GAW / Josh Garza discussion Paycoin XPY xpy.io ION ionomy. ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :) - page 1207.

Josef_Stylin

member

Activity: 60

Merit: 10

Quote from: bananafana on March 09, 2015, 10:53:03 PM

Quote from: Josef_Stylin on March 09, 2015, 10:29:38 PM

The guy continues to lie in the public about his identity.

I've seen that claim before, but never any evidence to back it up. What's your evidence?

not interested in outing the guys personal information. not really my place either, to be honest. i've had a conversation with him in PMs regarding this a few weeks ago and he just stopped responding after throwing a mild tantrum. I told him I would not publicly post the information, so I'm going to stick with that for now. I don't think he's doing anything truly malicious, other than generating pageviews to his blog.

people can do their own research and believe into what they choose to believe. if anyone is interested enough and the least bit knowledgeable in such areas it's pretty simple to get it though.

subseaguru

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 504

I know the voices in my head aren't real.

Quote from: supercarton on March 09, 2015, 11:52:43 PM

I hope they won't delete my good suggestions Sad

i speculate that libertymind doesnt watch Bill O'Reilly.

supercarton

newbie

Activity: 5

Merit: 0

I hope they won't delete my good suggestions Sad

http://picpaste.com/pics/Untitled-lOl1xiMm.1425963809.jpg

https://hashtalk.org/topic/33375/coinfire-some-suggested-articles-for-you/

http://picpaste.com/pics/Untitled-lOl1xiMm.1425963809.jpg

TracerX

hero member

Activity: 918

Merit: 1002

Quote from: TheMage on March 09, 2015, 11:21:39 PM

There are several reasons someone would hide behind a pen name, especially if they were reporting on something that people overlook as a potential scam where a lot of money was invested. Perhaps you shouldnt be so closed minded?

I trust coinfire, so far their articles have proven to be truthful and hard hitting, not just on GAW but multiple stories. Pen name or not I will continue to read them.

We've gone over all this twice now with this guy in previous pages. He's just rolling by on his troll train again.

TracerX

hero member

Activity: 918

Merit: 1002

Quote from: truckinusa on March 09, 2015, 10:47:05 PM

I enjoy your posts. Have a thicker skin. I joined your coinfire plus btw. I appreciate what you do. Looking forward to checking out your new service.

It's refreshing to meet someone that's polite. Thank you for that, regardless of which side of this you might be on.

TheMage

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

Litecoin Association Director

Quote from: Josef_Stylin on March 09, 2015, 10:29:38 PM

Quote from: HashieNewb on March 09, 2015, 10:21:13 PM

Quote from: -Redacted- on March 09, 2015, 10:15:50 PM

I think the answer that it would jeopardize their source is a valid answer to that question.

perhaps, but I think the question being avoided is why would anyone outside of the chain of custody involving evidence collected by a government entity have access consistently and repeatedly when no one else does ?

There are several reasons not to trust Coin Fire that are sitting out there on the Internet with about 5 minutes of research. The guy continues to lie in the public about his identity. His HashTalk AMA gave him the opportunity to own up to it being just a pen name or his real identity and he decided to stick with the lie. That's just one. There are several others.

Ummm, who cares?

There are several reasons someone would hide behind a pen name, especially if they were reporting on something that people overlook as a potential scam where a lot of money was invested. Perhaps you shouldnt be so closed minded?

I trust coinfire, so far their articles have proven to be truthful and hard hitting, not just on GAW but multiple stories. Pen name or not I will continue to read them.

Paul Revere

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 260

The Scamcoats are coming!

WTF?

P.S: I have looked at a couple of the small transactions from the "5,000,000 XPY security wallet" and they both lead to exchanges. Check for yourself, follow block 91713 and they start doing the scam dance and then eventually lead to exchanges. Here is the "security wallet": https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xpy/address.dws?232492.htm

bananafana

full member

Activity: 378

Merit: 100

Quote from: Josef_Stylin on March 09, 2015, 10:29:38 PM

The guy continues to lie in the public about his identity.

