpoena not being real. |
|
|
|
Maybe there should be implemented a limit of feedbacks / trust / flags in a given time (if it doesn't exist already)? There are limits already, but they are quite high: OK, new limits:
- You can't give more than 5 ratings to a single user.
- Your total sent ratings is limited to three times your activity, but at least 1.
- The comment length is limited to 600 characters, but each newline counts as 120 characters.
Ah, that explains why I never received a 6th negative trust from Hatch Support!  |
|
|
|
mosprognoz, Lauda, suchmoon, and owlcatz are all wanted for defamation
LOL. "Wanted for defamation". Good one.  Flags opposed. |
|
|
|
There's no "mystery" behind why it got removed. Suchmoon already explained it to you. It's you spamming the forum and the trust system with useless garbage. And using threads posted by a known troll as references, so they disappear when the troll gets nuked. Create your own threads and archive them.
The person who wrote the thread you referenced was evading a ban for spamming. They got caught and their posts were deleted. Basically, you were relying on the words of a banned spammer to make your point. Congratulations. |
|
|
|
I've decided to make a game of it, whoever sets the best lineup wins some merit.
Here's my 7 player lineup for those positions: QB: Jameis Winston, TB RB1: Aaron Jones, GB RB2: Devonta Freeman, Atl WR1: Michael Thomas, NO WR2: Mike Evans, TB TE: Hunter Henry, LAC - he played already, but didn't quite meet his projected points, so leaving him in isn't exactly cheating FLEX: David Johnson, Ari |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
