Ok... you do know that I asked for proof right? What you've provided is you restating the same statements you've already made. Proof requires an outside authority qualified to speak on the matter. You are neither qualified to speak on any of the above matters (I doubt you're qualified to speak on most matters, come to that) nor are you an authority on anything, except perhaps babbling and poor math skills. But I digress.
See, I asked you to provide proof of your allegations and you have failed to do so. Lets take just one example:
Violated probation:
The defendant shall not engage, as whole or partial owner, employee or otherwise, in any business involving loan programs, gambling or gaming activities, telemarketing activities, investment programs or any other business involving the solicitation of funds or cold-calls to customers without the express approval of the Probation Officer prior to engagement in such employment.
Where is your proof of this? What you provided here is not proof by any definition of the word. What you did provide, however, is a statement from a document that expressly gives someone permission to engage in those activities with the express approval of a probation officer. Are those activities being engaged in? Please provide proof if you believe they are. Furthermore, is there express approval? Please provide proof if you believe there is not. See, proof is you providing fact based evidence to support your claims. You have provided none, ergo you have not provided proof.
And you have the unmitigated gall to call me a spineless piece of shit. The only piece of shit here is the one sitting on your chest that your boss left you. I know it's hard to be a company whore, doing whatever your boss wants to do to you so that you maintain your sham writing "career", but lets try to at least live up to the bare minimum of journalism standards. By the way, when was the last time you wrote anything of import? Poorly written soft-core Scifi fan fiction doesn't count, honey.
Lets look at another example, just for shits and giggles:
Your first singles were delivered in late February / early March 2012 (three months late). They work ~800 Mh, and not 832 Mh, which was your revised spec. Scumbags that you are you claim that 800 is "within the advertised 10% tolerance" conveniently forgetting to point out that said tolerance applies to 1050 Mh, which you never met. In reality, you are 23.8% under spec. They draw 80 Watts. That puts you 304% over spec for power consumption.
And yet, inexplicably, you have the gall to call my statement false. How do you go through life without a spine, you piece of shit?
Oh noes! BFL made a mistake and corrected that information and reduced the price! It's a conspiracy! See, there's a thing called "Good faith." BFL believed, at the time, it was offering a product with certain specifications in good faith. When it became clear that it could not meet that, BFL reduced the price and posted accurate specs. But hey, if you want to consider a mistake as "Proof" that "promises wern't kept" then I will accept your definition. However, please be advised that if we do use that definition, the fact that you made a promise to provide proof of violation of probation and now have failed to do so, you are also a lying piece of shit who doesn't keep her promises. So pot, meet kettle.
Lets take a look at another one, since it's representative of the rest of your "proof" and we only have to examine this one as the same conditions apply to the rest:
There you go. For the record, the guy was supposedly going to "answer" at some point in September. It's been four months.
And yet, inexplicably, you have the gall to call my statement false. How do you go through life without a spine, you piece of shit?
Again, I asked for proof. You provided a reference to
your own post. That's not proof, honey. You can't cite yourself as an authority in this matter. You are not qualified to speak on the matter and you are not an authority, outside or otherwise. You need an outside authority qualified to speak on the matter. You failed to provide one. The rest of your "proof" is you citing your own posts again and again. You are a lying, spineless piece of shit who has the unmitigated gall to call me a liar. When I make a claim, I have outside sources that I can and do cite. You have none. Ever. You are pathetic.
Fully documented by ngzhang.
And yet, inexplicably, you have the gall to call my statement false. How do you go through life without a spine, you piece of shit?
This is an interesting one, while you don't cite yourself, you cite another person, who is qualified to speak with regards to the type of chips, certainly. But he is most definitely not qualified to make statements on what the source or disposition of the chips were. I mean, how could he be? Was he somehow secretly privy to BFL's business dealings at the time? Not to my knowledge. However, if you believe this to be the case, please provide some proof or evidence.
An yet, inexplicably, you have the gall to call my statement false. How do you go through life being unable to even accomplish simple tasks like understanding the definition of "proof," you worthless piece of shit? Pathetic.
So here it is: every claim I made is entirely and univocally backed by facts, pretty much everything you say is either stupid, a lie or both. And yet, inexplicably, you have the gall to call my statement false. How do you go through life without a spine, you piece of shit?
So here it is: Please point out where you provided a single fact. Pretty much everything you say is either stupid, a lie or both. I have provided you with the task of providing proof to back up your claims and you have failed to do so, repeatedly. Sorry sister, but the only piece of shit here is you.
Not the case. Last time we met twas you who slunk off into silence, which makes me wonder why exactly you think this one's going to be different, Rakim?
I'm sorry if you think I "slunk off." I repeatedly asked you to provide proof of your claims. You came back to me with random numbers (again, these are not proof or facts, they are numbers manufactured randomly, or quasi-randomly). You literally valued the company you work for at 500,000 BTC! Seriously, you valued MPEX at $5 million dollars! You then went on to claim that the valuation of MPEX dwarfed BFL... and now here you and your boss are claiming that BFL's net worth is somewhere
above the 500,000 BTC mark. So which is it you lying piece of shit? Oh... I'm sorry... did I just catch you in a blatant lie?
Your statement that MPEX is worth 497170 BTC:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=124441.msg1340625#msg1340625Your claim that MPEX is the "Largest Bitcoin Business in existence (provedly [sic] *Authors note: Provedly isn't a word*)":
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=124441.msg1340273#msg1340273So which is it baby? Which claim are you going with, because they both can't be true (or are you seriously calling your boss a liar?):
http://polimedia.us/trilema/2013/preemptive-strike-to-have-on-hand-for-when-butterfly-labs-gets-hauled-off-to-jail-in-corpore/What's that? Did I see you throwing around the Micon $25 million estimate somewhere? That would put it at 1,784,000 BTC valuation, 3 times that of your claim for MPEX! But maybe you don't agree with the math challenged Micon and we'll just stick with your boss's numbers, which exceed 500,000 BTC. Oh ouch, that must be painful... now you have to choose which false story you want to back, sorry about that.
A little more complicated than that: you demand proof for things that are widely known and amply documented. If the OP presents you that proof you claim they "repeat the same information in the vain hope that if you say it enough times it might be believable". If the OP doesn't bother with your retarded ass you claim they "slink off in silence". It's right there in this latest installment of nonsense, he's pretty much saying it outright.
Dang, I called that one. So lets see if you continue to repeat the same stuff over and over without citing any authorities or providing proof... or if you just slink off in silence like usual.
