Looks like cypherdoc siphoned 3000BTC off Hashfast while customers were pre-paying for undelivered mining equipment.
The payments were made in return for his 'shilling' on bitcointalk.org in the HashFastEndorsement thread.

[–]cypherdoc2 11 points 2 days ago
You made your bed--now you get to lie in it.
Gmax does lie alot. Especially about our dealings.

[–]nullc -8 points 2 days ago*
By "our dealings" I assume you're referring to the fact that I remain torqued that you were a part of the Hashfast fradulent (see the latest ruling wrt fraud here) bitcoin miner sales,
where you received 10% of gross receipts-- over 3000 BTC-- and walked away with them while most customers (like myself!) got nothing while hashfast folded into insolvency; which is a fact which has landed you personally in court and trashed your reputation on bitcointalk.
Please, if I've gotten anything wrong there-- I'm all ears for corrections. Errors happen, but I certainly wouldn't want to spread any misinformation.

[–]cypherdoc2 10 points 1 day ago
That's all you've spread, misinformation. You coordinated the smear campaign against me on BCT and could be accused of libel.
Where's the guilty verdict Greg? just because someone is involved in a dispute doesn't make them guilty, you liar.
No one other than you is saying I "walked away". I was "paid" that money for services rendered. That's your way of twisting the story like you've twisted this block debate.
Are you always so quick to rush to judgment? Do you conduct your dev analyses this way, based on no evidence?

[–]nullc -10 points 1 day ago
Being accused doesn't make someone guilty, indeed-- but there isn't a dispute about the core facts.
Your own attorney reports that you were paid 3000 BTC and other considerations in connection with the hashfast scheme, 10% of retail price of the units.
On August 8, 2013 posting on behalf of Hashfast you promised that hashfast would "offer full refunds by the end of the year if they’re late", a statement later repeated by other agents of hashfast.
Yet there is no dispute that hashfast failed to deliver on these promises, leaving most customers with a total loss.
Prior to the litigation against you causing the disclosure of your contract and the extent of your involvement with hashfast and the resulting windfall, I believed that you were just another victim in this bad situation because you lead me to believe so (in contrast to the appearance of extensive involvement created by your public comments). Only after your court documents shows up on Bitcoin talk did I know otherwise.

[–]cypherdoc2 3 points 1 day ago*
Of course I got paid that.. I never denied that. The allegation in the docs is "we paid you too much". WTF is that? "According to the signed contract" I'd add. They are going to lose.
What do you mean they failed to give refunds? Of course they did. I tried to get you to take the same refund I took in USD after the end of the year but you ridiculously tried to get refunded in BTC, which had approximately doubled in value by that point. That is ridiculous.
You got burned because you were greedy and wanted a windfall.

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3jwebt/mike_hearn_on_sidechains_and_blockstream/cut8qib?context=4