Quote from: Quickseller on March 21, 2018, 03:30:41 AM

I didn't say proof is not important, you are twisting my words. I very clearly said that my source is not important. The evidence is my word that I have been told this information by someone who wishes to not be named. I am not making this up.

It isn't like it matters either way because those types of chat logs are nearly impossible to authenticate, and lauda will just argue what he was saying is "random gibberish" like he did when defcon23 came out with extortion claims, of course he will only do this if he is forced to comment on any presented chat logs, his first reaction will be to attempt to derail the conversation with trolling.

I am not sure why you, or anyone else would be surprised when someone does not want to be a public source of negative information about lauda. I am not sure if you have noticed, but lauda will troll (nearly) every negative thread created about him, will never respond to any type of criticism professionally (based on his public behavior), and has given negative trust to many people for being critical of him. The trolling is much more intense for those who have a more significant reputation who are critical of lauda, and come from many people closely associated with him. I asked lauda a few months (?) ago how many threads about him he responded to in a way that addressed concerns raised about him in the (then) previous 3 (?) months, and the response I got was that none raised concerns that merited a professional response.

I'm sorry to break this to you, but your word is worthless. You have lied so many times that nobody should trust anything you say without solid evidence.

It's funny how within the same post you say "I am not making this up" and then proceed to lay out a scenario which (in your mind apparently) excuses you for making it up.

Or to put it another way - even if what you're saying were true, you're actually discrediting it with your slimy dishonest trollery and the obvious bias you have against anything Lauda does or says or looks at.

If you had a real source or real proof you could show it to a trusted member and get them to corroborate your story. What's your excuse for not doing so?