Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 06:30:11 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Bitcoin Foundation members are resigning!  (Read 8103 times)
RodeoX
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2464


The revolution will be monetized!


View Profile
January 28, 2015, 04:58:33 PM
 #81

So you are basically telling me that this guy is resining and speaking about other people that they are doing crimes etc... and those people won't go to jail ? Could someone please explain why ?
No. What crimes are you talking about?

"Charlie Shrem engaging in alleged money laundering and associated crimes."
"Brock Pierce being associated with alleged pedophilia. (Now newly elected to an industry seat)"

Charlie Shrem was arrested and is facing sentencing. When that happened he left the board. As far as I know the only accusation came from the police. He was right to step down.If he had not he would have been removed.

In the case of Brock Pierce there was some kind of complaint years ago. It was looked at and he was cleared. As much as pedophiles get us all upset, we can't start acting on a mere accusation. Every day we see countless baseless claims here. If that is going to be the benchmark then we are going nowhere. I myself have been accused of being in the Illuminati, a secret agent, and an alien.  Roll Eyes 
If anyone has evidence of a pedophile , scammer, thief, then please do tell the police. I'll help!

The gospel according to Satoshi - https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Free bitcoin in ICELAND - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1610684
1512973811
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1512973811

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1512973811
Reply with quote  #2

1512973811
Report to moderator
1512973811
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1512973811

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1512973811
Reply with quote  #2

1512973811
Report to moderator
1512973811
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1512973811

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1512973811
Reply with quote  #2

1512973811
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Spendulus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722



View Profile
January 28, 2015, 05:19:17 PM
 #82

.....
I understand. I would ask you to consider that I am not defending Pierce, Shrem, or Karpeles. I am trying to separate facts from accusations. I lobbied against Brock Peirce for his seat. But the election had him as the winner anyway. Should I disregard a fair vote because he was accused of something in the past? Should his drug use preclude him from serving? If so then why can George Bush do acid and coke and still be president? It's true that if Brock were convicted I would feel different. Not because he goes from being good to bad, but because the claim was seriously looked at and investigated by a court rather than a bitcoin forum.
Look at the case of Mark K. You would think from reading here that he stole the money at Gox. There is no evidence of that, but the people who lost money want to blame someone rather than face the idea that an anonymous thief took their money and it is gone forever. Maybe Mark did take the money, maybe not. We do not know. That's the fact, and all I'm saying. 

Before making statements such as that bolded above, I would go back and read a fair number of the court transcripts and examine the timelines.  I would not make them lightly, because that actually does put you in the position of defending Karpeles, Pierce, Shrem, etc.

Having read a number of the legal transcripts, I assure you that the "We do not know" statement is to a fair extent, false.  I have the impression that you have not done so, but are well intentioned.  This has implications. 

For example, your claim that Brock's stuff was "seriously looked at and investigated by a court" has no merit.  In reality, a large number of "convictions" are plea bargains by those who don't have the money for court.  And a large number of dismissals are achieved by way of money passing hands or otherwise an agreement being reached between the defendant and the plaintiff. 

And what none of the above truly handles well is the continuing fact that bad has swirled around the Bitcoin Foundation.  You can't make the stink go away by trying over and over to put these characters in the "innocent until proven guilty" category.

RE George Bush.  Rather than discredit my point, you make it.  Pierce signed up and paid to run for director only a few days before voting closed.  IIRC.  This put the awareness, disclosure and fact-searching relative to his past post-election, rather than prior to the election.  There was actually NOT a discussion on these issues prior to the election.  Bush freely admitted pre election that he'd gone through some rough times.

RodeoX
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2464


The revolution will be monetized!


View Profile
January 28, 2015, 06:24:33 PM
 #83

.....
I understand. ...
...We do not know. That's the fact, and all I'm saying.  

Before making statements such as that bolded above, I would go back and read a fair number of the court transcripts and examine the timelines.  I would not make them lightly, because that actually does put you in the position of defending Karpeles, Pierce, Shrem, etc.

Having read a number of the legal transcripts, I assure you that the "We do not know" statement is to a fair extent, false.  I have the impression that you have not done so, but are well intentioned.  This has implications.  

For example, your claim that Brock's stuff was "seriously looked at and investigated by a court" has no merit.  In reality, a large number of "convictions" are plea bargains by those who don't have the money for court.  And a large number of dismissals are achieved by way of money passing hands or otherwise an agreement being reached between the defendant and the plaintiff.  

And what none of the above truly handles well is the continuing fact that bad has swirled around the Bitcoin Foundation.  You can't make the stink go away by trying over and over to put these characters in the "innocent until proven guilty" category.

RE George Bush.  Rather than discredit my point, you make it.  Pierce signed up and paid to run for director only a few days before voting closed.  IIRC.  This put the awareness, disclosure and fact-searching relative to his past post-election, rather than prior to the election.  There was actually NOT a discussion on these issues prior to the election.  Bush freely admitted pre election that he'd gone through some rough times.
Pedophiles are almost never in a position to plea bargain or to have their cases dropped. Maybe I have not seen it, but I find no record of a plea or court action. Not that I disagree that many crimes are bargained away, but Pedos are hated by everyone, including the other inmates and the nature of their crimes combined with high recidivism keeps most judges from dealing. In any case, the police need to be informed if anyone has any info, not me. If there is something to the charge they have the power to investigate.
As far as not disclosing his past and starting his election bid at the last minute... Well, that is part of why I did not vote for him. But he did win. The time for people to ask about his past was when he was running.  
The bottom line is that we do not know. You say we do via court records, but where is the conviction then?

The gospel according to Satoshi - https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Free bitcoin in ICELAND - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1610684
Spendulus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722



View Profile
January 28, 2015, 09:06:53 PM
 #84

....
Pedophiles are almost never in a position to plea bargain or to have their cases dropped. Maybe I have not seen it, but I find no record of a plea or court action. Not that I disagree that many crimes are bargained away, but Pedos are hated by everyone, including the other inmates and the nature of their crimes combined with high recidivism keeps most judges from dealing. In any case, the police need to be informed if anyone has any info, not me. If there is something to the charge they have the power to investigate.
As far as not disclosing his past and starting his election bid at the last minute... Well, that is part of why I did not vote for him. But he did win. The time for people to ask about his past was when he was running.  
The bottom line is that we do not know. You say we do via court records, but where is the conviction then?

Well, there you go again.  Focusing on Pierce. 

When I make a statement such as:


Having read a number of the legal transcripts, I assure you that the "We do not know" statement is to a fair extent, false.  I have the impression that you have not done so, but are well intentioned.  This has implications.

....the intent is not to demonstrate a conviction, but to indicate the presence of many facts in those documents.  Again, you seem to be trying to conflagrate "conviction" with "bad human."  Or you may be limiting "fact" to "presence or absence of conviction."

I disagree with that, having hired over the years probably hundreds of "convicted felons", and I can assure you that they do not represent "bad people."   court documents will show situations, associates, events, many things that certainly do shed a light on matters.

Make no mistake about it, you come across as an apologist for Pierce in particular, and somehow attempt to disassociate the BF from actions of it's directors, past and present.  Might want to reconsider that...
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!