Vod is an extortionist. Get him out of DT!

[OgNasty]

OG, what happened to the 2,600 BTC you had earned for your ponzi depositors?  Why did it vanish when you paid out the much smaller "insurance" fund?

Can you answer the question instead of deflecting for dozens of pages?

Any BTC earned for depositors was paid to them. I’ve heard no depositor say they had any funds vanish.

[Vod]

Any BTC earned for depositors was paid to them. I’ve heard no depositor say they had any funds vanish.

Victims of embezzlement (your depositors) usually don't know they've been scammed.   Once they know, they usually want their money back.  Lawyers are needed, and rewards are given.  If that's the path you want to take, I'll thank you now for my new solar panels.  

You deflected from the question -   What did you do with the 2,600 BTC you owed your depositors when you collapsed your ponzi?

You and Theymos may know the truth, but you and I know what you did.   This forum may increasingly care less about scammers, but your government may, especially since you planned it with malice, something even Pirate didn't do.  

I'm not discussing it with you anymore on this forum, because nothing you say is true.  

(And I really want to launch my site)

[OgNasty]

I'm flattered that you continue to spend so much time letting your imagination run wild.  Your rewrite of history is certainly more exciting. 

[JaredKaragen]

*snip*
You and Theymos may know the truth, but you and I know what you did.  
*snip*

Notice the separation between truth, and what he did. 
The elephant of irony is:  Isn't your root implication that the 'truth' is 'what he did'?   Nice circular argument with yourself.

Why not stop walking yourself in circles, take off the huggies and actually own up to your own actions before you even begin to consider analyzing the [ASSUMED] actions of anyone else.  I have yet to see any proof of this actual instance you keep beating on that would hold up in any reasonable court.  Just accusations without any clear path of evidence.


Put down your emotions.  Be the adult you claim to be.


Now if you have the mental capacity (your ignorance of my posts is deafening):      look at ALL of the erroneous negative trusts you have handed out (no less be caught in doing recently);  and the subsequent retractions of those illegitimate negative trust flags your spiteful and aggressive behavior that you display caused you to make....
because those retractions and those illigitimate attacks have shown me what type of person you actually are:  one whom uses unfounded accusations using hearsay with unsubstantiated additions as 'evidence' to attack someone they disagree with.   The use of the word deplorable actually is 100% suiting.

[OgNasty]

Put down your emotions. 

Putting down the alcohol might help as well.

[rikuu]

Regarding Vod, I personally wouldn't trust a single word of someone that says

"I don't need to investigate/research", "Look at my numbers"

stating not only that he knows everything, but also that he doesn't even need to prove it (source).

Also, I wouldn't trust someone that cares that much about "his numbers", and, even less, that uses it as an argument to prove that he is right. Each post should contain all information to defend itself. Arguments like "my experience" doesn't exempt anyone from being diligent and providing proofs, something Vod doesn't seem to do very often.

To make things even worse, he also uses misleading arguments about how finances work (source) to validate his arguments, trying to manipulate people to make them believe he is right (something that was destroyed later on here). Not to mention that he dares to recommend books (about topics he uses to mislead people), implying that you have no idea and he does, again misleading people.

Accusations without proofs or evidence. Lack of diligence. Lack of respect for other members. Avoid.

[logfiles]

Regarding Vod, I personally wouldn't trust a single word of someone that says

We know why you are salty, because of that Ponzi scheme negative feedback, and he's right about it.

Accusations without proofs or evidence. Lack of diligence. Lack of respect for other members. Avoid.

But it's quite evident that you were promoting a Ponzi scheme... and we all know every Ponzi scheme is scam. Scams/Scammers are not entertained here.

[rikuu]

Regarding Vod, I personally wouldn't trust a single word of someone that says

We know why you are salty, because of that Ponzi scheme negative feedback, and he's right about it.

Accusations without proofs or evidence. Lack of diligence. Lack of respect for other members. Avoid.

But it's quite evident that you were promoting a Ponzi scheme... and we all know every Ponzi scheme is scam. Scams/Scammers are not entertained here.

Another example of someone doing what Vod does. Accuse without proofs or evidence... No research or investigation. Nothing.
Very professional. Same as Vod.

Any proofs to back your accusations?

I hope not all your contributions to bitcointalk are the same.

[hacker1001101001]

Regarding Vod, I personally wouldn't trust a single word of someone that says

"I don't need to investigate/research", "Look at my numbers"

stating not only that he knows everything, but also that he doesn't even need to prove it (source).

Also, I wouldn't trust someone that cares that much about "his numbers", and, even less, that uses it as an argument to prove that he is right. Each post should contain all information to defend itself. Arguments like "my experience" doesn't exempt anyone from being diligent and providing proofs, something Vod doesn't seem to do very often.

To make things even worse, he also uses misleading arguments about how finances work (source) to validate his arguments, trying to manipulate people to make them believe he is right (something that was destroyed later on here). Not to mention that he dares to recommend books (about topics he uses to mislead people), implying that you have no idea and he does, again misleading people.

Accusations without proofs or evidence. Lack of diligence. Lack of respect for other members. Avoid.

I can understand your sentiment about, someone saying "look at my number's" while accusing you of something out, that even clearly show's how some of the users on bitcointalk are rolling with new users by showing them who is big or bullying them in a way. I am sad to say you would find some more similar users here who just rome around with the same argument of "look at my number's" and yet pretend they are helpful enough.

That not being the right argument, on the other side, even I don't think what your promoting is legit as I mostly just remember 'Bitconnect' when I see such high returns monthly scheme's.

[rikuu]

I can understand your sentiment about, someone saying "look at my number's" while accusing you of something out, that even clearly show's how some of the users on bitcointalk are rolling with new users by showing them who is big or bullying them in a way. I am sad to say you would find some more similar users here who just rome around with the same argument of "look at my number's" and yet pretend they are helpful enough.

