And you're still making assumptions based on your own preconcieved opinions of the guy. But you have your set opinion, so whatever.
Pot, kettle... Exactly! Thank you! And you're still making assumptions based on your own preconcieved opinions of the guy. But you have your set opinion, so whatever.
The judgements of courts and the statements of prosecutors and judges aren't my own preconceived opinions. Your statements, on the other hand, are coming out of thin air. You had a friend who skipped out on his rathole apartment one time, so Bruce getting sued for half a million in back rent was probably a similar situation when you think about it! It's like you're convinced that Bruce is a heavenly angel and you can't help but look at everything he does in the absolute best light. You're like Latarian Milton's grandma when it comes to Bruce. It's almost kinda creepy. Friend didn't skip out, but wanted to. I've repeatedly said that Bruce is an untrustworthy and unscrupulous person. The dead horse I am apparently beating is the statement that "Bruce didn't defend himself because he was obviously at fault" is nothing but speculation, and in my opinion no better or worse than the statement that "Bruce didn't defend himself because the business was such a collosal failure that there was no point in wasting any more lawyer money." The only facts we have are that he didn't perform (nothing about whether he even tried), a claim that all of it was a scam, based on false advertising (we don't actually know his real intent for starting this), and that there is a lot of stuff that we don't know. Also, half a million in back rent? Are you sure you're not mixing up more numbers? Assuming he stayed at the place for two years before running, that's $42,000 a month in rent... This is also kind of what I'm talking about: unchecked accusations end up mixing up and snowballing into wild ones. |
|
|
|
This is amazing. You managed to turn scamming desperate people out of their last dollars and jetting off to Thailand for hookers into a sob story. Just how many "illegal mistakes" do you have to make before it starts being on purpose?
And you're still making assumptions based on your own preconcieved opinions of the guy. But you have your set opinion, so whatever. |
|
|
|
1) I believe there is often more to the story than what the court summary presents (remember the story about the lady who spilled McD's coffee on her lap?),
I'm honestly curious what you think about that case. Everybody who has no idea how the law works and just heard a joke about it on TV tends to pick the same side on that case, so lets hear yours. For the sake of those who don't know: The summary of the case just says the old lady spilled hot coffee on herserf, sued McDonals, and won. The details of the case were that the coffee was dangerusly hot, above the recommended safety level. The old lady got third degree burns on her thighs and genitals, and needed hospitalization and surgery. Afterwards she asked McDonald's to compensate her for the hospital bill only (I seem to remember only $10,000?) McDonalds refused. That's when she took them to court. The initial judgement was high, and McDonalds was shown to be negligent in serving way too dangerously hot coffee in really unsafe containers. McDonalds appealed, appelate court still ruled in the old lady's favor, but reduced the judgement. So Bruce is innocent because a jury decided that McDonalds were 80% at fault for serving coffee so hot that a woman suffered third degree burns and was hospitalized for 8 days receiving skin grafts?
Ok.
No, just pointing out that the court summary shows the old lady as a sue-happy opportunist, and that's what most people with preconcieved notions assume. The details often don't match people's assumptions. |
|
|
|
I just think that either he is a sock puppet or being deliberately disingenuous. I spent a bit of time reading over those things and there is proof of: Judgement against him for deliberately misleading people into believing that he could fix their financial problems with 0 positive results shown by his defense to refute this; fleeing the jurisdiction of that judgement without paying that judgement; conviction for prostitution that was plead down; confirmed judgement against him in 1 state for fleeing with sums of money owing in rent; current proceedings in another state for the same thing; current proceedings in that state for an assault as part of that.
This is not made up, the documents have been found.
That is just the stuff we know about, it is worth noting he confirmed that he is the same person in the first case - that IS the same person in the other ones - so it is him. That is a fact. The silly part is that when looking at all of that proven information, people fasten onto some animal/child sex thing that only the trolls came up with to ignore the rest. They have to be either sock puppets, deliberately disingenuous or completely dense.
Come on, how can you defend any of those things in good faith?
