Conscientiously objecting to something is one thing, projecting that objection on to other people by discriminating against them is something else entirely. You are free to believe whatever religious-based morality you have been conditioned to replace secular reality with, you are not free, however, to force it on to other people through your discrimination.

The seats may be just as comfy at the back of the bus, but if somebody is told they may not sit on the seats at the front, because people consider that person to be 'not as equal' a human being as those 'kind' who get to sit on the seats at the front of the bus, does telling that person they can choose any seat they wish at the back mean you can dismiss their protestations at being discriminated against as leftist/liberal 'intolerance'?


ORLY? A business is a legal trading entity and, as such, does not have the right to pick and choose who it serves based on the personal discrimination issues of its staff.

You want to sell cakes to white people only? You can't form a company and refuse to serve black people.

You want to give cakes to white people only? Knock yourself out, you racist asshole, you are perfectly entitled to personally hand out cakes just to white people and tell any black person who asks for one that you refuse to because it goes against your fundamentalist xtian 'morality'. That is your right.

Do it for money, though, and your racist self doesn't get to dictate company law because the business, as a legal entity, is performing the trade.

I'd express surprise at the sheer number of people who don't seem to understand that basic fact, but seeing as they are the type who like to call homophobic discrimination 'conscientious objection', and cite those who protest against discrimination as being 'intolerant'. It's almost like they are so wilfully ignorant they don't even understand the irony (as well as absurd stupidity) of using that word to describe people who are against other people's intolerance of those 'who are not like them'.

The only reason he might not be afraid of prison is because he never believed he would be sent there. We are talking about a guy who, with his *extremely* close relationship with Stuart Fraser, had spent the preceding years dreaming himself to be a Gates/Musk/Jobs/Satoshi future-tech visionary and had conned Fraser into throwing money at his shitty business schemes.

He is a narcissistic nobody who was fortunate enough to gain a personal connection to a very wealthy man who believed the crap he was spouting about how clever his ideas were.

Once the expensive cars and private jets started coming into the mix he probably started to believe his own bullshit. Sure, when the alphabet agencies have him against the wall, he'll just give 'em that dumb-fuck squinty-eyed grin and say sorry for making some bad business decisions and losing the muggles a great deal of money. They'll shrug their shoulders and be all, "Awww, hey, that's ok Joshie, this is the land of the free, home of the brave, you just be living the 'Mercan Dream, son!" and then send him on his way, right? Right? RIGHT? I mean, he's a good religious boy who loves himself some Jesus and fears himself some God, the 'right' god, of course, so nobody is going to be sending him to prison just for being an honest entrepreneur.

Cocaine's a hell of a drug.

Give the evidence that this scheme is legit, as you have already claimed has been proven, or find yourself heading towards marked scammer territory.

Your continued shilling for this scam and readiness to throw around empty claims about how it has been proven legit, is highly suspicious.

That a scam pays is not evidence it is not a scam. That's ponzi bullshit 101.

Evidence or retract.

This discussion thread even had a newbie-account shill turn up and try claiming he was a customer and that they are a legit operation, because that's not suspicious AT ALL. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1128611.0

That is one shitty-looking website. Good find.

Awesome domain, just rolls off the tongue.


Great rebuttal, you *really* capture the essence of a good argument against those who are asserting that you are a no-mark brand-new-account shill for the scam known as Recyclix. It is *totally* reasonable to say the equivalent of, "Yeah, well you stink, too" as a way of proving how legit you are.

Nothing says legit like a company paying you with PayPal from their hotmail account, right?
http://www.moneymakergroup.com/Recyclix-Recyclixcom-t493509.html&view=findpost&p=1109292008#entry1109292008

Uhuh, course you are. Just a really really keen customer wanting to give us lots of information about how reputable they are

There's money to be made in throwing together a good front. Just go ask the Urocoin scammers... as well as cloudthink.io... and every other Mlm,Hyip,ponzi op that has passed through here.

If it walks like a duck..

Uhuh, of course you did, brand new account.

Sponsoring an industry event doesn't make any company less of a ponzi-scam.

Still doesn't make it any less of a ponzi-based criminal scam.

I contacted their North West office and you just need the judgement and to fill out their 'transfer up' form, along with paying a flat GBP60.00 payment.

Indeed, it's all part of the same 'family' of Ukrainian scammers I believe.

Eobot, Rdpmain and cloudmining.website are likely the same scumbags, along with their 'Cloudmining Monitoring' website, cmmonitor, which supposedly shows which ponzi scam, I mean cloud-mining service, is still operational.

