Speaking of new thread.

You're one of the few losers who are still afraid of Robert and sinking with the boat? He'll send shit your way when it's time.

If I was a medical doctor I would tell him to bring a Geiger counter for real. But I'm not so I won't 

A flight to Tchernobyl in Ukraine may have been a better idea.

Bluff. He's castrated now.

Lucky guy

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/south-pacific-islands-prepare-to-sue-french-government-for-1billion-over-nuclear-tests-9879653.html

Send us picture when you take a dip in those quiet little ponds of still water

More assets to be seized? 

There should be a "Like" button on BCT.

Criminal Code of Canada

346. Extortion

346. (1) Every one commits extortion who, without reasonable justification or excuse and with intent to obtain anything, by threats, accusations, menaces or violence induces or attempts to induce any person, whether or not he is the person threatened, accused or menaced or to whom violence is shown, to do anything or cause anything to be done.

Extortion

(1.1) Every person who commits extortion is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) if a restricted firearm or prohibited firearm is used in the commission of the offence or if any firearm is used in the commission of the offence and the offence is committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, a criminal organization, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of

(i) in the case of a first offence, five years, and

(ii) in the case of a second or subsequent offence, seven years;

(a.1) in any other case where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and

(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.

Subsequent offences

(1.2) In determining, for the purpose of paragraph (1.1)(a), whether a convicted person has committed a second or subsequent offence, if the person was earlier convicted of any of the following offences, that offence is to be considered as an earlier offence:

(a) an offence under this section;

(b) an offence under subsection 85(1) or (2) or section 244 or 244.2; or

(c) an offence under section 220, 236, 239, 272 or 273, subsection 279(1) or section 279.1 or 344 if a firearm was used in the commission of the offence.

However, an earlier offence shall not be taken into account if 10 years have elapsed between the day on which the person was convicted of the earlier offence and the day on which the person was convicted of the offence for which sentence is being imposed, not taking into account any time in custody.

Sequence of convictions only

(1.3) For the purposes of subsection (1.2), the only question to be considered is the sequence of convictions and no consideration shall be given to the sequence of commission of offences or whether any offence occurred before or after any conviction.

Saving

(2) A threat to institute civil proceedings is not a threat for the purposes of this section.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 346;R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 46;1995, c. 39, s. 150;2008, c. 6, s. 33;2009, c. 22, s. 15.

And for those who want an easy way to report Robert Duskes misbehavior to the authorities:
http://www.antifraudcentre-centreantifraude.ca/english/reportit-howtoreportfraud.html

What would be a reasonable market cap vs time for this project?

Thanks! The old one is still working fine but I just want to be on the safe side. Any pessimistic/optimistic ETA?

Is there an ETA for the new rebuilt QT wallet so staking can resume?

Done.

To make it convenient to anyone new here, can you put the link to the new thread when you refer to it? Finding it in this mess may not be obvious.

If possible add it at the top of the OP too.

Start your own. You're the only potential value in this whole mess.

The key for trust on this board is "Robert Bradley Duskes", not the obfuscated version.

You are repeating his lines. Only Robert Bradley Duskes refers to himself as Bobsurplus, probably an obfuscation tactic. Playing on the forum timer is also neat.

A decentralized market will have to resist these kind of high level scams in the future.

So you trust the new thread even if dzimbeck hasn't vouched yet?

Don't be fooled by the new thread until dzimbeck has vouched, he is probably sleeping now. Only Bobsurplus refers to himself as Bobsurplus. This is weak. Distraction is thinning out.

THE NEW THREAD IS FAKE! DON'T CLICK LINKS THERE!

R(obert) Bradley (Duskes) in Laval on canada411.ca.
That's a police case.

This is like playing a game of Mafia. My bets are:
1. David Zimbeck is a very smart and now a bit less naive young guy working on some breakthrough technology and he got dragged into a moderately successful scam lead by equally smart manipulators who are trying to piggy ride his credibility.
2. These manipulators are lead by a guy named Robert Duskes who definitely tried to hide his identity. His only real weapon is distraction. Fucking efficient distraction.
3. David must have tried to withdraw from the scam part, no moon happened, Duskes got angry and decided he wasn't going down alone.
4. David does have the blueprints for the technology in his head.

Now the BTER case has to be settled.