Topic: GAW / Josh Garza discussion Paycoin XPY xpy.io ION ionomy. ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :) - page 1767. (Read 3377956 times)

So far, these are proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Can somebody archive the post form jmordica on here referencing josh on josg21? That would be very good. Idk how to look up members =/
https://archive.today/eRMVF

https://archive.today/gYSp9

https://archive.today/uFXmN

https://archive.today/ONfEk =



EDIT: Jmordica and Garza talking https://archive.today/YhU46

That's not really evidence of anything, so I don't think a disclaimer is necessary.

People who lost money in this should be pissed.

Sometimes things don't go as planned. Sometimes there's miscommunication between the developers and management, especially if they use overseas contractors. Sometimes issue arise, and you don't have what you thought you did.

I really thought that was what happened here until you supersluthes found the post(s) where he outlines his business plan. It was always supposed to be like this.

I was lucky enough to get my money back when XPY was inflated. People with losses should absolutely sue.

I'm pretty sure that post explaining how he's planning to sell vaporware and only use a portion of revenue to develop the non-existent product people are buying is enough to show intent, at least to the degree that would get him past a grand jury. Then you get the ability to subpoena, which should show a lot more about what they had vs what he claimed they had to sell at any given time.

That post shows intent. That's huge. Fraud requires an intent to defraud. Before now, there had been no evidence of anything criminal because there was no intent. It could just be incompetence. Now we know it was planned from the start, from the sale of the first hashlet.

Supporters can try to couch it in the excuse that he's describing a different operation, but, considering that what he describes is EXACTLY what GAW did, I doubt many would fall for that outside the clique of true believers.

Who has jurisdiction? I'm thinking wire fraud comes into play, so it could be a federal case.

4th February 2014, 05:13 PM
I knew they would eventually decide it's better to use our money to build their own data center for them to mine themselves. I kept thinking to myself, why would the same company that makes miners that make more money then selling them, sell them? Why not just milk the miners? 1. Sell the first product to customers, even thought it would be more profitable to mine. This will create a loyal following and set the stage for act two. 2. Now that you have a loyal customer base, use them to fund your next product. But also use them to fund your own data center so you can do your own hashing. 3. Develop the product your customers paid for and but them in said data center and start hashing and keep the mine. Right at the point customers are on edge to "loose loyalty" the product will be magically be done. And volla, it will already be in a data center. Then offer data center to customer for free to win loyalty back. Businesses are in business to do one thing. Make money. Don't believe me? Look at what just happened with the jupiters they promised to sell. You don't think there was a guy who did a spreadsheet over a few times, then came running in the CEOs office saying "look look, if we just keep the jupiters instead of selling them, we will make more!" ? The funny part up is, they are actually using the hosting center they built with our cash as a way to make us feel better. Genius

I'm pretty sure that post explaining how he's planning to sell vaporware and only use a portion of revenue to develop the non-existent product people are buying is enough to show intent, at least to the degree that would get him past a grand jury. Then you get the ability to subpoena, which should show a lot more about what they had vs what he claimed they had to sell at any given time.

That post shows intent. That's huge. Fraud requires an intent to defraud. Before now, there had been no evidence of anything criminal because there was no intent. It could just be incompetence. Now we know it was planned from the start, from the sale of the first hashlet.

Supporters can try to couch it in the excuse that he's describing a different operation, but, considering that what he describes is EXACTLY what GAW did, I doubt many would fall for that outside the clique of true believers.

Who has jurisdiction? I'm thinking wire fraud comes into play, so it could be a federal case.

Hmmm, somewhere I had the original image, all I can find though is the tiny one on the Myspace page. This is a non-important tangent anyways.

Carry on gentlemen.

I am not an expert on this, but the image shows a blocky outline when abstracted on the photo forensics site:

http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?id=d48eeae7529646da4f19774cfc7c9ef128589853.44273

The blocky outline says PS job to me.

I'm digging your vest, TracerX!

Nah, looks like an early cell phone camera shot with a low megapixel cmos sensor.

Something strange that I notice is that it appears that the original image posted by Josh on that Myspace page may actually be Photoshopped. Check out the black outline around himself. Is that just an artifact from shrinking or something, or is the original itself PS'D?

Something strange that I notice is that it appears that the original image posted by Josh on that Myspace page may actually be Photoshopped. Check out the black outline around himself. Is that just an artifact from shrinking or something, or is the original itself PS'D?

I was a few pages back when I posted--curse my need to be gainfully employed!

That's not really evidence of anything, so I don't think a disclaimer is necessary.

yeah it got figured out a few pages back 

Needs disclaimer inside the image itself indicating the vest is 'shopped, lest the acolytes fall for the inevitable "those guys on BCT are making up 'evidence'".