Topic: BitcoinEXpress is a scammer (Read 2270 times)

Is that not how it always is?

You know you remind me of my 94 year old great grandmother, suffers from rather bad senility :/

But she will often ask a question, then not listen for the answer, or just igor it, or ask another question while your trying to answer her last.

Sound familiar guys?

Also signing your posts ~BCX~ reminds me of her, constantly reminding us of who she is, who she knows.... we know who she is, shes part of the family.

We know who you are, it says it next to your post. Then again who BCX relay is... well thats a different thread i suppose.

Isn't it also fair to remember that when the proposed attacker publicly informs all of the newbie users of his intentions and what the resulting outcome could be, along with advice to MOVE/SELL whatever coins that they are not interested in loosing........ is it really the new user's fault's in the end ?

Of course, this is all alleged and hypothetical, as these threats may or may not have been made from either an imaginary person, a hacked account, or a lunatic.

If one person of medicore means could destroy the Litecoin blockchain, you didn't actually have an investment. You were just speculating you would have a chair when the music stopped.

As it turns out, Litecoin is not so vulnerable as you have been claiming. Perhaps if you understood better what you purchased, you would not have panicked.

Thank you.

Not just this but the threat causing quite a few jump to solo and lose out financially, well the guys with little hardware.

Caused me 500 LTC short, along with what ever downtime that you caused with ddos the pools.

Scammer tag needs to be applied to this person. I will fight it as long as this person is here, and will follow IT with big red scammer text until done so. IT, get use to seeing big red bold scammer following you as long as you're here and don't have the tag. Get the tag, I'll stop. Until then my >>Freedom of Speech<< of big red bold scammer will follow you.

People sold coins on the assumption there was going to be an attack causing them to lose money. Regardless of whether an attack happened or not they were economically damaged.

All that remains is for people to show they sold prior to the attack. Im sure btc-e exchange can corroborate this.

Wouldn't it also depend on exactly WHO you were pretending to be at the time ?

Obviously the products and/or services offered by DannyMaddox would differ from those offered by Laney, or say...Kelly Wu, wouldn't they ?

It's quite funny how you avoid the tough questions STILL.

Hey BitcoinEXpress, Is there any chance you might be able to contact 'DannyMaddox' and ask for a copy of the Police Report for both the Bomb threat and the Child endangerment complaint ?
I'm not sure if this requires a FINGER SNAP, or EYE BLINKING to switch personalities, but I would think that you have the best chance of getting us all a copy of this report (from yourself that is).

Thanks again for all of your co operation throughout this ordeal. As I said... I know it couldn't have been easy for you, to keep so many different lies floating at the same time, oddly enough, crossing paths all at the same time.

Go figure.

Thanks again for all your help.

Theres now a clear case of economic damage which means BCX should get a scammer label for causing it. I urge people to report sucha  thing to theymos.

You do realize it was designed to keep people like yourself out the main forums. Which has worked. You do spend a lot of time in here. Consider yourself head of trashcan.
 

Hey, if it's the Wild West. BCX must be the 'rusty sheriff's badge'.
BCX certainly talks out of it.

I agree with the joint, I took a financial loss as well. Not by selling but by moving my miners to solo mining. This has no interference with paying my loans, But I could have payed them earlier than said.

Full blown scammer tag is indeed, needed for this scumbag.

Only in due time and I will wait patiently.

I actually agree with this scammer idea.  Ordinarily, I would think that calling someone a scammer just because they made a threat and didn't follow through is a pretty ridiculous idea.  But, this was quite different.

I forget which moderator said it, but isn't it possible to be labeled a 'scammer' because you say things like "I traded with person x' when that didn't actually happen, especially when person y then trades with person x and loses money because they are under the impression that person x is legitimate?  The point is, a case like that has financial consequences.  BitcoinEXpress's little stunt also had financial consequences.

For example, I sold about 1300-1600 LTC at .005 BTC when I otherwise was planning on holding.  Why did I sell?  Well, just in case -- duh.  I was on vacation and I really didn't want to deal with the stress of watching over the markets the whole time.  In other words, BitcoinEXpress's little stunt had financial consequences on me personally.

There's a reason why it's illegal in some countries to do things like threaten to sue and then not follow through on it, make threats period, etc., and in this case I think that making a threat to attack an entire currency deserves punishment as it alters the nature of the way investors invest and the way that various pools and exchanges operate (e.g. BTC-e shut down LTC deposits/withdrawals for a little while).  

To make a similar analogy, let's say an announcement was made that terrorists were going to attack the NYSE and that this was made aware to the public -- except the head of the NYSE was in on it the whole time and didn't let anybody know, neither investors nor businesses.  Do you have any idea how pissed investors would be?  It would be talked about in the news for years.

I agree.  Mark BitcoinEXpress as a scammer and/or ban the fuck.  

Well shit, if Psy can be made staff then anyone can   Crazyness.

Let's see if I've got this straight.

When BCX claims to be about to start doing something you don't approve of, we should believe her 100%, despite ZERO evidence of follow-through?

But....When BCX claims that she was kidding and merely rallying the troops to defend LTC, we should refuse to believe her, despite lacking evidence to the contrary, plus indications that her plan was successful and coblee was kept in the loop?

That's a fascinating way to approach evaluating credibility you got going there bud.  You've discovered a quantum theory of believability!

That only relates to the DDoS'ing of the forum on July 5, 2012. And what theymos did was ask BCX if the IRC log was real, to which BCX gave a negative answer, like the coward he is.

Stop being dense, BCX II.

Source from bitcoinexpress means a lot. More lies. /Dead end there bud.

A prank now? Sort of? Theymos? Source? Evidence?

Calling out an admin to participate in a prank is serious.

It was a trick, and it worked.  No need for all the Epic Butthurt (although it is very amusing).

Do you also think coblee and theymos are scammers?  They were in on the prank, sort of.

I love watching Jr Members with <100 posts making accusations and demands of Hero Members, Mods, and Admins.

Cry Moar!  Cry harder!  Maybe you'll get your way if you start enough threads and complain enough.  It's worked for the anti-Pirates.

Oh wait, no it hasn't, never mind.

I like the altcoin ghetto, it's at least as dynamic, interesting, and educational as the main one.  The forum would suffer without it.

Thank you BCX, for removing the incentive to DDOS our LTC pools!  Successful trickster had much success.

Bitlane should be moved to Staff. Recall the paraipan case? I believe bitlane is doing a great job here. Keep up the great work, Bitlane.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1056972

Edit:

It is only a matter of time before IT gets labeled.