So here's where you either shit or get off the pot. Do you want to try to get to the bottom of these issues in a clear way? I'm open to other ways of doing so in an organised, logical manner - where mods can clearly see what it is that is being disputed (without it being buried in pages of long generalised posts by both of us and many others)? Do realise that on the Nyan one I don't think you even realise what incident I'm referring to yet - I've kept my powder pretty dry on that one.
I don't think you can afford to try an approach where you have to deal with clear unambiguous statements minus rhetoric - as the truth just isn't on your side. But feel free to prove me wrong.
As I've said before, you should make a new post with a clear explanation of what your precise claim is, and containing whatever evidence it is you have. Until then, the onus is not on me to defend or show anything. The onus is on you to explain yourself otherwise it appears as if you are just crying wolf.
The onus moved onto you (at least partially) when you made a thread claiming I'd libelled you. To support that claim you need to prove that what I said was untrue. I'm suggesting a means to solve both claims at once. I'm i no way inclined to make a new post, spend a load of time reiterating what I already clearly laid out here (in respect of the insurance issue) then just have you respond with "Go away Troll, I already explained this before. Mods please give him a scammer tag".
Let me reiterate about the burden of proof:
YOU made a scammer accusation thread with MY name in the title.
I posted my accusation in an existing thread here made by someone else - and only did so after YOU told me to do so as you didn't want to discuss it elsewhere. In fact I'm on the record as saying that I didn't think a scammer thread about you was even a good idea (not because I believed you innocent - but because I believed that by hanging on you'd provide more evidence making it easier for mods to award a tag).
But the burden of proof is on me somehow? You don't have to prove your allegation (that I lied) but I have to prove mine (that you lied)? How about YOU make a thread (or even a post) and explain the BMF/CPA contract - and how every time you made a decision on BMF's behalf it was in the best interests of BMF investors (I'm charitably assuming you know that when deciding on behalf of BMF investors you have to act in the interest of BMF - whether or not it disadvantages CPA). Then I'll point out just how it doesn't make sense - and that you clearly lied in the past and are continuing to do so now.