OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

~

TL;DR

[I haven't bothered to actually look in to any of this but I am willing to form an opinion and share it publicly anyway. Victims might not have known they were robbed. Who needs victims anyway? We can still use this as an opportunity to allow certain people here to pursue personal vendettas. After all what is important is that we pass judgement on people even if there is no harmed party seeking redress.]

You will notice you removed the context of not only the "TL;DR" indicating it was a summary of another user's post, but you also took the time to remove the brackets which are another indication of such so that you could reply to the comments as if it fit the narrative you are trying to manufacture. You did in fact edit my quote and take it out of context. You can repeat that I have not looked into it ad nauseam, but that doesn't make it a fact. You know what is textbook psychological projection? Exactly what you just did editing my quotes and purposely manufacturing new context to push your preferred narrative.

That is what you get, Tecshare, for attempting to confuse matters.  You get confusion that you, yourself, caused, seemingly on purpose with your lame-ass attempt at creating a dinsingenuous summary that you were inaccurately striving to spin in your favor.

If you try to be a bit more genuine in your renditions of the conduct and statements of others, then maybe someone will feel sorry for you.  Including me.  Perhaps?    

But, here, you dug your own little hole (a victim of your own seeming success) and then you are complaining (largely off topic and irrelevantly and who gives any shits) about someone else pulling up the ladder.  Difficult to feel sorry for that when we have other topics of the thread, which is largely the evidentiary relevance of various matters concerning OGNasty and if there is any accounting that needs to be done based on more recent evidentiary revelations or the extent that any of the new evidentiary revelations matter.

[TECSHARE]

That is what you get, Tecshare, for attempting to confuse matters.  You get confusion that you, yourself, caused, seemingly on purpose with your lame-ass attempt at creating a dinsingenuous summary that you were inaccurately striving to spin in your favor.

If you try to be a bit more genuine in your renditions of the conduct and statements of others, then maybe someone will feel sorry for you.  Including me.  Perhaps?    

But, here, you dug your own little hole (a victim of your own seeming success) and then you are complaining (largely off topic and irrelevantly and who gives any shits) about someone else pulling up the ladder.  Difficult to feel sorry for that when we have other topics of the thread, which is largely the evidentiary relevance of various matters concerning OGNasty and if there is any accounting that needs to be done based on more recent evidentiary revelations or the extent that any of the new evidentiary revelations matter.

Attempting to confuse matters? I am sorry if you were confused, but I can't be responsible for every simpleton that wanders in and has trouble reading my words. What was lame-ass was your original lazy opinion based on not even bothering to review the information fully, by your own admission, but still be willing to have a strong opinion about it. This is exactly what I was criticizing about TwitchySeal. He knows damn well most people aren't going to bother to look that close and he has a good chance of convincing people through repetition of his baseless theories operant conditioning style. Combine this with the long term trend of himself and his buddies repeating this behavior clearly directed at OGNasty, and it becomes quite obvious this is about serving personal vendettas, not about righting any wrongs done. Why would I want you to feel sorry for me? What hole? Why is it you rely on projection so much? Is it perhaps because you don't have any logical retort to what I said?

[JayJuanGee]

That is what you get, Tecshare, for attempting to confuse matters.  You get confusion that you, yourself, caused, seemingly on purpose with your lame-ass attempt at creating a dinsingenuous summary that you were inaccurately striving to spin in your favor.

If you try to be a bit more genuine in your renditions of the conduct and statements of others, then maybe someone will feel sorry for you.  Including me.  Perhaps?    

But, here, you dug your own little hole (a victim of your own seeming success) and then you are complaining (largely off topic and irrelevantly and who gives any shits) about someone else pulling up the ladder.  Difficult to feel sorry for that when we have other topics of the thread, which is largely the evidentiary relevance of various matters concerning OGNasty and if there is any accounting that needs to be done based on more recent evidentiary revelations or the extent that any of the new evidentiary revelations matter.

Attempting to confuse matters? I am sorry if you were confused,

I'm referring to your actions,  not my state of thinking.

but I can't be responsible for every simpleton that wanders in and has trouble reading my words.

