Vod vs OgNasty - OgNasty drops most claims

[Vod]

You are the one who keeps pressing me to submit the evidence to the court about the sexual complaint against you which you keep saying you will publish. As for it being false, it didn’t seem that way in your PM to me. People can read it for themselves and decide.

1) I am pushing you to file a version in your conflicting defense. I have never pushed you to post or not post your fantasies.  In fact, I am not reporting you or stopping you from publishing whatever you believe to be true in the proper area.  Even an apparent legal buffoon like yourself has to understand the rules and consequences by now.

2) The way the pedophile accusation that sounded true encouraged you to work with me closely for months tells me you were not bothered by it.  You even enquired about BPIP credit recently and you wanted to associate your brand on my website half a year later.  Why did the accusation of such a sick subject increase your interest if it sounded true?   And then what does a pervert like that do to change your mind?  

I've always been happy with the way the case was going but I was frustrated with the two year limit on libel.   Now I can go back several years to refute your new libel with your own words.  You've also seemed to convince another person and that shows malice so hopefully you will no longer find the lawsuit amount frivolous.  

I won't post here again until I have lawsuit news.   OgNasty can post whatever he wants knowing it can be used against him. In fact OgNasty if you have facts to back up a counter suit and you're holding out for some uncharacteristic reason, please bring it forward so we can end the drama faster!  Your other victims need sworn statements to start the coin recovery process.  

[Vod]

I hope when you do get the news that the case has been thrown out, you don’t take it too hard.

You know, you can post lawsuit news as well OgNasty!  It's going to take my lawyer a few weeks to update the lawsuit with all the new libel.  Let us know when you've decided it's thrown out. 

[Vod]

Received OgNasty's affidavit today.     He has backed away from most points and is pulling a

hail mary on a jurisdictional challenge.  He will be providing all his tax receipts claiming he has never sold anything to anyone in Canada, as if that matters on the internet.     AI response after analyzing all my claims/evidence and his claims/evidence:

DEFENCE POINTS ABANDONED BETWEEN STATEMENT OF DEFENCE (Oct 2025) AND AFFIDAVIT (Apr 2026)

• "FIRED FROM TREASURER ROLE" — DROPPED
  Defence: Claimed he was "fired" due to plaintiff's harassment, administrator "did not believe" plaintiff, suffered "significant monetary losses"
  Affidavit: Mentions only that he was employed as treasurer "for a period" — no termination, no losses, no administrator quote
  Why abandoned: Unsubstantiated damages claim; hearsay issues; opens door to employment discovery
  
  
• SPECIFIC $5M DEMAND DATE — DILUTED
  Defence: "August 3, 2021" — exact date
  Affidavit: "Several years ago" — vague
  Why abandoned: Fixed date hurts limitation defence; vagueness obscures timeline relative to 2-year limitation period
  
  
• 2018 "EXPOSURE" MESSAGE AS EXTORTION — DROPPED
  Defence: Central origin story — plaintiff's April 2018 PM was "threatening, intimidating and an attempt at extortion"
  Affidavit: Not mentioned at all
  Why abandoned: Conflated two separate events; 2018 message was ambiguous; no police report undermines credibility
  
  
• DETAILED "MENTALLY ILL" POST JUSTIFICATIONS — DROPPED
  Defence: Extensive defence of "mentally ill," "retarded," "crazy," "wacko" posts as "commentary, opinion, factual descriptions"
  Affidavit: Neutral mention of plaintiff's "mental issues as a result of a brain injury" — no defence of inflammatory language
  Why abandoned: Hardest to defend as "fair comment"; risks appearing malicious; medical condition known = higher culpability
  
  
• OWNERSHIP OF "PEDOPHILE" ACCUSATION — DISTANCED
  Defence: Implicitly owned the April 9, 2025 "pedophile" post (included in claim, defended generally)
  Affidavit: Attributes "paedophile" references to "various members" and "other users" — implies he merely repeated others
  Why abandoned: Most damaging allegation; hardest to justify; distancing reduces direct liability
  
  
• INFLAMMATORY RHETORIC — DROPPED
  Defence: Reproduced "Og derangement syndrome," "cowardly little dishonorable weasels," "testicle fortitude," "spineless weasel"
  Affidavit: Completely sanitized tone — none of this language appears
  Why abandoned: Undermines "good faith" defence; makes defendant appear malicious and obsessed
  
  
• "VEXATIOUS LITIGANT" COUNTERCLAIM — SOFTENED
  Defence: Formal remedy: "A declaration that the Plaintiff is a vexatious litigant" (has procedural consequences)
  Affidavit: Uses "frivolous" repeatedly — never "vexatious"
  Why abandoned: High procedural bar; risks backfiring; "frivolous" is safer rhetoric
  
  
• SPECIFIC LIMITATION ACT CITATION — DROPPED
  Defence: "Section 3 of the Limitation Act R.S.A. 2000" — precise statutory reference
  Affidavit: General "statute-barred" language — no statute cited
  Why abandoned: Precision invites scrutiny; vagueness makes argument harder to attack
  
  
• ADMINISTRATOR'S "DISBELIEF" OF PLAINTIFF — DROPPED
  Defence: Administrator "did not believe the Plaintiff" but fired defendant anyway "to maintain integrity"
  Affidavit: Administrator described plaintiff's conduct as "reckless and vicious doxing" — no mention of disbelieving plaintiff
  Why abandoned: Hearsay; administrator may not corroborate; contradicts other affidavit references to administrator's negative comments about plaintiff
  

NEW ARGUMENTS ADDED IN AFFIDAVIT (Not in Defence)

