If we are playing by GP rules then we shall play by GP rules:
I have the ability to assess the mental state of accounts which are "irreparably mentally damaged beyond the point of return".
I don't have the qualifications to psychoanalyze anyone but because of my time on the forum, I can do the above.
All "irreparably mentally damaged beyond the point of return" users cannot be trusted and their opinions are null.
I now retroactively apply this tag of "irreparably mentally damaged beyond the point of return" to game-protect, nullifying all of his opinions.
game-protect owes me 20 000 Euros for this assessment. Thanks.
Topic: Please make your vote for the flag created against game-protect - page 7. (Read 2847 times)
October 26, 2019, 11:04:55 AM
October 26, 2019, 04:42:08 AM
Please quote where I have stated that I do not have the required qualifications to discover extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains?
Considering that you are providing a "professional service" and was challenged in regards to your qualifications this can be considered as a claim that you have "professional qualifications" in detecting extreme mentally illness and/or brain dead brains (zombies ?)
I logically can only assess the mental estate of these accounts based on the extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit they post and not the physical estate.
You didn't answer the question.
Do you have such a qualification ?
October 25, 2019, 05:50:04 PM
Please quote where I have stated that I do not have the required qualifications to discover extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains?
Considering that you are providing a "professional service" and was challenged in regards to your qualifications this can be considered as a claim that you have "professional qualifications" in detecting extreme mentally illness and/or brain dead brains (zombies ?)
I logically can only assess the mental estate of these accounts based on the extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit they post and not the physical estate.
October 25, 2019, 05:35:52 PM
Please quote where I have stated that I do not have the required qualifications to discover extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains?
Considering that you are providing a "professional service" and was challenged in regards to your qualifications this can be considered as a claim that you have "professional qualifications" in detecting extreme mentally illness and/or brain dead brains (zombies ?)
Is that your claim ?
Because scammers are usually vague about their qualifications or claim to have fraudulent qualifications or qualifications they do not have.
Perhaps you would like to clarify this by stating your qualifications rather than being deliberately vague.
October 25, 2019, 04:07:52 PM
As such, it is impossible to determine the mental illness or lack thereof for a certain individual without having the required qualifications, of which you have already stated you have none.
You can detect a serious mental disorder solely based on the extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit such a brain posts!Is this true?
Please quote where I have stated that I do not have the required qualifications to discover extremely mentally and or brain dead brains?
To determine the difference between an 'extremely mentally and or brain dead' brain and any other brain, you would need to know how to identify a dichotomy between brains with certainty.
Legal experts usually have studied law at an university and it is very unlikely that they will thereafter spam its signature for cents on brain wash forums!
However, almost every extremely mentally ill and or brain dead bitcointalk account making statements about Game Protect claims to know how legal things in the real world work!
It is so laughable and obvious!
October 24, 2019, 08:16:20 PM
As such, it is impossible to determine the mental illness or lack thereof for a certain individual without having the required qualifications, of which you have already stated you have none.
You can detect a serious mental disorder solely based on the extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit such a brain posts!Please quote where I have stated that I do not have the required qualifications to discover extremely mentally and or brain dead brains?
To determine the difference between an 'extremely mentally and or brain dead' brain and any other brain, you would need to know how to identify a dichotomy between brains with certainty.Otherwise, that would be a lie! And perhaps a defamation suit will be aimed towards your direction?
October 24, 2019, 05:08:31 PM
Online consumer protection service daily interacts with extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains and it is very easy for me to discover such brains. 
I doubt many people are scrambling to your door to send you their psychoanalyses of medical records.
As such, it is impossible to determine the mental illness or lack thereof for a certain individual without having the required qualifications, of which you have already stated you have none.
You can detect a serious mental disorder solely based on the extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit such a brain posts!Please quote where I have stated that I do not have the required qualifications to discover extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains?
October 24, 2019, 05:00:04 PM
Online consumer protection service daily interacts with extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains and it is very easy for me to discover such brains.
I doubt many people are scrambling to your door to send you their psychoanalyses of medical records. As such, it is impossible to determine the mental illness or lack thereof for a certain individual without having the required qualifications, of which you have already stated you have none. October 24, 2019, 04:53:35 PM
Yes, I do not know how extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains neurologically function, but it is easy for me to detect such brains based on the extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit they post.
