Latest posts of: LDeneault

#Proof of authentication
Joined Campaign : Twitter
Twitter Profile Link : https://twitter.com/ldeneault213
Followers : 5300

Thank you

#Proof of authentication
Bitcointalk username: LDeneault
Bitcointalk profile link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=315706;sa=summary
Telegram username:@ldeneault1

Reported for Facebook
Reported for Twitter

#Proof of authentication #Proof of participation:
- Joined Telegram - Yes
- Did you check our Bounty thread? YES
- Are you going to participate in our bounty campaign? YES

#PROOF OF JOINED POST
Twitter Campaign
Twitter url: https://twitter.com/ldeneault213
Followers : 5300

#PROOF OF REGISTRATION
Bitcointalk UserName: LDeneault
Telegram Username: ldeneault1
Campaign Participated: Twitter Campaign

Bitcointalk name: LDeneault
Twitter Profile Link = https://twitter.com/ldeneault213
Telegram Username = @ldeneault1

#Proof of Authentication Post Link
Joined Campaign : Twitter
Bitcointalk username : LDeneault

Week 2 (24/09-30/09)
Twitter Campaign:
Tweet/Retweet+Like
1. https://twitter.com/hetachain/status/1042992727170854913
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Proof of Authentication
Bitcointalk Username : LDeneault
Bitcointalk Profile link : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=315706;sa=summary
Bounty Campaign/s to join : Twitter

Proof of application post
Bitcoin username: LDeneault
Bitcoin link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=315706;sa=summary
Twitter Campaigne

Quote from: Keyser Soze on October 20, 2014, 07:28:26 PM

BFL isn't/wasn't a ponzi and has nothing to do with BT, not sure why you make that comparison.

When BFL first opened up their Monarch refunds, the reason that they publicly gave for why there was a sixty-day delay on refunds is because they had to sell your place in line to another customer. Using a later customer's money to fund the payout of an earlier customer is practically the definition of a Ponzi scheme. That's why I made the comparison.

It would be an interesting thing to see how many people who got ripped off by the obvious Bitcoin Trader Ponzi also made fun in the past of the folks who got ripped off by the equally-obvious Ponzi of Butterfly Labs.

I narrowly escaped getting ripped off by BFL and swore then that I'd never invest a single cent in anything related to cryptocurrency. I wonder how many Bitcoin Trader marks will come to the same conclusion?

Quote from: Inaba on September 25, 2014, 11:15:10 PM

Why would I do that? I'm not the one making false statements with nearly every post.

The only false statements you make are when you're speaking officially on behalf of Butterfly Labs.

The question I have, Josh, is this: when you made one hopelessly untrue claim about delivery after another, did you know at the time that they were untrue or are you just hopelessly inept at your job. As best as I can tell, "inept" is about your only legal defense going forward.

As an aside, the way you're continuing to ban people on the BFL forums goes against the very clear instructions that have been released by the Receiver.

Quote from: Inaba on September 24, 2014, 02:26:46 AM

Clearly it's you... throwing another tantrum. What a surprise.

Shouldn't you be working on a resume or something? On the other hand, given your reputation and the incredibly rich Google paper trail you've left behind, you're likely unemployable at this point.

Quote from: Syke on September 23, 2014, 07:27:21 PM

Still just an employee. As much as I'd like for Josh to put on his big boy orange jumpsuit, he appears to have no ownership in the company and thus his liability is minimal. Fancy title means little. He had no authority to do anything.

Since part of the fraud revolves around intentionally delaying the delivery of hardware, his role at BFL would put him smack in the middle of things despite the fact that he doesn't own the company.

I think it would boil down to:

1.) Were there really delays in manufacturing the Monarch?
2.) When he made the public statements about delivery times, was he intentionally misleading customers?

The inability to deliver useful hardware in the stated time-frame would rest at the feet of the person in charge of such things, which would be Josh methinks. That would put Josh's role in the center of the fraud.