[ANN][XOM] Coin and P2P Marketplace|Launched|AirDrop|Escrows|Reputation|and More

[Tradingriver]

as an AGS investor - i will never support your project.

taking our sourcecode is fine, but you should read the license agreements.

but maybe we can recycle some good ideas for our self.

[Tuck Fheman]

as an AGS investor - i will never support your project.

taking our sourcecode is fine, but you should read the license agreements.

[merockstar]

Only allowing wealthy investors fund your project, -8 points.

Kickstarter such that normal people get NO equity in your business, -7 points.

Forking BitShares code without mentioning BitShares explicitly even once, -8 points.

Not honoring the BitShares consensus of 10/10 to PTS/AGS holders, -6 points.

Screen shots that look horribly designed, -7 points.

ah CLains, couldn't have said it better myself.

I will actively discourage anybody I ever talk to about the project for the above reasons.

[zorco]

Only allowing wealthy investors fund your project, -8 points.

Kickstarter such that normal people get NO equity in your business, -7 points.

Forking BitShares code without mentioning BitShares explicitly even once, -8 points.

Not honoring the BitShares consensus of 10/10 to PTS/AGS holders, -6 points.

Screen shots that look horribly designed, -7 points.

Right on !!! I really don't get why they chose to do it this way. Good luck with that but no thanks. I will never support this in any way for the reason mentioned above.

[joele]

Honor AGS and PTS,or BTS?

 

Yes. It's no secret that we are copying BTSX. (References to DPoS and TITAN are a dead give-away to anyone who knows BTSX.) But, we are also adding a few important features. Of course, OmniCoin will be open-source. So BTSX will be able to benefit from our work, just as we are benefitting from theirs.

Best,
Rick

Rick,

I'm sure you know that's not how it works. If you don't give 10% of your coins to AGS and 10% to PTS or BTS, you'll incur the wrath and repudiation of the BitShares community. You can try to hide behind your idea that "BTSX will be able to benefit from our work"; but I guarantee you that no AGS donator will see it that way.

What you're doing is this: you're looking out at the pool of people who "get" crypto, and you're singling out a particular group (AGS donators) who really really get crypto and you're saying "we don't want you to be a part of this community. Everybody else, come and get it! But we're going to ensure that you AGS donators never have anything to do with our project."

If that sounds like a smart move, go for it - but know that you will certainly alienate one of your biggest potential client bases.

+5%

[OmniBazaar]

There is probably not a completely reliable way to prevent this type of Sybil "attack", but there are several possible ways to make it more difficult. If I recall correctly, for example, I think Stellar tracks IP addresses, and limits the number of accounts that a "family" at one address can create. I think they also restrict creating new accounts through TOR (which makes sense).

We have not settled yet on exactly how to handle this issue, and would be glad to get community input on this. Anyone have any bright ideas they would like to share?

Good question. Thanks.

Rick

Here is one idea https://forum.nemcoin.com/index.php?topic=2620.msg8259#msg8259

Thanks. That was helpful

I appreciate the input.

Rick

[OmniBazaar]

Honor AGS and PTS,or BTS?

 

Yes. It's no secret that we are copying BTSX. (References to DPoS and TITAN are a dead give-away to anyone who knows BTSX.) But, we are also adding a few important features. Of course, OmniCoin will be open-source. So BTSX will be able to benefit from our work, just as we are benefitting from theirs.

Best,
Rick

Rick,

I'm sure you know that's not how it works. If you don't give 10% of your coins to AGS and 10% to PTS or BTS, you'll incur the wrath and repudiation of the BitShares community. You can try to hide behind your idea that "BTSX will be able to benefit from our work"; but I guarantee you that no AGS donator will see it that way.

What you're doing is this: you're looking out at the pool of people who "get" crypto, and you're singling out a particular group (AGS donators) who really really get crypto and you're saying "we don't want you to be a part of this community. Everybody else, come and get it! But we're going to ensure that you AGS donators never have anything to do with our project."

If that sounds like a smart move, go for it - but know that you will certainly alienate one of your biggest potential client bases.

Well, I see I struck a nerve here...

First, I want to assure you that I would rather have your support than your animosity. I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here.

But, when I go to GitHub and look at the license file for the Bitshares project, here is what I see:

This is free and unencumbered software released into the public domain.

