Independent source review · Version 1.0

NastyFans & NastyMining:
a public-record review

A reconstruction of the project’s public timeline, BTC-denominated seat prices, distribution records, published wallet accounting, Pirate-related disputes, and reported Alberta litigation.

Scope note

This is not a court finding, an audit, or investment advice. Forum statements are attributed to their speakers. Allegations are not presented as facts, and disputed claims are marked as such.

01 / Forum treasury custody

500 BTC in custody—and a disputed airdrop

The contemporaneous record supports unauthorized use of the forum’s cold-storage address for a personal airdrop claim. It does not support saying that the major fork coins were kept.

Custody record

OgNasty was selected to safeguard 500 BTC belonging to the forum.

In 2013, administrator theymos publicly sought “extremely trustworthy people” to hold 250–500 BTC chunks of forum money. The published agreement required a treasurer to keep the held bitcoins safe and return them on a legitimate request. The public roster later listed OgNasty with 500 BTC at 1Eog8UqRFLufC71rBLt2nYgfUDskgxAyVF.

Major fork proceeds returned 21.534665 BTC BCH, BSV and BTG liquidated in November 2019
GBYTE attributed to forum-held BTC 31.25 GBYTE Calculated from the 2017 airdrop record
Reported value at receipt ≈ 7 BTC Contemporaneous estimate, not a present-day valuation
Verified forum record

The major fork coins were transferred back

The forum administrator reported liquidating the major forks associated with the 500 BTC: 14.272715 BTC from BCH, 6.818999 BTC from BSV, and 0.442951 BTC from BTG. The reported total was 21.534665 BTC. Lower-value forks were later assigned to OgNasty.

Administrator’s accounting
Undisclosed airdrop / disputed characterization

A separate GBYTE claim used the custody address

In December 2019, LoyceV published a signed-message record showing that the 500 BTC address had been used to claim a 2017 Byteball/GBYTE airdrop. About 31.25 GBYTE—then estimated at roughly 7 BTC—was attributable to the forum-held balance. Theymos said he had not known about the claim and called the lack of permission unprofessional.

Airdrop evidence and response
Careful finding

The administrator expressly said the agreement made fork coins forum property, but treated airdrops differently: collecting them was not prohibited and the forum had no contractual claim to the proceeds. He nevertheless criticized using the cold-storage key without asking. On this record, “stole the forked coins” is an allegation, not an established fact; “claimed an airdrop tied to forum-owned BTC without prior permission” is supported by the contemporaneous thread.

02 / Findings at a glance

What the record supports — and what it does not

Project record

Seats, voting, and BTC distributions were the stated model.

The project’s long-running Bitcointalk post describes seats as carrying voting rights and a share of donation distributions. It links public member, trade, and distribution feeds.

Source S1
Source data

The recorded seat price fell by more than 99.8% for early benchmarks.

The first recorded lot was 0.44889676 BTC per seat. A 2026 trade recorded 0.0005 BTC per seat. That is a 99.8886% price decline, before distributions or resale proceeds.

Source S2
Operator statement

Published wallet accounting is detailed, but not an independent audit.

In 2017, site operator nonnakip reported 644.40754294 BTC in chain-visible donations and 725.60538763 BTC in total reported donations. The 81.19784469 BTC difference was attributed mainly to NastyShop-linked donations.

Source S5
Disputed

Pirate pass-through allegations are documented; liability is not established here.

Forum threads allege that funds connected with a Pirateat40 pass-through were missing or mishandled. OgNasty disputes wrongdoing. This review found no judgment establishing those allegations against him.

Read both sides
Reported court matter

An Alberta file number is publicly reported, but the docket was not obtained.

Forum participants identify Court of King’s Bench file 2503 12841. Alberta’s official service can return the filed-document list for CAD $25. This review has not purchased that record or found a public final judgment.

Lawsuit record
Not established

Tax evasion, personal-use funding, and family-relationship claims remain unverified.

The reviewed material does not establish tax evasion, that a personal vehicle was paid for with NastyFans or Pirate funds, or claimed off-forum family relationships. Those claims are therefore not adopted by this site.

Editorial standard

03 / Reconstructed chronology

Fourteen years in the public record

Dates come from the project’s own chronology and live feeds unless marked as reported or disputed.

  1. Project record

    NastyMining announced

    The main Bitcointalk topic dates the project to 10–11 June and records an ASIC order later that month, an FPGA beginning to hash in July, and a first BTC distribution on 27 July.

    S1
  2. Project + source data

    NastyFans launches; trading and distributions begin

    NastyFans was announced on 8 December. The trade feed begins the next day at 0.44889676 BTC per seat, with early lots as high as 0.6 BTC. The first distribution record is dated 17 December at 0.00131686 BTC per eligible seat.

    S1S2S3
  3. Project chronology

    Public membership and major fundraising claims

    The project chronology says membership opened on 14 January, the 100th BTC was distributed on 1 March, 200 BTC was raised for a Mini-Rig in July, and another 185 BTC was raised for Monarch upgrades in August.

