Topic: The Case against Bitcoin OZ (Read 7162 times)

Didn't some guy once get a scammer tag for playing a prank in #bitcoin-otc?

I find this interesting:


Also, there is a reason the SEC requires financial disclosures for publicly traded securities.  There is no way to prove a business is reporting their information faithfully unless auditors or other 3rd parties are looking through the information.

Bitcoin Oz deserves a scammer tag for misrepresenting him as a "Marketing Executive" of coinabul. If I went on #bitcoin-otc, changed my name to a well known member of this forum that didn't have enforce on, said in the channel that I'm that person, then I'd have got a scammer tag even if I didn't actually conduct any trades.

Augusto, a question if I may. What the hell is that... thing... on your head. Do they not have barbers where you live?

There is not. You have been exposed. You are a liar. You are looking for excuses to disguise your actions.


I do not pretended to know what you are suggesting. I caught you lying:

I didn't say I know more about bitcoin global than I do. That was your mistake -- you said I claimed to have access to the logs. I did not claim any such thing. I said I had access to the financial records, and I also explained to you how I got them -- from Theymos, as a bidder.

How so? BitcoinOZ started attacking me on the forums. His intent MAY have been to get out of returning shares to me, yes, but that's not my fault.

I don't suppose it helps to point out that random people walking in here and posting only serves to illustrate why I cannot ignore this and I have to fight it. Some people who should have known better have said some very irresponsible things recently...

This thread looks like a good way to ensure you never get your shares back from asset issuers.

Further to this, you are starting to show extreme hypocrisy. How dare you sit there and accuse me of blackmail, when you have black and white evidence that Ian Bakewell attempted to blackmail me in PM, for the sole purpose of defrauding CPA and it's customers? Why don't you go do something about that instead? I even made a post on the Scam Accusation forum about it. You said yourself that it has to involve financial damages. Well it does, and provable ones, from Ian's own mouth. Blackmail has specific provisions for this exact purpose in many countries (let's quote the flavor of the month; Australia this time): "a threat to publish attacks on a company calculated to lower the value of its shares" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackmail#Victoria.2C_Australia).

Do you realize what you have done here? The least of my complaints against you is that you are a poor moderator, and that you are.

You have shown bias, malice, and you have accused me of a crime. I would very much like an apology for the things you've said here.

"In common usage, blackmail is a crime involving unjustified threats to make a gain or cause loss to another unless a demand is met."

You just accused me of committing a crime. I therefore request a formal apology. Do you see how this works? It is not blackmail. Look it up. You accuse me of a crime... I ask for an apology... and so on. This is how it's done. That isn't blackmail. Please see (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_threat) specifically the following (which of course is just a non-official opinion, but is still interesting in light of the general level of legal knowledge you've presented here):


Effect of legal threat

For the most part a legal threat is of no legal significance other than a matter of negotiation tactics; however, in certain instances a legal threat does have some legal significance. Among other things a legal threat may do the following:

-- Establish notice - the party receiving the threat, and the party making the threat, are "on notice" of the circumstances and cannot later claim they were unaware.
-- Constitute extortion, blackmail, or some other crime or tort involving improper threats of harm: for example, it is considered unethical, and in some cases a crime, to threaten to report criminal conduct to the police unless a settlement is reached.
-- In some circumstances, a claim (veiled or not) that a party will take action based on alleged violation of the law gives rise to a right by the receiving party to bring an action for declaratory judgment that it has not broken the law: for example, if the holder of a trademark claims that a party is infringing a trademark, that party may bring suit asking a court to declare that there is in fact no infringement.


In particular to the above, (1) I have asked people to stop. (2) I have not threatened to report any criminal conduct. I assure you that all criminal conduct I am aware of is, will be, or has been disclosed to the proper authorities. There is no condition on this; Some people here are in serious hot water right now. Don't doubt that for a second Mr. Bear. (3) In line with what Deprived said; I am now free to bring suit against anyone to show that I am not, in fact, insolvent. Among other charges laid against me in these forums.

However, I have not said I will do so. No legal threat has been made -- not even a veiled legal threat such as mentioning a referral to council, or a cease and desist letter, for example. I've said nothing. Feel free to quote me on this. And yes I realize I am going up against a global moderator here. Which is what makes this case particularly important for both parties; you should quote me and explain why you believe I resorted to blackmail, or you should apologize. That is nothing but a personal request at this stage -- and I hope you do not treat it as irreverently as you have done my previous requests for you to stop making such statements. Do you see how this works now? You accuse me of something, I'm going to have to first ask you to apologize. You are being notified that what you are doing is not proper.