• "Duelbits" gambling sponsorship — Evidence plaintiff earns ongoing income from forum, contradicting damages claim
  
• Specific usernames "suchmoon" and "ibminer" — Added detail to website sale narrative
  
• Passport expired July 23, 2016 — New "proof" he never traveled to Canada
  
• Forum non conveniens doctrine — Expanded jurisdictional argument beyond mere "lack of jurisdiction"
  
• Exhibits A-G — New documentary evidence package
  

STRATEGIC INTERPRETATION

The affidavit represents a tactical retreat from the merits. The defendant's counsel has:

ABANDONED aggressive counter-narratives that were risky or unprovable
SOFTENED inflammatory language that undermined "good faith" defences  
PIVOTED to procedural exits (jurisdiction, limitation) rather than fighting substance

The contrast between the bombastic forum posts and the sanitized affidavit is stark — and potentially damaging to credibility at trial. The defendant now appears to be running from his own words rather than defending them.

Bottom line: He knows the defamation claim has teeth. The scorched-earth defence is becoming a scorched-earth retreat.

[Vod]

I started a new topic in investigations where I can post defensive documents in an area not indexed by Google.  Despite being served, despite being unable to prove most of his claims and dropping them, OgNasty wants to continue increasing his liability.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5581963.msg66685044

[Vod]

If you are still wondering who the bullshitter is, please see my legal link in the Investigations section.  You can ask it any question you want and it will answer based only on the documents OgNasty and I have filed. 

[Jessie2121]

I actually have been meaning to remove my negative trust rating for him [Vod] because I just plain don’t care about him anymore at all.

1) You've claimed to not care about me for over six years now.   What changed recently to make it so "plain"?

2) You claimed I extorted you for $5,000,000, am constantly harassing you offline, and have abused the trust system of a forum and people you love and trust.   Do those things no longer bother you, or did they never happen?

3) My lawyers haven't contact you or Theymos yet.   What/who is forcing you to do this?  


frivolous

I think is time to let go some issues the both of you have for that 6 years, some members might not be on line in the forum when this quarrel the both of you have as of then and we still have new faces who have come to see this issue still hanging by. Well my take on this is for the both of you to face the reality, is time to end it because all of these doesn't pay, you guys have to make up and forget all that happened and if I'm to be the judge I won't want to know who's started it because 6byears is too long if you ask me, but is best for you guys to wear the cloth of peace, both of you are the winners in this battle if I should call it that. I think nobody is forcing @OgNasty to do anything, as a human that we are there are time we call it a quit, so Mr @Vod is best for us to see that change starting from you two, let it go and I wish to see something more challenging from you two and not this quarrel that have lasted for 6 years, wow a long year to sentence someone in jall.

[Free Market Capitalist]

I think is time to let go some issues the both of you have for that 6 years...

That simply is not gonna happen. This isn't just a friendly spat that will be resolved by Friday, with everyone making up and having a few beers together. There are very serious allegations, a trial, and a long wait until it finally took place.

[Jessie2121]

I think is time to let go some issues the both of you have for that 6 years...

That simply is not gonna happen. This isn't just a friendly spat that will be resolved by Friday, with everyone making up and having a few beers together. There are very serious allegations, a trial, and a long wait until it finally took place.

From the looks of things is just how you said it and I know it will be hard I mean very hard for them to reconcile but whatever do you expect to happen when they have been on their neck for 6 years from what @Vod said? Something need to happen for them to end this case, not an easy one but they still need to look for the better option to end it.

[Vod]

when they have been on their neck for 6 years from what @Vod said?

You don't even need to trust me - you can ask any question about the case.  Look in investigations for the AI chatbot.  It took OgNasty three years to decide he didn't like working with who he believed were pedophiles.  

I asked what are the dates OgNasty first contacted Vod, offered advice and requested advertising, as well as the date he started attacking me, along with delta from start

OgNasty first contacted you and began collaborating in 2016–2017; he took your advice and sought advertising from you between June and October 2018, and he began attacking you in November 2019. The time delta from the start of collaboration (2016) to the first major attack (November 2019) is roughly 3 years, and from the peak of your advice/advertising period (mid‑2018) to the attacks is about 1 to 1.5 years.

Collaboration and advice/advertising phase
The evidence summary states that your screenshots from 2016–2018 show OgNasty agreeing with you on forum threads and complimenting your BPIP work in 2016–2017. It further notes active private‑message collaboration on BPIP development and the trust system from December 2017 to February 2018, followed by June–October 2018, when OgNasty “took Vod's advice, promised merit rewards, and sought advertising/sponsorship on Vod's platform.”

In short:

First contact/collaboration: 2016–2017 (forum threads and PMs).

Advice and requested advertising: June–October 2018.

Start of attacks and deltas
The knowledge base dates the first “manufactured” pedophile accusation to November 2019. It also records that a further escalation to calling you a “child molesting piece of shit” occurred in March 2020, after he had already begun attacking you.

Based on those dates:

Start of attacks: November 2019 (first pedophile accusation).

Delta from first contact (2016) to attacks: about 3 years.

Delta from advice/advertising period (June–October 2018) to attacks: about 1–1.5 years

they still need to look for the better option to end it.

God knows I'm trying to end this, but he wants to drag it out with a dismissal and refiling in Arizona.  His merits are lacking on the application as well, so it's likely to fail.    OgNasty claims he didn't have time to find a lawyer to properly respond but he did contact a number of lawyers who felt sorry for him, and he got oral advice from young women when discussing the case drunk - so I hope the judge sees it as the frivolous application it is and we can move forward.