I've seen that claim before, but never any evidence to back it up. What's your evidence?

truckinusa

hero member

Activity: 534

Merit: 500

Quote from: HashieNewb on March 09, 2015, 10:21:13 PM

Quote from: -Redacted- on March 09, 2015, 10:15:50 PM

I think the answer that it would jeopardize their source is a valid answer to that question.

perhaps, but I think the question being avoided is why would anyone outside of the chain of custody involving evidence collected by a government entity have access consistently and repeatedly when no one else does ?

I am glad to have information keep flowing even if it is the Hashking himself. I can judge whether to believe it or not.

truckinusa

hero member

Activity: 534

Merit: 500

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 09:57:32 PM

Quote from: HashieNewb on March 09, 2015, 09:29:21 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 07:29:18 PM

Quote from: KC6TTR on March 09, 2015, 06:07:58 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 04:36:13 PM

For an SEC investigation that doesn't exist the attorneys for Josh sure turned over a lot of stuff to the government as part of the subpoena process.

We are now in possession of those documents and have begun sorting through them.

Clarification needed: How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?

Scott-

I can not under any circumstances reveal my sources.

I asked you previously why you continue to bait this thread with your connections to the SEC with nothing substantial to report. Scott didn't ask you to reveal your sources, he asked "How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?"

To even state how we obtained it would jeopardize our sources.

How is it baiting this thread when each time we've made such a statement we have published a story regarding the documents?

Edit: We won't be publishing on this message board any further. Our reporting will simply stand for itself.

I enjoy your posts. Have a thicker skin. I joined your coinfire plus btw. I appreciate what you do. Looking forward to checking out your new service.

L1C

newbie

Activity: 27

Merit: 0

Quote

Edit: We won't be publishing on this message board any further. Our reporting will simply stand for itself.

Please do note here when you've published a new story.

Josef_Stylin

member

Activity: 60

Merit: 10

Quote from: HashieNewb on March 09, 2015, 10:21:13 PM

Quote from: -Redacted- on March 09, 2015, 10:15:50 PM

I think the answer that it would jeopardize their source is a valid answer to that question.

perhaps, but I think the question being avoided is why would anyone outside of the chain of custody involving evidence collected by a government entity have access consistently and repeatedly when no one else does ?

There are several reasons not to trust Coin Fire that are sitting out there on the Internet with about 5 minutes of research. The guy continues to lie in the public about his identity. His HashTalk AMA gave him the opportunity to own up to it being just a pen name or his real identity and he decided to stick with the lie. That's just one. There are several others.

HashieNewb

sr. member

Activity: 616

Merit: 250

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

Quote from: -Redacted- on March 09, 2015, 10:15:50 PM

I think the answer that it would jeopardize their source is a valid answer to that question.

perhaps, but I think the question being avoided is why would anyone outside of the chain of custody involving evidence collected by a government entity have access consistently and repeatedly when no one else does ?

-Redacted-

hero member

Activity: 574

Merit: 501

I think the answer that it would jeopardize their source is a valid answer to that question.

HashieNewb

sr. member

Activity: 616

Merit: 250

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 09:57:32 PM

Quote from: HashieNewb on March 09, 2015, 09:29:21 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 07:29:18 PM

Quote from: KC6TTR on March 09, 2015, 06:07:58 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 04:36:13 PM

For an SEC investigation that doesn't exist the attorneys for Josh sure turned over a lot of stuff to the government as part of the subpoena process.

We are now in possession of those documents and have begun sorting through them.

Clarification needed: How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?

Scott-

I can not under any circumstances reveal my sources.

I asked you previously why you continue to bait this thread with your connections to the SEC with nothing substantial to report. Scott didn't ask you to reveal your sources, he asked "How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?"

To even state how we obtained it would jeopardize our sources.

How is it baiting this thread when each time we've made such a statement we have published a story regarding the documents?

Edit: We won't be publishing on this message board any further. Our reporting will simply stand for itself.

I think the question is valid without criticizing the reporting you have done on your site.

cloverme

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1057

SpacePirate.io

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: rawbot on March 09, 2015, 08:47:34 PM

Quote from: racebyu on March 09, 2015, 08:42:28 PM

Someone cranking coin production into overdrive?
At that rate it will be worthless in no time!

Not if the Hashtards have anything to do with it.