In addition to their legal significance, legal threats may create a number of practical results:

-- Intimidating a party into acquiescing to the demand, whether or not there is a legal basis for it, out of fear of litigation expense, negative publicity, loss of entitlement (e.g. losing a business license), or other negative consequence
-- Alerting a party to illegal conduct it was unaware of, or that it did not realize was illegal or objectionable
-- Risking public disclosure of the threat, thereby portraying the party making the threat in a bad light (see the Streisand effect)


I particularly note item #2, that if you were not aware that (accusing me of blackmail) was illegal, YOU HAVE NOW BEEN MADE FULLY AWARE. And, all I'm asking for is an apology. Get it?

"Burden of proof refers most generally to the obligation of a party to prove its allegations at trial." -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof

If BitcoinOZ has evidence of a crime, he should probably go to the police.

You've got the burden of evidence wrong here.

You're accusing HIM of scamming here.

If you want to claim he lied when (if) he said CPA was insolvent then guess what?  You need to prove CPA ISN'T insolvent.  It's for you to lay out your case first - not for him to defend himself before you've given any evidence that he was lieing.

That is, after all, why you locked your thread accusing me (and others) of lieing is it not?  Because to proceed you'd have to:

1) Commit to a single set of lies - e.g. explaining how you acted in the interest of BMF investors both when you entered into the insurance contract AND when you chose not to claim on it.
2) Commit to those lies in advance of finding out precisely what evidence I had showing them to be lies.

Point 2) is, of course, also why you keep asking for everyone to lay out all their evidence clearly - so you know which bits you can safely lie about and which you have to tell the truth on.  Plus you've likely by now realised there's NO account you can give which would show you acting on BMF's behalf in BMF's interest throughout that sorry episode.

You attempted to argue the accusation against you of being pretentious was logically wrong - in the process showing a text-book example of pretention (paraphrased you said "I can't be pretentious because I'm THIS good so it would be impossible for me to exaggerate my worth and be pretentious.").  And that argument (by you) demonstrates clearly your main failing - that you have a delusional belief that your own ability is SO high that anything you do MUST be right as YOU did it and you're great therefore any claims against you MUST be wrong as they're made by lesser beings (according to the other thread we should revere you).

Your company reports regularly followed the same pattern : "We lost some more money.  It was someone else's fault.  I'm a great manager and I run great companies."  At some point in your life you need to wake up and realise that when everything around you keeps going wrong it might, just occasionally, be YOUR fault.

You must be getting pretty desperate to resort to blackmail. Someone getting a little too close?

I don't really care, I just want an apology and I want the smear campaign to stop. If you admit that you don't actually have any evidence that (for example):

a) CPA is/was ever insolvent *(do you have the financial records?),
b) I have created preferential shares of CPA / I have scammed shareholders of CPA or BMF by selling a single *(do you have proof that BMF or CPA had clear ownership that single, or do you have material evidence disputing the statement it was personally owned?)
c) any other instance such as where you called the existance of the CPA liquidity loans into question

If you can just give me an apology for what you said and then stop, I won't have any complaint here, I will forgive you, and will not pursue this matter any further in any regard. I really do not want to be in this thread right now so let's just close it okay?

http://www.animalnoises.com.au/animal-noises-articles/1992/11/28/unstable-killer-jailed/
"David Albain Hollis, 20, allegedly roamed around Meadowbank in August last year, making animal noises as he stabbed people. According to medical evidence, his mind was abnormal."

FWIW. Yes, I did things in my life I was not proud of. I've even lied about my age, as you appear to have just done. And yes, my past follows me, as you yourself have attempted to shove down my throat.

But I wish to make a statement, sir. In my past, I stood up for what I believed in. I said what I felt was right. Okay, maybe I was wrong. I grew up a little and I can admit that now. But if now, 10-15 years after the fact, I have to put up with anonymous tormail garbage saying things like 'usagi also used the name renli in the past therefore he is a scammer', then I am willing to live with that because I had good intentions and I didn't actually wrong anyone. And hey, the truth is, I paid my dues in the martial arts community. When someone puts in the time, be it piano playing, martial arts, chess, an olympic sport, whatever -- I believe one should "respect the uniform if not the man". So why don't you just let it be?