Nope, not a sock puppet. Don't know Bruce personally, never met him, don't know what makes him tick. Do like his show and the contributions he has made to the group so far. Do still want to meet him and find out what kind of a person he is. A judgement is a judgement, but 1) I believe there is often more to the story than what the court summary presents (remember the story about the lady who spilled McD's coffee on her lap?), and two, the judgement only told us what it did, leaving out too many details. I don't like people extrapolating that to things they only assume. If you want to accuse Bruce of anything, feel free to accuse him of things that were found during the fact finding portions of the trial. I'm fine with that, and will support you, even if our opinions of the person himself end up slightly different. Just don't forget that mine is an opinion, as is yours, and neither are "correct." No, I don't care about prostitution or any other consentual sex acts, nor speeding tickets. Yes, the rest of the stuff makes him out to be even more of an unscrupulous person. My parents have rental properties and have dealt with people trying to get away without paying rent. I also have friends who ended up in such shit holes that they wished they could abandon their property without having to pay for the rest of the lease. All this tells me is that Bruce has led a rather difficult and "interesting" life (growing up gay, especially in his time, I'm sure hasn't helped much, either), is not to be trusted easily when it comes to money and business, and is prone to stupid and possibly illegal mistakes (again, all of this is my opinion, based on my interpretation of the limited facts). Within that context, I don't think it has much of an influence on his just doing a talk show where he interviews guests, or organizes gatherings. People with that kind of charisma are extremely rate, and among geeky computer types are almost non-existant. So, despite his colorful past (which, as i said, I am curious about, since I like people who's lives are not borning), I am willing to forgive, or overlook, or ignore it, for the sake of continuing my own entertainment in watching his shows and learning about developments in the Bitcoin world. Had there been alternative shows, or other people willing to take up the rather difficult job Bruce volunteered for, I would not be defending the idea of his show continuing as much. But so far, he is pretty much it. Besides, although he obviously has interest in financial things, here he has no involvement with any business or direct involvement with taking other people's money (assuming he is just a spokesperson for the charities, and others are responsible for collecting and distributing money). Perhaps this is finally something he can do in his life where he can be involved in things he loves (finance), without the risk of screwing people over. A way to redeem himself in a safe environment and finally settle on a path in his life (and maybe earn the money to pay all those people back? Maybe wishfull thinking on my part...). He's not exactly young any more, and I admit I do feel kind of sorry for him for being so far in his age, and, from what the court docs say, still having such an unsettled whirlwind of a life. (If Bruce is reading, sorry for calling him old. I know how much of an offense it is for homos) |
|
|
|
Who raises the standard of living? How? With what labor and what incentives?
Entire thread dedicated too that but i summarize it for you. Who raises the standard of living? * Mankind I think you answered the "who" below, which seems to be volunteers and government workers, with money collected through taxation, with "for the greater good/motherland (motherplanet?)" I still don't see how this differs from early 20th century USSR. They also used science and technology to support their agricultural projects, and also simply printed money to pay for it, which on worked because no one was allowed to trade that currency for other currencies. Before i answer anything more , where did you read in my post "with money collected through taxation". It looks like you read what you want to read ( or what is filtered with your perception unconsciously ) without actually thinking. You said government sponsored. Projects that big will have to be. Do you have a system for the government to collect thet billions that will be required to start this project voluntarily? |
|
|
|
Got some good responses from most of those sponsors.
Thank you Bit-pay!
Thank you Meze Grill!
( They just heard about all the accusations in the last 12 hours. They wanted to wait and see if Bruce addressed any of it in this recent show. He didn't. )
Thank you Bitbrew!
'Thank you" as in they said they will pull sponsorship? I'd love to see their responses  |
|
|
|
He obviously lied to get business. That WAS apparently illegal. We don't know if he just took money and decided to keep it, or if as soon as he opened his business with all the lies, a whole bunch of desperate people sent him checks before he had the investors lined up to help him, and after a month or few of "where's my money/help?" he goes sued before he even had a chance to do anything.
You know what you do if someone just sends you a check and you don't think you can provide services? You don't cash the check. How do you know the service of actively looking for investors was not being performed? Because the fucking court found that not one fucking customer could be found that a investor was fucking found for. If you could have a read through the fucking court documents and see what people have beeen talking about for fucking weeks... That is true, but the court said fuck-all about whether he was actually trying or not. Yes, I did read "the fucking court documents." Please point me to the part where it said he was sitting on his ass doing nothing. Also, what I do with your mom and animal costumes is none of your business, kid. |
|
|
|
He obviously lied to get business. That WAS apparently illegal. We don't know if he just took money and decided to keep it, or if as soon as he opened his business with all the lies, a whole bunch of desperate people sent him checks before he had the investors lined up to help him, and after a month or few of "where's my money/help?" he goes sued before he even had a chance to do anything.
You know what you do if someone just sends you a check and you don't think you can provide services? You don't cash the check. How do you know the service of actively looking for investors was not being performed? |
|
|
|
Personally, having studied business court cases, that is still a case of he-said she-said to me, with way too few details, and I can easily imagine getting into the type of situation he described in a legitimate business example.