Yes.  You seem to have trouble focusing on the topic, and you seem inclined to attack people who seem to NOT be fully lovey dovey with your goals and objectives to confuse matters in order to protect your lil buddy... and that is not even attempting to say anything negative about OGNasty, it is just referring to your ongoing distraction pitbull-like behaviors.

What was lame-ass was your original lazy opinion based on not even bothering to review the information fully, by your own admission, but still be willing to have a strong opinion about it.

I doubt my opinion was strong.  I just was talking about the process that suggests reviewing evidence and logic to the extent that exists and is presented.

This is exactly what I was criticizing about TwitchySeal. He knows damn well most people aren't going to bother to look that close and he has a good chance of convincing people through repetition of his baseless theories operant conditioning style.

Oh?  I see.  Twitchy is a menace to the forum because he presents evidence and logic, and the forum members are too fucking stupid to understand that Twitchy is full of shit, and so therefore, Twitchy should not be presenting such evidence to all of us (forum member) dumb fucks... because we are too damned gullible.  And furthermore, Twitchy is tricky as fuck for engaging in such manipulation.  Shame on you Twitchy!!!!!


When I really consider what you are saying Tecshare, that makes a whole lot of sense. 


NOT.

Combine this with the long term trend of himself and his buddies repeating this behavior clearly directed at OGNasty, and it becomes quite obvious this is about serving personal vendettas, not about righting any wrongs done.

You are so NOT very convincing in this regard. Evidence and logic is evidence and logic.  Either it is convincing or it is not.  Who knows how to resolve it, but members should be able to assess the information for themselves, and if any member has strong proposals or recommendations regarding what should be done or argued for in light of the evidence and arguments, then they should be free to make such assessments and to make whatever proposal, including the one that you are making (which is to drop the matter, but you are just one member, right?). 

Why would I want you to feel sorry for me?

Hopefully, you don't want that.

What hole?

You got me?  I don't know what hole you are referring to.

Why is it you rely on projection so much?

Did not realize that I was doing that. 

Is it perhaps because you don't have any logical retort to what I said?

I don't know.  I already responded to everything that seemed to be necessary to respond to.

You, Tecshare, sure do seem to have a tendency to devolve into a lot of irrelevant divergencies, including questioning my own competencies or whatever you had been attempting to do in your post.

Probably, I should apologize for responding to all of this seemingly irrelevant nonsense that Tecshare seems to be bringing up... but I tend to not be easily deterred.. regarding baloney talk... .. I might have to get a lesson from Nancy Reagan ("just say no"... ... hhahahahahahaha)...

[suchmoon]

~

Don't waste your time trying to understand his pretzel logic. Debating with TECSHARE is like marriage - the only way for it to work is to admit that you're always wrong and he's always right.

[TwitchySeal]

I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday.  If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong.

Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it.   (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).)


We have pirates ledger for every transaction.
We have ogs thread archived.
We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer.
We have the block chain.

Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors.

The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012.  

On August 6  Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8
On August 13 Og received an interested payment of  BTC39.2
On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38

On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors.  BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54

We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2.

You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it.

Bump^^

Reference Material:

OgNastys WalletExplorer Transactions from August 2012

OgNasty transactions with pirate from April 2012

Pirates Ledger . (ctrl + f 'ognasty')

OgNasty Posts June Payments in pass through thread

OgNasty Posts July Payments in pass through thread

August


If you're taking Ogs character into account, consider what he put in his OP:

"You should [use in Bitcoin Savings & Trust]. pirateat40 is a great asset to the community and if you have the BTC to establish an account, a current member willing to refer you, and are willing to wait for your invite, please do"

Now go read the first page and a half of this thread. And keep in mind the 'insurance' he mentions was BTC65 total.

[sbogovac]

[edited out]

Now we can discuss the extent to which one is more harmful than the other, but I (and - again - I suspect more people around here) am (are) not up for that.

It is difficult to appreciate your perspective, sbogovac, in terms of your seeming desire to speak up for what is good or not good for the forum community, regarding forum topics to be discussed and/or explored.  

