Topic: Roger Ver to be sued for defrauding bitcoin newbies. - page 13. (Read 3146 times)

Poor franky1, staunch Roger Ver supporter. His fraudulent tendencies are very clear as night and day but you keep on defending him. Why?

I wish to see you discuss about Bitcoin Cash's development and the pros and cons of bigger blocks to convince us to use it.

Plus I never gave you a "think what you want attitude". I tried to stick to the facts, but your replies are tinfoil hat conspiracies trying to pull everyone down to Roger Ver and Craig Wright's level.

At any rate I enjoy the discussion. I like listening on your side of the story and I believe everyone should too. But stick to the facts, not the subjective consiracy stories.

I like Bcash precisely because it pisses Ver off so much. I mean I am all for letting the markets decide, but if Ver is a true libertarian, he should not feel so insecure about people calling his preferred coin a particular name. The markets will decide if a meme sticks or not.

Another reason for bitcoin's price to decline. Not only that possible investors are lost, but the image it may give to people with a little knowledge about bitcoin can spread like a wildfire.

More reason for countries to ban and not support cryptocurrencies.

@DooMAD

It seems that Ver is obsessed with calling his BCash creation "Bitcoin". He knows very well the true power behind the crypto name and brand with historical emphasis is with Bitcoin and not with "Bitcoin Cash".

Those in the know are happy to make money out of BCash in the same way as they could from any altcoin, no problem about that but the idea a couple of angry disgruntled whales get together and try to use the Bitcoin name saying Satoshi would have wanted Bcash instead of Bitcoin to associated as his closest vision of crypto is just ridiculous.

I agree with you and think by far most of the community agree that Bitcoin is Bitcoin (not "Bitcoin Core"). And Bitcoin Cash is either Bcash or Bitcoin Cash or BCH and is just an altcoin.

So we're changing the definition of decentralisation to mean that completely incompatible networks get to decide what other chains call themselves?  And everyone's cool with that?  Awesome.  

Get a clue.

You've got your decentralisation because you already can say BTC or BCH, but we are not calling the BTC chain "Bitcoin Core" just because you think it should be called that.  You are completely broken in the head if you think otherwise.  You keep calling it that if you want.  The economic majority will continue to prove they can claim the Bitcoin brand because it will continue to be known as Bitcoin.  Make whatever impotent and irrelevant arguments you want.  It's not changing.

You are pissing into the wind.

You have a nice outlook on life. I hope you have lots of Bitcoins and other crypto which one day will make you so wealthy that whales including Ver will look like a paupers in front of you

Its so unfortunate that such established figures use their influence and knowledge to defraud innocent investors who's only intention is to make something out of their investments. Such people should be held responsible for their activities. Its unfortunate hat such things happen. The newbies should however be encouraged to do more research on the coins they invest in before making investment decisions. This way they will avoid not only being scammed but also making wrong investment moves.

briefly??
core were stuck at the 35% from december 2016 until august 1st 2017.. (over 8 months)
it only BRIEFLY jumped to 100% once the bilateral split occured UASF and split events were occuring on august 1st+. then for 2 weeks wait period to lock in. and then a further week or so to activate.. thus was only 95%+ for 3 weeks.. and only at that level due to the split
. not due to community desire or economic majority, due to full mining pools support.. but purely due to selective vote counting of only supporters to get 100% and banning the opposition from voting
so please if your going to make a reply. atleast back it up with some damn facts (review the code)(look at charts)
oh and before you ven scream propaganda.. here is a chart from your king(sipa)p.wuiile himself.
notice the orange blur of 20-40% between 01/01/17 and 01/08/17 (8 months). then on august first mega jump to 100% (the blue purple and orange all merge and jump)

come on.. think about it 100% vote happening all of a sudden on august 1st.. thats impossible election result unless they are throwing the count
http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ver9-small-ever.png



secondly... your missing the whole point..
NO ONE
NO ONE
not core not cash not one has economic claim to brand bitcoin

are you that ignorant of the meaning of decentralisation.

like the dollar if anyone says they want dollar... it must be asked
is that U.S dollar(USD) or A.U dollar(AUD).. like what happens in the fiat world to avoid confusion

if anyone says they want bitcoin... it must be asked
is that bitcoin core(BTC) or bitcoin cash(BCH).. like what should happen in the crypto world to avoid confusion

The funny thing is, the guy has benefited so much from Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Community and now he just turns away from us and claims Bitcoin is something different than it has been for almost 10 years.

I think he should be held accountable. The damage he has already caused and is still doing is unacceptable.

At one stage those might have briefly been the figures, but BIP91 had over 95% of miners supporting it.  Plus, as always, it's not just about the miners, but also about the economic majority.  Please tell me how you think BCH has an economic claim to that supposed 65% you keep referring to.   I could do with a good laugh. 

