Topic: OgNasty Ponzi passthrough and ponzi fans.. BTC losses everywhere he goes - page 6. (Read 7999 times)

Scooby: RRUT ROH, Shaggy! I rusta said sumfin right rabout Mr. Rasty
Shaggy: TECSHARE is mad and has no way to deflect!  Like letsss get outta heeerree Scoooob!!!!

OG twists the shit out of things at times too, sometimes Trumping others into corners over their words like a genius, sometimes just embarrassing himself over the whole pedo link bullshit..

Otherwise, I very much trust OG..

Click..
Insane..

Bold: Bold lies, otherwise known as bold-faced or barefaced lies, are obvious to people who hear the lies. These types of lies are so egregious that they’re seen in children more often than adults.

OG twists the shit out of things at times too, sometimes Trumping others into corners over their words like a genius, sometimes just embarrassing himself over the whole pedo link bullshit..

Otherwise, I very much trust OG..

Click..
Insane..

Bold: Bold lies, otherwise known as bold-faced or barefaced lies, are obvious to people who hear the lies. These types of lies are so egregious that they’re seen in children more often than adults.
Deceptive: Deceptive lies are crafted carefully and skillfully, with the intent to mislead the person on the receiving end. These lies are often subtle and hard to detect.
Denial: Denial involves refusing to acknowledge something that’s true.
Error: Lies can happen by mistake. People may believe what they’re saying is true, even if that isn’t the case.
Exaggeration: Exaggerations make the false assertion that something is greater or better. For instance, people may try to paint a more attractive picture of themselves by saying they’re more successful than they are. Another example is people over-promising something to make up for a mistake.
Fabrication: Fabrications deliberately make up a story or something that’s not true. These types of lies tend to be overt and can be a mark of desperation.
Minimization: Minimizations lessen the extent of something. Often, these types of lies involve rationalization and take place when people can’t completely deny the truth. Minimizations are the opposite of exaggerations.
Omission: Lies of omission leave out part of the truth. For many people, omission is easier to engage in than other types of lies because omission is passive and doesn’t involve making up anything.

OG twists the shit out of things at times too, sometimes Trumping others into corners over their words like a genius, sometimes just embarrassing himself over the whole pedo link bullshit..

Otherwise, I very much trust OG..

Except he isn't just asking questions. He is claiming to be able to "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" OGNasty is responsible for theft and making conclusions.

This also should be taken in the larger context of this exact same pattern of behavior related to other accusations where he makes more accusations over and over again without any definite proof. Anyone pretending there isn't a pattern here is lying to themselves.

1 and 2 are absolutely valid. Nr3 depends on what you value your account at, personally. You can trash it only once, and once it's done, it's done. So, I don't think just because something's worth more, it has to be the preferred choice or sacrifice in order to make some money off of it.
It would surely help if OgNasty would bring some clarification into this topic, but regardless of whether or not he's pocketed the funds, I can see why he does not reply, here.

I also generally agree with the whole burden of proof thing. This is generally something which is highly annoying in this forum… shifting the burden of proof to the wrong side seems to be pretty common, here. People got judged and punished for much less information than we have here. However, I think the information presented by Twitchy is enough to at least ask questions, don't you think? With everything presented, it's a possible scenario some misconduct has happened.

Maybe this whole thing had a better chance to get resolved if the OP was just a tad less clickbaity and more "functional". Now, we have a derailed thread with people repeating the same stuff over and over, with no solution in sight. And the one all this is about isn't even here.

given the fact that Og apparently lied about ever being reimbursed by pirate

I tend to look at net totals when considering including/excluding people from my trust list: are they doing more good than harm?

How long will you continue to avoid addressing these points?