Anyone is free to copy, modify, publish, use, compile, sell, or distribute this software, either in source code form or as a compiled binary, for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, and by any means.

In jurisdictions that recognize copyright laws, the author or authors of this software dedicate any and all copyright interest in the software to the public domain. We make this dedication for the benefit of the public at large and to the detriment of our heirs and successors. We intend this dedication to be an overt act of relinquishment in perpetuity of all present and future rights to this software under copyright law.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

For more information, please refer to http://unlicense.org/

Now, I understand that the license is different from the Social Contract you are writing about. And if I were interested in creating an asset or a DAC under BTSX, and I needed technical help from Dan and the core developers, I would probably agree to that Social Contract. But, I'm not asking for any help, and I am adding new features to the code base.

It seems to me that 20% is a pretty steep price to pay for the approval of BTS and AGS investors -- especially when that approval is not accompanied by any financial support. I'm offering up to 20% of the company to investors in exchange for financial support that will help me get this project completed, launched and widely promoted. No offense, but I just can't see giving up another 20% just to make BTS and AGS investors feel good about me. I completely understand that, as a BTS/AGS investor, you want me to do what is in your financial best interest. But, if you were in my position, you would likely feel as I do.

I've been around these forums long enough to understand one thing: Even if I were Satoshi himself (which, of course, I am not), and I were promoting the greatest new idea since the release of Bitcoin itself, I would still have critics, nay-sayers and detractors.

Again, I would prefer to have your support. But, if I can't, I'm still going to build the coin and the marketplace.

I personally think the world needs it.

Best,
Rick

[OmniBazaar]

Only allowing wealthy investors fund your project, -8 points.

This is a matter of compliance with securities law. The way we are offering our Private Placement REQUIRES that we accept investments only from "Accredited Investors". People who are not wealthy, but like what we are doing, can contribute on IndieGoGo, and get coins as perks.

Kickstarter such that normal people get NO equity in your business, -7 points.

Again, this is a matter of compliance with both US securities law and the rules of IndieGoGo. Normal people may at some point be able to invest via our offering at AngelList (https://angel.co/omnibazaar-inc), at such time as we have a lead investor who is willing to form what they call a "syndication".

Forking BitShares code without mentioning BitShares explicitly even once, -8 points.

[shrug] Where would you suggest I mention it? The IndieGoGo campaign is already too technical for most people who see it. It has already come up in this thread, and is completely out in the open. Does it really matter that much which coin we used as the base for OmniCoin? Every coin out there (except Bitcoin) is based on some other coin. "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." We think BTSX is great. We're not hiding that, or any of the great features.

Not honoring the BitShares consensus of 10/10 to PTS/AGS holders, -6 points.

See my response to "biophil" above.

Screen shots that look horribly designed, -7 points.

If you would like to help make it better, we could probably arrange to let you help. If you would like to express some specific constructive suggestions, PM me. I will be glad to hear what you have to say. But "look horribly designed" is not particularly helpful or constructive.

Best,
Rick
[/quote]

[Indemnified]

Only allowing wealthy investors fund your project, -8 points.

This is a matter of compliance with securities law. The way we are offering our Private Placement REQUIRES that we accept investments only from "Accredited Investors". People who are not wealthy, but like what we are doing, can contribute on IndieGoGo, and get coins as perks.

Kickstarter such that normal people get NO equity in your business, -7 points.

Again, this is a matter of compliance with both US securities law and the rules of IndieGoGo. Normal people may at some point be able to invest via our offering at AngelList (https://angel.co/omnibazaar-inc), at such time as we have a lead investor who is willing to form what they call a "syndication".

Forking BitShares code without mentioning BitShares explicitly even once, -8 points.

[shrug] Where would you suggest I mention it? The IndieGoGo campaign is already too technical for most people who see it. It has already come up in this thread, and is completely out in the open. Does it really matter that much which coin we used as the base for OmniCoin? Every coin out there (except Bitcoin) is based on some other coin. "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." We think BTSX is great. We're not hiding that, or any of the great features.

Not honoring the BitShares consensus of 10/10 to PTS/AGS holders, -6 points.

See my response to "biophil" above.

Screen shots that look horribly designed, -7 points.