Could you list any businesses you are a part of so I will know to avoid them. ...I do work for the government as a finance analyst... Everything makes sense now. My last company was privately owned, but had a horrible boss. I needed some place to hold me over while I work on my degree, that won't make me go insane. I do fear I am getting too comfortable here, and it's scaring me a bit, so i don't plan to stay. I am also trying to get things going on the side as private business ideas, too, so I'm not completely useless. Also, despite working for the gov, my finance and business training is from the Harvard school, so is definitely more Austrian than Keynesian, Atlas. I'm very much on your side with all of that. |
|
|
|
Lucky for you, none yet. Still working on my master's  I do work for the government as a finance analyst, so feel free to avoid government  That's two strikes against you. You suck off taxpayers doing nothing worthwhile. How can you stand living an unexamined life? What was the first strike? And what do you mean by unexamined life? |
|
|
|
Personally, having studied business court cases, that is still a case of he-said she-said to me, with way too few details, and I can easily imagine getting into the type of situation he described in a legitimate business example.
Could you list any businesses you are a part of so I will know to avoid them. Lucky for you, none yet. Still working on my master's I do work for the government as a finance analyst, so feel free to avoid government |
|
|
|
Let me repeat, the court found and declared his business to be a scam. The court rejected and did not admit into public record his explanation.
The court rejected it because his statements were false. Speculation. He told a shitload of people he'd had great success saving houses. In court, he pulls the "Oh, yeah, well once business picked up we got overwhelmed" and then couldn't actually name a single client he helped.
He obviously lied to get business. That WAS apparently illegal. We don't know if he just took money and decided to keep it, or if as soon as he opened his business with all the lies, a whole bunch of desperate people sent him checks before he had the investors lined up to help him, and after a month or few of "where's my money/help?" he goes sued before he even had a chance to do anything. The court is allowed to reject evidence that can be demonstrated to be fraudulent. Bruce "defaulted" because perjury in an actual trial would have gotten him thrown in prison and there was nothing truthful he could say in his defense.
Speculation again. The court paper didn't say why it was rejected. His "defense", he already posted it on the forum. His claim was he got "overwhelmed." The court rightfully rejected that argument. It was covered in one of the financial news articles back then, someone posted the link to the archive in one of the threads.
Must not have bee one of the few I'm following then. |
|
|
|
I may have forgotten the facts, I'll give you that. Yes, I know there are multiple issues in multiple states. Stuff about assault in NY I think? Your points about why explanations were bullshit were also your speculation. No evidence on either your part or his, sorry.
Bruce couldn't provide the court in Illinois with the name of _ONE PERSON_ whos home he saved. The ads he ran claimed he'd been doing that for 12 years and had over 70 offices. And those ads have been posted for all to see. So, let's see. Bruce ran ads claiming 12 years experience, multiple lawyers on staff, 70+ offices nationwide. Those ads have been posted, archived through independent sources, and those ads are part of the court documentation against him. Bruce could not actually provide the name of _ONE SINGLE SATISFIED CUSTOMER._ You think that means it's "speculation" that he committed willful fraud? Wake the fuck up. I'm sure it's pointless to ask, but was he the sole employee of that company? Was he in charge of advertising or creating the website? Does he even know how to make a website? Do we have a timeline from when his business opened doors and got its first customer until they were sued, to see if they were really given enough time to find clients? More importantly, do we have proof that Bruce stole millions, or is a pedo, or is behind Mybitcoin? Even MORE importantly, are you running your own show? Do you know who will make a better spokesman for Bitcoin? Do you have any plans to help them get started? The MOST important question, do you think you can influence the opinions of the community as a whole about whom they should or should not give a feck about? Do you think you will be able to stop Bruce from continuing his show? Do you think you can change the minds of the fans of his show, or change the minds of people who never liked his show, anyway? Do you think anyone else outside of Bitcoin will even care? |
|
|
|
Not convinced at the facts? Are you serious? The guy ran a mortgage scam, preying on the desperate, and never had any intention nor did he ever actually help anyone, in any way, aside from relieving them of their money. That's documented fact. I'm not sure what else you would need to determine he's a despicable person.
Let me repeat, the court found and declared his business to be a scam. The court rejected and did not admit into public record his explanation. The court also decided it's judgement as default. Not just a judge deciding on the case immediately due to overwhelming evidence, but deciding in default due to Bruce just refusing to defend himself after his explanations were rejected. We can go based on the court's word, or we can go on Bruce's word. Personally, having studied business court cases, that is still a case of he-said she-said to me, with way too few details, and I can easily imagine getting into the type of situation he described in a legitimate business example. What I would need is to either read minds, or know Bruce personally. Or a confession from someone he worked with, admitting that the whole thing was really a scam. I don't have either. |
|
|
|
But that's OK, I understand you conveniently forgot because that let you keep defending him. And I understand that you're only interested in defending the beloved spokesman and so you repeatedly ignored facts. I understand that you made up your mind right from the start and the discussion we had in another thread where I pointed at actual court documents, then pointed out why some of the "explanations" were bullshit, well, of course you and a bunch of other people just have to reject that because it doesn't fit the conclusion you formed before you had facts.
