PSA WARNING !!!

This project has been

proven to be fraudulent

DO NOT PROMOTE OR YOU

WILL BE MARKED WITH NEGATIVE

TRUST FOR PROMOTING A SCAM



Details of scam can be found in this thread.

PSA WARNING !!!

This project has been

proven to be fraudulent

DO NOT PROMOTE OR YOU

WILL BE MARKED WITH NEGATIVE

TRUST FOR PROMOTING A SCAM



Details of scam can be found in this thread.

I have already pointed out that your 'guaranteed 500% ROI' claim is fraudulent, Bob. Stop pretending like you don't know this.

^^^ A 'never guaranteed' guarantee?

You're breaking the law, Bob and your IEO is a scam making fraudulent claims about a non-guaranteed 'guaranteed' ROI.

So retract your claim towards the IEO offering a guaranteed 500% ROI.

It is a fraudulent claim and you are breaking the law. As you've just posted yourself to publicly acknowledge that it is 'never guaranteed', you have objectively demonstrated you are fully aware of the fact of the matter, namely, that your guarantee is no guarantee at all.

You are knowingly breaking the law if you do not retract that claim, Bob.

A 'plan to generate' revenue is not in any way shape or form a 'guarantee' that you will generate the needed revenue.

So your 500% ROI 'guarantee' is worthless and, more than that, it is intentionally misleading and fraudulent.

Remove your fraudulent claim of an ROI guarantee, Bob, you're breaking the law and you know full well you are.

No, you have not, Bob. You're attempting to con members of the public into buying your NXR token under the 'guarantee' that they will make a minimum of a 500% ROI and yet that 'guarantee' is entirely predicated on sufficient merchant revenue being generated to buy back those tokens.

This is not 'guaranteed' in any way whatsoever.

Your IEO is based on a fraudulent claim and you are in violation of securities law, ergo, a scam.


We are, by alerting the community to your shady MLM/pyramid connections and your fraudulent 500% ROI 'guarantee'.

You're welcome.

^^^  and there we have it.

Bobby boy is a shameless MLM scammer no different to those LEOcoin 'Learn Earn Own' scumbags like Dan Gunnar Andersson.


Explains everything.

Ok, even if we ignore the questions over the profile pics, how to you defend having Asif Baloch on your team?


But, even above all of these issues and concerns, there is this:


No, what you've provided is a video of you illegally offering a security with a claimed profit guarantee that you cannot possibly deliver:

"we're offering the nexxustokens, NXR, for 20c a token, but we're also guaranteeing along with the tokens the purchasers receive a buyback option for $1 per token, so its a guaranteed 500% return on investment"

This absolutely makes your IEO/ICO a scam through fraudulent misrepresentation.

Hand-wavy nonsense about how "because we're not dependent on speculative trading, we create our own buyer demand" does not equate to a viable economic model, ergo, you're talking bollocks and trying to convince gullible members of the public to send you their money on the basis that you're going to 'guarantee' they'll make a profit...because something something something.

Your IEO is an attempt to scam the public and you are making fraudulent claims about a guaranteed profit you absolutely cannot back up with real numbers.

LOL. Hitting the ol' copy/paste a bit quick on your multiple sock-puppet bounty accounts there.

P.S. Stop promoting this scam

Likewise, I had otherwise overlooked that.

:thumbs:

GTFO, you've already been widely exposed as a scam by Xtraelv way back in 2017:




Flag raised against Bobnexxus for being a shameless scammer can be supported here.

Well if CSW's handiwork in the fraudulent evidence department so far is anything to go by they'll likely be proven to have come out of the factory in 2014.

Well I can attest to the fact that he's provably dishonest. He keeps intentionally misrepresenting the legal meaning of 'established facts' in the judgement text even after having it clearly explained to him.

Yes. Don't forget that it is absolutely in the Kleiman family's interest to let his claim of bitcoin address ownership remain uncontested. Because if he can't actually hand over 500k+ btc then they are still owed the equivalent in cash/asset value which he is liable for.

CSW simply had his guy extract a list based on the following criteria:
   1. Blocks mined between January 3, 2009 and August 21, 2010
   2. Unspent coinbases
   3. Pay to public key coinbases
   4. Non-reused addresses
   5. Single coinbase output
   6. Nonce least significant byte of 0-58

This excellent redditor explains more


Why are you being so dishonest? I already explained to you that 'the Court deems the following facts to be established for purposes of this action:' is solely about this case alone as they are facts neither side contested

*sigh*
Ok, I'll assume you're just ill-informed when it comes to legal terminology, rather than being wilfully ignorant. When it is stated that facts are 'undisputed', it does not mean they are proven, it simply means that neither party contests them.

As has been stated already, it is absolutely in the Kleiman family's interest to agree with Craig's assertions towards claimed IP and mined bitcoins. He asserts such in order to try and convince people he is Satoshi, remember, but went on to perjure himself with false evidence while trying to claim that Kleiman was, at various different times, either nothing to do with the assets or was merely holding them on his behalf.

The assets in question, predominantly, the claimed vast quantities of bitcoin, have yet to even be proven as ever being in either of their control, with the 'Tulip Trust' story being rubbished by the judge as a fabrication. Craig has already been proven to have fraudulently claimed ownership of wallets which were subsequently shown to belong to other entities, such as MtGox. I have yet to come across a single piece of evidence proving that CSW possessed any bitcoin prior to 2013, have you?

Again, the key part of that sentence is, "for the purposes of this action". In that neither party disputed the claimed facts then they are accepted as being established for the purposes of this particular action only. It was never the intent of the court to work to disprove anything that both parties were in agreement with.

Do you understand?

It appears as if you are under the mistaken impression that the judge's statement about their partnership supports CSW's claim to be Satoshi:
"One, Dr. Wright and David Kleiman entered into a
50 percent 50/50 partnership to develop Bitcoin intellectual
property and to mine Bitcoin."

^^^ This does not assert that said partnership created Bitcoin, only that they were supposedly developing Bitcoin-related IP at some point.

Which bit of the judge's statement explicitly clarifying that they were not ruling on the matter of Satoshi Nakamoto's identity confuses you?

 

The thing with that bit of scammy replay 'signing' was that, as with much of CSW's forgery attempts, he appears to be really lazy with the whole process

Considering that he's one of the co-authors on Dave Kleiman's Hacking and Forensics study guide, he has proven to be repeatedly sloppy covering his tracks with the fraudulent messages and emails he tried to pass off as legit during the trial.


Yeah that 10,000+ TPS claim for BSV is bullshit, too. Doesn't matter how big you make the block size, if they're only being written to the blockchain every 10 minutes then that is 10 minutes during which those transactions could be 'reversed' through a double-spend. Utterly useless for mass adoption in real-time retail. BSV is no better than Bitcoin in that regards.

Calvin Ayre and the rest of the BSV zombies seem to be wilfully ignorant to this fact.

If you have a key it serves to show you at least might be its original owner but, more importantly, it results in the burden of proof being transferred to others to prove that you are not.

Without having a key you are no different to anybody else who does not have a key, meaning the burden of proof is on you to show you were its original owner.

Craig Wright is a proven liar who has repeatedly perjured himself and presented multiple forgeries as supposed proofs which have been exposed as such. That you still want to believe his word in the face of the facts showing him to be a liar and a fraud, is beyond absurd.