It's a sad comment that some people are so mentally deranged they would take something like the tormail letter or whatever, and try to use it as evidence in a smear campaign against me. Or something like that catchy song you keep posting. But that is life. I accept my past. Do you accept your past?

Tell you what. If you apologize to me about what you have said, if you admit that you were making mere accusations, that you had no evidence, etc. then I will forgive you. Immediately. I give you my word and stake my reputation on that promise.

Please stop lying about me. I said, as you quoted:
I have access to the financial documents of bitcoin global from that time.
I don't see anything about a laptop.

As a matter of fact the financial records were sent to me by Theymos in PM. Why? Because they were sent to all people who were bidding on Theymos's shares. When I saw the financial records from GLBSE that he sent me, and GLBSE shut down, I pulled my bid. So that is how I got the financial records from that time. That makes what I said very very easily provable because so many people outside Bitcoin Global have access to that information. Out of respect for Theymos I will not publish the documents.

Second, this is not helping you. Are you really:

a) telling us where the evidence of your wrongdoing is (in the bitcoin meeting logs, which I had never mentioned as the source of my information)
b) accusing me of having that information?

I mean what? How does that help your case here at all?

The entire point of this thread is a witness to your character. Why? Because as I have shown I believe you are falsely accusing me of committing several crimes, you have denied or ignored requests to stop, and the forum mods here are not willing to perform what has become a clear obligation out of what appears to be six of malice and a half dozen of apathy.

I cannot stand idly by and allow you to accuse me of committing a crime (which is in and of itself a serious offense). Do you understand now why it has become relevant if you are a convicted murderer or not?

Unfortunately for you, you are not an anonymous jerk on tormail who says illogical things like "usagi is also known as renli, therefore SCAMMER". We have to live in a world where people may hate us for our past. On rec.martial-arts I stood up for what I believed in. I wasn't always right but I had good intentions and I believe I was unique in my field because I was one of a very few people who put the work in to try and figure out what tai chi was about. I considered myself a sort of scientist or explorer, testing old claims. Let's just say, I believe I was able to inform my final conclusions regarding Tai Chi. I doubt you would be interested in the story. I merely mention it to say that if your past is going to haunt you... make it for something you believed in and something you wanted to stand up for. In that sense, in a way, I don't mind the trolls. Even the anonymous tormail trolls who lie about me.

But I didn't get drunk, take a knife, and make animal noises while stabbing and killing innocent people.

In 1992, the Sunday Morning Herald published a quote by David A. Hollis in an article entitled "Unstable Killer Jailed":

"I know it is hard to believe, but to all those people I hurt, I just want to say I am sorry. It really was such a terrible thing to do."

I am one of the few people who can actually have empathy for someone who was in such a position. So please. Don't make this any worse. Please just admit what you did, if you did it, and leave me alone -- stop lying about me, stop accusing me of committing crimes, in short order change your character, because the developing story is that your character stinks.

I indeed believe someone can regret a mistake. If I ask someone to straightly deny certain evidence and the answer is "I do not deny the evidence, but I am regretful of that action. I have learned a lesson.", I would trust completely in that person. Otherwise, If I ask someone to straightly deny certain evidence and an answer is not provided, I would  become suspicious of that person and not trust him/her.

If he did do it I think he learned his lesson, cause he has not done it since. That was over 20 years ago, and he may have regret for his actions and has obviously learned from them. So I agree it should be about the business dealings.

Et tu.  Your "convicted murder" statements are also irrelevant to the subject of this thread.

As usual your logic is terrible.

Unless you're the most important person in a field it's possible to claim to be more important that you actually are.
Unless you have so much talent it's impossible to be more talented it's possible to claim to be more talented than you actually are.

Arguing that because you have some (any non-infinite amount in fact) importance/talent/whatever you can't possibly be pretentious is a totally illogical statement.  That you actually made the claim I quote is, in fact a classic example of being pretentious.  You are arguing that you are SO important/talented etc that it's impossible for you to be pretentious as your abilities are so great that they can't be exaggerated.  And that is precisely what is described by the definition of pretentious that you quoted.

NOONE is SO great that it is impossible to claim they are better than they actually are.

Nice job quoting a definition then making a ridiculous claim that actually proves the point you were attempting to disprove.