I listened only to the 7 minute point where judge was skewering the female attorney who is arguing for the plaintiffs against our resident Dr. Lebron alias Cypherdorc (lol, just kidding ya my BOO!).

In any case, the plaintiffs will lose the case with that bonehead attorney and line of argument.

If they wanted to win, they wouldn't argue that DorkyDoc didn't do adequate promotion (because there is an entire thread on this forum showing he did, and now we have a core Dev admitting he invested 100 BTC based on Dorc's thread which adds validity to his promotional value). Rather they would argue that contract was fraudulent because why would they limit themselves to an exclusive marketing arrangement when there were multitudes of others who had similar reputations on Bitcointalk.org at the time (which is provable). In other words, DonaldDorc wasn't a scarce resource and thus it was an intentional overpayment of collusion.

But then the problem is HashFast (the plaintiff) would argue against themselves, so that is why they are not arguing to win the case. They've hired a female attorney to purposefully lose the case. This is a setup. I speculate I know what is happening here.

Vokain and Gmax kiss your BTC goodbye. Suckers.

(just joking for the dramatic effect but it also a point to everyone to be careful and responsible and also raises the question why is a core Dev speculating on scams, I would never get caught in that... my weaknesses was ... nevermind. Gmax thanks for sharing any way)

P.S. Gmax you committed a category error. It doesn't matter to his case if he slobbers on the technology (and because so many people can't understand the technology including some of the readers here, the attorneys, and the judge); it only matters that he has a huge following.

(my pops is former West coast Division head attorney for Exxon)