Search Results
ID: 7P9pAShn/biz/60494882#60506655
6/15/2025, 3:46:15 PM
>>60506537
>so far you were very eager to summarize all the links to the eth explorer, yet somehow you've missed this one entirely
Since you are down to misrepresenting what I wrote and continually dodging the question as to why any of this is relevant to people investing or trading $LINK today, I summarize for the lurkers:
- Retard 60502914: posted 6 transaction ID's which can be examined on etherscan
- In 60503540, I point out that the first address is just internal transfers between ChainLink Labs team wallet and a non-circulating supply wallet.
- Retard 60503723: claims he provided "evidence" and won't spoonfeed.
- In 60505587, I repeat none were sent to exchanges and ask why I should keep looking (burden of proof rests with the claimant).
- Retard 60505742: misrepresents what I wrote, dodges the question as to why I should trawl through six transactions when the first one showed nothing, fails to explicate what the evidence is.
- Retard 60505754 replies seemingly to no one and quotes a single transaction.
- In 60506059, I note there appears to be evidence of ChainLink Labs sending tokens IN 2019 and in 2023 to a single address.
- I ask why any of this is relevant today, especially since there are 15x as many wallets as there were in 2019 when this first appeared.
- This question remains unanswered.
- Retard 60506380: tells me to kms and AVOIDS ANSWERING the question as to RELEVANCE of these transactions or the purpose of abusing people asking.
- In 60506401, I ask why some of these transactions he has submitted as evidence have a message CAUTIONING the observer that THEY WERE NOT MADE BY THE ADDRESS SENDING THE TOKENS.
>i.e. the transactions are not real, they are a form of spoofing.
- Retard 60506438: suffers a catastrophic meltdown now that he's been found out. Continues with the ad hominem attacks and fails to answer the question.
Transaction spam on the blockchain is a real thing kids, and only proves that these guys are REALLY desperate.
>so far you were very eager to summarize all the links to the eth explorer, yet somehow you've missed this one entirely
Since you are down to misrepresenting what I wrote and continually dodging the question as to why any of this is relevant to people investing or trading $LINK today, I summarize for the lurkers:
- Retard 60502914: posted 6 transaction ID's which can be examined on etherscan
- In 60503540, I point out that the first address is just internal transfers between ChainLink Labs team wallet and a non-circulating supply wallet.
- Retard 60503723: claims he provided "evidence" and won't spoonfeed.
- In 60505587, I repeat none were sent to exchanges and ask why I should keep looking (burden of proof rests with the claimant).
- Retard 60505742: misrepresents what I wrote, dodges the question as to why I should trawl through six transactions when the first one showed nothing, fails to explicate what the evidence is.
- Retard 60505754 replies seemingly to no one and quotes a single transaction.
- In 60506059, I note there appears to be evidence of ChainLink Labs sending tokens IN 2019 and in 2023 to a single address.
- I ask why any of this is relevant today, especially since there are 15x as many wallets as there were in 2019 when this first appeared.
- This question remains unanswered.
- Retard 60506380: tells me to kms and AVOIDS ANSWERING the question as to RELEVANCE of these transactions or the purpose of abusing people asking.
- In 60506401, I ask why some of these transactions he has submitted as evidence have a message CAUTIONING the observer that THEY WERE NOT MADE BY THE ADDRESS SENDING THE TOKENS.
>i.e. the transactions are not real, they are a form of spoofing.
- Retard 60506438: suffers a catastrophic meltdown now that he's been found out. Continues with the ad hominem attacks and fails to answer the question.
Transaction spam on the blockchain is a real thing kids, and only proves that these guys are REALLY desperate.
Page 1