Twitchy is providing evidence and arguments for a theory.  Of course, some other members are throwing in their perspective, too and providing links to other evidence and theories in a kind of crowd sourcing way (that sometimes might support existing evidence and arguments and sometimes negate the same), and it is up to members (including yourself) to decide for themselves the extent that they are "up to it" or not and whether they are going to give such evidence and logic any weight at all or completely say that Twitchy and others who support such Twitchy evidence and logic is full of shit or not.

If you read back a couple of posts you will notice I am saying nothing about Twitchy's argument(-ation). I simply reacted to Tecshare's statement that a legendary member was engaging in "petty interpersonal battles" with another legendary member. And pointing out that that behaviour was mutual.

Now, if you think that that behaviour (by either one of them) is actually doing anything good for this community you'r totally entitled to that opinion. Mine should be clear by now, but let me quote someone who put it much more clearly then me:

[...] All three of TMAN, Vod, and OgNasty are forum veterans with good trade histories, and I would tend to trust all three of them (to varying degrees).

This drama is highly counterproductive. Nobody has a real trade complaint AFAICT, so the underlying facts hardly matter. [...] I challenge all of you to just knock it off. If you can't work together, then ignore each other, even if you're being prodded.

Which, BTW, brings us back on topic; because it would be really nice (especially for OgNasty's own reputation) if this was to be cleared up crystal clear. But I also do not really see any "real trade complaint"...  

[ibminer]

The quote you keep referencing from theymos was made in relation to OgNasty vs Vod at a time when insults after insults were being hurled at each other and no real facts or evidence were being presented of anyone having "a real trade complaint", it was certainly not productive for the forum to have 2 of its veteran members going at each other like that.

Just because their feud may have spurned up someone like TwitchSeal who has shown newer evidence to suggest OgNasty is much worse than a liar, if what I'm seeing is accurate with the numbers pirateat40 confirmed under oath, and what OgNasty publicly proclaimed to his investors, I think there would be a valid trade complaint here. Trendon Shavers (pirateat40) would have made a very large mistake if he lied to the SEC and I don't think he or his lawyers would have been willing to take that chance.

OgNasty is likely in PMs trying to figure out WTF to say while TECSHARE stalls everyone with useless arguments.  suchmoon said it best:

Debating with TECSHARE is like marriage - the only way for it to work is to admit that you're always wrong and he's always right.

From TECSHARE's perspective, he is never wrong, those that disagree will be attacked until they succumb. If you don't succumb, round' and round' you will go on the pretzel train. Chooo chooooo.

I guess we just shouldn't look at the new evidence since TECSHARE thinks it came out due to a personal feud... whether or not one may have been triggered by the other, shouldn't they still be treated as separate cases and situations with various elements of evidence and facts in each?   If someone came out right now stating Donald Trump was molesting 12 year olds, and presenting evidence for it, is TECHSHARE going to come in and say "this is just a witch hunt because people don't like his foreign policy, nothing to see here, walk away!" 

Og doesn't want to respond directly to any of this, just like he didn't want to provide me any full-context on his chopped up PMs with Vod... and any response will unfortunately be some sort of PR-like statement that is vague and requires you to just trust him.

You're gonna go far, Og. (meaningful lyrics.)

[TECSHARE]

~

What actions? You mean my words? Last I checked words required a state of thinking to interpret but maybe you have some special way of reading where you don't use your brain. I am quite focused on the topic, just not the parts of it you wish to emphasize. Calling it evidence and logic doesn't make it evidence an logic. There is transaction data yes, but the part where it is assumed there was wrongdoing, victims, or other malpractice is absolutely assumption, not facts or logic.

I am not particularly interested in convincing you. I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated.

More operant conditioning presenting no new information

The quote you keep referencing from theymos was made in relation to OgNasty vs Vod at a time when insults after insults were being hurled at each other and no real facts or evidence were being presented of anyone having "a real trade complaint", it was certainly not productive for the forum to have 2 of its veteran members going at each other like that.

Just because their feud may have spurned up someone like TwitchSeal who has shown newer evidence to suggest OgNasty is much worse than a liar, if what I'm seeing is accurate with the numbers pirateat40 confirmed under oath, and what OgNasty publicly proclaimed to his investors, I think there would be a valid trade complaint here. Trendon Shavers (pirateat40) would have made a very large mistake if he lied to the SEC and I don't think he or his lawyers would have been willing to take that chance.