You would first need to understand what is considered "extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit", whatever that is. How do you know what mentally ill brains post?
You can be the best car driver without knowing how a car technically runs!
Sure but you need to know how to drive. If your analogy compares a car to a driver, then in this case it would be a brain to a... online gaming consumer protection service.You know...
Quote
Continuously stating things without any connection to the real world highly indicates a serious mental disorder!
October 24, 2019, 04:44:34 PM
Yes, I do not know how extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains neurologically function, but it is easy for me to detect such brains based on the extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit they post.
You would first need to understand what is considered "extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit", whatever that is. How do you know what mentally ill brains post?You can be the best car driver without knowing how a car technically runs!
Sure but you need to know how to drive. If your analogy compares a car to a driver, then in this case it would be a brain to a... online gaming consumer protection service.You know...
Quote
Continuously stating things without any connection to the real world highly indicates a serious mental disorder!
October 24, 2019, 04:29:23 PM
I am not a psychiatrist and do not know how extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains function, but I never said that his false and misleading defamation campaign is justified!
So where's the lie?
One lie is that he claims I violated a written contract resulting in damages July 2019!
If your brain read this, then you doubtless suffer a serious mental disorder!
I thought you weren't a psychiatrist and don't know how brains function.You can be the best car driver without knowing how a car technically runs!
Continuously stating things without any connection to the real world highly indicates a serious mental disorder!
October 24, 2019, 04:07:15 PM
I am not a psychiatrist and do not know how extremely mentally ill and or brain dead brains function, but I never said that his false and misleading defamation campaign is justified!
So where's the lie?If your brain read this, then you doubtless suffer a serious mental disorder!
I thought you weren't a psychiatrist and don't know how brains function. October 24, 2019, 04:00:15 PM
If I was supposed to give the 210€ back much much earlier and failed, his suspicion would have been substantiated much much earlier, right?
Maybe, but h4ns could easily have given you the benefit of the doubt.
So the 'defamation campaign' and opinion that you were a scammer was justified: that's what you're saying.
If your brain read this, then you doubtless suffer a serious mental disorder!
October 24, 2019, 03:55:40 PM
If I was supposed to give the 210€ back much much earlier and failed, his suspicion would have been substantiated much much earlier, right?
Maybe, but h4ns could easily have given you the benefit of the doubt.
October 24, 2019, 03:37:39 PM
If I was supposed to give the 210€ back much much earlier and failed, his suspicion would have been substantiated much much earlier, right?
Maybe, but h4ns could easily have given you the benefit of the doubt.
The behavior of h4ns clearly confirms my assessment!
September 3rd he asked to get the 210€ back and the same day he felt the necessity to inform the public that Game Protect is almost certainly a scam.
Few days later September 9th he felt the necessity to open a public scam accusation on bitcointalk.org
So if the 210€ were much much earlier due, h4ns almost certainly would have informed the public much much earlier, right?
October 24, 2019, 03:25:08 PM
If I was supposed to give the 210€ back much much earlier, his suspicion would have been substantiated much much earlier, right?
Maybe, but h4ns could easily have given you the benefit of the doubt. And you were supposed to give it back earlier: you had created an agreement for that very purpose.And not September 3rd and not based on asking him the second time if he can lend me BTC worth 10€, but based on not giving him the 210€ back, right?
I can't understand this fragmented sentence with no clear context. Rewrite it. October 24, 2019, 03:18:52 PM
After his suspicion was substantiated September 3rd, he immediately asked to get the 210€ back and I agreed and confirmed with immediately closing his pending support tickets. Agreeing and confirming to give the 210€ back is not a scam in the real world! 
Sure... but weren't you supposed to give the money back much, much earlier?
And his suspicion would not have been substantiated only September 3rd, right?
And his suspicion would have been substantiated based on not giving him the 210€ back and not based on asking him the second time if he can lend me BTC worth 10€, right?
My suspicion substantiated when he asked me to borrow him €10. For the second time (September 3rd).
October 24, 2019, 03:01:43 PM
This suspicion substantiated September 3rd after I asked him the second time if he can lend me BTC worth 10€.
Quoting for reference.After his suspicion was substantiated September 3rd, he immediately asked to get the 210€ back and I agreed and confirmed with immediately closing his pending support tickets. Agreeing and confirming to give the 210€ back is not a scam in the real world!