If you would like to help make it better, we could probably arrange to let you help. If you would like to express some specific constructive suggestions, PM me. I will be glad to hear what you have to say. But "look horribly designed" is not particularly helpful or constructive.

Best,
Rick

[SHRUG]  I'd say you have miscalculated but,
[SHRUG] time will tell............

[sidhujag]

Its just a shitcoin copyclone of bitshares.. I doubt this is the ltc of bts...

Where is the github link? Funny you clone bitshares but not even provide your link in the op...

Doesnt seem like you get it about social consensus... You should read up a bit instead of being greedy...

So you will secretly keep copying bitshares stuff including the voting stuff which is a work in progress and hold it privatly yet you want money upfront from investors? Rolf

Why dont u just create a dac inside of bts and plan around turing complete scripts for trustless auctions/buy it now marketplaces? Oh wait social consensus again doh!

[thevampireskilledit]

The bitshares community are among the smartest I've come across and honoring the AGS/PTS consensus is probably the smartest thing you could do. Until then I'm going to just watch.

[Corleone1918]

XOM will have a future.

[toast]

You are significantly more likely to succeed if you honor AGS/PTS.

[liondani]

I suggest you to not ignore AGS donators since they are the reason you can now use the bitshares_toolkit for your project...
You say you don't need the help of the bitshares_toolkit devs and that's a reason not to give 10% ...YOU ARE WRONG... it is maybe a reason not to give more than 10% like the majority are doing (peertracks,lottocoin,DNS,VOTE,PLAY etc.)
But 10% is the absolute minimum you should give away for all the work already done!!! Or do you think it is fair to violate the social consensus.Go for it if you want to be the first one (and the last one)
I am sure you will loose more than 10% on future value of your project (if it survives due luck of quality support) because of your bad reputation that will be a result of ignoring a demographic that is responsible
for the technology you will use. How do you expect future investors to trust you? (at least the majority of them) knowing the background story? You can not hide the truth, that's for sure!
I wish you good luck since you will need it 100%
I hope you change your mind and look into your project as a professional and not as a gambler or as a... thieve

[fuznutts]

I can honestly say I do not support your methods.  

So let me please get to why.

Well, I see I struck a nerve here...

You did strike a nerve and for someone with a sense of ethical and honorable behavior, it should be apparent why.  But for the newbies who are reading this post (and for you if you really have that much of a problem with comprehending such simple things), I will explain why.  

Many people in this community have sacrificed a great deal to bring this opportunity to crypto as a whole.  They hoped that people like you would be able to build awesome things with the toolkit, but also expected that if the risks they personally took for everyone paid off that there would be honorable and ethical devs who cared enough to give back as a /bow and /thank you for their risks making it possible to outcompete all other, similar technologies.  

Somehow you saw fit to not only fall short of reaching the social consensus--you also found a way to completely ignore it.  Never did you make a post telling the community of your intentions to do this in bitsharestalk.org forums...you simply did a complete end-around us in hopes that you could gain from others' risks.  To a degree, this would be fine with me as I am not personally in this to get fabulously wealthy, but it does tend to sadden me and dim my outlook for humanity that someone is so obviously bent on getting wealthy off a product someone else built without so much as a pittance of thanks.   This, to me, speaks volumes about the character of those who are working on this project.  

If I am a potential investor, I am wondering why you wouldn't throw me under the bus at the first chance too.  We have plenty of pump and dump schemes out there...and you officially made yours look like one.  If you can't trust the dev to act with a modicum of respect for others, what exactly makes you want to invest in their project (which is directly tied to them)?

Forking BitShares code without mentioning BitShares explicitly even once, -8 points.

First, I want to assure you that I would rather have your support than your animosity. I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here.

I am glad that you outwardly express that you wish no animosity, but sadly your actions speak much louder.  If you really want this to change...change your actions

This is specifically what bothers me most:  Nowhere do I see a symbol that says "Powered by Bitshares".  You seem to think that saying "it is no secret we are cloning btsx" on a post somewhere buried deep in bitcointalk is an acceptable retort...

It is a mystery to me how you can be so blatantly ignorant to what most people learn in middle school.  Even creative commons material openly references those whose content is featured, giving the due respect to those who selflessly created their content for open source use.  Take a moment and imagine yourself in everyone's shoes.

