Nope, there is no may about it.  Unregulated security trading is not illegal, it doesn't matter what you are trading them for. 

Thank you for your support.

No, a user who is an expert guitarist with guarantees of world fame falsely delivering a product that was not as advertised in an attempt to scam someone to comply with a written agreement. 

Right, I wonder why they didn't do that?

(Their business is illegal)

Thank you, they did as the quotes I have provided clearly illustrate.


The monetary value to a collector of a rare personalized performance from one of the world's greatest musicians early in their career is huge.  The monetary value involved here is tremendous. 

Shareholders, no, but what about partners and officers like Theymos?

Please exit the thread if all you wish to do is call the authenticity of my attempts to pursue justice into question.  This is a very serious matter for me and has been from the start.  I would not have agreed to cease my efforts to warn members of the forum of some of the dangers of investing with Dank in exchange for this personalized performance if I did not have a strong a legitimate need to do so in order to make my niece happy.  

I agree, bitcoin.me deserves the scammer tag.

You are clearly the one who has no understanding of how business is done.  It is good that is the last you have to say on this since you have added nothing and are clearly an ignoramus.  We had a written agreement for the exchange of goods and services in which a fraudulent attempt to deliver was made.  It is a scam, even if actual real money like Bitcoins has not been exchanged the products in question have monetary value.

Right, go post that in the Nefario thread.

The emotional damages to my niece are only one aspect of this case.  In attempting to defraud me into believing he had played the song requested in accordance to our agreement he was attempting to silence a vocal critic of his business.  He had an economic motive in this scam.

No, the written agreement was made over several posts and is quoted in full in the first post of this thread.  Please stop wasting my time.


It's like saying somebody shouldn't be charged with bank robbery if the guard thwarts them.  You are an idiot.  Nothing was taken from me because I identified the scam as it was in progress.


Neither of those statements are opinions.  They are facts.


We had an agreement, and this is all spelled out in writing, that if he played Mary Had A Little Lamb (and was given a tab to show what song I meant) I would agree to perform certain actions.  There is no need for dates or "Why Yes" since it was conditional on Dank making the effort.  I later asked him to post the song in accordance to our agreement, and he claimed he was doing so with the posted song.  This is when the scam occurred, had he simply never claimed to have played it there would be no complaint.  The agreement did not require him to.  The scam is in claiming to have fulfilled the agreement when he did not in an attempt to falsely claim payment.

You cannot sell a car and deliver a bike and act as if it is all the same.  The product did not match the tune or rhythm of the provided tab.  It is not a matter of interpretation.  Even properly tuned and undistorted the notes played would not be identifiable as the requested song.

In a false attempt to claim this as the product promised and not the entirely distinct song it was, you have now admitted instead to purposefully providing a low quality unrecognizable product.  Such an intentional action out of spite to provide an unrecognizable product is an admission of scamming.   You may as well have agreed to sell me a hamburger but instead sold a hot dog you spit on.  Clearly not the agreed upon product.

If you are indeed capable of playing Mary Had A Little Lamb in a recognizable manner which as an expert guitar player you surely can, you can provide your defense by recording it and posting it for this thread.  Given your history of fraud, however, you should do it on video and provide us with identification.

I did not ask for a favor, I had a written agreement as documented in the very first post of this thread.  I was not "satisfied" because the agreed upon product was not delivered and was falsely represented as genuine in an attempt to get me to comply with our agreement.  This is a scam by the most basic of definitions.  

The monetary gain for Dank in this scam was to silence a vocal critic of his business practices and the monetary value of recorded music is well established.

Gee I dunno, could it be because this community turns into a pitchfork wielding mob that doesn't think straight and blames the wrong people?  It's amazing Theymos is getting away with whipping up a mob on his forum while whitewashing his involvement in all this.  Wake up, people.

I did not receive the product that was promised.  The fact that I did not make payment is irrelevant as the purpose of the tag is to warn people in the future that the tagged breaks their agreements.  The user in question solicits large amounts of money through this forum and can not be trusted to stand by his word.  


By no standards was this the requested song according to the provided tab.  It was not poor quality, it was a different song.  If you maintain a standard where people can lie entirely about the products they sell on the forum there will be no reason for anyone to ever continue to buy and sell here.  If someone promises to sell an iPhone and instead sends a low quality flip phone they should not receive leniency for simply sending a phone.


Dank himself has made the promise of music greatness, if you are telling me he has misrepresented this than it is just more proof he is untrustworthy and has operated a scam.


We have a written agreement for a product to be provided, it was not.  There is nothing to debate.

Absolutely not.  Dank is an exceptional musician who my niece and myself are fans of, he has made assurances he will be one of the most famous and talented musicians in the world.  These are the reasons I stood to gain personally and economically in negotiating to receive a recording of Mary Had A Little Lamb from him. 

Yes, Yes, I called out the scam before my payment was required.  My loss in not getting the recording I promised is vast, the value of an early rare personalized recording from a great musician is vast.

As Dank is offering no explanation, denial, or defense I believe this case remains open and shut.

Sounds like you just admitted to them all, just with the caveat that you were going to stop the lies and lies of omissions later if you got a sucker on the hook.  Sure you would have.  Sure!

The perpetrator of the fraud is offering no defense and refusing to discuss terms to address the issue.  Our deal is written and agreed to in plain terms and has been broken.  A fraudulent product was attempted to be passed off as fulfilling our agreement.  It is time to give Dank the tag, if he is willing to violate agreements he should not be running a Bank or otherwise accepting payments with promise of later fulfilling his obligations on this forum without users knowing the value of his word as a businessman.