Because I enjoy a good fight, and I am not full of hate toward ver & wu especially since their real foes are the banking cartels.

It really makes very little difference to me which side wins.  

Why the smiley face at the end of your post? Why are you celebrating and having a crypto-cyber-orgasm when pushing the idea that nobody can stop Wu and Ver?

Nobody wants to stop Wu or Ver, I certainly do not hate either of them and at the same time have no interest in them... let them get on with it at their hearts content but to use the bitcoin.com domain with a completely diffrent format to bitcoincash.org is very confusing for newbies if they are one and the same (ie bitcoin cash). Hopefuly bitcoin.com domain will stop its confusing message and be diverting visitors to bitcoincash.org instead.

I do agree that with Bitcoins being mined using Bitmain technology it is funding the Bitcoins for Wu to swap in to Bitcoin cash. Until or unless that cycle stops things will not change. Maybe miners need to take note and stop using Bitmain products. (Note I did not add a smiley face to show I was having crypto-cyber-orgasm after making my point)

Thanks for your post though. When you are calm and polite you make valid points.

I think you miss the point, Ver & Wu are never going to give up on Bitcoin Cash,
Ver thrown his reputation behind it , the only way to clear up the slander , is to prove he was right and Bitcoin Cash Crushes Bitcoin Core.
You guys have really left him no choice with your constant insults of the man.

Wu knows that the mining rewards drop in 2020 by half and makes the miners more dependent on transaction fees.
Wu has no intention of running an LN Hub and becoming a minion of the Banking cartels, he is putting his money where his mouth is,
and everyone seems to forget he can subsidize Bitcoin Cash with a fraction of his Bitcoin Core earning forever and none of you can stop him.
Everytime you buy a bitcoin core coin, that Wu created, you are directly funding Bitcoin Cash Continued Existence.  

Bitcoin Cash can survive if Bitcoin Core dies as the miners are planning to switch and death spiral bitcoin core sometime after 2020,
in the meantime they get free funding to consolidate more Bitcoin Cash Coins in their accounts before the flippening.  

That is their plan, and Bitcoin Core supporters really has no way to stop them ,
unless they change algorithms immediately, but that could also hasten the flippening once the miners feel threatened.  

There Can Be Only One: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J3VeogFUOs 

Well the truth is Ver did say that his fork was closer to what Satoshi would have wanted his end product Bitcoin to look like. So basically the community believes he tried to destroy Bitcoin because Satoshi would have wanted it?

The day Ver and Wu give up on Bitcoin Cash the price will plummet.

poor windfury. core defense cap wearer of 2018
ive shown code. ive shown links to websites showing where the funding of both sides comes from.
and yet.. windfury you only reply with "think what you want"
wow.. so much evidence you provided to counter..


so anyway
funding.. im sure you didnt click the link so here is a image for you to gloss over and pretend doesnt exist


bitcoin core - bitcoin core
bips - luke JR moderated - blockstream paid("founder and consultant") - funds from DCG
mailing list - rusty russel moderated - blockstream paid("founder and consultant") - funds from DCG
fibre - matt corralo - blockstream paid("founder and consultant") - funds from DCG
segwit - p wuille - blockstream paid - funds from DCG

bitcoin cash - bitcoinABC
jgarzic - bloq paid - funds from DCG
gavin A - bloq paid - funds from DCG
ver - blockchain.info paid - funds from DCG

as for the hyperledger
well lets take coindesk (media site owned by dCG.co)
https://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-10-new-firms-hyperledger-blockchain-project/
yes. read the disclaimer too
"CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group"

anyway lets allow you to have a few hints about fibres workings.. as a way of ensuring no opposing blocks get around the network

quotes from fibre


ill give you a hint. core complient pools create and validate core blockdata banning opposing blocks. send valid blocks to fibre that distribute it out super fast to other core nodes.


plus i do laugh when u went and asked if segwit was backward compatible and they told you
"Segwit transactions are not validated by legacy nodes because legacy nodes CANNOT correctly validate them."
they also told you a segwit node translates the data to make it a anyonecanspend

ive been mentioning about the anyone can spend incompatibility since early 2016 even before segwit got a maiinnet candidate release. so 2 years on and it still makes me laugh

again. if you cant copy the blockchain (copy and paste file folders) like for like. and it requires translation.. and that translation does not result in a tx that is validatable if the network needed to downgrade.. then its not compatible with downgraded clients.

lets put it simple.
a french person writes a book. in french. your old and unbale to learn french. french people tell you its ok the book is english compatible. ... just make a special request and we will make a bespoke copy of the book in english that is 4 times short and doesnt have any of the juicy details in it.
you accept the bespoke book. now. you try to hand that book onto someone else that is french. they reject it because it doesnt have the juicy details..
or
its like compressing and converting data from an sd card to floppy disk. and the the old pc user seeing it holds data but cant validate it so just assumes the person he got it from validated it.. thus no self validation..
and then finds he cant just hand the floppy disk on to someone with a sd card reader because they dont accept floppy disks and will reject it

segwit it not backward compatible... its not allowing an old(legacy) node to be part of the relay of full data. (i shown you before the image of the "doenstream filters" where by the old legacy client is not a part of the upstream p2p network(bitcoin core network). you cannot simply pass on the bespoke data to a segwit client, as the segwit client wont see it as a anyone can spend(invisable) they would see it as a segwit tx with no witness.
and if your not able to validate transactions then you are not part of the p2p validation network.


P.S
you are so deep into loving core that you really believe anyone not loving core must love ver.. (you are really stuck in the kylie vs khloe drama mindset of only 2 choices) you cannot see true decentralisation of no team ownership because all you keep thinking is if they dont love A they must love B... SHAME ON YOU

This was bound to happen, in similar posts about him on this forum, some people suggested that. When you are doing fraud at such big scale, it is just matter of time someone influential becomes a victim.

That is all a bunch of subjective bullshit from you. But you are free to think of it that way. Thank God Almighty that almost none would think of it the same as you.


This of it however you want. But Core does not centralize development. They only happen to be the best group of developers with great ideas like Segwit and we cannot blame the community if they run their software.


Sorry franky1, but you are the only one who believes that. Roger Ver has lost. No one from the Bitcoin community is willing to follow him except a few people with their own agendas.

Plus a forecast. As a desperate move, Roger Ver will start arguing for the BTC ticker as rightfully for Bitcoin Cash because "Satoshi". Then hilarity ensues once again. Hahaha.

core had 35% opposition had 65%
yet the 35% still think that core is the prime network

it was a bilateral split that insured the 65% became invisible so that although there were less pools and nodes to count.. the pools making blocks that core seen as visibile instantly became 100%

try reading bip9 bip 148 do some research on bilateral split. and you will see that real true fair consensus was not used. but vote rigging was

you have not really checked out how things have changed since 2013 have you.

did yu know that due to FIBRE the only blocks being pushed out of the ring of mining pools is blocks that strictly follow cores rules. all other blocks get rejected in under 2 seconds. if a pool attempted to make blocks that differ. and keep doing it. they get banned from the network until they comply, thus Fibre forces the pools to follow the rules of core or nver get a block to be part of the chain and thus they are mining without ever getting a reward that matures to be spendable on the chain.

other developers who make nodes. if they did nake their own github and their own bip list and promote a upgrade that differs from cores roadmap. first needs to follow cores rules to just be allowed and seen by the networ and can only flag their desire. but has to flag using a bip9 process that core have to acknowledge. then it has to get enough nodes and enough pools to also run that same codebase to out power core..

well guess what. bitcoin ABC(cash) got 65% core got 35% and core simply done a bilateral split on the whole process.. and people still think core is "the network". so by core removing the 65% opposition. it automatically got cores BIP9 to see the remaining nodes co-operating and being seen by other core nodes equalled over 95% although there was in reality far more nodes/opposing pools that were simply invisible to bip9

core having 35% (letss say 7 pools out of 20(cant be arsed to count the pools with less than 1% block mining network hash power))
now imagine samson mow (UASF/blockstream) and bloq deciding to make a second choice to drama the sheep into another field.  and made it so pools that didnt flag for segwit moved over too



thus on that day if pools were not scared and continued to refuse to join the 7 core loyalist pools they would get their blocks rejected.

so when the rejects occured and fibre simply ban hammered the pools off the core network of those not UASFing.. all that was left mining the core network were segwit supporting pools. and on that day far less than 20 pools were mining (for example 7 pools out of 7 pools=100%)
..all the core support nodes got to see was blocks made by segwit supporting pools. thus although the pool count dropped, the percentage support jumped to 100% hense why segwit got locked in and activated only a few weeks after august..
it is real funny people think after months of 35% community consensus. it jumped to 100% in a couple weeks. and people still think that it meant evryone loved it.. no the majoirty were just made invisible so that only one fanclub could be seen

yes core done a rigged election
the users had no consensus election. all the users seen was 35%-100% jump.  
its really worth you actually reading some code and looking at some stats. ahd how things like bips, and fibre work. it will completely shock you how things have changed since 2013

I disagree. It would be expensive for both sides, and Ver would have to spend a fortune defending himself. Given that he has profited from the confusion, he could be liable. It is my understanding that he quickly changed his conduct and the lawsuit was canceled.

That he changed some of his behavior tells you what you need to know.

His citizenship is irrelevant, if a judgment in the U.S. is issued against him and it gets domesticated within the legal system of Japan. Moreover, the lawsuit could be filed in Japan. Having a class-action lawsuit filed against you is not a game. It would be expensive for both sides.

It is my understanding that the planned lawsuit was canceled, however.