Mr. OG, what did you do with the 2600 BTC you owed your investors? In your wallet one day, then vanished and you paid out an insurance fund. It will bug you till the day you are stabbed to death that I found out.
Write whatever lies you want. As far as I'm concerned, you're posting from jail on your boyfriend's phone.
Vod’s fantasies about me have turned homoerotic. We all knew it was coming. The death threat is probably uncalled for though considering what a bitch he is. I wonder if this was another drunk post or if he’s stroking out again.
I would say Vod is firmly into felony territory under US as well as Canadian law. It would be a shame if the forum suffered some kind of legal action when he inevitably harms some one or causes some massive financial damage in spite of his clearly illegal behavior being quite public. At this point it is kind of hard to claim ignorance.
It should also be noted that what Vod did also qualifies as harassment under Canadian law.
"The Criminal Harassment section of the Criminal Code of Canada states:
264. (1) No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct referred to in subsection (2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.
Prohibited conduct
(2) The conduct mentioned in subsection (1) consists of
(a) repeatedly following from place to place the other person or anyone known to them;
(b) repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, the other person or anyone known to them;
(c) besetting or watching the dwelling-house, or place where the other person, or anyone known to them, resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or
(d) engaging in threatening conduct directed at the other person or any member of their family.Punishment
(3) Every person who contravenes this section is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
As can be seen, sub-sections 2 (a), (c) and (d) describe rather obvious forms of prohibited conduct—stalking and threatening behaviour. However, the vast majority of charges laid under this section of the Criminal Code are under 2 (b) and deal with a much more subtle issue–persistent communication with another individual. Cary Grant and Christian Grey beware.
In our age of the internet and ubiquitous smartphones, instant and whimsical communication is easy. But take heed; one too many emails, texts, or facebook messages can land a jilted lover or persistent suitor in criminal trouble.
So when does unwanted communication become criminal? In fact, section 264 (2) (b) of the Code has quite precise requirements before proof can be found. Based on the legislation and its interpretation by the courts, the following must be shown to establish the elements of criminal harassment by communication:
The communication must be repetitive (however, this has been interpreted by the courts to mean simply more than one occasion of communication).
The target of the communication must be harassed (a definition of harassment often quoted with approval by Canadian courts is “The complainant must be more than vexed, disquieted or annoyed by the prohibited conduct.
The Crown must demonstrate that the complainant was tormented, troubled, worried continually or chronically, plagued, bedeviled and badgered”—note the use of the disjunctive “or”).
The defendant must know that the complainant is harassed (on the other hand, keep in mind that such knowledge need not be proven by direct evidence; the necessary knowledge on the part of the defendant may be inferred from the circumstances of the communication and may include reference to the nature of the relationship prior to the conduct that forms the basis of the charge).
The conduct complained of must cause the complainant to fear for his or her safety or the safety of anyone known to him or her (once again, the caveat in point 3 above also applies here—the necessary fear may be inferred from the context in which the communication takes place including the history of the relationship between the parties)."
https://davidgbayliss.com/criminal-harassment-canada/
Mr. OG, what did you do with the 2600 BTC you owed your investors? In your wallet one day, then vanished and you paid out an insurance fund. Remember that your classy responses will be read by everyone you know. 