No...you do not need to go into depth on the kickstarter page about bitshares.  In fact, I would imagine you would do this in a way that buries it further under walls of text that no user will ever use.  From your behavior thus far, it is a fair assumption that this would be your path of choice anyway.  However, you could easily at least quell animosity (which you openly state you want to do) by putting the "Powered by Bitshares" logo legibly on your logo so people can see who did the hard work so you could get your pay day, and do their own research into what BitShares is.

Instead, you somehow seem to find a way to act as though you are ignorant to these obvious details...  

Please man...just FIX it.  You wont get the support or help (in any direct way) from the community...but at least you will help quell the animosity.  

[fuznutts]

I see the OP has little to nothing to say in response.  So I will do my best to get you get you an image file to use...

Please consider being a decent human being and AT LEAST using it. 

[OmniBazaar]

Instead of answering each individual post about "honoring the AGS/PTS consensus", I would like to address them all in a single post.

Attribution:

I have added mention of Bitshares X on the OP of this thread, under the heading of "OmniCoin Features". I will also add an attribution to other promotional materials in instances where it will not simply confuse the intended audience. I won't use the "Powered by Bitshares" logo, as my understanding is that it is reserved for projects that are either assets on the Bitshares blockchain or participating in the AGS/PTS "consensus". I apologize for the oversight of not attributing more clearly in the original post. It was never my intention to hide the fact that we are using the BTSX code base.

Consensus

The consensus in the rest of the crypto community is that the open source code of coin projects can be freely copied. Bitshares participates in this consensus by clearly and unambiguously sharing the code on GitHub using the "unlicense" license. Bitshares then essentially contradicts that consensus and that license by trying to create a separate "social contract" that would have developers pay a hefty price for using the open source code. I don't know of any other project that takes this approach, and I don't really understand the legal notion that would support this contradiction. I prefer to participate in the consensus of the rest of the crypto community -- the consensus that open source is actually free to copy and extend. Since the rest of the crypto community is larger than the subset of AGS/PTS investors, I am betting that I am on fairly safe ground by doing so.

Fairness

Accepting the AGS/PTS "consensus" would force us to launch OmniCoin in a manner that many people feel is unfair. In order to give 20% (or even 10%) of the coins to AGS/PTS, I would be required to "pre-mine" a very substantial number of coins. We wouldn't be the first to do an "pre-mine", and probably wouldn't be the last. But, we would prefer to distribute 100% of the coins broadly and fairly, to the users and service providers in the OmniBazaar marketplace. We feel that "Insta-mines", "pre-mines", "ninja-mines", and the like, put an unfair (and unnecessary) burden on the end users of a coin for the benefit of the developers, insiders, investors, and early adopters. Having said that, yes, we are offering OmniCoins as perks in our crowd-funding campaign. And yes, that will require that we "pre-mine" some small number of coins to distribute to the campaign contributors. But, that distribution will end up being a fraction of 1% (unless we end up more than 400% overfunded on our campaign). There is a big difference between 1% and 10 or 20%. And those coins will end up in the hands of the public, not the developers or some group of investors.

Legality

The legality of issuing coins to represent "equity" ownership in an asset or project is (in my opinion) questionable in many jurisdictions. For example, in the United States, the US Supreme Court has ruled (in SEC v. Howey) that a "securities contract" is defined as "a contract, transaction, or scheme whereby a person invests his money in a common enterprise and is led to expect profits solely from the efforts of the promoter or third party".

Let's say that the promoters "pre-mine" and issue a certain number of coins to development team, or make an "Initial Coin Offering" (ICO) to the public. As soon as someone purchases coins in that ICO, or buys those "pre-mined" coins from the promoters, with the expectation that the value will go up, we cross into very dangerous territory. I believe  that the SEC could (and will) take the position that the developers have offered and sold a security. The regulators would make the case that sale of the coin is a "transaction or scheme" where people are investing money (by buying coins), in a "common enterprise" (the company or group that created and sold the "pre-mined coins) with the expectation that the value of the coins will go up based on the efforts of the "promoters" (the company and its developers). This is especially true in the case of coins like AGS, "SuperNet", NXT, XCP, and others that overtly tell buyers that ownership of the coin represents ownership of (one or more) assets.