OgNasty is likely in PMs trying to figure out WTF to say while TECSHARE stalls everyone with useless arguments.  suchmoon said it best:

Debating with TECSHARE is like marriage - the only way for it to work is to admit that you're always wrong and he's always right.

From TECSHARE's perspective, he is never wrong, those that disagree will be attacked until they succumb. If you don't succumb, round' and round' you will go on the pretzel train. Chooo chooooo.

I guess we just shouldn't look at the new evidence since TECSHARE thinks it came out due to a personal feud... whether or not one may have been triggered by the other, shouldn't they still be treated as separate cases and situations with various elements of evidence and facts in each?   If someone came out right now stating Donald Trump was molesting 12 year olds, and presenting evidence for it, is TECHSHARE going to come in and say "this is just a witch hunt because people don't like his foreign policy, nothing to see here, walk away!"  

Og doesn't want to respond directly to any of this, just like he didn't want to provide me any full-context on his chopped up PMs with Vod... and any response will unfortunately be some sort of PR-like statement that is vague and requires you to just trust him.

You're gonna go far, Og. (meaningful lyrics.)

Ah look who it is, Mr. "I am a neutral party" who always just coincidentally seems to argue for Vod's position. There is no new evidence. The only thing that is new is injected speculation, theorizing, and assumption. That and the need to manufacture yet another scandal to be used to attack OGNastys character for criticizing the wrong people here. There is nothing factual supporting the conclusion that he stole money, or that anyone was victimized. This is all just suspicion characterized as fact because hey look at his name in this transcript and here are some transactions that I made assumptions about.

Why should OG reply to you harpies? There is nothing logical or rational he can say that will stop this ceaseless series of attacks on his character, because it is based on targeting the individual, not on facts or logic. There is no path to redemption with you people, which is why people like me will consistently tell you to go fuck yourselves and get a life of your own rather than harassing people on the internet.

[sbogovac]

[...] Just because their feud may have spurned up someone like TwitchSeal who has shown newer evidence to suggest OgNasty is much worse than a liar, if what I'm seeing is accurate with the numbers pirateat40 confirmed under oath, and what OgNasty publicly proclaimed to his investors, I think there would be a valid trade complaint here. [...]

We basically agree; what I told Tecshare was about the (prolonged) feud between Vod and OgNasty (and the quote you refer to is in that context).

But regarding this issue in this topic I was clear:

[...] it would be really nice (especially for OgNasty's own reputation) if this was to be cleared up crystal clear. [...]

So...

[...] Why should OG reply to you harpies? There is nothing logical or rational he can say that will stop this ceaseless series of attacks on his character, because it is based on targeting the individual, not on facts or logic. There is no path to redemption with you people, which is why people like me will consistently tell you to go fuck yourselves and get a life of your own rather than harassing people on the internet.

Actually, it would be quite simple:

[Deflection]

C'mon... how hard can it be...?

[...]This is pretty much very simple yes-know question.

@OG have you returned whole amount to depositors? Did pirate return you whole amount, as he claim he did?

and provide the blockchain proof to back his words up... sounds simple enough to me...

[nutildah]

I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated.

To everyone else observing it looks like you are barking at anyone who questions why OgNasty said he lost funds in the BST ponzi when Trendon Shavers testified to the SEC that he had refunded him in full.

[sirazimuth]

I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated.

To everyone else observing it looks like you are barking at anyone who questions why OgNasty said he lost funds in the BST ponzi when Trendon Shavers testified to the SEC that he had refunded him in full.

In coming ...”WOOF WOOF! blah blah angry rant blah blah ...nutilduuuhhh”

[marlboroza]

May I suggest everyone to ignore Tec's hare, obviously trying to move thread into different direction. TH said he didn't read anything, so OG could have robbed a bank and he would say that "he didn't read it" and continue spewing his online rants.
Lets make something clear @Ognasty: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2834153.msg53304177#msg53304177

Have you invested YOUR money or money which was generated by other passtrough-depositors?