    S1
  4. Operator statement

    1NastyFR… becomes the stated donation address

    The address appears in the project’s opening post. In a later accounting, nonnakip described it as the official donation address from this date onward.

    S1S5
  5. Operator statement

    Debt settlement and “debt-free” milestones

    The project chronology states that debt was settled in October 2014 and that the operation became debt-free in June 2015. These are project statements, not audited findings.

    S1
  6. Operator statement

    Donation-accounting checkpoint published

    nonnakip reported 166.14730886 BTC to the old address and 478.26023408 BTC to 1NastyFR…, totaling 644.40754294 BTC visible on-chain. The site total was stated as 725.60538763 BTC.

    S5
  7. Source data + forum comparison

    BTC-denominated seat value contracts sharply

    Trades in the public feed appear around 0.0015–0.002 BTC. A 2018 discussion used a prior 0.0077 BTC seat price to compare returns from distributions.

    S2S7
  8. Allegation / disputed

    Pirate-related accusations become a sustained public dispute

    Dedicated forum threads questioned an alleged 2,600 BTC connected with the earlier pass-through. The amount, ownership, obligations, and conduct remain contested.

    S8S9
  9. Forum calculation + source data

    0.00056 BTC reserve calculation; 0.0005 BTC buyback trades

    A forum participant calculated 16.801 BTC across 30,000 seats as about 0.00056 BTC per seat. The public feed then records 1,499 seats traded at 0.0005 BTC in April.

    S6S2
  10. Source data

    Later trades cluster near 0.00045–0.0006 BTC

    The feed records 259 seats at 0.00055 BTC in June 2024, 162 seats at 0.0006 BTC in July 2025, 628 seats at 0.0005327 BTC in September 2025, and 217 seats at 0.0005 BTC in February 2026.

    S2
  11. Reported court matter

    Alberta litigation is discussed publicly

    Forum participants identify Alberta Court of King’s Bench file 2503 12841 and report a 26 June filing. Later posts discuss service, defence, and an August 2026 appearance. No official docket copy or final judgment is included in this review.

    S10S11
  12. Source data

    Recent distributions are measured in single-digit satoshis per seat

    Numerous 2026 entries report 0.00000007–0.00000008 BTC per eligible seat. The latest record reviewed is dated 5 September 2026.

    S3

04 / BTC-denominated calculations

Price decline is measurable. Personal P/L is not yet.

Public trades show the seat price at specific moments. A holder’s actual result also depends on every distribution received and any resale proceeds.

BTC return calculator

per seat

Use the distribution field only when you have a verified per-seat total for the holding period. Zero shows price change alone.

Price-only result

−99.8886%

−0.44839676 BTC per seat

Total value recovered
0.11%
Formula
(exit + distributions − entry) ÷ entry
Selected public-record benchmarks, excluding distributions
Entry / basisComparisonBTC price declineEvidence
0.44889676 BTC0.0005 BTC99.8886%Trade feed
0.60000000 BTC0.0005 BTC99.9167%Trade feed
0.00770000 BTC0.0005 BTC93.5065%Forum basis + trade feed
0.00770000 BTC0.00056003 BTC92.727%Reserve calculation

A 99.9% seat-price decline is not automatically a 99.9% net investment loss. Net BTC result requires the original acquisition price, all distributions received while held, and the final sale or current comparison value. The trade feed does not identify buyers, so it cannot support named-user loss claims by itself.

05 / Wallet & distribution evidence

A public address, a published reconciliation, and an audit gap

Blockchain records can verify transactions. They do not, on their own, prove the owner, purpose, or off-chain agreement behind every transfer.

On-chain reference

Longstanding project donation address

1NastyFRkeUTmMdbMmzggDVTQA6r3ibUoX
Open explorer

Old address, reported 166.14730886 BTC Project-operator statement in 2017
1NastyFR…, reported 478.26023408 BTC Project-operator statement in 2017
Chain-visible total, reported 644.40754294 BTC Sum stated by nonnakip
Additional site-reported amount 81.19784469 BTC Attributed mainly to NastyShop-linked donations; underlying private records were not published in the cited post

What can be checked

  • The address is published by the project itself.
  • The distribution feed lists transaction IDs and blocks.
  • Those transactions can be inspected independently on-chain.
  • The trade feed supplies dates, quantities, and per-seat prices.

What still needs evidence

  • A full reconciliation of inflows, distributions, refunds, reserves, and expenses.
  • Public records supporting the additional 81.19784469 BTC described in 2017.
  • Historic seat ownership needed to assign distributions to specific purchase lots.
  • Proof tying any particular personal purchase to project or pass-through funds.

06 / Pirate pass-through record

A proven Ponzi scheme; a disputed connection

The legal record concerning Trendon Shavers is separate from allegations about OgNasty’s pass-through activity. Conflating them would overstate the evidence.

Government record

Bitcoin Savings and Trust was a Ponzi scheme.

The SEC obtained a final judgment against Trendon Shavers and BTCST in 2014. The U.S. Department of Justice later reported that Shavers pleaded guilty and was sentenced for securities fraud. That legal finding concerns Shavers and BTCST.