Unfortunately, I predict that we will see regulators challenge and attack some or all of these coins (and their developers) in the coming months and years. I don't think it will make much difference if the developers of the coin are incorporated in a jurisdiction outside the United States, or if the organization is a Distributed Autonomous Corporation (DAC). If a developers individually, or the "company" as a group sells to US citizens, they will be expected to comply with US laws. And, I think it is fairly clear that it doesn't make any difference if ICO coins were purchased using another cryptocurrency, like Bitcoin.

I really hope that this does not happen to the AGS/BTS team. But, I believe that overtly promoting AGS as an investment vehicle will make them a prime target for the SEC and other regulators. And, I think that any project that gives up a percentage of its coins to participate in the AGS/BTS consensus may find themselves stuck in the same legal quagmire. Beyond that, the scrutiny and regulations that result will likely be detrimental to the entire crypto community.

The above is precisely why we are offering investment in OmniBazaar exclusively through a standard Private Placement Offering, in strict conformance with US securities law. It is also why we have a very carefully considered plan for how we are going to distribute OmniCoins.

And it is another reason we are not particularly interested in being part of the AGS/BTS "consensus".

Self-Interest

The calls to conform to the "social contract" and participate in the AGS/BTS "consensus" are ultimately based in personal self-interest. Several posters have called me greedy or selfish for not giving up 20% of OmniCoins to their group. Yet these same posters ignore the fact that they are trying to protect and promote the value of an "asset" that they have "invested" in. They are promoting their own self-interest. And that's okay with me. Almost everyone on this forum, and almost everyone in the world does the same every day. So, let's be open and honest about it. Name calling doesn't accomplish anything, especially when it is "the pot calling the kettle black".

I won't apologize for protecting the interests of OmniBazaar stockholders, future OmniCoin holders, and myself, from calls to "share the wealth".

Value

I appreciate that the various posters see enough value and promise in OmniBazaar and OmniCoin to want a share of that value. There is a legal and fair way available for "accredited investors" to share in the value of the project (https://angel.co/omnibazaar-inc). We hope to make it possible for small investors to also participate in our offering on AngelList via a "syndicate". And there is a simple way for anyone to add value to the project through our crowd-funding campaign.

We believe we are bringing something valuable to the world with this project. I hope that everyone (including AGS/PTS investors) will accept it based on its merits.

I realize this is a very long post. Thank you, and congratulations, if you took the time to read it all the way through.

Best,
Rick

[sidhujag]

Aright u talk about fair and self interesr? How about airdrop all omnis based on btc holders(snapshot btc chain)... that is the biggest community thus you cant use those arguments anymore... what will it be this time?

[Nigel Lew]

Hi folks. My name is Nigel.  I am here solely to qualify a range of things. 

For the sake of transparency... the PR guy associated with this project Dave Goehst straight up robbed me out of what appears to be about 750 dollars on a community development project.   I can prove this. No one has to take my word for anything.  This may or may not become germane to the conversation but as I selflessly throw myself out there I figure I might as well clear up a range of lies from this idiot.

To be clear, anything I say can be proven light years beyond the shadow of a doubt anyway.  I frankly could not sit by and do nothing after reading some of the rampant stupid going on in this thread.


Mojorisinup is Dave Goehst. He is also aboutfreelance, Roger Kowalewski, Roger Klawinski and Sarah Bitner( and a few more unrelated to this) I will get to those in a new thread.

Lets take a look at a few things.... On the first page of this thread Dave says....

"Let's define a scam (to establish what a scammer is) as Webster's states:

noun

1. a confidence game or other fraudulent scheme, especially for making a quick profit; swindle."

That is interesting, Dave.

http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06021005jgb.pdf   It seems you like to stick empty bank envelopes into ATM machines, remove the cash and wittingly try to cash obviously dodgy checks.

It would appear that you fit that description perfectly. 

He was also busted and banned from Digital Point forums for running some sorta bit coin mining scam  a few months ago.

https://forums.digitalpoint.com/threads/second-round-6-slots-55-roi.2713790/

That thread was started by "aboutfreelance"  When the staff figured out what he was doing  they merged his accounts together. (SAME IP's used for both accounts) I will be posting a range of other threads shortly that qualify he is not only both people but he used them both to prop up his fraud.(talk to himself)

Dave will proceed to lob ad hominem attacks at me now as he is known to do.  I am fully prepared for this. He typically will point out a very unflattering thread about me there as well in attempts to deflect the conversation away from himself. 