[The-One-Above-All]

The reader should read this post and note there will be NO DEBUNKING OF THE CENTRAL POINTS there is no IRREFUTABLE PROOF of what they are claiming took place ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE. It is all speculation the critical evidence is the "word" of a convicted "scammer".

These SAME DT members have previously claimed  WHEN IT SUITED THEM.

That accusations or EVEN QUESTIONS that are too pointed are to be classed as DEFAMATION AND LIES and those bringing them forward should have RED TRUST.

Clear DOUBLE STANDARDS.

Our questions (to hhampuz) were accompanied by 100% undeniable independently verifiable observable instances and NONE of the DT members even dared dispute them and they still said it was DEFAMATION AND LIES and we got 8 red trusts for that question and supplying the corroborating evidence that they did not dispute.

So how can we trust these same DT members that are now WILLING to 100% believe the words of a convicted "scammer" (as their only strong evidence of full refund) and YEARS LATER THEY SUDDENLY GET ALL INTERESTED  when OG gets back on DT and their accounts are glowing with CORRECTLY GIVEN red trust demonstrating many of them are scammers or extortionists.

The reader should note that this other JayjuanGEE or whatever his pathetic dreg name is has been CLEARLY demonstrated to be dishonest and in league with the proven scam facilitators and other trust abusing scum. I would not trust the SPIN he attempts to put on anything. This fool falsely presented evidence out of full context and deliberately deleted out "nutildahs" asserting that we just made the mistake of believing. He is often found in cahoots and protecting the SAME SCAMMERS and SCAMMER supporters he is aligning with NOW.

See this thread for more Undeniable independently verifiable instances of FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING (no need to rely on the desperate words of a convicted fellon) you can read and investigate this all for yourselves.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170789.0

Then look at the ONLY DT to be flagging these correctly as scammers OGNASTY and then ask yourselves I wonder WHY NOW AFTER ALL OF THESE YEARS are these scammers and scammer supporters who are only now starting to glow red because OG got back on DT.

They are trying anything and willing to believe anyone and scrape any dirt up to get OG off DT.

Do not trust their slanted speculations

This is not to say we claim to KNOW that OG is not guilty of what they claim. BUT they have clear motivation for attacking him NOW and are proven scammers or scammer supporters themselves.  So I would await CONCLUSIVE PROOF of guilt before listening to their SLANT on it.

Love their willingness to believe 100% what a convicted "scammer" says but Unwilling to accept undeniable conclusive proof when it demonstrates financially motivated wrong  doing ON THEIR PART.

If we hold to THEIR SELF IMPOSED STANDARDS then OG is NOT GUILTY and it is DEFAMATION and LIES until CONCLUSIVE PROOF (even then it will be defamation and lies if it is regarding themselves LOL)

Twitchy scum bag is an obseravble supporter of scammers and scammer supporters. I mean let's look at who is on his trust list.... and where his merits come from.


OG is 100x more trustworthy than these foul leaches. He just returned 500BTC to the foum after years. Do you think you would see that 500BTC from lauda, twitchy,tman, JJG, LFC bitcoin, nutildah or any of these undeniable scum bags.


DEBUNK ANY OF OUR CENTRAL POINTS SCAMMER AND SCUMBAGS here and now. YOU CAN NOT.

here comes the crying "trolling" "lies" "mentally ill" " who is we" "any other excuse not to tackle the central points because we are unable to".... LOL


this jayjuangee is the scammers new front man they have rolled out it seems. Another scumbag going on the dirty turds thread soon. He already is protecting other trust abusers/scammer supporters and protecting willing scam facilitators. RUNS AWAY from debating with us because we will pull this scumbag to piece in public.



TLDR?? OG IS NOT GUILTY BY DT MEMBERS OWN SELF IMPOSED STANDARDS. Do not let them impose double standards on other members.

[JayJuanGee]

~

What actions? You mean my words?

Yes.  Last time that I checked, posting constitutes an action.

Last I checked words required a state of thinking to interpret but maybe you have some special way of reading where you don't use your brain. I am quite focused on the topic, just not the parts of it you wish to emphasize. Calling it evidence and logic doesn't make it evidence an logic. There is transaction data yes, but the part where it is assumed there was wrongdoing, victims, or other malpractice is absolutely assumption, not facts or logic.

