DamageX

Corruption is the way supply and demand find equilibrium, in a market restrained by (government) regulation.

[DamageX @DamageX]

@NassimGhorayeb @stefanobernardi @Algorand I'm well aware of the definition of plutocracy. One of the few differences between what you're describing and democracy, is that in a democracy the right to use violence is delegated by more individuals. 😉

[DamageX @DamageX]

@NassimGhorayeb @stefanobernardi @Algorand You're right. Democracy is more like a 30% attack. If that... 😉

[DamageX @DamageX]

@Melt_Dem @twobitidiot @WGMGpodcast Shit, that easy huh? Watch out world, I'll be a multi-gazillionaire in no time!

[DamageX @DamageX]

@AkadoSang Sounds like "democracy" to me? ;)

[DamageX @DamageX]

@MadBitcoins Who's the one getting pounded? :D

[DamageX @DamageX]

@stefanobernardi @Algorand Actually, it *could* work that way. It's called a 51% attack. Funny how that's not the case when it comes to society in general. ;)

[DamageX @DamageX]

@CalvinAyre You mean unlike his legal actions, which are also aimed at censoring others' voices?

Right...

[DamageX @DamageX]

@AkadoSang Free marketing is cheap marketing. ;)

[DamageX @DamageX]

@CryptoCobain "How would we provide the people with cultural experiences, if the government didn't tax people?"

Well...

[DamageX @DamageX]

@Moon__Rekt LOL

Children, can we say "competition"?

[DamageX @DamageX]

@BitcoinAdoption @LN_Master_Hub @DanDarkPill You can defame someone's character by only using true facts. 😉

[DamageX @DamageX]

@00iamgru00 @BitcoinAdoption @DanDarkPill tl;dr but unless someone else provided proof of them being Satoshi, CSW committing a fraudulent act doesn't automatically disprove him being Satoshi.

[DamageX @DamageX]

@LN_Master_Hub @BitcoinAdoption @DanDarkPill Yep. And he can easily prove that Hodlnaut's constant trolling created a shitstorm for him. Arguably no bigger than others he's created on his own, but still. That's ALL the proof he needs to provide, that his character was defamed, regardless of reason.

[DamageX @DamageX]

@BitcoinAdoption @DanDarkPill Your example is not fraud, it's insanity. Which is why the court wouldn't require an accuser to provide proof.

[DamageX @DamageX]

@nioctibmai @C1aranMurray @CoinDeskMarkets Fine with me, as long as they come with equal responsibilities. 😉

[DamageX @DamageX]

@Beautyon_ The High Court cannot mandate someone to make a statement that the plaintiff cannot prove to be true.

[/scenario]

[DamageX @DamageX]

@BitcoinAdoption @DanDarkPill Accusing someone of fraud shifts the burden of proof onto the accuser. 😉