The thread is here https://forums.digitalpoint.com/threads/nigel-lew-issiue.2051958/

Some thoughts on that you can find here where Dave set up an account to astroturf this project by talking to himself with his aboutfreelance reddit account.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Scams/comments/2c6j7r/is_nigel_lew_jnlew_media_group_a_scam/


proof of that is here http://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/2jpr3g/cooperative_marketplace_built_for_cryptocurrency/



He is so freaking retarded that he actually thinks someone cant figure that out in 2 seconds. That account simply posts links to his own stuff, me or this campaign.  I hope I dont have to go to lengths to qualify that one.

I have screen shots of all this stuff too. He has a curious habit of trying to delete that stuff.

He has also made a range of entirely slanderous and defamatory remarks about me on reddit using a different account. 

I am trying to keep this on point here I just need to point out that not only is the guy a known convict he posts stuff like that to reddit thread pretending to be someone else entirely.

So a few things on that point. Its not only bullshit... but Dave is an article writer. He is not a programmer, but he has somehow figured out how to write code all of a sudden and produce a magic codified means to stop defamation http://www.gofundme.com/defeatdefamation

GET THAT?  Dude straight up posts defamatory shit about people but is making up a position against defamation... lol... FFS you cant make that shit up.

I frankly do not possess the vocabulary to say much about that other than its just more financial fraud.
Unless of course its legal to simply make shit up and get folks to pay me for nothing.

I have several months of daily conversations with him and range of ways to qualify that Dave is in fact all of those people and all coming from IPS in his town. (with in blocks).

I have a standing offer to anyone even remotely computer literate to fire up team viewer and I can walk you through months of stuff in about 20 minutes to qualify the following:

I also have a standing offer to proffer my entire hard drive to any relevant law enforcement agency who would like it. Midget porn and all.

1. Dave Goehst is in fact all of those people
2. That Dave is in no uncertain terms not a programmer, hence his go fund me campaign is a complete sham.
3. That Dave roams the internet as different people trying to deflect attention from himself like this
located here http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/advertzones-david-ghoest-published-links-articles-were-deleted-after-payment-is-done-c697502.html

Which is also entirely true as he has been punted from all of his writing gigs for selling links. No examiner.com, no huffpo, no nothing.

I will have more on his use of the word "duplicitous" and some other language I quite intentionally planted on him like "vernacular" and "rube" in a later thread if need be.


Out of the gate I have no inherent investment in this campaign. I am not party to any of the other people involved in it.

I will say that their position on open source matters is entirely disgusting and frankly untenable, though.  That is none of my concern though.

I am fully prepared for the ensuing bullshit as well. The more he talks about me and tries to deny things the worse its going to get for him.

I am going to be entirely transparent and human here. I am happy to answer questions, have someone log into team viewer so I can fire up trillian and you can read his own words.

With that said, I know shit about bitcoin itself so I don't have much to add here except perhaps this gem...

"This isn't your quintessential 'fly by night' shitcoin or underdeveloped dream - all the more reason anyone with an IQ greater than a grapefruit should be all over this."

Well, they don't have enough sense to even Google you apparently

https://www.google.com/search?q=dave+goesht&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb

so your IQ of a grapefruit quip is pretty tenuous.

Not entirely germane per say but punching chicks is par for the course http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/07110701ehf.pdf   page 8 or 9 I forget. You may want to jump straight there though. That particular read is pretty unsettling.

I will have the relevant bits of him not capable of coding some algo to stop defamation sent off to gofundme shortly.

I am also happy to field any questions about me or anything else.

FULLY FUCKING TRANSPARENT  I was a real dick to a few folks, lacked decorum as I have mentioned as well.  Not to try and excuse anything but when people have to deal with folks like Dave they have a tendency to wig out. I have never scammed anyone and do not owe people cash. Am not banned from DP like Dave and half the folks in that thread for that matter.  I have simply gotten better at dealing with folk who try to rip me off.

Dave will, attempt at least, to suggest that I have edited or manufactured months and months of conversations with him and also that I am somehow not me because I route some stuff through my colleagues paypal account. He would further have you believe that I made that up as well and somehow manufactured 60 years of being on this earth.( I know, Facebook is hard)

I can in no uncertain terms qualify that as bullshit as well.

