Topic: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes - page 3. (Read 8015 times)

That's not how burden of proof works. The accusers have produced completely ambiguous evidence that is proof of nothing. The burden of proof is on the accusers to prove their claims, not OGNasty to detail his private activities to satiate your obsessive vendetta.

All you can do is deflect, you sick fuck.  :/

Maybe shut up for a bit and let OG explain why he didn't return funds that were returned to him. 

I could try to make sense of this insane rambling, but then I would probably require heavy medication like you. Any chance you are going to be on topic any time soon?

Yes you are, but that's YOUR issue with OG.  He is the one that pointed out deflection is a common tactic of pediophiles.

You'd be very smart to stop deflecting like that self described sick fuck.

What do you mean then? I have left about an average of 2 negative ratings a year since I have been on this forum, can you even count how many you have left?

So I am a pervert now too? That is a new one. I don't even particularly like OGNasty and have had minimal contact with him over the years. I have a vendetta against YOU? That would be funny if it weren't totally batshit insane considering your years of stalking and abusing the trust system against me.

I put the part where you inverted the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused in bold. I don't have to prove anything. I am by far not the only one who thinks the evidence in this case is ambiguous at best. Now if you are done being an unstable wingbat and projecting everything you do upon me, perhaps you can actually post on topic.

No, I don't mean that.  Stop deflecting pervert.  

Practice what you preach, end your attitude of OG being guilty of nothing with no proof, just because you are bored, he's your pal, and you have a vendetta against me.

Take the first step, remove some of your abusive feedback trust, and start a wave.    It make even convince OG to take the first step in turning honest.

Rules for thee, but not for me. Glad that forum rules are equally applied by the leftist moderators. Oh wait. Rules aside, it's like that for many things here apparently.

WHAA?  Dat only possible if you have no common sense!!


How many passes you give?


Common sense must play a role!


Yeah, and:

Shaggy: Like WoW!
Scooby: RUT ROH, RAGGY!

How many passes Mr. Nasty allowed  5? 10?

I make coin and be good escrow,, now I get freedom to swindle? 
Nice place here

I am curious how long the moderators will continue ignoring these off topic posts.

Theymos also said this:


So, you are looking to theymos for approval here, but not doing what he considers the best course of action.

At this point your socks just confirm what everyone is already thinking, this accusation is horse shit. As Phillipma1957 already explained, we have no idea what happened to the funds or why. This is why we need to end this atmosphere of guilty until proven innocent and digging into everyone's business just because some bored assholes have fantasies, suspicions, or vendettas or else privacy will be a thing of the past here.

other possibilities og paid the 144 in coins with cash.

to someone that was owed the btc.

and that person does not want to be revealed.

this would mean og is taking a beating in this thread simply because he is preserving some one’s identity.

I want to point out. at first to this thread began with 2500 missing coins which became 1000 missing coins
which now really looks to be 144 coins worth just under 1700 usd.

i do sales i do passthroughs i do trades.

you could never understand my business by looking at the blockchain.

and my biggest account shows 350 coins passing through.

og has an address with 17500 coins coming in and out in the last 8 years.

i doubt very much that is the only way he does business.

 look if you can show me someone that says og robbed the 144 coins directly from me i would be surprised.
ie john smith say og should have given me the 144 coins and did not.

as for obvious ponzi in 2012 there was no such thing since

pirate could have had 100000 or more cheap coins from 09 and 10.

so by creating the bank to boost price of his stack of coins it was possible it was not a ponzi.


these days this could happen with a coin like doge.

i have two trezor accounts one with 230000 doge and one with 140000 doge.

if doge went up to three dollars i would be a millionare.

maybe i would do a doge pirate club like the first pirate did.

the difference would be i would pay out in the hopes it would drive the price higher.

back in 2012 many may have thought pirate was running his club to publicize bitcoin and drive the price up.

there were very little coins to mine or use in 2012.

so to say it was an obvious ponzi is pretty much wrong.

to say it may have been a ponzi is more accurate.

do i think og gets a pass on this yes until

some one shows me he was not paid the 144 in coins and was due the 144 in coins og gets a pass.

i did read a thread saying og pledged the forums 500 in btc and got the equivalent of 7 btc worth of digabyte for doing this.
that seems more interesting than this thread.

so at the op why not see what you can find out about that?

i will look for that thread.  


I was referring to this.



