— SteemCN

RE: ReddCoin (RDD) Technical Projection Outlines a Trend Reversal from Down to UP!

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

ReddCoin (RDD) Technical Projection Outlines a Trend Reversal from Down to UP!

baah (61) in reddcoin • 7 years ago

It is currently at 0.7%

Bullshit.

The whole 6% claim was extremely dubious from the beginning and has been discussed and debunked thoroughly.

Bullshit again.

reddcoin

7 years ago by baah (61)

$0.00

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!

Sort Order:

Trending

[-]

trmnl-cmdr (32) · 7 years ago (edited)

Well that is a solid argument you make.
http://steem.supply/@haejin
Just look at it yourself.

$0.00

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

The argument that it was "debunked many times" still is floating in limbo waiting for anything to SUBSTANTIATE it, but thanks for showing everyone that one user is taking up what 10000 couldn't, eating to the tune of 8-10k a week from the collective.

$0.00

[-]

trmnl-cmdr (32) · 7 years ago

I'm sorry you missed the thread but I won't make it my responsibility to dig it up for you. There was a bug at steem.supply that caused a simple comma to confuse burnie. Either he really is that stupid or he used a minor code mistake to drum up controversy where there isn't one.

$0.00

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

You already did when you brought it up multiple times. Let me guess it was debunked so many times that it isn't in any of the threads that I posted where the original claims were made and now there is one thread that I missed. The burden of proof is on the claimant, don't try to shift it onto me. Either way the controversy is this, Haejin is raping the rewards, and he was raking in 10x the rewards a few months ago, 80k a week for week after week, and you, an idiot thinks that it was bernie, you dipshit moron idiot ignoring the numerous people that spoke up regardless of what Percent he was raping the reward pool for, dipshit ignorant dillweed. It was only ever my balls, Let's see the thread you idiot, let's see the debunking that happened NUMEROUS times, you pathetic liar.

$0.00

[-]

trmnl-cmdr (32) · 7 years ago

Just because it feels true doesn't mean you have to believe it.

$0.00

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

The whole 6% claim was extremely dubious from the beginning and has been discussed and debunked thoroughly.

Bullshit.

$0.00

[-]

trmnl-cmdr (32) · 7 years ago

Eat it, troll.
https://steemit.com/steem/@pawsdog/the-curious-case-of-the-errant-comma-haejin-berniesanders

$0.00

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

One instance rates to "it was debunked many times".

the 6% figure has been debunked many times. It was actually only ever 0.6% but the original post that got everyone so riled up fudged the numbers. Watch out for who you trust.

Really, why does that post above, where haijin made about half of what he did when he was making 80k a week, is 4 times more than your claim that it was only ever 0.06% you liar asshole that thinks trolling is calling bullshit out, be it lies or unfounded and doubious claims that offfer no proof of what they purpout.

$0.00

[-]

trmnl-cmdr (32) · 7 years ago

I never said 0.06%, idiot. I said 0.7%. Stop spreading lies.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago (edited)

It's a typo you dimwitted dullingotn. You see where I said that the post above is 4 times more than what you claimed it was only ever? Meaning 2.4%. Who's spreading lies you faggot?

$0.00

[-]

trmnl-cmdr (32) · 7 years ago

So those seemingly random groups of words and phrases were supposed to actually mean something? Learn to form coherent sentences. Also, learn a little maths. You won't look like such a fucking dum dum next time.

$0.00

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

You understood enough to dispute a typo even though the math couldn't be more basic, somehow you think that your comment will convince anyone you're not a scumbag liar because obviously you linked a post showing 4x what you claimed it was ever at, but you never said %0.06. Yeah lol, you didn't but the post still shows you lied, was it only ever %0.6 or 0.7 or what you linked you idiot, not to mention that week he mad half of what he made when he was cashing out 80k a week. Dullington.

$0.00

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

the 6% figure has been debunked many times. It was actually only ever 0.6% but the original post that got everyone so riled up fudged the numbers. Watch out for who you trust.
The lie detector test determined that was a lie!

I said 0.7%

And the lie detector test determined you lied AGAIN.

$0.00

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago (edited)

I'm not a liar, you're a liar. What a fucking moron.

$0.00

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

Tell me again how it's been debunked many times as well

$0.00

[-]

trmnl-cmdr (32) · 7 years ago

There has been plenty of discussion on this issue. Sorry you missed it, and sorry you're still wrong. The image says it all. 0.7%

$0.00

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

Yeah it does:

So I did the math..
$46,960 divided by $2,147,847 = .021863 or 2.1863%

Where's your disparaging figure? 0.6%? 0.7%? Where did you pull that out of: only ever.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

trmnl-cmdr (32) · 7 years ago

It's literally right there in the picture, near the bottom. Maybe turn on accessibility features if you're blind.

$0.00

[-]

thabiggdogg (56) · 7 years ago

You are NOT the Censor Master of Steemit! Downvoted in disagreement!

$0.03

2 votes

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

It was a Rhetorical you dillweed. You lied and said "It was actually only ever 0.6%". What a bullshit because we know this from your own article:

So I did the math..
$46,960 divided by $2,147,847 = .021863 or 2.1863%

And the intereting part is that during that week he was making 49k, there were weeks he was making o ver 80k. Debating these things with someone who lies like this and doesn't cough up proof of their claims but proof of their own lies is a waste of time.. you BELIEVE what you want to believe, and trust who you want.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

baah (61) · 7 years ago

the 6% figure has been debunked many times. It was actually only ever 0.6% but the original post that got everyone so riled up fudged the numbers. Watch out for who you trust.

The lie detector test determined that was a lie!

$0.00