I like that .. Hashtards .. sounds good .. someone should start a twitter handle ..lol

Hashtards! Hhahahahhaha

CoinFire

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Online at CoinFire.io

Quote from: HashieNewb on March 09, 2015, 09:29:21 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 07:29:18 PM

Quote from: KC6TTR on March 09, 2015, 06:07:58 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 04:36:13 PM

For an SEC investigation that doesn't exist the attorneys for Josh sure turned over a lot of stuff to the government as part of the subpoena process.

We are now in possession of those documents and have begun sorting through them.

Clarification needed: How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?

Scott-

I can not under any circumstances reveal my sources.

I asked you previously why you continue to bait this thread with your connections to the SEC with nothing substantial to report. Scott didn't ask you to reveal your sources, he asked "How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?"

To even state how we obtained it would jeopardize our sources.

How is it baiting this thread when each time we've made such a statement we have published a story regarding the documents?

Edit: We won't be publishing on this message board any further. Our reporting will simply stand for itself.

truckinusa

hero member

Activity: 534

Merit: 500

Quote from: HashieNewb on March 09, 2015, 09:29:21 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 07:29:18 PM

Quote from: KC6TTR on March 09, 2015, 06:07:58 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 04:36:13 PM

For an SEC investigation that doesn't exist the attorneys for Josh sure turned over a lot of stuff to the government as part of the subpoena process.

We are now in possession of those documents and have begun sorting through them.

Clarification needed: How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?

Scott-

I can not under any circumstances reveal my sources.

I asked you previously why you continue to bait this thread with your connections to the SEC with nothing substantial to report. Scott didn't ask you to reveal your sources, he asked "How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?"

Here are my guesses:

1. Josh Garza is careless and his communications are being intercepted. (very possible)
2. Someone works at the law firm and has access to the the documents.
3. Josh Garza doesn't care and like the drama and therefore releases it intentionally
4. Employee at GAW is releasing information. (very likely, especially if there are pay issues)
5. They are infiltrated with a some sort of hack and don't know it. (This has happened before sort of with the google boards)
6. SEC employees are releasing information (I find this hard to believe, but possible)
6.

KC6TTR

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 259

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 08:22:32 PM

Quote from: vizique on March 09, 2015, 07:32:38 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 07:29:18 PM

Quote from: KC6TTR on March 09, 2015, 06:07:58 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 04:36:13 PM

For an SEC investigation that doesn't exist the attorneys for Josh sure turned over a lot of stuff to the government as part of the subpoena process.

We are now in possession of those documents and have begun sorting through them.

Clarification needed: How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?

Scott-

I can not under any circumstances reveal my sources.

You really might just wanna keep a little quieter about some of this?
I appreciate your desire to set the record straight and have done fine work, no doubter here, but opening yourself and your source to closer scrutiny seems ill advised?
You get the amateur sleuths at it and all sorts of accusations start flying. Kind of muddies the waters you're trying to clear?

We are being pretty transparent. People who are members of Coin Fire Plus will be able to see our full editorial calendar soon and see that we are working on such documents anyways Wink

I appreciate what you are saying, but with all due respect, I do not pay for my news or to review content that is already within the public domain -> with the exception of legally privileged material, which was the basis for my original enquiry for clarification. All I am getting at is be careful. Activities that could potentially lead to an obstruction of justice can unwind a lot of work invested up to this point and also cloud up the waters of an otherwise solid case.

Just my 0.03 XPY's worth.

Scott-

HashieNewb

sr. member

Activity: 616

Merit: 250

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 07:29:18 PM

Quote from: KC6TTR on March 09, 2015, 06:07:58 PM

Quote from: CoinFire on March 09, 2015, 04:36:13 PM

For an SEC investigation that doesn't exist the attorneys for Josh sure turned over a lot of stuff to the government as part of the subpoena process.

We are now in possession of those documents and have begun sorting through them.

Clarification needed: How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?

Scott-

I can not under any circumstances reveal my sources.

I asked you previously why you continue to bait this thread with your connections to the SEC with nothing substantial to report. Scott didn't ask you to reveal your sources, he asked "How are you a party to the chain of custody regarding the paperwork between the private law firm and the agencies involved?"

Topic: GAW / Josh Garza discussion Paycoin XPY xpy.io ION ionomy. ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :) - page 1207. (Read 3377857 times)