So Dave. You have until the end of business tomorrow to send me the $750 you owe me or I am going to send a metric shit ton of irrefutable evidence to the DA's office in your town, to gofundme and to indiegogo. Astroturfing reviews is a federal offense as well by the way.

I am pretty certain it will not take me more than 10 minutes to track down the first bunch that prosecuted you for fraud, which you weaseled down to theft... and then tried to weasel out of that as well.

While I know exactly what is about to happen here do not let this shitbag distract from the matter at hand. This is not about me. I just happen to be able to prove, in no uncertain terms, what is available about this cat. 

What is going on here is not about me. I know shit about bitcoin. 

I also have several more links and threads to stuff he was doing over there as well but I have to get a bit of work done. I actually do stuff.

EDITED TO ADD THE ALIAS Roger Klawinski  http://myventurepad.com/180891/freelancewriter

Nigel

[Nigel Lew]

I just got this from Dave in an email...

LOL.  You're having loads of fun trying to extort people out of money.  Not going to work.

Take your fake chat logs and shove them up your duplicitous ass - make one slick move, little boy, and I'll slap you around like a lawn dart, bitch.

Don't one single soul owe you a fucking dime - you're just a broke bitch trying to extort mother fuckers out of money, which anyone will laugh at.  So keep up with your threats - nobody actually takes you seriously, little faggot.


On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Roger Kowalewski <aboutfreelance@gmail.com> wrote:

    Test this banner out.  (Note that this a reply to a pre-existing conversation)

So now he has confirmed for me that he is both of those folks as well.  Its in thunderbird so whomever I opt to let into my comp and meet me can qualify that as well.

Nigel

Here is the email header...

From - Tue Nov 11 15:31:29 2014
X-Account-Key: account1
X-UIDL: UID27830-1373472278
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-Mozilla-Keys:                                                                                 
Return-path: <aboutfreelance@gmail.com>
Envelope-to: office@jnlew.com
Delivery-date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 01:27:19 +0300
Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com ([209.85.218.52]:38596)
   by server.jnlew.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
   (Exim 4.82)
   (envelope-from <aboutfreelance@gmail.com>)
   id 1XoJu8-0005es-Oh
   for office@jnlew.com; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 01:27:19 +0300
Received: by mail-oi0-f52.google.com with SMTP id u20so7749191oif.11
        for <office@jnlew.com>; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 14:27:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
         :subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=NKeMyP7uUjWS6pBFCgkPFG0M/eacoJHEYCFM27o8BBM=;
        b=zYIOBlVovcO4jvbHfu3m75Dl4V38HsPwn8RfGGKJT8nB3kFHwW65UusOvAx5VyaEDg
         e36KdruPwST1UCdJOlRkZGTzpNoviI+qGMwoH9LZIBReOlnoZM3b7Xb39Il9fWps3Akh
         5cyxi4a99b8q1alrIpr9ef92N446BJdlq+AxGv46axBcH+7Je8vO0+mQ0Df7tQbvC+T+
         b3UBrW7gr4WdZZFtc+iraoZhjXb75IuiVIaAldSGlOP+pFe9ZWh4+0VnkaDp/ioUlQe/
         c3jEDSOXNwvgBhKMq610CcpI5SBBePSw0NSitFYpaduGOyoolchQau5WCFL6hsnK+lmn
         NpSg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.92.234 with SMTP id cp10mr4347356obb.53.1415744834951;
 Tue, 11 Nov 2014 14:27:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.202.72.87 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 14:27:14 -0800 (PST)
Reply-To: aboutfreelance@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAF44TOQ9sXJkR1aHuGQSV94rGqvDJS-8EY_=xr-466TWPy9k+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF44TOQ9sXJkR1aHuGQSV94rGqvDJS-8EY_=xr-466TWPy9k+A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 17:27:14 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF44TOT8_qBb01C_PKdLHBL1jNZDUcepK4nv0Et3A6sQDow4ow@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Forum banner
From: Roger Kowalewski <aboutfreelance@gmail.com>
To: Nigel Lew <office@jnlew.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c30504fae1e105079cc752
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1




And my several months of Trillian logs are with that account as well.  I guess its a coincidence ehh Dave?

Nigel