Yeah, thanks for the confirmation.

Anyhoo, back on-topic and reasonable discussion-land, the point is that this thread is clearly to do with people who already have received these Titan miners from KnC and are not getting any support from KnC. That they have made the effort to try and improve on their situation through developing it further is not 'supporting' KnC, it is that they are supporting themselves following KnC's shoddy delivery.

You think your unhinged paranoia in complaining that they are supporting KnC by actually using the miners they've already paid for makes any sense?

Would you prefer they not switch them on? Who would that benefit?

Aren't you needed over in the scrypt.cc thread as SpanishSoldier to try and desperately pump that also-failing criminal ponzi-based scam?

Must try harder, simply asserting that people who keep exposing your fraudulent scams are in the pay of competing services, fraudulent or otherwise, doesn't actually pass the smell test and frankly makes you come across as a desperate shill running out of ideas to ensnare more suckers into 'investing' in his criminal scams.

He left out the intergalactic shape-shifting space lizards.

Meth is one hell of a drug.

Thanks, Legendary member, that's super-helpful in the fight against these scams for you to continue 'only' posting about the payouts you are receiving.

Still waiting on a reply to my previous post to you:

I blame Vod for the OP's 'Blame Vod' button page not loading anymore.

I blamed Vod once and he turned me into a newt.

I got better though.

What a complete and utter load of hysterical bollocks. I have already reported the success I had with engaging LPC Law, winning the case and then engaging a collection agency (DCBL) to enforce the judgement, which resulted in Alpha paying the full judgement amount within a matter of days.



It cost me nearly GBP900 for the whole process but that was covered by the judgement amount being made for the full claim, plus interest, plus my expenses. Maybe some of you are simply too dumb to work through the process needed and so you want to start throwing your toys from the pram and blaming other people for your failure to deal with this properly.

FightAlpha have done more to help people get on with recovering their funds than any other person or group in this thread, so I'd suggest you rethink the possible motivation its detractors might actually have.

Ever thought that jorgefernandez IS Alpha? Now there's food for thought!

Firstly, I'm not conceding anything as I certainly have never implied that QS's fraudulent behaviour warranted life imprisonment without parole, which is what I assume you intended to type, and I doubt anybody else has, either.

Secondly, If that was, indeed, the 'point' of your original post then you have actually just conceded I was right to state that you were attempting to downplay the seriousness of the fraud by way of your reductio ad absurdum reference to life imprisonment as punishment. In claiming that a lack of complaint posts being made by his unwitting victims is somehow evidence of the 'lesser' seriousness of the crime you are showing that your 'point' was solely to downplay the seriousness of the crime.


Fact is the *only* reason the discussion of his proven and admitted fraudulent actions continue to warrant clarification and confirmation as to the evidencing of Quickseller's dishonesty is due to his personality-disorder-laden OCD rants against other members, along with his persistent attempts to deny the simple fact that his proven and admitted dishonesty renders him untrustworthy, ergo, he cannot complain about receiving negative trust for being proven and admittedly dishonest.

If he would shut the fuck up and show a little maturity about having been exposed as the deceitful and dishonest person he is then these type of whiny threads he keeps creating wouldn't invite continued 'clarification' of his deceit and dishonesty for others to better understand just how absurd and irrelevant his complaints are.

I didn't say that, you did. The fact that it is extremely suspect for anybody to be taking the same bullshit deflection attempt as QS suggests a motivation that isn't necessarily linked to sock-puppet accounts of QS. That is only one possible explanation.



Right, so simply claiming you're not trying to downplay anything is perfectly reasonable a response after having posted an 'observation' that is a deflection from the real issue of QS having fraudulently conned his customers. What other value would you like to insist the content of your post be taken as, if not to suggest the issue isn't serious or relevant unless defrauded customers are posting about it?

I did ask what amount of BTC you'd consider it reasonable to trade with when your trading partner is acting as the Escrow without your knowledge? It is, of course, a rhetorical question as it is asinine to suggest any amount of money is 'ok' to risk with a fraudulent escrow.

As has been said, self-Escrow is no Escrow at all.

Again . . . The Fuck?

QS has already admitted to self-escrowing a number of deals. Stop trying to deflect from the issue.

Anyone else find it rather suspect that BCX keeps trying to down-play QS's proven and admitted fraud?


Oh lookie, more attempts to down-play the proven and admitted fraud.

It doesn't matter a jot whether you want to claim that nobody can say how people might have felt, the fact is you committed a fraudulent act and are, therefore, untrustworthy.

Stop trying to deflect from the issue.