Allegation / disputed

The amount and handling of pass-through funds remain contested.

Forum users allege that large sums—often framed as roughly 2,600 BTC—were not properly returned or accounted for. OgNasty has denied wrongdoing and characterized the claims as unsupported. The reviewed sources do not resolve the amount, ownership, or legal obligation.

Editorial rule: “BTCST was a Ponzi scheme” is a court-supported fact. “OgNasty retained or misappropriated 2,600 BTC” is a disputed allegation and is not stated here as fact.

07 / Reported Alberta litigation

The public forum trail is not the court docket

No public final judgment located
Reported file 2503
12841
Court
Alberta Court of King’s Bench
Reported filing
26 June 2025
Parties
Discussed publicly as Vod v. OgNasty; legal names not reproduced here without the docket
Verified here
The official Alberta search process and fee; public forum statements by the disputants
Not verified here
The filed pleadings, causes of action, defence, exhibits, orders, or final outcome

What the official service says

Alberta allows a search by action or court-file number. The CAD $25 result includes a list of documents filed; copies and certification can cost more.

Alberta civil search

Current publication limit

Because the docket has not been obtained, this site does not characterize either party’s pleadings as true, state that anyone has won, or treat the lawsuit as proof of fraud, theft, tax evasion, or any other alleged misconduct.

08 / Methodology

How claims were classified and calculated

Snapshot date: 20 September 2026. Live sources may change after that date.

1

Prefer the closest available source

Project feeds support trade and distribution facts. Government pages support legal findings and court-search procedures. Forum posts support only what a participant said.

2

Label the evidentiary status

“Project record” is first-party material, not automatic verification. “Operator statement” is attributed. “Allegation / disputed” is not adopted. “Government record” refers to an official publication.

3

Keep price change separate from total return

Price decline = (entry − exit) ÷ entry. Net BTC return = (exit + distributions − entry) ÷ entry. No USD conversion is used because entry and exit dates materially change the answer.

4

Do not invent user-level losses

The 2,013-lot trade feed omits buyer identities. Current ownership does not establish who bought a historic lot. Named-user P/L requires historical ownership or transfer evidence plus the distribution history for the holding period.

5

Account for editable and live records

Bitcointalk posts can be edited and NastyFans CSVs are live. Material claims should be archived with a retrieval date before use in legal, regulatory, or journalistic work.

6

State what was not found

No independent audit, official Alberta docket copy, or public final judgment resolving the forum parties’ dispute was located for this version. Absence from this review is not proof that a record does not exist.

09 / Source archive

Direct links used in this review

Sources are described by provenance, not by whether they support one side.

S1

NastyMining / NastyFans main topic

Project introduction, structure, donation address, and operator-maintained chronology.

First-party forum record
S2

NastyFans historic trade feed

2,013 purchase lots with date, time, quantity, and price per seat; no buyer field.

First-party live CSV
S3

NastyFans distribution summary

Per-seat amounts, eligible seat counts, blocks, transaction IDs, fees, and donations to NastyMining.

First-party live CSV
S4

NastyFans current seat-owner list

Current seat counts, public identifiers, and donation preferences. Not historic ownership evidence.

First-party live CSV
S5

2017 donation-accounting discussion

nonnakip’s published address totals, site-reported total, and explanation of the difference.

Attributed operator statement
S6

2021 reserve-per-seat discussion

Third-party calculation of 16.801 BTC divided across 30,000 seats.

Forum calculation
S7

2018 minted-seat return discussion

Contemporaneous discussion using a 0.0077 BTC seat-price basis and reported distributions.

Forum comparison
S8

Pirate pass-through accusation thread

Contains allegations, rebuttals, historic links, and transaction claims. Not a judicial finding.

Disputed forum record
S9

OgNasty reserve-fund topic

Historic first-party thread advertising interest on BTC deposits; later marked closed and paid out.

First-party forum record
S10

Forum posts identifying Alberta file 2503 12841

Participant discussion of the reported lawsuit and access to court materials.

Attributed forum report
S11

Alberta Court of King’s Bench civil search

Official process for action-number searches, filed-document lists, and applicable fees.

Government service
S12

SEC final judgment release: Trendon Shavers / BTCST

Official civil-enforcement record identifying BTCST as a Ponzi scheme.

U.S. government record
S13

DOJ sentencing release: Trendon Shavers

Official criminal-case summary, plea, sentence, and victim-loss description.

U.S. government record
S14

Blockchair address view

Independent explorer view for the project-published 1NastyFR… address.

Third-party blockchain explorer
S15

Forum treasurer recruitment

Theymos’s 2013 request for custodians of 250–500 BTC portions of forum funds.

Forum administrator · 6 Feb 2013
S16

Published treasurer agreement

Custody obligations, return rules, and public roster for the forum’s distributed treasury.

Forum administrator · 19 Mar 2013
S17

Fork-coin accounting and GBYTE disclosure

Contemporaneous thread containing the 21.534665 BTC fork liquidation, signed airdrop evidence, and the administrator’s response.

Forum record · Nov–Dec 2019