And I understand that the concept that a spokesman should have a reputation for integrity, instead of a reputation for fraud, is obviously completely beyond you. But, hey, if you think someone who scammed tons of people in multiple states is the best person to make Bitcoin look good...
I may have forgotten the facts, I'll give you that. Yes, I know there are multiple issues in multiple states. Stuff about assault in NY I think? Your points about why explanations were bullshit were also your speculation. No evidence on either your part or his, sorry. Also, I don't think of him as a spokesman. Gavin is the developer. Bruce is just one guy with a show, and little technical knowledge behind the project. And again, I'm honestly not trying to defend him, I'm just trying to put some breaks on the extreme overreacting and EXTREME reaching on some of the claims. |
|
|
|
Because unpaid parking tickets are exactly like multi-million dollar mortgage scams, among other things.
Multi-million now? I you sure it wasn't billions? It's like the charges against Bruce on this forum are like Bitcoin, going "Up... up... up...!" (wasn't the ruling about amounts ranging from $600 to $3000?) Read the Illinois State Prosecutors documents. It was well in excess of $1 million all told and he only had to pay a fractional percentage of that value and it still ended up at $500k. Well, he obviously didn't care enough about the order to pay it back, but the point still stands. The one I raid listed amounts in the $600 to $3000 range, had a total he had to pay back be around $230k, and the $500k was punitive (fine/punishment). I didn't see anything about a million, or that $500k being part of the money he stole. |
|
|
|
Why are you and Rassah etc. so obsessed with defending him? If you don't want to join in any boycott then why keep posting instead of moving on?
You his buddies?
Don't know him personally, no. Don't actually have an opinion of him, since all I know of him is what the court's opinions of his actions are, and the persona he projects on camera. Those do not a person make. From a business sense, I would be very wary of hiring him to do anything or giving him my money. From a personal hanging-out type sense, I don't know, he seems like a fun guy. Do I think he's despicable for what he did? I don't know, because I'm still not convinced of the facts. Thing is, none of you here know all the facts, either. Just court decisions, and a lot of speculation. Why am I "defending" him? I guess it just bothers me when I see a shit-ton of angry trolls start witch hunts, which quickly go from court decisions based on he-said she-said, to wild accusations about who the hell knows what. Bottom line is, I can say that the court evidence is damning, but doesn't tell me everything. Can you say that you know for a fact that Bruce does not feel remorse for screwing up the people he did, whether through scam or shit business idea? |
|
|
|
Because unpaid parking tickets are exactly like multi-million dollar mortgage scams, among other things.
Multi-million now? I you sure it wasn't billions? It's like the charges against Bruce on this forum are like Bitcoin, going "Up... up... up...!" (wasn't the ruling about amounts ranging from $600 to $3000?) |
|
|
|
Jesus Christ people. Stop apologizing for the criminal. This is what's going to kill bitcoin. How many of you are absolute fucking idiots.
I am starting to believe you hate him so much, because since we have Bruce you are no longer the only gay in bitcoin town. To me it seems more like what happens in the furry fandom, where when one of them gets caught on camera in the news doing something embarrassing or illegal, the rest of them immediately freak out, turn against them, and try to distance the community as far from that person as possible by any means necessary. It's a rather sad source of drama in that fandom, and, sadly, is a major source of entertainment for SA goons and anyone else who likes to pick on insecure nerds. Really though, as you said, they just shouldn't care. |
|
|
|
Honestly, I think half the posters on this thread deserve to be ripped off out of every last dime they have. The stupidity is astounding. "Oh, it was years ago." Yes, people. Conveniently forget the CURRENT, ACTIVE case in New York. If I recall right that one is an over half a million dollar judgment.
What the fuck do you think he did to get that, swiped a pack of cigarettes?
Jesus Christ people. Stop apologizing for the criminal. This is what's going to kill bitcoin. How many of you are absolute fucking idiots.
What DID he do to deserve a half million dollar judgement? And did he hurt you, or the bitcoin community, personally for them to be so enraged about it? If not, just consider him a bad and untrustworthy man, and move on. If the trangressions that have nothing to do with Bitcoin, by some guy with an obscure internet TV show, can kill Bitcoin, then Bitcoin has bigger problems than Bruce Wagner! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
