Why do you feel this need to "convince others"?

With your history of shilling for LTCGear, you would have been perfect for the job!

So, how does that square with rooting out and posting some dumb college kid's Facebook photos here?   "Bully tactics"  Do explain!

You clearly have no idea about how all the various cyber-harassment and cyber-stalking laws work, do you?  Much less, common decency.  The kid is a non-combatant in your jihad against GAW.  

But go on, keep being that adorable face of cryptocurrency.   You're helping to promote widespread adoption with every post you make.

Read it again.  It's OK to move your lips, if that helps.  Have somebody help you sound out the words.


Not to go all "Dr. Phil" here, but there's a well-known psychiatric issue called "projection".   

If you want to play the "eyes" and what people look like game, do be kind enough to apply that same logic to something like say, the Bitcoin Foundation Board.  There's pictures available there.  I'm happy to hear your interpretation of how much their eyes tell you.  Or haircuts. Or, whatever.  Your theory.  Run with it.



Point for you to address:  Please correlate your perceived view of somebody's looks with their verifiable integrity.  Bonus points if you want to relate that to last name or skin color.
 


I have a somewhat familiarity with how internet forums get way out of hand when it comes to going "real life" on participants.
 


Yeah, publicly hammer on some kid because he didn't make it through all the Facebook privacy checkboxes.  You are a true shining light of BCTalk.

Envy, thy name is "bitcoinnoisseur".  Don't you secretly wish you could provide for your kid(s) that well?

Is that because you're trying to correlate integrity or posting habits to looks somehow?  Explain. Otherwise, you just look like a keyboard commando who bolsters his so-called arguments with oh-so-witty banter about how somebody looks or what a knee-slapper their name is.

Prove me wrong.  Post a picture of yourself.  Integrity personified, I'm sure.


Exposing what, exactly?  The kid dresses like what many call a dork. World's full of them.  That's a big shocker in the crypto world.  Stop the presses.  A whole new paradigm.


Anything to keep from having to address my points, huh?  


Finding and posting pictures of people you don't have a business or personal relationship with ==  Pervy stalker

Indeed.  Seriously bitcoinnoisseur, does posting pictures somehow bolster your position about GAW?  Does what somebody looks like somehow matter to you?  Or do you just get some pervy stalker tingles from doing it?    

I never suggested otherwise.  And I don't recall your citizenship status being questioned or pertinent to the discussion at hand.



You seem to be wanting very badly to make a statement about your rights and ability to make complaints to various agencies.  Good for you.  You won't find where I have ever suggested otherwise.  Your above paragraph sounds like you think you might be being prevented from somehow exercising those rights, but you don't say how and by whom.



I didn't ask for your CV.  I really don't care.  Your posting that looks to me like arguing from authority.

I don't think you're posting too many legal terms. Not enough, in fact. Defined by actual chapter and verse codes and regulations, and your layman's opinion how how an actor meets the elements of whatever crime you think they may have committed.

What you are posting is a bunch "legal-sounding" terms.  As below:


Sales of chains or pyramid schemes.  People who sell shady deals should be prosecuted.


Lawyers and accountants of Ponzi schemes. They should be prosecuted


Banks of Ponzi schemes. They should be prosecuted

None of those three links above address your post here:


Bold items are significant.  In the first one, you clearly suggest that somebody who has reached ROI and posts about it may be added as a "willing collaborator" in your words.

None of the above three links you presented offer any such interpretation, and are limited to those involved with a Ponzi in a professional capacity, like a banker, accountant, or attorney.

In the second one, you offer up some idea of being "notified" and how support (assume that you mean by posting here) would create some legal liability.

I ask again, what defines "notified"?  You surely don't expect that posting on some internet forum is any kind of legally valid notification or service, do you?

How could a simple customer, who happen to make posts on the internet, become legally liable, and for what exactly?  Please elaborate.

If it were a "disguise", buying 5 PH/s of mining hardware, showing pictures a data center(s), and selling actual physical miners, is an awfully difficult way of creating a disguise, isn't it?  Why not just create a pretty web page somewhere with some data center stock photos and a to-good-to-be-true rate and bank the BTC as long as you can.


I doubt there's much of a market for just internet forums.  But I could be wrong.


I assume that you, after after reading GAW's WP, will provide your opinion of what "faux" means in this context.

One and the same.

Thanks, suchmoon.  I hope your helpful post does cull out the folks who want to argue without bringing actual facts, or at a minimum, reasoned opinions.

Please cite any law or case where such a thing has happened.  While you're at it, provide a legal definition of "collaborating" and "notified".  Are you somehow suggesting that your posting on a random Internet forum is some kind of legally valid notification?  Are you somehow suggesting that GAW customers who might read such a random Internet forum and don't close their account now open themselves up to some kind of, in you words, "liability"? 

You're tossing out a bunch of legal-sounding verbiage here, so it's not unreasonable for a reader to ask what your exact legal qualifications and training are and what statutes or cases support your position.