"which is the alt account of the borrower."
@shasan: You continue to speak lies, either make your statements truthful or declare something when you know it as fact. Some X years old wallet link is not proof. There are distinctly individual people involved here and continually coming back to the "it's one person" suspicion is just going to benefit the loan defaulter(s). And you as a lender should already know this.. How much time.. 6 years lending..?
I am giving 72 hours to repay the loan or make the schedule for how loans will be settled. If there is no positive response regarding this then I have to tag and create a flag for all those accounts that are connected and also will try to find as many accounts as possible which is the alt account of the borrower.
<users snipped>
And others who are the alt of these users.
1. So at creation-of-thread day, you couldn't wait those 72 hours? (Which would have possibly avoided me being 'dragged through your stain game')
2. You already have tagged everyone involved without trying to settle the matter privately it seems?!
3. If you wish to stay it, then stay knowledge-less and money-impaired... a fool... and keep going about your lawyer-istic exploits after non-repayment in a Bitcoin lending venture (thought you would have known that business a bit more by now ...... ah!, right, greed).
You haven't provided even a tiniest shred of rebuttal for the spend-linked addresses between you and banned/scammed accounts.
So far the only reason I can think for not disclosing the presumed buyer of that account or the existence of the sale itself (if that's what you're implying here) is that maybe there was no sale and you're the scammer. Would be trivial to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.
Years have elapsed, from the link time period to now; what has happened with forum accounts isn't trackable based off of that. Here's another reason: simple privacy, next: I could also be implicating yet another innocent person just to satisfy your thirst for knowledge under guise that it "helps the investigation" and "helps get a repayment" - it won't.
The "trivial to prove me wrong" statement is "guilty-until-proven-innocent"; not a great way, and not really supported in (normal) societies (apart from these cases where 'anything goes' because of the nature of BTC (I imagine?): accusations/allegations .. lead to this absurdity!).
Not to be snark but with how this began, do not expect my immediate cooperation. My initial stance remains truthful; and I still have not yet responded in-kind to the defamation I am experiencing. Probably can't be arsed to follow up on that, thickheaded minds are tough to reason with, let alone convince ;-).
Just to be clear.. If there's an obvious way I can help, and I can conduct that help, - I will. End of <response_number_fifty>...........
@shasan: You continue to speak lies, either make your statements truthful or declare something when you know it as fact. Some X years old wallet link is not proof. There are distinctly individual people involved here and continually coming back to the "it's one person" suspicion is just going to benefit the loan defaulter(s). And you as a lender should already know this.. How much time.. 6 years lending..?
For the record, I'm ready to rescind all my negative trusts when all 3 loans are repaid in full. I don't want it to be a "hindrance" to the loaned when formulating a morality in deciding whether or not they should repay the loans. I'm sure other leavers of negative trust would probably be inclined to do the same.
Along with your words, I want to add a few more things:I am giving 72 hours to repay the loan or make the schedule for how loans will be settled. If there is no positive response regarding this then I have to tag and create a flag for all those accounts that are connected and also will try to find as many accounts as possible which is the alt account of the borrower.
<users snipped>
And others who are the alt of these users.
1. So at creation-of-thread day, you couldn't wait those 72 hours? (Which would have possibly avoided me being 'dragged through your stain game')
2. You already have tagged everyone involved without trying to settle the matter privately it seems?!
3. If you wish to stay it, then stay knowledge-less and money-impaired... a fool... and keep going about your lawyer-istic exploits after non-repayment in a Bitcoin lending venture (thought you would have known that business a bit more by now ...... ah!, right, greed).
'Slanderous' feedback received by me, as it stands at present:
You haven't provided even a tiniest shred of rebuttal for the spend-linked addresses between you and banned/scammed accounts.
So far the only reason I can think for not disclosing the presumed buyer of that account or the existence of the sale itself (if that's what you're implying here) is that maybe there was no sale and you're the scammer. Would be trivial to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.
Years have elapsed, from the link time period to now; what has happened with forum accounts isn't trackable based off of that. Here's another reason: simple privacy, next: I could also be implicating yet another innocent person just to satisfy your thirst for knowledge under guise that it "helps the investigation" and "helps get a repayment" - it won't.
The "trivial to prove me wrong" statement is "guilty-until-proven-innocent"; not a great way, and not really supported in (normal) societies (apart from these cases where 'anything goes' because of the nature of BTC (I imagine?): accusations/allegations .. lead to this absurdity!).
Not to be snark but with how this began, do not expect my immediate cooperation. My initial stance remains truthful; and I still have not yet responded in-kind to the defamation I am experiencing. Probably can't be arsed to follow up on that, thickheaded minds are tough to reason with, let alone convince ;-).
Just to be clear.. If there's an obvious way I can help, and I can conduct that help, - I will. End of <response_number_fifty>...........