Sure... but weren't you supposed to give the money back much, much earlier?September 3rd h4ns also started his defamation campaign on sportsbookreview.com
Defamation would be based on falsities, correct?Let's start in reverse:
>He is the least trusted user in this forum.
True.
>Game-Protect is probably a scam, read the reviews in the Bitcointalk forum.
Opinion, substantiated with the multiple-month delay towards a previous financial agreement as well as alternative feedback from other users.
>The email address of gamestrict is similar to the one that allegedly belongs to the foundation that collects the money (same provider)
Opinion.
>It could be a sister-site of game-protect.com
Opinion, substantiated with the commonality in the name and game.
Where are the lies?
October 24, 2019, 02:53:59 PM
Not breaking apart the quote pyramid because context is important here.
Since when is being suspicious of someone the same thing as defamation?Since never!
A suspicion is a suspicion and publicly false and misleading claiming that Game Protect is a scam / show is the criminal offense of defamation!
So exactly: h4ns was suspicious on September 3rd. Did his 'defamation campaign' start when he became suspicious? It seems strange because the thread on Bitcointalk was only started on the 9th, so how could you refund his 210€ into the defamation total which did not exist at the time?
No, until September 3rd h4ns was suspicious that Game Protect is a scam.My suspicion substantiated when he asked me to borrow him €10. For the second time (September 3rd).
His illegal defamation campaign towards Game Protect caused a compensation demand towards h4ns September 3rd!Since when is being suspicious of someone the same thing as defamation?
A suspicion is a suspicion and publicly false and misleading claiming that Game Protect is a scam / show is the criminal offense of defamation!
So exactly: h4ns was suspicious on September 3rd. Did his 'defamation campaign' start when he became suspicious? It seems strange because the thread on Bitcointalk was only started on the 9th, so how could you refund his 210€ into the defamation total which did not exist at the time?
This suspicion substantiated September 3rd after I asked him the second time if he can lend me BTC worth 10€.
My suspicion substantiated when he asked me to borrow him €10. For the second time (September 3rd).
After his suspicion was substantiated September 3rd, he immediately asked to get the 210€ back and I agreed and confirmed with immediately closing his pending support tickets.
Agreeing and confirming to give the 210€ back is not a scam in the real world!
September 3rd h4ns also started his defamation campaign on sportsbookreview.com
"Game-Protect is probably a scam, read the reviews in the Bitcointalk forum. He is the least trusted user in this forum"
You both agree that you were supposed to refund him 210€ so where is the lie?
One lie is that he claims I violated a written contract resulting in damages July 2019!Quote
h4ns alleges: game-protect violated a written contract, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. game-protect did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around July 2019. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance.
October 24, 2019, 10:55:44 AM
Not breaking apart the quote pyramid because context is important here.
Since when is being suspicious of someone the same thing as defamation?Since never!
A suspicion is a suspicion and publicly false and misleading claiming that Game Protect is a scam / show is the criminal offense of defamation!So exactly: h4ns was suspicious on September 3rd. Did his 'defamation campaign' start when he became suspicious? It seems strange because the thread on Bitcointalk was only started on the 9th, so how could you refund his 210€ into the defamation total which did not exist at the time?
If you reduced the 20 000€ total BEFORE his 'defamation campaign' started, then the 20 000€ is based on thin air and unjustified.
If you reduced the 20 000€ total AFTER his 'defamation campaign' started, then you need to show where h4ns is lying for it to be defamation in the first place. You both agree that you were supposed to refund him 210€ so where is the lie?
My suspicion substantiated when he asked me to borrow him €10. For the second time (September 3rd).
His illegal defamation campaign towards Game Protect caused a compensation demand towards h4ns September 3rd!Since when is being suspicious of someone the same thing as defamation?
A suspicion is a suspicion and publicly false and misleading claiming that Game Protect is a scam / show is the criminal offense of defamation!
If you reduced the 20 000€ total BEFORE his 'defamation campaign' started, then the 20 000€ is based on thin air and unjustified.
If you reduced the 20 000€ total AFTER his 'defamation campaign' started, then you need to show where h4ns is lying for it to be defamation in the first place. You both agree that you were supposed to refund him 210€ so where is the lie?
Jump to: