Topic: SCAM: Bitcoin SV (BSV) - fake team member and plagiarized white paper - page 24. (Read 25829 times)

To answer your question regarding proof that CSW is Satoshi. Yes, I know for a fact, that Craig Wright is the sole creator of BitCoin and the person behind the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto. I have empirical evidence. I have already stated it. How many times must I repeat it? Empirical evidence is the best kind of evidence and that's why I can say with 100% certainty that Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto.

What's so hard to follow ? He produced the documents HIMSELF and retracted them only when it was clearly established they wrere forgeries.

There is not a SINGLE piece of evidence of a hacking.

Keep entertaining us with your BS. You are one more proof that BSV shills suffer from heaby brain damage.

Are you going to make with the proof that CSW is Satoshi or what? You know it as a fact. Share why with us.

Unlike the contributors of this thread with which you are arguing, you've produced no evidence of anything other than that you have a huge ego.

Thus far you have simply attempted to "win the argument" via personal attacks and logical fallacies.

Produce your evidence or shut up.

Obviously you didn't read what I wrote.

Get this through your thick skull --- if someone forges a document under my name to set me up, that is not the same thing as me forging that document under my name.

Are there forged documents in this equations? YES.

Did Craig himself forge them? NO.

Who forged those documents then? Possibly Craig's ex-employee or someone else who helped him at it.


What is here so hard to follow? Ah, of course, it completely and utterly destroys your narrative, so you froze and just repeated by copy-pasting documents which WE ALL KNOW ARE FORGED. Except, you want it so hard to be the case that Craig was the one who forged them, that when confronted with a fact that it was his ex-employee, you just repeat yourself wishing it becomes true if you repeat it enough.  Go seek help, really. You need professional psychiatric help, it's really that bad.

reductio ad absurdum x2, propositional fallacy

We are not just talking about a couple of documents here are we. The evidence is overwhelming ...

CSW has provided no valid cryptographic proof whatsoever to date. Bitcoin is Financial Cryptography.

Again, BSV is a scurge on this entire industry. Avoid it like the plague. Do not use any services that list and/or endorse it. Cease and desist.

Obviously you haven't read them. The documents are from an affidavit written and sworn by Craig Wright in 2013 as plaintiff (person who starts the proceedings).

It's a laugh alright. So you won't be using Metanet then, I take it?

Not that anybody will, because it doesn't exist outside of a paid membership. Its kind of like joining the Faketoshi Fan Club for those who want to throw money at Craig directly. Right now, Metanet consists of 3 YouTube videos. Take a look for yourself:

https://metanet.icu/

Decentraland will be hosting full-fledged virtual orgies before Metanet has its first actual user.

Writing / posting anything is for 'free' - what do you expect?

Metanet will fix that

 

All they are doing is censorship by noise. They have nothing of any value to offer to the conversation and their only aim is to drown out the facts published in this thread by writing nothing of value.

Nope to your nope. See how easy that is?

Anybody can do what you're doing.

Nope to your nope. See how easy that is?

Anybody can do what you're doing.

Nope

Feb 8, 2020

An issue has arisen on Bitcoin SV (BSV). Its nodes accidentally connect to some Bitcoin Cash (BCH) nodes when in safe mode.

Bitcoin SV (BSV) is a hard fork of Bitcoin Cash (BCH), and it seems that its architects did not change much. Bitcoin SV’s shoddy engineering allows for some BSV nodes to connect to BCH nodes when in safe mode...

The issue was brought to the attention of devs last week, and it was unfixed until recently. According to the comment on GitHub, the Bitcoin Cash blockchain is longer, which sometimes fools the Bitcoin SV node when in safe mode. It automatically enters safe mode when it finds a longer but invalid chain. The temporary solution now is to force-disable safe mode.

The issue underscores how similar BSV is to BCH—so similar that, apparently, even the nodes themselves sometimes struggle to tell the chains apart. The fact that the issue was allowed to persist for so long is also damning in its own right. Bitcoin SV has been live since November 2018, and only now this issue is being brought to light. Either the devs or doing a poor job or no one is paying attention to the actual architecture of Bitcoin SV.

Bitcoin SV has often faced criticism for the divisive activities of its founder, Craig Wright. Recently, even the founder of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales, weighed in on the controversy: he says that BSV “offers nothing” and that it absolutely will not be used by Wikipedia. The comments came after BSV fans were speculating Wales might come out in support of BSV after committing to a speaking slot at an upcoming CoinGeek conference.

--snip--because I know for fact that Craig Wright and he alone is Satoshi.

You don't seem to know how courts work. That's okey. Let me explain.

If the judge orders you to hand over all documents matching certain criteria, then you are obliged to hand them all over regardless of their origin and circumstances. So for example, if your ex-employee has forged a document in an attempt to set you up, you are still obliged to hand over that document. Failure to do so is what gets you into trouble. Craig simply followed the order. It's was not his duty to decide whether a clearly forged document is relevant to the case or not. Now your fallacy lies in the fact that you assume it was Craig who forged the document in the first place while it was actually a rogue employee.

None of these documents were forged by a disgruntled employee.

They were presented by CSW himself in court. The document is notarized by CSWs lawyer. The address was used by CSW as equity in his business.

So either he owns the address and is in possession of  the MtGox stolen funds or it was used falsely as collateral in a fraudulent business transaction.
(The business transaction was part of court proceedings that CSW instigated in 2013)

If there is another plausible explanation other than theft or fraud - I'd love to hear it.

Willful ignorance is one hell of a drug.

Meanwhile, the rest of the world knows that those forged documents were not forged by Craig but instead of the rogue ex-employees who wanted to liquidate his company. You honestly believe a document that was found from the computer of a rogue ex-employee and which seemingly appears to be forged by Craig actually proves that Craig forged it? You have to be living in a fantasy land where wishful thinking has replaced common sense   or alternatively, you're a simpleton who's mind freezes when it has to deal with recursion, so like a true NPCs that you are, you fall back to "aussie man bad" if you can't comprehend the recursion.