So og was allowed to earn 7btc as a bonus using forums funds.  but not risking them.  and theymos said : "I don't see it as a violation of the treasury agreement "


Maybe  he felt it was to pay og for the doxxing vod did to og.  Maybe theymos felt og deserved some $$  for vod's doxxing.

Which is why these threads need to come to an end. 

This is at the core of the issue, as those who do not, realize their ability to freely impugn the reputation of anyone who crosses them is threatened by such a standard.

I have.. I have been following this topic of conversation from it's origination, since before it was even moved to this particular thread, and many previous semi-related topics.. I believe you will find that this topic originated there in the link (OG stealing from passthrough)..
But you know, I would not claim myself to be a foremost expert on blockchain investigation, so it is possible my understanding is faulty, no matter my personal efforts, though my efforts have been great, including the effort to make this post..

However..
philipma1957 is more trustworthy than me or any other user commenting here, according to me personally, and I also trust him to have among the highest level of blockchain expertise to decipher this evidence..  
I also don't see anyone here daring to accuse him of anything character or motive related, therefore I find it quite reasonable for me to accept his findings as highly accurate, logical, and neutral..


What evidence we have here seems to show, with quite great magnitude of certainty IMO, that OG's pirate passthrough was not fully paid out by pirate..
This shows me that their is very little reason to believe that OG lied about being fully "reimbursed", or I would rather say "paid out" by Pirate..


1. Their is no proof.. Only a dead end.. But many here seem to believe that proof is not required, contrary to my and philipma1957's opinion, which is what creates this great divide in the community, between those who require proof to come to a solid conclusion, and those who do not..
Our only choice is to either agree to disagree on the necessity of proof, or argue on forever.. I think I am in the "agree to disagree" camp, seeing as this will most likely just be left unsolved..
I don't see how this could be any more respectable on my part than that..

2. These coins being OG's share of the partial reimbursement and him rightfully keeping them is just as logical of a hypothesis as him "stealing" them, and IMO more likely due to OG's most excelent track record of handling great amounts of funds over many many years, if he even kept them at all..

OGNasty's word > pirate's word 100% IMO, and the fact that statements were made to the police or any government agents only makes them less credible, also IMO..


What basis do you have for this claim? Link please?
The thread I linked at the top of this post clearly proves that he did not steal BHC, unless you are thinking of some other unrelated incident I am yet unaware of.. But I welcome any evidence you may be able to share..

Yeah of course "words" are not proof, but words have meanings in the event that you happen to attempt to read, organize to understand beyond the mere "words on a page".

A reply by OgNasty would be appreciated:

1. We can identify pirate's addresses.
2. We can identify Og's addresses.
3. There is no 3. There doesn't need to be.


No, its not a court room because its an internet forum.


Its a repayment. Its from pirate's address used to pay Og, as it was a dozen times previous.


In the past two weeks you've further solidified your pattern of being habitually deceptive so I don't fault Lauda at all.


You're really not doing jack shit. You haven't stopped anything.


1. I'm not targeting you. As far as the history of this thread is concerned, you're the one who has been doing the targeting.

2. You being "targeted" is not dependent on your "efforts" being effective. You were targeted for being dishonest.

OG stole BCH - fact.   
OG lied about being reimbursed by pirate - fact.

Who do you want us to target?  Lauda?   

I'm prob the only person here that cares about the community.   Techy does not.

People keep throwing words around like "proof". Repeating the word proof over and over again doesn't make it proof. What you have is some ambiguous statements and some transactions to addresses owned by recipients you can not identify. No, this isn't a court room, because if it was this discussion would have been over with once it was established no one can identify the owners of the final unexplained transaction. That's all it is, is an unexplained transaction, but you and the rest of The Hardly Boys created this speculative novel around the events like you always do any time you can use circumstances to cast aspersions upon anyone who resists your attempts at targeting and intimidation.

Yes, I am sure the trust rating from Lauda regarding a months old event was just left today totally coincidentally, and not because I am making it harder for their buddies to continue their long term attempt at the character assassination of OGnasty and anyone else who doesn't bow to their abuse of systems designed to prevent fraud. Actually it has paid dividends. If my efforts weren't effective you and The Hardly Boys wouldn't need to target me. Good luck following your raging clues.

The lie has been proven. Again, your failure to digest the proof is nobody's fault but your own. From all available evidence it would appear that Og only paid investors from his reserve fund. However, this isn't a court room and nobody is attempting to convict anybody of anything, so its doesn't matter.


Wrong. You're being "punished" (its not all about you btw) because of your habitually deceptive behavior.


Yeah because that tactic has paid dividends for you in the past.