You are not really saying anything in need of response so far, but I will read on. 

I am not particularly interested in convincing you. I am more focused on everyone else observing getting the full backround of the motivations behind this targeting, and the long term consequences for this community if this kind of Stalinist behavior is tolerated.

I doubt that you are really saving anyone or clarifying matters with your ongoing unsupported conclusions, ie that this is a witch hunt, and your other various convolutions and ad hominems etc.

[TwitchySeal]

The reader should read this post and note there will be NO DEBUNKING OF THE CENTRAL POINTS there is no IRREFUTABLE PROOF of what they are claiming took place ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE. It is all speculation the critical evidence is the "word" of a convicted "scammer".

You should really go back and read the thread man.

The court document where pirate said he paid Og back isn't crucial evidence.  It's entirely possible pirate was lying.  The crucial evidence can be found in the forum archives and block chain.

Nothing else you said is directly related to whether or not Og scammed pass-through 'investors'.  I could be the biggest scammer piece of shit in the world and it wouldn't change the facts.

I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday.  If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong.

Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it.  (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).)


We have pirates ledger for every transaction.
We have ogs thread archived.
We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer.
We have the block chain.

Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors.

The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012.  

On August 6  Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8
On August 13 Og received an interested payment of  BTC39.2
On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38

On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors.  BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54

We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2.

You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it.

Bump^^

Reference Material:

OgNastys WalletExplorer Transactions from August 2012

OgNasty transactions with pirate from April 2012

Pirates Ledger . (ctrl + f 'ognasty')

OgNasty Posts June Payments in pass through thread

OgNasty Posts July Payments in pass through thread

August


If you're taking Ogs character into account, consider what he put in his OP:

"You should [use in Bitcoin Savings & Trust]. pirateat40 is a great asset to the community and if you have the BTC to establish an account, a current member willing to refer you, and are willing to wait for your invite, please do"

Now go read the first page and a half of this thread. And keep in mind the 'insurance' he mentions was BTC65 total.

[The-One-Above-All]

The reader should read this post and note there will be NO DEBUNKING OF THE CENTRAL POINTS there is no IRREFUTABLE PROOF of what they are claiming took place ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE. It is all speculation the critical evidence is the "word" of a convicted "scammer".

You should really go back and read the thread man.

The court document where pirate said he paid Og back isn't crucial evidence.  It's entirely possible pirate was lying.  The crucial evidence can be found in the forum archives and block chain.

Nothing else you said is directly related to whether or not Og scammed pass-through 'investors'.  I could be the biggest scammer piece of shit in the world and it wouldn't change the facts.

I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday.  If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong.

Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it.  (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).)


We have pirates ledger for every transaction.
We have ogs thread archived.
We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer.
We have the block chain.

Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors.

The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012.  

On August 6  Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8
On August 13 Og received an interested payment of  BTC39.2
On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38

On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors.  BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54

We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2.

You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it.

Bump^^

Reference Material:

OgNastys WalletExplorer Transactions from August 2012

OgNasty transactions with pirate from April 2012

Pirates Ledger . (ctrl + f 'ognasty')

OgNasty Posts June Payments in pass through thread

OgNasty Posts July Payments in pass through thread

August


If you're taking Ogs character into account, consider what he put in his OP:

"You should [use in Bitcoin Savings & Trust]. pirateat40 is a great asset to the community and if you have the BTC to establish an account, a current member willing to refer you, and are willing to wait for your invite, please do"

Now go read the first page and a half of this thread. And keep in mind the 'insurance' he mentions was BTC65 total.

Let's make this VERY SIMPLE

Striking away pirates claim

You are claiming you have CONCLUSIVE PROOF of clear and undeniable financially motivated wrong doing by OG nasty.

YES OR NO?? 

If you say YES and you do NOT have conclusive proof. That is defamation and lies according to DT precedent here. So you accept you should be flagged and tagged??

I mean in our case we had conclusive undeniable proof they did not even dispute that but still gave us red for asking a QUESTION. So be very careful. Then again you do not need to be careful as you currently support them.