That not being the right argument, on the other side, even I don't think what your promoting is legit as I mostly just remember 'Bitconnect' when I see such high returns monthly scheme's.

I will try to keep this brief, as I don't want to pollute this thread with another topic.

I completely respect your opinion. Kudos for sharing it in a respectful way (unlike Vod does).

I have nothing against people sharing their opinions, and anyone that reads the thread I quoted can see that I said many times "everyone should do their own research". I was trying to be polite and respectful at the beginning of my thread, despite Vod being aggressive and disrespectful, and then I got fed up with so much BS from Vod and alike and started defending myself.
I was just sharing something that I found interesting. I investigated it and I been following it closely since the very beginning (as everyone should do with the projects they put money in), but I always said that people should investigate it for themselves and form their own opinions. People shouldn't trust me for saying "it is legit", nor should trust Vod for saying "it is a scam" (specially with arguments like "I don't need to investigate/research").

It is not right that people attack other people like Vod does. Sharing opinions is OK. Throwing scam accusations without evidence, insulting or calling liar, just because you don't like what the other person is saying, is not. Vod became very aggressive very quickly in my thread. He started to insult and throw all kind of accusations, and I didn't do anything to deserve it. I believe people like Vod are toxic and their contributions to Bitcointalk are not worthwhile.

I just wanted to share my experience with Vod, that is in line with what I have read here so far.

[Vod]

nor should trust Vod for saying "it is a scam"[/u] (specially with arguments like "I don't need to investigate/research").

Wrong.  You should trust Vod - threads like this are proof I bother scammers.

I've investigated ponzis for several years - why do I need to investigate any further?  I was very nice to you at first, but you seem to think you've discovered something the brightest minds in the world cannot. 

You can show me the underwear in a different color, but it's still going to itch.  :/

[rikuu]

nor should trust Vod for saying "it is a scam"[/u] (specially with arguments like "I don't need to investigate/research").

Wrong.  You should trust Vod

Just wow....

It is amazing that despite this thread being 42 pages long, it still can't fit Vod's ego.

Sure... why does anyone need to have their own opinion?

I've investigated ponzis for several years - why do I need to investigate any further?

/ultrafacepalm

Please, don't become a lawyer.... or a judge for that matter.

[Vod]

I've investigated ponzis for several years - why do I need to investigate any further?

/ultrafacepalm

You don't understand the sentence, or you think you need to re-learn the same thing every time a new textbook comes out?

[rikuu]

I've investigated ponzis for several years - why do I need to investigate any further?

/ultrafacepalm

You don't understand the sentence, or you think you need to re-learn the same thing every time a new textbook comes out?

Oh yes, I understand the sentence very well, thank you for asking.

Are you going to teach me a lesson with another misleading example? Please go ahead.

[rikuu]

I've investigated ponzis for several years - why do I need to investigate any further?

/ultrafacepalm

You don't understand the sentence, or you think you need to re-learn the same thing every time a new textbook comes out?

Oh yes, I understand the sentence very well, thank you for asking.

Are you going to teach me a lesson with another misleading example?

I just realised you just did! Wow, you are getting good at misleading people.

You used the "re-learn ... textbook" as a misleading example, again.

What does learning has anything to do with proving? "To Learn" is not the same as "to prove". Apologies for being the bearer of bad news for your argument. Analogies like that are misleading.

I didn't say you need to learn again what a ponzi is, I said you need to prove it before throwing accusations. And, as far as I know, you can't re-prove something without proving it first. And sorry, proving A doesn't prove B. If you are too lazy to do your homework is not my fault.

Also, saying something over and over again doesn't make it true. Keep it in mind before continue calling someone a liar or something a scam. It is more effective to back up your arguments with evidences than repeating it until people believes it.

[Vod]

I didn't say you need to learn again what a ponzi is, I said you need to prove it before throwing accusations.

Ponzis have been proven scams for decades now.   Don't need to prove it again.

It is more effective to back up your arguments with evidences than repeating it until people believes it.

Good summary of this thread!

[rikuu]

I didn't say you need to learn again what a ponzi is, I said you need to prove it before throwing accusations.

Ponzis have been proven scams for decades now.   Don't need to prove it again.

/facepalm

Who doesn't understand the sentence now? I said that you need to prove that something is a ponzi/scam before throwing accusations. No one talked about proving that a ponzi is a scam.

It is more effective to back up your arguments with evidences than repeating it until people believes it.

Good summary of this thread!

Also good summary of 90% of your posts.

[Vod]

As long as everyone can see in your trust that you promote a ponzi, palm your face as many times as you want.

When you prove you know something about finance, we can chat again. 

[OgNasty]

When you prove you know something about finance, we can chat again. 

Vod, you can’t hold a job as a minimum wage night watchman. You pretend to know about finance but let’s be honest, you couldn’t get an entry level finance assistant job. You are a liar, a fraud, incompetent, and have absolutely no experience, moral, or educational ground to stand on over anyone in this community. In reality, you are well below average when it comes to financial understanding here, and that’s being polite.

[Vod]

When you prove you know something about finance, we can chat again. 

Vod, you can’t hold a job as a minimum wage night watchman. You pretend to know about finance but let’s be honest, you couldn’t get an entry level finance assistant job. You are a liar, a fraud, incompetent, and have absolutely no experience, moral, or educational ground to stand on over anyone in this community. In reality, you are well below average when it comes to financial understanding here, and that’s being polite.

I understand you embezzled over 2,000 bitcoin during the pirate scam, and I understand you have to pay that back.  That's all that is important.

I really don't care what a person like you thinks about me.  I won't even bring up your extensive criminal record when you drink.  :/