You are correct though that if you have CONCLUSIVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF your motives do not really matter and can be struck away. Those motives only MATTER if there is NOT CONCLUSIVE PROOF.

[TwitchySeal]

The reader should read this post and note there will be NO DEBUNKING OF THE CENTRAL POINTS there is no IRREFUTABLE PROOF of what they are claiming took place ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE. It is all speculation the critical evidence is the "word" of a convicted "scammer".

You should really go back and read the thread man.

The court document where pirate said he paid Og back isn't crucial evidence.  It's entirely possible pirate was lying.  The crucial evidence can be found in the forum archives and block chain.

Nothing else you said is directly related to whether or not Og scammed pass-through 'investors'.  I could be the biggest scammer piece of shit in the world and it wouldn't change the facts.

I hadn't made any conclusions until yesterday.  If you'd have read the thread you would've known that I was open about the fact that I could be wrong.

Right now (as of yesterday) there is enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Og stole BTC144 and I don't need Pirates statement about paying out OgNasty in full to prove it.  (There is evidence that he took more, but it's not strong enough (yet).)


We have pirates ledger for every transaction.
We have ogs thread archived.
We have both Pirates and OgNastys wallets indexed on wallet explorer.
We have the block chain.

Og was receiving weekly interest payments from Pirate, and making monthly payments to his pass through investors.

The last interest payment Og sent to his investors was on August 2, 2012.  

On August 6  Og received an interested payment of BTC66.8
On August 13 Og received an interested payment of  BTC39.2
On August 17 He received a withdraw for BTC38

On Sept 2 he paid out the insurance he had been collecting to 4 investors.  BTC9.92, BTC4.59, BTC22.95 and BTC27.54

We know that was the insurance because Og posted on the same day 'reserves have been paid, pirate has defaulted', and they total BTC65, the same amount Og listed as the 'current reserves' on August 2.

You'll find transaction ids to all of these in the thread if you decide to bother looking into it.

Bump^^

Reference Material:

OgNastys WalletExplorer Transactions from August 2012

OgNasty transactions with pirate from April 2012

Pirates Ledger . (ctrl + f 'ognasty')

OgNasty Posts June Payments in pass through thread

OgNasty Posts July Payments in pass through thread

August


If you're taking Ogs character into account, consider what he put in his OP:

"You should [use in Bitcoin Savings & Trust]. pirateat40 is a great asset to the community and if you have the BTC to establish an account, a current member willing to refer you, and are willing to wait for your invite, please do"

Now go read the first page and a half of this thread. And keep in mind the 'insurance' he mentions was BTC65 total.

Let's make this VERY SIMPLE

Striking away pirates claim

You are claiming you have CONCLUSIVE PROOF of clear and undeniable financially motivated wrong doing by OG nasty.

YES OR NO??  

If you say YES and you do NOT have conclusive proof. That is defamation and lies according to DT precedent here. So you accept you should be flagged and tagged??

I mean in our case we had conclusive undeniable proof they did not even dispute that but still gave us red for asking a QUESTION. So be very careful. Then again you do not need to be careful as you currently support them.

You are correct though that if you have CONCLUSIVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF your motives do not really matter and can be struck away. Those motives only MATTER if there is NOT CONCLUSIVE PROOF.

Just read the post man.  I already said it proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he pocketed BTC144 and there's evidence that the the number is higher, it's not as strong, but still worth discussing.

As far as the BTC144, it's not impossible that after receiving the last 3 payments from Pirate in August he used a completely different wallet with completely different funds and paid the 4 investors to completely separate wallets from all the other payments they received (even though he said all payments would go to the address the investor provided when they invested) and then on Sept 1 paid out the reserves from and to the original addresses that every other payment had been made in previous months, and didn't mention it in the thread, unlike every other payment.

Look at all the evidence and decide for yourself how likely it is that that is what happened, and let me know if you can think of any other scenario where he didn't steal any funds.  Also, scrutinize all the evidence yourself - it's possible I made some stupid mistake somewhere.  If someone finds one I'm happy to admit it and go back and edit my posts to reflect that. I've already admitted I made a mistake about him deleting posts in the original thread when he found out I was looking into it.  It was just content in the OP, not any actual posts.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

Let's make this VERY SIMPLE

Striking away pirates claim

You are claiming you have CONCLUSIVE PROOF of clear and undeniable financially motivated wrong doing by OG nasty.

YES OR NO?? 

If you say YES and you do NOT have conclusive proof. That is defamation and lies according to DT precedent here. So you accept you should be flagged and tagged??

Did someone die and put you in charge of what are the forum/thread rules regarding discussion of topics, whether accusations or otherwise?

I doubt it.  You seem to have about as much of a clue for proper and relevant forum/thread discussion(s) as a fruit fly.  Maybe you are a fruit fly, disguising yourself as a forum member?

[The-One-Above-All]

[edited out]

Let's make this VERY SIMPLE

Striking away pirates claim

You are claiming you have CONCLUSIVE PROOF of clear and undeniable financially motivated wrong doing by OG nasty.

YES OR NO??  

If you say YES and you do NOT have conclusive proof. That is defamation and lies according to DT precedent here. So you accept you should be flagged and tagged??

Did someone die and put you in charge of what are the forum/thread rules regarding discussion of topics, whether accusations or otherwise?

I doubt it.  You seem to have about as much of a clue for proper and relevant forum/thread discussion(s) as a fruit fly.  Maybe you are a fruit fly, disguising yourself as a forum member?

DT already set a precedent moron. THEIR RULES

Shhh fool. Nobody is going to fall for your cheap parlor tricks to derail this thread.

Twitchy clearly stated he has NO CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING. IT is merely speculation. However COMPELLING it seems DT members demand CONCLUSIVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING before you can speculate, insinuate or even ask questions or it is DEFAMATION, SPREADING LIES and you will all get red trust from each other LOL

What if after all of this he did pay it back from another account or somewhere else there is an explanation? where are these people that were scammed??

GO red trust all the other proven scammers that have undeniable observable instances of scamming, scam facilitating for pay and then we can come back to the ones we SPECULATE or it seems PROBABLE ( to some DT members that do not like OG being on DT) that have scammed after that.

I'm not saying OG is not enjoying a lavish lifestyle on others bitcoins he kept. I am saying you have NO CONCLUSIVE PROOF so stick to your own fucking self imposed standards and come back with it or by your own definitions you are DEFAMING him and spreading lies.

The timing and the specific members here is what makes it look extremely fishy to me. Not claiming there is no fire with your smoke just you need to find the fucking fire don't you. We supplied the fire and you never denied any of it. You just said bringing it up was defamation and spreading lies LOL. That was a question not even a clear accusation like many are making on this thread.

No more double standards here on this forum. You set precedents and hold to them. You must hold to them for all members.

/thread

come back with conclusive proof of financially motivated wrong doing or fuck off.

If you had enough for a type2 or 3 flag you would have pulled it by now. You do NOT.  Of course red trust or the lemons flag is just a joke and proves NOTHING.

Hmmmm would I trust someone who just handed back 500 btc after years of being in SOLE control of it or a bunch of people that are undeniable scammers, or scammer supporters trying years after the event to drag anything up to get their main enemy removed from DT which they want sole control over???

HMMMM let me think.....hahaha

Twitchy if you had NOT been supporting and protecting scammers whilst shouting down whistle blowers and those that have been trust abused then perhaps it would have seemed less contrived and motivated to just pull OG off DT by any and all means. Same for this JJG windbag. It all just seems a little TOO convenient right now he just got back on DT and some of the scammers he tagged are getting some red on their accounts.  I hope the campaign managers will be removing them soon or else we will be asking WHY THIS IS. Surely not MORE double standards LOL

[TwitchySeal]

Twitchy clearly stated he has NO CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING. IT is merely speculation.

It's not merely speculation.  There's a shitload of evidence.  What I stated was that the evidence "proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he pocketed BTC144"  

If scammers were only labeled such when it was proven that it would be impossible for them not to have scammed....nobody would ever be labeled a scammer.

Could you take the default trust list drama to another thread please?